Bears To Target Randle El

[nitetrain8601]

Young is a good college QB.  I don't see his weak passes translating into the pros however, and I don't think he will be nearly as good a scrambler in the pros as he is in college.  He has poor throwing mechanics, and hasn't shown consistant accuracy through his entire collegian career.

 

And yea, its Leinart, Young, then Cutler.

 

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.

[Felix]

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.

[nitetrain8601]

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.

 

Jake is a mediocre QB and it's not because of his throwing motion. It's because of his decision making on the field. Young doesn't have that problem.

[Soxbadger]

He said he had the same "mechanics".

 

I personally dont see anything wrong with Youngs mechanics, and I think he has a good arm when he needs to use it.

 

As for consistency through out his entire career, generally I look for improvement instead of consistency.

 

Young improved immensely at QB, and still had the same spark in the running game.

 

Nitetrain,

 

If Young was white, no one would be questioning his ability to throw the ball.

[Felix]

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.

[Soxbadger]

In this situation it does have to do with race.

 

Leinart and Young went head to head, Young clearly was the better qb.

 

He was the better passer, the better runner, the better field general.

 

Yet no one questions Leinart, and everyone sees Young as the black guy who can run but cant throw the ball.

 

Ill let Young vindicate me on the field.

[WHarris1]

In this situation it does have to do with race.

 

Leinart and Young went head to head, Young clearly was the better qb.

 

He was the better passer, the better runner, the better field general.

 

Yet no one questions Leinart, and everyone sees Young as the black guy who can run but cant throw the ball.

 

Ill let Young vindicate me on the field.

I actually agree 100% with this.

 

I don't really feel like discussing it but I don't think people can get past the mental block of all the failed black QB's.

[Felix]

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.

[nitetrain8601]

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.

 

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.

[nitetrain8601]

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.

 

Yeah, Leinart did a better job with superior WR's and RB's in the pocket. Young hit the passes he needed to hit. He did not have guys wide open all day, or by a large amount or on a consistant basis. I'm not sure if you were even watching that game. Young went through his checkdowns first unless USC dropped everyone back in which case, the Longhorns ran the ball, either with Young or their RB's.

 

I'm going to agree with Soxbadger's and WHarris assessments. I'm not African-American or Caucasion, so it's not like I'm bias to either one. I don't really want to discuss it either and have a race thread.

[DBAHO]

Grossman's QB Rating : 68.8

Orton's QB Rating : 59.7

 

I'll take the guy who doesnt get hurt every f***in year.

Cos you definitely know that's going to happen every year right?

[Felix]

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.

 

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.

 

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.

Edited January 28, 2006 by Felix

[Soxbadger]

I think Young had the better passing game.

 

He threw 0 interceptions, and it can be argued if not for Leinart's int USC would of won the game.

 

He threw an int while his team was in a position to get no worse than 3 points and take a touchdown lead.

 

I mean the fact is when you put together all of their stats, Young blew Leinart out of the water.

 

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.

[Felix]

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..

[Soxbadger]

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

 

Its pretty clear the question is,

 

Why do you think Leinart will transfer better to the pros than Young? or What makes you think that Young will not be successful?

 

I did not think I had to spell it out and figured that my 2 statements and their divergent answers would give you a chance to make an argument of why you believe what you do.

 

The position seems to be: Young wont make it in the NFL, Leinart will.

 

I actually think the opposite. Leinart scares me, a lot. He does not have the arm strength, although he has pretty good accuracy. His drive also scares me, turning down going pro last year so he could stay around USC and screw around?

 

That does not seem to be the make up of a champion. Its one thing if you stay to win a national title, or stay to win the heisman, or if there is something left to prove.

 

Leinart just scares me like old Florida QB's, play in a good system with great talent will get you far in college, but will the pro game catch up?

Edited January 28, 2006 by Soxbadger

[Felix]

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.

 

His drive also scares me, turning down going pro last year so he could stay around USC and screw around?

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.

Edited January 28, 2006 by Felix

[nitetrain8601]

er, hold on.  Editing the post, I posted by accident

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

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.

 

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.

[Soxbadger]

Young is a pass first run second qb, except on draw or option plays. If you have time watch some film on his drop back passes, he scans the field and then makes a decision. A run first qb will not go through nearly as many progressions, and you would not have seen him throw to his tight end that many times. Young would have forced passes to his primary wr's, but he almost always found the soft spot or the open player.

 

As for Leinart,

 

Lets look at college football as a business, like college is for normal people. I go to college because I want a better job I want to make more money, etc. Now lets say after my junior year, I get offered the best possible job and I am offered the highest possible salary.

 

What is my motivation to go back?

 

Now add to the mix that unlike a regular student, college football players suffer career changing injuries at a staggering rate.

 

Why would I stay?

 

My answer is fear.

 

Leinart is having the time of his life, he is big man on campus and hanging out with movie stars or with b-list celebs hehe. His team is vastly more talented than any other team in the Pac-10, and all he had to do was take 1 class dancing and show up on saturdays.

 

Big fish, small pond.

 

Not my type of player.

[Felix]

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.

[Felix]

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.

[nitetrain8601]

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.

 

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.

[Felix]

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!

Edited January 28, 2006 by Felix

[nitetrain8601]

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!

 

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.

[Felix]

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.

Edited January 28, 2006 by Felix

[Palehosefan]

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.

 

USC also faced 7 defenses ranked 86th or worse. Granted, USC probably helped skew those numbers, but its still pretty clear which team faced the better defenses all year long.