NFL Draft

[jakez4ut]

Texas would have been a National Championship contender with any quality player at QB the last two years. I have no problem saying they had more talent than USC this year. The Texas defense was vastly superior to that put on the field by the Trojans. If USC's offense had played against their defense, they would have scored 80 points. Vince Young didn't play against a single great defense last year. He, and the Titans, are in for a painful indoctrination process.

Well, being Steelers' fan and Pathers' fan, i could really not care less about the the Titans problems with their draft picks, real or perceived....

but i don't know that i would say TX's talent was all that much better than USC's, offensively at least. Defensively, i agree with you 100%.

I do think TX played tougher Defenses than USC did all year long...but on the flipside, TX wasn't exactly plyaing jugernauts offensivley either....which i think speaks volumes about TX's def. in the NT game. But really, looking back on that game, and the plays he made in it, do you really think TX beats USC w/out Vince Young?

either way, the affect V Young had for TX's offense was unquestionable. He was the offense. For USC, you had Bush and White in the backfeild, of which, TX had nothing that even sniffed either of those two backs (Benson was good, but not in the same zip code as those two). Receivers....i don't know....1st glance would say USC....but that could be a product of the type of qb the two teams had....ML obviously can throw it, and while Young made some throws, i don't think he's got the arm or accuracy ML has. Just as ML doesn't have the ability to make playes out of nothing like V Young can....which is the difference between the two...

ML could run the system. He can make the throw that's called. And there's nothing wrong with that, and over time, i think it will be proved that ML will be a better pro qb than VY....so, please don't misinterpret this as me saying VY is a better qb than ML...cause i don't think he is....at least as it translates in to the NFL.

But VY could make plays that weren't there. His athletic ability gave him options that ML didn't have. and many times that turned in to big plays for TX that made a difference in winning and losing a game....OSU, A&M, USC last year to name a few, and the KU game two years ago...all games they would have maybe lost had they not had V Young making some of the plays he made in those games....

So i do understand why the pick was made, that doesn't mean that you aren't right in your assesment of it turning out to be a huge mistake down the line...which it defintely could.

 

[hatvol96]

Well, being Steelers' fan and Pathers' fan, i could really not care less about the the Titans problems with their draft picks, real or perceived....

but i don't know that i would say TX's talent was all that much better than USC's, offensively at least. Defensively, i agree with you 100%.

I do think TX played tougher Defenses than USC did all year long...but on the flipside, TX wasn't exactly plyaing jugernauts offensivley either....which i think speaks volumes about TX's def. in the NT game. But really, looking back on that game, and the plays he made in it, do you really think TX beats USC w/out Vince Young?

either way, the affect V Young had for TX's offense was unquestionable. He was the offense. For USC, you had Bush and White in the backfeild, of which, TX had nothing that even sniffed either of those two backs (Benson was good, but not in the same zip code as those two). Receivers....i don't know....1st glance would say USC....but that could be a product of the type of qb the two teams had....ML obviously can throw it, and while Young made some throws, i don't think he's got the arm or accuracy ML has. Just as ML doesn't have the ability to make playes out of nothing like V Young can....which is the difference between the two...

ML could run the system. He can make the throw that's called. And there's nothing wrong with that, and over time, i think it will be proved that ML will be a better pro qb than VY....so, please don't misinterpret this as me saying VY is a better qb than ML...cause i don't think he is....at least as it translates in to the NFL.

But VY could make plays that weren't there. His athletic ability gave him options that ML didn't have. and many times that turned in to big plays for TX that made a difference in winning and losing a game....OSU, A&M, USC last year to name a few, and the KU game two years ago...all games they would have maybe lost had they not had V Young making some of the plays he made in those games....

So i do understand why the pick was made, that doesn't mean that you aren't right in your assesment of it turning out to be a huge mistake down the line...which it defintely could.

Cedric Benson is every bit as good, if not better, than Lendale White.

 

[jakez4ut]

Cedric Benson is every bit as good, if not better, than Lendale White.

OK. sooooooo...............................? he's not better than the combo of Bush and White....which is what i was getting at...

 

[hatvol96]

OK. sooooooo...............................? he's not better than the combo of Bush and White....which is what i was getting at...

You said Texas never had a back as good as either Bush or White. That's simply not accurate.

 

[milohimself]

I suppose your argument concerning "being a winner" has to do with the number of games he won at Vanderbilt compared to what Leinart and Young won at USC and Texas. How do you not see the ridiculous in that assessment? If Cutler and Leinart switched places do you think Leinart would have won any more games with the surrounding talent and Vanderbilt? No! Would Cutler have won as many games as Leinart did with all the surrounding talent at USC? Yes! You can do the same thing with Young and Cutler. You don't think Cutler was a "winner" in High School? He was.

Even if you wanted to pick a winner, it should have been Leinart before Young. Vince Young got elevated to that pick based on one game against a porous USC defense. NFL defenses will not allow Young to do what he did against USC's defense. He will not be able to be a passer in the NFL and defenses are too good for him to run all over them.

Winning games is all about what you do on the field... And Cutler just didn't win that many. I realize there was only so much he could do with what he had, but there's a mentality winners have about the game. Especially at the quarterback spot.

That's just not accurate. Look at the number of top 3 round picks Texas has produced the last couple of years. Benson, Johnson, Huff, etc. Young is wildly overrated as an NFL prospect. That's why the Titans are fading into oblivion. Moves like drafting a QB who can't really throw don't help build a Super Bowl contender.

I do agree that Vince Young is very overrated but not for the same reasons. If Lendale White gets those extra three inches and USC converts against Texas, Vince Young is automatically a late first rounder. I think it's because Vince Young had the skills to make college defenses look foolish, coupled with the fact that he single-handedly won Texas the Rose Bowl.

Texas' defense being THAT good? Please. That game was all about Vince Young. Texas did nothing otherwise when it came down to the game. Need I remind you what USC did to that vastly superior texas defense? 365 passing yards coupled with 209 rushing yards for a total of 576 yards. Converted over half of their third downs. 5.1 yards per carry. Young had to account for 84% of all Texas' offense, while the rest of his team did jack.

All this is why he is so highly touted. I don't buy it. I simply fail to see somebody who can do any of those same things at the pro level.

 

[jakez4ut]

You said Texas never had a back as good as either Bush or White. That's simply not accurate.

yeah, yeah....but i also said:
"(Benson was good, but not in the same zip code as those two)"

which i thought might have cleared that up....oh well. i trust that the point is now taken?

 

[hatvol96]

Winning games is all about what you do on the field... And Cutler just didn't win that many. I realize there was only so much he could do with what he had, but there's a mentality winners have about the game. Especially at the quarterback spot.
I do agree that Vince Young is very overrated but not for the same reasons. If Lendale White gets those extra three inches and USC converts against Texas, Vince Young is automatically a late first rounder. I think it's because Vince Young had the skills to make college defenses look foolish, coupled with the fact that he single-handedly won Texas the Rose Bowl.

Texas' defense being THAT good? Please. That game was all about Vince Young. Texas did nothing otherwise when it came down to the game. Need I remind you what USC did to that vastly superior texas defense? 365 passing yards coupled with 209 rushing yards for a total of 576 yards. Converted over half of their third downs. 5.1 yards per carry. Young had to account for 84% of all Texas' offense, while the rest of his team did jack.

All this is why he is so highly touted. I don't buy it. I simply fail to see somebody who can do any of those same things at the pro level.

That Texas defense will end up with at least 7 of its 11 starters as NFL contributors. You missed my point. Sure SC moved the ball and put up points against the Texas D. But imagine what they would have done to the pathetic SC defense. Also, it certainly appeared the Texas D made the plays they had to. You hit on it with your "If Lendale White" scenario. He didn't because the Texas defense stopped him.

 

[therickbol]

Blaming Vanderbilt's losses on Cutler is ascinine! And, if you are not blaming them on him then you can't hold him responsible for the lack of wins he had throughout his college career. Its a ridiculous argument. Vanderbilt won games they should not have because they had Cutler at QB. His talent surrounding him was inferior basically every game he played in college. Now in Denver his surrounding talent will be very good. A great running game. He is going to thrive and this "winning mentality" crap will look silly.

 

[milohimself]

That Texas defense will end up with at least 7 of its 11 starters as NFL contributors. You missed my point. Sure SC moved the ball and put up points against the Texas D. But imagine what they would have done to the pathetic SC defense. Also, it certainly appeared the Texas D made the plays they had to. You hit on it with your "If Lendale White" scenario. He didn't because the Texas defense stopped him.

That's not shutdown though... Yes, it is clutch, rising to the occassionan, but it's hard for me to praise a defense that lets an opponnent within breathing distance of 600 yards. Even if it is USC. Not saying Texas' defense was bad by any means though. I know they stopped Lendale White when it counted, but that's the only time they stopped USC all game.

 

[milohimself]

Blaming Vanderbilt's losses on Cutler is ascinine! And, if you are not blaming them on him then you can't hold him responsible for the lack of wins he had throughout his college career. Its a ridiculous argument. Vanderbilt won games they should not have because they had Cutler at QB. His talent surrounding him was inferior basically every game he played in college. Now in Denver his surrounding talent will be very good. A great running game. He is going to thrive and this "winning mentality" crap will look silly.

We'll see how he does. Have you ever played organized football? Just wondering.

 

[WA_Vol]

Change the subject, apparently Texas didnt draft Reggie Bush because they couldnt get him to agree to a $ figure before the draft started, and didnt want to waste a draft pick on someone they couldnt sign.

Whats up with that?

 

[therickbol]

We'll see how he does. Have you ever played organized football? Just wondering.

Yes. A lot. I coach in high school. Though not football at this time.

 

[GAVol]

Change the subject, apparently Texas didnt draft Reggie Bush because they couldnt get him to agree to a $ figure before the draft started, and didnt want to waste a draft pick on someone they couldnt sign.

Whats up with that?

Not surprising. The team with the #1 pick almost always negotiates a deal before draft day. Obviosuly the Texans didn't want to be held hostage by their top pick holding out.

 

[gonygonygo]

Change the subject, apparently Texas didnt draft Reggie Bush because they couldnt get him to agree to a $ figure before the draft started, and didnt want to waste a draft pick on someone they couldnt sign.

Whats up with that?

I dont believe in tying up all your money in one player. Especially as a rookie, when he has proved nothing on this level. I'm sure his potential put him in the class to be one of the best playmakers in the league. However, what happens if he gets hurt? Then you are paying all your money to someone that cannot help him win games. Then you can't afford other quality players to take up the slack. Then you are screwed. Football is a team game. You do reward the best with the highest salaries, but not at the expense of having a good team. One good player can be neutralized. But if there are other quality guys around him, the gameplan of trying to neutralize Bush will not work because the others WILL make you pay.

Look at the NBA... Iverson can't do it alone. T-MAC can't do it alone. Jordan didn't do it alone.
NFL... Barry didn't do it alone. Elway didn't do it alone. Marino didn't do it alone.

Having all your resources in one player is a guarantee for failure. It is a proven fact. I personally WOULD have taken Reggie Bush... I would have worried about the $$ later. I know I just contradicted myself, but Bush is clearly the best available in the draft.

 

[gonygonygo]

One more thing...

Who will the Texans take with the 1st overall pick in the 2007 draft??

 

[GAVol]

I'd never make it as an NFL GM because I think I would always want to trade down. There just aren't that many single players who can make more of a difference than 2 or 3 good players.

 

[jakez4ut]

same here, but it would have been tough not to take Reggie bush...

however, i do think for the Texans, they made the right pick for them....their offense isn't terrible....but the D was awful, just plain awful.

Now the Saints on the other hand....it mad perfect sense for them....they already had a good solid group on offense with the additon of Breese....the D wasn't terrible last year...and they are now legitimately an offensive threat.....

I don't like either team, but i think it worked out very well for both of them....

 

[milohimself]

I'd never make it as an NFL GM because I think I would always want to trade down. There just aren't that many single players who can make more of a difference than 2 or 3 good players.

True. You can always get far more value out of that #1 overall.

 

[la.lovesorange]

The Saints have a great team now but they will still have the curse. It dosent really matter how good they are on paper...................