Florio: 5 QBS who should be benched

[TJ]

Sorry to post this around lunch time and ruin your appetite. Give you one guess as to who is #5 on this list. This is a terrible write up all together.

http://www.sportingnews.com/nfl/article/2010-07-21/five-quarterbacks-who-should-be-benched

 

[LoyaltyisaCurse]

Florio is a no-nothing hack... eff him...

 

[82CardsGrad]

He isn't saying anything that hasn't already been said hundreds of times...

Hopefully, he will become another one of the thousands (of which I am one) that Matt will prove wrong.

 

[DieHardCardFan]

So Lienart could not beat out a Hall of Fame QB who was in the top 5 QB ratings the last 2 years? And that means he is worthless? What a hack!!!! Hell the way Warner was playing it is likely no NFL QB would have beat him out with the Cards.

 

[82CardsGrad]

So Lienart could not beat out a Hall of Fame QB who was in the top 5 QB ratings the last 2 years? And that means he is worthless? What a hack!!!! Hell the way Warner was playing it is likely no NFL QB would have beat him out with the Cards.

Agreed.

 

[ajcardfan]

So Lienart could not beat out a Hall of Fame QB who was in the top 5 QB ratings the last 2 years? And that means he is worthless? What a hack!!!! Hell the way Warner was playing it is likely no NFL QB would have beat him out with the Cards.

You certainly wouldn't have needed more than three fingers to count the number of QBs who could've beat out Warner these past two seasons.

 

[RugbyMuffin]

hmm...

Would he have to be off the bench to be in fact "benched" ?

He hasn't even played a game yet. We are going to bench him over 1 game in 2 years, and preseason starts ?

Come' on.

 

[Unsterblich856]

General gist of the writeup: bench your QBs before they have a chance to prove themselves.

 

[IAWarnerFan]

He's struggled in the limited playing time he's gotten thus far, but it's too early for this stuff. Lets see how he does after the first few games of the regular season first.

 

[conraddobler]

I expect the first part of the season to go very well, because Whiz isn't stupid, Warner and Matt are very different and so is our team now from when Matt last started.

IMO they'll shock people early then once teams get a look at what we're trying to do with Matt then someone is going to counter that and then we'll figure out if Matt has it or not.

It's a long season, and I expect it to be a very compressed one year tryout by Matt.

 

[Renz]

I think the Rams should bench Sam Bradford.

 

[seesred]

THe man has a right to his opinion. I hope to the Cardinal God that he fools all of the non believers.

GBR
40

 

[RugbyMuffin]

IMO they'll shock people early then once teams get a look at what we're trying to do with Matt then someone is going to counter that and then we'll figure out if Matt has it or not.

Well, put.

 

[SoCal Cardfan]

I think that he's right, but like any other Cards fan who doesn't believe in Matt, I would happily eat a huge plate of crow.

What put me so firmly against Matt, was how poorly he played in mop up duty.. If you can't do anything in low pressure situations, what are the odds he can come through in the clutch?

 

[dreamcastrocks]

What put me so firmly against Matt, was how poorly he played in mop up duty.. If you can't do anything in low pressure situations, what are the odds he can come through in the clutch?

You mean like the Tennessee game?

 

[Mulli]

I think that he's right, but like any other Cards fan who doesn't believe in Matt, I would happily eat a huge plate of crow.

What put me so firmly against Matt, was how poorly he played in mop up duty.. If you can't do anything in low pressure situations, what are the odds he can come through in the clutch?

Kinda depends on if you practiced with the first team that week, doesn't it?

 

[TJ]

I think that he's right, but like any other Cards fan who doesn't believe in Matt, I would happily eat a huge plate of crow.

What put me so firmly against Matt, was how poorly he played in mop up duty.. If you can't do anything in low pressure situations, what are the odds he can come through in the clutch?

When Warner went down in the Division Round of the playoffs against NO, Matt was 7 for 10 passing and put them in FG range to close out the first half.

Basically, he was told to rally and win a playoff game (before Warner came back). 70% completion in a HIGH pressure situation is pretty good IMO.

Your disdain for Leinart has been duly noted but you need to realize what the alternatives are. the other two options are an erratic, inaccurate Derek Anderson and a rookie 5th rounder in Skelton. Even the biggest Leinart haters have to realize that the other options are much worse

 

[cardsfanmd]

When Warner went down in the Division Round of the playoffs against NO, Matt was 7 for 10 passing and put them in FG range to close out the first half.

Basically, he was told to rally and win a playoff game (before Warner came back). 70% completion in a HIGH pressure situation is pretty good IMO.

Your disdain for Leinart has been duly noted but you need to realize what the alternatives are. the other two options are an erratic, inaccurate Derek Anderson and a rookie 5th rounder in Skelton. Even the biggest Leinart haters have to realize that the other options are much worse

This needed to be put up twice.

 

[IAWarnerFan]

Doing well for a series or two in a playoff game is nice, but a starting QB needs to do well in the regular season to even make it to the playoffs. ML hasn't looked nearly as good in his nearly 595 regular season attempts thus far. With Warner out of the picture he'll have to improve on his current 70.8 QB rating. Again tho lets wait to see what he does his first few games of the regular season this year.

 

[Mulli]

Doing well for a series or two in a playoff game is nice, but a starting QB needs to do well in the regular season to even make it to the playoffs. ML hasn't looked nearly as good in his nearly 595 regular season attempts thus far. With Warner out of the picture he'll have to improve on his current 70.8 QB rating. Again tho lets wait to see what he does his first few games of the regular season this year.

You must be registered for see images

 

[D-Dogg]

I think that he's right, but like any other Cards fan who doesn't believe in Matt, I would happily eat a huge plate of crow.

What put me so firmly against Matt, was how poorly he played in mop up duty.. If you can't do anything in low pressure situations, what are the odds he can come through in the clutch?

You mean like the Tennessee game?

Or the NE snow game, when he was the only guy who got the ball to Larry and put a TD on the board?

Bottom line, Matt hasn't had a terrible showing overall for a guy with limited experience. HE put us in gamewinner position against both the Bears and Chiefs and Rackers missed both times. His footwork has improved since then, and there really isn't reason to be so down on the guy, other than injury concerns but THAT never seems to be the reason people bash him. Silly, really.

He's shown more good than bad, and in an offense that will suit his skills (run based with Beanie and Tim) he should perform just fine. He's done NOTHING to justify the opinion he should be benched before he starts freaking TRAINING CAMP this year.

 

[D-Dogg]

ML hasn't looked nearly as good in his nearly 595 regular season attempts thus far. With Warner out of the picture he'll have to improve on his current 70.8 QB rating.

Neither did Peyton Manning, Drew Brees, Troy Aikman, Brett Favre in their first 600 passes. And many of them had those 600 passes in less than 2 years. Not spread out sporadically over 4 years.

I'm more iimpressed by improved footwork and solid performance under pressure over that timeframe than some random sampling of sporadic passes thrown across several years of games, which coincides with some great players similar learning curves in the NFL. That's not to say that he's going to ever be at the level of those guys, but the regular season attempt argument doesn't hold much water.

 

[IAWarnerFan]

Neither did Peyton Manning, Drew Brees, Troy Aikman, Brett Favre in their first 600 passes. And many of them had those 600 passes in less than 2 years. Not spread out sporadically over 4 years.

I'm more iimpressed by improved footwork and solid performance under pressure over that time frame than some random sampling of sporadic passes thrown across several years of games, which coincides with some great players similar learning curves in the NFL. That's not to say that he's going to ever be at the level of those guys, but the regular season attempt argument doesn't hold much water.

Those QBs were thrown to the wolves and Leinart has had time to split time with Kurt Warner for that time. Some of the time he has had to come in for mop up time, but he has also started games(17 of 29) as well. You could say that since he didn't get to start those 12 other games he probably didn't get to practice with the 1st team offense, but that still leaves the 17 that he probably did.

In 2007, the one year that he was able to start the regular season as starter he struggled. The fact that he got more time to mature behind Warner should help him and hopefully it will. In 2010 he should get another chance to start the season as the starting QB and lets just see how does with it. Those other QBs were able to mature and become great starting QBs.

 

[D-Dogg]

Those QBs were thrown to the wolves and Leinart has had time to split time with Kurt Warner for that time. Some of the time he has had to come in for mop up time, but he has also started games(17 of 29) as well. You could say that since he didn't get to start those 12 other games he probably didn't get to practice with the 1st team offense, but that still leaves the 17 that he probably did.

In 2007, the one year that he was able to start the regular season as starter he struggled. The fact that he got more time to mature behind Warner should help him and hopefully it will. In 2010 he should get another chance to start the season as the starting QB and lets just see how does with it. Those other QBs were able to mature and become great starting QBs.

He didn't struggle in 2006 (when he started the regular season as a rook for 12 games). His numbers are comparable to all those other guys in that year, and that was when he led us to near victories over KC and the Bears (very good teams at the time, and the bears were unbeaten) that were lost by gamewinning miss....errrr gamelosing kicks by Rackers. It is revisionist history to say that he struggled because the kicker missed end of game kicks against teams when Matt drove the squad down to put us in position to win or tie games.

In 12 starts he was 4-8 (give him the bears/KC games, and it's 6-6). 74 passer rating. 11 TDs to 12 INT. Only 57% completion, but all in all you tell me a rookie QB goes .500, has a 74 rating, even td/int ratio and I'll show you tons of others that started the same way, including the mannings and such. It's a solid start to a career. He only played 5 games the following year (going 3-2 in those) before being injured for the year. After that, he was bench guy.

So you have a guy, who arguably should be 9-8 as a legit starter, with a 70ish rating, roughly 1:1 TD/INT ratio but has shown poise (and bad footwork) in driving his team to gamewinning kicks against strong teams that went on to the Superbowl, as basically a rookie. Then he sits behind a HoF QB who catches FIRE with great WRs clicking, a new coach that opens it up and plays to the HoFers strength, team goes to a SB, HoF plays well again and then retires.

And now, guy who had what for ANY team would be a promising start to his career, is washed up and should be benched?????

Again, if you talk about injuries, I'm all freaking ears because that shoulder/collarbone is worrisome. But talent? What he has "shown us so far?" Take that argument to the trash can because the only thing he's shown us so far is that he has a lot of potential, and has performed in line with the way a solid QB can develop from...he didn't suck when he played. He didn't light it up, but neither do most QBs coming into the NFL. It takes time. Matt's had it. Now it's up to him to show us that he's GOT it. We don't know now...but we SHOULD know that he doesn't suck, and IMO people are FAR too concerned about how Matt will perform. Yes, there will still be some learning curve, but he's shown a good foundation to date.

 

[Shane]

He didn't struggle in 2006 (when he started the regular season as a rook for 12 games). His numbers are comparable to all those other guys in that year, and that was when he led us to near victories over KC and the Bears (very good teams at the time, and the bears were unbeaten) that were lost by gamewinning miss....errrr gamelosing kicks by Rackers. It is revisionist history to say that he struggled because the kicker missed end of game kicks against teams when Matt drove the squad down to put us in position to win or tie games.

In 12 starts he was 4-8 (give him the bears/KC games, and it's 6-6). 74 passer rating. 11 TDs to 12 INT. Only 57% completion, but all in all you tell me a rookie QB goes .500, has a 74 rating, even td/int ratio and I'll show you tons of others that started the same way, including the mannings and such. It's a solid start to a career. He only played 5 games the following year (going 3-2 in those) before being injured for the year. After that, he was bench guy.

So you have a guy, who arguably should be 9-8 as a legit starter, with a 70ish rating, roughly 1:1 TD/INT ratio but has shown poise (and bad footwork) in driving his team to gamewinning kicks against strong teams that went on to the Superbowl, as basically a rookie. Then he sits behind a HoF QB who catches FIRE with great WRs clicking, a new coach that opens it up and plays to the HoFers strength, team goes to a SB, HoF plays well again and then retires.

And now, guy who had what for ANY team would be a promising start to his career, is washed up and should be benched?????

Again, if you talk about injuries, I'm all freaking ears because that shoulder/collarbone is worrisome. But talent? What he has "shown us so far?" Take that argument to the trash can because the only thing he's shown us so far is that he has a lot of potential, and has performed in line with the way a solid QB can develop from...he didn't suck when he played. He didn't light it up, but neither do most QBs coming into the NFL. It takes time. Matt's had it. Now it's up to him to show us that he's GOT it. We don't know now...but we SHOULD know that he doesn't suck, and IMO people are FAR too concerned about how Matt will perform. Yes, there will still be some learning curve, but he's shown a good foundation to date.

I like how your argument for Matt is the "he should" be 9-8 as a starter or he has a "70ish" rather than the flat 70 rating making it sound better than it is. The "1 to 1 INT to TD ratio" which is not even close at 14-20. I especially love the "but we SHOULD know that he doesn't suck" when in reality we dont know that. That still has yet to be decided on both sides of the fence. Has he shown promise at times? Yes. Has he just plain been terrible at times? Yes.

Time will tell. Nobody on the optimistic side or the pessimistic side is any more right than the other. But I will tell you this. WE ALL HOPE THOSE ON THE OPTIMISTIC SIDE ARE THE CORRECT ONES!