Fitz: "Whiz gets too much of a bad rap"

[Shane]

Matt Stafford is better than Alex Smith, but it's not, IMO, as good as even a guy like Matt Schaub. He's (right now) a third-tier QB after the elite tier (Rodgers, Brees, Roethlisberger, Brady, Rivers) and the very good tier (Flacco, E. Manning, J. Freeman, Sanchez, Schaub, Vick).

Stafford is on the next tier with guys like Sam Bradford, Jason Campbell, Cam Newton, Andy Dalton, etc. The transitional guys whose good games you can still remember, but are probably on the way up or on the way down.

Kevin Kolb is playing ball with Chad Henne and Kyle Orton right now. Good company.

But we're burying the lede. We're four weeks away from Terrelle Pryor starting an NFL game, everyone! Tim Tebow and Terrelle Pryor will be starting in the same division! Unfortinately, Denver and Oakland meet in their last matchup on the season November 11, so unless Kyle Boller is so bad that he gets replaced in four weeks, we're not going to see them on the same field.

Sam Bradford is nowhere near the level of Matthew Stafford.. Saying they are in the same tier is almost laughable.

 

[Mulli]

Sam Bradford is nowhere near the level of Matthew Stafford.. Saying they are in the same tier is almost laughable.

Same tier.

 

[Cheesebeef]

Sam Bradford is nowhere near the level of Matthew Stafford.. Saying they are in the same tier is almost laughable.

it's not almost laughable, it IS laughable. Stafford's got a 98 passer rating, throws for a 62% completion percentage and has a TD:INT of 15:4. the guy looks like one of the best QBs in the league and that's coming into the season with just 9 games under his belt as a starter.

I mean... Andy Dalton... CAMPBELL?!

 

[Cbus cardsfan]

I would put Stafford in the second tier and he's probably going to only get better. Now, the other Matt, Ryan, is the guy who I think has always been overrated. With Stafford, it will be a matter of if he can stay healthy.

 

[Catfish]

Kurt Warner's statement of 'players being wide-open', is really a veiled attempt at saying that Kurt Warner could have found some of those receivers. How many Kurt Warners are currently playing in the NFL? Sure, he possessed the quick reading ability, and the toughness to stand in there long enough to get the ball out with his quick release. Who else could be doing that? Surely not someone with 11 starts in the NFL.

Fitz is pretty much saying that the QB is not getting the ball to the open receivers. Yet the missed blocks he refers to have been on Whiz since his arrival here. So is the lack of a pass rush. (Remember, he did elect to pass on Terrell Suggs to take Levi Brown at #5 overall). What difference might it have made if we had a pass rusher like Suggs in the SB at the end of the game. We win that game, and probably none of this is being talked about now, because real free agents would be beating Whiz' door down to come to Az. This is still on Whiz, and that won't go away until he does, (or he fixes it).

 

[Buckybird]

Kurt Warner's statement of 'players being wide-open', is really a veiled attempt at saying that Kurt Warner could have found some of those receivers. How many Kurt Warners are currently playing in the NFL? Sure, he possessed the quick reading ability, and the toughness to stand in there long enough to get the ball out with his quick release. Who else could be doing that? Surely not someone with 11 starts in the NFL.

Fitz is pretty much saying that the QB is not getting the ball to the open receivers. Yet the missed blocks he refers to have been on Whiz since his arrival here. So is the lack of a pass rush. (Remember, he did elect to pass on Terrell Suggs to take Levi Brown at #5 overall). What difference might it have made if we had a pass rusher like Suggs in the SB at the end of the game. We win that game, and probably none of this is being talked about now, because real free agents would be beating Whiz' door down to come to Az. This is still on Whiz, and that won't go away until he does, (or he fixes it).

I believe that was the infamous Graves trade for BJ & Pace

 

[kerouac9]

it's not almost laughable, it IS laughable. Stafford's got a 98 passer rating, throws for a 62% completion percentage and has a TD:INT of 15:4. the guy looks like one of the best QBs in the league and that's coming into the season with just 9 games under his belt as a starter.

I mean... Andy Dalton... CAMPBELL?!

Stafford's having a great season, but he's a third-year veteran. Sam Bradford looked really good last year without the best WR in the NFL playing on the outside. As I said, it's a transitional level. Are you ready to put Sam Bradford If He Stays Healthy on the same level as Matt Schaub, Eli Manning, Mark Sanchez, Josh Freeman, and Josh Freeman after 6 games? Matt Stafford wasn't all that good last year before he got hurt.

Should I go back six months in the archives and see what you were saying about Sam Bradford when I was advising caution before crowning him the best QB in the NFC West?

 

[Cheesebeef]

Stafford's having a great season, but he's a third-year veteran. Sam Bradford looked really good last year without the best WR in the NFL playing on the outside.

sam bradford looked solid for a rookie and had a lot of potential but he wasn't putting up league leading stats and leading a moribund franchise to a 5-1 record.

As I said, it's a transitional level. Are you ready to put Sam Bradford If He Stays Healthy on the same level as Matt Schaub, Eli Manning, Mark Sanchez, Josh Freeman, and Josh Freeman after 6 games. Matt Stafford wasn't all that good last year before he got hurt.

you're right... 535 yards, 6 TDs and 1 pick and a 91 passer rating in 2.5 games at the beginning of last season isn't all that good. Are you kidding? The kid looked very good before he got hurt.

And are you saying Sanchez is a better QB than Stafford is? What in the world are you talking about... or is this just another guy you slammed back in the day and are now loathe to admit you were wrong? If so, give it a break dude. it's okay to admit fault every once in a while. refreshing even.

Should I go back six months in the archives and see what you were saying about Sam Bradford when I was advising caution before crowning him the best QB in the NFC West?

sure... although you'll probably find me saying Bradford's probably going to be the best QB in the West... and that was in a West with us having NOTHING, the Seahawks having nothing and the Niners having Alex Smith who's Trent Dilfer.

The guy is lighting up the league right now and looked good last year before he got hurt... but hey, if you've got some kind of vendetta against him, I'm sure you'll find reasons to fault him or put him in a class with Campbell... CAMPBELL? I mean, I know you liked him coming out of college, but that's beyond stupid K9.

 

[Mitch]

The problem with Fitz's and Warner's whole argument is yeah some receivers may be wide open---and the players could execute better on offense---BUT---they are not even talking about the defense which no one of the planet Earth could offer a legitimate excuse for how inept Whisenhunt has been in delivering at least an adequate defense in Arizona under his 5 year tenure. Fitz can blame the defensive players on that too---and some of it certainly falls on them, but the way this defense has been built and largely ignored in Whisenhunt's tenure is indefensible and inexcusable. No progress whatsover. And thus the Cardinals remain a 45-17 loser on any given game...particularly the ones where the players take the week off as they did in Minnesota---on BOTH sides of the ball.

What I also question here is Fitz's own agenda---in Whiz he knows he has a HC/OC whose top priority is the passing game and trying to get the ball to Fitz---so, of course, Fitz is going to commend his coach. It's a weak argument for sure---after 3-13 in the last 16 games---many of which were either self-destructions or embarrassing debacles.

To me this proves that Fitz is only looking after himself. He likes the coach who caters his offense to him, regardless of 3-13. Period.

And furthermore---expect Whiz to get much more verbal support from the players who have loved the soft approach to TC and practices---and who have loved that they don't even get yelled at for not showing up and still collecting fat paychecks.

We will see what the players really think of the coaches the rest of this season---if they truly respect and like the coaches, the players will play hard and play to win. Think that is going to happen?

Talk is cheap Fitz...and by the way Fitz, you are not the player you were two years ago when Haley was riding your arse. How about showing up yourself?

 

[O]

The players loved McGinnis too.

How did that work out?

 

[Red Dawn]

Larry's a company man, what else would he say.

I wonder how many ugly losses Whiz has to get before he becomes accountable.

 

[Buckybird]

The problem with Fitz's and Warner's whole argument is yeah some receivers may be wide open---and the players could execute better on offense---BUT---they are not even talking about the defense which no one of the planet Earth could offer a legitimate excuse for how inept Whisenhunt has been in delivering at least an adequate defense in Arizona under his 5 year tenure. Fitz can blame the defensive players on that too---and some of it certainly falls on them, but the way this defense has been built and largely ignored in Whisenhunt's tenure is indefensible and inexcusable. No progress whatsover. And thus the Cardinals remain a 45-17 loser on any given game...particularly the ones where the players take the week off as they did in Minnesota---on BOTH sides of the ball.

What I also question here is Fitz's own agenda---in Whiz he knows he has a HC/OC whose top priority is the passing game and trying to get the ball to Fitz---so, of course, Fitz is going to commend his coach. It's a weak argument for sure---after 3-13 in the last 16 games---many of which were either self-destructions or embarrassing debacles.

To me this proves that Fitz is only looking after himself. He likes the coach who caters his offense to him, regardless of 3-13. Period.

And furthermore---expect Whiz to get much more verbal support from the players who have loved the soft approach to TC and practices---and who have loved that they don't even get yelled at for not showing up and still collecting fat paychecks.

We will see what the players really think of the coaches the rest of this season---if they truly respect and like the coaches, the players will play hard and play to win. Think that is going to happen?

Talk is cheap Fitz...and by the way Fitz, you are not the player you were two years ago when Haley was riding your arse. How about showing up yourself?

I'm not buying that

 

[Buckybird]

The players loved McGinnis too.

How did that work out?

Larry's a company man, what else would he say.

I wonder how many ugly losses Whiz has to get before he becomes accountable.

Players rarely call out coaches or question their ability to lead or win, it just doesnt happen often

 

[Duckjake]

I'm not buying that

Did you see the nfl network show on Kurt Warner. In that they show Fitz telling Warner he (Larry) only needs x amount of yards to get to a 100 yards receiving. Warner tells him that he'll try and get him the ball and then adds "but what about winning the game".

Warner said that Larry has supposedly outgrown that sort of attitude.

 

[Shane]

Same tier.

In your dreams. Stafford is in another stratosphere compared to bradford who IMO is way way over hyped.

 

[Buckybird]

Did you see the nfl network show on Kurt Warner. In that they show Fitz telling Warner he (Larry) only needs x amount of yards to get to a 100 yards receiving. Warner tells him that he'll try and get him the ball and then adds "but what about winning the game".

Warner said that Larry has supposedly outgrown that sort of attitude.

I saw it. But every WR cries for the ball to some extent. Given the person has been in life & what he's achieved on the field to this point tells me his main goal is winning.

And to think Kurt doesn't have some sort of ego? I would say all athletes to some extent do.

 

[Mulli]

In your dreams. Stafford is in another stratosphere compared to bradford who IMO is way way over hyped.

Both are over-hyped, but Bradford isn't being hyped much lately.

 

[red desert]

In your dreams. Stafford is in another stratosphere compared to bradford who IMO is way way over hyped.

Actually, I think Bradford is better. He'll prove it in the coming years, much to our chagrin.

 

[Buckybird]

Both are over-hyped, but Bradford isn't being hyped much lately.

Stafford isn't overhyped IMO. Bradford has basically zero weapons & a poor Oline. I still think he's a star in the making. In the long run I would take either over Sanchez, Newton or Flacco anyday

 

[Shane]

Actually, I think Bradford is better.

Based on what?

 

[LVCARDFREAK]

Matt Stafford is better than Alex Smith, but it's not, IMO, as good as even a guy like Matt Schaub. He's (right now) a third-tier QB after the elite tier (Rodgers, Brees, Roethlisberger, Brady, Rivers) and the very good tier (Flacco, E. Manning, J. Freeman, Sanchez, Schaub, Vick).

Stafford is on the next tier with guys like Sam Bradford, Jason Campbell, Cam Newton, Andy Dalton, etc. The transitional guys whose good games you can still remember, but are probably on the way up or on the way down.

Kevin Kolb is playing ball with Chad Henne and Kyle Orton right now. Good company.

But we're burying the lede. We're four weeks away from Terrelle Pryor starting an NFL game, everyone! Tim Tebow and Terrelle Pryor will be starting in the same division! Unfortinately, Denver and Oakland meet in their last matchup on the season November 11, so unless Kyle Boller is so bad that he gets replaced in four weeks, we're not going to see them on the same field.

Have you watched Sanchez? Really good QB? Come on, his accuracy is bordering on awful.

Ill agree on Calvin Johnson, but the way Fitz is covered by 2 and sometimes 3 guys is ridiculous. Andre Roberts and Early Doucet scare no one.

 

[Mulli]

Based on what?

Playing a full season?

 

[Shane]

Playing a full season?

So he is better just because he played one full season even though he sucks balls on the field?

 

[Mulli]

So he is better just because he played one full season even though he sucks balls on the field?

Stafford yet to prove himself over course of year. Very streaky.

 

[kerouac9]

sam bradford looked solid for a rookie and had a lot of potential but he wasn't putting up league leading stats and leading a moribund franchise to a 5-1 record.



you're right... 535 yards, 6 TDs and 1 pick and a 91 passer rating in 2.5 games at the beginning of last season isn't all that good. Are you kidding? The kid looked very good before he got hurt.

And are you saying Sanchez is a better QB than Stafford is? What in the world are you talking about... or is this just another guy you slammed back in the day and are now loathe to admit you were wrong? If so, give it a break dude. it's okay to admit fault every once in a while. refreshing even.



sure... although you'll probably find me saying Bradford's probably going to be the best QB in the West... and that was in a West with us having NOTHING, the Seahawks having nothing and the Niners having Alex Smith who's Trent Dilfer.

The guy is lighting up the league right now and looked good last year before he got hurt... but hey, if you've got some kind of vendetta against him, I'm sure you'll find reasons to fault him or put him in a class with Campbell... CAMPBELL? I mean, I know you liked him coming out of college, but that's beyond stupid K9.

Wow. That escalated quickly to an argument that wasn't about football. I like Jason Campbell. Since you know that, you shouldn't take particular offense when I put them in the same tier of "Talented Quarterbacks with Question Marks." If you don't believe me about Matt Stafford, then listen to Football Outsiders:

Stafford announced that he was 100 percent healthy in May; blooming crocuses and an injury-free Stafford are two sure signs that it is not autumn. Stafford has not yet strung together two straight good games. Last year’s Redskins-Jets sequence was solid, but it’s hard to say a quarterback had a “good” game when he suffers a season-ending injury and his team loses. Nearly half of Stafford’s career touchdown production came in two games: last year’s four-touchdown effort against the Redskins and the wild five-touchdown 38-37 shootout against the Browns in 2009. Stafford aces the eyeball test when he is in the lineup, but his career lacks traction, so we still don’t know what to expect if Stafford manages to string 8-10 consecutive games together. Even if Stafford conquers injuries, there is not much evidence to suggest that he will suddenly blossom into Matt Ryan. Three years into his career, he still has some rookie growing pains to work through.

Maybe there should be another tier in my QB ratings for "Promising but Unproven." That's where I'd put Cam Newton, Stafford, McCoy, and Bradford right now. Ryan Fitzpatrick might be at the top of the category. Tim Tebow would be at the bottom.

Yes. Mark Sanchez is a better QB than Matt Stafford is. And there's no question in my mind about it. Weren't you the one saying that you don't care about the stats, Matt Hasselback is a winner, and has been his entire career? That's Mark Sanchez. You don't go to consecutive AFC Championship games to open your career because you're a scrub, and you don't win two road playoff games each time.

I have Sanchez ahead of Matt Ryan on my QB rankings for this very reason.

I'm probably still over-enamored with Jason Campbell. If I were to put a bottom tier together called Eating Out of the Garbage, he'd be on top, above Kerry Collins, Chad Henne, Donovan McNabb, John Beck, Rex Grossman, and Tavaris Jackson.