remember when david carr was leading the league in QB rating. QB rating is a totally sweet stat!!!!!!!
Well, his QB rating came down to earth by the end of the season. Regardless, for all of David Carr's faults, he did have one good thing: he was an extremely accurate passer (finished the season #1 in the league in completion pct). If not for that, his rating would have ended up much worse than 82. Nobody claims QB rating is the holy grail of QB stats. All we are saying is that a career rating of 65.7 is pathetic and inexcusable for a starting quarterback in this league.
silly. he was a rookie. most of us didn't expect him to start a game all season. he didn't play in the first 3 or so games at all.' leinart's was at 41.1
Every game in franchise history has been a sellout. Try again. I think the Texans are more worried about trying to do the best thing to win games as opposed to making bandwagoners become "fans."
Actually, no. Matt Leinart's rating was 74, and that was despite having to work behind arguably the worst offensive line in the league. You'd think as a sophomore Vince Young should be looking to improve his passing abilities, but his rating for last Sunday's game was 47.
you're right...the 41.1 was for this season's only game...my bad. it was 74 all last season...and 41.1. sorry, but those numbers aren't vastly better than VY's. and leinart is a pocket-passer. i'm guessing vy's numbers will improve. look...i'm all for the texans. i hope we beat the crap out of the titans. but pretending that VY can't play...or isn't a legit starting QB in this league??? in the words of ozzie guillen, "pfffttt....please."
Actually the biggest problem I see with this discussion and other discussions like this is that folks are continuously trying to justify their support for one player vs. another by tearing down the other player. That's why there is no middle ground because all here because all of the arguments and the positions being taken pro or con, are in the extreme with no middle ground. It's like a strange zero-sum game to justify the 2006 draft: Mario is good only if Bush is bad or VY really isn't as good as everyone thinks so it was the right thing to draft Mario or Bush, VY, Cutler and Leinart haven't exactly set the world on fire either so the drafting of Mario wasn't a mistake and on it goes. Sometimes reading this board is akin to watching the Arabs and Israelis or the Sunnis and the Shiites go after each other...
either? no, it's entirely because of the system - that's my point. these are teams. hold up - providing loosely connected "evidence" that doesn't stand-up to even a passing glance is not what i'm asking for. i want an explanation for the theory behind the notion that a running QB makes it easier for a running back to succeed. no; i find it dubious. you know what? too nice: it's total bull****. if jonathan wells had gone to tennessee, with his body of mediocre work, and rushed for 1,200 yards, it might have some validity. but when you're crediting baby vince with cedric benson's "ascent" to greatness; when you're ignoring travis henry's two 1,300-yard seasons in buffalo, calling two subseqent injury/suspension-riddled seasons as sucky so you can then proclaim, "see? 1,200 yards! must be vince!!", i'm sorry but i'm not buying it. thus i'd like a football-based explanation for how a running QB makes running easier. well, i hate the titans, yes. but this has nothing to do with any hatred. i merely want the vince jack-off to stop; i want vince nation to acknowledge there are 52 other players on the titans' roster; i want them to admit/understand/accept/concede - whatever, that it takes more than plopping an exceedingly mediocre QB onto a team for it to succeed. ok, how 'bout this: since being named head coach in 1995, fisher's running backs have rushed for 1,031 yards or more in every single season but three. nine of 12 years. and in one of those three years (95), rodney thomas totaled 947 in ten starts. so do you think maybe... just maybe, fisher and his coahing staff and their system might have a little something to do with it...? that they might have a system in place that really works, given it's been consistently prolific for 12 years now? or do you really ****ing think it's vince ****ing young? do also believe a fat-ass, ageless reindeer-owner plops down your chimney once a year, too? ignore? try dismiss. are you really going to argue that cedric benson, who posted 2,500 yards and 25-something TDs in his first two years on a college campus wasn't going to continue to get better as a back if vince young hadn't be **** from the heavens over austin? he was one of the most recruited high school backs in the nation. cedric benson was a great college running back. futher, you're aware travis henry posted 1,400 and 1,300-yard seasons in buffalo, right? and that last year was actually his third-best year as a pro? 02: 1,438; 89.8/game; 4.4/carry 03: 1,356; 90.4/game; 4.1/carry 06: 1,211; 86.5/game; 4.5/carry (btw: 04-05: started only 6 games because he broke his leg/was suspended/hurt his ankle; or, as major calls it: "sucking") even if you want to discount the game he didn't start last year: 02: 1,438; 89.8/game; 4.4/carry 03: 1,356; 90.4/game; 4.1/carry 06: 1,189; 91.5/game; 4.6/carry. you're talking about a 20-30 yard difference over a 16-game schedule - roughly two ****ing yards a game - and major wants to argue he was better? worse, you're willing to blindly follow such low-grade pap and call it "evidence," "data," etc? you know what? you win: VINCE YOUNG IS WORTH TWO YARDS A GAME. GET CANTON ON THE PHONE AND TELL MONTANA HE'S A p***y FOR PASSING SO MUCH!
joe joe, good stuff; thanks! that makes a lot of sense, but most of your evidence is from watching him in college, right, minus two pro games? vy totaled 83 rushing attempts, or 5.2 a game, last year (and how many of those were designed? the game-winner against the texans certainly wasn't). in college, he totaled 457 rushing attempt in 37 games, or 12.4 a game. i would guess defenses WERE defending him and the longhorns differently in college.
I don't know how to take this. I speculate the reasons Dunn and Henry do so well with a running QB in the NFL are very similar to why a RBs do very well with running QBs in college. I doubt NFL defenses have problems that college defenses don't have. Henry's best season in the NFL, yards per carry, was last season. His first game in Denver was great, but Denver is known as a good place for RBs and I think their OL technique is more valuable than having a running QB. Henry did get about a half yard more per carry in 2006 than the rest of his career even with the Denver game. If one game is statistically relevant, look at what VY's presence does for Brown this season. I don't think it is, but you might. Dunn also has averaged about a half yard more during his tenure with Vick on average. VY won't be a great QB in the NFL until he ups his passing game. I don't know how important the decoy ability is worth, but it is definitely not worth the lack of production at passing.
This just shows you don't read. Please change your handle BTW, I don't want to get attributed to saying something stupid or acting like a jackass for something I didn't do, not that I don't have some moments on my own This was well articulated earlier by Joe Joe. And look at Atl and Tenn's rushing stats w or w/o Young and Vick behind the center since they were drafted. And then go on and look at those teams W-L record during that period with those guys behind center vs when they were not. The Titans from 2003-2007 were 9-26 with McNair/Volek/Collins as the starter. They are 9-5 with VY as the starter. You want to dismiss VY as a significant positive factor at all. And you think we have a tough case of bias or something to own up to, sheesh. Very few individual players make a 3-4 W/L difference in their team, and that is a very conservative estimate for what VY meant as a rookie to his team.
wait. dunn and henry have BOTH posted good seasons without running QBs. i think the key to dunn's resurgence in ATL is health. between '04-'06 - his three best seasons - he played and started in all 16 games. atlanta was also a good team, and yes, vick was a multi-threat. still, that's more than a coincidence that dunn gets healthy at last... and starts to thrive. he had never started all 16 games in any season prior to '04. in fact, in the 3 years prior, he had missed 9 games and started only 32 (out of 48). and there's a king kong-sized difference in defending a running QB in college and a scrambling QB in the pros. QBs don't run enough by design for it to drastically impact defending the run. does it impact the passing game? oh yeah. but when vince is averaging 6 rushes a game, and i'm guessing at least 1 or 2 of those are scrambles and not designed... how is he impacting the other running backs positively? we could quibble; instead, i'll concede it was his "best" season, by about a grand total of two yards a game. travis henry was a VERY good back before vince young, he'll be a VERY good back without him (if he can stay healthy). in 11 starts, brown rushed for 1,067 yards in 2004 with tennessee, averaging 4.8 ypc, including 6 100+ yard performances (3 140+) and a 91-yarder for good measure. that's an average of 97/gaem, or a 1,552-yard pace. how did he do that without baby vince? think maybe, just maybe - stay with me here as i get a little crazy and go out on a shaky limb - jeff fisher's system might've had an impact on some of these guys? or is it just easier to think vince scrambling 6 times a game opened up SCORES of previously closed rushing lanes? i guess that makes more sense, huh? especially when teams are having to sit back and defend against his rocket laser accurate arm that's slinging the balls all over the field, completing 51% of his passes for a league record 6 yards per attempt...
