Where is VY? (all things Vince Young goes here)

How can you count on that QB to take us to the next level when A) you don't even know who that would be, or B) if we even draft a QB at that position. FA? Who do you suggest we get since there are so many out there? Kolb? He couldn't keep the job given to him in Philly where they have one of the best coaches for the passing game with Andy Reid. So we are at the point where we want back up QB's as our starter? Is this how far our expectations have dropped for a QB? I know, maybe we can go get Volek.

Superbowl is a far reach for either. Only one QB can win the superbowl a year. But I feel like VY has a way better chance of winning a SB while he's playing than the Titans will. But the way we treat our great players it might be 2055 when we win a SB once Bud and company is gone. I guarantee that VY will have a better winning % (and not just by a lttile bit either) than the Titans the rest of his career. We don't know how to win and that's not going to change until Bud is gone. VY knows how to win and he's proven it at every level. It will be frustrating next season when VY is winning with a coach that wants him while we are arguing which QB we should draft in 2012, and again in 2013, and again in 2014 and on and on.

 

QB's that win start. Only the Titans would cut a winning QB.

 

So your belief is the Bud Adams will live to be 132 years old and we will bust three times on QB's consecutively? Are you prone to hyperbolic statements by any chance?

For real though. Since you think our franchise is so poorly run and we are so screwed feel free to abandon ship with all the "fans" that bailed when we cut Fisher. The exit door is to the right; you should see dbc's fan card on the way out.

 

Its funny how we gave Pacman 15 different chances when his incidents were way on another level.

 

Two wrongs don't make a right. Besides the guy who gave Adam Jones all of those extra chances was fired about 2 months ago.

 

No, it's actually how discussion, debating, etc, goes. Once your opponent unnerves you to the point that you're throwing insults or calling them names, they've won. You've lost the intended audience that you were trying to make (in some senses "market") your ideas to, and unfortunately the point has become lessened, damaged, or lost because of it

First off, that's not necessarily right. You can't just call that latter a certainty. It's one thing to say giving a better chance to win vs will win.

Anything about Rusty I've really seen, also, has pretty much been about him, at best, serving as a placeholder for the new QB they draft and afterwards working his way up to a backup role (again at best). And if they sign a veteran QB like they have been saying they will, Rusty might not even get part A of that last statement. So no, I don't really see anywhere that it's choosing Rusty over Young, because Rusty's felt to be such a better option.


Secondly, (and if you're reading this as argumentative or as though someone was yelling, then you're missing the point)

Vick had to do a hell of a lot to redeem himself in the eyes of nearly everyone in this league; it's really not the same to throw his case around like done there. It wasn't that he just got picked up and promoted to started. He not only had to earn his way back to that starting spot he had to earn his way back onto a team's roster period.

Even when he was signed, the Eagles pretty much did it as a "if this doesn't work, there's no major loss on our part." The guy had to go well out of his way - after serving time for what he had done as well - to show not only that he had changed, but that he was worth getting a roster spot; not because playing abilities or athletics or whatever, but heavily through off-field actions (interviews with league higher ups, maturity being overly measured through the actions he was taking, responsibilities he had to follow up on, etc, he pretty much had to go well out of his way to show worth still; he had about as much attractiveness as an UDFA mid-season).....and even then, the chance he received for starting play time came about pretty much as about from several pretty much unexpected (and not really controlled) events. (The guy still pretty much walks a thinner line than almost anyone else in this league currently also.)



I'm not at all condoning, nor have I ever, anything he did. The man, however, didn't just come back, have a team oggle over him, and get handed a starting job once he got back, as was seemingly implied here.




I've been over it enough in the past that Roethlisberger isn't (and shouldn't be used as) a comparable model for Young, nor that anything the former does automatically make lesser things okay for anyone, including the latter. It's simply a poor argument.

 

yeah, that's not exactly how it went either.

....also you're using pacman to try to justify something...in some senses, that'd be like (i dunno, let's go with) "Mussolini did much worse" to justify real world actions

 

Yea so in one scenario your getting a for sure Pro Bowl caliber qb where as the other is your draft selection vs the percentage of qbs that come out of the draft a bust. Your right 4realz some of the people on here don't have a brain if thats their thought pattern. I think i would stick with the for sure Pro Bowl caliber qb and he may have gotten injured but oh why are the Eagles sticking with Vick?

 

I'm not certain that you can call a guy who has been a third-fifth alternate three times a "for sure Pro-Bowl caliber" quarterback.

Also, you and 4realz really need to learn the definition of ad hominem and how it does nothing to strengthen ones position in debates

 

Sig bet anything you want. Come up with it. By the end of next season Vince will be starting.