Opinions are fine and dandy, but let's talk about numbers. I'm assuming superior to not just mean better, but
far better.
Now, when I look at Matt Lienart: 3815yrds... and then look at Vince Young: 3036 yrds......... One could argue that is far better.
When looking at Matt Lienart: 65.7% comp percentage, then Vince Young: 65.2% completion percentage, I doubt many would say that is far better. Most will probably say they are darn near identicle(sp).
So, if you were to assume Vince completed 65.2% of the other 109 attempts that Matt had(Vince blew teams out, and therefore sat most of the 3rd & 4th quarters) @ Vince's avg 9.3ypa(Matt's is 8.85ypa by the way, definitely not superior) you'd get (109*0.625*9.3=)616 yards, bringing Vince to 3652 yards. Which 3815 isn't really
far better than. Then, if you were to assume YPA means yards per attempt(which, I really don't know what it means) Vince would have (109*9.3+3036=)4049yrds passing....(pretty David Carr like)
Then you've got TD/Int..... Matt threw 2 more than TDs, and 2 less ints. Better, but not
far better. We already covered Vince's better YPA, but Vince also has a better QB rating...... 163.95 vs 157.74(would that make vince the highest rated QB in the draft??

)
Now, consider UT....... is not known for their QB production. Chris Simms didn't really light it up when he was at UT. I definitely credit the work he must have put in with his dad for his performance now, more than I give Mack Brown. UT doesn't build around QBs. They just don't. UT Olineman aren't generally drafted because of their superior(there's that word again) pass blocking techniques. UT builds teams to run. And they do that very well.
So personally, if every one says UT dumbed down their offense for Vince, because of Vince. I don't take it as a knock against Vince. I think it has more to do with the way the team was built, which is not to the advantage of the QB.