sportznutt
Canadian Card
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2005
- Posts
- 3,334
- Reaction score
- 177
ESPN - Arizona is a loser
- Thread starter sportznutt
- Start date
Cbus cardsfan
Back to Back ASFN FFL Champion
- Joined
- May 14, 2002
- Posts
- 21,614
- Reaction score
- 7,986
Clayton is a loser. Let's say for some reason Skelton becomes a star QB. Clayton would be on their praising the Cards for only giving up McFadden. Clayton has one of the worst football minds out there.
Zeno
Ancient
He is also one of the weirdest looking guys I've ever seen. Truly.
I think all these analysts just judge based on where they think a player should be picked and their judgement of what each teams needs are.
Oh and McFadden was AWFUL.
Garthshort
ASFN Addict
Clayton is an info guy and not an analyst. And he usually gets pretty good info. When he tries to go analytical, he's usually influenced, unduly IMO, by his Pittsburgh/Seattle background. His heart influences his head too often. JMO.
RonF
Per Ardua Ad Astra
One of the most difficult positions to fill successfully is the CB position. There is no doubt in my mind that the Cardinals coaching staff must have felt that McFadden wasn't worth the money they were paying him.
AND... They were right!
JeffGollin
ASFN Icon
The comment by Clayton (not ESPN, "Clayton") was that our trading away McFadden seemed "strange" in terms of what we got for him (i.e. the Skelton pick). Nowhere can I find Clayton or ESPN saying that "Arizona is a Loser."
The worst you can say about Clayton's comment is that it reveals a total lack of knowledge of McFadden's (pretty crumby) past year with the Cardinals. (Being as charitable as I can be: McFadden seemed to me to be an "off" cover guy put in "tight-cover" circumstances opposite DRC and, as such was too often late to the ball and undressed in key situations. What the Cards appeared to be looking for opposite DRC was "another DRC." Toler fits that description (as will hopefully youngsters, Calvin and Jefferson. McFadden wasn't happy. The Cards weren't happy; and they cut their losses).
To accuse Clayton of not doing his homework on the Cardinals is, I think, justified. But to make the claim that ESPN called us "Losers" is inaccurate, misleading and (as much as I love to rip ESPN) unfair.
The worst you can say about Clayton's comment is that it reveals a total lack of knowledge of McFadden's (pretty crumby) past year with the Cardinals. (Being as charitable as I can be: McFadden seemed to me to be an "off" cover guy put in "tight-cover" circumstances opposite DRC and, as such was too often late to the ball and undressed in key situations. What the Cards appeared to be looking for opposite DRC was "another DRC." Toler fits that description (as will hopefully youngsters, Calvin and Jefferson. McFadden wasn't happy. The Cards weren't happy; and they cut their losses).
To accuse Clayton of not doing his homework on the Cardinals is, I think, justified. But to make the claim that ESPN called us "Losers" is inaccurate, misleading and (as much as I love to rip ESPN) unfair.
Stout
Hold onto the ball, Murray!
IMO, this is an indictment on our FO for their disasterous decision, following suit from previous seasons, on a high-money free agent.
Cardiac
ASFN Icon
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2002
- Posts
- 12,079
- Reaction score
- 3,351
Yep. McFadden has made both the Steelers and Cards look a bit goofy. Hopefully the hot potato that is McBlind blows up in the Steelers hands.
This was as much a salary dump as much as anything. Many teams traded players during the draft to get rid of salary etc and got not a whole lot in return in draft value. Cards were hardly the only team to do this.
conraddobler
I want my 2$
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2002
- Posts
- 20,052
- Reaction score
- 237
You know it sounds stupid to trade a guy back and give up a pick to do it but in reality if you think he's not worth the money it's a great call.
Getting the guy in the first place is actually the real mistake, trading him back and getting out of paying him is a great thing, but it itself looks like the mistake when it was not.
Getting the guy in the first place is actually the real mistake, trading him back and getting out of paying him is a great thing, but it itself looks like the mistake when it was not.
Goldfield
Formally known as BEERZ
Exactly
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2009
- Posts
- 1,589
- Reaction score
- 1
Don't any of you flash "SpongeBob" when Claytons face pops up? Too many grandkids love that show when we have the living one to watch.
CardsFan88
ASFN Addict
- Joined
- May 28, 2002
- Posts
- 7,707
- Reaction score
- 4,888
It also depends on what you got. We gave up mcfadden, and got skelton. It shows some guys aren't high on Skelton, or are overly high on mcfadden.
I think it was a great move, espn can say anything they want about it, they probably would have blamed us for not getting a qb if we didn't trade up. We chose between toler/mcfadden and skelton/next guy. It seems we would rather be proactive and go after toler/skelton situation than mcfadden/next guy situation. You don't trade up for a QB unless you want him.
ESPN just seems they can't understand that. Trading McFadden to moved up 40 spots to secure a QB with all-pro potential in Skelton is a clear move.
I'm also surprised no one in espn being the attention ***** that they are, bothered to put two neurons together and go hmmm maybe this means the Steelers are sticking by Big *****.
This was the worst ESPN draft coverage from a cards fan perspective that I can remember, and we've seen pretty bad.
I think it was a great move, espn can say anything they want about it, they probably would have blamed us for not getting a qb if we didn't trade up. We chose between toler/mcfadden and skelton/next guy. It seems we would rather be proactive and go after toler/skelton situation than mcfadden/next guy situation. You don't trade up for a QB unless you want him.
ESPN just seems they can't understand that. Trading McFadden to moved up 40 spots to secure a QB with all-pro potential in Skelton is a clear move.
I'm also surprised no one in espn being the attention ***** that they are, bothered to put two neurons together and go hmmm maybe this means the Steelers are sticking by Big *****.
This was the worst ESPN draft coverage from a cards fan perspective that I can remember, and we've seen pretty bad.
Mitch
Crawled Through 5 FB Fields
Great post, 88.
And let me add these contexts to the McFadden trade:
1. What other team would have traded for McFadden after the year he had last year and with his $5M salary? The fact that the Cardinals got anything for him is outstanding.
2. Having missed out BY ONE PICK on Mike Kafka in the 4th round, and having just sent Chris Miller and others out to NY to dine with Skelton and work him out the next morning, the fact that the Cardinals did not wait around until the end of round 6 and went and got the player they wanted speaks volumes to how far the Cardinals have come in their ability to work the draft. Skelton would not have been available at #195 had the Cardinals waited. And they were smart enough not to take that risk.
And, another thing...what John Clayton probably never knew or realized is how other NFC teams told the Cardinals that they were all set to pick Williams and Washington had the Cardinals not beat them to it.
Matt L
formerly known as mattyboy
I think a lot of these guys have the mindset that you can just give these players some sort of ranking and put them in a lineup, similar to a fantasy sports or Madden system where you just need to get the best of what is available and then throw them in your lineup.
I am not certain if the "pundits" look at scheme and the strengths of the player when they provide their analysis.
Based on what I have seen and what I have read, McFadden didn't really fit our defensive scheme. DRC was/is pretty good in man coverage and can lock onto a receiver. McFadden looked better suited for zone coverage and preffered to give up the short pass but couldn't turn and run with a receiver and then look back for the ball.
I learned a long time ago that the "experts" have a shorter memory than most of the public and it is probably better for their career to have that trait.
I am not certain if the "pundits" look at scheme and the strengths of the player when they provide their analysis.
Based on what I have seen and what I have read, McFadden didn't really fit our defensive scheme. DRC was/is pretty good in man coverage and can lock onto a receiver. McFadden looked better suited for zone coverage and preffered to give up the short pass but couldn't turn and run with a receiver and then look back for the ball.
I learned a long time ago that the "experts" have a shorter memory than most of the public and it is probably better for their career to have that trait.
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2003
- Posts
- 120,120
- Reaction score
- 60,691
The question I have, is would the Cardinals have been required to pay McFadden a significant amount of money if they cut him?
If so, this trade makes all the sense in the world... using a pick to rid dead weight and getting the QB that you want.
Matt L
formerly known as mattyboy
I believe that all depends on how the salary is structured. Maybe our salary cap guru has some insight on that....
Mitch
Crawled Through 5 FB Fields
None of McFadden's salary this year was guaranteed.
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2003
- Posts
- 120,120
- Reaction score
- 60,691
So it wasn't the money. The Cardinals must have really wanted Skelton and payed the price.
Cardiac
ASFN Icon
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2002
- Posts
- 12,079
- Reaction score
- 3,351
Actually it was about the money IMO. Cards had no invested funds (bonus $) invested this year in McFadden so they just cleared about 5 mil of the books in salary for this year. I don't disagree with this since every team has a budget and can't spend like druken sailors.
I will be very disappointed if this saved money isn't used for extending core players etc.
A 3rd string CB simply can't make $5 mil. The thing that has me concerned is that to keep the budget inline while still having talent at the 3rd CB position a team needs to have a young draft pick in place. I don't see that on our roster at this time.
Uh, from the article ...
Here are the winners and losers in a fascinating day of wheeling and dealing:
Winners
1. The Seahawks
2. The Raiders
3. The Eagles
Losers
1. Tony Pike
2. The Jets
3. Arizona
