Tee Martin/Vince Young

#127
#127
finevol said:
Anyone think Matt L will get it together?
Click to expand...
Absolutely. With the talent on hand in Arizona, if they can find a coach who can make them forget they're the Cardinals and play in the present, they're going to be very good.
 
#128
#128
tidwell said:
Not a bad guy at all to take your chances with. If VY can come along and both teams get a defense, that could be a possible AFC playoff matchup for the years to come.
Click to expand...
Losing Pollack, and probably Odell Thurman, really sets the Bengals back defensively.
 
#130
#130
finevol said:
Hat if you owned a NFL team would you take Young or Matt L in there rookie year? and no CPF is not the coach.
Click to expand...
Matt Leinart. I simply don't believe in the long term viability of a QB whose best asset is his running ability.
 
#131
#131
finevol said:
Anyone think Matt L will get it together?
Click to expand...

He had the best rookie campaign between the big 3, and he seemed to improve over the season. VY was up and down, and Cutler seemed to start getting it.

Leinart will probably make multiple Pro Bowls.
 
#132
#132
Since Tee Martin is the thread topic, did anyone ever think he would make it in the NFL? I did not think so even when we won. I really thought he was soooooooo inacurate.
 
#133
#133
hatvol96 said:
Matt Leinart. I simply don't believe in the long term viability of a QB whose best asset is his running ability.
Click to expand...

Well how many QB's actually fit into that catagory besides the obvious? It could be viewed that this "new school" approach to the position hasn't really been around long enough to form a solid conclusion about it's effectiveness.

Perhaps Young can do what Vick hasn't been able to: use the style effectively.
 
#134
#134
finevol said:
Since Tee Martin is the thread topic, did anyone ever think he would make it in the NFL? I did not think so even when we won. I really thought he was soooooooo inacurate.
Click to expand...
I'm suprised he never really stuck as a backup. A mobile QB is nice to have coming off the bench for an injured starter as a change of pace. I never thought he would be an NFL starter.
 
#135
#135
SWIL said:
Well how many QB's actually fit into that catagory besides the obvious? It could be viewed that this "new school" approach to the position hasn't really been around long enough to form a solid conclusion about it's effectiveness.

Perhaps Young can do what Vick hasn't been able to: use the style effectively.
Click to expand...
Randall Cunningham did. I'd certainly call his career nothing spectacular. Bobby Douglass used to run a lot for the Bears, don't think anyone is clamoring for his induction to Canton. Cade McNown was a mobile QB. That turned out well, didn't it?
 
#136
#136
Leinart had more INTs than TDs this season.

His completion percentage & QB rating were lower than Cutler's.

He accounted for 6 fewer TDs than Young.

I'm not sure what his record was as the starter, but I don't think it was better than 8-5.

He did throw for more yards than Cutler and Young.

Just throwing some stats out there for argument sake on who had the better rookie season.
 
#137
#137
I attribute the 8-5 record more to Travis Henry and Pacman Jones than Vince Young, but VY definitely played very well. Leinart has no offensive line.
 
#138
#138
I'll take my chances with Young.He has come a long way.McNair did alot of running and he was great and still is.My only worry is if you have to rely on the qb that runs often, sooner or later your toast.
 
#139
#139
McNair didn't start off as a great passer, either. His completion percentage in his third season was 52%.

He came along very well especially in 2001 and 2002 when the Titans had to rely more on the passing game with the departure of Lorenzo Neal and the running game along with Eddie George's permanent turf toe injury.
 
#140
#140
Speaking of McNair, his stats for 2005 and 2006 are amazingly similar. It's truly amazing where a collection of talent will get you.
 
#141
#141
tidwell said:
Speaking of McNair, his stats for 2005 and 2006 are amazingly similar. It's truly amazing where a collection of talent will get you.
Click to expand...
I think rookie of the year says something about his Young's ability.
 
#142
#142
Perhaps, but as pointed out earlier in the thread, rookie of the year isn't a good indicator of future success.
 
#143
#143
tidwell said:
Speaking of McNair, his stats for 2005 and 2006 are amazingly similar. It's truly amazing where a collection of talent will get you.
Click to expand...
I think it has a lot to do with not having to live among a bunch of Billy Ray Cyrus/Tammy Wynette wannabes.
 
#145
#145
Young certainly isn't a football god, but he in college, at least in his last season, was definitely better than Martin was.
 
#146
#146
hatvol96 said:
I think it has a lot to do with not having to live among a bunch of Billy Ray Cyrus/Tammy Wynette wannabes.
Click to expand...
Then shouldn't his stats be better this year instead of a mirror image of his last season in the cultural disaster known as Nashville?
 
#147
#147
blaker024 said:
Leinart had a better year that Young? Dohkay.
Click to expand...

He did.

Young:
15 G, 51.5%, 2199 yards, 6.16 ypa, 12 TD, 13 INT, 66.7 rating, 552 yards rushing

Leinart:
12 G, 56.8%, 2547 yards, 6.76 ypa, 11 TD, 12 INT, 74.0 rating, 49 yards rushing

Leinart clearly had the better year.
 
#149
#149
VolinArizona said:
He did.

Young:
15 G, 51.5%, 2199 yards, 6.16 ypa, 12 TD, 13 INT, 66.7 rating, 552 yards rushing

Leinart:
12 G, 56.8%, 2547 yards, 6.76 ypa, 11 TD, 12 INT, 74.0 rating, 49 yards rushing

Leinart clearly had the better year.
Click to expand...

It's not that clear from your numbers.

Plus I believe Young had a better record.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top