Felix

QUOTE(DukeNukeEm @ Jan 28, 2006 -> 09:21 PM) Young has spent 3 years (pretty much) starting at QB, thats just as much as a Leinart or any other QB in this draft. Young has gotten better over the years in his passing. Vick has gotten worse. Better over the years? From 2003-2004, one can argue that he got worse, and the only time he got better was between 2004-2005. He's shown he can do it once, but does that make up for being a far worse QB the first two years? Not in my opinion. If he stayed around for his senior year and had another good passing year, my thoughts might be different. But as of now, I see 2 bad years and 1 good year. And by the way, Leinart is just about the same size (weights a little less than him, but is the same height) as Young, has had a far superior college career, has been more successful winning games (something you seem to think makes Young so great, but choose to ignore about Leinart). Tell me which QB is better over a 3 year basis: QB A 84/143 1155 yards 6 TD 7 INT 148/250 1849 yards 12 TD 11 INT 212/325 3036 yards 26 TD 10 INT QB B 255/402 3556 yards 38 TD 9 INT 269/412 3322 yards 33 TD 6 INT 283/431 3815 yards 28 TD 8 INT

QUOTE(Random @ Jan 28, 2006 -> 08:30 PM) try filtering it and screw around w/ all the filter stuff till it looks cool. real scientific approach

QUOTE(nitetrain8601 @ Jan 28, 2006 -> 08:34 PM) And since when is Kansas and OSU's secondaries crappy? Kansas passing defense = #54 (out of 117) Oklahoma St. passing defense = #53 (out of 117)

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Jan 28, 2006 -> 07:09 PM) I like BA and all, but he shouldn't let his mother cut his hair anymore. Go back to the longer locks man. Yep, now he looks all preppy

QUOTE(Heads22 @ Jan 28, 2006 -> 08:29 PM) He's not going to have near the time he would to throw, and his motion, I feel, will lead to problems. I've said this countless times, but it just gets ignored. Whatever..

You really wanted to distract yourself from the ISU game, eh?

Good stuff I hope I can get to a few games this year, its sort of hard living in Jersey

Old Brian is better, long hair > short hair.

He wasn't really suspended, he was kicked out. He can apply for reinstatement in 2 years, but that still wouldn't make this a suspension

QUOTE(sayitaintso @ Jan 28, 2006 -> 11:54 AM) Kind of a dumb question, but what day is the draft? April 29th and 30th.

Young won't fall that much because of his name and running abilities, but I do agree that he won't be have more than second day talent in the NFL.

QUOTE(nitetrain8601 @ Jan 27, 2006 -> 10:55 PM) That's a really weak argument. The numbers are skewed by maybe 3 slots both ways. That still doesn't even it out in the slightest bit. USC didn't face a defense until Texas and they lost against that team. Texas had faced good defenses throughout the year, and your argument is that Vince Young faced weak defenses in college and he wouldn't be able to do what he did in college, against the NFL, whereas Leinart would translate better due to facing better competition in college which isn't the case. If that's not the argument, please tell me what it is. So you don't think playing easier teams affects defensive stats? Supposed the Bears played the Colts, and let up 24 points, while the Saints played the 49ers, and shut them out. Then, the Bears let up 20 points to the Seahawks, while the Saints shut out the Texans. Then, the Bears let up 24 points to the Bronocs, while the Saints let up 3 points to the Titans. Since the Saints let up less points, are they a better defense? Or can you not truely tell because the Bears had to play really good offensive teams, while the Saints played push overs? The same can be said about the college defensive stats previously mentioned. And this debate really isn't going anywhere. I don't think you'll change my mind, and I highly doubt I'll change your mind, so this is rather pointless.

QUOTE(Palehosefan @ Jan 27, 2006 -> 10:42 PM) Texas schedule: OSU 5th ranked D, Kansas was 11th in the nation in defense, Oklahoma 13th, TT 30th, Colorado 41st, Missouri 50th, Baylor 63rd. USC schedule: Arkansas 34th, Fresno State 38th, Oregon 44th, Cal 46th, ND 75th. And yet those numbers are also rather skewed. For example, Texas Tech played I-AA teams. Does that mean they really had a great defense? No. It just means their defense could dominate a team in I-AA. Also, Oklahoma's stat is likely the end of the year number, correct? When Texas played them, Oklahoma was struggling a lot. They really picked it up towards the end of the year.

QUOTE(nitetrain8601 @ Jan 27, 2006 -> 10:37 PM) And just as easily as you said that, I could say USC played a bunch of overrated teams as well. All offense, no defense in the Pac-10. I'm pretty sure if I could find defensive team stats that it would show Texas played a tougher schedule against defenses than USC did. And your point? They both played crappy schedules. They both played crappy defenses. I think Leinart did better against his crappy defenses than Young. And before you reply with QB ratings, think of Grossman and Orton's QB ratings, and what the truth is behind them.

QUOTE(SSH2005 @ Jan 27, 2006 -> 09:40 PM) He's just being respectful to the veteran Podsednik. I'm sure Ozzie already knows where Anderson is playing and that would be CF. One can hope so at least

QUOTE(nitetrain8601 @ Jan 27, 2006 -> 10:24 PM) He turned into one though. He's evolved into a pass first QB. And where do you get all this crap that he faced slow defenses? Are you calling Ohio State's defense slow? Right now you have me scratching my head wondering if you have watched any games outside of the Rose Bowl game against USC. By nature, college defenses are slower than those in the NFL. And by the way, Texas also played La Lafayette, Rice, Missouri, Oklahoma (when they were struggling), Colorado (overrated), Texas Tech (played I-AA teams, had no defense, overrated), Oklahoma State, Baylor, Kansas, Texas A&M, and Colorado again. Real good teams!

QUOTE(Soxbadger @ Jan 27, 2006 -> 10:14 PM) What is my motivation to go back? No team in NCAA Football history had ever went back to back to back, and USC had a hell of a good shot at doing it (not really though since they didn't technically win the BCS in 2003). Thats enough motivation for me to come back to college, I don't know about you.

QUOTE(nitetrain8601 @ Jan 27, 2006 -> 10:14 PM) Yet you don't realize that Young is a pass first QB who will run if necessary ala Steve McNair, Donovan McNabb, Daunte Culpepper and his potential is better than every one of those guys. In previous years, he wasn't a pass first QB. Last year was the first year he truely became a pass first QB, so he doesn't have much experience as one.

QUOTE(Soxbadger @ Jan 27, 2006 -> 10:00 PM) Why do you think Leinart will transfer better to the pros than Young? or What makes you think that Young will not be successful? Well, I'm a traditional guy. I like "small ball" in baseball, and I like pocket QB's in the NFL. Traditionally, players with Vince Young's makeup in previous years (run first, pass second) haven't succeeded in the NFL in terms of passing. Last year, Young looked like a better passer, but he still wasn't that great, and is far from NFL quality in terms of passing. As Bill Simmons said in one of his articles awhile ago (I think it was him at least), take Young's passing highlights from college and you don't see anything special. He's an average passing QB, and its not that hard to see. Considering the fact that he has the nations best offensive line in front of him, he gets a LOT of time in the pocket. When he goes high in the draft, whatever team that takes him is not going to have a good offensive line, something that I believe he needs to succeed. When given a lot of time in the pocket, Young can be dangerous. He can make more time for his receivers to get open, and he can make a somewhat accurate pass if its not too far down the field. However, as said, he's not going to have that sort of time in the pros. The defenses are faster. From most of the highlight runs of Young's this year, they are a result of slow defenses and horrible tackling. This isn't the case in the pros. Put Young up against the Bears (on most weekends at least) and he'll get raped, hard. Could Young become a good QB down the line? Yea, its possible. If he works hard at his passing, as he has in college, and understands that he has to stay in the pocket in the pros, then he could become a good QB. Do I think he will do this? Not really. Young is going to have a s***load of pressure on his shoulders, especially in the first few years, and he's going to try too hard to make plays that he could do in college, but not in the pros. This will lead to mistakes, and could wear him down over time. From what I've seen, Leinart is capable of making the big pass when its needed. Young? Well, I've seen it once (OSU game). I don't really think Leinart will be that great a QB in the pros, as you said, his arm isn't that strong (much stronger than Young's though), but I do think that if he's given time to develop (ala Carson Palmer), he'll be a good QB. Why do you think this? Leinart had a great year, and was set to win the National Title again, along with the Heisman. He wasn't at USC just to screw around, and I don't know where you came up with that from.

QUOTE(Soxbadger @ Jan 27, 2006 -> 09:17 PM) The question I have is: Young was a good scrambler in college, good qb in college, but NFL defense's are going to catch up to him, eventhough he played in a far better defensive conference than Leinart. Leinart was a good qb, on the best offensive team in the nation, playing in one of the worst defensive conferences in college, yet he will have no problem transitioning with his weak arm. Unfortunately there are no YAC stats that I can find for that game or any other game, but I have a feeling that throwing passes to Bush and Jarret gave him quite an advantage. I dont see a question..

QUOTE(nitetrain8601 @ Jan 27, 2006 -> 08:07 PM) So you're saying a guy with a worse off rating is going to translate better in the NFL? And why would this make sense? It's not like Young throws a submarine style ball. Its not only about the numbers, its the type of QB they are, and how they do passing the ball. From all I've seen, Young takes advantage of poor secondaries with easy passes, but is not that great a QB when forced to make the pass. He can run at the collegian level, yes. Can he be so successful at the pros, where the defenses are better at tackling and faster, while throwing confusing coverages at the offense? I don't know, but if he does adapt to the level where he can dominate NFL defenses, it won't be in the first 3 years, which is why I'd take Grossman over him in the next 3 years anyday of the week. QUOTE(nitetrain8601 @ Jan 27, 2006 -> 08:10 PM) He did not have guys wide open all day, or by a large amount or on a consistant basis. Hardly. For the entire first half, his receivers had a minium of 2 or 3 yards in between them or the USC secondary. QUOTE(nitetrain8601 @ Jan 27, 2006 -> 08:10 PM) Yeah, Leinart did a better job with superior WR's and RB's in the pocket. Yes, Leinart had better WR's and RB's, but he didn't have any time in the pocket whatsoever. He was constantly pushed out of the pocket, and his receivers were not as open as Texas' were. Oh, and by the way, Leinart had a better Rose Bowl through the air. He was 29/40 passing for 365 yards while throwing 1 TD/INT. Young was 30/40, but only had 267 yards passing and 0 TD/INT.

QUOTE(Soxbadger @ Jan 27, 2006 -> 07:21 PM) Leinart and Young went head to head, Young clearly was the better qb. Young was the better scrambling QB, and won the game with his legs. I think Leinart was the better pocket passer however. He faced constant pressure in the pocket, and his receivers were often well covered, yet he still had a good game. Young on the other hand had plenty of time in the pocket, and had receivers open by a large amount on a constant basis. Yes, Young won the game, but I think that Leinart did a much better job given what he had to work with.

QUOTE(nitetrain8601 @ Jan 27, 2006 -> 07:15 PM) Young doesn't have that problem. Didn't have that problem in college. The pros are a completely different ballgame, and defenses are much more complex. And Soxbadger, playing the race card is just wrong. It has nothing to do with his race.

QUOTE(nitetrain8601 @ Jan 27, 2006 -> 07:06 PM) He has the same throwing mechanics as Jake Plummer/Steve McNair. His mechanics are fine and he's been working with McNair on it for the past year and a half on it(which is why they're alike). People just like hating on Vince Young for whatever reason. I'm not saying he will be the best QB in the league and a surefire HOF, but he'll be a damn good QB in 3-5 years. Listing Jake Plummer as a defense for any QB is just sad. Jake is a horrible QB, and this year is his first good year in the pros.

Great post Thanks