Got into an argument with Kurt Warner tonight...

[ANDY440]

Say CC got his extension early into or before this past season,how long before he's bitter, fires his agent and holds out for what the new going rate is for a top d lineman. Of course then it will be the Cards fault for getting him at a discount and the same people who are bitching now will demand they tear up his contract and throw the bank at him 2 years into it. As far as Dansby and Anquan are concerned if you don't want to be a Cardinal I don't want you on my team.

 

[cardsfanmd]

This is where I am at. The Campbell situation is mirroing the Dansby situation so much. We had some reservations about Dansby coming into that 2007 season just like we had reservations about Campbell this past offseason. Both had shown flashes, but both weren't the dominant players that we thought they could be. But, instead of taking a small gamble investing in young talent, we waited, and then were forced to watch the market dictate the asking price. Because we couldn't agree on numbers with Dansby, we franchised him, rather than slightly overpaying at that time. Then when Dansby had another solid, his asking price naturally rose, and once again the Cardinals failed to step to the plate. Finally we were in a position were we could not afford to franchise Dansby again, and had to let him test the open market where he found a better deal with a team that tipped the scales by making him feel wanted. Hopefully the Campbell story turns out differently, but right now it doesn't look good long term.

You're forgetting one thing, Dansby cared about NOTHING but getting every possible penny that he could. He wanted to be franchised both years. Campbell, from what I've seen, actually wants a long term deal done now.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

Hayes was seen as easier to sign because he didn't make the impact Dansby did... plain and simple IMO (and that's all it is... my opinion).

And once we fired DG and realized he was out to lunch and Dansby was an impact player AGAIN, what was the reason we didn't give him an extension? Because we were still believing the opinion of DG's ******** which was just fired?[/QUOTE]

Certainly was the case for some on this board.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

Point of order:

Kurt Warner stated on numerous occassions that he would give up $1,000,000 of his last contract to use towards re-signing Anquan Boldin. That IS being a team player and putting the good of the team ahead of himself (just not ahead of Bidwill holding onto a million dollars in his pocket).

Washington > Dansby
This is not a valid argument as we could have had them BOTH. This is not an either or situation and our D would have been SICK with those two leading our LB corps. Cardinals screwed the pooch on this one. Similar to Anquan, the organization completely alienated Dansby to where he was going with the best offer outside of ours.

If people want to defend the team because of the strike for not spending the $30 mil, fine. However, the $8 million does come into play, not because they didn't overspend on mediocre players but because they didn't use it to extend or retain players in the immediate years leading up to this one. That said, there WERE players we could have used that $8 million on as there were top talent players available and that $8 million (or part of it) would have gone a long way to sway them to us (Asomugha for one).

1. That Warner was offering $$$ after he signed his deal is irrelevant as it's not allowed.

2. Alienated Dansby? They franchised him twice and made a very rich man. They simply had a difference of opinion on his value, which was skewed by the Pace contract with the Jets. Remember, that Dansby to this day believes he's the best LB in football. If you don't believe me, ask him?

3. We bid on Asomugha and there was at least one report that he had taken less to join Philly.

 

[cardsfanmd]

I have never had any issue with giving RG crap, but I don't fault him in the least for the Dansby debacle.

 

[Chopper0080]

You're forgetting one thing, Dansby cared about NOTHING but getting every possible penny that he could. He wanted to be franchised both years. Campbell, from what I've seen, actually wants a long term deal done now.

We disagree about Dansby because I think he wanted a long term deal, but after the Cards kept haggling over the cost of a long term, he decided that he would take the franchise tag until it was no longer affordable and then get the best contract that he could. Who wouldn't be ok with 8+ million a year?

I do agree that Campbell wants a long term deal right now, but if he plays under the tag for the year, and then gets it again next year, whose is to say that he won't have the same reaction?

My point in all of this is the Cardinals should have never got into these situations because they should be locking up their young talented players before they got to this point. You either over pay now or over pay later in my opinion, but you should not bank on getting home town discounts.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

We disagree about Dansby because I think he wanted a long term deal, but after the Cards kept haggling over the cost of a long term, he decided that he would take the franchise tag until it was no longer affordable and then get the best contract that he could. Who wouldn't be ok with 8+ million a year?

I do agree that Campbell wants a long term deal right now, but if he plays under the tag for the year, and then gets it again next year, whose is to say that he won't have the same reaction?

My point in all of this is the Cardinals should have never got into these situations because they should be locking up their young talented players before they got to this point. You either over pay now or over pay later in my opinion, but you should not bank on getting home town discounts.

We simply don't know, but, I would imagine that if CC was willing to sign a virtual copy of DD's contract, it would be done. Again, I imagine that he believes he's worth considerably more and wants to play that hand.

Bottom line is the deal get's done this year or Cards use the tag to put time on their side. No point, in my mind, fretting about eventualities that in worse case are a season or two away.

And, yes, Dansby wanted a long-term deal... but... and this is a big but... he wanted more $$$ than Pace who had signed an outrageous contract in most estimations at the time.

 

[Buckybird]

We disagree about Dansby because I think he wanted a long term deal, but after the Cards kept haggling over the cost of a long term, he decided that he would take the franchise tag until it was no longer affordable and then get the best contract that he could. Who wouldn't be ok with 8+ million a year?

I do agree that Campbell wants a long term deal right now, but if he plays under the tag for the year, and then gets it again next year, whose is to say that he won't have the same reaction?

My point in all of this is the Cardinals should have never got into these situations because they should be locking up their young talented players before they got to this point. You either over pay now or over pay later in my opinion, but you should not bank on getting home town discounts.

Amen

 

[Cheesebeef]

We simply don't know, but, I would imagine that if CC was willing to sign a virtual copy of DD's contract, it would be done. Again, I imagine that he believes he's worth considerably more and wants to play that hand.

Bottom line is the deal get's done this year or Cards use the tag to put time on their side. No point, in my mind, fretting about eventualities that in worse case are a season or two away.

And, yes, Dansby wanted a long-term deal... but... and this is a big but... he wanted more $$$ than Pace who had signed an outrageous contract in most estimations at the time.

you keep using the Pace thing, but it's a completely specious argument. He wanted and DESERVED a deal BEFORE Pace ever hit the open market. it's really preposterous that you keep limiting the discussion to that point in time.

 

[Cheesebeef]

Say CC got his extension early into or before this past season,how long before he's bitter, fires his agent and holds out for what the new going rate is for a top d lineman. Of course then it will be the Cards fault for getting him at a discount and the same people who are bitching now will demand they tear up his contract and throw the bank at him 2 years into it. As far as Dansby and Anquan are concerned if you don't want to be a Cardinal I don't want you on my team.

how many players actually hold out and miss time in the regular season? Oh yeah... basically NONE. Did Q ever do that when he was disgruntled with his deal? Did Dockett? No. Players can bitch and complain all they want, but for the overwhelming majority of the time, that's all they do, thus the above has no basis in reality because he would have never held out of any games and wouldn't have wanted to lose money by holding out of pre-season.

seriously... when was the last time you saw the above happen?

 

[Crazy Canuck]

you keep using the Pace thing, but it's a completely specious argument. He wanted and DESERVED a deal BEFORE Pace ever hit the open market. it's really preposterous that you keep limiting the discussion to that point in time.

And it's equally preposterous, if I for a moment accept your premise, to ignore the reservations expressed by many about extending him earlier.

Perhaps, you were one of those who called for an earlier extension, I don't recall, but if not then you might want to add a bit of context to the Dansby saga and your harangue.

 

[Chopper0080]

And it's equally preposterous, if I for a moment accept your premise, to ignore the reservations expressed by many about extending him earlier.

Perhaps, you were one of those who called for an earlier extension, I don't recall, but if not then you might want to add a bit of context to the Dansby saga and your harangue.

While I see where you are coming from, it has become painfully apparent with young players, you either over-pay now, or over-pay later. Either way you end up having to invest top dollars into a player with a limited professional history. As an organization, I would rather trust my scouts who convinced me to draft the guy and invest 14 million guaranteed into a promising player than having to offer 24 million guaranteed once he proves he is a top player and possibly risk losing him a year or two later. Both options come with an injury risk, so why not risk less financially on injury and more on production.

Obviously the Cardinals and I differ about how to handle young players.

 

[Cheesebeef]

And it's equally preposterous, if I for a moment accept your premise, to ignore the reservations expressed by many about extending him earlier.

Perhaps, you were one of those who called for an earlier extension, I don't recall, but if not then you might want to add a bit of context to the Dansby saga and your harangue.

I was CONSTANTLY pounding on this back in the day and repeatedly getting into arguments with Hardy Brown who was acting as the mouthpiece of the organization who was bashing Dansby's ass because the Cardinals didn't want to pay him, while lauding Langston Moore, who ended up getting cut. there's your context. A blind man could see that not only was Dansby going to be the bes player/captain of the defense, but he was already was in 2006.

sorry... the idea that my premise is preposterous when Dansby was the biggest playmaker on the defense from the second he stepped on the field (while putting up stats with all the best LBers in the game who were all getting extensions) is ludicrous.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

I was CONSTANTLY pounding on this back in the day and repeatedly getting into arguments with Hardy Brown who was acting as the mouthpiece of the organization who was bashing Dansby's ass because the Cardinals didn't want to pay him, while lauding Langston Moore, who ended up getting cut. there's your context. A blind man could see that not only was Dansby going to be the bes player/captain of the defense, but he was already was in 2006.

sorry... the idea that my premise is preposterous when Dansby was the biggest playmaker on the defense from the second he stepped on the field (while putting up stats with all the best LBers in the game who were all getting extensions) is ludicrous.

Let's both drop the preposterous, ludicrous line. You've made a case without the invective. If you were leading the charge... good on you.

I was also a fan of his from day one and thought that Green did him a tremendous disservice by suggesting he wouldn't play hurt, etc.

My point, and I end it on this; was that the Pace contract complicated the ability of both parties to come to agreement.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

While I see where you are coming from, it has become painfully apparent with young players, you either over-pay now, or over-pay later. Either way you end up having to invest top dollars into a player with a limited professional history. As an organization, I would rather trust my scouts who convinced me to draft the guy and invest 14 million guaranteed into a promising player than having to offer 24 million guaranteed once he proves he is a top player and possibly risk losing him a year or two later. Both options come with an injury risk, so why not risk less financially on injury and more on production.

Obviously the Cardinals and I differ about how to handle young players.

Can't agree on the overpay, per se. Do believe, however, that a player should be rewarded for outplaying his contract, and the Cards did recognize this on a few occasions.

 

[Arizona's Finest]

Somewhere in the middle is the truth.

More importantly, Twitter is awesome.

 

[Darkside]

Don't know about Twitter being awesome, nor Facebook for that matter--I personally find them to be huge time-sinks with little value, but that's just me. That being said, I wouldn't call this back-and-forth with Warner an "argument" as described in the title of this thread.

At best it's a discussion; at worst it's KW disagreeing with Moe and trying to get rid of him by saying, "If you say so!" and repeatedly saying, "Love the optimism." To me that's a nice way of saying--as if a parent talking to a child who wants to argue--"that's nice Timmy, now run along and play," and patting him on the head.

Having said that, the fact that Warner even responded to someone he doesn't know, probably doesn't care about, and surely knows just wants to argue, deserves to be congratulated rather than turned into a triumphant thread inferring that you bested Kurt in some manly game of Twitter.

But again, that's just me.

 

[jaguarpaw81]

Washington > Dansby
This is not a valid argument as we could have had them BOTH. This is not an either or situation and our D would have been SICK with those two leading our LB corps.

News flash, they play the same position and neither would excel at any other position on the team. Maybe Green Bay should go out and sign Brees in free agency this year. He and Rodgers would be awesome together...

 

[Duckjake]

News flash, they play the same position and neither would excel at any other position on the team. Maybe Green Bay should go out and sign Brees in free agency this year. He and Rodgers would be awesome together...

How do you know Dansby and Washington couldn't play together? Horton moves guys all over the field. But regardless if the Cards don't have to draft DWash to replace Dansby how do we know the guys we could have drafted with the two draft picks they used to get Washington wouldn't have been as good as Daryl? Or that the guys they could have picked up with the picks used to get Rhodes wouldn't have been solid players?

Letting Leonard Davis go cost the Cardinals Adrian Peterson. BIG + All Day >>>>> Levi Brown. I also don't buy the cap problems issue. Too many teams sign multiple players and the cap hell the conventional wisdom claims is coming their way never arrives.

However, the argument is getting old. As was written earlier in the thread we've had this same debate every year since the advent of free agency. And that in itself speaks volumes.

 

[40yearfan]

How do you know Dansby and Washington couldn't play together? Horton moves guys all over the field. But regardless if the Cards don't have to draft DWash to replace Dansby how do we know the guys we could have drafted with the two draft picks they used to get Washington wouldn't have been as good as Daryl? Or that the guys they could have picked up with the picks used to get Rhodes wouldn't have been solid players?

Letting Leonard Davis go cost the Cardinals Adrian Peterson. BIG + All Day >>>>> Levi Brown. I also don't buy the cap problems issue. Too many teams sign multiple players and the cap hell the conventional wisdom claims is coming their way never arrives.

However, the argument is getting old. As was written earlier in the thread we've had this same debate every year since the advent of free agency. And that in itself speaks volumes.

And since it is supposition on BOTH sides, the argument is fruitless. If you change one thing in a chain of events, it has a ripple effect on all future moves in that chain. Trying to predict the outcome is like trying to prove the existance of a supreme being. It's impossible to know with the current facts.

 

[red desert]

Don't know about Twitter being awesome, nor Facebook for that matter--I personally find them to be huge time-sinks with little value, but that's just me. That being said, I wouldn't call this back-and-forth with Warner an "argument" as described in the title of this thread.

At best it's a discussion; at worst it's KW disagreeing with Moe and trying to get rid of him by saying, "If you say so!" and repeatedly saying, "Love the optimism." To me that's a nice way of saying--as if a parent talking to a child who wants to argue--"that's nice Timmy, now run along and play," and patting him on the head.

Having said that, the fact that Warner even responded to someone he doesn't know, probably doesn't care about, and surely knows just wants to argue, deserves to be congratulated rather than turned into a triumphant thread inferring that you bested Kurt in some manly game of Twitter.

But again, that's just me.

 

[MoeIsBetter]

Lol I never said I bested him. We have different opinions on the Cards moves and it was posted here to show the difference of opinion between a fan and a player, nothing more. I even thanked him for debating me.

Plus I don't think he'd have even responded if we didn't communicate back and forth about religion. This was just one we disagreed on.

 

[Arizona's Finest]

Don't know about Twitter being awesome, nor Facebook for that matter--I personally find them to be huge time-sinks with little value, but that's just me. That being said, I wouldn't call this back-and-forth with Warner an "argument" as described in the title of this thread.

At best it's a discussion; at worst it's KW disagreeing with Moe and trying to get rid of him by saying, "If you say so!" and repeatedly saying, "Love the optimism." To me that's a nice way of saying--as if a parent talking to a child who wants to argue--"that's nice Timmy, now run along and play," and patting him on the head.

Having said that, the fact that Warner even responded to someone he doesn't know, probably doesn't care about, and surely knows just wants to argue, deserves to be congratulated rather than turned into a triumphant thread inferring that you bested Kurt in some manly game of Twitter.

But again, that's just me.

Wow. Seems to me you missed the point of everything that actually happened in this thread. I Won't even address the last two paragraphs you wrote as not sure ANY of what you said is what the OP was actually getting at.

But i will defend my Twitter comment because like you said, you dont get that either.

Twitter is awesome because a regular Moe gets to discuss football with a Future Hall of Famer when otherwise there was no outlet for this to take place. What's not to get about that? It may not for you personally ( and to me this is akin to someone saying "I dont like the news or having a Hobby" - just makes no sense IMO especially if you like football enough to sign up for a Message Board) but the fact that this convo even happened is pretty cool.

 

[Duckjake]

And since it is supposition on BOTH sides, the argument is fruitless. If you change one thing in a chain of events, it has a ripple effect on all future moves in that chain. Trying to predict the outcome is like trying to prove the existance of a supreme being. It's impossible to know with the current facts.

Very true. Who would have ever thought that Rackers missed FG vs Chicago at the end of the Monday Night Meltdown would lead to the Cards going to the Super Bowl!

As for the 2008-2009 team one thing Warner and those of us debating often overlook is the retirement of Berry. I really believe he was a key contributor off the field to the Cards success even as age deteriorated his on the field skills.

Sadly the one thing that most impacted the Cards success, veteran players, also contributed to their sudden demise. Warner, Gandy, Okeafor and Berry all critical components simply got old.

As a side note: Calais Campbell must be retained long term. Somehow, some way. CC's presence in FG defense alone is worth a win or two a season. How much is that worth?

 

[cardsfanmd]

How do you know Dansby and Washington couldn't play together?

Common sense? Neither is close to being stout enough against the run or good enough at shedding blockers to reach anything close to their full potential as a SILB nor are they anywhere close to being able to set the edge on the outside. If we ran a 4-3 it would be a possibility (and for the record I think they would play well together in that setting) but we dont go in to it nearly enough to validate having those two on the same team.