Get Leinart Back... Seriously...

[azsouthendzone]

If Leinart was as good as some on here think ... someone like Shanahan or even his old college coach would have made a move for him by now. He wouldn't be 3rd string...riding the pine.

True because teams all over the league are usually scrambling at the end of preseason to find a starter.

The Texans have been said to be looking to re-sign him to a longer deal and everything has been positive. The moment that every Whiz fan is dreading is if Schaub goes down, because if he does and Leinart sees the field and has any sliver of success.......

Look, no one ever suggested he was Elway or Montana. That is the way the Whiz apologists act every time ML is brought up, like the fans questioning the move have some ridiculous man crush on ML. The criticism isn't about Matt as much as the decision. If you don't see the flaw in that clearly controversial move than I don't know what to say. He was simply the best fit for this year for this team given the options. To dispute that at this point is a pretty stubborn stance to take. Look at the results.

 

[azsouthendzone]

DA played very bad against San Diego and Atlanta but I would also love to see Matt Leinart compete in a shootout against Matt Ryan and Philip Rivers. Let's face it, no QB below elite status was going to win those games with the way the defense was playing.

The defense was bad vs ATL but vs SD they had no chance. QB play effects the whole team.

 

[WarnerHOF]

BTW as one of the biggest Leinart haters, I now personally think it was a mistake to keep Max Hall instead of Matt Leinart as the the backup but I'm not going to go around saying he's any sort of upgrade over DA.

 

[Duckjake]

True because teams all over the league are usually scrambling at the end of preseason to find a starter.

The Texans have been said to be looking to re-sign him to a longer deal and everything has been positive. The moment that every Whiz fan is dreading is if Schaub goes down, because if he does and Leinart sees the field and has any sliver of success.......

Look, no one ever suggested he was Elway or Montana. That is the way the Whiz apologists act every time ML is brought up, like the fans questioning the move have some ridiculous man crush on ML. The criticism isn't about Matt as much as the decision. If you don't see the flaw in that clearly controversial move than I don't know what to say. He was simply the best fit for this year for this team given the options. To dispute that at this point is a pretty stubborn stance to take. Look at the results.

Too true. It's hilarious listening to someone call Leinart Captain Checkdown when our starting QB last Sunday has a net yards per pass attempt of 3.2!

Things are so bad now I'd almost be willing to bring back Josh McCown.

 

[LoyaltyisaCurse]

http://www.arizonasportsfans.com/vb/member.php?u=1265

azsouthendzone
Moxie and Intangibles

http://www.arizonasportsfans.com/vb/member.php?u=1265http://www.arizonasportsfans.com/vb/member.php?u=1265How about: Intoxibles?

 

[nscr1006]

In what way? Leinart looked as bad as a QB could look prior to the "benching". DA looked pretty bad himself but he moved the team occasionally, something Matt apparently had no intention of doing.

Steve

you sir
A. did not watch the pre-season games
or
B. are an idiot

prior to the 'benching' he faced nothing, NOTHING but blitz on every play form TWO teams 1st string defense ,.... and STILL had better stats than the clowns we have now ... and didn't fumble and didn't throw interceptions..

when he (and other 1st stringers left) the other teams put in 2cnd stringers and the blitzing stopped and clowns did OK...

exactly WHAT games were you watching ?

 

[nscr1006]

LMFAO...the thought that Captain Checkdown can convert a 2nd and 20 for the game winning TD against the Rams is laughable. DA actually played decently in the game, the fumbles in Rams territory by other players were what kept the game close.

Of course Leinart on his worst day is better. I'll just leave you with this.

*** lame video of NON game against Packers ****

is that a joke ? you really want to use that game ? the one where Whiz didn't even let WARNER audible, called a total of 4 different plays all game long and told the defense to just wing it... ?? all on purpose because he knew he'd play them the next week ...

WARNER left the game with a look of TOTAL frustration because he wasn't ALLOWED to try to win ... and you hang this as a bad one on Leinart ??
Your hatred blinds you my friend, I know it's sad Leinart knocked up your squeeze, but let it go... he's gone (and so is she)

 

[desertdawg]

you sir
A. did not watch the pre-season games
or
B. are an idiot

prior to the 'benching' he faced nothing, NOTHING but blitz on every play form TWO teams 1st string defense ,.... and STILL had better stats than the clowns we have now ... and didn't fumble and didn't throw interceptions..

when he (and other 1st stringers left) the other teams put in 2cnd stringers and the blitzing stopped and clowns did OK...

exactly WHAT games were you watching ?

Why are you so quick to call some one a idiot? I bet you can find one in your house.

 

[AzStevenCal]

you sir
A. did not watch the pre-season games
or
B. are an idiot

prior to the 'benching' he faced nothing, NOTHING but blitz on every play form TWO teams 1st string defense ,.... and STILL had better stats than the clowns we have now ... and didn't fumble and didn't throw interceptions..

when he (and other 1st stringers left) the other teams put in 2cnd stringers and the blitzing stopped and clowns did OK...

exactly WHAT games were you watching ?

There are many ways to disagree with someone without calling them an idiot. And hiding it in a multiple choice exam doesn't make it any better.

I watched the games. I watched our first string offense get eaten alive by our opponents. I watched our starting QB throw for a grand total of 77 yards in those two games. Granted, he didn't get a lot of opportunities but he and the rest of the offense had a lot to do with it.

Matt didn't get his nickname by dropping his checkbook. It looked to me (and obviously, many others) that Matt was more concerned with completing his passes than moving his team. If you saw something other than that, well, that's great for you.

Steve

 

[Duckjake]

There are many ways to disagree with someone without calling them an idiot. And hiding it in a multiple choice exam doesn't make it any better.

I watched the games. I watched our first string offense get eaten alive by our opponents. I watched our starting QB throw for a grand total of 77 yards in those two games. Granted, he didn't get a lot of opportunities but he and the rest of the offense had a lot to do with it.

Matt didn't get his nickname by dropping his checkbook. It looked to me (and obviously, many others) that Matt was more concerned with completing his passes than moving his team. If you saw something other than that, well, that's great for you.

Steve

Well I didn't see that at the time either. And judging from the results so far this season it looks like it was the Cards offense that was causing those "short" passes and no TDs not just Leinart trying to look good, even though Matt averaged 7 yards per attempt through the first 3 preseason games to DOA's 5.4.

However, Leinart only threw 23 passes in those games so there really isn't a large enough base imo to judge his performance at all using those preseason stats and I am in the camp of those who believe that something else was wrong and so it was best that Leinart leave.

 

[ReddBird]

The Texans have been said to be looking to re-sign him to a longer deal and everything has been positive. The moment that every Whiz fan is dreading is if Schaub goes down, because if he does and Leinart sees the field and has any sliver of success.......

I haven't seen anything that says Houston wants Leinart to sign a longer deal. They signed him as their #3 for a buck and change, he hasn't seen the field since, so what kind of deal would they offer? League minimum?

And, if Schaub goes down, it's not the #3 QB who trots into the game.

It's easy to admire Leinart's abilities when he doesn't have to display them. The more he isn't here, the more I like his play, too.

 

[Duckjake]

I haven't seen anything that says Houston wants Leinart to sign a longer deal. They signed him as their #3 for a buck and change, he hasn't seen the field since, so what kind of deal would they offer? League minimum?

And, if Schaub goes down, it's not the #3 QB who trots into the game.

It's easy to admire Leinart's abilities when he doesn't have to display them. The more he isn't here, the more I like his play, too.

Meanwhile we just loooove the play of the QBs who are here.

I think Arizona needs to go to the old style Raiders offense as long as DeWreck is going to play QB. Run, Throw Deep, Run, Run, throw deep, rinse and repeat.

 

[Crimson Warrior]

Meanwhile we just loooove the play of the QBs who are here.

I think Arizona needs to go to the old style Raiders offense as long as DeWreck is going to play QB. Run, Throw Deep, Run, Run, throw deep, rinse and repeat.

#1, I would like to thank everyone for the indirect gratification I receive from those keeping this thread alive all week. This, despite the fact that the original post was complete whack.

#2 I would use the last year's TEN game as an example of what matty would do if given the chance to be a starter. The TEN game was a meaningful roadie against a good defense (we were also without Boldin I believe).

Leinart was of course unspectacular, but steady. Would a matty TEN-like performance have allowed us to win against TB? I think so.

But my ultimate rebuttal to those disparaging the idea of having hollywood on the current roster is this:

At this point, wouldn't we at least like to have the option of giving Leinart a start?

I will concede that it's possible that Leinart might not play better than Anderson (not Hall though). But at least as recently as last season, we had actually seen, with our own eyes, Matty perform, for an entire game, capably enough to allow us to win the division this year.

Is the above not reasonable?

Therefore, it is (edited for the children's sake) unconscionable that I couldn't see #7 throw some passes for the cardinals against SEA and TB.

Duckjake says that there was something beyond performance that led to his departure. I agree. But whatever that "something" was, it wasn't a public charge (like a DUI, drug charge, assault, etc.) and therefore, was not compelling enough to leave us in the mess were in now.

Those that don't like or appreciate Leinart have the right to their opinion. But they could type for a million years and it still wouldn't change my opinion that sending hollywood packing was the worst coaching/front office decision in the history of this sad franchise.

Let's go Derek!

 

[AzStevenCal]

#1, I would like to thank everyone for the indirect gratification I receive from those keeping this thread alive all week. This, despite the fact that the original post was complete whack.

#2 I would use the last year's TEN game as an example of what matty would do if given the chance to be a starter. The TEN game was a meaningful roadie against a good defense (we were also without Boldin I believe).

Leinart was of course unspectacular, but steady. Would a matty TEN-like performance have allowed us to win against TB? I think so.

But my ultimate rebuttal to those disparaging the idea of having hollywood on the current roster is this:

At this point, wouldn't we at least like to have the option of giving Leinart a start?

I will concede that it's possible that Leinart might not play better than Anderson (not Hall though). But at least as recently as last season, we had actually seen, with our own eyes, Matty perform, for an entire game, capably enough to allow us to win the division this year.

Is the above not reasonable?

Therefore, it is (edited for the children's sake) unconscionable that I couldn't see #7 throw some passes for the cardinals against SEA and TB.

Duckjake says that there was something beyond performance that led to his departure. I agree. But whatever that "something" was, it wasn't a public charge (like a DUI, drug charge, assault, etc.) and therefore, was not compelling enough to leave us in the mess were in now.

Those that don't like or appreciate Leinart have the right to their opinion. But they could type for a million years and it still wouldn't change my opinion that sending hollywood packing was the worst coaching/front office decision in the history of this sad franchise.

Let's go Derek!

I think you're overrating him a bit when you say he was steady but unspectacular. Other than that, I agree with much of what you're saying until you reach your final point. I think it's reasonable to look back and call it a horrible decision with the benefit of hindsight but IMO it was a very understandable decision at the time.

I can't see anyone hanging on to a QB that was given all the chances that Matt's recieved solely because the 3 guys behind him might be much worse. This coaching staff had already convinced themselves that they couldn't coach Matt up to where they needed him to be and they felt the need to see what they had in DA (and eventually Hall and perhaps even Skelton).

Had Matt excepted his new role as backup I seriously doubt we'd be in this position. Once the experiment with DA failed, Leinart would have been back under center and I have no doubt that he'd outperform anything we've put out there. But it didn't work out that way and Matt had a lot to do with it. The damage he could have done to this locker room just wasn't worth the risk when you consider his marginal showing to date.

Steve

 

[cardsloco]

I think you're overrating him a bit when you say he was steady but unspectacular. Other than that, I agree with much of what you're saying until you reach your final point. I think it's reasonable to look back and call it a horrible decision with the benefit of hindsight but IMO it was a very understandable decision at the time.

I can't see anyone hanging on to a QB that was given all the chances that Matt's recieved solely because the 3 guys behind him might be much worse. This coaching staff had already convinced themselves that they couldn't coach Matt up to where they needed him to be and they felt the need to see what they had in DA (and eventually Hall and perhaps even Skelton).

Had Matt excepted his new role as backup I seriously doubt we'd be in this position. Once the experiment with DA failed, Leinart would have been back under center and I have no doubt that he'd outperform anything we've put out there. But it didn't work out that way and Matt had a lot to do with it. The damage he could have done to this locker room just wasn't worth the risk when you consider his marginal showing to date.

Steve

Unlike the damage and disruption caused by having a QB controversy with two men not qualified to play the position, and a premium set of receivers going to waste. This move was made because Wiz really thought he could coach up D.A as coaches in the past have thought. At least going forward I suspect Wiz will learn to judge what is in front of him and not try to project what players will become. I am not a Leinart lover, but he was capable, what we have now is below NFL standards at the QB position. Come tomorrow D.A will be staring down his receivers and blaming them for not being in the right place, and we will have to pray our defense can win the game for us.

 

[Duckjake]

I can't see anyone hanging on to a QB that was given all the chances that Matt's received solely because the 3 guys behind him might be much worse.

Has to be the key here. The coaches just had to have made an error in judgment of the talent if there wasn't such a personality conflict that Matt had to go just like the situation with Boldin.