Cutler/Young at 12-15

[wick]

Vince Young detractors never seem capable of addressing his 2005 quarterback rating. Nor his perfect throw to beat Ohio State in Columbus. Nor the way he carved up USC's secondary with laser-precise intermediate passing. Young was dominant as a passer the past season. End of story.

 

[Pokes28]

Vince Young detractors never seem capable of addressing his 2005 quarterback rating. Nor his perfect throw to beat Ohio State in Columbus. Nor the way he carved up USC's secondary with laser-precise intermediate passing. Young was dominant as a passer the past season. End of story.

A few things.

First in the comparison of stats between ML and VY in the Rose Bowl. Does anybody here actually think the USC Defense was nearly as good as the Texas Defense? I don't. Yes they have some great players, but nothing like what Texas had on the field. This isn't a zero sum game. Because one guy looked great doesn't make him better than the other. They weren't playing against the same defense.

Now for the laser-precise intermediate passing. How many times did VY have to throw a precise pass? Meaning that the guy was actually barely open and not wide open? I'll tell ya. ZERO

The great thing about this is that it is going to be a lot like the debates I had last year about DJ or the year before that about Williams. Yes these were great players in college and could be great players in the NFL. But you simply can't take what they did in college and say they will have the same effect in the pros. Though Williams has been the same guy either being injured or making spectacular catches or simpy disappearing.

In 5 years when it is obvious that VY isn't going to be a complete NFL QB (like it is with Vick right now), those that now say he'll be great will just take one of these stances: He never had an OC adapt to his strengths... He never had the right talent around him.... Or they will simply state that lots of first round QBs fail and that it this couldn't be predicted (or they will attack those that did predict it as saying we were taking the odds sort of saying we took the easy way).

I admit when I'm wrong about players. It happens every year to some degree. If you want, I'll give you my list of players that I've made predictions on.

David Harrell - Pokes
dwh

 

[kartr]

Your comparing that sandlot offense that Texas ran last year to what we ran in the Early 90's? I did just read that? Any offense in which the QB, after the snap, only looks at half the field isn't going to succeed in the NFL, at least not for long, see the offense we ran with Quincy that got less successful as the year went on.

You were calling UT's skill position players pedestrian in the middle of your argument between Cutler and Young, therefore any logical human would consider those statments to be directed toward that discussion. This is especially likely as you never mentioned Leinart directly in your entire post.

I suspect Vince Youngs numbers here in Dallas for 2-3 years would be bad enough that everyone would want him run out of town. We are not running any form of an offense he could be successful in, and aren't likely to while Parcells is here. Frankly, I think Young here in Dallas would be a disaster waiting to happen. Cuttler or Leinart would be a much better immedate fit here, but I don't think we are drafting a QB anyway.

What Vince Youngs passing leadership of the Longhorns says in the Rose Bowl game is meaningless. His rushing stats says either he wasn't seeing the players to throw too or he was tucking the ball and running a lot because they weren't open. Not sure which was the case, and I doubt anyone who wasn't at the game is. The RB's yes the USC backs were better, but they also got more carries, their YPA wasn't that different. I think that says something as the Big 12 is a better defensive conference than the Pac 10, at least in my esitmation.

I'll try to focus on just one area for you. You are correct in that the Big 12 is a better defensive conference than the Pac 10, but the other side of that coin should tell you that Vince Young's numbers would have been better in the Pac 10 too and Leinart's numbers would have been worse in the Big 12. Also, if the Big 12 defenses are better than the Pac 10's, then that means that the Big 12 defenses are closer to NFL quality, thus inferring that Vince Young would be a better pro than Leinart and Cutler as well, since he didn't elevate his teams' play the way Young did.

You keep bringing up Quincy in this discussion for some reason, usually to make some negative statement about him when he has nothing to do with Young or Leinart, but for all Quincy's faults, he put up respectable numbers overall in 2003 in terms of td's and yardage and was the main weapon of offense. He had to face defenses like Buffalo,New England,Miami,Philly,Tampa,Carolina, and went 3-4 with no possession receiver over the middle and no legitamate RB, contrasted with those teams backs like Ricky Williams,Warrick Dunn,Steven Davis/DeShaun Foster,Travis Henry,Antwan Smith/Kevin Faulk,Brian Westbrook. Every single team we played against had a better running back. That was Parcells fault and he acknowledged the error by trying to trade 3 times that year for a decent running back. If Quincy had had a halfway decent RB that year, he would have thrown for another 300-400 yards and over 20 tds. I know that is true because our receivers dropped some 29 passes worth probably 300-400 yards.

So if you take away the drops and add a decent running back,Quincy would have been a 4,000 yard qb with 25-30 tds and those my friend, are pro bowl numbers. So say all you the negative things you want about Q,considering the schedule and supporting cast, he did a pretty fair job and you would see that if you took the blinders off.

 

[Pokes28]

I'll try to focus on just one area for you. You are correct in that the Big 12 is a better defensive conference than the Pac 10, but the other side of that coin should tell you that Vince Young's numbers would have been better in the Pac 10 too and Leinart's numbers would have been worse in the Big 12. Also, if the Big 12 defenses are better than the Pac 10's, then that means that the Big 12 defenses are closer to NFL quality, thus inferring that Vince Young would be a better pro than Leinart and Cutler as well, since he didn't elevate his teams' play the way Young did.

Who said that the Pac 10 Defenses weren't as good as those in the Big 12? I've only read about the comparison of SC to Texas and in that, Texas had a much better defense. And saying the Big 12 defenses are closer to NFL quality is a misnomer as well. The Big 12 is a running conference by and large. Yes there are some spread offenses, but there aren't ANY NFL style offenses in the Big 12 whereas that is the common style in the Pac 10. You build defenses based on the offenses you will have to face. It is an apples to oranges argument. Just like comparing Young's Rose Bowl numbers to those of Leinart.

You keep bringing up Quincy in this discussion for some reason, usually to make some negative statement about him when he has nothing to do with Young or Leinart, but for all Quincy's faults, he put up respectable numbers overall in 2003 in terms of td's and yardage and was the main weapon of offense. He had to face defenses like Buffalo,New England,Miami,Philly,Tampa,Carolina, and went 3-4 with no possession receiver over the middle and no legitamate RB, contrasted with those teams backs like Ricky Williams,Warrick Dunn,Steven Davis/DeShaun Foster,Travis Henry,Antwan Smith/Kevin Faulk,Brian Westbrook. Every single team we played against had a better running back. That was Parcells fault and he acknowledged the error by trying to trade 3 times that year for a decent running back. If Quincy had had a halfway decent RB that year, he would have thrown for another 300-400 yards and over 20 tds. I know that is true because our receivers dropped some 29 passes worth probably 300-400 yards.

So if you take away the drops and add a decent running back,Quincy would have been a 4,000 yard qb with 25-30 tds and those my friend, are pro bowl numbers. So say all you the negative things you want about Q,considering the schedule and supporting cast, he did a pretty fair job and you would see that if you took the blinders off.

The primary reason that there is a comparison to Quincy is that both VY and Quincy played in offenses where they weren't required to read more than 1/3rd of the field. Yes Quincy had a really good season. But to say that a running game was going to improve Quincy's numbers is nothing more than conjecture. If Parcells had a RB that he could rely on, I would guess Dallas would have run the ball more than they did and Q's numbers could have gone down. You talk about what his figures would have been without drops, but drops are part of the game. Can you imagine how many yards the Seahawks would have without drops? How about the Colts or the Commanders? If you only say "he would have had great numbers if you only change this one thing" then you have to change that one thing for every other system to actually have a real world example of if those are good figures or not.

This isn't a question of blinders. I think that most of us that doubt VY's ability to make it big in the NFL clearly state that he's got every measurable you would ever want and he's a winner (unlike Cutler). We just see some question marks that make us doubt whether he will be able to make the transition. I just have a hard time with those that will not accept anything but fanatical endorsement of all things Vince. He's not a perfect prospect. There has never been a QB that came into the NFL with his talent set that has become a major success. There have been darn few (if any) that have come into the NFL with his talent set but those that have come close (Randall Cunningham is a great example) always have a hole in their game. Yes Randall had some great years, but there aren't many if any coaches that will allow their QB to improvise the way Buddy Ryan allowed it from him. It wasn't until Randall was an old man that he actually had success in a real NFL offense and at that time he had Cris Carter and Randy Moss to throw to. Basically anybody could throw for 30 TDs to those guys.

David Harrell - Pokes
dwh

 

[Derinyar]

I'll try to focus on just one area for you. You are correct in that the Big 12 is a better defensive conference than the Pac 10, but the other side of that coin should tell you that Vince Young's numbers would have been better in the Pac 10 too and Leinart's numbers would have been worse in the Big 12. Also, if the Big 12 defenses are better than the Pac 10's, then that means that the Big 12 defenses are closer to NFL quality, thus inferring that Vince Young would be a better pro than Leinart and Cutler as well, since he didn't elevate his teams' play the way Young did.

You keep bringing up Quincy in this discussion for some reason, usually to make some negative statement about him when he has nothing to do with Young or Leinart, but for all Quincy's faults, he put up respectable numbers overall in 2003 in terms of td's and yardage and was the main weapon of offense. He had to face defenses like Buffalo,New England,Miami,Philly,Tampa,Carolina, and went 3-4 with no possession receiver over the middle and no legitamate RB, contrasted with those teams backs like Ricky Williams,Warrick Dunn,Steven Davis/DeShaun Foster,Travis Henry,Antwan Smith/Kevin Faulk,Brian Westbrook. Every single team we played against had a better running back. That was Parcells fault and he acknowledged the error by trying to trade 3 times that year for a decent running back. If Quincy had had a halfway decent RB that year, he would have thrown for another 300-400 yards and over 20 tds. I know that is true because our receivers dropped some 29 passes worth probably 300-400 yards.

So if you take away the drops and add a decent running back,Quincy would have been a 4,000 yard qb with 25-30 tds and those my friend, are pro bowl numbers. So say all you the negative things you want about Q,considering the schedule and supporting cast, he did a pretty fair job and you would see that if you took the blinders off.

No, because you can't run a shotgun spread offense in the NFL and expect to have any success. No team has done it, or likely ever will. So therefore trying to extrapolate Youngs success at the college level to the NFL level isn't that valid.

I don't bring up Quincy as much as I bring up the offense that we designed for him in that one season. He was better in the first part of the season, before teams adjusted to the fact that he was reading one half of the field. I suspect that Youngs NFL offense will likely look similar, at least for 3-4 years. If that is the case then Young will likely have a bad 3-4 years and to me that means that Young would be run out of here on rails.

If the 2003 Cowboys had a top flight RB Quincy's numbers probably go down, as his pass attempts probably drop down precipitiously. He probably has better completion % numbers and maybe even a better TD/Int ratio, but his raw numbers likely drop.

You can't take drops out of football. They are part of the game. Thats sorta like saying if we ignore Interceptions Quincy had a nice year. While thats true, its just not reasonable. 29 drops sounds bad, but I suspect isn't a horrible number across the NFL, I'd guess thats around average. 2 drops per game isn't that bad, while the number 29 looks good. You could also wonder how many spectacular catches were made on Quincy's behalf that year, and how much yardage he would have lost if the WR's hadn't made those. Once again thats just not relevant. The plays that were made were made, those that weren't weren't.

 

[ZB9]

People had a lot of the same concerns about Randal Cunningham, Steve McNair, Steve Young, Culpepper, and Donovan McNabb.

imo, Young is a better player than any of those guys were COMING OUT OF COLLEGE. He is a bigger, faster, stronger, Randal Cunningham (and Young is probably more poised and a better leader). If he gets in the right situation, the sky is the limit for Young in the NFL. He has all of the tools to get it done.

Watch some film of this past year and tell me what throw the kid cannot make.

 

[ComicBookGuy]

Watch some film of this past year and tell me what throw the kid cannot make.

A deep ball over the WR's shoulder. He throws good crossing routes, but his corner and deep routes are lacking. He sails his deep balls a lot.

 

[ZB9]

A deep ball over the WR's shoulder. He throws good crossing routes, but his corner and deep routes are lacking. He sails his deep balls a lot.

i dont know man. He threw some really good deep balls in his career. Some of them can be seen in this video. Young threw the deep pass pretty well in his career overall, imo.

http://www.youtube.com/w/Vince-Young-Career-Highlight-Video?v=BXXBL4b5NfY&search=vince%20young

and with all of the criticizms of Texas's offense as it translates to the NFL game, that offense required mainly downfield passes. Young was not able to "dink and dunk" with screen passes all day (like the Texas Tech, Hawaii, and oklahoma offenses for example). He didnt throw many screen passes in his career. Young was required to make a lot of complicated "NFL type of throws" in that offense (and Pete Carroll, the defensive genius, said as much in a rose bowl pregame press conference)

anyway, just about every college QB has to adjust to playing in a pro style NFL offense. Young is not unique in that regard. College offenses are quite a bit different than NFL offenses.

 

[ComicBookGuy]

There were very few balls thrown over 20 yards in that video. So I'm not sure what I'm supposed to look at. His running? We all know that is good. His escape ability? Same. His throws on crossing routes? Ditto.

He had one or two throws that impressed me as far as deeper throws with accuracy. That is all. The rest were short passing routes with RAC or VY's escape ability and improvisational running.

 

[ZB9]

There were very few balls thrown over 20 yards in that video. So I'm not sure what I'm supposed to look at. His running? We all know that is good. His escape ability? Same. His throws on crossing routes? Ditto.

He had one or two throws that impressed me as far as deeper throws with accuracy. That is all. The rest were short passing routes with RAC or VY's escape ability and improvisational running.

LOL. Young didnt throw many balls over 20 yards? Did you even watch him at all when he was at Texas?

In 2005, Young averaged 9.4 yards per completion (3rd in the NATION), and no he didnt have the advantage of having WRs that gave him very many RAC yards. Add the 65% completion percentage to the 9.4 yards per completion and i dont see how he wasnt successful throwing the deeper passes. The stats back up what my freakin eyes saw when i watched every single Texas game for the past two seasons.

 

[Pokes28]

OK, you say that Young didn't dink and dunk (like the spread offenses in the Big 12 south) yet he averaged 9.1 yards per completion. You then say that he didn't have receivers that got much RAC yards. So if that is all true, then he had to throw a lot of short passes if he did throw a lot of passes over 20.

You can't have it both ways in this argument. You can't say that he was a bomber throwing great long passes all the time and that he got no help from his receivers when his completion yards weren't even half of what the discussion is about. For every 20 yard pass completion, he'd have to have a zero yard completion just to near his 9.1 average. If you say his receivers didn't give him much after they caught the ball, perhaps I can argue that he didn't put the ball to where they could continue down the field.

I'm not arguing talent. I'm just saying that you can't have the argument both ways.

David Harrell - Pokes
dwh

 

[ZB9]

OK, you say that Young didn't dink and dunk (like the spread offenses in the Big 12 south) yet he averaged 9.1 yards per completion. You then say that he didn't have receivers that got much RAC yards. So if that is all true, then he had to throw a lot of short passes if he did throw a lot of passes over 20.

You can't have it both ways in this argument. You can't say that he was a bomber throwing great long passes all the time and that he got no help from his receivers when his completion yards weren't even half of what the discussion is about. For every 20 yard pass completion, he'd have to have a zero yard completion just to near his 9.1 average. If you say his receivers didn't give him much after they caught the ball, perhaps I can argue that he didn't put the ball to where they could continue down the field.

I'm not arguing talent. I'm just saying that you can't have the argument both ways.

David Harrell - Pokes
dwh

your post doesnt make any sense. How am i trying to "have it both ways"?

there were only two QBs in the entire nation with higher yards per attempt than Vince Young, and no one had a yp/a average over 10.0 for the season. A player has to have had success throwing the ball downfield if he averages out at 9.4, with a 65 percent completion rate. If Vince Young was in a "dink and dunk" offense, then he wouldnt have had one of the highest YP/A rates in the nation.

anyway, ypa stats arent everything...but whomever states that Vince Young didnt have success throwing the ball downfield consistently, must not have watched the kid play very much. If you had watched him, then you wouldnt be saying that.

 

[Derinyar]

OK, you say that Young didn't dink and dunk (like the spread offenses in the Big 12 south) yet he averaged 9.1 yards per completion. You then say that he didn't have receivers that got much RAC yards. So if that is all true, then he had to throw a lot of short passes if he did throw a lot of passes over 20.

You can't have it both ways in this argument. You can't say that he was a bomber throwing great long passes all the time and that he got no help from his receivers when his completion yards weren't even half of what the discussion is about. For every 20 yard pass completion, he'd have to have a zero yard completion just to near his 9.1 average. If you say his receivers didn't give him much after they caught the ball, perhaps I can argue that he didn't put the ball to where they could continue down the field.

I'm not arguing talent. I'm just saying that you can't have the argument both ways.

David Harrell - Pokes
dwh

The problem is that he made a typo. It was supposed to be Yards per Attempt as opposed to completion. YPA is a pretty normal stat.

What that amounts to is 14.4 yards per completion. Most likely that means a good number of 7-12 yard passes and a hand full over 20. So that would pretty much defeat the idea that its a long range passing offense. Remember that one 50+ yard completion can help seriously skew the numbers. And I'll agree he likely did have several of those last year, but that many of those yards were likely RAC.

In fact Young completion % argues against an agressive down field passing game, as the further the ball has to travel the lower the chances of it being successful. Very few down field passing games, especially in college, get a completion % nearing 60, much less over it. Frequently the high % passing games are screens or the shorter comeback style offenses. Texas ran a comeback style of offense, at least in most of the games I saw them play. It makes for a high completion % as the ball is usually going into the short to edge of intermediate range with the DB being a yard to two off the ball. It doesn't produce RAC as the WR has basically come to a stop to catch the ball.

Also if you look at a game to game stats as opposed to the over all agregate numbers you see that he feasted on weaker teams, and struggled against better teams. USC was not a great defensive school, but Young averaged 6.6 YPA for that game. Where as against teams that UT was vastly better than he tended to have large YPA numbers(Kansas, Baylor, ULaLa). Also his completion % was higher in those games than one can normally expect to see also. So you in essence wind up with Youngs numbers being inflated against sub standard opponenets and being much more medicore against talented teams that actually bother to play defense. Theres a reasonable argument that could be made that give much credit for what he did last season to torching Colorado twice.

 

[Pokes28]

In fact Young completion % argues against an agressive down field passing game, as the further the ball has to travel the lower the chances of it being successful. Very few down field passing games, especially in college, get a completion % nearing 60, much less over it. Frequently the high % passing games are screens or the shorter comeback style offenses. Texas ran a comeback style of offense, at least in most of the games I saw them play. It makes for a high completion % as the ball is usually going into the short to edge of intermediate range with the DB being a yard to two off the ball. It doesn't produce RAC as the WR has basically come to a stop to catch the ball.

Thanks for clearing up our disconnect on communication. The point being is that the things that he was asked to do in college won't translate to the NFL. Sure they throw comebacks in the NFL, they throw everything. There are just a lot more things that he didn't do in college that some on here think will not be a problem.

Troy Aikman didn't throw a great deep ball. But if you look at highlight reels, it sometimes looks like he was a mad bomber carving up deep secondaries with laser precision. Reality is that Troy could make every other throw and make it well. No QB in the history of the league threw a better 15-20 yard out than he did. His senior season at UCLA, he threw all the passes that he would throw in the NFL as they ran a much more pro-style offense. Yes the playbook wasn't nearly as thick, but there was no question about his ability to throw in passing lanes or precision with timing. These are all questions with Vince Young.

Honestly, the only reason we are having this conversation is because Texas won the national championship this year. Had Texas gone 10-2 and won the Cotton Bowl, odds are that Vince would not be thought of by many as the elite prospect. Winning in college tends to elevate player's value. Vince is a proven winner. But then again, so are a lot of QBs that don't amount to diddly in the NFL.

David Harrell - Pokes
dwh

 

[Derinyar]

Thanks for clearing up our disconnect on communication. The point being is that the things that he was asked to do in college won't translate to the NFL. Sure they throw comebacks in the NFL, they throw everything. There are just a lot more things that he didn't do in college that some on here think will not be a problem.

Troy Aikman didn't throw a great deep ball. But if you look at highlight reels, it sometimes looks like he was a mad bomber carving up deep secondaries with laser precision. Reality is that Troy could make every other throw and make it well. No QB in the history of the league threw a better 15-20 yard out than he did. His senior season at UCLA, he threw all the passes that he would throw in the NFL as they ran a much more pro-style offense. Yes the playbook wasn't nearly as thick, but there was no question about his ability to throw in passing lanes or precision with timing. These are all questions with Vince Young.

Honestly, the only reason we are having this conversation is because Texas won the national championship this year. Had Texas gone 10-2 and won the Cotton Bowl, odds are that Vince would not be thought of by many as the elite prospect. Winning in college tends to elevate player's value. Vince is a proven winner. But then again, so are a lot of QBs that don't amount to diddly in the NFL.

David Harrell - Pokes
dwh

I personally think hes a great talent but not as great of a QB prospsect, for all of the reasons that I have mentioned before. But I suspect the problem is the number of UT homers that love him to death and miss seeing his problems in the midst of the championship season is massive.

If winning in college was all that mattered to the NFL teams then why is Chris Simms in the NFL when Major Applewhite is a sports talk guy in Austin? Simple, its not the same game and winning in college does not translate into winning in the NFL. In college its much more important to get the team behind you and united. In the NFL hopefully the more adult players don't need a single individaul to fire them up and get them moving in the same direction.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

The one thing that will carry over from the NCAA to the NFL, where Young is concerned, is his ability to put players in "No Man's Land". Because Young has the ability to find guys down field and break games open with his running ability, he does put enourmous pressure on defensive players. Players are put in a position to make a quick decision on what to do about Young, when he breaks containment they will hesitate. That's going to carry over to the NFL. Pursuit will be better and quicker in the NFL but that will provide any Pro offense the opportunity to cut back on the pursuit and open up the running game. If they don't commit to pursuit, he will isolate LBs or DBs and big plays will result. He has the skills to make life difficult, even in the NFL. He's an interesting player.

 

[sporadic]

Stats, Strength of Conference, Can't do this, won't succeed unless you do that...blah blah blah blah blah. WINNERS WIN. I am not a TU fan, but I know a winner when I see one...and that is all VY. HE won the Rose Bowl in spite of one of the worst coaching performances I have ever seen. Mack should call up Vince every day for the rest of his life and thank him for winning the big one for him. Even against tOSU, he refused to let his team lose. I don't know about everyone else, but I like that attribute in a QB. Roger was not a pure pocket passer with a strong arm, but he was a winner. WINNERS WIN. PERIOD.

 

[ComicBookGuy]

David Greene won a lot in college. Don't think he'll do much in the NFL.

Dorsey was pretty damn good as well. In fact he had a better career record than VY. He must be doing pretty well in the NFL.

What about Charlie Ward, Chris Weinke, and Josh Heupul? They have great NFL careers? Or maybe Steve Walsh, Tommie Frazier, and Ty Detmer? They won a few games I think.

I'm not entirely sure what Mack did in that game that you think was so horrible(much less to be called one of the worst coaching performances ever), but whatever.

Winners don't always win at the next level. If they did, the level of play at the NFL would be incredible since there is a very large number of winners at both the high school and collegiate levels.

He may very well turn out to be the best QB of the next decade, but to parlay his collegiate record into success at the NFL is ludicrous at best.

 

[ZB9]

yes, i mistyped. The stat i posted for Young in my first post was his yp/a, not his yp/c....but it doesnt matter. VY was among the national leaders in BOTH categories, and that was my point. You dont rank among the tops in the nation in BOTH yp/a, and yp/c if you are in a "dink and dunk" offense.

you say he only did it against bad teams? you really must not have watched Texas v. Ohio State (275 yards passing, 9.3 yp/a), Texas v. Oklahoma (3 td passes, 9.0 yp/a), or Texas v. USC (30/40 completions, 267 yards passing).

He cant throw downfield? BS. You dont need to look at any stats to know that is crap if you watched Texas this past year.

 

[ZB9]

Thanks for clearing up our disconnect on communication. The point being is that the things that he was asked to do in college won't translate to the NFL.

how is Young unique in that regard? Just about every single QB that "graduates" to the NFL has to deal with the same thing.

Sure they throw comebacks in the NFL, they throw everything. There are just a lot more things that he didn't do in college that some on here think will not be a problem.

yes, they throw a hell of a lot of comebacks in the NFL, and Young threw a lot of comebacks. VY threw all kinds of passes this past season, including comebacks. What throw can Young not make?

tell me if you think this is an "NFL throw", on the road, in crunch time http://www.qisports.com/vinceyoung2006.html

Troy Aikman didn't throw a great deep ball. But if you look at highlight reels, it sometimes looks like he was a mad bomber carving up deep secondaries with laser precision. Reality is that Troy could make every other throw and make it well. No QB in the history of the league threw a better 15-20 yard out than he did. His senior season at UCLA, he threw all the passes that he would throw in the NFL as they ran a much more pro-style offense. Yes the playbook wasn't nearly as thick, but there was no question about his ability to throw in passing lanes or precision with timing. These are all questions with Vince Young.

Aikman was one of the most accurate QBs in the history of the NFL, it's not fair to compare Young to him. VY doesnt have to be Troy Aikman....but Aikman loved the comeback throw as well, if you will remember.

Honestly, the only reason we are having this conversation is because Texas won the national championship this year. Had Texas gone 10-2 and won the Cotton Bowl, odds are that Vince would not be thought of by many as the elite prospect. Winning in college tends to elevate player's value. Vince is a proven winner. But then again, so are a lot of QBs that don't amount to diddly in the NFL.

we are having this conversation because Young was a dominant player in college (one of the most dominant to EVER play college ball)