Stout said:
Nope, he's only had 3 years and is going into his 4th year. Last year was Drew Brees 4th year. If it took him 4 years to get there, why can't you give Josh the same time frame? Brees didn't look very good in his third year either.
Can McCown have a Drew Brees type year??
- Thread starter AzWins23
- Start date
Nope, he's only had 3 years and is going into his 4th year. Last year was Drew Brees 4th year. If it took him 4 years to get there, why can't you give Josh the same time frame? Brees didn't look very good in his third year either.
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2003
- Posts
- 91,014
- Reaction score
- 67,542
40yearfan said:
No - but he was only a year removed from a very promising 2nd year - being the QB of a team that started the season 6-2 and then succumbed to injuries and finished 8-8. He also threw for 17 TDs and 16 TOs - better than Josh's 11 and 15 TO - which if you shift those numbers over a full season would likely have been 12 TDs and 18 TOs.
bottom line - the Chargers did as we did - they got a guy because they didn't think Brees was the ultimate answer - even after having a pretty good 2nd year and they benefited - hopefully - we do the same.
That being said - I'm nervous with both Josh and Kurt - neither one of them was impressive last year and the pessimist in me fears one is a has been and the other is a never will be.
Stout
Hold onto the ball, Murray!
Evil Ash said:
I'll give him this year, but it's going to be on the bench. It's going to be very difficult for him to prove his quality with Warner on the roster. If he does manage to show something, then fine, but I'm not sure how that's going to happen, barring injury to Warner.
Oh, and are you seriously using QB ratings to say how good a QB is? By that rationale, a QB can complete a lot of passes, but still fail to score or gain significant yardage and fumble the ball away and take costly sacks. And still have a really good QB rating. Wait, Josh did that in the Atlanta game. Had a high QB rating, completed a high percentage of passes, and still sucked.
Please, don't try and bring up QB ratings. Watch tape of the Tampa Bay game, and PLEASE try to tell me that's not regression, because he failed to convert on some of the basics of QB play in that game. Pretty tough to deny.
Stout
Hold onto the ball, Murray!
40yearfan said:
This is very simple. Show me a QB who sucked in the NFL for 3 years and turned it on in the 4th, and I'll show you fifty who sucked for 3 years and then continued to suck.
You can hope all you want that Josh will finally get it. You may wish for it. Who knows, it may happen. I doubt it, but I guess anything's possible. The fact of the matter is, his chances of suddenly 'turning it on' don't look good.
Evil Ash
Henchman Supreme
Stout said:
1) You don't know that, you're doing a lot of assuming here
and
2) Warner has had more than a few injuries the past 2 seasons so expecting him (a guy well known for holding the ball too long) is going to go through a season (especially behind an Oline not known for pass blocking and is reported to have troubles doing so through minicamp) unscathed is a asking a helluva lot.
Maybe there is a QB competition, maybe there isn't. I don't know whats going through Green's mind and neither does anyone else here. We'll find out at training camp.
What do you suggest I use? Completion %? TD passes? TOs? What?
The QB rating system is supposed to take just about everything into account thats why I used it.
Or you could watch tapes of the last Rams game. You know the one where McCown had 4 TDs and 0 TOs. As said earlier in this thread it goes both ways.
I've watched both thank you and to me his fate is still undetermined. Again Green thinks highly enough not to give the starting QB job away (at least not knowledgably ... opinions on how it will be given to Warner are opinions, not fact). If he didn't think somewhat highly of Josh, he would probably have been let go and if he didn't really want to give him a chance and just be cheap he would have signed him to the low tender. Guess what neither of these things happened.
We don't really know what's going on in Green's mind to determine if he thinks Josh is the QB of the future or not. We'll just let him decide ... everything else is PURE SPECULATION
Evil Ash
Henchman Supreme
Stout said:
He might, he might not. I just don't understand the fear and/or anger that comes about from this argument. Did he sleep with everyone's SO or something? Geez
Our offense was not all together at all last year and he was a young QB starting for the first time. Give the kid a shot (you know kind like what coach Green is doing). If it works out so be it, if it doesn't so be it. I just don't know why people have to bitch and cry and tell us something is a certainty when nothing has been decided yet.
I'm just glad we have depth at the QB position for once to allow us to even have this "discussion". Now lets wait until training camp for the chips to fall, shall we?
Stout
Hold onto the ball, Murray!
Well, the fact that Green let slip that Warner is more than likely the starter is a pretty convincing quote, IMO. It was on ESPN Radio. When asked about QB play, he said something like, "Well, Kurt Warner is going to be able to come in and really help us, blah blah (insert standard line of confidence)"---can't remember the exact quote---and when the interviewer said he thought it was an open competition, Denny had to backpedal to say so.
Is that a definitive thing? No, but it darn well sounds like Denny has his mind made up, and wants to hold his cards close to the vest. Of course, not many people believe there's actually a competition anyway.
Is that a definitive thing? No, but it darn well sounds like Denny has his mind made up, and wants to hold his cards close to the vest. Of course, not many people believe there's actually a competition anyway.
Stout
Hold onto the ball, Murray!
I don't hate the guy at all. No idea what kind of person he is. And, if you'll recall, even though I wanted Big Ben, I was in Josh's corner before last season. Yes, I did jump on his case when he stunk, but I'll do that for just about anybody that's playing badly. So will a lot of people. The failed Plummer experience really set us up to be critical, I think, and rightly so. When we see lousy QB play, and people try to preach patience, I think a lot of folks wonder how long a QB has to play like crap before we pull the plug.
Because, if we give McCown another year to start, or two, or three, and he doesn't turn it on (not much reason to believe he will), then we'll have that many wasted seasons. I don't have enough confidence that he'll turn it around to waste even one season, because I think this year is so critical. So no, I don't hate the guy. I just don't want him ruining the season or even seasons to come.
Because, if we give McCown another year to start, or two, or three, and he doesn't turn it on (not much reason to believe he will), then we'll have that many wasted seasons. I don't have enough confidence that he'll turn it around to waste even one season, because I think this year is so critical. So no, I don't hate the guy. I just don't want him ruining the season or even seasons to come.
MaoTosiFanClub
The problem
Like all of us have said, we understand that nothing is an absolute certainty. But there's nothing wrong with speculating that McCown will never be a good QB. As a matter of fact, there's more evidence to suggest that will eventually be the case than there is to support the theory that the light will turn on for McCown. Same goes with guys such as Wendell, Calvin Pace, and Jeremy Bridges just to name a few.Evil Ash said:
Last edited:
Well, irregardless of how any of us feel, DG had decided to give Josh another shot this year. Hopefully Warner will light up the NFL like he did with the Rams and this whole issue will be moot for another 3 or 4 years. 
BigRedMO
Registered
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2004
- Posts
- 1,250
- Reaction score
- 12
40 year if you mean a shot as in a shot at being the back up and riding the bench you are right. He will get that shot. A team does not pay Warner what they are paying him to ride the bench on opening day. It did not happen in NY even though they had a franchise QB in Manning.
Your reference to Mccown by first name indiactes to me that you feel some kind of personal relationship. They are all just players to me and I dont feel any personal attachment to any of them.. Maybe that partly explains the difference betwen our posts.
But I will remember this discussion come September. If I am right (the odds are in my favor) and you are wrong and a man of honor then you can just admit I was right and you were wrong. If you are not a man of honor you will come up with excuses of why Mccown is really better but circumstances conspired against him.
Back to the revenue issue though. If you feel like money is not a problem for Bidwill answer me these questions:
Why have the Cards been significantly under the cap during the season in recent years even though thay had needs and players were out there? There no name WR corps a few years ago after Sanders and Moore were gone leaps to mind. The team was playing with WRs that had no NFL experience when there were veterans available.
Why are the Cards playing a home game in Mexico City? Is it that Bidwill NEEDS the revenue of 100,000 fans versus 30,000? So he hamstrung his team with a realistic chance to make the playoffs with one less homegame for the revenue? One game likely will be the difference. seems to me that a guy that would do that really NEEDS the revenue.
Why does Bidwill want a new stadium? Does he need the added revenue from the luxury boxes and hopes for more than 30,000 showing up adding more revenue. Other teams who average 60,000 fans get twice the revenue that Bidwill is getting from ticket sales assuming roughly equivalent ticket prices. It is true TV revenue is a bigger piece of the puzzle. But still ticket revenue is important.
Why are the Cards the least valuable NFL franchise? It is more than just win/loss record. The Redskins are the most valuable but have done nothing in years. Anybody with the money to buy a team would be so full of himself to think he could turn around any team by his personal actions. Once again look at The Redskins owner's ego in this regard. Notwithstanding the stadium are the Cardinals under capitalized? If so any investor would know that if they bought the Cards they would have to put in a lot of money to compensate for the undercapitalization. Does that explain why they are worth so little compared to other teams?
Your reference to Mccown by first name indiactes to me that you feel some kind of personal relationship. They are all just players to me and I dont feel any personal attachment to any of them.. Maybe that partly explains the difference betwen our posts.
But I will remember this discussion come September. If I am right (the odds are in my favor) and you are wrong and a man of honor then you can just admit I was right and you were wrong. If you are not a man of honor you will come up with excuses of why Mccown is really better but circumstances conspired against him.
Back to the revenue issue though. If you feel like money is not a problem for Bidwill answer me these questions:
Why have the Cards been significantly under the cap during the season in recent years even though thay had needs and players were out there? There no name WR corps a few years ago after Sanders and Moore were gone leaps to mind. The team was playing with WRs that had no NFL experience when there were veterans available.
Why are the Cards playing a home game in Mexico City? Is it that Bidwill NEEDS the revenue of 100,000 fans versus 30,000? So he hamstrung his team with a realistic chance to make the playoffs with one less homegame for the revenue? One game likely will be the difference. seems to me that a guy that would do that really NEEDS the revenue.
Why does Bidwill want a new stadium? Does he need the added revenue from the luxury boxes and hopes for more than 30,000 showing up adding more revenue. Other teams who average 60,000 fans get twice the revenue that Bidwill is getting from ticket sales assuming roughly equivalent ticket prices. It is true TV revenue is a bigger piece of the puzzle. But still ticket revenue is important.
Why are the Cards the least valuable NFL franchise? It is more than just win/loss record. The Redskins are the most valuable but have done nothing in years. Anybody with the money to buy a team would be so full of himself to think he could turn around any team by his personal actions. Once again look at The Redskins owner's ego in this regard. Notwithstanding the stadium are the Cardinals under capitalized? If so any investor would know that if they bought the Cards they would have to put in a lot of money to compensate for the undercapitalization. Does that explain why they are worth so little compared to other teams?
Last edited:
The NFL
put the game in Mexico because of revenue sharing. We won't be the last two teams to do it. every game in any other country does very well.
As for being a man of honor, I'll be more than happy to give it up for forty. A better man, on this board, would be hard to find.
As for him calling Josh by first name, how that equates to anything personal is beyond me.
The question is COULD Josh have a brees like year? Possible? Very. Probably? Not very, but there is a chance.
As for the Bidwills ,money spent and the cap space. Look into what the Cards have put out for their draft picks the last 8 years (and team for that matter) and compare it to other organizations. FA's don't want to come and play here after visiting for a game or two. The know what the temps are on that field. However, the Bidwills and money have nothing to do with the question.
put the game in Mexico because of revenue sharing. We won't be the last two teams to do it. every game in any other country does very well.
As for being a man of honor, I'll be more than happy to give it up for forty. A better man, on this board, would be hard to find.
As for him calling Josh by first name, how that equates to anything personal is beyond me.
The question is COULD Josh have a brees like year? Possible? Very. Probably? Not very, but there is a chance.
As for the Bidwills ,money spent and the cap space. Look into what the Cards have put out for their draft picks the last 8 years (and team for that matter) and compare it to other organizations. FA's don't want to come and play here after visiting for a game or two. The know what the temps are on that field. However, the Bidwills and money have nothing to do with the question.
BigRedMO
Registered
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2004
- Posts
- 1,250
- Reaction score
- 12
The NFL does not hava an anti-trust exemption like baseball. The NFL can not force one team to give up a home game while not asking all others to do it in that same season. Bidwill could have said no. You think Tagliabue chose the Cardinals as the team to represent the NFL in Mexico City? He would much have preferred Philadelphia or NE to represent the NFL. Those teams woull tell Tagliabue to take a hike if asked to give up a home game. Bidwill jumped at it because he needs the money. He cant get more than 30,000 to show in AZ.
Like I said before Bidwill can and will pay the first string guy. It is the second and third string he has trouble finding the money to pay. He is walking the fine line of trying to field a winner without breaking his finances. He knows to have any chance of staying afloat he must provide hope of a winner to put more than 30,000 in the stands. He will always find the money for the top draft picks.
Like I said before Bidwill can and will pay the first string guy. It is the second and third string he has trouble finding the money to pay. He is walking the fine line of trying to field a winner without breaking his finances. He knows to have any chance of staying afloat he must provide hope of a winner to put more than 30,000 in the stands. He will always find the money for the top draft picks.
Last edited:
Evil Ash
Henchman Supreme
MaoTosiFanClub said:
Again thats fine. I just don't like the absolute certainty that people speak with. Why did Green want him back if he's so awful? Why didn't he give him the low tender?
The simple truth is we don't know but God knows that if you mention a young player possibly developing that everyone has to jump down your throat (Hell this thread is 11 pages long and the majority of it is people saying that it could never happen). There seems to be a ton of venom for a guy that really hasn't done anything to deserve it.
Let things fall where they may. Its out of our hands
GreenCard said:
Where's that smiley with the extended middle finger when you need it?
Chaz
observationist
For some reason I find it really funny that McCown can still generate 10 pages of argument in short order.
BigRedMO said:
BRM, I call everyone by the part of the name I like the best. Haven't you called AQ Quan before? Everyone else has. I've never met the kid, but I like his attitude. Besides that, he's a Cards player and all of the players have my respect, even the guys at the bottom of the pile.
As far as the Bidwill's and money go, I keep telling you that you are living in the past tense. They don't have the capital a lot of the NFL teams have available, but it hasn't seemed to slow them down the past two years. The day the stadium was finalized, they started spending money like I've never seen before and they are doing it in a controlled and planned way. I have a feeling that if AZ. had kept their promise to Mr. B, this would have happened a long time ago.
I credit RG and Mike B. for the turnaround in attitude and the way the money is being handled. They hired DG and are using him to increase the skill level of this team.
Here are some team expenditures:
New England Patriots
Year Median salary Total Payroll
2004 $ 660,300 $ 76,999,180
2003 $ 707,650 $ 82,128,250
2002 $ 540,300 $ 46,194,915
2001 $ 535,500 $ 65,793,825
2000 $ 476,800 $ 51,344,300
Arizona Cardinals
Year Median salary Total Payroll
2004 $ 621,424 $ 78,961,345
2003 $ 652,800 $ 81,034,928
2002 $ 383,165 $ 66,967,535
2001 $ 512,000 $ 74,891,809
2000 $ 455,050 $ 58,610,500
Dallas Cowboys
Year Median salary Total Payroll
2004 $ 626,234 $ 65,409,479
2003 $ 454,000 $ 81,042,307
2002 $ 317,000 $ 74,138,471
2001 $ 320,560 $ 48,469,232
2000 $ 441,300 $ 50,104,200
Green Bay Packers
Year Median salary Total Payroll
2004 $ 614,700 $ 80,383,682
2003 $ 572,900 $ 77,230,121
2002 $ 469,160 $ 49,980,056
2001 $ 514,520 $ 68,979,435
2000 $ 434,400 $ 56,148,300
In case anyone else wants to check it out, this is the site I got the team expenditures from:
http://asp.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/salaries/teamresults.aspx?team=12
http://asp.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/salaries/teamresults.aspx?team=12
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2003
- Posts
- 91,014
- Reaction score
- 67,542
SirChaz said:
and that's without me or Rats getting involved. I don't know why anyone would still be arguing about this kid.
DEEEFENSE!!!
Registered
Keep in mind Brees was "blessed" with a very good defense which made the offense better (i.e. field position).With our defense poised to be a top 5 defense, hell yes Josh can have a Brees like year.
- Joined
- May 14, 2002
- Posts
- 10,077
- Reaction score
- 0
40yearfan said:Well, irregardless of how any of us feel, DG had decided to give Josh another shot this year. Hopefully Warner will light up the NFL like he did with the Rams and this whole issue will be moot for another 3 or 4 years.
BIM: irregardless is non standard humourous use of regardless. Is that what you intended?
CaptTurbo
ASFN Icon
cheesebeef said:
Rats will owe me a jersey so he may try to fade out. lol
Probably because it has happened only once that I can remember in the last 10 years or more in Arizona. That "once" being Adrian Wilson.
Poor drafts, poor coaching and constant staff turnover are the main reasons for that.
That is also why the Cardinals have no "home grown" position players with 5 years or more of NFL experience on the current roster.
Did you know that with the departure of McKinnon,Clement and Shelton, Russell Davis (waivers/Bears/Aug.2000) now holds the longest tenure with Arizona of anyone other than our punter?
