Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Is this debatable?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Is this debatable?

    Ken Dorsey = Matt Leinart?

    both had amazing talent around them. Both lost 2 games in their NCAA career's. The only difference it seems is that Leinart was very over-rated by most folks because of USC's talent pool around him.

    Any thoughts?

  • #2
    Ken Dorsey had a girly arm and the NFL knew it. That's why he was a 7th round pick. Leinart had a sub-par arm coming out but looked like a legit franchise QB coming out. Its not like Leinart is a bust yet anyhow, he had a decent rookie year and missed mostly all of 2007 with an injury. Let him start a full year before we make any judgements.

    But speaking of Ken Dorsey, he will probably never see the field for the Cleveland Browns as a QB unless the first 2 on the depth chart get hurt, but he's a great player coach for us and the only reason he's still around. He gets the game, he'll be a coach as soon he's out of the league I'll tell ya that.

    Comment


    • #3
      I do not personally like Matt Leinart, but i think he's worlds above Dorsey

      Comment


      • #4
        Naturally I liked Dorsey more in college but as far as the NFL goes Leinart's skills are much greater than that of Dorsey

        Comment


        • #5
          No, its not debateable. Its undeniably WRONG. Shame on you for making such a stupid thread. Because they were both successful in college with great teams, they're equal? By that logic, John Elway=Tim Couch. Both were good in college, but played on terrible teams and were taken in the 1st round based not on college success, necessarily, but the skills they possessed.

          Comment


          • #6
            aye, this is a no contest. if it were even close, leinart would have been a much lower draft pick or dorsey much higher.

            i think if leinart gets a full year in, people will see a guy who could become a great pro QB. if the cards o-line continues to improve, as i believe it will under whisenhunt and grimm, i would say the cards have a very talented offense, just like what leinart ran at USC.

            bolding and fitz - check
            improved oline - check (or at least getting there)
            edge + maybe a stewart/mendenhall - could be...

            if he fails with all of that around him, then yeah, ill say hes a bust.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by BeerBaron View Post
              aye, this is a no contest. if it were even close, leinart would have been a much lower draft pick or dorsey much higher.

              i think if leinart gets a full year in, people will see a guy who could become a great pro QB. if the cards o-line continues to improve, as i believe it will under whisenhunt and grimm, i would say the cards have a very talented offense, just like what leinart ran at USC.

              bolding and fitz - check
              improved oline - check (or at least getting there)
              edge + maybe a stewart/mendenhall - could be...

              if he fails with all of that around him, then yeah, ill say hes a bust.
              People always said that, of the top 10 teams, the Cards might have been the best place for him to go because of this reason.

              I see no reason why he can't do well in Arizona.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by JT Jag View Post
                People always said that, of the top 10 teams, the Cards might have been the best place for him to go because of this reason.

                I see no reason why he can't do well in Arizona.
                because arizona is where football careers go to die. joe montana couldn't put together a winning season there.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Dorsey had a weak arm (yes weaker than Leinart), was very skinny and less athletic than Leinart, and was also less accurate (In his three years starting he never completed more than 58.5% of his passes in any given year) and wasn't asked to make harder throws than the ones Leinart was making.

                  Dorsey had Reggie Wayne and Santana Moss at WR in 2000 and Andre Johnson for 2001 and 2002. Dorsey also had Jeremy Shockey at TE in 2000 and 2001 and then Kellen Winslow JR in 2002. He had Clinton Portis at RB for 2001 and then Willis Mcgahee in 2002.

                  Leinart had Keary Colbert and Mike Williams in 2003 when he was a sophomore. And had Dwayne Jarrett and Steve Smith in 2004 and 2005. He had Dominique Byrd at TE and Reggie Bush and Lendale White at RB. Now these USC players were good to great college players but I think it's safe to say that the receivers surrounding Dorsey were more talented.
                  10 Favourite prospects for 2010: Colt McCoy, Dez Bryant, Golden Tate, Noel Devine, Ndamukong Suh, Greg Hardy, Eric Norwood, Travis Lewis, Eric Berry, Trevard Lindley

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Solomon View Post
                    Dorsey had a weak arm (yes weaker than Leinart), was very skinny and less athletic than Leinart, and was also less accurate (In his three years starting he never completed more than 58.5% of his passes in any given year) and wasn't asked to make harder throws than the ones Leinart was making.

                    Dorsey had Reggie Wayne and Santana Moss at WR in 2000 and Andre Johnson for 2001 and 2002. Dorsey also had Jeremy Shockey at TE in 2000 and 2001 and then Kellen Winslow JR in 2002. He had Clinton Portis at RB for 2001 and then Willis Mcgahee in 2002.

                    Leinart had Keary Colbert and Mike Williams in 2003 when he was a sophomore. And had Dwayne Jarrett and Steve Smith in 2004 and 2005. He had Dominique Byrd at TE and Reggie Bush and Lendale White at RB. Now these USC players were good to great college players but I think it's safe to say that the receivers surrounding Dorsey were more talented.
                    very nice, i agree completely. Although USC players were great in college no doubt, you cant take that away from them. Maybe it was more system for USC then talent? that could be a possibility.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X

                    Debug Information