How about Matt

[moklerman]

With the cap space freed from letting an aging QB whose best days are likely behind him, we can spend it on other areas that this team needs such as pass rushers and Olinemen.

The first year of a multi-year deal is going to keep the Cardinals from signing FA's? I'm pretty sure Edge's contract will more than cover what Warner will ask and still have some left over.

Leinart had a good training camp and was in a very close competition with Warner.

And a good training camp means 100% of diddly-poo. Leinart was given every chance to hang onto the job...not win it, just hang on to it and still wasn't ready and/or capable.

Warner can't hang onto the ball, won't continue to produce at his 2007 levels, won't win the job, won't stay healthy, etc. Starting QB in the pro bowl and the reward is thanks, but there's the door? What would he had to have done to retain his job for those of you that want to replace him?

It not this "ZOMG Warner PWNED Leinart" crap that Warner fans want to spew out.

I don't recall much of this sentiment. I think it was fairly obvious that it was Leinart's job to lose and he did. Warner's bid in the competition was his performance in 2007.

Just to reiterate, what did Warner need to accomplish this year for him to retain his starting job in 2009? I think he did enough.

 

[Evil Ash]

The games that Warner has struggled the most in are also the games where the O-Line has struggled and that's no coincidence. It doesn't matter who you have at QB if the O-Line is getting battered by your opponents D-Line. Your QB is going to struggle and may even get injured. We're very fortunate that with some of the hits Warner has been taking that he hasn't been injured.

There was no pass rush in the 2nd St Louis game and our last game, yet Warner still struggled. Yes, some of the Oline woes were a contribution to his poor play in some games. However it doesn't excuse all of it.

If he comes back, making him the backup would be an insult and disrespecful.

Meh. He doesn't have to comeback if he doesn't want to. He could always go somewhere else.

If the Cardinals don't want him I'm certain somone else will.

Probably and I wish him well (except when he plays the Cardinals). However the money that could be spent on him could be spent on improving the team.

There is only so much Leinart can learn on the sidelines

 

[moklerman]

We need more than a QB. The money for his contract could be spent elsewhere.

Did the Cardinals spend everything under the cap in 2008? Or recent years?

It didn't help them enough this year and may have screwed up their future.

One 2nd round pick isn't going to screw up their future. This is a team that spent a gazillion dollars on Faneca and Pace so please let's not act like bringing in Favre is a kiss of death for the Jets. They spent a ton of money to buy a championship and it paid dividends for most of the season. If Favre hadn't have gotten hurt maybe they win one of the games they needed but let's not forget that he was getting MVP talk half way through the season and the Jets were considered the best in the AFC after knocking off the undefeated Titans. It wasn't a bad move, just an unfortunate finish.

You're kidding right? Have you seen the QB play around the league?

No, I'm not kidding. I think Green Bay's offense is good enough that a solid FA QB would be able to step in there and keep them rolling. Derek Anderson was the first name that popped to mind but what about Cassel? There are quite a few FA's for '09 that would make that unit roll. Anderson and Cassel wouldn't do the same for other teams necessarily but in GB, I think it wouldn't be difficult to find a QB to do well enough.

Just like we can improve ourselves by moving on by not spending big money on a QB whose best days have past him and spending that money elsewhere (Oline and OLB).

Again, I don't believe the Cardinals are going to be cap strapped. Nor do I believe that Warner is going to demand "big" money. Nor do I believe that his best days are behind him.

I would really like someone who's an expert with such things to lay it all out there at some point but I don't recall the Cardinals being unable to sign FA's because of a lack of money. Faneca and Suggs were sought after but I think it was best that they didn't sign them at the ridiculous contracts they received elsewhere. I don't think the Cardinals should do that in '09 either. If they don't go after a truly big money FA then I don't see any problem with continuing to add depth and filling out the roster with the cap money that's on hand.

Whis' roots in Pittsburgh would lead me to believe that they wouldn't overpay or spend big in any one area and that should mean there will be money to go around.

 

[moklerman]

There was no pass rush in the 2nd St Louis game and our last game, yet Warner still struggled.

C'mon, Ash. What are your expectations? The Cards won that Rams game 34-10 and Warner had a 95 rating. Maybe not a flawless game but 73% completion and almost 300 yards isn't what I'd consider struggling. Even moreso with the Seattle game. Because he started off slowly means that 4 TD's and a 117 rating is struggling?

Couldn't it just as easily be said that he needed a little time to get back into a rhythm and started to adjust his game to the fact that the running game and play action was an option?

 

[Evil Ash]

The first year of a multi-year deal is going to keep the Cardinals from signing FA's? I'm pretty sure Edge's contract will more than cover what Warner will ask and still have some left over.

Getting rid of Edge's contract helps but we need help in more than a few areas. Not to mention that along with those upgrades there are a number of players that want pay RAISES meaning they are going to take up more cap room not less

And a good training camp means 100% of diddly-poo. Leinart was given every chance to hang onto the job...not win it, just hang on to it and still wasn't ready and/or capable.

Maybe he wasn't ready to start this year but we aren't talking about THIS YEAR. Leinart looks to have a long future in this league, Warner does not. Thats the point. We have to move on at some point and see what Leinart has.

Warner can't hang onto the ball, won't continue to produce at his 2007 levels, won't win the job, won't stay healthy, etc. Starting QB in the pro bowl and the reward is thanks, but there's the door?

If he wants the starting job handed to him and/or wants more that $4 million a year, absolutely. That money could spent elsewhere on things that would improve this team.

Just to reiterate, what did Warner need to accomplish this year for him to retain his starting job in 2009? I think he did enough.

Have a higher TD to turnover ratio than 1:1, Play at a consistent level for the majority of the season (he played well for about half of it), just to name a few

 

[Evil Ash]

C'mon, Ash. What are your expectations? The Cards won that Rams game 34-10 and Warner had a 95 rating. Maybe not a flawless game but 73% completion and almost 300 yards isn't what I'd consider struggling. Even moreso with the Seattle game. Because he started off slowly means that 4 TD's and a 117 rating is struggling?

Couldn't it just as easily be said that he needed a little time to get back into a rhythm and started to adjust his game to the fact that the running game and play action was an option?

Turnovers are a killer. He fumbled in the first qtr of both games and we won largely due to how horrid those teams were. QB ratings do not take fumbles into account.

I don't hate Warner or anything. I'm grateful for what he did for us this season and I wish him well but it would be interest of the team to move on

 

[moklerman]

Turnovers are a killer. He fumbled in the first qtr of both games and we won largely due to how horrid those teams were. QB ratings do not take fumbles into account.

But this doesn't warrant wanting Leinart in there. Leinart has turned the ball over 3.7% of the time in his career and Warner was at 3.3% this year.

 

[Evil Ash]

But this doesn't warrant wanting Leinart in there. Leinart has turned the ball over 3.7% of the time in his career and Warner was at 3.3% this year.

Leinart is still young so you have to be able to live with some of his mistakes. Warner is a veteran that should know better than to turn the ball over with regularity (like he has done the 2nd half of this season)

Yet again we are talking about the FUTURE of the team. Bringing Warner back doesn't really help us in that regard. He's 38 and not getting any younger. You have to move on some point.

 

[IAWarnerFan]

Leinart is still young so you have to be able to live with some of his mistakes. Warner is a veteran that should know better than to turn the ball over with regularity (like he has done the 2nd half of this season)

Yet again we are talking about the FUTURE of the team. Bringing Warner back doesn't really help us in that regard. He's 38 and not getting any younger. You have to move on some point.

You're taking the risk that he'll get a lot better with experience. If you were the owner of the team it would be your right to do so.

I'm not willing to take that risk, he's already been given chances and I'd be willing to look elsewhere. If I was the owner of the team it would be my right to do so. I feel I have time right now where I can let Leinart go and look elsewhere for a QB. Kurt Warner can still play well for two more and if I was the owner it would be my right to take that risk and look for another QB of the future for Warner to groom in the next two years.

Lets just agree to disagree.

 

[moklerman]

Not to mention that along with those upgrades there are a number of players that want pay RAISES meaning they are going to take up more cap room not less

Any new or re=structured deals would be cap friendly for '09 and maybe '10. Those things are always backloaded.

Leinart looks to have a long future in this league, Warner does not. Thats the point. We have to move on at some point and see what Leinart has.

Well, I'll forgive you for seeing things with your heart but Leinart hasn't shown he has a long future in this league at all. All he has shown is that he may not be able to handle the punishment an NFL QB must endure. Why do the Cardinals have to move on from a player that is one of the best at his position? If this was 2002 or 2003 Warner and what he was showing at that time it would make perfect sense. But forget his age, his production is what it is.

If he wants the starting job handed to him and/or wants more that $4 million a year, absolutely. That money could spent elsewhere on things that would improve this team.

Downgrade the QB position to improve...? The Cardinals were bottom 5 in total salary cap money spent in 2008 so I still don't see how re-signing Warner is somehow going to restrict the Cardinals from doing what they want to do in other areas. Especially since whatever contract he signs will likely be a loophole deal that would be backloaded and spread out to give relief.

Have a higher TD to turnover ratio than 1:1, Play at a consistent level for the majority of the season (he played well for about half of it), just to name a few

12/16 games of 81.5 or higher rating. 10/16 90 rating or higher. 30 TD to 21 turnovers is better than 1:1.

 

[moklerman]

Warner is a veteran that should know better than to turn the ball over with regularity (like he has done the 2nd half of this season)

I don't think you are giving enough consideration to just how much is on Warner's shoulders. 14 interceptions is really an impressive number considering the total lack of a rushing game. Less than 1 interception per game in almost 600 attempts with only 1100 team rushing yards on the year?!?

If Warner was on the Giants or Falcons or Vikings or Dolphins or any of those teams then I would totally agree with you that Warner wasn't protecting the ball as much as he should and that he was in error for taking risks with that kind of running game.

But consider also, Warner improved from a 4.9% rate of turnover in 2007 to 3.3% in 2008. Wasn't that the caveat to start the year? Warner has to improve protecting the ball. Well, he made a pretty significant improvement. He's stayed healthy, he's improved protecting the ball, he was named the starter of the pro bowl, led the Cardinals to the playoffs, set the team record for TD's and completion %(I think), etc. I can't agree with not rewarding him for all he's done and I think he's clearly earned retaining his starting job.

 

[Evil Ash]

Any new or re=structured deals would be cap friendly for '09 and maybe '10. Those things are always backloaded.

Not always. Even still we need help with the Oline, TE, an additional RB, DE, OLB, depth in the secondary, punter ... the list keeps going and there's only so much of the salary cap to go around.

Well, I'll forgive you for seeing things with your heart but Leinart hasn't shown he has a long future in this league at all. All he has shown is that he may not be able to handle the punishment an NFL QB must endure. Why do the Cardinals have to move on from a player that is one of the best at his position? If this was 2002 or 2003 Warner and what he was showing at that time it would make perfect sense. But forget his age, his production is what it is.

Well thats because you don't look at anything objectively when it comes to the QB position. During the first preseason game, Leinart had a QB rating of over 110 and yet all you did was say "yeah but" the entire time giving zero credit to him. This repeated throughout the preseason. I get it. You are a Warner homer and that's cool but don't expect everyone else to be.

As for the production comment, you're making my point as his production has dropped off significantly the last 6 games. Its not 2002 and his age seems to be catching up with him.

Downgrade the QB position to improve...? The Cardinals were bottom 5 in total salary cap money spent in 2008 so I still don't see how re-signing Warner is somehow going to restrict the Cardinals from doing what they want to do in other areas. Especially since whatever contract he signs will likely be a loophole deal that would be backloaded and spread out to give relief.

It may or may not be a downgrade. We don't know that yet. We were up by 1 score against the Seahawks when Leinart came in and we didn't seem to miss a beat.

Again I'm thinking of the future of team. You are thinking of the present. Warner is not the future of this team and we've seen the best of him. He's not getting younger and seems to have gotten worse as the year has worn on (and no not everything can be blamed on the Oline). He has a pass first mentality and our coach has a run first mentality (they went with the passing game due to how the personnel was structured and not simply by choice).

Leinart's game fits more with the structure of what the coach would like to go to - more of a ball control offense.

12/16 games of 81.5 or higher rating. 10/16 90 rating or higher. 30 TD to 21 turnovers is better than 1:1.

QB rating is a flawed argument since fumbles - a HUGE problem for Warner lately - aren't taken into account. His turnover ratio is better than 1:1 for the whole year so I'll give him credit for that but the turnovers have gone up as the season has gone on and to me that is not a good sign for an aging QB

 

[jstadvl]

I am confused as to the injury prone thing. Matt got his collar bone broken ONCE. Kurt has been knocked out, sidelined, or replaced how mant times due to injury?

 

[moklerman]

Not always. Even still we need help with the Oline, TE, an additional RB, DE, OLB, depth in the secondary, punter ... the list keeps going and there's only so much of the salary cap to go around.

Only in the extreme hypothetical does signing Warner prevent or limit the Cardinals from addressing those needs. If they were up against the cap every year then I could see the concern but it really hasn't been the case. Warner's contract won't be a lynch pin to the 2009 offseason.

Well thats because you don't look at anything objectively when it comes to the QB position. During the first preseason game, Leinart had a QB rating of over 110 and yet all you did was say "yeah but" the entire time giving zero credit to him.

Seriously? You're going to accuse me of having no objectivity when you're using the first preseason game in which Leinart only threw 8 passes as evidence of something? He had the equivelant of one good drive in preseason game #1 and I'm supposed to lend credence, much less give credit for it?

C'mon, man. Leinart has some positive things going for him but 7/8 passing with no TD's in the preseason opener is what you want to talk about?

As for the production comment, you're making my point as his production has dropped off significantly the last 6 games. Its not 2002 and his age seems to be catching up with him.

If the running game, blocking and drops/fumbles by the receivers hadn't also regressed then I could see your point. The offense became more unbalanced and more predictable and that coincided with tougher opponents. Did or did not Warner's production spike once an attempt at a running game was returned to?

It may or may not be a downgrade. We don't know that yet. We were up by 1 score against the Seahawks when Leinart came in and we didn't seem to miss a beat.

I thought the offense scored 4 TD's with Warner and 2 FG's with Leinart? I don't blame Leinart for not putting up the same production but it was hardly as if it was the same. Not to mention it being the 4th quarter of the last game of the year. Both teams were on cruise control by the time Leinart came in. Oh wait, Leinart was handing the ball off and that's why Edge had his longest run as a Cardinal, right? It had nothing to do with the Seahawks playing with one foot in the U-Haul truck.

Again I'm thinking of the future of team. You are thinking of the present. Warner is not the future of this team and we've seen the best of him.

His best is pretty darned good. And there is no "future" that you keep alluding to. This league is year-to-year at this point and you play the best players while they are producing. Willingly giving up that kind of production just to see if Leinart's able to play a full schedule and then be productive is folly.

Leinart's game fits more with the structure of what the coach would like to go to - more of a ball control offense.

Is that what you assume or do you have a quote or two from Whis? Warner led the NFC in completion pct. and Whis has continually commented on how he doesn't care how they hold onto the ball and sustain drives. Pass or run. They have a ton wrapped up in Fitz and will likely hang onto Q(from what I've heard) so I don't see how handing the reigns to a career 55% QB is what he'd want to do when Warner's one of the most accurate ever and right now.

QB rating is a flawed argument since fumbles - a HUGE problem for Warner lately - aren't taken into account.

One lost fumble in his last five games and three in his last ten games is a HUGE problem? Pardon me if I disagree.

but the turnovers have gone up as the season has gone on and to me that is not a good sign for an aging QB

We all know and knew that if the Cardinals put Warner in a position where the success of the offense was entirely on his shoulders it would spell trouble. Just like it would just about any QB. Did or did not Warner's troubles start when they completely abandoned the running game?

All QB's are aging and Warner's still 37(not 38 as posted by someone earlier).

I am confused as to the injury prone thing. Matt got his collar bone broken ONCE. Kurt has been knocked out, sidelined, or replaced how mant times due to injury?

Leinart injured his shoulder his rookie year and the collar bone the next year. In just over 500 pass attempts(roughly 1 season's worth of passes) getting injured twice is not an encouraging sign.

And speaking of fumbles, I still don't see how it's being argued that Leinart is so much more secure with the ball. He's had 29 pass attempts in relatively non pressure situations this year and fumbled it twice. 1/15 attempts isn't better than 1/60 attempts is it?

 

[cardpa]

I personnally think this is comparing apples to oranges. Everyone knows what Warner's strengths and weaknesses are. They have been established over time. Leinart has played roughly a total of two season's worth of games? I don't think we really know what Leinart can do.

Warner has far more years of experience than Leinart. Warner has gotten to play under the present system for a year and 1/2. Leinart played only 1/2 season in the present system and it was at it's newest when Leinart played under it.

I would expect Warner's numbers and stats to be better than Leinart.

Stats can be somewhat misleading. When and where on the field the INTs or fumbles occurred are probably more important than the quantity. I would rather have my QB toss an INT inside an opponents 20 than toss one inside my own 40. I would rather have the INT thrown in the 1st qtr rather than the 4th when you are trying to hold possession especially in a close game when you have a lead or are behind by one score.