Bad News for Matty

[joeshmo]

I still stand by what I said tho. That's honestly how I feel about it. It's not fair to compare ML to Warner tho. Warner is a future Hall Of Famer and we have yet to find out if ML is even all that great at QB.

Thats why I like you even though your thinking is completely different then mine and others. You dont take yourself to seriously or the posts of others to seriously and can laugh even though we dont agree.

 

[RugbyMuffin]

That's strange, the other forum I'm on is completely behind Kurt Warner (and have been the entire season) and doing everything possible in order to keep him as starter next year.

Yeah, that is great. We all support the Cardinals here and think Warner is doing a great job.

And this is not directed towards just one poster

But there is a point, Warner IS NOT walking on water. It is obnoxious to read things that are just not true about what Warner is doing. Futhermore, the mindless hypocritcal madness, and bending of stats and facts to try and force Warner to be the best QB of all time is ridiculous.

There must be 50 threads that are 20 pages long each, with the same madness when it comes to the QB position. All filled with about 80% BS.

Seriously, this topic has become more annoying than "We should have drafted Adrian Peterson" and "Neil Rackers should be fired".

Some of you think Warner is great........ WE FLIPPIN' GET IT ALREADY. We understand completely, but if someone does not agree it is annoying to see that person who disagrees to be badgered by Warner-philes till he is forced to agree in order to close the conversation.

Seriously GIVE IT A REST!

NOTE: This is not an anit-Warner thread. Those who think it is....have a problem of massive sensitivity and assumption issues.

 

[Arizona's Finest]

To further destroy the point of removing Warner and assuming that the running game would remain the same.

Sando is probably the most repected Cardinals NATIONAL observer but I am sure you will take a blindseye to this as well....

http://myespn.go.com/blogs/nfcwest/0-6-118/If-the-Cardinals-had-Adrian-Peterson.html

The more interesting issue to me is how different the Cardinals might look with Peterson as a centerpiece of their offense. Drafting Peterson might have affected the Cardinals' thinking at quarterback. Kurt Warner is at his best spreading the field and throwing from the shotgun. He isn't comfortable running a traditional offense. The Cardinals would have an entirely different feel if they felt compelled to give their first-round running back 20 or 25 carries a game.

Would you rather have Matt Leinart handing off to Peterson, with fewer passes to the receivers? Or would you rather have Warner spreading the field and firing


So yeah the offense would be entirely different. I don't think Peterson would be Peterson if he was trying to run with Warner back there in the shotgun 82% of the time. He would be good but he sure as hell wouldn't be leading the league in rushing.

 

[Cheesebeef]

RolleRocks I suggest you stop re-registering to back up your own posts.

jesus. what kind of loser does this?

 

[CtCardinals78]

That's strange, the other forum I'm on is completely behind Kurt Warner (and have been the entire season) and doing everything possible in order to keep him as starter next year.

IAW I enjoy your posts in here. I like that you stand behind what you say and find you to have an open mind to different opinions and don't get offended. But when you say that people are doing everything possible to keep him as a starter is it by comparing Kurt Warner to Moses!?

http://forums.azcardinals.com/showthread.php?t=35982

 

[IAWarnerFan]

Thats why I like you even though your thinking is completely different then mine and others. You dont take yourself to seriously or the posts of others to seriously and can laugh even though we dont agree.

Agreed, and I think we both understand each other's side of the issue.

 

[IAWarnerFan]

Yeah, that is great. We all support the Cardinals here and think Warner is doing a great job.

And this is not directed towards just one poster

But there is a point, Warner IS NOT walking on water. It is obnoxious to read things that are just not true about what Warner is doing. Futhermore, the mindless hypocritcal madness, and bending of stats and facts to try and force Warner to be the best QB of all time is ridiculous.

There must be 50 threads that are 20 pages long each, with the same madness when it comes to the QB position. All filled with about 80% BS.

Seriously, this topic has become more annoying than "We should have drafted Adrian Peterson" and "Neil Rackers should be fired".

Some of you think Warner is great........ WE FLIPPIN' GET IT ALREADY. We understand completely, but if someone does not agree it is annoying to see that person who disagrees to be badgered by Warner-philes till he is forced to agree in order to close the conversation.

Seriously GIVE IT A REST!

NOTE: This is not an anit-Warner thread. Those who think it is....have a problem of massive sensitivity and assumption issues.

Agreed, some people have gone way overboard on this issue. I just simply want ownership to do everything in their power to resign him and keep him as starter next year. I also want to see other moves that are benificial for the good of the team. It's going to be very difficult to do both, but I believe it is very possible.

 

[Cheesebeef]

To further destroy the point of removing Warner and assuming that the running game would remain the same.

Sando is probably the most repected Cardinals NATIONAL observer but I am sure you will take a blindseye to this as well....

http://myespn.go.com/blogs/nfcwest/0-6-118/If-the-Cardinals-had-Adrian-Peterson.html

The more interesting issue to me is how different the Cardinals might look with Peterson as a centerpiece of their offense. Drafting Peterson might have affected the Cardinals' thinking at quarterback. Kurt Warner is at his best spreading the field and throwing from the shotgun. He isn't comfortable running a traditional offense. The Cardinals would have an entirely different feel if they felt compelled to give their first-round running back 20 or 25 carries a game.

Would you rather have Matt Leinart handing off to Peterson, with fewer passes to the receivers? Or would you rather have Warner spreading the field and firing


So yeah the offense would be entirely different. I don't think Peterson would be Peterson if he was trying to run with Warner back there in the shotgun 82% of the time. He would be good but he sure as hell wouldn't be leading the league in rushing.

if we had Peterson we'd be Super Bowl favorites with Warner. He'd make the O-line better and with an actual running game, Warner would have a field day and not in be in the position to be given enough rope to hang himself every once in a while. We'd be every bit as good (or maybe just a little worse) than the Rams teams that went to the Super Bowl.

 

[IAWarnerFan]

IAW I enjoy your posts in here. I like that you stand behind what you say and find you to have an open mind to different opinions and don't get offended. But when you say that people are doing everything possible to keep him as a starter is it by comparing Kurt Warner to Moses!?

http://forums.azcardinals.com/showthread.php?t=35982

Agreed, that's way overboard and I don't plan on posting in that topic. I just want to see him back as starter next year. It's going to be extremely difficult, but I believe it is possible.