A Fair Observation from Outside the Fish Bowl: J. La Canfora - NFL.com

[RugbyMuffin]

Arizona Cardinals
For the most part, you can't blame the front office or coaches for this one. The moment Kurt Warner ended his Hall of Fame career and retired, well, this team got a whole lot worse. That's just reality. Couple that with the departures of Antrel Rolle and Karlos Dansby in free agency (and Boldin via trade), and it's hard to say the Cardinals are still the favorites to win the NFC West.

You can't go from Warner to Matt Leinart/Derek Anderson and call that anything other than a massive dropoff. Warner made that thing go. Finding a way to extend Darnell Dockett, maximize the talents of Kerry Rhodes, bolster the running game and find some gems in the draft is a must ... but even then, losing a quarterback and leader such as Warner leaves a gaping void.

http://www.nfl.com/freeagency/story...emplate=with-video-with-comments&confirm=true

I think from an outside looking in perspective this is a very fair and balance view of what has been going on with the Cardinals so far.

Here in Cardinal land, we have a good & healthy split of Kool-Aid'ers and Darksiders.

Where some of us believe that while Warner was a big part of the success of the Cardinals, he was still only a part of the big picture, and that big picture is healthy and ready to defend the NFC West Division. That Matt Leinart is ready to take this team over, and a more balanced offense will give us success. That the loses of Dansby, and Rolle were tough, but understandble. That Boldin leaving may be addition by subtraction.

and

Where some believe that the Cardinal success was all because of Warner. That our offense is nothing without him, that Leinart will be a bust, and Anderson will be no better. That the loss of Boldin will be a huge loss. That the new found running game will be lost again. That losing Dansby, and Rolle will take a much maligned defense and make it worse.


I say some where in the middle is the truth. But, both sides have very valid points. The Cardinals organization are facing these questions, and we all will only know the answers once the season starts.

Just thought La Canfora's blurb was a pretty good summation of our offseason so far, if you were looking from the outside in. Keep in mind he obviously thinks that Warner was the cause of the success and not just part of it.

 

[dreamcastrocks]

Arizona Cardinals
For the most part, you can't blame the front office or coaches for this one. The moment Kurt Warner ended his Hall of Fame career and retired, well, this team got a whole lot worse. That's just reality. Couple that with the departures of Antrel Rolle and Karlos Dansby in free agency (and Boldin via trade), and it's hard to say the Cardinals are still the favorites to win the NFC West.

You can't go from Warner to Matt Leinart/Derek Anderson and call that anything other than a massive dropoff. Warner made that thing go. Finding a way to extend Darnell Dockett, maximize the talents of Kerry Rhodes, bolster the running game and find some gems in the draft is a must ... but even then, losing a quarterback and leader such as Warner leaves a gaping void.

http://www.nfl.com/freeagency/story...emplate=with-video-with-comments&confirm=true

I think from an outside looking in perspective this is a very fair and balance view of what has been going on with the Cardinals so far.

Here in Cardinal land, we have a good & healthy split of Kool-Aid'ers and Darksiders.

Where some of us believe that while Warner was a big part of the success of the Cardinals, he was still only a part of the big picture, and that big picture is healthy and ready to defend the NFC West Division. That Matt Leinart is ready to take this team over, and a more balanced offense will give us success. That the loses of Dansby, and Rolle were tough, but understandble. That Boldin leaving may be addition by subtraction.

and

Where some believe that the Cardinal success was all because of Warner. That our offense is nothing without him, that Leinart will be a bust, and Anderson will be no better. That the loss of Boldin will be a huge loss. That the new found running game will be lost again. That losing Dansby, and Rolle will take a much maligned defense and make it worse.


I say some where in the middle is the truth. But, both sides have very valid points. The Cardinals organization are facing these questions, and we all will only know the answers once the season starts.

Just thought La Canfora's blurb was a pretty good summation of our offseason so far, if you were looking from the outside in. Keep in mind he obviously thinks that Warner was the cause of the success and not just part of it.

Did he follow the team when Warner sucked before Whisenhunt got here?

 

[82CardsGrad]

Did he follow the team when Warner sucked before Whisenhunt got here?

This has been debated and debated and debated... there are, as is always the case, several reasons why the Cards have improved and starting winning. But IMHO, as I have stated time and again, the biggest - by far - contributing factor was the play of one person - Kurt Warner... You can deny that reality all you want. But clearly, 2010 will be the true test of this...

 

[RugbyMuffin]

Did he follow the team when Warner sucked before Whisenhunt got here?

No, thus why he is a good respresentation of someone on the outside looking in at the present situation.

 

[Evil Ash]

This has been debated and debated and debated... there are, as is always the case, several reasons why the Cards have improved and starting winning. But IMHO, as I have stated time and again, the biggest - by far - contributing factor was the play of one person - Kurt Warner... You can deny that reality all you want. But clearly, 2010 will be the true test of this...

We're not arguing it was because he played well. Kurt did play well the last few seasons here but he didn't play well before Whisenhunt got here.

The point was that our coaching staff is good enough to build around a player's strengths to give him the best chance to succeed. Leinart isn't Warner. No one is. Expecting the same output and running the same offense without him would likely make just about any QB look bad.

They changed the offense to fit Kurt's strengths and now it is up to them to do the same with Leinart. It is also up to Leinart to perform to the best of his abilities. It takes more than one thing to make an offense run well.

and to answer DCR's question - no because national reporters have short memories and attention spans

 

[dreamcastrocks]

This has been debated and debated and debated... there are, as is always the case, several reasons why the Cards have improved and starting winning. But IMHO, as I have stated time and again, the biggest - by far - contributing factor was the play of one person - Kurt Warner... You can deny that reality all you want. But clearly, 2010 will be the true test of this...

Deny that? Warner had virtually the same players 3 years ago and sucked.

The biggest by far contributing factor was the hiring of a new coach.

No, thus why he is a good respresentation of someone on the outside looking in at the present situation.

......And someone only looking at a single picture instead of the whole roll of film.

 

[Mulli]

Deny that? Warner had virtually the same players 3 years ago and sucked.

The biggest by far contributing factor was the hiring of a new coach.



......And someone only looking at a single picture instead of the whole roll of film.

Yep, Warner's winning percentage was scary bad, almost sinful (pun) before Whiz.

 

[dreamcastrocks]

Yep, Warner's winning percentage was scary bad, almost sinful (pun) before Whiz.

Leinart had a better win percentage than Warner before Whisenhunt.

... more food for thought.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

The guy "looking in" on the situation picked the Seahawks as the winner in the NFC West last season. Then he was on the 49 bandwagon. He has a thing about the Cards... and it's not a good thing.

 

[Renz]

For the most part, you can't blame the front office or coaches for this one. The moment Kurt Warner ended his Hall of Fame career and retired, well, this team got a whole lot worse. That's just reality.

By what criteria will we be judged "a whole lot worse"? Personally, I only care about wins and losses. It isn't like Kurt led us to 13-3 and 14-2 seasons.

I still think we're good enough without Warner to go 9-7/10-6.

 

[82CardsGrad]

Deny that? Warner had virtually the same players 3 years ago and sucked.

The biggest by far contributing factor was the hiring of a new coach.

As I said, there are always several reasons as to why teams are able to turn themselves around as dramatically as the Cards have done. Whiz is a big reason of course. But IMHO, none of it would have happened had Kurt not been at the helm.
And as for you ridiculous comment about him "sucking" prior to Whiz's arrival:

2005 Kurt starts 10 games. Fitz catches 103 balls and Q catches 102. No Breaston. A HORRIFIC O-line. NO Running game. And of course, a pathetic defense...Yet, Kurt completes 64.5% of his passes that year and throws for 2,713 yards. Sucks?? You can't be serious...

In 2006, the Cards take a shot on the "most NFL ready QB to ever come out of the draft", thus, Kurt only starts 5 games that season. As a result, Fitz catches 69 passes. Q catches 83... Kurt puts up another incredible completion % figure of 64.3% and a rating of 89.3. Sucks?? Seems pretty clear that because he only started 5 games, the offense fell apart.

And of course, in 2007 Whiz steps in and indeed makes an immediate impact. However, the Cards also are boosted by some terrific drafting and the addition of Edge who put up over 1,200 yards with a 3.8 YPC...

Anyway, to say Kurt "sucked" pre-Whiz is simply being incredibly ignorant...
The addition of Whiz, along with a dramatic improvement in talent across the field is what helped Kurt maximize the chances that became within reach for the Cards.

 

[john h]

Arizona Cardinals
For the most part, you can't blame the front office or coaches for this one. The moment Kurt Warner ended his Hall of Fame career and retired, well, this team got a whole lot worse. That's just reality. Couple that with the departures of Antrel Rolle and Karlos Dansby in free agency (and Boldin via trade), and it's hard to say the Cardinals are still the favorites to win the NFC West.

You can't go from Warner to Matt Leinart/Derek Anderson and call that anything other than a massive dropoff. Warner made that thing go. Finding a way to extend Darnell Dockett, maximize the talents of Kerry Rhodes, bolster the running game and find some gems in the draft is a must ... but even then, losing a quarterback and leader such as Warner leaves a gaping void.

http://www.nfl.com/freeagency/story...emplate=with-video-with-comments&confirm=true

I think from an outside looking in perspective this is a very fair and balance view of what has been going on with the Cardinals so far.

Here in Cardinal land, we have a good & healthy split of Kool-Aid'ers and Darksiders.

Where some of us believe that while Warner was a big part of the success of the Cardinals, he was still only a part of the big picture, and that big picture is healthy and ready to defend the NFC West Division. That Matt Leinart is ready to take this team over, and a more balanced offense will give us success. That the loses of Dansby, and Rolle were tough, but understandble. That Boldin leaving may be addition by subtraction.

and

Where some believe that the Cardinal success was all because of Warner. That our offense is nothing without him, that Leinart will be a bust, and Anderson will be no better. That the loss of Boldin will be a huge loss. That the new found running game will be lost again. That losing Dansby, and Rolle will take a much maligned defense and make it worse.


I say some where in the middle is the truth. But, both sides have very valid points. The Cardinals organization are facing these questions, and we all will only know the answers once the season starts.

Just thought La Canfora's blurb was a pretty good summation of our offseason so far, if you were looking from the outside in. Keep in mind he obviously thinks that Warner was the cause of the success and not just part of it.

Without question we are very likely to see a big drop of at the QB position. Warner was playing at an all pro level the past few years. It is not likely that Leinart/Anderson will be anywhere close to Kurt Warner in leadership, experience, and production. The QB is the guy that makes any team go. Without a good one you just are not going to advance to a superbowl or even win your division. I am not sure everyone understands just what we lost when we lost Kurt Warner. I think we had the best QB we have ever had for a 3 year period. Where do you go from there? If the Colts did not have Manning they would be just another NFL team. Same with New Orleans. Winning starts at the QB position. We will go as far as our QB can take us. This is a scary thought.

 

[dreamcastrocks]

As I said, there are always several reasons as to why teams are able to turn themselves around as dramatically as the Cards have done. Whiz is a big reason of course. But IMHO, none of it would have happened had Kurt not been at the helm.
And as for you ridiculous comment about him "sucking" prior to Whiz's arrival:

2005 Kurt starts 10 games. Fitz catches 103 balls and Q catches 102. No Breaston. A HORRIFIC O-line. NO Running game. And of course, a pathetic defense...Yet, Kurt completes 64.5% of his passes that year and throws for 2,713 yards. Sucks?? You can't be serious...

In 2006, the Cards take a shot on the "most NFL ready QB to ever come out of the draft", thus, Kurt only starts 5 games that season. As a result, Fitz catches 69 passes. Q catches 83... Kurt puts up another incredible completion % figure of 64.3% and a rating of 89.3. Sucks?? Seems pretty clear that because he only started 5 games, the offense fell apart.

And of course, in 2007 Whiz steps in and indeed makes an immediate impact. However, the Cards also are boosted by some terrific drafting and the addition of Edge who put up over 1,200 yards with a 3.8 YPC...

Anyway, to say Kurt "sucked" pre-Whiz is simply being incredibly ignorant...
The addition of Whiz, along with a dramatic improvement in talent across the field is what helped Kurt maximize the chances that became within reach for the Cards.

Kurt lost us more games in that year that he won as I recall. The turnovers, especially fumbles were deadly.

As usual, we'll just have to agree to disagree.

 

[Shane]

Kurt lost us more games in that year that he won as I recall. The turnovers, especially fumbles were deadly.

As usual, we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Warner from a pure QB standpoint did not suck prior to Whiz. But you are right his major downfall was the fumbling. I think one year it seemed like he fumbled twice a game and down in the redzone too. It was pretty damn bad and the hate around here was flowing freely.

 

[82CardsGrad]

Kurt lost us more games in that year that he won as I recall. The turnovers, especially fumbles were deadly.

As usual, we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Meh... you're wrong dude... I'll agree to that!

 

[dreamcastrocks]

Warner from a pure QB standpoint did not suck prior to Whiz. But you are right his major downfall was the fumbling. I think one year it seemed like he fumbled twice a game and down in the redzone too. It was pretty damn bad and the hate around here was flowing freely.

What happened last weekend? We waited up for you until like 2:30am.

Meh... you're wrong dude... I'll agree to that!

Nuh uh, you are.

 

[Shane]

What happened last weekend? We waited up for you until like 2:30am.



Nuh uh, you are.

Told Linda I would call if I was able to make it. Saturday the wife didnt get home till around 1am and I was just plain tired. Sunday had to work and was just beat by the end of the shift. Long story related to that one. Might post it in EE. When I have the energy to type that much.

 

[john h]

We're not arguing it was because he played well. Kurt did play well the last few seasons here but he didn't play well before Whisenhunt got here.

The point was that our coaching staff is good enough to build around a player's strengths to give him the best chance to succeed. Leinart isn't Warner. No one is. Expecting the same output and running the same offense without him would likely make just about any QB look bad.

They changed the offense to fit Kurt's strengths and now it is up to them to do the same with Leinart. It is also up to Leinart to perform to the best of his abilities. It takes more than one thing to make an offense run well.

and to answer DCR's question - no because national reporters have short memories and attention spans

Kurts strengths are he is a Hall of Fame QB. Been to several Superbowls. Taken the Cardinals to the Superbowl, won several division titles with the Cards. and was the best QB in Cards history. Kurt was throwing he ball and probably calling as many plays as the coaches. Whiz did not create Kurt. He was great before he got here. Kurt may have just helped create Whiz. Next season we will likely see just how much Warner meant to this team.

 

[82CardsGrad]

Kurts strengths are he is a Hall of Fame QB. Been to several Superbowls. Taken the Cardinals to the Superbowl, won several division titles with the Cards. and was the best QB in Cards history. Kurt was throwing he ball and probably calling as many plays as the coaches. Whiz did not create Kurt. He was great before he got here. Kurt may have just helped create Whiz. Next season we will likely see just how much Warner meant to this team.

Terrific point and one that I've been thinking about bringing up - but knew I would get flamed by all the Whiz-heads out there...

 

[RugbyMuffin]

......And someone only looking at a single picture instead of the whole roll of film.

Uh, yeah. EXACTLY what I have stated twice, and one of the main points made in the entire post.

Not sure what you are trying to state ?

You must be registered for see images

It's not me....it's him right?

 

[Shane]

Terrific point and one that I've been thinking about bringing up - but knew I would get flamed by all the Whiz-heads out there...

Actually that is not a great point. Saying Kurt "was Great before whiz got here" just isn't true. He had periods of greatness but they were 3 to 4 years prior to Warner and Whiz being together back in his Rams heyday. That 3 to 4 years stretch right before Whiz was hired he was an average QB who fumbled WAY to much.

Whiz came along and lo and behold the TO's stopped and Warner was having QB ratings in the mid 90's and throwing 300 yard games like they were going out of style.

It was obviously a mutually beneficial union. I would say that they each helped the other equally.

 

[dreamcastrocks]

Terrific point and one that I've been thinking about bringing up - but knew I would get flamed by all the Whiz-heads out there...

Then who created the sloppy, careless Warner that caused him to fumble and play like the bad Kurt?

I have never seen a player more Jeckyl/Hyde than Warner.

 

[82CardsGrad]

Actually that is not a great point. Saying Kurt "was Great before whiz got here" just isn't true. He had periods of greatness but they were 3 to 4 years prior to Warner and Whiz being together back in his Rams heyday. That 3 to 4 years stretch right before Whiz was hired he was an average QB who fumbled WAY to much.

Whiz came along and lo and behold the TO's stopped and Warner was having QB ratings in the mid 90's and throwing 300 yard games like they were going out of style.

It was obviously a mutually beneficial union. I would say that they each helped the other equally.

The addition of talent had nothing to do with it Shane? Breaston, Edge, Hightower, Patrick, Deuce, Levi, Sendlein, Wells, Gandy, Berry, Dansby, Wilson, Rolle, DRC, Dockett, Campbell... along with a dramatically improved coaching staff.

Sorry, Kurt was always a great QB. Whiz, as the head coach, was able to do things that maximized Kurt's abilities. And in doing so, some would say that Whiz got away from being the type of coach he was and wanted to be here. He changed to maximize what he had in Kurt.

 

[82CardsGrad]

Then who created the sloppy, careless Warner that caused him to fumble and play like the bad Kurt?

I have never seen a player more Jeckyl/Hyde than Warner.

Man.... you are so biased...

When you are the ONLY legitimate threat to make anything happen for a team, the spotlight is always brighest on you. Pre-Whiz and pre-talent, Kurt was all we had. He was our only shot at simply being competitive... So yea - when it's all on you and you drop a ball now and then, it's gonna hurt because there is nobody else to pick up the slack... ZERO margin for error.

 

[Shane]

The addition of talent had nothing to do with it Shane? Breaston, Edge, Hightower, Patrick, Deuce, Levi, Sendlein, Wells, Gandy, Berry, Dansby, Wilson, Rolle, DRC, Dockett, Campbell... along with a dramatically improved coaching staff.

Sorry, Kurt was always a great QB. Whiz, as the head coach, was able to do things that maximized Kurt's abilities. And in doing so, some would say that Whiz got away from being the type of coach he was and wanted to be here. He changed to maximize what he had in Kurt.

Most of that talent you metioned above was on the team prior to Whiz.