I am so sick of Kurt Freaking Warner

Duckjake

LEGACY MEMBER
LEGACY MEMBER
Joined
Jun 10, 2002
Posts
32,190
Reaction score
317
Location
Texas
Why is that not debateable, duckjake?

Because people are using the term like Warner was Dave Brown. Indicating that a guy who had not played regularly probably in several years was having to come in and do the same job as a guy who had started 45 games over the last 3 years.

That is not the case with Warner.
 

cardsfanmd

ASFN Icon
Joined
Jan 16, 2007
Posts
13,976
Reaction score
4,175
Location
annapolis, md
Because people are using the term like Warner was Dave Brown. Indicating that a guy who had not played regularly probably in several years was having to come in and do the same job as a guy who had started 45 games over the last 3 years.

That is not the case with Warner.
IIRC, Dave Brown played plenty for the Giants before he came here.
 

Duckjake

LEGACY MEMBER
LEGACY MEMBER
Joined
Jun 10, 2002
Posts
32,190
Reaction score
317
Location
Texas
IIRC, Dave Brown played plenty for the Giants before he came here.

But he didn't play plenty while he was in Arizona. But to keep you from missing the point substitute John Navarre for Dave Brown in my post.
 

Diamondback Jay

Psalms 23:1
Joined
Feb 28, 2004
Posts
4,910
Reaction score
1
Location
Mesa
Can't we all just bump any one of the old "Warner Sucks" threads that are looming round these parts rather than creating another repeating the same crap?
 

Jetstream Green

Kool Aid with a touch of vodka
Joined
Feb 5, 2003
Posts
29,524
Reaction score
16,774
Location
San Antonio, Texas
Our TE (Benawhatever) made that one int. this game, Warner threw a great pass RIGHT INTO HIS HANDS and the idiot cannot hold on. Warner is our backup...GEEEEZ people, drop it already.
 
Last edited:

cardsfanmd

ASFN Icon
Joined
Jan 16, 2007
Posts
13,976
Reaction score
4,175
Location
annapolis, md
But he didn't play plenty while he was in Arizona. But to keep you from missing the point substitute John Navarre for Dave Brown in my post.
You can't substitue Navarre because he is a third stringer, not a backup. Warner is our backup, plain and simple. Please tell me ten other backups you would rather have. Better yet, just name 5.
 

green machine

I rule at posting
Joined
Sep 4, 2002
Posts
6,126
Reaction score
11
Location
Phoenix, AZ
To be fair, how many people were saying Warner should have been starting over Leinart anyway? How come he should be the starter, but when he struggles it's OK because "he's just the backup?"

I don't pin this loss on Warner, but he sure isn't helping being the turnover machine that he is in close games.
 

cardsfanmd

ASFN Icon
Joined
Jan 16, 2007
Posts
13,976
Reaction score
4,175
Location
annapolis, md
To be fair, how many people were saying Warner should have been starting over Leinart anyway? How come he should be the starter, but when he struggles it's OK because "he's just the backup?"

I don't pin this loss on Warner, but he sure isn't helping being the turnover machine that he is in close games.
Leinart is the starter. What backup would you like to replace Warner with?????????????????????????????????????????????????????
 

crdnl85

Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2003
Posts
105
Reaction score
13
Location
Goodyear,AZ
If Rackers makes 3 fgs, the ball NEVER gets to kurts hands. This team is in the playoffs with a good kicker.
I think you have that backwasd.If Kurt took care of the ball it would never have gotten to Rackers foot,except for kickoffs,and pats.
 
Last edited:

ajcardfan

I see you.
Supporting Member
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
39,288
Reaction score
27,134
I think you have that backwasd.If Kurt took care of the ball it would never have gotten to Rackers foot,except for kickoffs,and pats.

And, if "ifs" and "buts" were candy and nuts, we'd have a hell of a party going on.
 

Duckjake

LEGACY MEMBER
LEGACY MEMBER
Joined
Jun 10, 2002
Posts
32,190
Reaction score
317
Location
Texas
You can't substitue Navarre because he is a third stringer, not a backup. Warner is our backup, plain and simple. Please tell me ten other backups you would rather have. Better yet, just name 5.

That's exactly what I'm saying. Most team's #2 is a guy who almost never plays. People are trying to compare Warner to guys like Dave Brown who threw zero passes in 2001 and was 2-5 in 1998. Brown threw 243 passes in 4years with the Cards. Warner has thrown 903 in just 3 years.

He is not a typical backup. Matt Schaub threw 76 passes in three years with Atlanta. That's a typical backup.

People are trying to use playing our backup QB as a reason to accept a losing season. And I just don't buy it.
 

cardsfanmd

ASFN Icon
Joined
Jan 16, 2007
Posts
13,976
Reaction score
4,175
Location
annapolis, md
That's exactly what I'm saying. Most team's #2 is a guy who almost never plays. People are trying to compare Warner to guys like Dave Brown who threw zero passes in 2001 and was 2-5 in 1998. Brown threw 243 passes in 4years with the Cards. Warner has thrown 903 in just 3 years.

He is not a typical backup. Matt Schaub threw 76 passes in three years with Atlanta. That's a typical backup.

People are trying to use playing our backup QB as a reason to accept a losing season. And I just don't buy it.
Just using the term "typical backup" is silly. Every backup has the same exact role, duck. They stand on the sideline until either the game is over or the #1 QB gets hurt, in which they go in the game. No one goes and says I would rather have a backup who is gonna play alot. It is FOOTBALL!!!!!!! Injuries happen. Smart and lucky teams have good backups (like Warner) in the event of an injury to the starter.
 

Cheesebeef

ASFN IDOL
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Posts
92,635
Reaction score
71,517
Just using the term "typical backup" is silly. Every backup has the same exact role, duck. They stand on the sideline until either the game is over or the #1 QB gets hurt, in which they go in the game. No one goes and says I would rather have a backup who is gonna play alot. It is FOOTBALL!!!!!!! Injuries happen. Smart and lucky teams have good backups (like Warner) in the event of an injury to the starter.

only in Cardinals land could a guy who has a 12:17 touchdown to turnover ratio as a starter be considered good at his position.
 
Last edited:

Duckjake

LEGACY MEMBER
LEGACY MEMBER
Joined
Jun 10, 2002
Posts
32,190
Reaction score
317
Location
Texas
Just using the term "typical backup" is silly. Every backup has the same exact role, duck. They stand on the sideline until either the game is over or the #1 QB gets hurt, in which they go in the game. No one goes and says I would rather have a backup who is gonna play alot. It is FOOTBALL!!!!!!! Injuries happen. Smart and lucky teams have good backups (like Warner) in the event of an injury to the starter.

Why is it silly? If something doesn't fit the mold it is not typical. We have a formerly #2 QB who was our starter just last season. Atlanta had a guy who never played therefore our #2 was better prepared to come in and play well. 61% completion rate 21 td and only 15 ints is playing fairly well in my book.

You aren't looking at the way people are using the term backup to excuse losing . They are inferring that he is substantially inferior to our starter. This is not the case in Arizona.
 

green machine

I rule at posting
Joined
Sep 4, 2002
Posts
6,126
Reaction score
11
Location
Phoenix, AZ
Leinart is the starter. What backup would you like to replace Warner with?????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Uhh when did I say I wanted him replaced?

I said that earlier in the year people were clamoring for Warner, saying he was better then Leinart. Thus, to me, in their eyes Warner should have been the starter. Therefore those same people cannot use the "he's the backup" excuse for why he is performing poorly.
 

cardsfanmd

ASFN Icon
Joined
Jan 16, 2007
Posts
13,976
Reaction score
4,175
Location
annapolis, md
Why is it silly? If something doesn't fit the mold it is not typical. We have a formerly #2 QB who was our starter just last season. Atlanta had a guy who never played therefore our #2 was better prepared to come in and play well. 61% completion rate 21 td and only 15 ints is playing fairly well in my book.

You aren't looking at the way people are using the term backup to excuse losing . They are inferring that he is substantially inferior to our starter. This is not the case in Arizona.
In that case, I agree with you. He is not the reason we have lost though IMO. I just think he has done better than most backups could.
 

daves

Keepin' it real!
Supporting Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2003
Posts
3,638
Reaction score
7,602
Location
Orange County, CA
only in Cardinals land could a guy who has a 12:17 touchdown to turnover ratio be considered good at his position.

Not sure where you got those numbers, but according to NFL.com Warner has 21 TDs, 15 INTs, and 6 FL, for a 21:21 TD:TO ratio for 2007... and currently the 11th highest passer rating at 87.6.

Just keepin' it real....

...dave
 

Cheesebeef

ASFN IDOL
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Posts
92,635
Reaction score
71,517
Not sure where you got those numbers, but according to NFL.com Warner has 21 TDs, 15 INTs, and 6 FL, for a 21:21 TD:TO ratio for 2007... and currently the 11th highest passer rating at 87.6.

Just keepin' it real....

...dave

Damn, I meant to qualify those numbers with "as a starter" distinction. Like Harry said a while back when Leinart went down, a little of Warner is a lot better than a lot of Warner.
 

green machine

I rule at posting
Joined
Sep 4, 2002
Posts
6,126
Reaction score
11
Location
Phoenix, AZ
Not sure where you got those numbers, but according to NFL.com Warner has 21 TDs, 15 INTs, and 6 FL, for a 21:21 TD:TO ratio for 2007... and currently the 11th highest passer rating at 87.6.

Just keepin' it real....

...dave

That only counts fumbles lost. He's coughed the ball up a lot.
 

Duckjake

LEGACY MEMBER
LEGACY MEMBER
Joined
Jun 10, 2002
Posts
32,190
Reaction score
317
Location
Texas
That only counts fumbles lost. He's coughed the ball up a lot.

The Cards have only had 4 years where their leading passer threw more TD passes than interceptions since Neil Lomax had to retire.

McCown 11-10 in 2004
Plummer 18-14 in 2001
Buerlein 18-17 in 1993
Warner 11-9 in 2005

21-15 is really amazing in that context.

Heck Warner could end up with the best season for a Cardinal passer since Lomax in 1987!

But realistically that just shows how bad Cardinal QBs have been for the past 20 seasons.
 

82CardsGrad

7 x 70
Joined
Dec 31, 2004
Posts
36,486
Reaction score
8,645
Location
Scottsdale
The Cards have only had 4 years where their leading passer threw more TD passes than interceptions since Neil Lomax had to retire.

McCown 11-10 in 2004
Plummer 18-14 in 2001
Buerlein 18-17 in 1993
Warner 11-9 in 2005

21-15 is really amazing in that context.

Heck Warner could end up with the best season for a Cardinal passer since Lomax in 1987!

But realistically that just shows how bad Cardinal QBs have been for the past 20 seasons.

I have absolutely no doubts that if Warner were starting for teams like the Hawks, Packers, Cowboys, Vikings, and many others, he be playing football in January and doing some serious damage...
He is not the type of QB for the Cards (actually, there really isn't a QB for the Cards...). Kurt needs just a little more time, on average, and he would obliterate secondaries on a consistent basis...
Not all of the mistakes he's made this season are because of our pathetic o-line, but the majority have been... And the one's that weren't, were often made because Kurt is trying to overcome the massive futility of this sad franchise...
 
Top