How about David Carr for the Cards QB?

[WisconsinCard]

You can say it, but it doesn't make it so. Who?

Brett Favre for 1. His o-line sucks this year after giving up their 2 guards. They only have 1 win. Even their good years he had a good o-line and running game (just not the greatest recievers.) I dont believe that any QB ever will do good behind a bad o-line, Not only because they will get creamed too many times, but also because they will have no threat of running the ball.

 

[WisconsinCard]

Personally I think Leftwich sucks, and his oline is very very good. The rest I can agree with.

I can't agree more. What has he done so far? I am not impressed.

 

[Redsz]

You can say it, but it doesn't make it so. Who?

I would say Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, Brett Favre and Drew Bledsoe are ones you can make cases for having good offensive lines and that those four QB's don't 'play well in spite of their lines'.

Manning and Favre have proburbly been the least sacked QB's over the last 5 - 10 years. Not only that, but both the Colts and Packers have been great at opening up holes for some dominant running games over the years (espically Green Bay before they lost both of their all pro guards).

I'm really curious to why you included Drew Bledsoe in that list. Considering that his play has obviously improved since he came to Dallas and played behind a better line. In Buffalo, Bledsoe was regulary sacked, hit, hurried, fumbled and played horribly becuase of bad protection and holding onto the ball too much (and yet Kelly Holcombe has played much better?).

I'm not saying those guys aren't good (except for Bledsoe, who I do think is a product of a better line) but I don't agree that these guys have played well in spite of their lines when their lines consist of some really good linemen.

 

[Stout]

I would say Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, Brett Favre and Drew Bledsoe are ones you can make cases for having good offensive lines and that those four QB's don't 'play well in spite of their lines'.

Manning and Favre have proburbly been the least sacked QB's over the last 5 - 10 years. Not only that, but both the Colts and Packers have been great at opening up holes for some dominant running games over the years (espically Green Bay before they lost both of their all pro guards).

I'm really curious to why you included Drew Bledsoe in that list. Considering that his play has obviously improved since he came to Dallas and played behind a better line. In Buffalo, Bledsoe was regulary sacked, hit, hurried, fumbled and played horribly becuase of bad protection and holding onto the ball too much (and yet Kelly Holcombe has played much better?).

I'm not saying those guys aren't good (except for Bledsoe, who I do think is a product of a better line) but I don't agree that these guys have played well in spite of their lines when their lines consist of some really good linemen.

As I said above, in case you cared to actually read it, I said Manning when he came into the league, when he not only carried the OL, but he carried the TEAM. Bledsoe and Brady are working in front of patchword offensive lines. The Patriot run game is atrocious and doesn't make the defense sweat. Bledsoe's line is patchwork much the same way the St. Louis line is patchwork. Are they playing well because of the QB play, or is the QB playing well because of the O-line play? Or is it the rookie RB that's come in and made the difference? Chicken and the egg, maybe, but I think the improved QB play has made the difference. Also, last year, Favre's line was decimated due to injury, and they still made the playoffs, almost on his arm alone.

 

[Redsz]

As I said above, in case you cared to actually read it, I said Manning when he came into the league, when he not only carried the OL, but he carried the TEAM.

Marshall Faulk was in his prime in 98' and had a fantastic season that year with almost 2,000 all purpose yds. Manning 'carried' that team to a 3-13 record because he nearly threw 30 interceptions that year. And because the defense was so bad.

Manning has been one of the least sacked QB's over the last 5-10 years (including his rookie season). Which is in part because he has worked with essentially the same unit for most of his career. Of course this changed recently when his starting guards where signed away by other teams because they where so good.

Obviously, it isn't just the line. Manning is very, very good in the pocket and avoids sacks with his footwork. But the line has been a very big part of why he has been sucessful. And he hasn't suceeded in spite of it IMO.

Bledsoe and Brady are working in front of patchword offensive lines. The Patriot run game is atrocious and doesn't make the defense sweat. Bledsoe's line is patchwork much the same way the St. Louis line is patchwork.

On NE, they are still a good (underated) unit despite a few injurys on the left side. Working without a run game is nothing new for Brady. Last year when Dillion ran wild was the exception to the rule, not the norm because the Pats have always been a pass first ask questions later offense since Weis was OC.

Dallas interior is still very good as Allen and Rivera are All Pro's. And Dallas line is a thousand times better than Buffalo's (even with injurys) who Bledsoe struggled with. So I still don't see Bledsoe suceeding in spite of the line, considering his history with Buffalo and the fact that Dallas line is that much better than Buffalo's. It still looks like to me that he needs protection to be sucessful and that's what he is finally getting in Dallas. Not that he is over coming the lack of protection in Dallas.

Are they playing well because of the QB play, or is the QB playing well because of the O-line play? Or is it the rookie RB that's come in and made the difference? Chicken and the egg, maybe, but I think the improved QB play has made the difference.

Well, I guess I will have to agree to disagree here. To me it looks like these guys have good units who give them the protection they need to be sucessful.

Also, last year, Favre's line was decimated due to injury, and they still made the playoffs, almost on his arm alone.

Rivera, Wahle, Diem and Tauscher all started and played in 16 games last year. They did lose their starting center for a large portion of the year, though.

 

[BACH]

Carr has a $6M roster bonus due on March 1st, and will likely be cut.

Depending on our draft spot I would sign him asap. In Carr's four years in the league his OL has been #32 in sacks allowed for three years. Last season was the only season, when they weren't ranked #32, and the difference is pretty obvious:

2002 Houston Texans 16 16 444 233 52.5 2592 5.84 81 9 15 76/411 31 5 62.8
2003 Houston Texans 12 11 295 167 56.6 2013 6.82 78 9 13 15/90 22 5 69.5
2004 Houston Texans 16 16 466 285 61.2 3531 7.58 69 16 14 49/301 47 6 83.5
2005 Houston Texans 8 8 192 117 60.9 1126 5.86 34 7 6 43/292 10 0 76.4

 

[joeshmo]

Carr has a $6M roster bonus due on March 1st, and will likely be cut.

It is a 8 mill bonus, and will be spread out over 3 years, so the cap hit is minimal, and the bonus is blown way out of proportion, when talking about Carr getting cut.

Plus as of right now he will be on the team next year. Ownership has already been quoted and reported as saying as such. They are committed to him and will pay him his bonus and try to build around him better.

 

[john h]

In my everlasting quest to find a qb for the Cardinals, I've just seen that David Carr will become a free agent at the end of the season. That surprised me as I thought Houston had him locked up for a longer contract. But his name was on the list posted here regarding free agents in 2006.

He has a strong arm is still young. Athough he has taken a tremendous pounding, he has not suffered any serious iinjuries.

Should the Cardinals even consider him?

David Carr reminds me of Archie Manning. A very good player playing on the worst team in the NFL. One thing he has shown is he can take a hit and keep on ticking. He leads the league by far in being sacked. I read Houston intends to stick with him next year so they would likely take Bush if they are #1. We are certainly in the Leinhart sweepstakes with our continued injuries. There would be no excuse whatsoever for not taking Leinhart if he falls to us other than picking up a good young QB like Rivers. The Cards have a history of passing on #1 QB's so who really knows.

 

[john h]

what about if the texans end up with the #1 pick and take leinhart? i doubt they'd want both of them and their contracts in houston

They would take Bush. Most teams would take Bush according to the writers who I have read unless they are a team desperate for a QB like the Cards and Baltimore. Orton, the Bears rookie QB is turning some heads as he continues to win. I had hardly ever heard of the guy but he and the Bears defense have them in 1st place. I think the Bears are the surprise team of the NFL at this point. We are perhaps the most under achieving team.

 

[joeshmo]

They would take Bush.

Why would they take Bush, when they already have a pretty good stable of RB's. They have a QB, RB's, a WR, they dont have an OL. They either take Ferguson, McNiel or trade down IMO.

 

[Stout]

Marshall Faulk was in his prime in 98' and had a fantastic season that year with almost 2,000 all purpose yds. Manning 'carried' that team to a 3-13 record because he nearly threw 30 interceptions that year. And because the defense was so bad.

Manning has been one of the least sacked QB's over the last 5-10 years (including his rookie season). Which is in part because he has worked with essentially the same unit for most of his career. Of course this changed recently when his starting guards where signed away by other teams because they where so good.

Obviously, it isn't just the line. Manning is very, very good in the pocket and avoids sacks with his footwork. But the line has been a very big part of why he has been sucessful. And he hasn't suceeded in spite of it IMO.



On NE, they are still a good (underated) unit despite a few injurys on the left side. Working without a run game is nothing new for Brady. Last year when Dillion ran wild was the exception to the rule, not the norm because the Pats have always been a pass first ask questions later offense since Weis was OC.

Dallas interior is still very good as Allen and Rivera are All Pro's. And Dallas line is a thousand times better than Buffalo's (even with injurys) who Bledsoe struggled with. So I still don't see Bledsoe suceeding in spite of the line, considering his history with Buffalo and the fact that Dallas line is that much better than Buffalo's. It still looks like to me that he needs protection to be sucessful and that's what he is finally getting in Dallas. Not that he is over coming the lack of protection in Dallas.



Well, I guess I will have to agree to disagree here. To me it looks like these guys have good units who give them the protection they need to be sucessful.



Rivera, Wahle, Diem and Tauscher all started and played in 16 games last year. They did lose their starting center for a large portion of the year, though.

Manning led his team to a 13-3 record the very next season, if I recall correctly. Sure, it's nice to have a good RB (isn't that the year he got James), but the O-line was still not good. They still put a ton of pressure on him. And he didn't wilt.

Working without a run game is nothing new for Brady.
Thanks for proving that point of mine. He's OVERCOME shortcomings on his team to LEAD his team.

As to Dallas...Rivera? The guy who wanted to give his signing bonus back? Who almost retired? The team that's starting WHO at tackle? Uh huh. Yeaaaaah.

Green Bay....looks like I confused the injuries of this season to last year. That's my bad.

The other guys, though, have risen ABOVE difficulties and helped CARRY their team. It's undeniable. Carr has NOT done this. That's blatantly obvious. So, what are we arguing about here?

 

[Redsz]

Manning led his team to a 13-3 record the very next season, if I recall correctly. Sure, it's nice to have a good RB (isn't that the year he got James), but the O-line was still not good. They still put a ton of pressure on him. And he didn't wilt.

I disagree. You may be thinking of 1997 when the Colts gave up close to 70 sacks in one year. In 1998 the Colts only gave up only 22 sacks even with alot of new personnel that arrived when Jim Mora came in. Since then the Colts have always been among the best at allowing very few sacks and keeping Manning up-right and effective.

Working without a run game is nothing new for Brady.
Thanks for proving that point of mine. He's OVERCOME shortcomings on his team to LEAD his team.

The Patriots offense is DESIGNED to be a pass first offense. He isn't overcoming it because it is designed to be that way.

The Pats O-line has constantly been underated in the NFL for many years at what they do. Brady is the master at moving in the pocket to avoid pressure. But the amount of time he gets on a regular basis to make his reads is impressive.

As to Dallas...Rivera? The guy who wanted to give his signing bonus back? Who almost retired? The team that's starting WHO at tackle? Uh huh. Yeaaaaah.

Rivera is an All-Pro Guard, Stout, and has been for many years. Did you not pay attention to him when he helped pave the way for all three of GB's RB's to have over 5.0 YPC in 03'?

Rivera wanted to give his signing bonus back because he injured himself working out and may not have played in 05'. That is the type of guy he is. But I can't see the connection of how that effects his play and the quality of player he is?

And Bledsoe has worked withoutFlozell Adams for two whole games. It isn't like he hasn't had a good LT for most of the season so far. If he continues to put up career high numbers then maybe I will buy it. But watching Bledsoe in Buffalo, he did not over come the short comings of his o-line and with better players on the Dallas o-line I don't see him doing it now ether.

Green Bay....looks like I confused the injuries of this season to last year. That's my bad.

No problem.

The other guys, though, have risen ABOVE difficulties and helped CARRY their team. It's undeniable. Carr has NOT done this. That's blatantly obvious. So, what are we arguing about here?

I don't want Carr ether. And I think Houston would be foolish to give up on him considering their continued neglect of his protection.

What we are disagreeing about here is that these guys have over come their o-lines. Something that I don't agree with. Because to me it seems like you are saying that these guys are over-coming all pro players.

 

[Stout]

I disagree. You may be thinking of 1997 when the Colts gave up close to 70 sacks in one year. In 1998 the Colts only gave up only 22 sacks even with alot of new personnel that arrived when Jim Mora came in. Since then the Colts have always been among the best at allowing very few sacks and keeping Manning up-right and effective.



The Patriots offense is DESIGNED to be a pass first offense. He isn't overcoming it because it is designed to be that way.

The Pats O-line has constantly been underated in the NFL for many years at what they do. Brady is the master at moving in the pocket to avoid pressure. But the amount of time he gets on a regular basis to make his reads is impressive.



Rivera is an All-Pro Guard, Stout, and has been for many years. Did you not pay attention to him when he helped pave the way for all three of GB's RB's to have over 5.0 YPC in 03'?

Rivera wanted to give his signing bonus back because he injured himself working out and may not have played in 05'. That is the type of guy he is. But I can't see the connection of how that effects his play and the quality of player he is?

And Bledsoe has worked withoutFlozell Adams for two whole games. It isn't like he hasn't had a good LT for most of the season so far. If he continues to put up career high numbers then maybe I will buy it. But watching Bledsoe in Buffalo, he did not over come the short comings of his o-line and with better players on the Dallas o-line I don't see him doing it now ether.



No problem.



I don't want Carr ether. And I think Houston would be foolish to give up on him considering their continued neglect of his protection.

What we are disagreeing about here is that these guys have over come their o-lines. Something that I don't agree with. Because to me it seems like you are saying that these guys are over-coming all pro players.

Well, I'd say that gameplan is one thing, but the QB (Brady) implementing it is another. Also, Manning himself is responsible as well as the OL for minimizing sacks. It's what a QB that can recognize the defense and throw into the blitz can do. Also, Rivera being injured and possibly below form would certainly be relevant. I don't know how that cannot be relevant.

But, like you said. You agree you don't want Carr. We can agree to disagree on the rest

 

[john h]

Well, I'd say that gameplan is one thing, but the QB (Brady) implementing it is another. Also, Manning himself is responsible as well as the OL for minimizing sacks. It's what a QB that can recognize the defense and throw into the blitz can do. Also, Rivera being injured and possibly below form would certainly be relevant. I don't know how that cannot be relevant.

But, like you said. You agree you don't want Carr. We can agree to disagree on the rest

Listening to Sports Center and some of the NFL players discuss Peyton Manning. They say he sees the field and can read the defense better than any QB in the NFL. They also indicated he had complete authority to change the play at any time and in fact changes it most of the time once he recognizes the attempt to disguise a defense. A QB like this can always minimize the number of sacks as the defense knows they can get burned if they try to overplay him a certain way.

 

[az jam]

Why would they take Bush, when they already have a pretty good stable of RB's. They have a QB, RB's, a WR, they dont have an OL. They either take Ferguson, McNiel or trade down IMO.

Bush is something special. He can change the game so quickly. Sporting News said that has 4.3 speed in the 40. I can't see any team passing on him unless they want Leinart. It will be interesting to see what happens.