He went absolutely unconscious in his last two years, but he had some seriously scary good plays in his first season when he was sharing time with Mock. The man was incredible at Texas.
I am going to assume that although what he said was Tim Tebow ‘Is the Greatest Player of Our Era’, what he meant was Tim Tebow ‘Is the Greatest Player of the two years Tim Tebow and I have spent as QB and coach for the Florida Gators”.
Man, I like watching Tebow play, but this is ridiculous. He had a great statistical season last year going for 20 rushing and 30 passing TDs, but that’s kind of where stats are misleading. THe 20 rushing TDs were what, an average of 3 yards? They used him as a FB for god’s sake. Had Meyer not been obsessed with destroying Tebow’s brain in suicidal runs up the middle, most any of UF’s large and talented players could have taken those in.
Ugh. I think I’ll always wonder what VY’s stats would have been had he played more than 70% for half the season.
Tebow won a national championship… as the change of pace QB. He threw 33 passes on the season and had 469 yards rushing.
This year they went 9-4, losing two games to unranked teams and getting stomped by Michigan in their bowl game.
Tebow is clearly a great player, but it’s hard to call a QB that lost 2 more games in a season than Vince Young EVER lost and doesn’t have a bowl victory to his name as the greatest player of our era. Young, Peterson, Bush; any of these guys are more deserving by far.
Your comment is a bit like saying: “Michael Jordan was subpar in the last week of the ‘96 season, especially against the lowly Bucks. Therefore, he was not the greatest ever.”
Seriously, I have it from team doctor sources that Vince was playing with the flu against A&M. Was he mediocre? Relative to his gigantic sack, I suppose. But he limped through the sad Aggies and then, with alllllllll the chips on the table, wrecked the team that hadn’t lost in 34 games.
Frankly, I’m embarrassed that Vince Young’s performance against Texas A&M University is even a subject of discussion. It’s beneath him.
Young threw 2 INTs (1 returned for a TD), fumbled twice, and was sacked 2 times. texas loses 65-13.
Did he have the flu then?
Washington State
6-14 passing, 15 yds, 1 sack, i fumble
The “greatest player ever” wasn’t even good enough to beat out Chance Mock as starter.
Did he have the flu that game?
2004
Oklahoma
8-23 passing, 3 sacks, 2 fumbles
A nice big goose egg on the scoreboard.
Did he have the flu that game?
Missouri
3-9 passing, 19 yds, 2 INTs
Did he have the flu that game?
Texas Tech
16-25, 213 yds passing, 2 TDs, 2 INTs, 2 fumbles
Coaches are so impressed with “greatest player ever”, they send Chance Mock out on the final drive to QB the team to the comeback win, b/c they don’t trust Young to run a 2 minute drill.
Did he have the flu then?
2005 Texas A&M
He was facing the worst pass defense in the nation, by far. A&M gave up 304.6 yds per game passing in ‘05. For comparison, texas’ record-setting 2007 pass defense gave up 277.8 yds per game passing.
The “greatest player ever” is 13-24 for 162 yds, 1 INT, 1 fumble lost, 3 sacks.
Young had 11 carries for a gaudy 19 yds rushing. Yep, “greatest player ever” all right.
But he had the flu.
Look, I know you love Vince Young. I’ve read enough of your posts on here to know that you really do think he is the greatest ever. Disregarding the fact that “ever” covers a lot of ground (I don’t think Vince compares to all-around talents in the single-wing era like Sammy Baugh or Davey O’Brien, for example), you ignore the fact that Vince was good for at least one lemon of a game every year.
Vince had a nice season in 2005, but that doesn’t make him the best ever.
I’m not saying I agree with Meyer regarding Tebow, b/c I recall Tebow not being able to lead his team from behind in losses to LSU and Michigan, but refuting Meyer by pointing to Young is asinine.
And yes, I know I’m not going to be able to change your mind on this, but blogs are for arguing.
Coaches are so impressed with "greatest player ever", they send Chance Mock out on the final drive to QB the team to the comeback win, b/c they don’t trust Young to run a 2 minute drill.
Given the choice between senior quarterback or a RS freshman to lead the 2 minute drill, who would you take?
I guess we pulled Chance off the bench because we just had to score those last seven points in our 30 point victory. Chance was a Junior, but Vince was a RS-Freshman in 2003, when we did call on the veteran to drive for the win. Great picture of Vince being the greatest in that link. Caption: “Vince Young scrambles for one of his four rushing touchdowns.”
Lets look at Barry Sanders, your greatest ever: Only started one season. In 86 and 87 only gained 325 and 622 yards per season respectively. Never beat rival Oklahoma as a starter Never played in a national championship game
Personally, I think Sanders deserves to be in the discussion as greatest ever and so does VY, but if you are comparing their Freshman and Sophomore seasons, well there is no comparison because while Barry was sitting on the bench, VY was winning the rose bowl.
The same Thurman Thomas who would win first-team All-American in 1987, his senior season. The same Thurman Thomas that would go on to a Hall of Fame career with the Buffalo Bills.
You want to argue that this is a mark against Sanders?
Barry Sanders Career Stats (I added in Bowl Games stats manually to be fair to Barry): 558 rushing attempts, 3797 yards, 6.8 YPC, 53 TD’s in 33 games. 1467 return yards, 6 TD’s.
Vince Young Career Stats: 457 rushing attempts, 3127 yards, 6.8 YPC, 37 TD’s in 37 games. 444-718 passing, 6040 yards, 44 TD’s, 28 INT’s.
The first thing that jumps out is how strikingly similar the rushing numbers are, particularly when you account for the fact that
a. Vince played freakin QB b. Vince got pulled early in a lot of games his junior year c. Vince was held back from running as much the second half of the season to avoid a potential injury.
While I agree, as would almost everyone here, I think, that statistically Sanders’ ‘88 season is the best single season individual effort ever, his career is hardly the same story.
The comparisons to Baugh and O’Brien are hardly applicable, as those periods cannot be compared numerically, rendering any argument one way or the other baseless speculation.
Personally, beergut, I don’t think that Vince was hands down the greatest college football player ever. I think that he would have been had he stayed for his senior year, but that is not the point.
What PB, HornBrain, Wells, and everyone else here objected to was your ignorant ass post that said that one game (that we WON) disqualified Vince from the discussion, got the facts wrong about your own team, and participated in hyperbole that only you are capable of.
The man was 30-2 as a starter, the only player with a 3000 &1000 season, and authored two of the greatest bowl performances ever. He may not be the hands down G.O.A.T., but he is damn sure in the conversation, and it is not, as you say, “asinine” to suggest as much.
And blogs are not, as you so eloquently put it, “for arguing”, at least not this one. If you would stick to the occasional insight and analysis that you are capable of, and avoid the shameless baiting that you usually resort to, your minority viewpoint might find a more receptive audience here.
As is, if you are wondering why Texas looks down on a&m as a little brother, it is comments like yours on this blog. If you want to write inflammatory nonsense, why don’t you find a good aggie blog upon which to post it.
Beergut, if you wanted to have this debate rationally, by defining an ERA (and omitting the segregation era players who didn’t have the benefit of weight training), and defining some logical criteria (“no bad games ever” is not a quality criteria) for “greatest of all time” or even “greatest SWC/Big 12 player of all time”, then I think folks would be receptive.
I also wouldn’t put VY as a hands down greatest of all time, Earl, Ricky and perhaps Nobis are other horns that should be in the conversation (depending on the defined era). Hell I’d even speak to the merits of John David Crow if you feel the need to have an Aggie in there.
But creating an inflammatory strawman just to waste time is truly asinine and keeps us from actually having a quality discussion about football.
Could you agree that the “best player ever” should have at least one season where he doesn’t have a game where he has less than a superlative performance?
For a RB, less than superlative would be anything under 150 yds rushing in a game.
For a QB, less than superlative would be anything under 250 passing/and or 75 rushing.
Barry didn’t have any less than superlative games in 1988. Vince had a less than superlative game at least one game every season of his college career.
When you are talking about the best player of an era, if the player you are arguing for (in my case, Sanders) has a perfect record (no less-than-superlative games), then the standard to argue against him is set, i.e. others you argue for cannot have a less-than-superlative game in a season.
Normally, you could say, “You can’t discount someone on just one game, everyone has bad games”; the problem is, Barry Sanders never had a bad game in 1988.
... arbitrarily creating a feat for someone to accomplish (not having an average game in a season) to become the greatest is not defining criteria in a meaningful way. Look at stats, look at the impact of the player on the team (In this case, Titles of any kind with Vince Young at Texas under Mack Brown: 2 (conf and Natty) Titles of any kind without VY at Texas under MB: 0 and thanks for playing). I’ll also take exception to you arguing that VY’s rushing stats were anything but a match for Sanders’ stats. You just said that a QB’s superlative game should be 75 yards or more, while an RB’s should be 150 or more. Both played three years, but VY almost equaled BS’ numbers when, by your standards, he should have around HALF. Plus he passed for a gazillion yards and had better passing stats than most statue QB’s. Whether you do it by numbers or by made up disqualifiers like Heisman hype, you just can’t argue anything but the fact that VY deserves, at an extreme minimum, to be in the discussion with Sanders, and the reality should probably be more the other way around.
In coming up with a criteria for a superlative game, I tried to be fair. I don’t think anyone would argue that a QB who passes for more than 300 yds in a game has had less than a superlative game. Some might quibble and want to include turnover stats and say 300 yds passing doesn’t mean anything if you throw 3 INTs, but since I don’t think comparing turnover numbers between QBs and RBs is fair (as I noted before, one touches the ball 35-40 times a game, the other touches it every play), I disregarded turnovers.
Now, the problem with insisting only 300 yd passing efforts is superlative is that there are dual-threat QBs who can have phenomenal games while not breaking the 300 yds passing threshold. For example, I think everyone on here would agree that Vince Young’s performance in the 2005 Rose Bowl was a phenomenal peformance, but he had only 180 yds passing. He also had 192 yds rushing, though, which gave him 372 yds of total offense. I do think it is fair when talking about dual threat QBs to consider a superlative game for them to be one in which they have over 300 yds of total offense between running and passing the ball. This way, if a QB has 200 yds passing and 100 yds rushing in a game, which everyone will agree is a superlative peformance, they don’t fail to meet the criteria.
My choosing of 75 yds rushing is not an attempt to equate what a QB does rushing the ball to what a RB does running the ball, as you seem to be insinuating. I’m just trying to define a standard for a performance, nothing more.
I could drop my rushing requirement to 51, but reality is, it doesn’t matter if a QBs has 290 yds passing, 11 rushing, he has still surpassed 300 yds total offense, meeting the criteria.
The problem is, Vince Young, who some are saying is “the greatest player ever”, had games where he didn’t even hit 200 yds of total offense, passing and rushing.
Whether you do it by numbers or by made up disqualifiers like Heisman hype, you just can’t argue anything but the fact that VY deserves, at an extreme minimum, to be in the discussion with Sanders
I don’t think I’ve argued on here that Young doesn’t deserve to be in the conversation (in fact, I think I posted he belongs in the top 10), I’ve just said he isn’t the greatest of all time.
Under such a single axis, non-adjusted criteria, Colt Brennan, Paul Smith, Graham Harrell and Sonny Cumbie would be eligbile for the discussion, Cody Hodges would barely miss the list, but Matt Leinart, VY, Peyton Manning, Ken Dorsey and Tommy Frazier aren’t even close.
Your criteria for RB’s manages to eliminate guys like Ricky Williams, Eddie George, Adrian Peterson, Earl Cambell, Marcus Allen and all 9 Herschel Walkers from the conversation entirely. At that point it’s not a conversation worth having.
But congrats for coming up with something to back up your argument, especially a rigged, arbitrary rushing stat which only one player will meet, and a passing stat that excludes some of the best QBs of the last 20 years, but manages to include just about every high octane system QB in existence.
If you think that Barry is the greatest of all time, congrats, T. Boone Pickens and billions of dollars agree with you. But, others define greatness on multiple axes, things like winning, raising the play of teammates (leadership for a Sammy Baugh fan), total contribution to a team’s offense (yards and points taken as a percentage), average contribution to a team’s offense per game (again, yards and points), team offensive success (VY QB’d the highest scoring offense of all time, worth noting), years of contributions, contributions to bowl victories, big games against ranked opponents and I know you were waiting for it, championships.
After all, isn’t the lack of championships why you continually dismiss Texas Tech, Leach and Harrell? Is that not an equal reason to dismiss Okie State and Barry? Barry didn’t do too well in that area, couldn’t overcome the grist mill that was Nebraska. Or Oklahoma for that matter…he actually only out rushed Mike Gaddis of the Sooners by 2 yards in that big game. Gaddis for G.O.A.T.? So forgive us, and the other “asinine” fans who adore their champions, and hail them as the greatest of all time. They were at least, the greatest of the moment. Through transcendent play they helped to create something greater than themselves. Frazier did it, Herschel did it, Leinart did it, VY did it, Dorsey did it, AP did it, Manning…did it (yea verily), as did Earl and Marcus. Barry never did.
Barry still has the single season rushing record though, but I don’t know if your school gets a trophy for that. He was a helluva back, and I’ll give you a hint, Barry does exceedingly well for himself under the criteria I mentioned. I didn’t rig the criteria you see. And by those same standards, so does Vince Young.
Barry Sanders must be involved in any conversation about the greatest of all time but you’d find more than a few knowledgeable, literate fans and coaches would would gladly trade him for a Vince Young, a Tommy Frazier or 9 Herschel Walkers. To do so is not asinine, it is to realize that one player, especially a quarterback can have an impact on the game which goes beyond the box score and gives his team the confidence to play above themselves. That too is a form of greatness. So don’t pick on our guy and point to Barry’s hollow numbers against Wyoming in the Holiday bowl and say that the fact Vince didn’t get a Heisman overwhelms what happened in the Rose.
That long bit said, as someone who has watched a lot of Aggie games and heard a lot of Agro lore, I can’t blame you too much. It has been too long since A&M has gotten a glimpse of that kind of greatness in maroon and white. Evidently you’ve forgotten what it looks like.
Just because I love the random one-liner about 9 Herschel Walkers.
By the way, PB, I think you should strongly put in a request to the SBN powers that be to have a function where we can bad-rec a post (like flagging, only so everyone can see the red). It would be quite enjoyable to see all of beergut’s ridiculousness on display.
It’s an interesting idea in theory, but would get ugly in practice. This is a community, and though back-and-forths with Beergut may be enhanced by embroidering his egregious agro errors in maroon dung…. as a policy, we encourage civility, even in disagreement.
For readers that crave a vile commenting atmosphere, I suggest a $100/year donation to Orangebloods.
Under such a single axis, non-adjusted criteria, Colt Brennan, Paul Smith, Graham Harrell and Sonny Cumbie would be eligbile for the discussion, Cody Hodges would barely miss the list, but Matt Leinart, VY, Peyton Manning, Ken Dorsey and Tommy Frazier aren’t even close.
Who is Paul Smith?
I’m trying to set a criteria that can be used to judge players in the conversation for “greatest player ever”. I seriously doubt many people (non-homer fans, at least), would put Grham Harrell, Sonny Cumbie, or Cody Hodges in that group. As for Matt Leinart or Ken Dorsey, I’ve never heard anyone argue for either of them being considered for the greatest QB of all time, much less the greatest player of all time. Peyton Manning (losses to Florida) and Tommie Frazier (mediocre passer) have other issues which preclude them from the conversation.
Your dismissal of my criteria seems to be, “Well, under that criteria, a lot of people can’t be considered.” That’s exactly the point. We’re not trying to inclde a huge group of people here, we’re trying to differentiate between very few.
Your criteria for RB’s manages to eliminate guys like Ricky Williams, Eddie George, Adrian Peterson, Earl Cambell, Marcus Allen and all 9 Herschel Walkers from the conversation entirely. At that point it’s not a conversation worth having.
Again, we need some type of criteria to eliminate people from the discussion. Exactly what would you suggest? Your argument against my criteria seems to be that it eliminates too many people from the conversation. Well, I think that some people might argue that Earl Campbell or Marcus Allen belong in the conversation, there are other you listed who many would argue do not (Peterson, for example, was an absolute freak of a college back, but he was also injury prone, and spent parts of two seasons off the field b/c of injuries. For that reason alone I would eliminate him from the conversation.)
Barry didn’t do too well in that area, couldn’t overcome the grist mill that was Nebraska.
I’m not quite sure why it is Barry Sanders’ fault that the Okie State defense gave up 63 points to Nebraska. For most teams, scoring 42 points is enough to win the game.
But, others define greatness on multiple axes, things like winning, raising the play of teammates (leadership for a Sammy Baugh fan), total contribution to a team’s offense (yards and points taken as a percentage), average contribution to a team’s offense per game (again, yards and points), team offensive success (VY QB’d the highest scoring offense of all time, worth noting), years of contributions, contributions to bowl victories, big games against ranked opponents and I know you were waiting for it, championships.
The problem with using a criteria of percentage of offense responsible for is that it is inherently unfair when comparing RBs and QBs. RBs will only get credit for runs of receptions that they personally scored on, while QBs get credit for both rushing TDs they scored on and passing TDs, as well as passing yardage. If you eliminated any play which included the participation of another player (a WR on a reception for yards or reception for TD), and allowed only consideration of yards gained by that QB exclusively as a rusher and points scored him him as a rusher, it would be a more equal criteria. However, you could also make the argument that nothing on the football field is an independent event, that it is all 11 players working together, somoene has to hand the ball to the TB, etc, which would make such a stipulation irrelevant.
Leadership sounds like a great criteria to use, but how exactly are you going to quantify something like that?
If we only use championships, that eliminates a lot of people, and leaves us with a rather desultory conversation. Williams was never a starting TB on a championship team at texas, starting on two teams that went 4-7 and 9-3 in ‘97 & ‘98. I guess he’s out of the conversation. But, we’re left with including some rather inspiring people for the “great of all time” consideration like Ron Dayne or (God help me) Craig Krenzel. They both won multiple championships, under your criteria. I don’t think either belong in this conversation, though.
That long bit said, as someone who has watched a lot of Aggie games and heard a lot of Agro lore, I can’t blame you too much. It has been too long since A&M has gotten a glimpse of that kind of greatness in maroon and white. Evidently you’ve forgotten what it looks like.
Unfortunately, I never was able to see it in orange and white, either, b/c in my one chance with Vince Young, he shit the bed, as I’ve pointed out before.
Really, dude. Why don’t you just come out and say that you think VY isn’t impressive because you’re an Aggie and have an obligation to hate on Longhorns? We’d accept that and move on, since we understand the nature of the rivalry. But trying to argue like this… it ain’t going anywhere.
I seriously doubt many people (non-homer fans, at least), would put Grham Harrell, Sonny Cumbie, or Cody Hodges in that group. As for Matt Leinart or Ken Dorsey, I’ve never heard anyone argue for either of them being considered for the greatest QB of all time, much less the greatest player of all time. Peyton Manning (losses to Florida) and Tommie Frazier (mediocre passer) have other issues which preclude them from the conversation.
Your dismissal of my criteria seems to be, "Well, under that criteria, a lot of people can’t be considered." That’s exactly the point. We’re not trying to inclde a huge group of people here, we’re trying to differentiate between very few.
He’s not rejecting your criteria just because it excludes certain players. OF COURSE criteria are supposed to differentiate. He’s pointing out that yours, and remember you basically only listed one initially (not having a bad game), excludes players that we know belong in such conversations and seems to bolster the cases for players that we all know should not. By merely saying that criteria should differentiate and that there should be several factors we look into doesn’t even address learned hand’s point. He would wholeheartedly agree with you… and then avalanche you with several things that Vince did better than Barry Sanders.
The problem with using a criteria of percentage of offense responsible for is that it is inherently unfair when comparing RBs and QBs. RBs will only get credit for runs of receptions that they personally scored on, while QBs get credit for both rushing TDs they scored on and passing TDs, as well as passing yardage.
So you can criticize his criteria but yours is fine? One can merely point out that this shows that Vince had more responsibility (as QB’s normally do) and thus made a bigger impact on football games than Barry. “Fair” comparison? Depends on how you define it, because at the least, it is an accurate point to make. Furthermore, if Vince, as a QB, has career rushing statistics similar to a great RB like Barry, I would venture to guess that it bolsters his case. Just a guess.
Leadership sounds like a great criteria to use, but how exactly are you going to quantify something like that?
I know you know more than enough about football to think that it is reducible to mere numbers. How are we going to quantify differences between eras, when players of the past didn’t weight train like they do now? How are we going to quantify differences in coaching, systems, and the impact of good teammates? How about the competition level players faced (for instance, 2005 had greater teams than 2007)? There are a host of things in sports that we can’t quantify; that doesn’t mean they are precluded from discussions about a player’s value. In fact, people who do so show little knowledge of the game (and sports in general). I know that that’s not you, so I have no idea why you would say such a thing unless it was for the sole purpose of trying to discount Vince’s strengths.
If we only use championships, that eliminates a lot of people, and leaves us with a rather desultory conversation.
If we only use “never had a bad game, or at least one that I’d define as bad, during one record-breaking season,” that eliminates a lot of people, and leaves us with a rather desultory conversation.
Unfortunately, I never was able to see it in orange and white, either, b/c in my one chance with Vince Young, he shit the bed, as I’ve pointed out before.
Are you saying you only watched Vince play that one game, or are you saying you’re discounting all the great things he did because it didn’t happen in that game? If the former, you’re too ignorant to discuss this matter. If the latter, you’re either showing your lack of knowledge or you’re being willingly blind (again, just for the purpose of criticizing Vince). Since I know you know some football and I’m positive you watched more of VY than one game, I’ll just conclude the willingly blind part. Take off your maroon blinders and you’ll see better through the light of the burnt orange sun. If not, at least spare us these arguments that not even your high-ranking dog would make.
Why don’t you just come out and say that you think VY isn’t impressive because you’re an Aggie and have an obligation to hate on Longhorns?
Because it isn’t true. There are several texas players I’ve enjoyed watching play, some of whom I think hold in higher esteem than even some texas fans do.
He’s not rejecting your criteria just because it excludes certain players. OF COURSE criteria are supposed to differentiate. He’s pointing out that yours, and remember you basically only listed one initially (not having a bad game), excludes players that we know belong in such conversations and seems to bolster the cases for players that we all know should not.
Well, but here is the thing: We’re talking about the best player ever. To argue that my criteria would be including certain people, like Tech QBs, is ludicrous, b/c none of them would come up in the greatest player conversation. We need some criteria to differentiate between the people who ARE in the conversation.
Someone tried to downplay my pick as greatest player ever by saying Barry’s stats aren’t all that impressive for his career. My counter-point is that he never had a bad game in his record setting season, which is just phenomenal. EVERYONE has a bad game, which makes what he did so special.
So you can criticize his criteria but yours is fine?
It isn’t so much that I’m criticizing his criteria as much as it is that I’m pointing out an inherent flaw.
So far, the only flaw people seem to have come up with for my criteria is that it is too exclusive. Well, the greatest player of all time is an exclusive list.
Are you saying you only watched Vince play that one game, or are you saying you’re discounting all the great things he did because it didn’t happen in that game?
I only had a chance to watch Vince Young in person twice, the ‘04 and ‘05 A&M games. In ‘04, Vince hadn’t become OMGVINCEYOUNG!!!111 yet. He had 93 yds rushing on 19 carries, 131 yds passing on 18 attempts. He also had a fumble that led to an A&M TD and allowed us to take the lead going into halftime. All in all, a so-so performance. The star of that game, the person I left most impressed with, was Cedric Benson. We simply couldn’t stop him in the 4th quarter. 2005, I get a chance to see this transcendant Vince Young, who has improved so much since 2004 and, well, you know what happened. So, in my one chance to see OMGVinceYoung!!!!111juan, he was disappointing.
Mostly, I was just poking learned hand for taking a potshot at the end of his comment. I don’t mind if you disagree with me, I just don’t see how insults or potshots improve the conversation around here.
I’m glad you don’t dislike Texas players just because they’re Longhorns, but it does make your insistence on this all the more confusing.
I don’t think the criticism levied against your criteria is simply that it’s “too exclusive.” The criticism is that it’s a poor way of figuring out greatness. I happen to think leading teams to championships is a lot more important than not having a “bad” game during the season, and the former excludes Barry Sanders. Is that a good point in VY’s favor? I think so.
Indeed, Vince did not play as well as he could have against A&M. However, I’ll ask you: Do you think this overshadows his big performances in big games? He crushed Michigan and USC. He took down OSU at the Horse Shoe, bouncing back from two interceptions and some big hits. He walloped Oklahoma and smashed Texas Tech when they were ranked in the top ten (sure, they were overrated, but they were still good). It’s not like only Longhorn fans think he’s the best they’ve ever seen. A lot of college football viewers have talked about how they’ve never seen the likes of Vince Young.
I don’t mind if you disagree with me, or others, either, but to be honest, it’s not like you always come off as “civil” yourself. You can and do participate in civil discussions, but you have provoked people before. If I have insulted you, I apologize, though I hope you accept that it is fair play to take a few sarcastic shots at the Aggies (and I fully expect the same directed at us). That’s the nature of the rivalry.
I don’t mind you being here. That said, I am still skeptical you were really thinking objectively when you said that bringing up VY to refute Meyer was stupid, especially when you yourself rank Vince Young somewhere in the top ten. I would agree with you on your post below that if Meyer said, “Tebow has a chance to be the greatest of our era,” then that’s a fair statement to make. But he didn’t, and so bringing up VY is perfectly legitimate. I don’t see how you can argue otherwise.
Indeed, Vince did not play as well as he could have against A&M. However, I’ll ask you: Do you think this overshadows his big performances in big games? He crushed Michigan and USC.
No, it doesn’t take away from what he did against Michigan or USC, but while some people may simply look at what he did in big games to declare he is the best ever, I look beyond that.
He walloped Oklahoma and smashed Texas Tech when they were ranked in the top ten (sure, they were overrated, but they were still good).
C’mon, Oklahoma sucked that season, and the fact that Tech did so well is just a testament to how poor the Big 12 was in ‘05. I don’t say that to denigrate texas winning the conference, b/c they clearly were the best team, but those two games do not support your argument. I was more impressed by texas beating OU in ‘06 than either of those two wins in ‘05. Y’all played a tougher schedule in ‘04 (6 ranked teams, 5 in conference) than you did in ‘05 (4 ranked teams, 2 in conference).
I happen to think leading teams to championships is a lot more important than not having a "bad" game during the season, and the former excludes Barry Sanders. Is that a good point in VY’s favor? I think so.
The problem with the “winning championships” criteria is that it penalizes players who are on merely good but not great teams, like ‘88 Oklahoma State or ‘98 texas.
It’s not like only Longhorn fans think he’s the best they’ve ever seen.
I asked a few people this weekend to name me the top 5 college football players of all time (none of them were texas fans). None of them mentioned Vince Young. I can remember when some kids wanted to be the next Charlie Ward, then the next Michael Bishop, then the next Michael Vick, now some people want to be the next Vince Young. In a few years, we’ll probably have kids coming out wanting to be the ‘next’ Terelle Pryor. It isn’t new to have an electric dual-threat QB capture the attention of college football fans everywhere.
And I contend that anyone who says that they never saw anyone like Young play never watched Matt Jones play QB at Arkansas, b/c while Jones had nowhere near the passing ability Vince developed, his running style was exactly the same as Young’s. They were both tall mobile QBs who looked like they were barely running while their long strides ate up the yards.
C’mon, Oklahoma sucked that season, and the fact that Tech did so well is just a testament to how poor the Big 12 was in ‘05. I don’t say that to denigrate texas winning the conference, b/c they clearly were the best team, but those two games do not support your argument.
OU finished the season by beating previously one-loss Oregon, shutting up their BCS whining. Texas Tech had a good team, and their high powered offense was throttled in Austin while we posted 52 points (could have been more). OU was obviously not as good as they have been before, but they weren’t absolutely awful. The fact is, we had lost to OU five years in a row and they gambled that Vince couldn’t pass. He threw 3 TD passes and we blew them out. As far as playing a tougher schedule, it depends on how you look at it. We certainly have played more ranked teams in the other years but we had to go to the Horse Shoe against an excellent Ohio State team and then face a team with a 34-game winning streak in what was practically their “home away from home.” We won both, incidentally, and I think VY had something to do with that.
The problem with the "winning championships" criteria is that it penalizes players who are on merely good but not great teams, like ‘88 Oklahoma State or ‘98 texas.
Don’t great players (at least, ones that deserve mention of the best of the best) elevate the play of their entire teams? I would agree that woodenly using the championship criteria doesn’t take the team concept into account, but it is used to evaluate a great player’s status as he displays his gifts on the biggest stage. After all, if you are going to harp on Vince so much in a few bad games, it is only consistent to give him due credit for his performances in the biggest games. And for sure, in his bad games, we can divide blame to the rest of the team as well. It goes both ways.
I asked a few people this weekend to name me the top 5 college football players of all time (none of them were texas fans). None of them mentioned Vince Young. I can remember when some kids wanted to be the next Charlie Ward, then the next Michael Bishop, then the next Michael Vick, now some people want to be the next Vince Young. In a few years, we’ll probably have kids coming out wanting to be the ‘next’ Terelle Pryor. It isn’t new to have an electric dual-threat QB capture the attention of college football fans everywhere.
That’s terrific. I’ve talked to people who aren’t Texas fans and they think he’s the most amazing thing they’ve ever seen. Are they right? It doesn’t matter. My point of bringing this up is because you seem to think that only Texas fans are blind enough to rank VY so high. By pointing out only a few examples otherwise, it disproves that contention.
Your point of kids wanting to be like the current stars is irrelevant. Of course that happens. Kids want to be like Lebron and Kobe now as the memory of MJ is starting to fade. How the heck is this relevant to this discussion? There are great players in every era people want to emulate. That says nothing about how great they stand as a matter of history.
And I contend that anyone who says that they never saw anyone like Young play never watched Matt Jones play QB at Arkansas, b/c while Jones had nowhere near the passing ability Vince developed, his running style was exactly the same as Young’s. They were both tall mobile QBs who looked like they were barely running while their long strides ate up the yards.
You contradicted yourself in a span of a paragraph. If Jones had nowhere near the passing ability Vince developed, then he simply wasn’t the same player. I’d argue that Vince was more awesome a runner anyway, but that’s beside the point here. The reason people say they haven’t seen anyone like Vince was not just because of the fac he could run. He led the NCAA in passing efficiency until the bowl season in ‘05 while being able to break tackles and outrun defenders in the open field.
Furthermore, I’m starting to conclude that you have relinquished the reason you started this discussion in the first place. Not all Texas fans think that Vince is hands down the greatest ever, since the discussion is quite difficult. All PB pointed out was that Urban Meyer made a careless statement because Vince Young was in college football only a few years ago, and you took exception to it. You seem to have let that go (as you should) and now are just trying to refute the idea that Vince was the greatest of all-time, which to me, is only an interesting side point. So I’ll ask you: Was PB justified in bringing up VY? Was it really asinine? With your statements that VY may be among the top ten greatest of all time and that Meyer should have instead said “Tebow has a chance to be the greatest of this era,” I’m guessing you have conceded that PB made a legit point. If so, this discussion is essentially over and the rest is just fun stuff to talk about on the side.
Barry Sanders Career Stats (I added in Bowl Games stats manually to be fair to Barry): 558 rushing attempts, 3797 yards, 6.8 YPC, 53 TD’s in 33 games. 1467 return yards, 6 TD’s.
Vince Young Career Stats: 457 rushing attempts, 3127 yards, 6.8 YPC, 37 TD’s in 37 games. 444-718 passing, 6040 yards, 44 TD’s, 28 INT’s.
You’re trying to compare stats between a QB (someone who touches the ball on every offensive play) to a RB (someone who touches the ball 35-40 offensive plays a game). That is an excercise in futility. If Sanders was a single wing TB who passed the ball, including passing stats would be relevant.
The comparisons to Baugh and O’Brien are hardly applicable, as those periods cannot be compared numerically, rendering any argument one way or the other baseless speculation.
“Ever” includes previous eras.
What PB, HornBrain, Wells, and everyone else here objected to was your ignorant ass post that said that one game (that we WON) disqualified Vince from the discussion, got the facts wrong about your own team, and participated in hyperbole that only you are capable of.
One game disqualified Vince from the Heisman conversation, so why shouldn’t it disqualify him from the argument of “greatest player ever”? I’ll say Vince belongs in the argument if you’re discussing top 10 greatest players of all time, but he isn’t in the top 5. As for “getting the facts wrong about my own team”, forgive me for not knowing that Rice had a worse defense, statistically, than we did. Wow. That really invalidates my statement that Vince crapped the bed against A&M.
if you are wondering why Texas looks down on a&m as a little brother
If you want to write inflammatory nonsense
Pot, meet Kettle.
I’ve never understood this statement from texas fans. “We look down on you”
Yeah? And you’ve lost to us the last two years, when it mattered. Your point is…..?
Vince was a redshirt sophomore in 2004, in his third year at texas.
hth
Yes, you are correct. Vince was a redshirt soph in ‘04, in his third year at Texas. Too bad the game where Mock came in for him was in 2003. As bamfor said, Vince was a RS Freshman in the game in question. If you’re gonna be a dick, be an accurate dick.
he only started one season at TB
b/c he was backing up Thurman Thomas.
The same Thurman Thomas who would win first-team All-American in 1987, his senior season. The same Thurman Thomas that would go on to a Hall of Fame career with the Buffalo Bills.
You want to argue that this is a mark against Sanders?
Yes, actually. If Sanders was the greatest of all time, shouldn’t he have started before his junior year? Unless Thomas was the second greatest of all time? Are you harboring a secret thing for okie’s, gut? Or is it the 80’s that have got you all hot and bothered?
You’re trying to compare stats between a QB (someone who touches the ball on every offensive play) to a RB (someone who touches the ball 35-40 offensive plays a game). That is an excercise in futility. If Sanders was a single wing TB who passed the ball, including passing stats would be relevant.
I put the stats up to show how similar the RUSHING numbers were, despite Vince not playing tailback. I didn’t even bring up the passing numbers, just included them, the same way I included Barry’s return stats. The point that I was attempting to illustrate was that Vince, despite not playing RB, still had comparable rushing numbers.
"Ever" includes previous eras.
Yes, it does. But in order to make such an argument, it becomes necessary to, much to your chagrin, go to numbers to make your point. O’Brien passed for 1733 yards and 19 TD’s his senior year. Baugh threw 39 TD’s in his 3 seasons as TCU quarterback. This is not like basketball, where Wilt Chamberlain averaged 50 pts. and 20 rebounds against inferior competition. If you want to argue that Baugh and O’Brien’s inferior numbers against inferior competition are better than what numerous players have done in the modern era, have fun. I’d love to see you support that argument with anything resembling a statistic.
One game disqualified Vince from the Heisman conversation, so why shouldn’t it disqualify him from the argument of "greatest player ever"? I’ll say Vince belongs in the argument if you’re discussing top 10 greatest players of all time, but he isn’t in the top 5. As for "getting the facts wrong about my own team", forgive me for not knowing that Rice had a worse defense, statistically, than we did. Wow. That really invalidates my statement that Vince crapped the bed against A&M.
Bush already had a significant lead in Heisman balloting going into the a&m game. The Heisman is an award for an individual season, not career. Different criteria, no? I’m not asking that you be right about everything, beergut. Just SOMETHING.
Pot, meet Kettle.
I’ve never understood this statement from texas fans. "We look down on you"
Yeah? And you’ve lost to us the last two years, when it mattered. Your point is…..?
Yes, you are correct. Vince was a redshirt soph in ‘04, in his third year at Texas. Too bad the game where Mock came in for him was in 2003. As bamfor said, Vince was a RS Freshman in the game in question.
Dammit. In my list of poor games for Young, I had that Tech game and stats listed under the ‘04 season, which is the reason for my mistake. So, Vince had three crappy games in ‘03, not two.
But in order to make such an argument, it becomes necessary to, much to your chagrin, go to numbers to make your point.
Actually, if you’re going to list the stats, list ALL the stats. There is a reason I pointed out Baugh in particular. Baugh was also a crackerjack punter and defensive back. His all-around excellence is why I don’t think Vince can compare to him.
Bush already had a significant lead in Heisman balloting going into the a&m game.
Bush had his defining performance on November 19, 2005, when he had 500+ all-purpose yards against Fresno State, which caused the media to forget some of his pedestrain performances from earlier in the season. Vince had the opportunity to help his own cause with a stellar performance against A&M, on a weekend when Bush wasn’t playing, and he’d have the television viewing public all to himself. He crapped the bed. Bush then followed his Fresno State performance with a victory lap through the UCLA defense on December 3, which made Vince’s performance in texas’ 70-3 win over Colorado meaningless. If Vince doesn’t crap the bed against A&M, his performance against Colorado would have solidified his spot with the voters, and he wins the Heisman going away.
... But you made all of that up. Completely your opinion as to what would have happened with the voters. My opinion is that since (I believe) Reggie and Vince got the most 1st and 2nd place votes, respectively, ever in Heisman voting, Reggie probably didn’t build that lead with one good game against Fresno and a slummy game by Vince. Surely it didn’t help Vince, but if the voters were that sure about it, nothing was going to change their minds. My opinion is my opinion, but at least I have a vote to back it up, You have an anger-curdled puddle of brains to back up yours.
Arguing with you is like arguing in a rapid-fire high school debate. You apparently think that just saying something makes it true as long as no one refutes it, so you throw in useless points like previous one, or the fact that Vince had three-ish bad games as a freakin’ RS Freshman, then you keep harping on them until someone calls you on your BS. I’ll bet Barry Sanders fumbled the ball at least once in his career, hence he had a less-than-superlative play and therefore sucks Okie dirt-pies. Refute that or I win. This is just so much blowing air at someone to look like you really know your stuff. Stick to the interesting X’s and O’s posts and stay away from the petty argument starters.
no, Reggie didn't build that lead in only one game
the Fresno State game simply put him over the top.
I don’t know if they still do it now, but at the time, the Dallas Morning News used to do a Heisman Watch column, and Bush was starting to get some criticism for some less-than-spectacular performances, despite the fact that USC kept winning. To argue that Bush had a momentous lead over Vince the whole season is simply not accurate. Vince still had a lot of people who favored him b/c of his performance the previous Rose Bowl against Michigan.
All of that criticism of Bush was silenced after the Fresno State game, when he had over 500 yds of total offense, and the national media went absolutely gaga. ESPN kept spent a whole week, IIRC, discussing Bush’s performance in that game.
Vince needed a spectacular performance to overcome what Reggie did against FSU and put the spotlight back on himself, and his next game was against A&M. Vince had a terrible game, Bush goes out and runs all over UCLA in his next game, and the media was happy to give him the Trophy.
What that one game against Fresno did was differentiate Bush from Vince as the most spectacular player in the game, which resulted in him winning the Heisman .
Arguing with you is like arguing in a rapid-fire high school debate.
Actually, I think the spread style of debating popular now is asinine. However, when we’re arguing something hypothetical like how one game influenced Heisman voters, I’m not sure what facts you can bring to bear here. If you can find polls of Heisman voters from that season before the award was given out to show who they would have voted for after each game, then you can refute what I said. Otherwise, you saying that one game didn’t cost Vince the Heisman is just as ‘made up’ as me saying it did cost him the Heisman.
Your last argument belies your point about one crappy game. Apparently Bush had a number of crappy games, but they were early in the season rather than late in the season, which was the difference in the voting. It wasn’t that Vince’s game was particularly bad, but that it was late in the season and fresh on the minds of the voters.
Besides, does anyone really think Bush would have still won the Heisman after the Rose Bowl? It would have been unanimous for Vince.
I’m not arguing that Reggie Bush is the greatest player ever. If I was, then yes, I would be contradicting myself.
Besides, does anyone really think Bush would have still won the Heisman after the Rose Bowl? It would have been unanimous for Vince.
Unfortunately for Vince, the Heisman is not decided after bowl games, it is awarded after the regular season in early December. I would actually argue that this hurts the award winner somewhat, b/c it puts a big target on their backs for the bowl game. Witness the number of Heisman winners that went on to perform poorly in bowl games.
Trying not to bury myself under all the crap in this thread
But one game would have netted Vince a Heisman? Reggie got the second most number of first place votes in the history of the Heisman trophy. The gap wasn’t even close. The media had already decided to go with the high profile USC player over the flyover state player from Texas. One game would not have changed that. If Vince hadn’t already proven to the media that he deserved it by that point in time, he was never going to prove it.
I wasn't going to dignify this with a response, but...
you’ve got to be fucking kidding me. So your argument is that one bad game precludes a player from being the greatest ever? Who, then, would you say was the greatest player ever, gut?
Also, far be it from me to give aggies credit for anything, but the ‘05 a&m defense was not the worst we faced that year. Rice gave up more points and yards, and Okie St. gave up more points. Colorado’s offense deserves a mention in this category as well.
It’s not enough for you to criticize our team inaccurately, you have to go and fuck up criticism of your own?
The media was giving Reggie Bush the Heisman whether we torched the Aggies or not.
So, to lay all this to rest: 1.) Saying that one game in which someone played poorly precludes them from being the greatest of all time is… well… about the least intelligent thing you’ve ever said on here, and I don’t think I’m exaggerating.
2.) We won the game! Are you kidding?
3.) Our defense made that game a near disaster since our coaches failed to prepare the team for the option (Mack Brown in one of the post Aggie-loss pressers personally said this, dumb). Had our defense played well (been coached well), yeah Vince has a bad game, but it’s a bad game where we score over 40 points and win by probably nearly 30. I think we give him a passing grade there.
4.) Vince had the flu (as I told you, but could not find a source) and still beat your butts. Sure it wasn’t James Street’s hungover no-hitter, but that’s nearly a Chuck Norris-style joke in itself. It’s more a part of his legend than a detractor from it.
5.) The Aggie defense was not the worst he faced all season, per ctex80. You even failed to be right on the one piece of your comment that had a chance to pass the s**t-mus test.
So here we go:
You can’t say Vince Young is the greatest ever not if you watched the ‘05 A&M game.
Wrong: See 1
Against the worst defense he would face all season,
Wrong: See 5
Young was absolutely horrible, and cost himself the Heisman.
Wrong and Wrong:See 2, 3, 4 and my opening statement.
Having shown and explained why every single part of your comment was completely untrue, I hereby proclaim your comment utter bullshit. Obligatory.
Still can’t figure out how to post videos in the comments. Think maybe they removed that to speed up load times or something.
3. Your defense wasn’t the reason Vince was fumbling the ball, throwing the ball to our players, and getting sacked. How does texas’ defense sucking in that game have anything to do with Vince Young?
4. Irrelevant. He had games where he sucked when healthy, too.
5. We had the worst pass defense in the nation, and he couldn’t pass on us. What does that tell you? Hell, his performance improved our passing defense stats for the season.
I would have to say that you have failed before you even started. It seems that your idea of the greatest of all time is some guy who always has an awesome game no matter what. What you’re doing is making up some criteria and saying “if you pass this test, then you are the greatest of all time.” This is dumb.
Why don’t you look at those Barry Sanders numbers again and realize that he too was on a curve, and he too reached the pinnacle in one season? After that Missouri game you mentioned, Texas and Vince were held below 30 points three times in 19 games, once by Ohio State at the Shoe, and they won all of them. Champions and legends aren’t immune to bad days (or the flu), but they win anyway. Vince won in three of your six examples, and participated in only one other loss in his career. I think you’re pretty crazy. Put Matt Nordgren in against A&M to rush for 19 yards and see how well the rest of the team is able to win “in spite of him”.
But only one of them was in the national championship season, and that’s the one where he had the flu. By your definition, only one season really counts, so only the A&M game counts. Where he had the flu.
Wow PB.. that video really pumped me up… nothing like a little VY magic to get us all going in the morning… infact, I propose something like 1 incredible VY clip everyday from now on until the start of the football season!
I can’t think of a better way to start my mornings!!
How many Super Bowls did Thurman Thomas lose to the Dallas Cowboys? How many Super Bowls did he lose in all?.....OVERRATED! I would think if he’s so good, he could’ve won 1 of the 4 Super Bowls that he went to…
I am so tired of hearing about this guy. So what? He’s a stand up Evangelical Christian with a clean track record. Woopity doo! Went 9-4 last season losing their bowl game to Michigan and yet he wins the Heisman trophy as a sophmore. What a joke. Tim Tebow is no slouch but he certainly is not a superstar. Never will be….mark my words. He has impressive size and the ability to rush like a fullback but other than that, I see nothing that makes him amazing whatsoever.
Urban Meyer makes me wanna punch his underdeveloped fetus face. Come the end of the 2008 season- florida will be 9-4 again with no significant wins, and Meyer will still be on his knees praying to his own personal Jesus- or at least that is what he calls it.
You may like or dislike Tebow. But I almost hope he wins the Heisman again because I tire of hearing Buckeyes fans deify Griffith for winning it twice.
Beergut, I share PB’s disbelief. I think you have respectable football knowledge and really do give useful insight in many of your posts, but then you turn around and write something that is frankly nonsense. It’s like the collective spirit of Aggie idiocy manifests itself and overrides your better judgment.
I don’t think any, objective person who reads this conversation will grant you your arguments. They’re just awful. Of course Vince had “bad” games. I grew up watching Michael Jordan play A LOT, and there were games where he stunk up the joint. I watched Joe Montana play and there were games he struggled. Sometimes, you have bad games, and it sometimes happens against teams worse than yours. It’s called sports. It happens, even to the “greatest.”
Would I trade VY for anyone? No, I wouldn’t. That doesn’t mean that I think it is a done deal and that anyone else who chooses the likes of Barry, Earl, etc. are all idiots. Goodness me, PB brought it up to refute Urban Meyer’s statement, which you said was “asinine”... and then you turn around and admit that VY belongs in the discussion of the Top Ten of All-Time, though not top five. Are you thereby saying Tebow, right now, belongs in the discussion of the top ten? If not, then PB made a valid point: You can’t say Tebow is the greatest of our era when just a few years ago we had a player who ranks among the top 10 or 15 EVER (your statement, not mine… I would say top five, obviously). So I’m frankly at a loss why you even bothered to start this.
when you consider Beergut’s argument against KD’s jersey being retired. In that thread he said that retiring KD’s jersey was “laughable”. So the logic goes as follows…
Barry Sanders is the greatest football player of all time, based on one record breaking season. Kevin Durant cannot be considered among the top two greatest players at his own school based on one record breaking season.
Goodness me, PB brought it up to refute Urban Meyer’s statement, which you said was "asinine"… and then you turn around and admit that VY belongs in the discussion of the Top Ten of All-Time, though not top five. Are you thereby saying Tebow, right now, belongs in the discussion of the top ten?
Tebow’s body of work (Heisman Trophy, national championship, record-setting QB) would get him into the conversation of greatest ever, but I wouldn’t rank him in the top 10….yet.
I think Meyer would have been more accurate if he had said Tebow “has the chance to be the greatest player of our era”, b/c he does. If he can repeat or better the numbers he had last season, and win a national title, I don’t think anyone would argue that he would deserve that designation.
am ignoring VY is can’t be considered as best player ever comment because of one game.
Tebow still has one, maybe two years left. I really don’t think final judgements about him should be made yet :} If he manages to win the national championship as the starting qb, then by all means compare him to His Vinceness.
PB
I was watching him say that as well, and the entire time I was waiting for him to say “with the exception of Vince Young.” But it never came.
Vince Young IS THE GREATEST COLLEGE FOOTBALL PLAYER OF ALL-TIME. PERIOD.
texasfan05 - July 23, 2008
Leave It To A Sooner To Disagree
But Barry Sandars was the best college football player of alltime.
ccmachine - July 23, 2008
Leave it to a Sooner to....
eh, too easy. Barry Sandars played for Florida A&M didnt he?
SuperBentley - July 23, 2008
Err..Sanders
It’s an Oklahoma thing.
ccmachine - July 23, 2008
All those early plays bring me back...
He went absolutely unconscious in his last two years, but he had some seriously scary good plays in his first season when he was sharing time with Mock. The man was incredible at Texas.
SuperBentley - July 23, 2008
Greatest College Football Player of All-Time?
That’s easy. Everyone knows who that is, and it’s neither Tebow nor Young. But Young definitely beats out Tebow in the “in our era” category.
Go Dogs!
NCT - July 25, 2008
Great video
Man those those Michigan highlights… its easy to forget how good a game he had there when now looking back our focus was on 2005.
There is no player like Vince.
BoddickerIsClutch - July 23, 2008
Urban Meyer is a heretic.
There is but one Football Jesus.
TheJeezus - July 23, 2008
Our era
I am going to assume that although what he said was Tim Tebow ‘Is the Greatest Player of Our Era’, what he meant was Tim Tebow ‘Is the Greatest Player of the two years Tim Tebow and I have spent as QB and coach for the Florida Gators”.
billb - July 23, 2008
[sigh]
Man, I like watching Tebow play, but this is ridiculous. He had a great statistical season last year going for 20 rushing and 30 passing TDs, but that’s kind of where stats are misleading. THe 20 rushing TDs were what, an average of 3 yards? They used him as a FB for god’s sake. Had Meyer not been obsessed with destroying Tebow’s brain in suicidal runs up the middle, most any of UF’s large and talented players could have taken those in.
Ugh. I think I’ll always wonder what VY’s stats would have been had he played more than 70% for half the season.
DogTown - July 23, 2008
Please...
Tebow won a national championship… as the change of pace QB. He threw 33 passes on the season and had 469 yards rushing.
This year they went 9-4, losing two games to unranked teams and getting stomped by Michigan in their bowl game.
Tebow is clearly a great player, but it’s hard to call a QB that lost 2 more games in a season than Vince Young EVER lost and doesn’t have a bowl victory to his name as the greatest player of our era. Young, Peterson, Bush; any of these guys are more deserving by far.
jw4425 - July 23, 2008
THERE GOES MY HERO!..nt whills
vy til i die - July 23, 2008
The trek up Mt. Olympus is long and dangerous.
And if Tebow should make it, he’ll find Vince already there.
whills - July 23, 2008
You seem to be forgetting that Vince has his own mountain
bamfor - July 24, 2008
You can't say Vince Young is the greatest ever
not if you watched the ‘05 A&M game.
Against the worst defense he would face all season, Young was absolutely horrible, and cost himself the Heisman.
Beergut - July 24, 2008
Dude
Beergut, you say some smart sh-t from time to time, but then you say stuff like this.
Peter Bean - July 24, 2008
To make sure you get the message
Your comment is a bit like saying: “Michael Jordan was subpar in the last week of the ‘96 season, especially against the lowly Bucks. Therefore, he was not the greatest ever.”
Seriously, I have it from team doctor sources that Vince was playing with the flu against A&M. Was he mediocre? Relative to his gigantic sack, I suppose. But he limped through the sad Aggies and then, with alllllllll the chips on the table, wrecked the team that hadn’t lost in 34 games.
Frankly, I’m embarrassed that Vince Young’s performance against Texas A&M University is even a subject of discussion. It’s beneath him.
Peter Bean - July 24, 2008
Amen brotha!
Misterserious7 - July 24, 2008
you want more than one game?
Okahoma, 2003
Young threw 2 INTs (1 returned for a TD), fumbled twice, and was sacked 2 times. texas loses 65-13.
Did he have the flu then?
Washington State
6-14 passing, 15 yds, 1 sack, i fumble
The “greatest player ever” wasn’t even good enough to beat out Chance Mock as starter.
Did he have the flu that game?
2004
Oklahoma
8-23 passing, 3 sacks, 2 fumbles
A nice big goose egg on the scoreboard.
Did he have the flu that game?
Missouri
3-9 passing, 19 yds, 2 INTs
Did he have the flu that game?
Texas Tech
16-25, 213 yds passing, 2 TDs, 2 INTs, 2 fumbles
Coaches are so impressed with “greatest player ever”, they send Chance Mock out on the final drive to QB the team to the comeback win, b/c they don’t trust Young to run a 2 minute drill.
Did he have the flu then?
2005 Texas A&M
He was facing the worst pass defense in the nation, by far. A&M gave up 304.6 yds per game passing in ‘05. For comparison, texas’ record-setting 2007 pass defense gave up 277.8 yds per game passing.
The “greatest player ever” is 13-24 for 162 yds, 1 INT, 1 fumble lost, 3 sacks.
Young had 11 carries for a gaudy 19 yds rushing. Yep, “greatest player ever” all right.
But he had the flu.
Look, I know you love Vince Young. I’ve read enough of your posts on here to know that you really do think he is the greatest ever. Disregarding the fact that “ever” covers a lot of ground (I don’t think Vince compares to all-around talents in the single-wing era like Sammy Baugh or Davey O’Brien, for example), you ignore the fact that Vince was good for at least one lemon of a game every year.
Vince had a nice season in 2005, but that doesn’t make him the best ever.
I’m not saying I agree with Meyer regarding Tebow, b/c I recall Tebow not being able to lead his team from behind in losses to LSU and Michigan, but refuting Meyer by pointing to Young is asinine.
And yes, I know I’m not going to be able to change your mind on this, but blogs are for arguing.
Beergut - July 24, 2008
Vince had a nice season in 2005?
The author lost all credibility right there.
billb - July 24, 2008
There are so many things wrong with that post.
But the one that stands out is
Given the choice between senior quarterback or a RS freshman to lead the 2 minute drill, who would you take?
bamfor - July 24, 2008
Vince was a redshirt sophomore in 2004, in his third year at texas.
hth
Beergut - July 24, 2008
2004 Texas Tech game
I guess we pulled Chance off the bench because we just had to score those last seven points in our 30 point victory. Chance was a Junior, but Vince was a RS-Freshman in 2003, when we did call on the veteran to drive for the win. Great picture of Vince being the greatest in that link. Caption: “Vince Young scrambles for one of his four rushing touchdowns.”
Horn Brain - July 25, 2008
This is retarded
Lets look at Barry Sanders, your greatest ever:
Only started one season.
In 86 and 87 only gained 325 and 622 yards per season respectively.
Never beat rival Oklahoma as a starter
Never played in a national championship game
Personally, I think Sanders deserves to be in the discussion as greatest ever and so does VY, but if you are comparing their Freshman and Sophomore seasons, well there is no comparison because while Barry was sitting on the bench, VY was winning the rose bowl.
Wells - July 24, 2008
he only started one season at TB
b/c he was backing up Thurman Thomas.
The same Thurman Thomas who would win first-team All-American in 1987, his senior season. The same Thurman Thomas that would go on to a Hall of Fame career with the Buffalo Bills.
You want to argue that this is a mark against Sanders?
Beergut - July 24, 2008
NO
What I am arguing is that if you pick and chose your data sets you can make ridiculous arguments seem slightly rational.
Wells - July 24, 2008
The "greatest player ever" wasn’t even good enough to beat out Chance Mock as starter.
If were an Aggie, I’d want to forget 2003 too.
Horncasting - July 24, 2008
Barry Sanders Career Stats (I added in Bowl Games stats manually to be fair to Barry):
558 rushing attempts, 3797 yards, 6.8 YPC, 53 TD’s in 33 games.
1467 return yards, 6 TD’s.
Vince Young Career Stats:
457 rushing attempts, 3127 yards, 6.8 YPC, 37 TD’s in 37 games.
444-718 passing, 6040 yards, 44 TD’s, 28 INT’s.
The first thing that jumps out is how strikingly similar the rushing numbers are, particularly when you account for the fact that
a. Vince played freakin QB
b. Vince got pulled early in a lot of games his junior year
c. Vince was held back from running as much the second half of the season to avoid a potential injury.
While I agree, as would almost everyone here, I think, that statistically Sanders’ ‘88 season is the best single season individual effort ever, his career is hardly the same story.
The comparisons to Baugh and O’Brien are hardly applicable, as those periods cannot be compared numerically, rendering any argument one way or the other baseless speculation.
Personally, beergut, I don’t think that Vince was hands down the greatest college football player ever. I think that he would have been had he stayed for his senior year, but that is not the point.
What PB, HornBrain, Wells, and everyone else here objected to was your ignorant ass post that said that one game (that we WON) disqualified Vince from the discussion, got the facts wrong about your own team, and participated in hyperbole that only you are capable of.
The man was 30-2 as a starter, the only player with a 3000 &1000 season, and authored two of the greatest bowl performances ever. He may not be the hands down G.O.A.T., but he is damn sure in the conversation, and it is not, as you say, “asinine” to suggest as much.
And blogs are not, as you so eloquently put it, “for arguing”, at least not this one. If you would stick to the occasional insight and analysis that you are capable of, and avoid the shameless baiting that you usually resort to, your minority viewpoint might find a more receptive audience here.
As is, if you are wondering why Texas looks down on a&m as a little brother, it is comments like yours on this blog. If you want to write inflammatory nonsense, why don’t you find a good aggie blog upon which to post it.
ctex80 - July 24, 2008
Agreed
Beergut, if you wanted to have this debate rationally, by defining an ERA (and omitting the segregation era players who didn’t have the benefit of weight training), and defining some logical criteria (“no bad games ever” is not a quality criteria) for “greatest of all time” or even “greatest SWC/Big 12 player of all time”, then I think folks would be receptive.
I also wouldn’t put VY as a hands down greatest of all time, Earl, Ricky and perhaps Nobis are other horns that should be in the conversation (depending on the defined era). Hell I’d even speak to the merits of John David Crow if you feel the need to have an Aggie in there.
But creating an inflammatory strawman just to waste time is truly asinine and keeps us from actually having a quality discussion about football.
learned hand - July 24, 2008
okay, if you want to define criteria
Could you agree that the “best player ever” should have at least one season where he doesn’t have a game where he has less than a superlative performance?
For a RB, less than superlative would be anything under 150 yds rushing in a game.
For a QB, less than superlative would be anything under 250 passing/and or 75 rushing.
Barry didn’t have any less than superlative games in 1988. Vince had a less than superlative game at least one game every season of his college career.
When you are talking about the best player of an era, if the player you are arguing for (in my case, Sanders) has a perfect record (no less-than-superlative games), then the standard to argue against him is set, i.e. others you argue for cannot have a less-than-superlative game in a season.
Normally, you could say, “You can’t discount someone on just one game, everyone has bad games”; the problem is, Barry Sanders never had a bad game in 1988.
Beergut - July 25, 2008
Ok...
... arbitrarily creating a feat for someone to accomplish (not having an average game in a season) to become the greatest is not defining criteria in a meaningful way. Look at stats, look at the impact of the player on the team (In this case, Titles of any kind with Vince Young at Texas under Mack Brown: 2 (conf and Natty) Titles of any kind without VY at Texas under MB: 0 and thanks for playing). I’ll also take exception to you arguing that VY’s rushing stats were anything but a match for Sanders’ stats. You just said that a QB’s superlative game should be 75 yards or more, while an RB’s should be 150 or more. Both played three years, but VY almost equaled BS’ numbers when, by your standards, he should have around HALF. Plus he passed for a gazillion yards and had better passing stats than most statue QB’s. Whether you do it by numbers or by made up disqualifiers like Heisman hype, you just can’t argue anything but the fact that VY deserves, at an extreme minimum, to be in the discussion with Sanders, and the reality should probably be more the other way around.
Horn Brain - July 25, 2008
superlative game
In coming up with a criteria for a superlative game, I tried to be fair. I don’t think anyone would argue that a QB who passes for more than 300 yds in a game has had less than a superlative game. Some might quibble and want to include turnover stats and say 300 yds passing doesn’t mean anything if you throw 3 INTs, but since I don’t think comparing turnover numbers between QBs and RBs is fair (as I noted before, one touches the ball 35-40 times a game, the other touches it every play), I disregarded turnovers.
Now, the problem with insisting only 300 yd passing efforts is superlative is that there are dual-threat QBs who can have phenomenal games while not breaking the 300 yds passing threshold. For example, I think everyone on here would agree that Vince Young’s performance in the 2005 Rose Bowl was a phenomenal peformance, but he had only 180 yds passing. He also had 192 yds rushing, though, which gave him 372 yds of total offense. I do think it is fair when talking about dual threat QBs to consider a superlative game for them to be one in which they have over 300 yds of total offense between running and passing the ball. This way, if a QB has 200 yds passing and 100 yds rushing in a game, which everyone will agree is a superlative peformance, they don’t fail to meet the criteria.
My choosing of 75 yds rushing is not an attempt to equate what a QB does rushing the ball to what a RB does running the ball, as you seem to be insinuating. I’m just trying to define a standard for a performance, nothing more.
I could drop my rushing requirement to 51, but reality is, it doesn’t matter if a QBs has 290 yds passing, 11 rushing, he has still surpassed 300 yds total offense, meeting the criteria.
The problem is, Vince Young, who some are saying is “the greatest player ever”, had games where he didn’t even hit 200 yds of total offense, passing and rushing.
I don’t think I’ve argued on here that Young doesn’t deserve to be in the conversation (in fact, I think I posted he belongs in the top 10), I’ve just said he isn’t the greatest of all time.
Beergut - July 25, 2008
No, actually we can't agree on that
Under such a single axis, non-adjusted criteria, Colt Brennan, Paul Smith, Graham Harrell and Sonny Cumbie would be eligbile for the discussion, Cody Hodges would barely miss the list, but Matt Leinart, VY, Peyton Manning, Ken Dorsey and Tommy Frazier aren’t even close.
Your criteria for RB’s manages to eliminate guys like Ricky Williams, Eddie George, Adrian Peterson, Earl Cambell, Marcus Allen and all 9 Herschel Walkers from the conversation entirely. At that point it’s not a conversation worth having.
But congrats for coming up with something to back up your argument, especially a rigged, arbitrary rushing stat which only one player will meet, and a passing stat that excludes some of the best QBs of the last 20 years, but manages to include just about every high octane system QB in existence.
If you think that Barry is the greatest of all time, congrats, T. Boone Pickens and billions of dollars agree with you. But, others define greatness on multiple axes, things like winning, raising the play of teammates (leadership for a Sammy Baugh fan), total contribution to a team’s offense (yards and points taken as a percentage), average contribution to a team’s offense per game (again, yards and points), team offensive success (VY QB’d the highest scoring offense of all time, worth noting), years of contributions, contributions to bowl victories, big games against ranked opponents and I know you were waiting for it, championships.
After all, isn’t the lack of championships why you continually dismiss Texas Tech, Leach and Harrell? Is that not an equal reason to dismiss Okie State and Barry? Barry didn’t do too well in that area, couldn’t overcome the grist mill that was Nebraska. Or Oklahoma for that matter…he actually only out rushed Mike Gaddis of the Sooners by 2 yards in that big game. Gaddis for G.O.A.T.? So forgive us, and the other “asinine” fans who adore their champions, and hail them as the greatest of all time. They were at least, the greatest of the moment. Through transcendent play they helped to create something greater than themselves. Frazier did it, Herschel did it, Leinart did it, VY did it, Dorsey did it, AP did it, Manning…did it (yea verily), as did Earl and Marcus. Barry never did.
Barry still has the single season rushing record though, but I don’t know if your school gets a trophy for that. He was a helluva back, and I’ll give you a hint, Barry does exceedingly well for himself under the criteria I mentioned. I didn’t rig the criteria you see. And by those same standards, so does Vince Young.
Barry Sanders must be involved in any conversation about the greatest of all time but you’d find more than a few knowledgeable, literate fans and coaches would would gladly trade him for a Vince Young, a Tommy Frazier or 9 Herschel Walkers. To do so is not asinine, it is to realize that one player, especially a quarterback can have an impact on the game which goes beyond the box score and gives his team the confidence to play above themselves. That too is a form of greatness. So don’t pick on our guy and point to Barry’s hollow numbers against Wyoming in the Holiday bowl and say that the fact Vince didn’t get a Heisman overwhelms what happened in the Rose.
That long bit said, as someone who has watched a lot of Aggie games and heard a lot of Agro lore, I can’t blame you too much. It has been too long since A&M has gotten a glimpse of that kind of greatness in maroon and white. Evidently you’ve forgotten what it looks like.
learned hand - July 25, 2008
Brav-o, sir. Well put. /nt whills
ctex80 - July 25, 2008
learned hand rec
Just because I love the random one-liner about 9 Herschel Walkers.
By the way, PB, I think you should strongly put in a request to the SBN powers that be to have a function where we can bad-rec a post (like flagging, only so everyone can see the red). It would be quite enjoyable to see all of beergut’s ridiculousness on display.
jc25 - July 25, 2008
While funny
I think the negative flag could encourage the community to become more mean spirited than PB may want.
Wells - July 25, 2008
too true
maybe just a special “beergut” flag then.
jc25 - July 25, 2008
Yeah
It’s an interesting idea in theory, but would get ugly in practice. This is a community, and though back-and-forths with Beergut may be enhanced by embroidering his egregious agro errors in maroon dung…. as a policy, we encourage civility, even in disagreement.
For readers that crave a vile commenting atmosphere, I suggest a $100/year donation to Orangebloods.
Peter Bean - July 25, 2008
Exactly
or TexAgs is free.
Old Army vs. New Army – devouring their young since 1870-something!
horndude - July 25, 2008
reply
Who is Paul Smith?
I’m trying to set a criteria that can be used to judge players in the conversation for “greatest player ever”. I seriously doubt many people (non-homer fans, at least), would put Grham Harrell, Sonny Cumbie, or Cody Hodges in that group. As for Matt Leinart or Ken Dorsey, I’ve never heard anyone argue for either of them being considered for the greatest QB of all time, much less the greatest player of all time. Peyton Manning (losses to Florida) and Tommie Frazier (mediocre passer) have other issues which preclude them from the conversation.
Your dismissal of my criteria seems to be, “Well, under that criteria, a lot of people can’t be considered.” That’s exactly the point. We’re not trying to inclde a huge group of people here, we’re trying to differentiate between very few.
Again, we need some type of criteria to eliminate people from the discussion. Exactly what would you suggest? Your argument against my criteria seems to be that it eliminates too many people from the conversation. Well, I think that some people might argue that Earl Campbell or Marcus Allen belong in the conversation, there are other you listed who many would argue do not (Peterson, for example, was an absolute freak of a college back, but he was also injury prone, and spent parts of two seasons off the field b/c of injuries. For that reason alone I would eliminate him from the conversation.)
Beergut - July 25, 2008
dammit
shoulda previewed that
Beergut - July 25, 2008
Beergut....
Really, dude. Why don’t you just come out and say that you think VY isn’t impressive because you’re an Aggie and have an obligation to hate on Longhorns? We’d accept that and move on, since we understand the nature of the rivalry. But trying to argue like this… it ain’t going anywhere.
He’s not rejecting your criteria just because it excludes certain players. OF COURSE criteria are supposed to differentiate. He’s pointing out that yours, and remember you basically only listed one initially (not having a bad game), excludes players that we know belong in such conversations and seems to bolster the cases for players that we all know should not. By merely saying that criteria should differentiate and that there should be several factors we look into doesn’t even address learned hand’s point. He would wholeheartedly agree with you… and then avalanche you with several things that Vince did better than Barry Sanders.
So you can criticize his criteria but yours is fine? One can merely point out that this shows that Vince had more responsibility (as QB’s normally do) and thus made a bigger impact on football games than Barry. “Fair” comparison? Depends on how you define it, because at the least, it is an accurate point to make. Furthermore, if Vince, as a QB, has career rushing statistics similar to a great RB like Barry, I would venture to guess that it bolsters his case. Just a guess.
I know you know more than enough about football to think that it is reducible to mere numbers. How are we going to quantify differences between eras, when players of the past didn’t weight train like they do now? How are we going to quantify differences in coaching, systems, and the impact of good teammates? How about the competition level players faced (for instance, 2005 had greater teams than 2007)? There are a host of things in sports that we can’t quantify; that doesn’t mean they are precluded from discussions about a player’s value. In fact, people who do so show little knowledge of the game (and sports in general). I know that that’s not you, so I have no idea why you would say such a thing unless it was for the sole purpose of trying to discount Vince’s strengths.
If we only use “never had a bad game, or at least one that I’d define as bad, during one record-breaking season,” that eliminates a lot of people, and leaves us with a rather desultory conversation.
Are you saying you only watched Vince play that one game, or are you saying you’re discounting all the great things he did because it didn’t happen in that game? If the former, you’re too ignorant to discuss this matter. If the latter, you’re either showing your lack of knowledge or you’re being willingly blind (again, just for the purpose of criticizing Vince). Since I know you know some football and I’m positive you watched more of VY than one game, I’ll just conclude the willingly blind part. Take off your maroon blinders and you’ll see better through the light of the burnt orange sun. If not, at least spare us these arguments that not even your high-ranking dog would make.
TheElusiveShadow - July 25, 2008
reply
Because it isn’t true. There are several texas players I’ve enjoyed watching play, some of whom I think hold in higher esteem than even some texas fans do.
Well, but here is the thing: We’re talking about the best player ever. To argue that my criteria would be including certain people, like Tech QBs, is ludicrous, b/c none of them would come up in the greatest player conversation. We need some criteria to differentiate between the people who ARE in the conversation.
Someone tried to downplay my pick as greatest player ever by saying Barry’s stats aren’t all that impressive for his career. My counter-point is that he never had a bad game in his record setting season, which is just phenomenal. EVERYONE has a bad game, which makes what he did so special.
It isn’t so much that I’m criticizing his criteria as much as it is that I’m pointing out an inherent flaw.
So far, the only flaw people seem to have come up with for my criteria is that it is too exclusive. Well, the greatest player of all time is an exclusive list.
I only had a chance to watch Vince Young in person twice, the ‘04 and ‘05 A&M games. In ‘04, Vince hadn’t become OMGVINCEYOUNG!!!111 yet. He had 93 yds rushing on 19 carries, 131 yds passing on 18 attempts. He also had a fumble that led to an A&M TD and allowed us to take the lead going into halftime. All in all, a so-so performance. The star of that game, the person I left most impressed with, was Cedric Benson. We simply couldn’t stop him in the 4th quarter.
2005, I get a chance to see this transcendant Vince Young, who has improved so much since 2004 and, well, you know what happened. So, in my one chance to see OMGVinceYoung!!!!111juan, he was disappointing.
Mostly, I was just poking learned hand for taking a potshot at the end of his comment. I don’t mind if you disagree with me, I just don’t see how insults or potshots improve the conversation around here.
We’re not in Vietnam after all. We can be civil.
Beergut - July 26, 2008
reply
I’m glad you don’t dislike Texas players just because they’re Longhorns, but it does make your insistence on this all the more confusing.
I don’t think the criticism levied against your criteria is simply that it’s “too exclusive.” The criticism is that it’s a poor way of figuring out greatness. I happen to think leading teams to championships is a lot more important than not having a “bad” game during the season, and the former excludes Barry Sanders. Is that a good point in VY’s favor? I think so.
Indeed, Vince did not play as well as he could have against A&M. However, I’ll ask you: Do you think this overshadows his big performances in big games? He crushed Michigan and USC. He took down OSU at the Horse Shoe, bouncing back from two interceptions and some big hits. He walloped Oklahoma and smashed Texas Tech when they were ranked in the top ten (sure, they were overrated, but they were still good). It’s not like only Longhorn fans think he’s the best they’ve ever seen. A lot of college football viewers have talked about how they’ve never seen the likes of Vince Young.
I don’t mind if you disagree with me, or others, either, but to be honest, it’s not like you always come off as “civil” yourself. You can and do participate in civil discussions, but you have provoked people before. If I have insulted you, I apologize, though I hope you accept that it is fair play to take a few sarcastic shots at the Aggies (and I fully expect the same directed at us). That’s the nature of the rivalry.
I don’t mind you being here. That said, I am still skeptical you were really thinking objectively when you said that bringing up VY to refute Meyer was stupid, especially when you yourself rank Vince Young somewhere in the top ten. I would agree with you on your post below that if Meyer said, “Tebow has a chance to be the greatest of our era,” then that’s a fair statement to make. But he didn’t, and so bringing up VY is perfectly legitimate. I don’t see how you can argue otherwise.
TheElusiveShadow - July 27, 2008
reply
No, it doesn’t take away from what he did against Michigan or USC, but while some people may simply look at what he did in big games to declare he is the best ever, I look beyond that.
C’mon, Oklahoma sucked that season, and the fact that Tech did so well is just a testament to how poor the Big 12 was in ‘05. I don’t say that to denigrate texas winning the conference, b/c they clearly were the best team, but those two games do not support your argument. I was more impressed by texas beating OU in ‘06 than either of those two wins in ‘05.
Y’all played a tougher schedule in ‘04 (6 ranked teams, 5 in conference) than you did in ‘05 (4 ranked teams, 2 in conference).
The problem with the “winning championships” criteria is that it penalizes players who are on merely good but not great teams, like ‘88 Oklahoma State or ‘98 texas.
I asked a few people this weekend to name me the top 5 college football players of all time (none of them were texas fans). None of them mentioned Vince Young.
I can remember when some kids wanted to be the next Charlie Ward, then the next Michael Bishop, then the next Michael Vick, now some people want to be the next Vince Young. In a few years, we’ll probably have kids coming out wanting to be the ‘next’ Terelle Pryor. It isn’t new to have an electric dual-threat QB capture the attention of college football fans everywhere.
And I contend that anyone who says that they never saw anyone like Young play never watched Matt Jones play QB at Arkansas, b/c while Jones had nowhere near the passing ability Vince developed, his running style was exactly the same as Young’s. They were both tall mobile QBs who looked like they were barely running while their long strides ate up the yards.
Beergut - July 28, 2008
reply
OU finished the season by beating previously one-loss Oregon, shutting up their BCS whining. Texas Tech had a good team, and their high powered offense was throttled in Austin while we posted 52 points (could have been more). OU was obviously not as good as they have been before, but they weren’t absolutely awful. The fact is, we had lost to OU five years in a row and they gambled that Vince couldn’t pass. He threw 3 TD passes and we blew them out. As far as playing a tougher schedule, it depends on how you look at it. We certainly have played more ranked teams in the other years but we had to go to the Horse Shoe against an excellent Ohio State team and then face a team with a 34-game winning streak in what was practically their “home away from home.” We won both, incidentally, and I think VY had something to do with that.
Don’t great players (at least, ones that deserve mention of the best of the best) elevate the play of their entire teams? I would agree that woodenly using the championship criteria doesn’t take the team concept into account, but it is used to evaluate a great player’s status as he displays his gifts on the biggest stage. After all, if you are going to harp on Vince so much in a few bad games, it is only consistent to give him due credit for his performances in the biggest games. And for sure, in his bad games, we can divide blame to the rest of the team as well. It goes both ways.
That’s terrific. I’ve talked to people who aren’t Texas fans and they think he’s the most amazing thing they’ve ever seen. Are they right? It doesn’t matter. My point of bringing this up is because you seem to think that only Texas fans are blind enough to rank VY so high. By pointing out only a few examples otherwise, it disproves that contention.
Your point of kids wanting to be like the current stars is irrelevant. Of course that happens. Kids want to be like Lebron and Kobe now as the memory of MJ is starting to fade. How the heck is this relevant to this discussion? There are great players in every era people want to emulate. That says nothing about how great they stand as a matter of history.
You contradicted yourself in a span of a paragraph. If Jones had nowhere near the passing ability Vince developed, then he simply wasn’t the same player. I’d argue that Vince was more awesome a runner anyway, but that’s beside the point here. The reason people say they haven’t seen anyone like Vince was not just because of the fac he could run. He led the NCAA in passing efficiency until the bowl season in ‘05 while being able to break tackles and outrun defenders in the open field.
Furthermore, I’m starting to conclude that you have relinquished the reason you started this discussion in the first place. Not all Texas fans think that Vince is hands down the greatest ever, since the discussion is quite difficult. All PB pointed out was that Urban Meyer made a careless statement because Vince Young was in college football only a few years ago, and you took exception to it. You seem to have let that go (as you should) and now are just trying to refute the idea that Vince was the greatest of all-time, which to me, is only an interesting side point. So I’ll ask you: Was PB justified in bringing up VY? Was it really asinine? With your statements that VY may be among the top ten greatest of all time and that Meyer should have instead said “Tebow has a chance to be the greatest of this era,” I’m guessing you have conceded that PB made a legit point. If so, this discussion is essentially over and the rest is just fun stuff to talk about on the side.
TheElusiveShadow - July 29, 2008
reply
You’re trying to compare stats between a QB (someone who touches the ball on every offensive play) to a RB (someone who touches the ball 35-40 offensive plays a game). That is an excercise in futility. If Sanders was a single wing TB who passed the ball, including passing stats would be relevant.
“Ever” includes previous eras.
One game disqualified Vince from the Heisman conversation, so why shouldn’t it disqualify him from the argument of “greatest player ever”? I’ll say Vince belongs in the argument if you’re discussing top 10 greatest players of all time, but he isn’t in the top 5. As for “getting the facts wrong about my own team”, forgive me for not knowing that Rice had a worse defense, statistically, than we did. Wow. That really invalidates my statement that Vince crapped the bed against A&M.
Pot, meet Kettle.
I’ve never understood this statement from texas fans. “We look down on you”
Yeah? And you’ve lost to us the last two years, when it mattered. Your point is…..?
Beergut - July 24, 2008
here we go again, twit.
First off, you make this WAY too easy…
Yes, you are correct. Vince was a redshirt soph in ‘04, in his third year at Texas. Too bad the game where Mock came in for him was in 2003. As bamfor said, Vince was a RS Freshman in the game in question. If you’re gonna be a dick, be an accurate dick.
Yes, actually. If Sanders was the greatest of all time, shouldn’t he have started before his junior year? Unless Thomas was the second greatest of all time? Are you harboring a secret thing for okie’s, gut? Or is it the 80’s that have got you all hot and bothered?
I put the stats up to show how similar the RUSHING numbers were, despite Vince not playing tailback. I didn’t even bring up the passing numbers, just included them, the same way I included Barry’s return stats. The point that I was attempting to illustrate was that Vince, despite not playing RB, still had comparable rushing numbers.
Yes, it does. But in order to make such an argument, it becomes necessary to, much to your chagrin, go to numbers to make your point. O’Brien passed for 1733 yards and 19 TD’s his senior year. Baugh threw 39 TD’s in his 3 seasons as TCU quarterback. This is not like basketball, where Wilt Chamberlain averaged 50 pts. and 20 rebounds against inferior competition. If you want to argue that Baugh and O’Brien’s inferior numbers against inferior competition are better than what numerous players have done in the modern era, have fun. I’d love to see you support that argument with anything resembling a statistic.
Bush already had a significant lead in Heisman balloting going into the a&m game. The Heisman is an award for an individual season, not career. Different criteria, no?
I’m not asking that you be right about everything, beergut. Just SOMETHING.
FINALLY! You got something right!
ctex80 - July 24, 2008
reply
Dammit. In my list of poor games for Young, I had that Tech game and stats listed under the ‘04 season, which is the reason for my mistake. So, Vince had three crappy games in ‘03, not two.
Actually, if you’re going to list the stats, list ALL the stats. There is a reason I pointed out Baugh in particular. Baugh was also a crackerjack punter and defensive back. His all-around excellence is why I don’t think Vince can compare to him.
Bush had his defining performance on November 19, 2005, when he had 500+ all-purpose yards against Fresno State, which caused the media to forget some of his pedestrain performances from earlier in the season. Vince had the opportunity to help his own cause with a stellar performance against A&M, on a weekend when Bush wasn’t playing, and he’d have the television viewing public all to himself. He crapped the bed.
Bush then followed his Fresno State performance with a victory lap through the UCLA defense on December 3, which made Vince’s performance in texas’ 70-3 win over Colorado meaningless. If Vince doesn’t crap the bed against A&M, his performance against Colorado would have solidified his spot with the voters, and he wins the Heisman going away.
Beergut - July 25, 2008
That sounds like it makes sense...
... But you made all of that up. Completely your opinion as to what would have happened with the voters. My opinion is that since (I believe) Reggie and Vince got the most 1st and 2nd place votes, respectively, ever in Heisman voting, Reggie probably didn’t build that lead with one good game against Fresno and a slummy game by Vince. Surely it didn’t help Vince, but if the voters were that sure about it, nothing was going to change their minds. My opinion is my opinion, but at least I have a vote to back it up, You have an anger-curdled puddle of brains to back up yours.
Arguing with you is like arguing in a rapid-fire high school debate. You apparently think that just saying something makes it true as long as no one refutes it, so you throw in useless points like previous one, or the fact that Vince had three-ish bad games as a freakin’ RS Freshman, then you keep harping on them until someone calls you on your BS. I’ll bet Barry Sanders fumbled the ball at least once in his career, hence he had a less-than-superlative play and therefore sucks Okie dirt-pies. Refute that or I win. This is just so much blowing air at someone to look like you really know your stuff. Stick to the interesting X’s and O’s posts and stay away from the petty argument starters.
Horn Brain - July 25, 2008
no, Reggie didn't build that lead in only one game
the Fresno State game simply put him over the top.
I don’t know if they still do it now, but at the time, the Dallas Morning News used to do a Heisman Watch column, and Bush was starting to get some criticism for some less-than-spectacular performances, despite the fact that USC kept winning. To argue that Bush had a momentous lead over Vince the whole season is simply not accurate. Vince still had a lot of people who favored him b/c of his performance the previous Rose Bowl against Michigan.
All of that criticism of Bush was silenced after the Fresno State game, when he had over 500 yds of total offense, and the national media went absolutely gaga. ESPN kept spent a whole week, IIRC, discussing Bush’s performance in that game.
Vince needed a spectacular performance to overcome what Reggie did against FSU and put the spotlight back on himself, and his next game was against A&M. Vince had a terrible game, Bush goes out and runs all over UCLA in his next game, and the media was happy to give him the Trophy.
What that one game against Fresno did was differentiate Bush from Vince as the most spectacular player in the game, which resulted in him winning the Heisman .
Actually, I think the spread style of debating popular now is asinine. However, when we’re arguing something hypothetical like how one game influenced Heisman voters, I’m not sure what facts you can bring to bear here. If you can find polls of Heisman voters from that season before the award was given out to show who they would have voted for after each game, then you can refute what I said. Otherwise, you saying that one game didn’t cost Vince the Heisman is just as ‘made up’ as me saying it did cost him the Heisman.
Beergut - July 26, 2008
Did you say
crackerjack?
ctex80 - July 25, 2008
Heisman
Your last argument belies your point about one crappy game. Apparently Bush had a number of crappy games, but they were early in the season rather than late in the season, which was the difference in the voting. It wasn’t that Vince’s game was particularly bad, but that it was late in the season and fresh on the minds of the voters.
Besides, does anyone really think Bush would have still won the Heisman after the Rose Bowl? It would have been unanimous for Vince.
jw4425 - July 25, 2008
how does that contradict my point?
I’m not arguing that Reggie Bush is the greatest player ever. If I was, then yes, I would be contradicting myself.
Unfortunately for Vince, the Heisman is not decided after bowl games, it is awarded after the regular season in early December. I would actually argue that this hurts the award winner somewhat, b/c it puts a big target on their backs for the bowl game. Witness the number of Heisman winners that went on to perform poorly in bowl games.
Beergut - July 26, 2008
Trying not to bury myself under all the crap in this thread
But one game would have netted Vince a Heisman? Reggie got the second most number of first place votes in the history of the Heisman trophy. The gap wasn’t even close. The media had already decided to go with the high profile USC player over the flyover state player from Texas. One game would not have changed that. If Vince hadn’t already proven to the media that he deserved it by that point in time, he was never going to prove it.
Meekrob - July 25, 2008
It's one game, brah.
And it’s not enough to undermine a body of work like VY’s. He’s not a robot; he’s a ballplayer.
Holly Anderson - July 24, 2008
(and the other games you cited aren't enough either. chillax.)
Holly Anderson - July 24, 2008
and all
but two of those games came in 2003 his first year starting
Hook'em13 - July 27, 2008
I wasn't going to dignify this with a response, but...
you’ve got to be fucking kidding me. So your argument is that one bad game precludes a player from being the greatest ever? Who, then, would you say was the greatest player ever, gut?
Also, far be it from me to give aggies credit for anything, but the ‘05 a&m defense was not the worst we faced that year. Rice gave up more points and yards, and Okie St. gave up more points. Colorado’s offense deserves a mention in this category as well.
It’s not enough for you to criticize our team inaccurately, you have to go and fuck up criticism of your own?
ctex80 - July 24, 2008
Lets be honest with ourselves
Reggie McNeil was the best player ever…How many D-dubs was it?
tvr'11 - July 24, 2008
greatest college player I've ever seen
Barry Sanders.
No question.
I think his worst performance in 1988, he still had over 150 yds rushing against Nebraska.
Beergut - July 24, 2008
agro data mining to dismiss a UT college football legend
Beergut – Nice try. Your logic sucks. Too bad that your team hasn’t won shit since the great depression.
burntup - July 24, 2008
One final note...
The media was giving Reggie Bush the Heisman whether we torched the Aggies or not.
So, to lay all this to rest:
1.) Saying that one game in which someone played poorly precludes them from being the greatest of all time is… well… about the least intelligent thing you’ve ever said on here, and I don’t think I’m exaggerating.
2.) We won the game! Are you kidding?
3.) Our defense made that game a near disaster since our coaches failed to prepare the team for the option (Mack Brown in one of the post Aggie-loss pressers personally said this, dumb). Had our defense played well (been coached well), yeah Vince has a bad game, but it’s a bad game where we score over 40 points and win by probably nearly 30. I think we give him a passing grade there.
4.) Vince had the flu (as I told you, but could not find a source) and still beat your butts. Sure it wasn’t James Street’s hungover no-hitter, but that’s nearly a Chuck Norris-style joke in itself. It’s more a part of his legend than a detractor from it.
5.) The Aggie defense was not the worst he faced all season, per ctex80. You even failed to be right on the one piece of your comment that had a chance to pass the s**t-mus test.
So here we go:
Wrong: See 1Wrong: See 5
Wrong and Wrong:See 2, 3, 4 and my opening statement.
Having shown and explained why every single part of your comment was completely untrue, I hereby proclaim your comment utter bullshit. Obligatory.
Still can’t figure out how to post videos in the comments. Think maybe they removed that to speed up load times or something.
Horn Brain - July 24, 2008
In my office
I’ve replaced the term “brainfart” with “beergutted”. It’s catching on.
ctex80 - July 24, 2008
ok
1. see above. I listed 5 games.
2. in spite of Vince Young, not b/c of him.
3. Your defense wasn’t the reason Vince was fumbling the ball, throwing the ball to our players, and getting sacked. How does texas’ defense sucking in that game have anything to do with Vince Young?
4. Irrelevant. He had games where he sucked when healthy, too.
5. We had the worst pass defense in the nation, and he couldn’t pass on us. What does that tell you? Hell, his performance improved our passing defense stats for the season.
Beergut - July 24, 2008
Judging from your Barry Sanders venture...
I would have to say that you have failed before you even started. It seems that your idea of the greatest of all time is some guy who always has an awesome game no matter what. What you’re doing is making up some criteria and saying “if you pass this test, then you are the greatest of all time.” This is dumb.
Why don’t you look at those Barry Sanders numbers again and realize that he too was on a curve, and he too reached the pinnacle in one season? After that Missouri game you mentioned, Texas and Vince were held below 30 points three times in 19 games, once by Ohio State at the Shoe, and they won all of them. Champions and legends aren’t immune to bad days (or the flu), but they win anyway. Vince won in three of your six examples, and participated in only one other loss in his career. I think you’re pretty crazy. Put Matt Nordgren in against A&M to rush for 19 yards and see how well the rest of the team is able to win “in spite of him”.
Horn Brain - July 24, 2008
5 games
But only one of them was in the national championship season, and that’s the one where he had the flu. By your definition, only one season really counts, so only the A&M game counts. Where he had the flu.
jw4425 - July 25, 2008
Vince. Young. Scores.
Never has a truer statement been uttered.
Horn Brain - July 24, 2008
THANK YOU PB!!
Wow PB.. that video really pumped me up… nothing like a little VY magic to get us all going in the morning… infact, I propose something like 1 incredible VY clip everyday from now on until the start of the football season!
I can’t think of a better way to start my mornings!!
VY IS THE BEST!
LonghornForLife - July 24, 2008
Fantastic Video
I love the video, but nowadays, it just serves to get me into a sappy, nostalgical mood. COME BACK, VINCE!!
heeltuckitandrun - July 24, 2008
Other things you may not have known about Mr. Tebow
Tim Tebow was never addicted to heroin. Heroin was addicted to Tim Tebow.
Tim Tebow once won a game of Connect 4 in 3 moves.
When Tim Tebow was a child, he made his mother finish his vegetables.
On his birthday, Tim Tebow randomly selects one lucky child to be thrown into the sun.
When Tim Tebow pissses into the wind, the wind changes direction.
When you open a can of whoop-ass, Tim Tebow jumps out.
When Google can’t find something, it asks Tim Tebow for help.
People with amnesia still remember Tim Tebow.
Tim Tebow has been to Mars. That’s why there’s no life on Mars.
When Batman is in trouble, he turns on the Tim Tebow signal.
Tim Tebow was conceived by torturing the other sperm until they gave up the location of the egg.
Meekrob - July 24, 2008
Tim Tebow’s left hand is the only hand that beats a royal flush.
Also, when VY hangs out shirtless, it’s with other dudes. Tebow is with hot chicks. Sorry PB.
mlmintampa - July 24, 2008
Methinks that the "Filipino Foreskin Flayer" doesn't want to take up that fight with "Superman"
learned hand - July 24, 2008
Why do I even respond to beergut?....
How many Super Bowls did Thurman Thomas lose to the Dallas Cowboys? How many Super Bowls did he lose in all?.....OVERRATED! I would think if he’s so good, he could’ve won 1 of the 4 Super Bowls that he went to…
SneezyBeltran - July 25, 2008
Tim Teblow...blah blah blah blah
I am so tired of hearing about this guy. So what? He’s a stand up Evangelical Christian with a clean track record. Woopity doo! Went 9-4 last season losing their bowl game to Michigan and yet he wins the Heisman trophy as a sophmore. What a joke. Tim Tebow is no slouch but he certainly is not a superstar. Never will be….mark my words. He has impressive size and the ability to rush like a fullback but other than that, I see nothing that makes him amazing whatsoever.
Urban Meyer makes me wanna punch his underdeveloped fetus face. Come the end of the 2008 season- florida will be 9-4 again with no significant wins, and Meyer will still be on his knees praying to his own personal Jesus- or at least that is what he calls it.
512 - July 25, 2008
I think hes already a superstar in College football.
Winning the Heisman kinda does that to you.
BoddickerIsClutch - July 25, 2008
You're right.
You may like or dislike Tebow. But I almost hope he wins the Heisman again because I tire of hearing Buckeyes fans deify Griffith for winning it twice.
Speedway - July 25, 2008
Wow
Just wow. You really don’t think Tim Tebow is one of the best players in college football?
Meekrob - July 25, 2008
hmmmm
SEC record for most rushing TDs.
SEC record for most TDs accounted for by one player.
NCAA record for most rushing TDs by a QB.
Passed for over 3000 yds and for 32 TDs.
Heisman Trophy winner.
Maxwell Trophy winner.
Davey O’Brien Award as nation’s top QB.
AP Player of the Year.
Only player in the nation who can do play-action to himself.
Nope, not a superstar. [/sarcasm]
Beergut - July 26, 2008
Wow...
Beergut, I share PB’s disbelief. I think you have respectable football knowledge and really do give useful insight in many of your posts, but then you turn around and write something that is frankly nonsense. It’s like the collective spirit of Aggie idiocy manifests itself and overrides your better judgment.
I don’t think any, objective person who reads this conversation will grant you your arguments. They’re just awful. Of course Vince had “bad” games. I grew up watching Michael Jordan play A LOT, and there were games where he stunk up the joint. I watched Joe Montana play and there were games he struggled. Sometimes, you have bad games, and it sometimes happens against teams worse than yours. It’s called sports. It happens, even to the “greatest.”
Would I trade VY for anyone? No, I wouldn’t. That doesn’t mean that I think it is a done deal and that anyone else who chooses the likes of Barry, Earl, etc. are all idiots. Goodness me, PB brought it up to refute Urban Meyer’s statement, which you said was “asinine”... and then you turn around and admit that VY belongs in the discussion of the Top Ten of All-Time, though not top five. Are you thereby saying Tebow, right now, belongs in the discussion of the top ten? If not, then PB made a valid point: You can’t say Tebow is the greatest of our era when just a few years ago we had a player who ranks among the top 10 or 15 EVER (your statement, not mine… I would say top five, obviously). So I’m frankly at a loss why you even bothered to start this.
TheElusiveShadow - July 25, 2008
It gets even worse
when you consider Beergut’s argument against KD’s jersey being retired. In that thread he said that retiring KD’s jersey was “laughable”. So the logic goes as follows…
Barry Sanders is the greatest football player of all time, based on one record breaking season. Kevin Durant cannot be considered among the top two greatest players at his own school based on one record breaking season.
ctex80 - July 25, 2008
actually
my argument against Durant was that I don’t think you should retire the jersey of someone who was only on campus for two semesters.
If Durant came back and earned his degree, my view on that would change.
Beergut - July 26, 2008
Dunno if you can use the directory...
... But KD is still taking classes. Barnes made him promise that if he came to Texas he would graduate, no matter how long he stayed here to play.
Horn Brain - July 28, 2008
haven't looked in the directory
that’s awesome if true
I’d still wait until after he graduates to retire his jersey.
Nothing wrong with giving him a little more motivation to hit the books.
Beergut - July 28, 2008
reply
Tebow’s body of work (Heisman Trophy, national championship, record-setting QB) would get him into the conversation of greatest ever, but I wouldn’t rank him in the top 10….yet.
I think Meyer would have been more accurate if he had said Tebow “has the chance to be the greatest player of our era”, b/c he does. If he can repeat or better the numbers he had last season, and win a national title, I don’t think anyone would argue that he would deserve that designation.
Beergut - July 26, 2008
I
am ignoring VY is can’t be considered as best player ever comment because of one game.
Tebow still has one, maybe two years left. I really don’t think final judgements about him should be made yet :} If he manages to win the national championship as the starting qb, then by all means compare him to His Vinceness.
Ultra Horn - July 30, 2008
Oh..and
speaking of VY, there is a new podium, without a tag or statue yet, just a little past the East Mall at UT on the wide set of stairs ;]
Ultra Horn - July 30, 2008
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Burnt Orange Nation to post a comment.