You can't really say that. He didn't go to a ****ty(sports) school and didn't lose a bunch of games.
Titans2008 said:
Am I serious about what? The number of sacks each of the three had over the last three seasons or that I think a flat-footed drop back passer stands a better chance of getting nailed in the backfield than a fleet-footed scrambler?
And I’m not trying to be facetious in my argument either. I admit that a quarterback who runs more will, of course, take more hits, but they’ll be down field hits that he can see coming and can sometimes even avoid by stepping out of bounds.
But you used the phrase “blindsided” and that, I think, opens up a whole ‘nother can of worms because scrambling quarterbacks will never get “blindsided” as much as sitting duck quarterbacks will.
Vince10 said:
You also have the evidence that the Titans thought enough of VY they used a #3 pick on him and are putting the entire future of the organization in his hands. We all need to get on board the VY band wagon and hope the Titans made the right decision.
My post is about the effects of hits on a scrambling quarterback versus a running back. You seem to be under the delusion that I was talking about drop-back passers versus scramblers.
Of course I can say that. It's obviously true...lowery21 said:
Young was a great college QB. Cutler was, too. The biggest difference (clearly not the only one) is the talent level surrounding them. Young had quite a bit. Cutler had very little. Young could not have made Vanderbilt into a great team on his own...
Titans2008 said:
Okay, fine. You were talking about the effects of hits on a scrambling quarterback versus a running back, but you posted it in reply to my post which questioned Ewker’s notion that VY could likely have an injury ridden career from running the ball too much – as opposed, obviously, to a quarterback who wouldn’t run the ball so much.
So please, Titans2008, excuse me for taking you out of the narrow parameters of your safe and tidy little point of view and trying to address the larger issue.
Sheesh!:irked:
So, let's get this straight.
Ewker seems to believe that Young will be subjected to more injuries than a pure pocket passer because he'll probably end up running the ball and thus, getting hit more.
You point out that other positions get hit a lot (such as RB) and don't necessarily get injured. (You also cited that Vince Young didn't get hurt in college which is a far from convincing argument but we'll leave that alone)
I explain to you why RB's don't get hurt as often (relative to the amount of times they take hits) as QB's and why teams aren't as concerned with RB's compared to QB's.
You quote it and turn it into me saying that Vince Young will be hurt his entire career.
So, you can try to address the "larger" issue all you want, but why would you quote a post that had nothing to do with it ?
Ewker seems to believe that Young will be subjected to more injuries than a pure pocket passer because he'll probably end up running the ball and thus, getting hit more.
You point out that other positions get hit a lot (such as RB) and don't necessarily get injured. (You also cited that Vince Young didn't get hurt in college which is a far from convincing argument but we'll leave that alone)
I explain to you why RB's don't get hurt as often (relative to the amount of times they take hits) as QB's and why teams aren't as concerned with RB's compared to QB's.
You quote it and turn it into me saying that Vince Young will be hurt his entire career.
So, you can try to address the "larger" issue all you want, but why would you quote a post that had nothing to do with it ?
HA! This is hilarious! I’m having fun, Titans2008. Are you having fun?
Okay, let’s do try to get on the same page.
As I understand what Ewker’s saying, yes. I believe so. And that I think is the larger issue I was trying to address.
Mmmm, very close. I don’t recall being the one to say VY had never been hurt in college, though it is true he never had to sit out more than a few plays due to being hit and/or shaken during his career at Texas. But I did sarcastically wonder aloud about how worried New Orleans ought to be about their shorter, lighter, can’t-miss franchise runningback who only put up rushing numbers comparable to VY’s despite being a feature back and playing against arguably lesser competition.
You conjectured that defensive players try to put bigger hits on QBs than RBs. What was you said? I’m not quoting you exactly, but something about defensive players wanting to knock out QBs while merely wanting to get RBs down.
That, Titans2008, is your opinion and you’re certainly entitled to it, but it’s hardly a documentable fact that you can prove.
But you know, that wasn’t even the part of your post that struck me as amusing. Nor was it even the part of your post that I questioned.
HA! What I quoted was the part of your post where you used the term “blindsided” and that brought me back to the larger issue with Ewker that began this discussion. If you want no part of that larger argument, then fine. So be it. You’re excused. You’ve had your say about how defensive players supposedly hit QBs harder than they hit RBs. Good for you.
But if you don’t mind, I would very much like to use your reference to QBs getting blindsided as a springboard to getting back to the larger issue at hand: scrambling QBs against drop back passers.
And my point is: a mobile quarterback is not as likely to get blindsided than a non-mobile quarterback.
Now, there!. I’ve said it. Can you argue with what I just said or do you just want to argue about the fact that I used a phrase from your post without your consent? :brow:
But I do wish to apologize if you think I misunderstood you, put words in your mouth or accused you of saying something you didn't say.
Okay, let’s do try to get on the same page.
Titans2008 said:
As I understand what Ewker’s saying, yes. I believe so. And that I think is the larger issue I was trying to address.
Titans2008 said:
Mmmm, very close. I don’t recall being the one to say VY had never been hurt in college, though it is true he never had to sit out more than a few plays due to being hit and/or shaken during his career at Texas. But I did sarcastically wonder aloud about how worried New Orleans ought to be about their shorter, lighter, can’t-miss franchise runningback who only put up rushing numbers comparable to VY’s despite being a feature back and playing against arguably lesser competition.
Titans2008 said:
You conjectured that defensive players try to put bigger hits on QBs than RBs. What was you said? I’m not quoting you exactly, but something about defensive players wanting to knock out QBs while merely wanting to get RBs down.
That, Titans2008, is your opinion and you’re certainly entitled to it, but it’s hardly a documentable fact that you can prove.
But you know, that wasn’t even the part of your post that struck me as amusing. Nor was it even the part of your post that I questioned.
Titans2008 said:
HA! What I quoted was the part of your post where you used the term “blindsided” and that brought me back to the larger issue with Ewker that began this discussion. If you want no part of that larger argument, then fine. So be it. You’re excused. You’ve had your say about how defensive players supposedly hit QBs harder than they hit RBs. Good for you.
But if you don’t mind, I would very much like to use your reference to QBs getting blindsided as a springboard to getting back to the larger issue at hand: scrambling QBs against drop back passers.
And my point is: a mobile quarterback is not as likely to get blindsided than a non-mobile quarterback.
Now, there!. I’ve said it. Can you argue with what I just said or do you just want to argue about the fact that I used a phrase from your post without your consent? :brow:
But I do wish to apologize if you think I misunderstood you, put words in your mouth or accused you of saying something you didn't say.
Starkiller said:
Well, I had something edited out of my message that would have made a little more sense. Needed to re-read the guidelines.
You are right that Vince would not have made Vandy great by himself, you can't make cheesecake out of mouse turds. However, I would argue that Vince would have made them much better than they were. ...and to a lesser extent, if you can't measure somebodies worth to the team by wins and losses what can you measure by?
I think that Vince Young could have made Vandy slightly better because a super-athletic running QB makes a much bigger impact on the college level than on the pro level (though Jay was hardly immobile). But it's not like they would have won the SEC.
But as far as measuring someone's worth on wins and losses, we're talking about different teams, not individual players. You can't replace any 1 player from Vandy and make them a great team. It's a team game, and every team has 22 starters.
Can we measure Danny Wuerffel's greatness based on his wins at Florida? How did he do in the NFL? Or Rick Mirer, who went 29-7-1 at Notre Dame and was the 2nd pick overall in the '93 draft? What about John Elway at Stanford, where he never went to a bowl game?
But as far as measuring someone's worth on wins and losses, we're talking about different teams, not individual players. You can't replace any 1 player from Vandy and make them a great team. It's a team game, and every team has 22 starters.
Can we measure Danny Wuerffel's greatness based on his wins at Florida? How did he do in the NFL? Or Rick Mirer, who went 29-7-1 at Notre Dame and was the 2nd pick overall in the '93 draft? What about John Elway at Stanford, where he never went to a bowl game?
All petty bickering aside, why is it that you think that a mobile qb will get blind-sided less anyway? It seems to me that even a mobile qb will stand in the pocket unless he sees the defender coming. So in the event that he doesn't see it coming, he will still get blindsided just like a statue. I guess you could say he would take off running if his first receiver wasn't open, but that's hardly the play that a starting-caliber NFL qb would make.
Titans2008 said:
You know, Titans2008, you and I should sit down for a beer someday because I tend to think a little alcohol could help us both communicate a little more effectively. We just don’t seem to be seeing eye-to-eye on anything as it is now.
Not that there’s anything wrong with that, I guess.
But just as you seem to believe (but can scarcely prove), based on your own experience of what you’ve seen and heard, that defenders try to hit QBs harder than RBs, I believe (but can scarcely prove), based on my own experience of what I’ve seen and heard that mobile quarterbacks do not get blindsided as easily or as frequently as non-mobile quarterbacks.
And no, it has nothing to do with a mobile quarterback taking off and running if his first receiver wasn’t open. Contrary to anti-VY myths that ESPN shamelessly promoted, Texas did not run an option offense and VY did not have only one read. Think about it. Last year VY threw TD passes to ten different receivers. Leinart meanwhile threw TD passes to only eight different receivers. Jay Cutler to only five.
How could Vince Young find so many different open receivers if he was – as ESPN has claimed – ready to tuck the ball and run if his primary was covered.
But I digress. You were asking me how a mobile quarterback can be any better off than a non-mobile one if he never sees it coming. Granted there will be times when a defender will have such a clean shot, there’s nothing any quarterback can do but take it. But – and I’m sure you’ve seen this – there are some quarterbacks who are simply sitting ducks back there whereas there are others who are able to miraculously slip out of the grasps of would-be sackers time and time again. And that is the difference between a mobile and a non-mobile quarterback: mobility.
Do you see what I mean?
Starkiller said:
Vince would definitely have taken Vandy to a bowl game. On a team with less talent, having a QB that is a threat both running and passing is a huge advantage because when everything breaks down, he will make more plays on his own or with less help.
But you guys are missing the really big point. Vince Young was the #1 ranked recruit in the whole country when he came out of high school. If he had signed with Vandy, it would have made a HUGE splash in recruiting circles. A guy with Vince's confidence and charisma, combined with his stature and fame (especially in Houston which puts out a lot of good football players), would have done wonders for Vandy's recruiting which would have then put better players on the field for him to utilize. Vince's presence would have made that team better in many ways.
At Texas, this is known as the "T.J.Ford Effect." Our basketball program could never get the top players to come to UT, even the local Texas kids. Then TJ Ford came along and made it cool to play basketball for Texas and it really worked wonders for our whole basketball program. Other top players followed. Vince would have made a similar impact at Vandy IMO.
Hawk said:
I agree, Vandy would've probably been able to recruit better with Young on the team, but there are still those pesky academic enrollment requirements to contend with.
The bigger picture is, the T.J. Ford Effect doesn't really help the Titans much seeing as how instead of recruiting, they scout.
Hawk said:
woulda, shoulda, coulda!!! you must have some awesome rose colored glasses :brow:
i dont think that he could have taken them to one of the major bowls, but he would have made the team a lot better, and a lot more fun to watch
It just took 1 more win, so it's entirely possible. But Jay won a lot of games with his arm that Vince possibly could not have...Hawk said:
That's all great in theory, but it doesn't have anything to do with the original argument about whether wins prove who the better player is.
Plus, it's completely unrealistic. Young would have never gone to Vandy. He wouldn't have even considered Vandy. Vandy wouldn't have even wasted their time trying to recruit him. Hell, Cutler didn't even want to go to Vandy until he didn't have any other real choices.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
