Darren Urban on AM 1060 - Aug 11

[Crazy Canuck]

If we had Warner for those 9er games no way we lose.

If you didnt drink the warner kool aid when he was a ram you must have passed out when he got the MVP in the league AND superbowl eh?

Perhaps I have you confused with rats. Been awhile since he was around good to see him back so I can get my jersey from him.

Say what

Our problem in the 9er games was defence not offence...

 

[CaptTurbo]

Say what

Our problem in the 9er games was defence not offence...

huh? If memory serves me we had a lot of 3 and outs, and our defense gave us a lot of 3 and outs. We scored, yes but on drives we dont score on you at least have to avoid going 3 and out all the time.

 

[kerouac9]

You don't think Faulk benefitted just as much from the system and the talent around him as Warner did?

Hell I'd argue Faulk benefitted MORE, Faulk played 5 seasons in the NFL with the COlts. his YPC those 5 years were 4.1, 3.7, 3.0, 4.0, 4.1, yes for his first 5 years pre Rams he averaged LESS than 4 YPC overall and his career best was 4.1.

Then he becomes a Ram and goes 5.5, 5.4, 5.3 during the 3 "magic" years where Warner became a star.

So we have a guy who'd never played in the NFL and thus has no "baseline" and a guy who has played 5 years and suddenly becomes 25% better than he's ever been before, and you're saying Warner didn't deserve MVP because the system made HIM better?

That's the beauty of football, a bunch of players coming together to make a team that's better than the individual parts.

Well, I also liked Faulk more because he's an RB (a position to which I'm predisposed), and because I was friggin' tired of "bagboy to NFL QB stories" every 15 minutes on every NFL show. I started changing the channel. And it gave Chris Berman another chance to get up on his high horse.

Faulk was a heck of a back when he was with the Colts; better than those YPC stats. Four years over 1000 yards. Two years over 1200 yards. Two seasons with 10+ rushing TDs. No season with fewer than 7 TDs. Averaged over 10 YPCatch. Funny thing was that he had kind of a fumbling problem while he was in Indy that never materialized once he got traded.

The system definitely helped Faulk, but it was Faulk being able to get to the outside, being able to line up in the slot, etc. that originally made Martz's system work. Because he was the most dangerous player in the NFL, I thought that Faulk deserved the MVP. As I remember, he was voted MVP of the Rams by his teammates those years.

You don't think that Warner got more accolades from the media because he was a great story? Really?

 

[Russ Smith]

Well, I also liked Faulk more because he's an RB (a position to which I'm predisposed), and because I was friggin' tired of "bagboy to NFL QB stories" every 15 minutes on every NFL show. I started changing the channel. And it gave Chris Berman another chance to get up on his high horse.

Faulk was a heck of a back when he was with the Colts; better than those YPC stats. Four years over 1000 yards. Two years over 1200 yards. Two seasons with 10+ rushing TDs. No season with fewer than 7 TDs. Averaged over 10 YPCatch. Funny thing was that he had kind of a fumbling problem while he was in Indy that never materialized once he got traded.

The system definitely helped Faulk, but it was Faulk being able to get to the outside, being able to line up in the slot, etc. that originally made Martz's system work. Because he was the most dangerous player in the NFL, I thought that Faulk deserved the MVP. As I remember, he was voted MVP of the Rams by his teammates those years.

You don't think that Warner got more accolades from the media because he was a great story? Really?

Sure I do, of course his story was part of the whole thing. I'm just saying discounting Warner's performance as by the system completely ignores that the same system made Faulk so much better.

I agree, Faulk was a quality player before the Rams, but if he'd played out his career on the same path he did with the Colts, he'd go down as a good RB. But instead he goes to the Rams and now he'd a lead pipe cinch first ballot HOF player.

If anybody benefitted from that system it was Faulk. Now I agree with you he fit martz perfectly, allowed him to do a bunch of things he couldn't have done with many other RB's, I'm a huge Faulk fan. I am merely saying you can't say Warner was a system QB without acknowledging that sytem helped others too.

The only guy on that offense you can say ever played THAT well before 99 was Isaac Bruce and that was back in 96 and 97 before all his leg problems hit and nearly forced him into early retirement.

I've always felt Bruce was the best story on that whole team, went from pro bowl WR to constantly injured contemplating retirement, back to pro bowl WR.

Synergy was a great description of that team.

And to me the best stat on that whole Ram season of 99 was Warner's 29 TD passes in the first half of games, that's just insane, if they hadn't had so many blowout wins that year he would have obliterated Marino's TD pass record long before Manning ever did, but they were always so far ahead that they didn't throw as much in the 2nd half of games. I forget exactly but it was something like only 3 NFL QB's had more than 29 TD passes that year(besides Warner) and he did his in just the first half of games.

 

[Stout]

Kerouac, just state one thing, please, and have done. Just say you don't like Warner, will not admit he was good, and no amount of solid logic will sway you. Because it's the truth. Whether or not he'll turn it around with us, and whether or not he was the all-world QB he looked like during his magical time at the Rams, he was UNDENIABLY a damn good QB during that time. Nothing you say, no amount of whining on your part, no amount of justification, no amount of mitigating the system's effect on other players' games while playing it up for Warner's game, can prove otherwise. Please give it a rest.

 

[D-Dogg]

So, he's going to be better than Bulger, Hassleback, Favre, Culpepper (runner up for MVP last season, IMO), McNabb, and Delhomme? Are you insane?

Honestly, if he approaches the numbers that Eli Manning's going to put up in New York, we should all be happy.

Meant the NFC West, not the NFC...my bad. But yes, he should have better numbers than Bulger and Hassleback. The rest, no.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

huh? If memory serves me we had a lot of 3 and outs, and our defense gave us a lot of 3 and outs. We scored, yes but on drives we dont score on you at least have to avoid going 3 and out all the time.

There are better examples in support of your usual, rather tiresome - anti Josh diatribes than the SF games. Our "D" collapse in the last 5 min. of the first game became the greatest comeback in 9er history. In the second, a good play by a SF DB in the back of the end zone - prevented us from mounting a similar comeback for the win. Joish was the least of our problems on those given days.

 

[kerouac9]

Kerouac, just state one thing, please, and have done. Just say you don't like Warner, will not admit he was good, and no amount of solid logic will sway you. Because it's the truth. Whether or not he'll turn it around with us, and whether or not he was the all-world QB he looked like during his magical time at the Rams, he was UNDENIABLY a damn good QB during that time. Nothing you say, no amount of whining on your part, no amount of justification, no amount of mitigating the system's effect on other players' games while playing it up for Warner's game, can prove otherwise. Please give it a rest.

1. I don't like Warner the person. I think he's smug.
2. As a QB, I think that Warner's skills are average. I think that it was the system and the rest of the personnel that mad ehim look all world and for a short time gave him the career QB rating record. I think that the Warner we saw in New York last season is closer to the "real" Warner than the one that was in St. Louis.
3. I'm agreeing with the logic that Russ is giving (though you've been pretty silent before getting on your high horse with this post), but I'm saying that some pieces were more important than others. I have little doubt that Marc Bulger could have put up similar numbers in the same place at the same time as Warner. I'm certain that Green could have been just as good (if not better) had he not torn up his knee the season that it all came together.
4. He was a good QB at the time, placed in a system and around personnel where almost anyone can succeed.

It's funny that there's no problem with people saying here that Tom Brady is a "system" QB, but say that Kurt Warner might have looked better than he was because of the system is like a whole big deal.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

1. I don't like Warner the person. I think he's smug.
2. As a QB, I think that Warner's skills are average. I think that it was the system and the rest of the personnel that mad ehim look all world and for a short time gave him the career QB rating record. I think that the Warner we saw in New York last season is closer to the "real" Warner than the one that was in St. Louis.
3. I'm agreeing with the logic that Russ is giving (though you've been pretty silent before getting on your high horse with this post), but I'm saying that some pieces were more important than others. I have little doubt that Marc Bulger could have put up similar numbers in the same place at the same time as Warner. I'm certain that Green could have been just as good (if not better) had he not torn up his knee the season that it all came together.
4. He was a good QB at the time, placed in a system and around personnel where almost anyone can succeed.

It's funny that there's no problem with people saying here that Tom Brady is a "system" QB, but say that Kurt Warner might have looked better than he was because of the system is like a whole big deal.

You have a problem with people who are "smug" - that's really

 

[CardShark]

K9, Warner has accomplished more than your precious Michael Vick. I'm sure Montana was another average QB that was pumped up by the system he played in. All QB's need to be in a system that they can flourish in or they are going to look mediocre. But the difference is that they seize the opportunity when it's in front of them.

As far as your evaluation of how our offense is, you are two faced. On one hand you say we don't know how it's going to play until it's for real, then you turn around and say they are worse than the Giants, whose only true threat last year was Barber. You say we have no TE. Last I saw we had 4 or 5 on the roster. We don't have a 1500 yard rusher? We don't know what we have in Arrington. You say Warner is mediocre. If he's healthy and gets protection, he'll be one of the top 10 QB's in the league.

Stick to one opinion. If you need help, please allow me. You know diddly squat at this time.

 

[BigDavis75]

Meant the NFC West, not the NFC...my bad. But yes, he should have better numbers than Bulger and Hassleback. The rest, no.

That would be awesome but I think he finishes 2nd behind Bulger.

 

[kerouac9]

K9, Warner has accomplished more than your precious Michael Vick. I'm sure Montana was another average QB that was pumped up by the system he played in. All QB's need to be in a system that they can flourish in or they are going to look mediocre. But the difference is that they seize the opportunity when it's in front of them.

As far as your evaluation of how our offense is, you are two faced. On one hand you say we don't know how it's going to play until it's for real, then you turn around and say they are worse than the Giants, whose only true threat last year was Barber. You say we have no TE. Last I saw we had 4 or 5 on the roster. We don't have a 1500 yard rusher? We don't know what we have in Arrington. You say Warner is mediocre. If he's healthy and gets protection, he'll be one of the top 10 QB's in the league.

Stick to one opinion. If you need help, please allow me. You know diddly squat at this time.

Well, Mike Vick is the only QB to beat the Packers at Lambeau Field in the playoffs. He also twice lead his team to the playoffs as a one-man show. Warner lead an offense with no fewer than three HoFers. I guess that Warner does lead Vick in the "most teams cut from" department.

I said that our team last year was worse than the Giants' team was. Can you really argue with that? Look at the record. Yes, we beat them head to head, but did the G-men lose to the worst team in the league twice? Do you really want to argue that it was the New York defense that was winning games?

Yes, our 4 or 5 nobodies are exactly equal to Jeremy Shockey, a former first-round pick and two-time Pro Bowler. Good call.

Your right, we don't know what we have in Arrington, but how many rookie RBs have rushed for 1500 yards in the past five years? Portis, maybe. Maybe Tomlinson? It's a lot to ask to tell me to believe that Arrington as a rookie is going to be of the same value to the Cards as Barber was last year (in my mind, he was an MVP candidate for the Giants).

What I do think was "special" about Kurt Warner was his deciciveness when he was playing with the Rams. His ability to pick out a WR and deliver the ball in a very, very complex system was impressive. But he didn't show anything of that kind of decisiveness last season in New York. But, he wasn't playing with two HoFers in New York, either. He's not playing with two HoFers in Arizona, though.

The Warner issue will play out over the season. If you really think that this Kurt Warner is better than Peyton Manning, Daunte Culpepper, Steve McNair, Marc Bulger, Trent Green, Drew Brees, Donovan McNabb, Tom Brady, Chad Pennington, and Jake Delhomme (the top 10 QBs in the league today--and that's not even counting Brett Favre), more power to you. I'll have to see it to believe it.

 

[Stout]

K9, the reason I've waited until now to chime in is because I didn't have anything to say. When the thread changed to a new topic, I almost stopped reading, until it became slightly interesting. Since then, I've seen a few folk give you good, solid logic supporting how good Warner was back then, and you refusing to see it. Your utter denial of reality finally made me post.

By the way, why didn't you respond on the Ram's road record when it was shown to be stellar? I know why...it's logic that doesn't support your fallible point. You flat out don't like the guy as a person or a player, so you're going to purposefully downplay his skills no matter what. Just give it a rest, why don't you. Your outlook is what it is, it won't change, so just drop it.

 

[arthurracoon]

There are better examples in support of your usual, rather tiresome - anti Josh diatribes than the SF games. Our "D" collapse in the last 5 min. of the first game became the greatest comeback in 9er history. In the second, a good play by a SF DB in the back of the end zone - prevented us from mounting a similar comeback for the win. Joish was the least of our problems on those given days.

However, some of that was because our D was on the field so much.

Our offenses inablilty to start a drive and keep the D off the field in the final minutes of the game was one of the main reasons we lost that game.

 

[Russ Smith]

The Warner issue will play out over the season. If you really think that this Kurt Warner is better than Peyton Manning, Daunte Culpepper, Steve McNair, Marc Bulger, Trent Green, Drew Brees, Donovan McNabb, Tom Brady, Chad Pennington, and Jake Delhomme (the top 10 QBs in the league today--and that's not even counting Brett Favre), more power to you. I'll have to see it to believe it.

Well I could argue a few of those names being in the top 10 too. Delhomme has had one good year and has never reached even 60% as a fulltime starter. The defense and run game took them to the Superbowl, not Delhomme. He put up big numbers last year but much like another Jake he had 3 times as many TD passes when behind as ahead last year. He did a lot of stat padding last year because due to injuries they were behind a lot.

McNair in my mind is just about done due to injury. Norm Chow is a brilliant mind but I don't think he took that job to resurrect McNair. Brees, one good year, Pennington, has to prove his shoulder will hold up.

I don't think anybody can accurately name the top 10 QB's in the NFL right now it's just too early.

This time last year would you realistically have included Delhomme and Brees on your list?

 

[kerouac9]

Well I could argue a few of those names being in the top 10 too. Delhomme has had one good year and has never reached even 60% as a fulltime starter. The defense and run game took them to the Superbowl, not Delhomme. He put up big numbers last year but much like another Jake he had 3 times as many TD passes when behind as ahead last year. He did a lot of stat padding last year because due to injuries they were behind a lot.

McNair in my mind is just about done due to injury. Norm Chow is a brilliant mind but I don't think he took that job to resurrect McNair. Brees, one good year, Pennington, has to prove his shoulder will hold up.

I don't think anybody can accurately name the top 10 QB's in the NFL right now it's just too early.

This time last year would you realistically have included Delhomme and Brees on your list?

Part of it was going off last year's list, part of it was knowing a guy was coming off injury, and I anticipate McNair to be good. He was co-MVP just two years ago, and camp reports have been good. Pennington will put up good completion % numbers, just not great long ball #s.

I think that Delhomme is a solid QB with really nice tools. It's not all completion percentage, at least not to me. For all the catchup they were playing, the Panthers managed to stay alive in the playoff hunt longer than the Cardinals did, and this was in part Muhammed having a monster season, and in part because Delhomme's performance opened up Goings' Marcel Shipp-like season.

If you want, take McNair and Brees out and add Favre and Collins. Do you really, really think that Warner's going to have as good, or better, a season than Kerry Collins? I'd put Vick on that list just in terms of wins, but now the arguement seems to have migrated to stats.

Warner was something like 14th or 15th in QB rating last season (behind part-time guys like Volek, as well as Plummer). I don't think that he needs to have a Top 10 season for the Cards to win some games (and he won't; don't worry). If he can be in the middle of the league again, the Cards are going to be in good shape.

 

[BigDavis75]

Well I could argue a few of those names being in the top 10 too. Delhomme has had one good year and has never reached even 60% as a fulltime starter. The defense and run game took them to the Superbowl, not Delhomme. He put up big numbers last year but much like another Jake he had 3 times as many TD passes when behind as ahead last year. He did a lot of stat padding last year because due to injuries they were behind a lot.

McNair in my mind is just about done due to injury. Norm Chow is a brilliant mind but I don't think he took that job to resurrect McNair. Brees, one good year, Pennington, has to prove his shoulder will hold up.

I don't think anybody can accurately name the top 10 QB's in the NFL right now it's just too early.

This time last year would you realistically have included Delhomme and Brees on your list?

No way should Pennington make any list of top 10 QBs. Ever.

 

[kerouac9]

(

If going 18-6 on the road '99-2001 including being 8-0 on the road in 2001 is mediocre I'd like to see what "good" is.

Well, they *were* playing *a lot* of games on turf during those seasons (they had Atlanta and New Orleans in division at that time--both indoor teams). And my point was that the *offense* struggled when on grass--is this really news to you? Many of those games were won on defense (some classic battles against the Tampa Bay Bucs come to mind...).

 

[BigDavis75]

Part of it was going off last year's list, part of it was knowing a guy was coming off injury, and I anticipate McNair to be good. He was co-MVP just two years ago, and camp reports have been good. Pennington will put up good completion % numbers, just not great long ball #s.

I think that Delhomme is a solid QB with really nice tools. It's not all completion percentage, at least not to me. For all the catchup they were playing, the Panthers managed to stay alive in the playoff hunt longer than the Cardinals did, and this was in part Muhammed having a monster season, and in part because Delhomme's performance opened up Goings' Marcel Shipp-like season.

If you want, take McNair and Brees out and add Favre and Collins. Do you really, really think that Warner's going to have as good, or better, a season than Kerry Collins? I'd put Vick on that list just in terms of wins, but now the arguement seems to have migrated to stats.

Warner was something like 14th or 15th in QB rating last season (behind part-time guys like Volek, as well as Plummer). I don't think that he needs to have a Top 10 season for the Cards to win some games (and he won't; don't worry). If he can be in the middle of the league again, the Cards are going to be in good shape.

You are wrong on Pennington he has good long ball comp. % but awful mid range. Also, I forgot about Vick I don't care what the Vick haters ays he is a great QB. Your Volek argument is useless though b/c Volek really tore it up when he played he almost made Drew Bennett into a Pro Bowl calibur player.

 

[DKCards]

Well, Mike Vick is the only QB to beat the Packers at Lambeau Field in the playoffs. He also twice lead his team to the playoffs as a one-man show. Warner lead an offense with no fewer than three HoFers. I guess that Warner does lead Vick in the "most teams cut from" department.

I said that our team last year was worse than the Giants' team was. Can you really argue with that? Look at the record. Yes, we beat them head to head, but did the G-men lose to the worst team in the league twice? Do you really want to argue that it was the New York defense that was winning games?

Yes, our 4 or 5 nobodies are exactly equal to Jeremy Shockey, a former first-round pick and two-time Pro Bowler. Good call.

Your right, we don't know what we have in Arrington, but how many rookie RBs have rushed for 1500 yards in the past five years? Portis, maybe. Maybe Tomlinson? It's a lot to ask to tell me to believe that Arrington as a rookie is going to be of the same value to the Cards as Barber was last year (in my mind, he was an MVP candidate for the Giants).

What I do think was "special" about Kurt Warner was his deciciveness when he was playing with the Rams. His ability to pick out a WR and deliver the ball in a very, very complex system was impressive. But he didn't show anything of that kind of decisiveness last season in New York. But, he wasn't playing with two HoFers in New York, either. He's not playing with two HoFers in Arizona, though.

The Warner issue will play out over the season. If you really think that this Kurt Warner is better than Peyton Manning, Daunte Culpepper, Steve McNair, Marc Bulger, Trent Green, Drew Brees, Donovan McNabb, Tom Brady, Chad Pennington, and Jake Delhomme (the top 10 QBs in the league today--and that's not even counting Brett Favre), more power to you. I'll have to see it to believe it.

I always thought the mark of a great player was making the other players around you better. All the HOFers you are talking about had their best years with Warner. Maybe that was because of him not in spite of him. As you say yourself Vick is a one man show. Vick is the better athlete but as being the better QB I don’t know. Based on your observations I would have to say that Warner was. Now if he still is, is just speculation on all of our parts. Who knows, he might just be playing with 3 or 4 HOFers this year or he could just be a washed up QB on a horrible offence. It will probably turn out to be somewhere in the middle of that. But if you listen to all the reports from camp they have mostly been encouraging and how you can not admit that I do not know. Don't let your hate cloud you view.

 

[kerouac9]

You are wrong on Pennington he has good long ball comp. % but awful mid range. Also, I forgot about Vick I don't care what the Vick haters ays he is a great QB. Your Volek argument is useless though b/c Volek really tore it up when he played he almost made Drew Bennett into a Pro Bowl calibur player.

No, I just meant that Volek won't be starting or supplanting McNair unless he gets hurt again. Volek was awesome last season in relief of McNair.

Pennington can't throw the deep out. It's long been the book on him. His deep balls flutter quite a bit, as well. He *can* get the ball deep; he just doesn't have a lot of zip on it. Never has, never will. I guess I'm not sure what you mean by "mid-range". He's great at completing short passes. Do you just mean deep outs and skinny posts?

 

[kerouac9]

I always thought the mark of a great player was making the other players around you better. All the HOFers you are talking about had their best years with Warner. Maybe that was because of him not in spite of him. As you say yourself Vick is a one man show. Vick is the better athlete but as being the better QB I don’t know. Based on your observations I would have to say that Warner was. Now if he still is, is just speculation on all of our parts. Who knows, he might just be playing with 3 or 4 HOFers this year or he could just be a washed up QB on a horrible offence. It will probably turn out to be somewhere in the middle of that. But if you listen to all the reports from camp they have mostly been encouraging and how you can not admit that I do not know. Don't let your hate cloud you view.

I agree, but my point is that who was making who better? As we saw in the past, a good WR can make a QB look pretty good. Warner had two Pro Bowl WRs. A QBs best friend is a great running game. Warner had a HoF back in his backfield.

Torry Holt had his best season under Bulger (1696 yds, 12 TDs in 2003[!]). Issac Bruce had his best season long before Warner (1995: 1781 yds, 13 TDs[!!]). Indesputably Faulk's best years were when he was with Warner, but to me a great running game contributes more to a great passing game than the other way around. We can go around and around on this forever.

Tom Brady is an excellent example of a great player who makes the players around him better. His WRs have never been great. Brett Favre is a similar example. But Kurt Warner? Please.

Again, I only think that Warner will be middling this season, and likely to be replaced because Green wants someone under center who can put up QB ratings in the mid-90s. The jury is very much out on Warner's effectiveness in this scheme. I just think that I have the odds in my favor in guessing that he'll be average than asserting that he's going to take the NFL by storm (which is what many are doing).

 

[LVCARDFREAK]

No, I just meant that Volek won't be starting or supplanting McNair unless he gets hurt again. Volek was awesome last season in relief of McNair.

Pennington can't throw the deep out. It's long been the book on him. His deep balls flutter quite a bit, as well. He *can* get the ball deep; he just doesn't have a lot of zip on it. Never has, never will. I guess I'm not sure what you mean by "mid-range". He's great at completing short passes. Do you just mean deep outs and skinny posts?

Thats untrue. See the AFC divisional game last year. He hit Moss on a 55 yard bomb and threw two passes to McCareins of over 30+ yards. These werent catch and runs, these were legitimate long balls.

I know most people believe he cant throw the long ball, but it really is just an true piece of misinformation sent out during his draft year.

 

[BigDavis75]

No, I just meant that Volek won't be starting or supplanting McNair unless he gets hurt again. Volek was awesome last season in relief of McNair.

Pennington can't throw the deep out. It's long been the book on him. His deep balls flutter quite a bit, as well. He *can* get the ball deep; he just doesn't have a lot of zip on it. Never has, never will. I guess I'm not sure what you mean by "mid-range". He's great at completing short passes. Do you just mean deep outs and skinny posts?

I mean like 10-20 yards, they showed a graphic on it and I believe he was 32. And for deep balls 20+ he was top 5, I know it really suprised me too.

 

[kerouac9]

Thats untrue. See the AFC divisional game last year. He hit Moss on a 55 yard bomb and threw two passes to McCareins of over 30+ yards. These werent catch and runs, these were legitimate long balls.

I know most people believe he cant throw the long ball, but it really is just an true piece of misinformation sent out during his draft year.

I think he *can* throw vertical. It's not pretty, and no one's going to confuse him with Daunte Culpepper. He can't throw the deep (20 yd) out, though. That pass requires a hard throw with lots of rpms to get past defenders. Ironically, it was something that McCown was pretty good at last season, but he didn't have the deep ball.

I think Pennington's a good passer. I know he's your boy. I'm just saying that he's more of a cerebral QB than most of the more successful guys at the position today.