Aaron Murray to Cards PS; Barkley to Bears PS

[CardsSunsDbacks]

This board was once the 'the place' to find AZ Cards info...it's become a low level intelligence...and worse yet the LAST place to find what's going on with the team. ESPN post faster than the forum here does now.
Disappointed in what this place has become

TBF ESPN was slow to post about this team when it wasn't any good. Now the Cardinals are one of the "stories" of the league and when things happen with them it is reported almost immediately.

 

[WisconsinCard]

This s board has gotten as ignorant as I've ever seen.
People here talk like 4th grade
Their knowledge of football is far far less than my 5th grade son who has season tickets

Then go away, we wont miss you you add nothing positive to this board anyway. Oh except that only season tickets holders have the right to say anything.

 

[cardpa]

This s board has gotten as ignorant as I've ever seen.
People here talk like 4th grade
Their knowledge of football is far far less than my 5th grade son who has season tickets

Then why don't you and your youngin get to postin here and give us back woods hillbilly hicks some of dat great knowledge you and your kin have so we cans get educated? We ain't dat bad cuz we got us a fifth grade education and we can all cipher. We all be lookin for dem posts of your so we can talk mighty educated like you and your city slicker ways. Excuse me now while I go wrasle me an alligator then I'm a goin to jump in the cement pond for a spell.

 

[Mitch]

Very curious to know what turned the coaches off about Matt Barkley. Was it his attitude? His work ethic? You know BA loves "gym rats." Did he do a lousy job of running the scout team last year in practice? Was it his practice habits in general?

From the outside looking in---it seems to me that any #3 QB the Cardinals bring in on the last day of cuts (as they did with Barkley last year via the trade, and now with adding Murray and Dysert via the PS) has an extremely difficult task. First of all, they have to learn BA's complex offense---which took even Carson Palmer a whole pre-season and 8 games to start feeling somewhat comfortable---but they don't even get many reps in the offense because they are running the scout team and other teams' offenses.

So then, the first chance they get to have meaningful reps is during OTAs and mini-camp where the team is divided into two and they are with all the rookies.

Thus, I think that for Barkley to perform as well as he did (630 yards, 4 TDs, 3 ints) with what little opportunities he had in such a short time is commendable. Yet, the coaches never seemed satisfied---you would think that they would talk Barkley up just to promote his trade value---instead BA lumped Barkley in to his "poor QB performances" explanations after the pre-season games, when Barkley was the only one moving the offense and earning a QB rating of over 80. Barkley's QB ratings in weeks 2-4 went up each game from 81.2 to 92.6 to 120.2. That's pretty dang good.

This repeated scorn for the young QBs BA has has since he arrived (particularly for the one QB he personally went and scouted and then drafted---Logan Thomas---and now for the one Steve Keim went and traded for) is discouraging.

What's just as discouraging is this kind of "blind faith brotherhood" BA has in Drew Stanton---whose pre-season performances the past two years have been putrid. And even after those awful performances Stanton is still telling people that he re-signed in AZ because they've had discussion about him being the successor to Carson Palmer. Really?

The truth is---with the money the Cardinals spent on Stanton, which is close to $4M a year, they could have easily re-signbed Dwight Freeney and added another FA CB to the mix. Barkley could have been the #2. Barkley looked so much tougher and more poised than Stanton did---much better footwork and accuracy and zip---that TD pass on the skinny post to Shipley was a thing of beauty.

 

[b8rtm8nn]

I wasn't as high on Barkley as yourself Mitch, although I thought he might have a shot on the PS. But I really think that the Cards aren't looking for a Stanton replacement with the third QB, but a Palmer replacement - so they are going for gold since the third QB is unlikely to ever see any real action. They will continue to churn through young QBs to see if they can find one they like a lot. It's free money at this point.

 

[Mitch]

I wasn't as high on Barkley as yourself Mitch, although I thought he might have a shot on the PS. But I really think that the Cards aren't looking for a Stanton replacement with the third QB, but a Palmer replacement - so they are going for gold since the third QB is unlikely to ever see any real action. They will continue to churn through young QBs to see if they can find one they like a lot. It's free money at this point.

I would think they would want a #3 QB who knows the offense in case of what happened two years ago.

And they should want a #3 QB to challenge Drew Stanton for the #2 because he has been awful for two pre-seasons in a row and he supposedly knows the offense better than anyone having spent the last 5 years with BA.

People say, "it's only pre-season." All players should be evaluated on how they play. All players should be held accountable. There should be no exceptions or excuses for Stanton.

 

[GuernseyCard]

Very curious to know what turned the coaches off about Matt Barkley. Was it his attitude? His work ethic? You know BA loves "gym rats." Did he do a lousy job of running the scout team last year in practice? Was it his practice habits in general?

From the outside looking in---it seems to me that any #3 QB the Cardinals bring in on the last day of cuts (as they did with Barkley last year via the trade, and now with adding Murray and Dysert via the PS) has an extremely difficult task. First of all, they have to learn BA's complex offense---which took even Carson Palmer a whole pre-season and 8 games to start feeling somewhat comfortable---but they don't even get many reps in the offense because they are running the scout team and other teams' offenses.

So then, the first chance they get to have meaningful reps is during OTAs and mini-camp where the team is divided into two and they are with all the rookies.

Thus, I think that for Barkley to perform as well as he did (630 yards, 4 TDs, 3 ints) with what little opportunities he had in such a short time is commendable. Yet, the coaches never seemed satisfied---you would think that they would talk Barkley up just to promote his trade value---instead BA lumped Barkley in to his "poor QB performances" explanations after the pre-season games, when Barkley was the only one moving the offense and earning a QB rating of over 80. Barkley's QB ratings in weeks 2-4 went up each game from 81.2 to 92.6 to 120.2. That's pretty dang good.

This repeated scorn for the young QBs BA has has since he arrived (particularly for the one QB he personally went and scouted and then drafted---Logan Thomas---and now for the one Steve Keim went and traded for) is discouraging.

What's just as discouraging is this kind of "blind faith brotherhood" BA has in Drew Stanton---whose pre-season performances the past two years have been putrid. And even after those awful performances Stanton is still telling people that he re-signed in AZ because they've had discussion about him being the successor to Carson Palmer. Really?

The truth is---with the money the Cardinals spent on Stanton, which is close to $4M a year, they could have easily re-signbed Dwight Freeney and added another FA CB to the mix. Barkley could have been the #2. Barkley looked so much tougher and more poised than Stanton did---much better footwork and accuracy and zip---that TD pass on the skinny post to Shipley was a thing of beauty.

The truth is.... that after close to a year of classroom, on-field training and pre-season games, BASK saw little reason to move forward with Barkley. The choice was not Stanton or Freeney or another CB. If they wanted either, a bit of creative accounting and presto they are here.

 

[Garthshort]

Re. Barkley, both Mitch and b8, imo, make a lot of sense.

 

[MrYeahBut]

Mitch, you might be over thinking this. They gave Barkley a chance to make it, he didn't, they cut him, they moved on.

 

[gmabel830]

This s board has gotten as ignorant as I've ever seen.
People here talk like 4th grade
Their knowledge of football is far far less than my 5th grade son who has season tickets

Bye Felicia!

 

[Mitch]

Mitch, you might be over thinking this. They gave Barkley a chance to make it, he didn't, they cut him, they moved on.

What mystifies me is why they wouldn't even sign him to the PS in case of an injury to Palmer or Stanton. They still could have signed Aaron Murray and kept Barkley and Murray (or Dysert). All those snaps in pre-season and all the progress Barkley made is completely wasted.

Believe me, had Barkley stunk---I would applaud the move. But, his QB ratings improved each week---he earned a 92.6 QBR in week 3 and then a 120.2 in Week 4. He outplayed Paxton Lynch. Going into the game I thought Lynch would be the better QB. Barkley stepped up.

And as for the argument that Barkley was playing against guys who were getting cut in Week 4---let's remember that rosters were already down to 70---look at how many players on our 53 man roster played much of the game. Same with the Broncos.

 

[MrYeahBut]

I see your point Mitch, but ya know, there's a lotta things in this world I just don't get either. This is pretty much like everywhere else though, you have to do your job better than the other guy or you get demoted or replaced... That goes especially for NFL coaches too.

Yeah, the cupboard is bare behind Stanton, but you could argue it's bare behind Palmer too. imo Barkley was never going to be a starter and the way the coaches see it, they don't need a #2 either. We all know the team is sunk if it comes down to Stanton being the guy anyway.

 

[GuernseyCard]

This s board has gotten as ignorant as I've ever seen.
People here talk like 4th grade
Their knowledge of football is far far less than my 5th grade son who has season tickets

The little fella could teach Dad a few things about grammar and syntax, no doubt.

 

[cardncubfan]

Anyone want to trade QB's with the Bears?

Jay Cutler
Brian Hoyer
Matt Barkley(PS)

No

 

[MrYeahBut]

The little fella could teach Dad a few things about grammar and syntax, no doubt.

True, but whether it's done with perfect grammar, syntax and diction or not....

Haters gonna hate

 

[BullheadCardFan]

What mystifies me is why they wouldn't even sign him to the PS in case of an injury to Palmer or Stanton. They still could have signed Aaron Murray and kept Barkley and Murray (or Dysert). All those snaps in pre-season and all the progress Barkley made is completely wasted.

+1

Since he showed some knowledge of the offense and was improving each game we could have put him on the PS and still signed the other QB's. I'm not saying he is the answer for the backup QB, but in case of injury he could at least step in and know the offense.

 

[oaken1]

Very curious to know what turned the coaches off about Matt Barkley. Was it his attitude? His work ethic? You know BA loves "gym rats." Did he do a lousy job of running the scout team last year in practice? Was it his practice habits in general?

.

I think the simplest answer is the truth in this case. BA made a comment about how MB needed "to learn to read a wristband"... that speaks volumes IMO

we all know from previous comments that the third QB barely gets any thought during the season...
they traded for MB, then basically he had a years worth of meetings and personal time to learn the offense and be ready for training camp 2016..
for one reason or another it appears he did not know the offense as well as the coach was expecting when training camp started.
from a fans perspective it looked as if he made great strides as camp and pre season moved forward. However we do not know if he was given a leaner version of the offense to run Vs CP and DS running the entire playbook.

plus, if we have learned anything from BA, it is that once you piss the coach off with an inability to learn his system....you end up on someone elses roster.... this issue is what got LT canned and is also what got JC traded.

 

[Chopper0080]

A couple thoughts...

Even if Barkley signs somewhere else on a practice squad, if the Cards want to sign him to their active roster, they can.

Barkley never showed a ton of growth in his time. The Cards know what he is, and they would rather give another player time to learn the system. I'm ok with that.

One area that it under appreciated is the ability to have a qb on the roster who knows the playbook and can call the plays. even if the execution is lacking, this is what a backup QB has become in this league. The difference in talent between backups is mostly irrelevant.

 

[GuernseyCard]

We don't know whether Barkley, after clearing waivers, was approached by the Cards and decided to take the offer from the Bears to join their PS. Not likely, but still possible.

 

[football karma]

Given the supposed complexity of the system to learn-- not sure why you don't keep Barkley on the PS -- even if you have concluded there isn't much future there.

If Palmer goes down for an extended period of time-- SB chances go with them

But what if Palmer is lost for, let's say three weeks, and Stanton goes down and can't come back. That's the scenario where you need somebody who can run the offense and maybe win a game or two to keep home field adv., etc within reach.

 

[oaken1]

Given the supposed complexity of the system to learn-- not sure why you don't keep Barkley on the PS -- even if you have concluded there isn't much future there.

If Palmer goes down for an extended period of time-- SB chances go with them

But what if Palmer is lost for, let's say three weeks, and Stanton goes down and can't come back. That's the scenario where you need somebody who can run the offense and maybe win a game or two to keep home field adv., etc within reach.

in which case they sign MB off of the bears PS..... and hope he can still remember the system.

 

[BullheadCardFan]

— So many wondered if Matt Barkley would stick, but as I have said many, many, many times, Drew Stanton was the No. 2 and Barkley simply didn’t show enough to pass him up. The Cardinals will have a QB on the practice squad — it could be Barkley — but it was clear listening to Bruce Arians over the time in camp he was disappointed Barkley didn’t come along faster.

Per Urban
Link

 

[don7031]

Barkley, Murray and Dysert (Miami of Ohio) have similar backgrounds - four year starters in college followed by a few years buried on the bench in the pros.

Being a four year starter in college may be more of a bane than a boon when it comes time to transition to the pros. Too many ingrained bad habits.

 

[RON_IN_OC]

What mystifies me is why they wouldn't even sign him to the PS in case of an injury to Palmer or Stanton. They still could have signed Aaron Murray and kept Barkley and Murray (or Dysert). All those snaps in pre-season and all the progress Barkley made is completely wasted.

Believe me, had Barkley stunk---I would applaud the move. But, his QB ratings improved each week---he earned a 92.6 QBR in week 3 and then a 120.2 in Week 4. He outplayed Paxton Lynch. Going into the game I thought Lynch would be the better QB. Barkley stepped up.

And as for the argument that Barkley was playing against guys who were getting cut in Week 4---let's remember that rosters were already down to 70---look at how many players on our 53 man roster played much of the game. Same with the Broncos.

Maybe Barkley wanted to move on...

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

 

[NMCard]

Clearly BA did not see the same progress as many fans seem to have seen.

it was clear listening to Bruce Arians over the time in camp he was disappointed Barkley didn’t come along faster.