For everyone bitching and complaining . . .

[Shane]

I remember I posted one year that our QB was playing God-awful football, he was lucky he wasn't picked twice as much as he had been up to that point, and we were going to get hammered because of it. I was shouted down, laughed at, ridiculed, and told because we were winning, I was just being a doom and gloomer.

We were 4-2 and Plummer was that guy. Yeah, I was pretty dumb in my ideas, huh? We all know how THAT season turned out.

Point is, no matter if we win, if a player is SUCKING, he's still sucking. McCown flat-out sucked yesterday. He had ONE good drive, and ONE really good throw. That's not enough. If you're Favre and you're a proven commodity, and you have a bad game yet come back to win it, that's one thing. If you're McCown and suck and show regression week after week after week after god-awful week, and do it, it doesn't matter one lick. Because the fact remains, McCown still sucks.

Little to zero credability in your comparison stout. In your comaparisons you fail to mention that the team that year had little talent and was playing over its head. But of course all wins/losses are the QBs fault in your eyes. That team as a whole just sucked no two ways about it.

This team now has more talent but not much. This is the worst pass blocking O-line if football. But of course that has no bearing on QB play

 

[This_Guy]

Nope. I didn't. You got me there. I didn't have him written off though. I gave him a little credit for having a less than stellar line last year and a little more developement.

Right.

Even his own coaches wrote him off and no one in the league wanted him on the cheap when it looked like Rivers would be the starter in a wasted season.

Makes you wonder what might happen if King got a shot. Not saying it will, just saying it might. That' s why it's insane that DG continues to stick with horrendous play at the QB position without trying something else.

 

[Redmark]

Point is, no matter if we win, if a player is SUCKING, he's still sucking. McCown flat-out sucked yesterday. He had ONE good drive, and ONE really good throw. That's not enough. If you're Favre and you're a proven commodity, and you have a bad game yet come back to win it, that's one thing. If you're McCown and suck and show regression week after week after week after god-awful week, and do it, it doesn't matter one lick. Because the fact remains, McCown still sucks.

What would make you happy?

Reality is we have a young, inexperienced and athletic QB with some skills and potential. The Chargers threw in the towel on Drew Brees last year and now in his 3rd full season he has them in 1st place with a high rating. Complaining and bitching never got anything accomplished. BTW do you think Plummer still SUCKS?

 

[tnvolman]

Jm

That 4th quarter comeback was as good as i have ever seen in cardinal football, wat to go JOSH

 

[pete]

BTW do you think Plummer still SUCKS?

For what he's been paid, and continues to get paid, ....YES!

 

[This_Guy]

What would make you happy?

Reality is we have a young, inexperienced and athletic QB with some skills and potential. The Chargers threw in the towel on Drew Brees last year and now in his 3rd full season he has them in 1st place with a high rating. Complaining and bitching never got anything accomplished. BTW do you think Plummer still SUCKS?

RIGHT. Drew Brees has no arm, no athletic ability and every GM and coach in the league, including his own, said that "he wasn't the answer"....yet he has them in first place.

Would they be in 1st place without Brees....who EVERYONE would have said "is not the answer"? No.

Try King. If comes in and does the same or worse than McCown... Great. Go back to McCown. But until we are out of the playoff hunt, I want to see Green TRY to get some positive production out the QB position.

 

[Redmark]

Try King. If comes in and does the same or worse than McCown... Great. Go back to McCown. But until we are out of the playoff hunt, I want to see Green TRY to get some positive production out the QB position.

When they interviewed DG after halftime, I thought he would indicate a change was coming. He said, we just didn't make plays that opportunity had presented and we would stay the course. I was upset at the QB play and was also hoping he would sit Josh.

Now that JMc knows the coach won't yank him immediately and it paid off with a much improved 2nd half and a comeback win, I think it will give both DG and JMc some confidence that this experiement may still pay off.

After Josh took that hit by Zach Thomas on the interception return that was overturned, you could see how physically shaken he was. To his credit he shook it off and made a great throw to BJ to get key FD before Emmitt's TD.

I thought Josh got mad, fired up or whatever you want to call it and really grew up as a QB after that hit. IMO he deserves another start to prove this is his team. All his critics will be singing the praises of Josh McCown if he turns in 4 TD- No TO - 350 yard game next week.

 

[CardsRep03]

FOR THE LOVE OF GOD KEEP WORKING!!!

My thoughts exactly!

 

[Russ Smith]

Please. You have no credibility because the only thing you discuss is why King should be QB, and you've got Russ joining you for the ride.

I'm not completely happy about Josh's performance but I've seen King play as well. He's not the answer. I'll defer to the guy who's coaching this team instead of a bunch of second guessers who's actual experience in football (other than watching it and studying stats) I would be interested to know.

King hasn't played in awhile, and he hasn't played much for THIS offense. The one game he did play the team marched us from the 9 yard line to the Falcons territory before taking a sack that MANY questioned him taking(so you know we don't just bash Josh) and we had to punt. But because of that field position, when Dunn fumbled 2 plays later we get the ball on the 19 yard line. If Williams doesn't fumble we at worst tie the game with a FG, at best win it with a TD.

King was 5-6 40 yards and moved the team. Made one mistake, the sack.

Same game Josh also moved the team, and was completing a high % for low yards, just like King, but he lost 3 fumbles and botched numerous scoring chances in the process.

So the one recent effort we have to judge King by, he did quite well. I don't think King is going to go Kurt Warner 1999 if we put him in there, but I don't think he's going to stare down his primary receiver on every play either and I suspect we'll see a LOT less blitzing if he gets to play.

Anquan Boldin, who plays in the NFL, seems to think King can play and apparently so do SOME of Josh' teammates although again we don't know for sure who was yelling on the Cards sideline and why, and what it really means.
I've seen Josh play, I'm not impressed. I'm not nearly as high on King as this_guy is but I'd like to at least see him get a chance if Josh continues to struggle.

The other reason I'd like to see him get to play is IF he does come out and play well I'd just love to see all the people who keep trashing this_guy admit they were wrong in saying "I've seen King before and he's not the answer." I said it too and if he plays well, I'll admit I'm wrong, will you?

 

[SECTION 11]

The other reason I'd like to see him get to play is IF he does come out and play well I'd just love to see all the people who keep trashing this_guy admit they were wrong in saying "I've seen King before and he's not the answer." I said it too and if he plays well, I'll admit I'm wrong, will you?

This_Guy himself can go in at quarterback. I don't really care, as long as they win.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

So the one recent effort we have to judge King by, he did quite well. I don't think King is going to go Kurt Warner 1999 if we put him in there, but I don't think he's going to stare down his primary receiver on every play either and I suspect we'll see a LOT less blitzing if he gets to play.

Correct me, if my wrong - Russ, but, don't you usually listen to the games on radio?.

If so, I take it that the reference to Josh "staring down his receiver on every play" is a product of the "mind's eye" and your particular bias.

 

[Russ Smith]

Correct me, if my wrong - Russ, but, don't you usually listen to the games on radio?.

If so, I take it that the reference to Josh "staring down his receiver on every play" is a product of the "mind's eye" and your particular bias.

Combination of the 3 games I've seen, and the comments here, and by Pasch and Mistler on radio.

last week they were talking about it openly as has already been discussed here, that Josh wasn't looking downfield, and was staring down one guy. They talked about the same thing in the Buffalo and New England games.

Even some of the people who think Josh is going to be just fine have admitted he tends to look at one guy too long. Which is oddly what scouts thought of him in college too, and that he held the ball too long, got hit a lot as a result, and didn't step into his throws because he got hit so much.

 

[red desert]

Good point Cheese. Last week, all that mattered was a W, who cares about numbers and excuses. Now I guess that Ws aren't good enough.

And the week we lost to the 49ers what mattered? And the week we lost to the Falcons, what mattered? And so forth and so on...

Cheese, I take issue with your comment about "stupidity". And yes, I know, who cares what I think.

However, in the spirit of ASFN, allow me to say that there is nothing stupid about a "Cardinal" fan being impatient. That comment shows your impatience and nothing else, IMO. I seem to recall that you yourself have been what has been impatient by other, shall we say, less accepted posters. Weren't you one of Josh's critics last season? I don't actually have an independent recollection of that, so I only pose the question for the sake of my point.

I am hugely dissapointed with Josh's play this season. And I, like others, were quite happy with him being named the starter. In my case that was due to his flashes of potential. But now, after his lackluster play (bad o-line or not) I don't see it happening for Josh. I just don't.

Simply put, he has failed to come through, to make his mark if you will, in those opportunities provided him.

Defining moments are presented to everyone of us on a daily basis. And Josh has certainly had his, IMO. So enough about the o-line problems.

Josh may be the answer. But beating Miami this Sunday does not make me forget about his failures the previous 8 weeks. He's not the answer. And I don't think feeling this way makes me stupid.

 

[Ryanwb]

Would they be in 1st place without Brees....who EVERYONE would have said "is not the answer"? No.

I think you are wrong.... The Chargers are in first place because of the fake field goal in preseason against the Cardinals. I hear the players look upon that play for strength and often reference it during post game interviews.

"When we were down in the 4th quarter we talked about "The Fake" in the huddle and it gave us the spark we needed to get into the endzone." LaDanian Tomlinson

 

[Crazy Canuck]

Combination of the 3 games I've seen, and the comments here, and by Pasch and Mistler on radio.

last week they were talking about it openly as has already been discussed here, that Josh wasn't looking downfield, and was staring down one guy. They talked about the same thing in the Buffalo and New England games.

Even some of the people who think Josh is going to be just fine have admitted he tends to look at one guy too long. Which is oddly what scouts thought of him in college too, and that he held the ball too long, got hit a lot as a result, and didn't step into his throws because he got hit so much.

Russ, I also listen to the games on radio and at the same time watch it on TV with the voice down and recording for later review. While there's no doubt that JOSH at times locks into a receiver, it has become such a theme for Pasch and Mistler that they make no or little reference to when, given time - he makes the necessary progressions. It's also quite striking at times to contrast what Pasch or Mistler say they saw... and what one sees on the screen beforehand.

 

[Russ Smith]

Russ, I also listen to the games on radio and at the same time watch it on TV with the voice down and recording for later review. While there's no doubt that JOSH at times locks into a receiver, it has become such a theme for Pasch and Mistler that they make no or little reference to when, given time - he makes the necessary progressions. It's also quite striking at times to contrast what Pasch or Mistler say they saw... and what one sees on the screen beforehand.

So even the radio announcers for the Cardinals are part of the conspiracy?

You actually think the angle on tv is better than what guys in the radio booth can see?

FWIW you can clearly TELL that Pasch likes Josh, he's been singing his praises as much as he can all year, the thing is he's doing it less and less as the season wears on because he's presumably less and less convinced that Josh's physical talent is going to translate into good QB play.

 

[Bobcat]

WE WON A GAME ON THE ROAD - WE ARE NOT THAT GOOD - WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU EXPECTING FROM A TEAM THAT HAS BEEN A LAUGHINGSTOCK FOR THE LAST TWO SEASON?!

My god - there's so many people bitching here - did Josh play great - Hell no - did Josh play well - hell no - but good God - he finally did what most of us were complaining about - STEP UP WHEN IT MATTERED - have some freaking patience you guys - seriously - this board is really showing a higher level of stupidity than I thought existed here.

I mean if I - one of the more vocal opinions in the BASH JOSH BRIGADE can cut him some slack - surely others who have flipped today can. Come on guys - THIS IS WHAT REBUILDING - OR BETTER PUT - BUILDING LOOKS LIKE! We've just never seen it before.

Rip away.

You are so damn right about this forum. The negativity is sometimes overwhelming. To many people with little knowledge of football complaining to much about nothing. God I petty their wifes and girl friends. It seems that no one can do anything right in their eyes.

Sorry but so of you don't know "**** from shinola" about football and it seems even about life.

Allan

 

[Crazy Canuck]

So even the radio announcers for the Cardinals are part of the conspiracy?

You actually think the angle on tv is better than what guys in the radio booth can see?

FWIW you can clearly TELL that Pasch likes Josh, he's been singing his praises as much as he can all year, the thing is he's doing it less and less as the season wears on because he's presumably less and less convinced that Josh's physical talent is going to translate into good QB play.

I'm not into conspiracies, whether football or in the realm of politics... and - as for angles to the play... well, I'm no expert and unless you've got a background in TV production, neither are you.

I suggest, you try combining Radio listening with TV watching, as I have - and reach your own conclusions.

 

[john h]

As long as we keep posting Ws, I'm happy.

I'll stick with Josh as long as he keeps turning in QB ratings of 85 or better.

I prefer a win to a great QB rating. If he wins I do not care about his QB rating.

 

[Russ Smith]

I'm not into conspiracies, whether football or in the realm of politics... and - as for angles to the play... well, I'm no expert and unless you've got a background in TV production, neither are you.

I suggest, you try combining Radio listening with TV watching, as I have - and reach your own conclusions.

You're missing the point sitting at home or in a bar watching tv you can only see the angle the tv camera shows you. Pasch and Mistler are sitting up in the radio booth AT THE STADIUM. The can absolutely see things that you can't on tv. They can see the whole field, AND the Tv angles, you can only see the tv angle and what they show you on replay. You see a QB's head moving slowly left to right and you assume he's going through progressions, they see it and they might be able to see that he's actually tracking the same WR as he runs across the field, which is something Pasch said happened at least twice on Sunday.

If I could figure out how to get an internet connection at the local sports bar, and how to get them to show the game, I would do both. Last week I had to come home and listen because they had a big group in that trumped me and they refused to put our game on for me. Second time this year I've had that happen at this place, first time I whined I was there first and they relented, this time they didn't care said the group was bigger, and that they do NOT guarantee they will show every game so they have the right to bump one game if demand for another means they can't show them all. Needless to say the Peacock Lounge(yes that's the name) is on my bad list right now.

This sunday I'm probably going to have to go to the English Pub I was going to last year. I stopped going there because I moved and the Peacock Lounge is now within walking distance and they told me before I'd be able to watch the games every week, but now they're not following through.

 

[pete]

You really can see more from above. I've sat all over SDS and the best view if you really want to see the whole field is in the upper deck. You are far away, but things like wide open WRs in the end zone are more noticeable.

Last game I sat in the 3rd row and I couldn't see jack, but it sure was fun heckling that ******* sideline zebra when he missed that obvious PI call right in front of the Card's bench in the 4th.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

You're missing the point sitting at home or in a bar watching tv you can only see the angle the tv camera shows you. Pasch and Mistler are sitting up in the radio booth AT THE STADIUM. The can absolutely see things that you can't on tv. They can see the whole field, AND the Tv angles, you can only see the tv angle and what they show you on replay. You see a QB's head moving slowly left to right and you assume he's going through progressions, they see it and they might be able to see that he's actually tracking the same WR as he runs across the field, which is something Pasch said happened at least twice on Sunday.

If I could figure out how to get an internet connection at the local sports bar, and how to get them to show the game, I would do both. Last week I had to come home and listen because they had a big group in that trumped me and they refused to put our game on for me. Second time this year I've had that happen at this place, first time I whined I was there first and they relented, this time they didn't care said the group was bigger, and that they do NOT guarantee they will show every game so they have the right to bump one game if demand for another means they can't show them all. Needless to say the Peacock Lounge(yes that's the name) is on my bad list right now.

This sunday I'm probably going to have to go to the English Pub I was going to last year. I stopped going there because I moved and the Peacock Lounge is now within walking distance and they told me before I'd be able to watch the games every week, but now they're not following through.

Sorry to hear that it's so difficult for you - a "true Fan" - to see all of the games. Ahh! the beauty of direct TV in all of its angles...

 

[Russ Smith]

Sorry to hear that it's so difficult for you - a "true Fan" - to see all of the games. Ahh! the beauty of direct TV in all of its angles...

Ironically enough the new deal Directv is announcing they are offering an enhanced package that WILL give fans access to other angles not necessarily shown on regular broadcasts. So at some point you actually WILL be able to see better angles in real life on your tv.

And some crazy redzone channel that will switch between games everytime some team gets in the redzone. Sounds pretty difficult to me.

Detailed well before the year started why I still don't have directv, renting a townhouse, came with Dishnetwork, owner doesn't want another dish, nor does he want me to replace his dish and receiver with directv because he doesn't plan on renting the place forever he's doing it now because of his job. Ironically I live in Cupertino and work in Fremont, and he moved to Fremont to be closer to his job in Fremont. So he moved to avoid the commute I've had for nearly 5 years since I lived in cupertino before the move too.

Love how you decided to attack whether or not I'm a fan because you can't refute the point that you have a much inferior view of what's going on watching on TV to what Pasch and Mistler can see in the radio booth. Always an effective debate tactic, when the evidence shows you're wrong, attack the other guy.

 

[Russ Smith]

You really can see more from above. I've sat all over SDS and the best view if you really want to see the whole field is in the upper deck. You are far away, but things like wide open WRs in the end zone are more noticeable.

Last game I sat in the 3rd row and I couldn't see jack, but it sure was fun heckling that ******* sideline zebra when he missed that obvious PI call right in front of the Card's bench in the 4th.

Nope, directv in Canada apparently offers views that beat even being in the Stadium up high.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

Love how you decided to attack whether or not I'm a fan because you can't refute the point that you have a much inferior view of what's going on watching on TV to what Pasch and Mistler can see in the radio booth. Always an effective debate tactic, when the evidence shows you're wrong, attack the other guy.

To think I had to read through "Life and Times of a commuter living in a towhhouse" to finally reach, what I imagine, was your real point.

Talk about "burying the the lead".

Where you see an attack in my intended compliment to you as being a "true fan" is puzzling to say the least. Read my point, again... there's no insult intended.

As for the so-called "evidence" you seem to think that you've established: Let me point out that Radio and TV announcers work with spotters because they CAN'T see everything, and more often than not - turn to the TV replay to either confirm or refute the point they've made about a particular play.

They use TV... why shouldn't I?

My point, quite simply - is that if you listen to the game on radio and watch it on TV at the same time there will be occasions when you'll disagree with the analysis.

I can only quess that the problem you've got with this rather innocent point is that your opinion is largely based on what the radio guys say... reinforced by posters with similar assessements.