PDA

View Full Version : Matt Leinart is better than Vince Young


gtexan02
01-12-2006, 02:25 PM
Plain and simple, I'd rather have Leinart than Young here.

What does VY have going for him?
Heart of a champion
Accurate Passer
Very mobile

What does Leinart have?
Same champions heart
More accurate passer
Not mobile, but doesn't need to be because of superior pocket presence
Calls his own plays

VY had a good junior year, true, but Leinart had 3 incredible seasons. I'd take consistency over 1 good game any day.

Matts stats:
2003 255/402 (63.4%) for 3556 38 TDs and 9 INTs
2004 269/412 (65.3%) for 3322 33 TDs and 6 INTs
2005 283/431 (65.7%) for 3815 28 TDs and 8 INTs

VY stats:
2003 84/143 (58.7%) for 1155 6 TDs and 7 INTs
2004 148/250 (59.2%) for 1849 12 TDs and 11 INTs
2005 212/325 (65.2%) for 3036 26 TDs and 10 INTs

If all you Longhorn fans really think we need a QB, why isn't Leinart even being considered? Because he's not from Texas? Thats ridiculous. He has shown for his ENTIRE career that he is a winner who gets it done. His worst season was still better than VYs best season as a passer. Sure he doesn't move around as much, but NFL quarterbacks aren't supposed to move around. Thats how you get hurt, just look at Vick. The fact of the matter is, Leinart is a MUCH BETTER NFL prospect than VY. He throws the ball perfectly. He is smart. He is calm. He reads defenses better, and he even calls his own plays. VY is a gamble, and may turn out great, but also may turn out badly

jacquescas
01-12-2006, 02:33 PM
agreed. if there is going to be a legitamate QB controversy it should be expanded to include Matt Linart.

MorKnolle
01-12-2006, 02:38 PM
You could argue that Vince has the potential to be a better QB, but I agree Leinart is by far more NFL-ready at this moment and if I was going to use the pick for a guy that is supposed to come improve my team, I'd probably draft Leinart over Vince, but again that would largely depend on my coaching staff and their offensive system.

Holden135
01-12-2006, 02:55 PM
I honestly think Matt will be a better pro qb than Vince as well. He is a better passing qb. Everyone wants to talk about the 200yds Vince ran for against USC. Newsflash guys, USC's defense is not that good. I think they were around 48th in the nation(could be off). The speed in the nfl will factor out VY's running greatly. He may have a few good runs here and there but qb's need to excel in the pocket which is something Leinart has proven he can do. Im not saying Vince can't do it but he hasn't shown that he can at the level of Matt.

swtbound07
01-12-2006, 03:00 PM
I honestly think Matt will be a better pro qb than Vince as well. He is a better passing qb. Everyone wants to talk about the 200yds Vince ran for against USC. Newsflash guys, USC's defense is not that good. I think they were around 48th in the nation(could be off). The speed in the nfl will factor out VY's running greatly. He may have a few good runs here and there but qb's need to excel in the pocket which is something Leinart has proven he can do. Im not saying Vince can't do it but he hasn't shown that he can at the level of Matt.


its not really about the "runs"..its about the ability to escape when an (inferior) pocket breaks down...matt leinart isnt mobile, and our o-line isnt good enough to give a pure pocket passer time to suceed....Matt Leinart would get murdered, much like david carr has been over the past 4 seasons....Vince Young can make plays on the run, and avoid sacks. That is why Matt isnt mentioned in the controversy....we dont have the personnel in place to support a pure pocket passer.

Dennis007
01-12-2006, 03:37 PM
I honestly think Matt will be a better pro qb than Vince as well. He is a better passing qb. Everyone wants to talk about the 200yds Vince ran for against USC. Newsflash guys, USC's defense is not that good. I think they were around 48th in the nation(could be off). The speed in the nfl will factor out VY's running greatly. He may have a few good runs here and there but qb's need to excel in the pocket which is something Leinart has proven he can do. Im not saying Vince can't do it but he hasn't shown that he can at the level of Matt.

You must of went to Casserly's School of Logic. Scary.
:dontknowa

TheOgre
01-12-2006, 03:41 PM
You must of went to Casserly's School of Logic. Scary.
:dontknowa

Instead of making a mocking statement and insulting the poster, can you be specific about what is flawed in the logic?

Texans_Chick
01-12-2006, 04:06 PM
its not really about the "runs"..its about the ability to escape when an (inferior) pocket breaks down...matt leinart isnt mobile, and our o-line isnt good enough to give a pure pocket passer time to suceed....Matt Leinart would get murdered, much like david carr has been over the past 4 seasons....Vince Young can make plays on the run, and avoid sacks. That is why Matt isnt mentioned in the controversy....we dont have the personnel in place to support a pure pocket passer.


This is the point made by a column from TN saying why VY not Leinert is perfect for the Titanhicks:

Jim Wyatt-The Tennessean (http://www.jacksonsun.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060111/SPORTS/601110328/1006)

This is not a column you should want to read after eating because the thought of it is bad bad bad.

txlonghorn14
01-12-2006, 04:08 PM
if leinart had the same amount of heart or more than Vince does, than Leinart and USC would be 3 Peat National Champs. Oh, thats right......Vince and Texas shocked the nation

TEXANFAN23435
01-12-2006, 04:13 PM
Behind this current OL, VY would find out very fast that in the NFL you have DL who weigh 300+ and can chase you down inside of 5 yards and make that even sooner for the 250+ pound LB's. There's just no way of knowing how VY would handle the pressure of a failing pocket especially when he realizes his feet won't always bail him out. Yeah, he got away with it at the college level but its different with no OL. Getting DE-CLEATED from the blindside will certainly lower your moxey levels. I noticed VY didn't really face that kind of pressure this year and he had time to check off multiple routes before throwing the ball which resulted in a very good season. Why didn't he accomplish this years results in his previous 2 years as a starter? At the NFL level, Vick ( who's faster than VY ) was exposed when defenses contained him. Where did Vick's escapability and team leading rusher stats get the Falcons this year?? If Vick doesn't learn how to read defenses, DC's are only going to get better at making him one dimensional and Falcon fans will eventually sour on him. I do not want to single out VY, but because of our current OL situation, I honestly feel there is not 1 current NFL QB with experience much less a rookie who could have come in here this year and led our team to the playoffs coming off of last seasons 7-9 campaign.

Long-Spurs-Texan
01-12-2006, 04:21 PM
What is the diffence between David Carr & Matt Leinart? Carr is probably tougher, and Leinart had top 10 NFL picks around him his enire career. Leinart also had NFL coaching. You could put a lot of skilled QB's in that system & they would succeed.

gtexan02
01-12-2006, 05:09 PM
if leinart had the same amount of heart or more than Vince does, than Leinart and USC would be 3 Peat National Champs. Oh, thats right......Vince and Texas shocked the nation

Sometimes you UT fanboys scare me with your blind loyalty. Heart does help you win games, but only when you are actually in a position to do that. USC's defense let them down in that game, not Matt Leinart. Also, do you know how many times USC came from behind after trailing at the half? Many, many times. You would know that if you watched any game other than the rose bowl. The fact is, 1 game proves nothing. You hvae to look at history, and it shows that both QBs have an incredible will to win. Remember that game against Fresno? Thats heart


PS: Heres a nice quote that I really like from an article on foxsports.com

"The first pick is not for taking gambles. Vince Young, at this stage of his development, is a gamble. The upside is there, and it is tremendous, but so is the risk that the Texans would be right back here five years from now watching the David Carr-led Raiders challenge the Reggie Bush-led Saints in Super Bowl XLV while trying to decide whom they should take with the top pick to replace Vince Young."

Long-Spurs-Texan
01-12-2006, 05:49 PM
The fact that you thought enough about that article to quote it isn't helping your image. The Raiders & Saints in the Super Bowl five years from now? Wake up & smell the crack rocks.

Huge
01-12-2006, 05:56 PM
DeAngelo's stats:
103 carries, 684 yards, 5 TDs
243 carries, 1,430 yards, 10 TDs
313 carries, 1,948 yards, 22 TDs
309 carries, 1,959 yards, 18 TDs

Reggie's stats:
90 carries, 521 yards, 3 TDs
143 carries, 908 yards, 6 TDs
200 carries, 1,740 yards, 16 TDs

In other words, a team would be stupid to take Reggie Bush over DeAngelo Williams.


Right?

And I'm sure Carson Palmer would love to hear your theory about how QBs aren't supposed to move around because they get hurt that way.

JDizzle
01-12-2006, 06:03 PM
The fact that you thought enough about that article to quote it isn't helping your image. The Raiders & Saints in the Super Bowl five years from now? Wake up & smell the crack rocks.

The Saints and Raiders in the SB in 5 years? Doesn't seem too farfetched to me, they have far more talent than we do on both sides of the ball with one, common missing peice. Insulting people isn't helping your image.

Holden135
01-12-2006, 06:06 PM
DeAngelo's stats:
103 carries, 684 yards, 5 TDs
243 carries, 1,430 yards, 10 TDs
313 carries, 1,948 yards, 22 TDs
309 carries, 1,959 yards, 18 TDs

Reggie's stats:
90 carries, 521 yards, 3 TDs
143 carries, 908 yards, 6 TDs
200 carries, 1,740 yards, 16 TDs

In other words, a team would be stupid to take Reggie Bush over DeAngelo Williams.


Right?

And I'm sure Carson Palmer would love to hear your theory about how QBs aren't supposed to move around because they get hurt that way.

How about you show receptions and return yards in there too. Reggie is not a RB. He is an offensive weapon with no real label.

Huge
01-12-2006, 06:09 PM
How about you show receptions and return yards in there too. Reggie is not a RB. He is an offensive weapon with no real label.
So then shouldn't we also show Vince's rushing stats when we're comparing the two QB's?

It'd only seem fair...right?

Big B Texan Fan
01-12-2006, 06:10 PM
Good job on the stats HUGE. Looks like Williams is durable too

uofmgriz
01-12-2006, 06:16 PM
I do agree with what you say regarding Matt, however, why even bother with a quarterback? The offensive line couldn't protect a crash test dummy. If they draft Young, Leinart, or Bush, all they are going to do is promptly destroy any hopes of this young talent from taking off in this league. I say trade the first round pick, for extra picks, and get an offensive line!!

Napa Auto Parts
01-12-2006, 06:18 PM
Plain and simple, I'd rather have Leinart than Young here.

What does VY have going for him?
Heart of a champion
Accurate Passer
Very mobile

What does Leinart have?
Same champions heart
More accurate passer
Not mobile, but doesn't need to be because of superior pocket presence
Calls his own plays

VY had a good junior year, true, but Leinart had 3 incredible seasons. I'd take consistency over 1 good game any day.

Matts stats:
2003 255/402 (63.4%) for 3556 38 TDs and 9 INTs
2004 269/412 (65.3%) for 3322 33 TDs and 6 INTs
2005 283/431 (65.7%) for 3815 28 TDs and 8 INTs

VY stats:
2003 84/143 (58.7%) for 1155 6 TDs and 7 INTs
2004 148/250 (59.2%) for 1849 12 TDs and 11 INTs
2005 212/325 (65.2%) for 3036 26 TDs and 10 INTs

If all you Longhorn fans really think we need a QB, why isn't Leinart even being considered? Because he's not from Texas? Thats ridiculous. He has shown for his ENTIRE career that he is a winner who gets it done. His worst season was still better than VYs best season as a passer. Sure he doesn't move around as much, but NFL quarterbacks aren't supposed to move around. Thats how you get hurt, just look at Vick. The fact of the matter is, Leinart is a MUCH BETTER NFL prospect than VY. He throws the ball perfectly. He is smart. He is calm. He reads defenses better, and he even calls his own plays. VY is a gamble, and may turn out great, but also may turn out badly



Im not going to agree with you but i think either one of this two great college QB's would be and upgrade for us.

rmartin65
01-12-2006, 06:22 PM
An offensive line is what I as a fan would like. But if it had to go between Young and Leinart, I'd pick Leinart. And a loathe USC. The reason I'd pick Leinart is that he is a proven QB. He could avoid sacks because he has a quick release and great pocket presence. An offensive lineman is what I want, but Leinart would be a better pick than Young.

thunderkyss
01-12-2006, 07:20 PM
Behind this current OL, VY would find out very fast that in the NFL you have DL who weigh 300+ and can chase you down inside of 5 yards and make that even sooner for the 250+ pound LB's. There's just no way of knowing how VY would handle the pressure of a failing pocket especially when he realizes his feet won't always bail him out. Yeah, he got away with it at the college level but its different with no OL. Getting DE-CLEATED from the blindside will certainly lower your moxey levels. I noticed VY didn't really face that kind of pressure this year and he had time to check off multiple routes before throwing the ball which resulted in a very good season. Why didn't he accomplish this years results in his previous 2 years as a starter? At the NFL level, Vick ( who's faster than VY ) was exposed when defenses contained him. Where did Vick's escapability and team leading rusher stats get the Falcons this year?? If Vick doesn't learn how to read defenses, DC's are only going to get better at making him one dimensional and Falcon fans will eventually sour on him. I do not want to single out VY, but because of our current OL situation, I honestly feel there is not 1 current NFL QB with experience much less a rookie who could have come in here this year and led our team to the playoffs coming off of last seasons 7-9 campaign.


Dante and Donovan have been very comfortable playing in the NFL. Neither faced the competition Vince has in college.

Vicks problem is that he can't throw the ball like McNabb, Like Donovan, Like Vince. HE has had that one game, where he showed he can throw it too. Vince has had two seasons.

gtexan02
01-12-2006, 10:21 PM
What two seasons are you referring to exactly? Vince only had 1 good year as a passer. His sophomore season he had nearly as many picks as TDs and only threw for around 2000 yards. Sounds like David Carr #s

HoustonFrog
01-12-2006, 10:31 PM
These posts crack me up because their main goal is not to find a better guy to draft but to discredit someone who is a good kid and awesome player. VY has improved every year. His throwing has been excellent and he had one of the highest QB ratings this year, part of it completion percentage. Jack Pardee was on the radio yesterday and said with his coaching knowlege the guy would fit perfectly in a system like the Colts run. I'm so tired of the Vick comparisons. There is a big difference besides Vick not being able to throw...Vick never won jack in college and hasn't led a team to anything. Vince is a winner, plain and simple. And I am a Bush draft supporter. Stop putting down a guy because you don't like the hype.

Huge
01-12-2006, 10:38 PM
What two seasons are you referring to exactly? Vince only had 1 good year as a passer. His sophomore season he had nearly as many picks as TDs and only threw for around 2000 yards. Sounds like David Carr #s
Reggie Bush - 908 rushing yards, 6 rushing TDs last season.

I know, I know...you're just dying to point out how he only had 143 carries and if he had more carries then his overall numbers would look a lot better. But you know you can't do that because I'll simply point out the limited number of attempts that Young had which would have an effect on his passing yards.

Frustrating, ain't it?

I don't think there's any question that Leinart is a better passer than Young. But does that make him the better QB? Not in my mind.

beerlover
01-12-2006, 11:29 PM
These posts crack me up because their main goal is not to find a better guy to draft but to discredit someone who is a good kid and awesome player. VY has improved every year. His throwing has been excellent and he had one of the highest QB ratings this year, part of it completion percentage. Jack Pardee was on the radio yesterday and said with his coaching knowlege the guy would fit perfectly in a system like the Colts run. I'm so tired of the Vick comparisons. There is a big difference besides Vick not being able to throw...Vick never won jack in college and hasn't led a team to anything. Vince is a winner, plain and simple. And I am a Bush draft supporter. Stop putting down a guy because you don't like the hype.

I predict BIG things for the HOUSTONFROG how do ya like that hype :heh:

Since this has been the only thing on everyones mind it might be possible that Vince Young while everything we need as a leader and playmaker at the QB position that we may just be at a point where we need so much that addressing several needs > taking #1 overall. we've got three months to hash this out but a trade down scenero where the Texans cash in on a bundle of picks for trading down just a few spots maybe the correct pathway, I just would like some assurance that Casserly will select better than in the past.

liltony9144
01-13-2006, 12:13 AM
At least Vince is actually getting better, as the stats state.

I think he's better under pressure overall, and plus, our line still may suck next year. Whats going to happen to Leinart when he isn't mobile enough to avoid certain sacks. Leinart's good, don't get me wrong, just a mobile QB is more of what we need. He would be better on a team with a fantastic line, as he can just sit there and then throw.

HOOK'EM
02-04-2006, 09:21 PM
Leinert is the next Tom Brady, VY is da next Kordel Stewart!:stirpot:

Texans>Colts
02-04-2006, 09:31 PM
Matt Leinart had 2 1,000 yd rushers that combinded for over 3,000yds (Bush= 1740yds White =1302yds), had 2 900 yd recivers (Steve Smith=958, Dwayne Jarrett=1,274), and one of the best o-lines in college. Now this is USC's Offense.

Young has a 900 yd rusher(charels=906), a 750 yd receiver, (Pittman), but has a good o-line to. Now this is Texas's Offense.

Maybe if Vince Young had Leinart's Team he would be better

kastofsna
02-04-2006, 09:37 PM
At least Vince is actually getting better, as the stats state.

I think he's better under pressure overall, and plus, our line still may suck next year. Whats going to happen to Leinart when he isn't mobile enough to avoid certain sacks. Leinart's good, don't get me wrong, just a mobile QB is more of what we need. He would be better on a team with a fantastic line, as he can just sit there and then throw.
he's as mobile as you need. people seem to have this thought that leinart is a statue. it's completely false. they run more bootlegs and rollouts than anyone in the country. he throws on the run a lot. he avoids the pressure very well. he steps up in the pocket when the collapses around him. he's not drew bledsoe. he'll avoid the pressure well

thunderkyss
02-04-2006, 10:00 PM
its not really about the "runs"..its about the ability to escape when an (inferior) pocket breaks down...matt leinart isnt mobile, and our o-line isnt good enough to give a pure pocket passer time to suceed....Matt Leinart would get murdered, much like david carr has been over the past 4 seasons....Vince Young can make plays on the run, and avoid sacks. That is why Matt isnt mentioned in the controversy....we dont have the personnel in place to support a pure pocket passer.


This has really got to be one of the worse reasons to draft Vince. If your Oline is weak..... fix the Oline. Don't go building your team around broken pieces.

HoustonFrog
02-04-2006, 10:10 PM
[QUOTE=gtexan02]VY had a good junior year, true, but Leinart had 3 incredible seasons. I'd take consistency over 1 good game any day./QUOTE]

I agree Leinart is awesome and if you think he is a better QB then more power to you, just stop losing all the respect you garnered in your post with a quote like this. VY was 29-2 and did the same thing in the Rose Bowl the year before, against OK St twice and against many other teams. It amazes me how much people DONY watch college football and say things like it was 1 game. No, I'm not a tsip and no, I don't want to draft him, just get your facts straight.

thunderkyss
02-04-2006, 10:20 PM
Matt Leinart had 2 1,000 yd rushers that combinded for over 3,000yds (Bush= 1740yds White =1302yds), had 2 900 yd recivers (Steve Smith=958, Dwayne Jarrett=1,274), and one of the best o-lines in college. Now this is USC's Offense.

Young has a 900 yd rusher(charels=906), a 750 yd receiver, (Pittman), but has a good o-line to. Now this is Texas's Offense.

Maybe if Vince Young had Leinart's Team he would be better


Then, then..... Matt played for 4 quarters every week...... Vince didn't.......

who knows what kinda numbers he'd have.

Besides, who is looking for quick fixes?? who needs NFL ready.... .I want the best prospect, over the long term. I'm looking for a Franchise QB. I'm not fortunate enough to actually know these guys. Wish I did. I need to sit down with the two, before I actually pick one.

But that's not really the point. I've become a Fan of Vince Young. doesn't matter if it started at the RoseBowl 2006, or the RoseBowl 2005. I think Vince has what it takes to be a franchise QB. I'm not saying Matt doesn't. I'm not saying Reggie doesn't.

swtbound07
02-04-2006, 10:41 PM
This has really got to be one of the worse reasons to draft Vince. If your Oline is weak..... fix the Oline. Don't go building your team around broken pieces.

i agree in theory, but the reality is the o-line has been atrocious since franchise inception, and you cant work under the assumption that this will finally be the year it gets fixed. People keep saying david carr might thrive under a good system and good o-line.....what happens if we NEVER FIX the o-line? I mean, its not a new problem, and it gets continually ignored....why are we taking it for granted that carr will ever get a fair shake here?

LBC_Justin
02-04-2006, 10:52 PM
This has really got to be one of the worse reasons to draft Vince. If your Oline is weak..... fix the Oline. Don't go building your team around broken pieces.GOOD POST.

Dr. Toro
02-05-2006, 12:39 AM
I am not opposed to a Leinart-Young debate.

To officially state my position, I think the Texans should take Vince Young. It's largely due to his size and athletic ability, big game presence, leadership, and solid passing skills. I just think it's a combination nobody has seen. The fact that he's from Houston matters to me. He seems to be a true "franchise player", you could say the same for Leinart, Bush, or Ferguson, but having witnessed 4 years, it's tough to say that about Carr.

Leinart is a stud as well. This is a great year to be drafting a QB #1, the Young/Leinart choice sure seems to be superior to what Carr/Harrington looked like coming out.

This is the way I see the Texans coming into the draft:

1. If the Texans were drafting on undisputed need, Ferguson is the pick. Getting Ferguson is the "smart" thing to do. I honestly don't understand why there's no push for D'Brickashaw at #1, there's no guarantee we can get him if we trade down, he's clearly a top 4 player. I thought he was the best player in the draft back in October, before the Young and Bush explosions. I now think VY is #1, but my initial instinct may have been right.

2. If the Texans are drafting not on dire need, but for a playmaker, Young is the pick. Our RB play has been better than our QB play. If the zone blocking scheme helps make the runner, investing a #1 pick in the RB seems wasteful when we have one solid RB Davis (big cap number/long term deal) and another proven runner in Wells. No one here is the final judge of talent, so maybe Leinart is the better pick if we want to improve the O for the longhaul. I would prefer him to Bush. I don't think the Texans are one year away. So the whole "It'll take Vince Young time" thing doesn't bother me. I'm interested in the long term future of the team, and I don't think Carr is the answer. The time spent on Carr is a sunk cost, it's no reason to keep him.

3. If the Texans think they can win next year or in 2007, Bush is the pick. Clearly, he is the quickest impact player. He will significantly improve the offense of whatever team he plays for. He might be the next LT/Faulk, then again he might not be a guy to build a franchise around. But if you are confident in your QB (Carr), have a good tough runner (Wells or DD), and a superstar WR (Johnson), he can definitely take your offense to the next level.
Nobody likes to hear it after 4 tough years, but I see the Texans in rebuilding mode. There's really no core area of strength to focus around. My fear is that drafting Bush will be a short term boost, but two years down the line David Carr won't be any better in the pocket or any more of a winner.

thunderkyss
02-05-2006, 01:06 AM
Behind this current OL, VY would find out very fast that in the NFL you have DL who weigh 300+ and can chase you down inside of 5 yards and make that even sooner for the 250+ pound LB's. There's just no way of knowing how VY would handle the pressure of a failing pocket especially when he realizes his feet won't always bail him out.
Is this what happened to David?? if so, fine. I've seen how David has risen to the challenge. I'm ready to move on.
It's a good thing only QBs have to worry about bigger faster DLs, and LBs, other wise Reggie wouldn't stand a chance.

Yeah, he got away with it at the college level but its different with no OL. Getting DE-CLEATED from the blindside will certainly lower your moxey levels. I noticed VY didn't really face that kind of pressure this year and he had time to check off multiple routes before throwing the ball which resulted in a very good season. Why didn't he accomplish this years results in his previous 2 years as a starter?I'm sure you've been corrected by now.... or at least explained that he didn't start the previous two years. I also wanted to thank you for being able to see something the other RB man-lovers deny(the text that is underlined)

At the NFL level, Vick ( who's faster than VY ) was exposed when defenses contained him. Where did Vick's escapability and team leading rusher stats get the Falcons this year?? If Vick doesn't learn how to read defenses, DC's are only going to get better at making him one dimensional and Falcon fans will eventually sour on him.for whatever knock you've got on Vince(even tough there is no basis for the comparison) you can apply to Vick. Didn't play in an NFL system in college, toooo risky, bad throwing motion, runs too much, Vick got his team to the NFC Championship game. This year, his team won more with him, than without.
I do not want to single out VY, but because of our current OL situation, I honestly feel there is not 1 current NFL QB with experience much less a rookie who could have come in here this year and led our team to the playoffs coming off of last seasons 7-9 campaign.
Now see that is were you are wrong....... way wrong.
Have you ever seen David run to the sideline, with the ball in his hand?? What did you want him to do with it?? Go on, you can say it.... THROW THE DAAAMMM BALL FOR KRIIIIST SAKE... now, can you think of any QBs in the league, that you don't have to tell that too?? Now on those occasions, and every other situation, when the pocket collapsed, and David started running just imagine a QB who completes 60% in those situations. do you think he could have done better than Carr?? be honest now, if David got out of the pocket, let's assume this other QB could get out of the pocket. When he is on the run his completion percentage goes up. Isn't it feesible, that he would have done better??? And there are others...Of course, if Pittsburgh is in town, it's understandable that he might not be able to get anything done...so that game is still a loss.... but every other game, could very well have been a win.

thunderkyss
02-05-2006, 01:19 AM
I am not opposed to a Leinart-Young debate.

To officially state my position, I think the Texans should take Vince Young. It's largely due to his size and athletic ability, big game presence, leadership, and solid passing skills. I just think it's a combination nobody has seen. The fact that he's from Houston matters to me. He seems to be a true "franchise player", you could say the same for Leinart, Bush, or Ferguson, but having witnessed 4 years, it's tough to say that about Carr.

Leinart is a stud as well. This is a great year to be drafting a QB #1, the Young/Leinart choice sure seems to be superior to what Carr/Harrington looked like coming out.

This is the way I see the Texans coming into the draft:

1. If the Texans were drafting on undisputed need, Ferguson is the pick. Getting Ferguson is the "smart" thing to do. I honestly don't understand why there's no push for D'Brickashaw at #1, there's no guarantee we can get him if we trade down, he's clearly a top 4 player. I thought he was the best player in the draft back in October, before the Young and Bush explosions. I now think VY is #1, but my initial instinct may have been right.

2. If the Texans are drafting not on dire need, but for a playmaker, Young is the pick. Our RB play has been better than our QB play. If the zone blocking scheme helps make the runner, investing a #1 pick in the RB seems wasteful when we have one solid RB Davis (big cap number/long term deal) and another proven runner in Wells. No one here is the final judge of talent, so maybe Leinart is the better pick if we want to improve the O for the longhaul. I would prefer him to Bush. I don't think the Texans are one year away. So the whole "It'll take Vince Young time" thing doesn't bother me. I'm interested in the long term future of the team, and I don't think Carr is the answer. The time spent on Carr is a sunk cost, it's no reason to keep him.

3. If the Texans think they can win next year or in 2007, Bush is the pick. Clearly, he is the quickest impact player. He will significantly improve the offense of whatever team he plays for. He might be the next LT/Faulk, then again he might not be a guy to build a franchise around. But if you are confident in your QB (Carr), have a good tough runner (Wells or DD), and a superstar WR (Johnson), he can definitely take your offense to the next level.
Nobody likes to hear it after 4 tough years, but I see the Texans in rebuilding mode. There's really no core area of strength to focus around. My fear is that drafting Bush will be a short term boost, but two years down the line David Carr won't be any better in the pocket or any more of a winner.

D'Brick has got issues just like any one else. I firmly believe, that if you want to fix the O, plug it with a FA worth his Paycheck. In this case, Bentley. put him in at Center, and all of a sudden both sides of your Oline start to look competent. Move him to the left side, and you've basically got a fort knox kinda thing over there.
Now, you can use your first overall, for first overall kinda talent, pick up an Offensive lineman, preferrably a left tackle, that you can start grooming.

Also look for young O-Lineman that will be getting cut after Training Camp start.... there maybe one guy that didn't fit another system, that would excell in yours........ They may not start, but might be servicable, and earn themselves spots on next years roster.....


By the way, did I say good post

Dr. Toro
02-05-2006, 01:36 AM
I know D'Brickashaw (I prefer the full name in all its glory) ain't perfect. I do like the idea of Bentley. There will be several FA linemen available, we should get one regardless of what we do in the draft. Mike Williams is one of those guys that might get cut, he might be worth a look. I don't know if Ferguson is an Orlando Pace caliber guy, but in years past he might have been #1. I'm not saying we should spend the #1 pick on him, but it seems unlikely we could get him if we traded down. The Jets might covet him, especially if being a hometown boy matters outside of Houston.

jerek
02-05-2006, 01:58 AM
Where's Leinart?

Simple: dropping his name does nothing to further Young fanatics' agenda.

swtbound07
02-05-2006, 03:48 AM
These posts crack me up because their main goal is not to find a better guy to draft but to discredit someone who is a good kid and awesome player. VY has improved every year. His throwing has been excellent and he had one of the highest QB ratings this year, part of it completion percentage. Jack Pardee was on the radio yesterday and said with his coaching knowlege the guy would fit perfectly in a system like the Colts run. I'm so tired of the Vick comparisons. There is a big difference besides Vick not being able to throw...Vick never won jack in college and hasn't led a team to anything. Vince is a winner, plain and simple. And I am a Bush draft supporter. Stop putting down a guy because you don't like the hype.


Anybody else remember vick leading v-tech to the national championship game, and almost singlehandedly beating a very very very good florida state team? dont say he never led his team...cause i distinctly remember him putting v-tech on his back

thunderkyss
02-05-2006, 07:52 AM
I know D'Brickashaw (I prefer the full name in all its glory) ain't perfect. I do like the idea of Bentley. There will be several FA linemen available, we should get one regardless of what we do in the draft. Mike Williams is one of those guys that might get cut, he might be worth a look. I don't know if Ferguson is an Orlando Pace caliber guy, but in years past he might have been #1. I'm not saying we should spend the #1 pick on him, but it seems unlikely we could get him if we traded down. The Jets might covet him, especially if being a hometown boy matters outside of Houston.


I'm just saying FA comes before the draft..... if we land Bentley, then our need to pick on OT in the Draft diminishes quite a bit. We've got the Draft, we've got FA, and a lot of guys will be getting cut to make the 52 man roster before the season starts. The draft is not the only solution to the OL.

MorKnolle
02-05-2006, 11:10 AM
I'm just saying FA comes before the draft..... if we land Bentley, then our need to pick on OT in the Draft diminishes quite a bit. We've got the Draft, we've got FA, and a lot of guys will be getting cut to make the 52 man roster before the season starts. The draft is not the only solution to the OL.

Bentley would be a great addition if we can indeed keep him from going to Cleveland, however adding him doesn't change the fact that Todd Wade is not very good at all and we need a new OT. If anything bringing in Bentley, drafting another OG and solidifying the interior of our line almost makes it more imperative that we get a new OT. If our OLine is going to suck, we might as well have a couple guys on there that are terrible and concentrate on fixing up our defense and getting offensive playmakers, but if we're going to fix up the rest of our OLine but still have that glaring hole at RT then we're still going to have our pass protection break down a lot.
If we're going to attempt to fix up the offense, let's do it all the way and get this team going and see what our offense can do with Kubiak leading the way.

C Madd
02-05-2006, 10:25 PM
if leinart had the same amount of heart or more than Vince does, than Leinart and USC would be 3 Peat National Champs. Oh, thats right......Vince and Texas shocked the nation
That's the stupidest, most illogical statement I've seen on these boards in a while. I guess Leinart's 2 to Vince's 1 means Vince is better. How can you say Vince has more heart? I'm fairly sure this isn't a measurable statistic. He definitely didn't have heart to win those 2....jeez.

awtysst
02-05-2006, 10:56 PM
That's the stupidest, most illogical statement I've seen on these boards in a while. I guess Leinart's 2 to Vince's 1 means Vince is better. How can you say Vince has more heart? I'm fairly sure this isn't a measurable statistic. He definitely didn't have heart to win those 2....jeez.


Actually leinart has one. LSU won 1, usc 1, UT 1.
I dont recognize the USC of three years back.

C Madd
02-05-2006, 11:05 PM
Actually leinart has one. LSU won 1, usc 1, UT 1.
I dont recognize the USC of three years back.
No offense, and definitely not trying to be a jerk, but didn't the AP poll recognize them? I think they have a bit more say than you.

swtbound07
02-05-2006, 11:12 PM
No offense, and definitely not trying to be a jerk, but didn't the AP poll recognize them? I think they have a bit more say than you.


the ap poll basically laughed in the face of the bcs system and went completely against what they said they would...that would be the same as the ap poll declaring auburn national champions last year. USC's first was bogus...oklahoma game was the only legit championship

C Madd
02-05-2006, 11:28 PM
If Texas won the AP poll, no one would be saying anything...they would have had 2, but since its USC its just "1".

And none of this changes the fact that its illogical say Vince has more heart than Leinart because of 1 game.

texplayer2
02-06-2006, 01:17 AM
Actually leinart has one. LSU won 1, usc 1, UT 1.
I dont recognize the USC of three years back.

Watch the Superbowl then, and check out Troy P. on the World Champion Steelers. He was their 3yrs ago do you recognize where he is at? SC was ranked #1 going into the title game 3 yrs. ago. by Coaches and AP. They didn't lose, how could they not be the NC. I don't let computers tell me how to think or who is #1. If you go by that Logic then, know that UT is already below SC in all the pre-season polls I have seen, and I don't buy them losing that spot at #1 until they have their first loss next year. You think West Virginia is #1 now? I don't.
As far as the Lienert/Young thing. Lienert loss two games in his college career by a field goal each. What was the point spread for Vince? In college the wins and losses mean a WHOLE lot more than stats. Stats are for guys already in the NFL and who generally lose at least a fourth of their games every year.:twocents:

swtbound07
02-06-2006, 01:38 AM
Watch the Superbowl then, and check out Troy P. on the World Champion Steelers. He was their 3yrs ago do you recognize where he is at? SC was ranked #1 going into the title game 3 yrs. ago. by Coaches and AP. They didn't lose, how could they not be the NC. I don't let computers tell me how to think or who is #1. If you go by that Logic then, know that UT is already below SC in all the pre-season polls I have seen, and I don't buy them losing that spot at #1 until they have their first loss next year. You think West Virginia is #1 now? I don't.
As far as the Lienert/Young thing. Lienert loss two games in his college career by a field goal each. What was the point spread for Vince? In college the wins and losses mean a WHOLE lot more than stats. Stats are for guys already in the NFL and who generally lose at least a fourth of their games every year.:twocents:


thats a false arguement. its like saying the colts should be nfl champions because vic carruci has them #1 in his power rankings. USC wasnt in the BCS championship game. Period. Thats the closest thing you have in college football to a playoff. USC wasnt playing for the national championship, and the AP poll violated their agreement to recognize the bcs champion. LSU won it fair and square, and the split championship was bs. Then, that shoe didnt apply the next year when they won the bcs game and auburn went undefeated...where is the split national championship game? USC=1 BCS Championship, LSU= 1 BCS championship, UT=1 BCS Championship. Thats the only way you crown a champion right now. The Associated Press has no bearing, and no Trophy.

texplayer2
02-06-2006, 01:56 AM
thats a false arguement. its like saying the colts should be nfl champions because vic carruci has them #1 in his power rankings. USC wasnt in the BCS championship game. Period. Thats the closest thing you have in college football to a playoff. USC wasnt playing for the national championship, and the AP poll violated their agreement to recognize the bcs champion. LSU won it fair and square, and the split championship was bs. Then, that shoe didnt apply the next year when they won the bcs game and auburn went undefeated...where is the split national championship game? USC=1 BCS Championship, LSU= 1 BCS championship, UT=1 BCS Championship. Thats the only way you crown a champion right now. The Associated Press has no bearing, and no Trophy.

Auburn Was not ranked #1 last year. USC and Oklahoma were seen as the best two teams by actual people. The year before SC was ranked ahead of both LSU and Oklahoma in both Polls that were not computer generated. The coaches were made to agree because they said they would, but the AP was not involved in that obligation. They should have done an error check on their program before it was implimented, but with most programming now days they put it out there and provide patches as you go. Along these lines if you put your taxes in a program and you know you should only pay $500 dollars, but the program says you owe $2000 dollars, you go ahead and pay it .......don't you?

texplayer2
02-06-2006, 02:07 AM
thats a false arguement. its like saying the colts should be nfl champions because vic carruci has them #1 in his power rankings. USC wasnt in the BCS championship game. Period. .

The NFL settles all the speculation on the Field, BcS does not. I do not always agree with poll makers as I said in regards to UT's current place at less than #1. But having all the coaches and AP say a team is #1 before being REQUIRED to vote another way doesn't work for me. You are the Best until some beats you. Ask Mac Brown about that, he voted for SC in the final poll of the regular season and then went out and took that spot.

swtbound07
02-06-2006, 03:51 AM
Auburn Was not ranked #1 last year. USC and Oklahoma were seen as the best two teams by actual people. The year before SC was ranked ahead of both LSU and Oklahoma in both Polls that were not computer generated. The coaches were made to agree because they said they would, but the AP was not involved in that obligation. They should have done an error check on their program before it was implimented, but with most programming now days they put it out there and provide patches as you go. Along these lines if you put your taxes in a program and you know you should only pay $500 dollars, but the program says you owe $2000 dollars, you go ahead and pay it .......don't you?


it doesnt matter though...the point is that you cant set up a system, and then disregard the result of the system when it delivers an undesireable result. Its not about the #1 ranking by people polls...people are BIASED, thats why computers are used in the system. The thing is, you cant just arbitrarily award USC a national championship...its insulting to the system, and its quite demeaning to what LSU accomplished on the field that year. Im by no means saying the BCS is perfect, cause it aint, but if you are going to say USC got screwed by the computers, i can make that same arguement for auburn, for Utah, for boise state pre bowl game. You agree to be a part of the system, you be a part of the system. The system was designed to do one thing, which is prevent split national championships. You dont get to make a split national championship when you dont like what the system does. USC has one championship. Period.

thunderkyss
02-06-2006, 08:25 AM
the ap poll basically laughed in the face of the bcs system and went completely against what they said they would...that would be the same as the ap poll declaring auburn national champions last year. USC's first was bogus...oklahoma game was the only legit championship

I think it should've been Auburn & USC....... I really don't believe that Oklahoma team should've been #2.

texplayer2
02-06-2006, 09:33 PM
it doesnt matter though...the point is that you cant set up a system, and then disregard the result of the system when it delivers an undesireable result. Its not about the #1 ranking by people polls...people are BIASED, thats why computers are used in the system. The thing is, you cant just arbitrarily award USC a national championship...its insulting to the system, and its quite demeaning to what LSU accomplished on the field that year. Im by no means saying the BCS is perfect, cause it aint, but if you are going to say USC got screwed by the computers, i can make that same arguement for auburn, for Utah, for boise state pre bowl game. You agree to be a part of the system, you be a part of the system. The system was designed to do one thing, which is prevent split national championships. You dont get to make a split national championship when you dont like what the system does. USC has one championship. Period.


If the system gives you a result contrary to the truth I will always go with the truth. The Coaches agreed because they were obligated and probably forced to comply. The AP which was also recognized by the BCS was not obligated and was based on reporting a ranking rather than establishing one. Just because you belong to BCS establishment, doesn't mean the majority are. Fact is I believe most people have found many problems with the BCS and you have to trust the system to follow it. If a large group of people didn't believe a three-peat was possible, then where did it come from?

swtbound07
02-06-2006, 10:58 PM
If the system gives you a result contrary to the truth I will always go with the truth. The Coaches agreed because they were obligated and probably forced to comply. The AP which was also recognized by the BCS was not obligated and was based on reporting a ranking rather than establishing one. Just because you belong to BCS establishment, doesn't mean the majority are. Fact is I believe most people have found many problems with the BCS and you have to trust the system to follow it. If a large group of people didn't believe a three-peat was possible, then where did it come from?


Here is the problem with your arguement...the truth is very subjective in this case...could USC have beaten LSU on the field that year? could they have beaten auburn? You never know...its impossible to know. USC could have 3 peated the AP championship. However, they didnt, and they only got one BCS championship. I dont belong to a BCS establishment, but the point is again that people are more biased than computers. LSU got the nod, and USC would have done well to just accept that. When you change the system to a playoff, then you can make a case for USC, but until then, i gotta say, you work the system you have. A lot of people have a problem with the electoral vote system of electing president....Gore won 1 part of it in 2000, but not the other. He doesnt get to go around calling himself the president. You use the system you have, or you change it. You dont subvert it.

BlueThunder
02-06-2006, 11:10 PM
Oh,I don't agree with this post at all.Wheres the rest of Vince's stats:BananaWav


The other half of his game thats missing.All them rushing yards and the 10 rushing TDs.:hyper:

Vince Young is ranked above Matt Leinart in total yards and Vinve had to run for his also..

Vince averaged 159 yards passing a game and Matt averaged 156

Matt Leinart threw 3 ints in the Rose Bowl and if it wasn't for his all american WR there would have been more..

MorKnolle
02-06-2006, 11:28 PM
Oh,I don't agree with this post at all.Wheres the rest of Vince's stats:BananaWav


The other half of his game thats missing.All them rushing yards and the 10 rushing TDs.:hyper:

Vince Young is ranked above Matt Leinart in total yards and Vinve had to run for his also..

Vince averaged 159 yards passing a game and Matt averaged 156

Matt Leinart threw 3 ints in the Rose Bowl and if it wasn't for his all american WR there would have been more..

What are you talking about with this post?

texplayer2
02-10-2006, 12:05 AM
Here is the problem with your arguement...the truth is very subjective in this case...could USC have beaten LSU on the field that year? could they have beaten auburn? You never know...its impossible to know. USC could have 3 peated the AP championship. However, they didnt, and they only got one BCS championship. I dont belong to a BCS establishment, but the point is again that people are more biased than computers. LSU got the nod, and USC would have done well to just accept that. When you change the system to a playoff, then you can make a case for USC, but until then, i gotta say, you work the system you have. A lot of people have a problem with the electoral vote system of electing president....Gore won 1 part of it in 2000, but not the other. He doesnt get to go around calling himself the president. You use the system you have, or you change it. You dont subvert it.

If you believe the BCS works you are part of the system. I will question the results of any system that doesn't work. BCS was not meant to pit #1vs #2 or it would have all the time. It was meant to establish certain conferences and bowls as the power brokers in college football. The way I see it the computers actually deprived LSU of a REAL NC because they had to play Oklahoma in a consulation game and didn't get to face the REAL #! team at that point. So this year the Texas Longhorns beat the two-time defending national champs.

texplayer2
02-10-2006, 12:10 AM
..could USC have beaten LSU on the field that year? could they have beaten auburn? You never know...its impossible to know. .


By the way USC 23 Auburn 0 the year you think they weren't #1. First game of the season.

swtbound07
02-10-2006, 12:25 AM
By the way USC 23 Auburn 0 the year you think they weren't #1. First game of the season.


2 different teams, 2 different years...no way to know. By the way...they werent number 1. I guess we could debate this until eternity, but i spose we should just agree to disagree

kbourda
02-11-2006, 01:41 AM
Keep in mind this post started before the college football season.

http://www.houstontexans.com/fan_zone/messageboards/showthread.php?t=10438on.

YoungnotBush
02-11-2006, 01:51 AM
Plain and simple, I'd rather have Leinart than Young here.

What does VY have going for him?
Heart of a champion
Accurate Passer
Very mobile

What does Leinart have?
Same champions heart
More accurate passer
Not mobile, but doesn't need to be because of superior pocket presence
Calls his own plays

VY had a good junior year, true, but Leinart had 3 incredible seasons. I'd take consistency over 1 good game any day.

Matts stats:
2003 255/402 (63.4%) for 3556 38 TDs and 9 INTs
2004 269/412 (65.3%) for 3322 33 TDs and 6 INTs
2005 283/431 (65.7%) for 3815 28 TDs and 8 INTs

VY stats:
2003 84/143 (58.7%) for 1155 6 TDs and 7 INTs
2004 148/250 (59.2%) for 1849 12 TDs and 11 INTs
2005 212/325 (65.2%) for 3036 26 TDs and 10 INTs

If all you Longhorn fans really think we need a QB, why isn't Leinart even being considered? Because he's not from Texas? Thats ridiculous. He has shown for his ENTIRE career that he is a winner who gets it done. His worst season was still better than VYs best season as a passer. Sure he doesn't move around as much, but NFL quarterbacks aren't supposed to move around. Thats how you get hurt, just look at Vick. The fact of the matter is, Leinart is a MUCH BETTER NFL prospect than VY. He throws the ball perfectly. He is smart. He is calm. He reads defenses better, and he even calls his own plays. VY is a gamble, and may turn out great, but also may turn out badly

You said it:

"Not Mobile"

Do you mean drew bledsoe "Not Mobile" or peyton manning "Not Mobile"?

And don't even think about saying Brady.

You have to have some mobility at the QB spot.

tulexan
02-11-2006, 02:11 AM
You don't have to have some mobility at the QB spot.

Dan Marino was one of the least mobile QBs in league history. Are you telling me that he wasn't a good QB. And why not include Brady? He isn't a mobile QB at all.

YoungnotBush
02-11-2006, 02:17 AM
If all you Longhorn fans really think we need a QB, why isn't Leinart even being considered? Because he's not from Texas? Thats ridiculous. He has shown for his ENTIRE career that he is a winner who gets it done. His worst season was still better than VYs best season as a passer. Sure he doesn't move around as much, but NFL quarterbacks aren't supposed to move around. Thats how you get hurt, just look at Vick. The fact of the matter is, Leinart is a MUCH BETTER NFL prospect than VY. He throws the ball perfectly. He is smart. He is calm. He reads defenses better, and he even calls his own plays. VY is a gamble, and may turn out great, but also may turn out badly


B/c Leinart isn't a Texas legend.

Do you think that the Oilers should have passed on Earl Campbell?

Let's face it Vince is going to sell season tickets. His face is going to be everywhere nationwide.

He has already started by hosting an All-star special for TNT on NBA.com during the week before the All-star game. He is going to be the most marketable guy out there.

Vick has still been further than LT. And won more playoff games.

YoungnotBush
02-11-2006, 02:22 AM
You don't have to have some mobility at the QB spot.

Dan Marino was one of the least mobile QBs in league history. Are you telling me that he wasn't a good QB. And why not include Brady? He isn't a mobile QB at all.


Dan Marino never won a Super Bowl. Brady gets the tough yards. He is mobile, he is not a scrambler by any means though. Peyton Manning and those "Not Mobile" QB's don't get the tough yards and those 6 or 7 yard first downs. Brady does.

the only problem is, that you can't teach anyone how to run like Vince Young, but Imagine if you could teach Vince Young to throw like a Brady. That is at least possible.

A whole lot easier than teaching David Carr how to win.

tulexan
02-11-2006, 02:25 AM
And Reggie Bush won't sell tickets and merchandise?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't there a Bush Bowl in December? Wasn't Reggie the Heisman winner? Reggie Bush will be just as marketable, if not more, than Vince nationwide. Outside of the Houston bubble, almost everyone agrees that Reggie is the best player in the draft. The argument isn't so much Reggie v. Vince, it is Reggie v. Trade down.

MorKnolle
02-11-2006, 12:17 PM
And Reggie Bush won't sell tickets and merchandise?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't there a Bush Bowl in December? Wasn't Reggie the Heisman winner? Reggie Bush will be just as marketable, if not more, than Vince nationwide. Outside of the Houston bubble, almost everyone agrees that Reggie is the best player in the draft. The argument isn't so much Reggie v. Vince, it is Reggie v. Trade down.

Vince Young will be more marketable around the Houston area and most of Texas, Reggie Bush will be as marketable if not more marketable than Vince nationwide and will draw more national attention to the Texans. No matter who the Texans draft, they will fill the stadium every week. There are over 4 million people in the Houston area and I"m pretty sure we can find 72,000 to fill the stadium every Sunday, last time I checked there was a 7-8 year waiting list for season tickets, so I'm hoping that after we don't draft Vince half of those people drop off and I can get my tickets sooner, but either way we will still sell tickets. As for merchandise sale, again we will sell more stuff around Texas if we get Vince, probably sell more nationally if we get Bush, but either way merchandise sale and all that goes under the shared revenues so it's not going to really help our team at all to sell a bunch more jerseys.

As for the original argument, if people sincerely believed the main problem with our team was David Carr and that we really needed a new QB, then they would have to mention Matt Leinart as an option because right now he clearly is the better QB between the two. Vince is more athletic and has more upside potential than Matt, but as of now Leinart is the better QB. This leads me to believe that many of these people don't really think Carr is the big problem and has to be replaced, they are just fans of Vince Young and want to see him come here, and there's nothing wrong with wanting your favorite player to come to your team, but some people do need to evaluate the situation a little more realistically than they are (i.e. people saying that the Texans will always suck if we don't get Vince or that Vince will instantly come in and we will be playoff contenders just from his presence on the team, etc.)

swtbound07
02-11-2006, 12:41 PM
Vince Young will be more marketable around the Houston area and most of Texas, Reggie Bush will be as marketable if not more marketable than Vince nationwide and will draw more national attention to the Texans. No matter who the Texans draft, they will fill the stadium every week. There are over 4 million people in the Houston area and I"m pretty sure we can find 72,000 to fill the stadium every Sunday, last time I checked there was a 7-8 year waiting list for season tickets, so I'm hoping that after we don't draft Vince half of those people drop off and I can get my tickets sooner, but either way we will still sell tickets. As for merchandise sale, again we will sell more stuff around Texas if we get Vince, probably sell more nationally if we get Bush, but either way merchandise sale and all that goes under the shared revenues so it's not going to really help our team at all to sell a bunch more jerseys.

As for the original argument, if people sincerely believed the main problem with our team was David Carr and that we really needed a new QB, then they would have to mention Matt Leinart as an option because right now he clearly is the better QB between the two. Vince is more athletic and has more upside potential than Matt, but as of now Leinart is the better QB. This leads me to believe that many of these people don't really think Carr is the big problem and has to be replaced, they are just fans of Vince Young and want to see him come here, and there's nothing wrong with wanting your favorite player to come to your team, but some people do need to evaluate the situation a little more realistically than they are (i.e. people saying that the Texans will always suck if we don't get Vince or that Vince will instantly come in and we will be playoff contenders just from his presence on the team, etc.)


Its a faulty arguement to say that if we were serious about needing a qb change that leinart is an option. You need a mobile quarterback if your offensive line is going to be atrocious. Im sorry if you dont feel that way, but i do. The ability to throw on the run, and escape pressure is key to success when your o-line is as porous as your average spaghetti strainer. Matt Leinart would have no more success in houston than david carr or peyton manning. The only other person you could reasonably put in the discussion with vince young is mike vick, and he isnt as good a passer. Im going to pose the same question i've posed for a long time. The arguement for david carr is "he has never had a chance to succeed, namely no offensive line". You know what? what if he NEVER gets those things...how long are you going to let him fail without accepting some of the blame for his own failure. Eventually if we are going to win somebody is going to have to step up and win with the personnel we have in place...and david has shown it wont be him.

texplayer2
02-12-2006, 01:54 AM
Its a faulty arguement to say that if we were serious about needing a qb change that leinart is an option. You need a mobile quarterback if your offensive line is going to be atrocious. Im sorry if you dont feel that way, but i do. The ability to throw on the run, and escape pressure is key to success when your o-line is as porous as your average spaghetti strainer. Matt Leinart would have no more success in houston than david carr or peyton manning. The only other person you could reasonably put in the discussion with vince young is mike vick, and he isnt as good a passer. Im going to pose the same question i've posed for a long time. The arguement for david carr is "he has never had a chance to succeed, namely no offensive line". You know what? what if he NEVER gets those things...how long are you going to let him fail without accepting some of the blame for his own failure. Eventually if we are going to win somebody is going to have to step up and win with the personnel we have in place...and david has shown it wont be him.

Vince will do no better behind a porus line than Lienert. Young has had an excellent line to work behind and the few plays where SC got through the line with a blitz I saw hurried throws and at least one fumble that Texas recovered. It will take him (awhile) to get up to speed with NFL defenses.

MorKnolle
02-12-2006, 11:06 AM
Its a faulty arguement to say that if we were serious about needing a qb change that leinart is an option. You need a mobile quarterback if your offensive line is going to be atrocious. Im sorry if you dont feel that way, but i do. The ability to throw on the run, and escape pressure is key to success when your o-line is as porous as your average spaghetti strainer. Matt Leinart would have no more success in houston than david carr or peyton manning. The only other person you could reasonably put in the discussion with vince young is mike vick, and he isnt as good a passer. Im going to pose the same question i've posed for a long time. The arguement for david carr is "he has never had a chance to succeed, namely no offensive line". You know what? what if he NEVER gets those things...how long are you going to let him fail without accepting some of the blame for his own failure. Eventually if we are going to win somebody is going to have to step up and win with the personnel we have in place...and david has shown it wont be him.

That's why you fix the OLine finally, especially in a draft with so many good OLinemen and all these high picks for us. VY will not be able to succeed behind our OLine either if we don't improve it, that is the single biggest need for our team. We shouldn't have most of this personnel in place, this team was built with a lot of lousy guys that are special teams-type players because our previous coaching staff didn't know how to assemble good players. That has hopefully changed now.

Many VY supporters keep saying that we can draft VY (or Bush supporters saying we can draft Bush) and still fix up our OLine and other holes later in the draft, but you seem to think we are stuck with all the rest of our team and only have this one pick to change things. As has been duly pointed out several times by people in both the VY and Bush camps, we have three other picks in the top 66, we have free agency, we can add better players to our team. Other people argue that we can afford to draft Bush/VY because we can fix our other team needs later in the draft, while you argue that we are stuck with the rest of our roster (mainly our OLine) and therefore we cannot afford to draft anyone but Vince because we need a more mobile QB behind our bad OLine. This is very entertaining seeing all these argument thrown out here for one guy or another.

swtbound07
02-12-2006, 02:05 PM
That's why you fix the OLine finally, especially in a draft with so many good OLinemen and all these high picks for us. VY will not be able to succeed behind our OLine either if we don't improve it, that is the single biggest need for our team. We shouldn't have most of this personnel in place, this team was built with a lot of lousy guys that are special teams-type players because our previous coaching staff didn't know how to assemble good players. That has hopefully changed now.

Many VY supporters keep saying that we can draft VY (or Bush supporters saying we can draft Bush) and still fix up our OLine and other holes later in the draft, but you seem to think we are stuck with all the rest of our team and only have this one pick to change things. As has been duly pointed out several times by people in both the VY and Bush camps, we have three other picks in the top 66, we have free agency, we can add better players to our team. Other people argue that we can afford to draft Bush/VY because we can fix our other team needs later in the draft, while you argue that we are stuck with the rest of our roster (mainly our OLine) and therefore we cannot afford to draft anyone but Vince because we need a more mobile QB behind our bad OLine. This is very entertaining seeing all these argument thrown out here for one guy or another.



Yes, and here is why. i completely agree we have several picks in which we COULD address our offensive line. However, im going on 4 years of history where we completely fail to address the offensive line. Just because the elephant is in the room doesnt mean the team will talk about it. If the team is proactive in addressing the biggest weakness in our franchise history, then i will back down off my arguement, but you have to admit, we have NEVER made that a priority, and i fail to see how this year will be different. This board is a place for assumptions, like last year most (not all, but a large percentage) of us assumed that if DJ somehow fell to us, we would take him in a heartbeat...welllll, he did and we didnt. Most of us this year are assuming we address the line through the draft or free agency. Well.....we might not.

kastofsna
02-12-2006, 04:51 PM
The ability to throw on the run, and escape pressure is key to success when your o-line is as porous as your average spaghetti strainer.
funny because that's one of matt leinart's biggest strengths

stevo3883
02-12-2006, 04:57 PM
funny because that's one of matt leinart's biggest strengths

are you joking?

Leinart is best when hes in the pocket with good protection.

Coach C.
02-12-2006, 04:59 PM
I think he was talking about Leinhart's pocket prescense which is quite good. Yes, even better than Vince, no he is not going to beat anyone with his legs but he will buy extra time with his movement and then make an accurate throw.

LikeABoss
02-12-2006, 05:01 PM
Matt Lienart has Tom Brady like pocket awareness.

He is not a statue in there, he sidesteps the pressure very well while never taking his eyes off his WRs. He does not get rattled by the pressure at all.

Matt can also throw well on the run as well, USC has also used him in alot of QB bootlegs and he would still place the ball exactly where it needed to be with pinpoint accuracy while on the move.

stevo3883
02-12-2006, 05:02 PM
I think he was talking about Leinhart's pocket prescense which is quite good. Yes, even better than Vince, no he is not going to beat anyone with his legs but he will buy extra time with his movement and then make an accurate throw.

he said one of leinart's biggest strengths is throwing on the run and using his mobility to escape pressure.

thats just not true.

thunderkyss
02-12-2006, 05:30 PM
If you guys can see the difference between Matt Lienart & Vince, then you can see the reason one guy would want to take Vince, and not Matt. Even on draft day, while you might think Lienart is the best QB in the draft, the team that picks the first QB, might not pick him for their team.

Will Matt be something in the NFL, or will he opt out, like Jason White??? I don't know. But Vince has something I want on my team. I'll admit, I've watched more Vince than Matt this year, so my judgement may be cloudy(or ernge). I do expect the NFL teams to sit down with these players, before they make their decision, soooo, there is no way I could tell you who will pick who. I can only tell you who I want them to pick.

David Carr is more to blame than anyone else on our team, for our 2-14 season. It wasn't all his fault, but he is the Quarterback..... the Defacto Leader. I think this would be the perfect time, to go a different route. Carr isn't costing us an arm and a leg... he's almost cheap as far as starting QBs go. We've got Kubiak & Sherman setting up camp on offense.... Car may bery well be gone in three years....

Vince will be ready in three years...

MorKnolle
02-12-2006, 05:41 PM
Yes, and here is why. i completely agree we have several picks in which we COULD address our offensive line. However, im going on 4 years of history where we completely fail to address the offensive line. Just because the elephant is in the room doesnt mean the team will talk about it. If the team is proactive in addressing the biggest weakness in our franchise history, then i will back down off my arguement, but you have to admit, we have NEVER made that a priority, and i fail to see how this year will be different. This board is a place for assumptions, like last year most (not all, but a large percentage) of us assumed that if DJ somehow fell to us, we would take him in a heartbeat...welllll, he did and we didnt. Most of us this year are assuming we address the line through the draft or free agency. Well.....we might not.

We have indeed ignored it in the past, but we have a new group of guys running the team now. If Kubiak and his group deem our current OLinemen to be subpar then I'm sure they will make it a point to bring in new guys. If they feel their main problem was in coaching last year then maybe they won't bring many in and will just work on improving the guys we have. Either way I trust Kubiak's judgment.

swtbound07
02-12-2006, 05:43 PM
We have indeed ignored it in the past, but we have a new group of guys running the team now. If Kubiak and his group deem our current OLinemen to be subpar then I'm sure they will make it a point to bring in new guys. If they feel their main problem was in coaching last year then maybe they won't bring many in and will just work on improving the guys we have. Either way I trust Kubiak's judgment.


i agree with you in trusting our new establishment, but im not going to believe it until i see it....i've thought this problem is too big an issue to ignore for several offseasons, and now im a bit jaded. We dont disagree on the needs of the club or the main points, maybe im just lacking a little faith that it will actually get done.

YoungnotBush
02-12-2006, 10:42 PM
We have indeed ignored it in the past, but we have a new group of guys running the team now. If Kubiak and his group deem our current OLinemen to be subpar then I'm sure they will make it a point to bring in new guys. If they feel their main problem was in coaching last year then maybe they won't bring many in and will just work on improving the guys we have. Either way I trust Kubiak's judgment.

Casserly is still running the show.

LikeABoss
02-12-2006, 11:19 PM
Casserly is still running the show.

Didn't Mr. McNair strip Casserly of alot of his duties as the team's GM when he decided to keep him on the staff?

From my understanding, Casserly just has the GM title along side his name, but he will no longer have final say on personnel decisions.

edo783
02-13-2006, 12:02 AM
Didn't Mr. McNair strip Casserly of alot of his duties as the team's GM when he decided to keep him on the staff?

From my understanding, Casserly just has the GM title along side his name, but he will no longer have final say on personnel decisions.

Pretty much true. CC isn't THE major player anymore, but he is still A player. This is going to be a much more collabrative draft IMO, and Kubes will be A/THE major player and McNair will be part of the team. I look for a much more conventional draft after the 1st with a probable trade down in the 1st. Focusing on needs and well rated players, but the O-line guys may not fit the conventional mode as the type of zone blocking scheme will have lighter more mobile players (DBrick fits well).

MorKnolle
02-13-2006, 12:11 AM
If you guys can see the difference between Matt Lienart & Vince, then you can see the reason one guy would want to take Vince, and not Matt. Even on draft day, while you might think Lienart is the best QB in the draft, the team that picks the first QB, might not pick him for their team.

Will Matt be something in the NFL, or will he opt out, like Jason White??? I don't know. But Vince has something I want on my team. I'll admit, I've watched more Vince than Matt this year, so my judgement may be cloudy(or ernge). I do expect the NFL teams to sit down with these players, before they make their decision, soooo, there is no way I could tell you who will pick who. I can only tell you who I want them to pick.

David Carr is more to blame than anyone else on our team, for our 2-14 season. It wasn't all his fault, but he is the Quarterback..... the Defacto Leader. I think this would be the perfect time, to go a different route. Carr isn't costing us an arm and a leg... he's almost cheap as far as starting QBs go. We've got Kubiak & Sherman setting up camp on offense.... Car may bery well be gone in three years....

Vince will be ready in three years...

Leinart isn't about to opt out. One huge difference is that Jason White had 6 different knee surgeries during his college career, Leinart hasn't. White also was not picked high in the draft at all (I don't remember if he was even drafted, and if so it was in the 6th-7th round), so Leinart isn't about to give up a $40 million contract as a top 3 pick to retire this early. He also has a much better pro-style game than White ever had, although White was certainly a great college QB.

MorKnolle
02-13-2006, 12:12 AM
Casserly is still running the show.

Casserly was never really running the show to begin with, and as LikeABoss said Cass has been stripped of some of his duites.

Big B Texan Fan
02-13-2006, 09:02 AM
Casserly was never really running the show to begin with, and as LikeABoss said Cass has been stripped of some of his duites.
Sounds like posturing for a firing if you ask me.

jerek
02-13-2006, 10:03 AM
You said it:

"Not Mobile"

Do you mean drew bledsoe "Not Mobile" or peyton manning "Not Mobile"?

And don't even think about saying Brady.

You have to have some mobility at the QB spot.

Yeah, guys like Peyton Manning and Dan Marino sure sucked. The list of "not mobile" QBs who have won Super Bowls is a hell of a lot longer than the list of "mobile QBs" and that is even when you are being generous and listing guys like Montana - who could run, but usually didn't - as "mobile."

kastofsna
02-13-2006, 08:57 PM
he said one of leinart's biggest strengths is throwing on the run and using his mobility to escape pressure.

thats just not true.
yeah it is. watch some USC games. they run a ton of rollouts and he rarely sets his feet on those passes. and he has plenty of mobility to escape pressure. not 4 guys barring down on him, but as much as the great ones, i.e. montana, brady, etc.

YoungnotBush
02-13-2006, 09:05 PM
Casserly was never really running the show to begin with, and as LikeABoss said Cass has been stripped of some of his duites.

Then why is even there? A GM that doesn't really run the show, and now has been stripped of his duties.

What exaclty is he doing, if not personnel?

YoungnotBush
02-13-2006, 09:06 PM
Tell me what yall think about this:

If the Texans pass on Vince and he goes to Tennessee, which is the most likely spot, that means the we have to play him twice a year AND beat him out every year for the division. Now, not only do we have to beat Peyton Manning twice a year, but also Vince. That doesn't sound to good for me.

Now think about this, because Tennessee wants Vince real bad.

For all you people that think Reggie is really the answer, then wouldn't the smart thing to do be to draft Vince and hold the Titans hostage, then trade him for the world to the titans.

New Orleans will still take Matt, because that is their biggest need. That means we could then draft Reggie at 3rd.

See I think Reggie will be around at 3. As long as we don't trade with anyone outside of 1-3, then we could get either one at 3, since Matt is pretty much a lock at 2.

Now I wouldn't care which one we got a the 3rd spot and we could still get something else also, which we need so desperately.

The 3rd spot is ideally where we wan't to pick, not only to save money on the pick, but also, because we could get something for trading down and if Reggie is there, then take Reggie, if Vince is there then take Vince. If the Titans did decide to take Reggie then we could still get Vince at the 3.

Everybody might be able to argue one or the other, but no one can argue with one and another pick or an up and coming DL or OL.

At that point, even if Leinart is there, which he won't be, it would still work out in the Texans favor.

dat_boy_yec
02-13-2006, 09:26 PM
Tell me what yall think about this:

If the Texans pass on Vince and he goes to Tennessee, which is the most likely spot, that means the we have to play him twice a year AND beat him out every year for the division. Now, not only do we have to beat Peyton Manning twice a year, but also Vince. That doesn't sound to good for me.

Now think about this, because Tennessee wants Vince real bad.

For all you people that think Reggie is really the answer, then wouldn't the smart thing to do be to draft Vince and hold the Titans hostage, then trade him for the world to the titans.

New Orleans will still take Matt, because that is their biggest need. That means we could then draft Reggie at 3rd.

See I think Reggie will be around at 3. As long as we don't trade with anyone outside of 1-3, then we could get either one at 3, since Matt is pretty much a lock at 2.

Now I wouldn't care which one we got a the 3rd spot and we could still get something else also, which we need so desperately.

The 3rd spot is ideally where we wan't to pick, not only to save money on the pick, but also, because we could get something for trading down and if Reggie is there, then take Reggie, if Vince is there then take Vince. If the Titans did decide to take Reggie then we could still get Vince at the 3.

Everybody might be able to argue one or the other, but no one can argue with one and another pick or an up and coming DL or OL.

At that point, even if Leinart is there, which he won't be, it would still work out in the Texans favor.

I'm sorry, but why do you say that the Titans are really high on Vince. If Fisher were high on any QB I would assume it would be Cutler after he was able to work with him at the senior bowl, also from what I've read on their message boards they are also real high on all the other prospects, such as D'brick and Williams or Hawk so please tell me why the Titans would be so likely to pick Young. QB is not exactly a weakness on their team.

YoungnotBush
02-13-2006, 09:35 PM
I'm sorry, but why do you say that the Titans are really high on Vince. If Fisher were high on any QB I would assume it would be Cutler after he was able to work with him at the senior bowl, also from what I've read on their message boards they are also real high on all the other prospects, such as D'brick and Williams or Hawk so please tell me why the Titans would be so likely to pick Young. QB is not exactly a weakness on their team.


Not exactly a weakness on a team that is rebuilding?

Most teams that rebuild want a QB like McNair to do it.

Come on, the only reason they would even keep McNair is to Mentor Vince. They are full blown rebuilding and a QB like Vince is perfect to replace McNair.

Also the word is that when Fisher was watching tape on Benson last year, he couldn't ever take is eyes of the person handing off the ball.

Don't let the hype on Cutler fool you. He is going to be good, but is not in the Vince's or Matt's ballpark right now. Imagine if Vince or Matt played in the Senior Bowl, how much hype there would be right now, not that there isn't enough anyway.

Tennessee needs a QB to hang their hat on and Vince would be the perfect replacement for McNair, not only are they similar QB's, but they are very much aquainted with each other anyway and McNair could play a couple of years in front of Vince and maybe splitting time the 2nd year or the 3rd. It is really setting up nicely for them, except they wouldn't want the Texans to know how high they were on Vince though, would they?

dat_boy_yec
02-13-2006, 11:06 PM
Not exactly a weakness on a team that is rebuilding?

Most teams that rebuild want a QB like McNair to do it.

Come on, the only reason they would even keep McNair is to Mentor Vince. They are full blown rebuilding and a QB like Vince is perfect to replace McNair.

Also the word is that when Fisher was watching tape on Benson last year, he couldn't ever take is eyes of the person handing off the ball.

Don't let the hype on Cutler fool you. He is going to be good, but is not in the Vince's or Matt's ballpark right now. Imagine if Vince or Matt played in the Senior Bowl, how much hype there would be right now, not that there isn't enough anyway.

Tennessee needs a QB to hang their hat on and Vince would be the perfect replacement for McNair, not only are they similar QB's, but they are very much aquainted with each other anyway and McNair could play a couple of years in front of Vince and maybe splitting time the 2nd year or the 3rd. It is really setting up nicely for them, except they wouldn't want the Texans to know how high they were on Vince though, would they?

You still didn't really answer the question, McNair may know Young. But Chow worked with Leinart and Cutler, Fisher also worked with Cutler at the Bowl. Hype or no hype they would be more comfortable with either of these two guys or trading down. The argument you pose works both ways, they wouldn't want anybody to know who they're really high on would they.