Article on Shaun King

[jstadvl]

Navarre

is a younger Bledsoe, so why?

 

[Crazy Canuck]

the consensus is that Josh and King SUCK.. then go with the most accurate passer of the bunch and hope the line doesn'e get him killed...

Navarre is by far the most accurate passer and the only one with a chance of being there in the future... PUT HIM IN and let the fans get behind him and see what he can do!

WTF

"by far the most accurate passer " really?

That certainly wasn't his reputation coming out of College.

So, how do you know this?

 

[Cheesebeef]

is a younger Bledsoe, so why?

seriously - if the guy is a younger Bledsoe - he wouldn't have lasted until the SEVENTH ROUND OF THE DRAFT.

 

[jstadvl]

Where

you picked in the draft has alot more variables to it than your skill level.
Who went first, who needs a QB, what other teams first needs are, etc.
You can't honestly tell me you think where your picked is a definite indicator of your talent?

 

[Cheesebeef]

you picked in the draft has alot more variables to it than your skill level.
Who went first, who needs a QB, what other teams first needs are, etc.
You can't honestly tell me you think where your picked is a definite indicator of your talent?

I think when you are picked in 7th round - more often than not - there's a pretty damn good reason you are picked there.

 

[jstadvl]

Well beef

we'll just have to agree to disagree. Until you see a person play you can't ever know. Well I can't. Sometimes the person in the mail room is a better manager than anyone in an office. Just needs the chance to prove it. And, what I meant was, He's an accurate pocket passer.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

we'll just have to agree to disagree. Until you see a person play you can't ever know. Well I can't. Sometimes the person in the mail room is a better manager than anyone in an office. Just needs the chance to prove it. And, what I meant was, He's an accurate pocket passer.

Every mailroom clerk "thinks" he's a better manager.

 

[jstadvl]

That's why

I said sometimes Craze.
I think beef is just rtying to bust my chops, as usual. Whatever floats his boat.
Do I think Navare is our answer? I don't know. Maybe with a fair chance in a legitimate game he might show us. right now, I don't see it happening. But, I do think, we'd be pleasantly suprised.
BTW when I was in the mail room I knew I was a better manager than them. LOL.

 

[Cheesebeef]

I said sometimes Craze.
I think beef is just rtying to bust my chops, as usual. Whatever floats his boat.
Do I think Navare is our answer? I don't know. Maybe with a fair chance in a legitimate game he might show us. right now, I don't see it happening. But, I do think, we'd be pleasantly suprised.
BTW when I was in the mail room I knew I was a better manager than them. LOL.

OMG - the funny thing is I thought when I was responding that I was agreeing with you. I thought you were asking why Navarre is a younger Bledsoe - I missed the "so". You shouldn't take everything personal - we disgaree on a lot of things apparently, but I disagree with a lot of thing WITH A LOT PEOPLE. I don't do anything to bust anyone's chops here - I see comments made - I disagree with them. That's all.

 

[Tangodnzr]

OMG - the funny thing is I thought when I was responding that I was agreeing with you. I thought you were asking why Navarre is a younger Bledsoe - I missed the "so". You shouldn't take everything personal - we disgaree on a lot of things apparently, but I disagree with a lot of thing WITH A LOT PEOPLE. I don't do anything to bust anyone's chops here - I see comments made - I disagree with them. That's all.

 

[kerouac9]

John Navarre is an older Andrew Walter. OK arm strength. OK pocket presence. Below-average mobility. Neither lead promising programs anywhere of note.

Didn't Drew Bledsoe win his Conference, and was a #1 overall pick by the Patsies? And Dvl wants to attribute Navarre's fall into the seventh round to "who went first, what other teams' needs are," etc.? That's enough to explain why Patrick Ramsey fell to the bottom of the first round when he was rated as a mid-first pick, but c'mon. Navarre was in danger of not even being drafted. He hardly compares to Bledsoe.

 

[conraddobler]

John Navarre is an older Andrew Walter. OK arm strength. OK pocket presence. Below-average mobility. Neither lead promising programs anywhere of note.

Didn't Drew Bledsoe win his Conference, and was a #1 overall pick by the Patsies? And Dvl wants to attribute Navarre's fall into the seventh round to "who went first, what other teams' needs are," etc.? That's enough to explain why Patrick Ramsey fell to the bottom of the first round when he was rated as a mid-first pick, but c'mon. Navarre was in danger of not even being drafted. He hardly compares to Bledsoe.

We have one QB we should even think about building a team around on this roster right now and that's Josh, Before anyone has a heart attack that statement is true and yet it also illustrates how desperate we are. Josh is far from proving anything.

Him being the most hopeful of the bunch just means we have an entirely too weak situation to begin with. Josh should be no better than a backup that may someday get a chance because of injury and that's it.

Navarre could be the next Brady sure, but what are the real odds of that if you are realistic about it?

 

[ASUCHRIS]

Just a wonderful paragraph:

"McCown was as exciting as sand. Yes, he protected the ball, scrambled, and all that nonsense. But a QB can't throw interceptions when every pass is either A) 3 yards B) a jump ball to Fitzgerald or C) misses everyone on the field by 20 yards. Iron Law of Passing #26: in order to throw interceptions, one must throw the ball in the general vicinity of a defender. McCown limited the number of bad things he did with the ball by basically not doing anything at all with it. Six TD passes....that's a decent week for Manning or Culpepper. And look who Culpepper is throwing to in Moss's absence. Nobody."

 

[Cbus cardsfan]

C'mon,........JOhn Navarre .THe guy makes Bledsoe look like Michael Vick. He was a sitting duck in college.The speed of the pro game will bury him.Now, if he had the slightest bit of mobility he would have been drafted higher.And yes, where you are drafted is usually a pretty good indication of yor talent level

 

[Russ Smith]

you picked in the draft has alot more variables to it than your skill level.
Who went first, who needs a QB, what other teams first needs are, etc.
You can't honestly tell me you think where your picked is a definite indicator of your talent?

All true but you don't go from first pick in the draft(Bledsoe) to 7th round pick because of variables.

Navarre was a bad college QB before his senior year, Michigan fans hated him, he lost big games, made dumb plays, he drove people nuts. Had a nice senior year, he actually FELL before the draft scouts worked him out and decided he was MUCH more raw than they expected from a guy who played that much in college, he was a 5th year senior and a 3 year starter, career record at Michigan was 31-11 as a starter, great most schools, not great at Michigan.

The knock on him was while accurate underneath, he has poor accuracy downfield, and tends to hang balls when throwing downfield, which in the NFL leads to decapitations at WR, and a lot of INT's. For a big guy with a strong arm, being ineffective downfield is a bad negative to have.

he's a tough kid, spent most of his career behind a great OL untouched, in the games against top competition he often got sacked a bunch, or turned it over a bunch.

He looked good in preseason, I'll never say never until I've seen a guy in real games, but i'd be surprised if Navarre pans out. I watched the guy a lot in college, I think he can be a decent backup, he WILL get hot and as a backup that's a nice trait, but as a starter, just don't see it. Also has a TERRIBLE habit of fumbling, with this OL he'd fit right in with Josh and King and fumbles.

 

[jstadvl]

You know

I have two dogs, they're both pretty big, about a year apart. They're both runts. When I was training them the trainer and my wife laughed at my pup, the younger, because he would piddle in times of duress. then the time came for some seriuos training-protection. the older one was'nt worth much, the one they laughed at, is big and tough and in the worst of situations would keep doing what he's supposed to until he's dead.And he's very good at it!
The point, appearances are deceiving, performance, at times is the same.
I wouldn't write McCown off just yet. I wouldn't write King off, he could get it done. But, beware the runt of the litter. I say this especially to people who have never played the game.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

I have two dogs, they're both pretty big, about a year apart. They're both runts. When I was training them the trainer and my wife laughed at my pup, the younger, because he would piddle in times of duress. then the time came for some seriuos training-protection. the older one was'nt worth much, the one they laughed at, is big and tough and in the worst of situations would keep doing what he's supposed to until he's dead.And he's very good at it!
The point, appearances are deceiving, performance, at times is the same.
I wouldn't write McCown off just yet. I wouldn't write King off, he could get it done. But, beware the runt of the litter. I say this especially to people who have never played the game.

i agree, but in this sitch, who the hell is the runt? the small dude (king) or the young pup (mccown)? runts or not, i still think they stink.

 

[jstadvl]

the Real runt ouchie

is Navarre. Josh, I still think can get it done. King, I think is a vet that can if he steps up. Navarre is the unproven unknown. Now before I'm beheaded, all I'm saying is you never know which dog is tops until they've had a chance in the ring. I can't stand the situation any more than the rest of you. But, we don't even know what we've got. We've seen McCown-nothing spectacular( ewww that hurts), but the win column looked ok. King I think is better than he played. But to just cast off Navarre as nothing but a dirty rag is foolishnes imo. Why draft him? Keep Parsons, use your pick on another "could be" gem. No?
Am I making sense?

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

is Navarre. Josh, I still think can get it done. King, I think is a vet that can if he steps up. Navarre is the unproven unknown. Now before I'm beheaded, all I'm saying is you never know which dog is tops until they've had a chance in the ring. I can't stand the situation any more than the rest of you. But, we don't even know what we've got. We've seen McCown-nothing spectacular( ewww that hurts), but the win column looked ok. King I think is better than he played. But to just cast off Navarre as nothing but a dirty rag is foolishnes imo. Why draft him? Keep Parsons, use your pick on another "could be" gem. No?
Am I making sense?

actually, you make perfect sense. i thought navarre was the perfect seventh round gamble. do i think he's the answer? not necessarily, but i think with good coaching, he's a possible answer. and i completely agree with your last logic about parsons and using that pick on another gamble.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

is Navarre. Josh, I still think can get it done. King, I think is a vet that can if he steps up. Navarre is the unproven unknown. Now before I'm beheaded, all I'm saying is you never know which dog is tops until they've had a chance in the ring. I can't stand the situation any more than the rest of you. But, we don't even know what we've got. We've seen McCown-nothing spectacular( ewww that hurts), but the win column looked ok. King I think is better than he played. But to just cast off Navarre as nothing but a dirty rag is foolishnes imo. Why draft him? Keep Parsons, use your pick on another "could be" gem. No?
Am I making sense?

Sure... it makes sense, but not this year when we are 4-6 and still mathematically in the hunt for a playoff spot.

 

[jstadvl]

Agree

Craze. Completely agree.

 

[JeffGollin]

Based on what we've seen to date, it's not hard to understand why we'd be down on both McCown and King.

But that doesn't mean that the light-bulbs couldn't suddenly be switched on for Josh. Or that Shaun won't shake the rust off and get in synch with his receivers.

And it doesn't mean that any of us can read Dennis Green's mind (or believe what he tells you) with regard to our current and future QB plans.

I do think he (and Rod and Michael) feels he has the ammo to put a creative, high-powered passing offense on the field that can entertain and attract the fans. And I suspect he doesn't want all that hot receiving talent to lie fallow in a plodding, conservative offense (even if that style of football might win a couple more games).

Ed and others who are projecting someone with a Bledsoe-like quarterbacking style to lead the Cards next year may not be very far off the mark.

But I'm not so sure this won't turn out to be Shaun King.

What do we know?

- Well, we know that King was elevated to starter.

- We know that the play calling was much more aggressive with King at the helm (i.e. more deep patterns aimed at giving our wideouts the opportunity to utilize their athleticism to make plays).

- We know that King and his receivers were out of synch (not just throwing to wrong spots but also hesitating a split second so the ball arrived late and gave defenders time to break on the ball).

- We know that King will put the ball on the ground when hit from behind.

- We've seen King on occasion throw lasers that are right on the money.

- But a couple of times on long patterns, as the receiver broke free, he failed to put enough air under the ball and overthrew him.

In terms of the entire package - and based on "right now" - I think we have a better chance winning with King than we do with Josh. But to some degree, this depends on whether Shaun can right about 80% of the wrongs he displayed last Sunday.

As for next year, I suspect that once that Dennis has had one season to figure out what he's got, he will not bet on the cum again when designating next year's QB. Either he'll feel confident that Shaun or Josh can do the job right now or he'll go out and get himself a new QB.

But like I said earlier, you can't predict what Dennis will do and you'd better take what he says with a great big helping of salt.

 

[phinius]

http://arizonasportsfans.com/storypage.php?Story_ID=528&Category=cardinals

Skorpion:

Your article on Shawn King was right on the money. I wished I could have said it as well as you did.

Phinius, the oldtimer

 

[CardinalLaw]

That was a great article.

 

[FrustratedFan04]

Todays game makes this article prophetic.