I saw this theme run through another thread and it got me to thinking. The athelete vs. the pocket passer. Instead of keeping the topic in such a generic format I decided to give names and faces to the characters in question. Who would you rather have taking snaps for you, Drew Henson or Terrelle Pryor?
Sorta OT: Henson vs. Pryor
....Henson has been injured the past couple of years and really hasn't recovered from his failed baseball experience.
Oh, do you mean turn of the millenium era Henson?
I'd still take Pryor - his passing will improve. If Pryor can pass like Vince Young when VY was a junior, Pryor will win the Heisman.
Drew Henson was amazing and I do miss the days that he played, but I would take Pryor. I know that there are a lot of critics out there saying that he can't pass and whatnot, but from watching him play he has amazing athletic ability with a ton of upside. When thinking of the all time great college football players in recent memory, I think of Vince Young and his ability to just take over games. Love him or hate him he was a special talent and Pryor has that potential. Whether he lives up to it is another story, but with our offense and his ability to run the ball from the qb position I would take him.
I see Pryor and just seems like limitless potential because of Vince Young. Now granted, I remember the one year where Henson played most of the season for us and that offense was like a freaking machine. If we had had half the defense we had in 97 we may have been talking another ship. But, Henson was surrounded by great players. Thomas, Terrell, Marques (old man) Walker. I can't remember who played on that Texas team with Vince Young that beat USC.
and double posts suck.
Or, should I say An error occured at /views/ajax.
Wow, I actually think Pryor is good, and will be better - but right now I'd say Henson. People don't remember how retardedly good he was in 2000, but that was the best single season turned in by a Michigan QB (in terms of throwing the ball) EVER. His yards-per-attempt for that season is more than 1 full yard higher than anyone else who through a similar number of passes.
So, we KNOW Henson was historically awesome. We THINK Pryor may someday be awesome. I'll take the certainty.
Agreed. Henson was so good a NFL team took a flier on him in the draft. That is nearly unheard of.
Pryor hasn't even been "great" in college yet. that is not to say he won't be, but Henson surely has proven he was.
I totally agree. I remember watching Henson those first two years and even though I thought Brady was better for the team (and this is not revisionist history - my roommates can attest to my man-crush on Brady while in school), you could not deny that Henson was unstoppable. Sure, he had some decent WRs to throw to, but he was so accurate AND athletic that it almost didn't seem fair at times seeing him line up behind center. Once he took over in 2000, it made you realize just how good this team could have been if he had stuck around for his senior year.
This thread is obviously started by someone who is too young to fully comprehend the comparison. Henson was every bit the highly touted recruit Pryor was, and he was very athletic (maybe not as fast as Pryor, but was a threat to tuck the ball and make something happen with his feet). His arm was the strongest I have ever seen at Michigan, Mallett and Henne included. Is accuracy was the best of anyone who played here. He was widely regarded as being the front runner for the Heisman and likely #1 overall pick should he have come back for his senior year.
Pryor may turn out to be great, and I clearly wish he was playing for M, but this isn't even close.
I would have taken Henson over Vince Young. And this thread is making the assumption that Pryor is already Vince Young.
I think him not being redshirted the Brady years set the program back a bit. But that is my opinion. As one of the previous posters said I too had a man crush on Brady during college. And I also saw how obscene Henson was the full year that he took the helm. I think that Chi makes the best point. Henson was obscene when he was in control of our offense. He made such a good point that I cant rebutt it. I just wanted to add an amen. lol... Mgoblog has just officially went to church.
Actually, Henson wasn't particularly accurate until his junior year, when he made a quantum leap forward in that department. He was very wild in his first two years. Also, despite having pretty good feet, Henson almost never tried to scramble, and we almost never called a designed run for him (I remember the bootleg against OSU and a QB draw against Auburn; that's it).
Henson's junior year was phenomenal. I don't know if Pryor can reach that level. But Henson was nowhere near that level himself in his first two years. I would say that Pryor's freshman year was better than Henson's freshman AND sophomore seasons. They were/are both great players, and you couldn't really go wrong with either. For the offense we now run, I'd take Pryor. For the Carr offense, I'd take Henson.
Easy choice. Jim Henson in a heartbeat. Just picture all kinds of muppets running around the big house, plus they have to play night games to hide the puppeteers.
Richard Pryor wasn't the same after the freebasing mishap.
some people act like a QB who can run is far more important than one who can pass. If you gave me any offensive type to be able to plug in at Mchigan, I would qould go with the Capital One Bowl offense. Strong O-line, which makes us near invincible with the ball, fast recievers, shifty/quick running back, and a QB who could make every single throw required of him.
Another example would be Oklahoma's offense. "But wait!" you cry. Didn't Florida own them? Wouldn't have been the case had they taken the two field goals on the goalline instead of going for it and not getting it, twice.
I concur and agree with all the points everyone is making and I still see Vince Young looking like Bo Jackson in Tecmo Bowl... He just seems to singlehandedly do it. I think that is what has everyone so enamored with him or (Pryor) who people are annoiting the next V Young.
After their freshman seasons I'd take Pryor. Henson (IIRC) was only ~50% passer as a freshman. If I could have the 2000 Henson, I'd take Drew hands down.
Henson threw about 50 passes his freshman year (mostly in garbage time), so I'm not sure that's how we should be judging him.
I was thinking more of his 1999 season, where he seemed to ocme in and bog down the offense every 2nd quarter. So I guess I'd take Pryor 2008 over Henson 1998 or 1999.
Remember that Drew also played professional baseball while at Michigan and it was his dream to play for the Yankees. Just imagine how good he could have been if he just played football and concentrated on developing as a quarterback.
that can pass, pryor cannot. his passing will get better, at ohio state? really? boeckman was there for 6 years and still throws horribly. rob schoenhoft transferred to my school from there, the coaches here had to IMMEDIATELY change the way he holds the ball, his footwork, AND his mechanics. mind you this is 1-AA Delaware and we're changing a former 4 star QBs mechanics because they had gotten so bad when he was at ohio state. if he gets better as a passer it's because he went outside the program for help.
oh i'd take henson.
Pryor is so bad at passing that he only completed 65% of his passes as a true freshman.
I can't wait until the first person replies to remind me that he only completed xx% in his game against us, because that totally negates the other how-many-ever games he played in this year.
Pryor was the #1 rated passer in the Big 10.
I somehow doubt that Ohio State coaches - who by all indications are pretty good at their jobs, are incapable of teaching a player how to hold the football.
I agree with the above posters that Pryor's 2008 was better than Henson's sophomore year by a pretty decent stretch. My only point is that Henson had his sterling-silver amazing awesome 2000 - Pryor hasn't had that. So, for now, I'd choose the guy I know was absurdly good over the guy I think may end up being absurdly good.