PDA

View Full Version : Irony......


thunderkyss
12-18-2006, 08:23 PM
.... remember the arguments against Vince Young??

He'd need 4 years to develop.....

Can't read an NFL defense......

Can't take a snap from under center....

Balls will be batted down because of his side arm delivery...

Not very accurate.....

Just thought it was kind of Ironic... wouldn't you think??

axman40
12-18-2006, 08:52 PM
.... remember the arguments against Vince Young??

He'd need 4 years to develop.....

Can't read an NFL defense......

Can't take a snap from under center....

Balls will be batted down because of his side arm delivery...

Not very accurate.....

Just thought it was kind of Ironic... wouldn't you think??
Alanis Morissette is that you ?
:shades:

Second Honeymoon
12-18-2006, 09:36 PM
.... remember the arguments against Vince Young??

He'd need 4 years to develop.....

Can't read an NFL defense......

Can't take a snap from under center....

Balls will be batted down because of his side arm delivery...

Not very accurate.....

Just thought it was kind of Ironic... wouldn't you think??

ironic? more like moronic.

Texans_Chick
12-18-2006, 10:02 PM
.... remember the arguments against Vince Young??

He'd need 4 years to develop.....

Can't read an NFL defense......

Can't take a snap from under center....

Balls will be batted down because of his side arm delivery...

Not very accurate.....

Just thought it was kind of Ironic... wouldn't you think??


His biggest supporters in the media were saying he would be a project and needed to sit. (McClain, Justice, Lord).

Snapple
12-19-2006, 02:01 AM
I am a Longhorn, and I love Vince as much as anyone. I thought he would succeed in the NFL, but even I thought it would be better if he sat a year.

thunderkyss
12-19-2006, 08:11 AM
OK....... Irony

irony:
2. Literature.
a. a technique of indicating, as through character or plot development, an intention or attitude opposite to that which is actually or ostensibly stated.

You see, I think it's Ironic, that the main arguments against drafting Vince Young were as stated above. We didn't want to wait for our QB to overcome those defieciencies in his game, so we stuck with David Carr. & by sticking with David Carr, we are having to wait for our QB to overcome those QB defieciencies we wanted to avoid in the first place.

It doesn't matter what Vince can/can't do. It doesn't matter if Vince sits for a year, or two, or none.....

the point is that the things we wanted to avoid........... we end up having to endure anyway.

BattleRedToro
12-19-2006, 08:28 AM
OK....... Irony

irony:


You see, I think it's Ironic, that the main arguments against drafting Vince Young were as stated above. We didn't want to wait for our QB to overcome those defieciencies in his game, so we stuck with David Carr. & by sticking with David Carr, we are having to wait for our QB to overcome those QB defieciencies we wanted to avoid in the first place.

It doesn't matter what Vince can/can't do. It doesn't matter if Vince sits for a year, or two, or none.....

the point is that the things we wanted to avoid........... we end up having to endure anyway.

Worst of all, is enduring the endless whining of Vince Young fans.

Speedy
12-19-2006, 08:13 PM
.... remember the arguments against Vince Young??

He'd need 4 years to develop.....

Can't read an NFL defense......

Can't take a snap from under center....

Balls will be batted down because of his side arm delivery...

Not very accurate.....

Just thought it was kind of Ironic... wouldn't you think??

He had minus 14 yards passing in the 2nd half Sunday. Led his team to 98 yards of total offense, 5 first downs for the game, 13 total yards in the 2nd half. He was 0-6 passing with a sack on 3rd down for the game, 5 of their 8 possessions weren't longer than 4 plays, a sixth possession was 5 plays.

Maybe it IS taking time to develop.

TexansSeminole
12-19-2006, 08:18 PM
OK....... Irony

irony:


You see, I think it's Ironic, that the main arguments against drafting Vince Young were as stated above. We didn't want to wait for our QB to overcome those defieciencies in his game, so we stuck with David Carr. & by sticking with David Carr, we are having to wait for our QB to overcome those QB defieciencies we wanted to avoid in the first place.

It doesn't matter what Vince can/can't do. It doesn't matter if Vince sits for a year, or two, or none.....

the point is that the things we wanted to avoid........... we end up having to endure anyway.

Yea, that's true. I think we (and by we I mean Bob McNair) didn't want to draft him in the first place because we were going to let him play another year or two to see if he could turn it around.

thunderkyss
12-19-2006, 08:35 PM
He had minus 14 yards passing in the 2nd half Sunday. Led his team to 98 yards of total offense, 5 first downs for the game, 13 total yards in the 2nd half. He was 0-6 passing with a sack on 3rd down for the game, 5 of their 8 possessions weren't longer than 4 plays, a sixth possession was 5 plays.

Maybe it IS taking time to develop.

Are we talking about David(the 5 year starter) against Oakland(a team playing for nothing but pride)??

Or Vince Young(the rookie) against Jacksonville(a team trying to get into the playoffss)??

Ole Miss Texan
12-19-2006, 10:01 PM
You see, I think it's Ironic, that the main arguments against drafting Vince Young were as stated above. We didn't want to wait for our QB to overcome those defieciencies in his game, so we stuck with David Carr. & by sticking with David Carr, we are having to wait for our QB to overcome those QB defieciencies we wanted to avoid in the first place.

It doesn't matter what Vince can/can't do. It doesn't matter if Vince sits for a year, or two, or none.....

the point is that the things we wanted to avoid........... we end up having to endure anyway.[/QUOTE]

It was a great point and pretty funny. But if that's is what we all thought vince would be doing. wouldn't you rather another player with the pick instead of using your 1st pick do something that carr will be doing? now we have balls batted down and a DE. lol

thunderkyss
12-20-2006, 02:04 AM
You see, I think it's Ironic, that the main arguments against drafting Vince Young were as stated above. We didn't want to wait for our QB to overcome those defieciencies in his game, so we stuck with David Carr. & by sticking with David Carr, we are having to wait for our QB to overcome those QB defieciencies we wanted to avoid in the first place.

It doesn't matter what Vince can/can't do. It doesn't matter if Vince sits for a year, or two, or none.....

the point is that the things we wanted to avoid........... we end up having to endure anyway.

It was a great point and pretty funny. But if that's is what we all thought vince would be doing. wouldn't you rather another player with the pick instead of using your 1st pick do something that carr will be doing? now we have balls batted down and a DE. lol

I like our DE.

I really have no problem that we passed on Vince..... I'd just like to convert a few more Carr homers, so we can move on, & fix this team.

whotex8
12-20-2006, 02:55 AM
People focus too much on the stat sheet. Tom Brady had 125 net yards passing vs the lowly Texans last week....

I'm not calling you a loser speedy, but I think Charlie Weiss said it best a few weeks ago.... "stats are for losers".

:ouch:.......OUCH!<--------:loser

kastofsna
12-20-2006, 09:26 AM
young still needs plenty of time to develop. he's still a run-first QB right now.

Speedy
12-20-2006, 03:33 PM
People focus too much on the stat sheet. Tom Brady had 125 net yards passing vs the lowly Texans last week....

I'm not calling you a loser speedy, but I think Charlie Weiss said it best a few weeks ago.... "stats are for losers".Stats are stats, there for everyone to interrupt however they wish. I'm certainly not a stat geek and I absolutely know that stats do not tell the whole story.

I just know that David Carr's minus 5 yards passing got thrown around here a whole lot. Then when somone throws a not so favorable stat out there for Young, all of a sudden stats are for losers. Okily dokily..

Honoring Earl 34
12-20-2006, 03:35 PM
If Vince were a baseball player ... he'd be hitting ... 250 with 25 hrs 105 rbi's ... batting 4th . While it would'nt seem like much ... he would have 15 hits to put his team ahead from the 7th on and 3 walkoff HRs .

Anybody want to translate Carr's .

real
12-20-2006, 03:36 PM
Stats are stats, there for everyone to interrupt however they wish. I'm certainly not a stat geek and I absolutely know that stats do not tell the whole story.

I just know that David Carr's minus 5 yards passing got thrown around here a whole lot. Then when somone throws a not so favorable stat out there for Young, all of a sudden stats are for losers. Okily dokily..

I think the difference is that Carr played poorly and throwing around the -5 yards stat was for the "ummmph" factor...Basically to make your message more powerful.....

Cleary using stats don't show how well or poorly a player played all the time, but in that case....well.....they did.....

kastofsna
12-20-2006, 03:44 PM
610am just said Vince Young was named a pro bowl alternate just like DeMeco is. Seems some people can look beyond a stat line and actually comprehend what they see without the need for a stat sheet.
no need for a stat-sheet. young still relies on his legs more than his arm beyond the 2nd read. still young, still developing though. those are the facts.

hobie
12-20-2006, 03:55 PM
Stats are just that, stats. A QB can go 12 for 29 for 118 yards with 2 picks and still get the win. Shoot, David went -5 and the Texans got the W. Bottom line is when were the completions made, when it was 3rd down and it was converted into a 1st. Those numbers are never put out there, so stats don't tell everything. Now they can tell alot of how a team did, but regardless of what they show, it doesn't tell the whole picture.

stevo3883
12-20-2006, 03:56 PM
If Vince were a baseball player ... he'd be hitting ... 250 with 25 hrs 105 rbi's ... batting 4th . While it would'nt seem like much ... he would have 15 hits to put his team ahead from the 7th on and 3 walkoff HRs .

Anybody want to translate Carr's .

Just see Morgan Ensberg's stats last year. Carr with his completion %, Ensberg with hios OBP

Speedy
12-20-2006, 04:09 PM
So Young played a good game? I mean, 0-6 on 3rd down is 0-6 on 3rd down. Yeah, I suppose there could have been 6 dropped balls. The point I'm trying to make is, if Carr goes 0-6 on 3rd down, or throws for negative yardage or whatever, all you see around here is Carr sucks. Lord Young does it and the rookie card comes flying out and it gets spun to a positive somehow and how dare you use a stat wah, wah, wah.

That's all I'm saying. Carr gets blamed for everything that has ever gone wrong. Vince gets credit when he didn't do jack.
Titans beat the Jags with Vince not doing crap and it's "VY wins again."
Texans beat Oakland with Carr not doing crap and it's "-5 yards passing? What a loser. Carr sucks."

That's all I'm saying.

dirty steve
12-20-2006, 04:25 PM
ENOUGH ALREADY...cant we just group all this same crapola VY vs. Carr talk into one f'ing thread, or give it it's own forum or something. i cant go one day on this MB and go without another tired thread on the same tired subject. it's like trying to convince me to like the Cowboys or that team that is owned by that slug of an owner in Nashville.

dirty steve
12-20-2006, 04:31 PM
hard to avoid it when that's all that is on here. it gets real old vin.

dirty steve
12-20-2006, 04:51 PM
cool..can't argue with that.

thunderkyss
12-20-2006, 05:10 PM
So Young played a good game? I mean, 0-6 on 3rd down is 0-6 on 3rd down. Yeah, I suppose there could have been 6 dropped balls. The point I'm trying to make is, if Carr goes 0-6 on 3rd down, or throws for negative yardage or whatever, all you see around here is Carr sucks. Lord Young does it and the rookie card comes flying out and it gets spun to a positive somehow and how dare you use a stat wah, wah, wah.

That's all I'm saying. Carr gets blamed for everything that has ever gone wrong. Vince gets credit when he didn't do jack.
Titans beat the Jags with Vince not doing crap and it's "VY wins again."
Texans beat Oakland with Carr not doing crap and it's "-5 yards passing? What a loser. Carr sucks."

That's all I'm saying.

Isn't it Ironic that we are having to watch our QB struggle reading defenses, taking snaps under center, throwing through tight windows, and just making a positive impact on the outcome of an NFL game........ Isn't it ironic that we are going through all that when that was the main reason QB was not on the list concerning the draft.

forget all that other stuff..... is it, or is it not ironic??

thunderkyss
12-20-2006, 05:13 PM
hard to avoid it when that's all that is on here. it gets real old vin.

That OLine..... it's a thread I started in the Bullpen, so far, there hasn't been a QB mentioned...... and I haven't seen you in it either..... it's football talk, you should give it a shot.

Hookem Horns
12-20-2006, 05:23 PM
.... remember the arguments against Vince Young??

He'd need 4 years to develop.....

Can't read an NFL defense......

Can't take a snap from under center....

Balls will be batted down because of his side arm delivery...

Not very accurate.....

Just thought it was kind of Ironic... wouldn't you think??

You know I have been on the same page with you since day 1. I KNEW Carr wasn't going to pan out and that is what made the above arguments that much more moronic. With VY at least you would have someone to develop. With Carr, we would just have to sit through another miserable season waiting for the front office to admit they were wrong, then once that is done FIND another QB to develop, then start waiting however long it takes for that guy to get used to the NFL (that's where the Texans are now if we are lucky). All the people making those arguments (especially those sporting those VY Titans jersey avatars before the draft that said "You know it looks real good, don't it?") were either not watching him much in college, or were just blindly biased against him for whatever reason.

It's also funny how some people are saying that most NFL teams didn't have him rated very high. With that I guess we learned that we are smarter than the majority of NFL GM's. Maybe we should start seeking employment in the NFL.

Double Barrel
12-20-2006, 07:45 PM
Individual stats are good for HoF nominees, but in a team sport, the only stats that really matter are wins and losses and rings on fingers.

Right now, VY looks to be a player that has potential to lead his team towards improving the important stats, while DC does not. I'm not a "Young lover" or "Carr hater", I just call it like I see it. The body of evidence for each QB is clear, too.

And yeah, to answer t'kiss' initial question, it's very ironic the way things worked out.

kastofsna
12-21-2006, 12:15 PM
You are the same guy who said he would never make it last year....you railed on and on about how he was too stupid and would take years and years to develop...I kind of stopped listening to your insight, although I must say it amuses me. VY hasn't done anything to hurt the Titans outside of one bad game vs the Jags. Otherwise he has done much to help them become respectable again after an 0-5 start.
blah blah blah, yeah yeah yeah, he's not hurting his team, whatever. i didn't say he is. i stated a fact: he's not yet figured out to read an NFL defense as well as some like to think he has. he's still a run-first QB. there's no reason to think it still won't take years for him to develop fully. am i wrong here? stop defending him as if i'm attacking him, i'm not.

Dr. Toro
12-21-2006, 12:50 PM
blah blah blah, yeah yeah yeah, he's not hurting his team, whatever. i didn't say he is. i stated a fact: he's not yet figured out to read an NFL defense as well as some like to think he has. he's still a run-first QB. there's no reason to think it still won't take years for him to develop fully. am i wrong here? stop defending him as if i'm attacking him, i'm not.

I think VY is a pass first QB, who runs when he has the opportunity. He's better right now at running than throwing, though. He's got 70 rushes on the year and has started 11 games. Let's say he's gotten 15 designed runs... that brings him down to about 60 rushing attempts in passing situations. That's 5.5 per game and 1 for every 6 passing situations. Vick runs about 25% of all passing downs... and 8 times per game (I don't know how many of those are designed runs). I think most people imagine he'll start throwing the ball more and at a higher clip. He's been over 65% in the last 4 games.

Vick isn't a great comparison... so let's try McNabb. Vince is having more success throwing the ball than McNabb as a rookie, and is running less often than McNabb did. He's also running less than McNair did in in his 3rd season when became the guy and has similar passing numbers. The thing that complicates this whole thing is that as VY has run more, his passing numbers have improved (or maybe it's the other way around). His numbers are actually pretty similar to the ones Steve Young put up in 1986 playing for Tampa, running every 6 passing downs. We're talking in subjective terms here, but Vince certainly doesn't appear to be a "run first" guy.

infantrycak
12-21-2006, 01:03 PM
I think VY is a pass first QB, who runs when he has the opportunity. He's better right now at running than throwing, though.

That is a much more fair synopsis than run first QB.

kastofsna
12-21-2006, 01:15 PM
a "run first QB" is a QB in my opinion who still needs the threat of using his legs to succeed. like vick. if he's forced to stay in the pocket, he's a disaster. he has to at least have that threat to take off and run at any time. when jacksonville and philly neutralized that with young, he had to try and do it all with his arm, and that didn't work. this is what good defenses do. look at the bucs with their history with vick. a "run first" mentality doesn't mean he's going to run 30 times a game.

Dr. Toro
12-21-2006, 01:33 PM
Agreed he needs the threat of running to succeed right now. However, he's not a "disaster" when he's stuck in the pocket. The OSU game comes to mind... neutralized the running threat, succeeded with his arm. He was effective against BAL, as well, same story. His passer rating is like 5 points lower than Peyton's was as a rookie and Leinart's is, working with considerably less offensive talent and experience. He's par for the rookie course passing, but he's well ahead of the curve in total.

kastofsna
12-21-2006, 01:36 PM
i wouldn't say he has less talent than matt leinart, not by a long shot. but that's another argument.

thunderkyss
12-23-2006, 04:23 PM
Come on man get over it already.:ok: He still isn't a great passer.

It's ironic that the guy we kept is also not a great passer.

swtbound07
12-23-2006, 04:58 PM
a "run first QB" is a QB in my opinion who still needs the threat of using his legs to succeed. like vick. if he's forced to stay in the pocket, he's a disaster. he has to at least have that threat to take off and run at any time. when jacksonville and philly neutralized that with young, he had to try and do it all with his arm, and that didn't work. this is what good defenses do. look at the bucs with their history with vick. a "run first" mentality doesn't mean he's going to run 30 times a game.

Your also the genius who has that avatar and signature because you swore up and down at draft time that no NFL team in the top 10 would touch Vince with a 10 foot pole and that Leinart and Cutler were locks to be picked ahead of him. Your calling Vince a disaster when forced to stay in the pocket? Based on what? Usually I just ignore you, but its glaringly bright how much you hate Vince Young, and I wonder why.