Vince Young overrated?

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Defensewins

Let me spell this out for you since you are obviously a little hyper sensitive and emotional about this. You mistakenly took my post as an attack. The expression 'Stats are for losers' comes from the situation of a player that plays on LOSING TEAM and has nothing to point to but his own individual stats, despite his teams being a big failure. So I was not attacking or calling your friend Jsarno a loser, I was calling the Cardinal TEAM losers. FACT #1.

FACT #2 is we are different when it comes to sports. I played a ton of sports during my life time. I played this game to win, not to be #1 in the stats department. By the way you cling to stats as the end all of fact, you might be more of a sports fan than an actual player. Stats are very misleading. Look at the Pats game this weekend. Randy Moss was doubled and received most of the attention of the Cowboys Defense. So his teammates benefited from it and a guy like Wes Welker had a career day. Well according to your non-bending "Stats Never Lie" theory Wes Welker is a better receiver than Randy Moss. We all know that is not the case. All of the Pats WR's benefited from playing opposite R. Moss and that does not show up on a stat sheet. Moss was statistically was 4th in receiveing that day, stats by themselves are not fact. You also have to consider who you are playing against when looking at stats.
Please don't take this as an attack on you. You asked me to back up my points with fact and I have. I am just stating a different opinion on the whole stats issue. However your comments on your highly emotional post challenging my football knowledge and calling me "blissfully ignorant" is a personal attack. Someone starting a thread every two weeks calling a QB on a winning team and singling him out is also an attack.
Football players are paid to win, not be #1 in stats.

Firstly, you did attack Jsarno for making an arguably unessecary but solid argument highlighting Vince's struggles until this point. My post was more of a defense of Jsarno than an attack on the you, and so far you've kept it clean and professional so I have no reason to be irate. Please don't mistake my passion for anger.

The problem is you have no idea what my stance even is. I use facts to analyze players to best evaluate them. I never use stats to make a bad argument, because that is completely counterproductive to what I'm trying to accomplish to be ultra analytical. Thus you get the "blissfully ignorant" part of my comment. Ignorant is not a dirty word, nor an insult. I hope no one takes it as so. It's merely an observation I make that you clearly have no idea what it is that I do.

Firstly, you make the assumption that I never played sports simply because I like to analyze so I am not ignorant. Secondly, you assume I take the "stats never lie" position and thirdly you defended it by giving an argument that I clearly don't support, nor have ever claimed to or referenced. Since you are wrong on all three accounts, that's ignorance. Not stupidity or evilness or anything even remotely bad. I personally don't even care that you misunderstood me, but if it goes on a public fourm, then I have to defend myself.

Nothing you said is fundamentally wrong, per say, but I believe it reflects on a very narrow persepcion of the game. I have often defended a many of your posts in the past as very good nuggets of knowledge, so obviously you know what you are talking about often. I wish you were willing to possibly look at other viewpoints when they make sense, but to each their own I guess.

I am not bitter and I'm sorry if I offended you.