Gradkowski V Leinart

[mjs020294]

He will never win even a division championship...until he demands a trade.

Don't count the Cards out.  They have a decent squad there now and with a little fine tuning they could turn it around.  Leinart and Edge plus their WR core give them a very good foundation for the future.

[mjs020294]

Have you got a little man-crush on Hollywood?

No, I've just watched him play for a long time, he went to high school about 5 miles from me. Remember when I was pulling for Grootegoed? Same reasons..

BTW, reversing the field on me is kinda lame..

hehehehehe 

What happened to Grootegoed?

[dukebuc]

For a little perspective…Leinart was making short throws to wide open receivers against a very soft Bear defense in the first quarter. He completed his first eight passes, 9 of first 11, including both TD’s. His first incompletion was on the interception that was overturned. The rest of the game he was 16/36…14/20 in the first half and 10/24 in the second half. Leinart's performance may have been good for a rookie, but was average overall.

For a little perspective...I might suggest that you would be the wrong guy to go to.  "His first incompletion was on the interception that was overturned"....uuum, that would make it an incomplete pass and not an interception, wouldn't it?

And considering that his performance was against the scary-good bears defense AND the fact that he was making his second start made the performance all the more remarkable.  Look, I'm a longhorn, so I'm a simms and young homer....I got nothing in rooting for Leinart.  But to suggest that his performance was anything less than remarkable is just flat out missing the obvious.  For whatever reason.

[RedAlert]

hehehehehe

What happened to Grootegoed?

Didn't make it, too small. What does that matter?

[flyinbuc]

The schedule this weekend really favors ML. He is going up against the pathetic raiders while grads is going against the Eagles. If Grad survives sunday we may really have something.

[Boid Fink]

Good leaders are made not born. If you have the desire and willpower, you can become an effective leader. Good leaders develop through a never ending process of self-study, education, training, and experience. This guide will help you through that process.
To inspire your workers into higher levels of teamwork, there are certain things you must be, know, and, do. These do not come naturally, but are acquired through continual work and study. Good leaders are continually working and studying to improve their leadership skills; they are NOT resting on their laurels.

Before we get started, lets define leadership. Leadership is a process by which a person influences others to accomplish an objective and directs the organization in a way that makes it more cohesive and coherent. Leaders carry out this process by applying their leadership attributes, such as beliefs, values, ethics, character, knowledge, and skills. Although your position as a manager, supervisor, lead, etc. gives you the authority to accomplish certain tasks and objectives in the organization, this power does not make you a leader...it simply makes you the boss. Leadership differs in that it makes the followers want to achieve high goals, rather than simply bossing people around.



Bass' (1989 & 1990) theory of leadership states that there are three basic ways to explain how people become leaders. The first two explain the leadership development for a small number of people. These theories are:

Some personality traits may lead people naturally into leadership roles. This is the Trait Theory.
A crisis or important event may cause a person to rise to the occasion, which brings out extraordinary leadership qualities in an ordinary person. This is the Great Events Theory.
People can choose to become leaders. People can learn leadership skills. This is the Transformational Leadership Theory. It is the most widely accepted theory today and the premise on which this guide is based.
When a person is deciding if she respects you as a leader, she does not think about your attributes, rather, she observes what you do so that she can know who you really are. She uses this observation to tell if you are a honorable and trusted leader or a self serving person who misuses authority to look good and get promoted. Self-serving leaders are not as effective because their employees only obey them, not follow them. They succeed in many areas because they present a good image to their seniors at the expense of their workers.
The basis of good leadership is honorable character and selfless service to your organization. In your employees' eyes, your leadership is everything you do that effects the organization's objectives and their well being. Respected leaders concentrate on what they are [be] (such as beliefs and character), what they know (such as job, tasks, and human nature), and what they do (such as implementing, motivating, and provide direction).

What makes a person want to follow a leader? People want to be guided by those they respect and who have a clear sense of direction. To gain respect, they must be ethical. A sense of direction is achieved by conveying a strong vision of the future. [/i]

FWIW, I decided to post the definition, because all this talk of being a leader, what is a leader, how it is taught, or wether it is given, is making me dizzy...and it appears by this particular definition of the word, that leaders actually learn to lead, and are not naturally born.  Lets face it, Gradkowski isn't exacty a George S. Patton here...

[rayfsc07]

How can you compare a top 10 pick to a 6th rounder?

Who is better:  Leaf or Grads?

Akili Smith or Grads?

[Boid Fink]

George Smith Patton, Jr. (November 11, 1885 – December 21, 1945) was a leading U.S. Army general in World War II. In his 36-year Army career, he was an advocate of armored warfare and commanded major units of North Africa, Sicily, and the European Theater of Operations. Many have viewed Patton as a pure and ferocious warrior, known by the nickname "Old Blood and Guts", a name given to him after a reporter misquoted his statement that it takes blood and brains to win a war. But history has left the image of a brilliant military leader whose record was also marred by insubordination and some periods of apparent instability.

Now there.  He would have made a great QB, huh?

LOL!

[Big_MAC_Buc]

For a little perspective...I might suggest that you would be the wrong guy to go to.  "His first incompletion was on the interception that was overturned"....uuum, that would make it an incomplete pass and not an interception, wouldn't it?

And considering that his performance was against the scary-good bears defense AND the fact that he was making his second start made the performance all the more remarkable.  Look, I'm a longhorn, so I'm a simms and young homer....I got nothing in rooting for Leinart.  But to suggest that his performance was anything less than remarkable is just flat out missing the obvious.  For whatever reason.

I believe I said "His first incompletion" which means "incomplete pass"...not interception as you say. And the "the scary-good bears defense" was scary soft in that first quarter playing off the receivers leaving them wide open. My grandmother could have made those throws. I have nothing against Matt Leinart. I would like to see him succeed because I thought he was clearly the best QB in the Draft and should have been drafted as the first QB if not the first pick overall. I am merely pointing out the obvious...that he was less than remarkable, especially after the first quarter. I think people are too quick to jump on any bandwagon whether it be for Leinart or Gradkowski. I really want Gradkowski to succeed because  he quarterbacks my team. There is room for more than one good rookie QB so more power to both of them. But we can prove nothing here. We'll have to wait and see what happens as the season progresses.
Also, since you admit you are a Simms homer I suspect you are secretly hoping Gradkowski fails. For whatever reason.

[mjs020294]

and it appears by this particular definition of the word, that leaders actually learn to lead, and are not naturally born.  Lets face it, Gradkowski isn't exacty a George S. Patton here...

People can learn to lead but it doesn't make them great leaders.  Some people make great leaders and it isn't something that was taught, it is just their personality and charisma.  

[Boid Fink]

People can learn to lead but it doesn't make them great leaders.  Some people make great leaders and it isn't something that was taught, it is just their personality and charisma. 

...I guess.

[RedAlert]

That was a good read, Boid. It's fair enough to give credence to all avenues of leadership birth.

Although the writer leans towards the Transformational Leadership theory with good sensibility, it doesn't appear that he/she was addressing the subject of an NFL quarterback. It reads more like text from business management curriculum..

But, with respect for your effort, and that dizzyness, I will submit that nobody is actually born with leadership attributes, such as "beliefs, values, ethics, character, knowledge, and skills." 

That covers pretty much everything, but I've coached enough young kids to know that the ones who have been blessed with parents who were wise enough to have instilled those specific attributes at a young age, along with adequate, but not always the greatest, athletic ability are what I have seen develop into the most exceptional leaders on the field.

So, for football purposes, I guess not really a "born" of the womb leader, but a borne leader, of circumstance. I don't really know how you can teach that, but it sure is a breeze to coach...


As far as Grads goes, the kid's showing alot of skills, knowledge and character...

Good start

[Beastie]

Seroiusly who really cares who is better the point is that both teams are happy and both quarterbacks have put their teams in position to win the last 2 weeks and thats all you can ask out of them.

Who has the better tools? Leinart BY FAR and for that reason he wouldve been the 1st overall pick in 05 and was 10 in 06. whoever doenst think so is just being a crazy homer.  But no one at least at this moment can be anything more than ecstatic over what Gradkowski is doing.

And you cant judge anyone on 2 games. You can only hope that they continue this success day in and day out.

[watson]

Brady came out of Michigan. Gradkowski came out of Toledo. Whereas your point about 1st round/6th round is true, the level of play between a Toledo and a Michigan is very different. You play your schedule, but Leinart (and Brady) played against Notre Dame, Washington, etc. Gradkowski played against Bowling Green; Eastern Michigan. You might be able to put up an argument that there is a difference between Leinart and Gradkowski that wasn't present for McNabb and Brady (although Syracuse has its fair share of Rutgers and Wyoming  ).

Not sure the comparison about where they played is a major factor.  There are 5 starting QBs in the NFL from the PAC 10, 3 starting QBs from the Big 12 and 5 starting QBs in the NFL from the MAC.  If the level of play is so different you would think that there would be a larger percentage of QBs from the PAC 10 and the Big 12.

[coopsxx]

Who has the better tools? Leinart BY FAR and for that reason he wouldve been the 1st overall pick in 05 and was 10 in 06. whoever doenst think so is just being a crazy homer.  But no one at least at this moment can be anything more than ecstatic over what Gradkowski is doing.

The point im making in the post is that he doesn't necessarily have better tool!!!

he cant scramble which is crucial.
His long ball is probably better but it aint an Elway, and his accuracy might be better but not by much too.

he is very similar to grad in talent, the gap is seemingly huge because of the pub and success he had at USC and draft position.

oh and the 50$ mill diff in contract.