Leinart on KTAR

[TJ]

Seems like all you guys harp on in this move is the throwing aspect of the QB's game. When right before the Texans game whiz was VERY specific saying that he was necessarily concerned with that when it came to Matt. It was all the intangibles that he was more interested in.

http://www.arizonasportsfans.com/vb/showpost.php?p=2290838&postcount=109

After the game Whiz was freaking pissed. He said that #1 WR's were lining up in the wrong spots and plays were being run that way etc..

QB's who are the leaders/coach on the field in year 4 in the system in no way shape or form should let that happen. How many times did you see Warner redirect a WR to the right spot? Happened quite a bit. That all has to do with having complete command of the offense and being a leader.

To me this move has to do more with that rather than actual physical performance. JMO.

But I dont see that from any of the QBs so far in preseason.

I agree that the intangibles such as leadership must be taken into consideration. IMO none of them are true leaders at this point. The only advantage Matty has in this department is familiarity with the players/coaches. It is not out of the realm of possibility that one or both come out as field generals.

With that said, physical talent is still the #1 priority. DA can be all the leader he wants to be but if he is an interception machine, he's better suited on the bench.

 

[JeffGollin]

I just wish he'd stop talking and just throw a clipboard or knock over a soda machine.

No doubt everyone of us has faced different personal challenges - facing up to a schoolyard bully or winning over a skeptical boss or gaining the support of co-workers to name a few.

Quite often you have to reach a point where you say: "Bleep it!", throw caution to the wind, forget about what other people think and give it your best shot.

I'm not so sure Matt has quite reached that point, and he has to.

Which reminds me of a story: This graveyard worker is digging a grave (along with his BFF, Seagram's 7). By the time he gets down about 10 - 12 feet, he passes out. Meanwhile this other dude is walking home from work after dark and takes a shortcut through the cemetary. Suddenly he drops into this gaping 12-foot hole. Over and over again he tries to claw his way out of the hole, but is unable to do so. Suddenly he hears this voice behind him mutter: "You'll never get out of this hole." But he did.

Matt, you'll never get out of that hole - unless you do.

 

[Doc Cardinal]

Well said Jeff.....throw down that beer bong and say "Who put Keystone Light in here....I'm pi$$ed!!."

 

[D-Dogg]

Which reminds me of a story: This graveyard worker is digging a grave (along with his BFF, Seagram's 7). By the time he gets down about 10 - 12 feet, he passes out. Meanwhile this other dude is walking home from work after dark and takes a shortcut through the cemetary. Suddenly he drops into this gaping 12-foot hole. Over and over again he tries to claw his way out of the hole, but is unable to do so. Suddenly he hears this voice behind him mutter: "You'll never get out of this hole." But he did.

Matt, you'll never get out of that hole - unless you do.

:maninground:

 

[Shane]

But I dont see that from any of the QBs so far in preseason.

I agree that the intangibles such as leadership must be taken into consideration. IMO none of them are true leaders at this point. The only advantage Matty has in this department is familiarity with the players/coaches. It is not out of the realm of possibility that one or both come out as field generals.

With that said, physical talent is still the #1 priority. DA can be all the leader he wants to be but if he is an interception machine, he's better suited on the bench.

You shouldn't expect to see it from Anderson. He has only had his head in this system and playbook since May. That's 4 months compared to 4 years. Anyway you slice it that is a huge difference. None of that should ever happen with Matt at this point. With DA it would be understandable.

Whiz was very clear what he was looking for in Matt. He didn't get what he wanted in the leadership dept. While less he said it happened again in TN. Huge no no on Matts part.

 

[Shane]

With that said, physical talent is still the #1 priority.

If this were the case it wouldn't be a competition. DA would win hands down.

 

[TJ]

If tjis were the case it wouldn't be a competition. DA wool win hands down.

Depends on what you look for in physical talent. Taking the mental and intangible portion out of the conversation, here is what we have:

Anderson

• Rocket Arm
• Big frame
• Aggressive
• Struggles when he has to take a little off his passes
• Inaccuracy, which in many cases leads to turnovers

Leinart

• Accurate
• Ability to make plays out of the pocket
• Operates well out of play action
• Can be ultra conservative
• Below average arm

It's all relative.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

Depends on what you look for in physical talent. Taking the mental and intangible portion out of the conversation, here is what we have:

Anderson

• Rocket Arm
• Big frame
• Aggressive
• Struggles when he has to take a little off his passes
• Inaccuracy, which in many cases leads to turnovers

Leinart

• Accurate
• Ability to make plays out of the pocket
• Operates well out of play action
• Can be ultra conservative
• Below average arm

It's all relative.

I really would like a list from someone on who they think has above average, average and below average arms in the league.

My sense is that a lot of these references, with the exception of truly self evident, are subjective.

I've read, time and time again, people in the business (not message boards) that Leinart can make every throw. If that's the case, he can't be below average in terms of arm strength.

Silly as it may seem, there is a bit of an optical illusion when it comes to left handers in both baseball and football. The left hand motion to throw just seems slower.

 

[Shane]

I really would like a list from someone on who they think has above average, average and below average arms in the league.

My sense is that a lot of these references, with the exception of truly self evident, are subjective.

I've read, time and time again, people in the business (not message boards) that Leinart can make every throw. If that's the case, he can't be below average in terms of arm strength.

Silly as it may seem, there is a bit of an optical illusion when it comes to left handers in both baseball and football. The left hand motion to throw just seems slower.

Strange. I've never heard anything from any supposed NFL expert talking abot matts arm strength. It has alway been referred to as average to below average.

 

[ASUCHRIS]

Most troublesome about all these interviews is Matt asserting that he's playing well and doesn't need to change anything. How about worrying less about your stellar completion percentage on dump offs that don't get first downs, and actually putting together some scoring drives?

 

[Cheesebeef]

Strange. I've never heard anything from any supposed NFL expert talking abot matts arm strength. It has alway been referred to as average to below average.

agreed. that's always been the knock on Matt from every analyst, draft guy since he graduated college.

 

[MrYeahBut]

Matt doesn't even know what a dump off is!!!

Signed, Y.A. Tittle







.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

Most troublesome about all these interviews is Matt asserting that he's playing well and doesn't need to change anything. How about worrying less about your stellar completion percentage on dump offs that don't get first downs, and actually putting together some scoring drives?

Matt:

"Can I get better? Absolutely. I know that. I’m not perfect and I know I have a lot of work to do".

 

[Duckjake]

Seems like all you guys harp on in this move is the throwing aspect of the QB's game. When right before the Texans game whiz was VERY specific saying that he was necessarily concerned with that when it came to Matt. It was all the intangibles that he was more interested in looking at. How much of a leader he was etc.. etc..

http://www.arizonasportsfans.com/vb/showpost.php?p=2290838&postcount=109

After the game Whiz was freaking pissed. He said that #1 WR's were lining up in the wrong spots and plays were being run that way etc..

QB's who are the leaders/coach on the field in year 4 in the system in no way shape or form should let that happen. How many times did you see Warner redirect a WR to the right spot? Happened quite a bit. That all has to do with having complete command of the offense and being a leader.

To me this move has to do more with that rather than actual physical performance. JMO.

Now that is a good point. How much of that went on with Warner we don't know but can assume that he did a lot of it. (Maybe that's why Levi Brown looks so lost. Kurt was reminding him who to block.) I'd bet that is one big reason guys like Peyton and Brady are so successful.

 

[Shane]

Now that is a good point. How much of that went on with Warner we don't know but can assume that he did a lot of it. (Maybe that's why Levi Brown looks so lost. Kurt was reminding him who to block.) I'd bet that is one big reason guys like Peyton and Brady are so successful.

Yup. You see guys like Manning yelling at the OL all the time and pointing out at the defense telling them to block this guy or that guy. It is very common.

 

[THESMEL]

now now

Coach sent Matt out there with rookies Roberts and williams at WR. i just watched it again just now. 8 yards nice pass to breaston, THT stuffed,
2 yard pass to Breaston that was a bad spot not challenged by Whiz but Steve never made sure f the yard to gain..

short hopp into double coverage, others covered, THT stuffed, Leiv false start and nice pass to TE short of the firt down on 3rd and 16.

Whers Mike Miller and Russ Grimm in all this? The coaches need to have the players ready not Matt, Geez Matt bombed the twin towers too, right!

Now that is a good point. How much of that went on with Warner we don't know but can assume that he did a lot of it. (Maybe that's why Levi Brown looks so lost. Kurt was reminding him who to block.) I'd bet that is one big reason guys like Peyton and Brady are so successful.

 

[THESMEL]

well

90+ QB ratings with no first downs is amazing! under constant blitz.
How about putting the best back into start, and quit mind fuzzing your starting QB and whole team.

Whiz needs kicked in the nuts but it wouldn't phase ole iron balls, he would just look at Grimm and grin.

I do like that about whiz, though. but it makes me crazy.

Most troublesome about all these interviews is Matt asserting that he's playing well and doesn't need to change anything. How about worrying less about your stellar completion percentage on dump offs that don't get first downs, and actually putting together some scoring drives?

 

[Shane]

90+ QB ratings with no first downs is amazing! under constant blitz.
How about putting the best back into start, and quit mind fuzzing your starting QB and whole team.

Whiz needs kicked in the nuts but it wouldn't phase ole iron balls, he would just look at Grimm and grin.

I do like that about whiz, though. but it makes me crazy.

How about your QB knowing where everybody should be lining up and makeing sure it happens?

 

[Crazy Canuck]

How about your QB knowing where everybody should be lining up and makeing sure it happens?

How about your centre making the proper blocking calls, that in turn lines things up properly? Just saying...

 

[Shane]

How about your centre making the proper blocking calls, that in turn lines things up properly? Just saying...

Center makes line calls true. But so do your QB's who have the better vision and can see the whole field rather than the center with his buried between 2 350 LB DTs right in front of you .

 

[green machine]

No matter what Leinart said people would have jumped on him.

If he said he's stunk, people would say he needs to show confidence.

If he said he's played fine, people say he's delusional.

If he said "well, it's not like I've had a lot of support," people would say he's not a good leader.

Point is he can't win when he's speaking - the only way he can come out ahead is by playing well. Period.

 

[wilycoyote24]

Actually according relativity it is possible.

Dude, I'm a graduate student in Physics. It isn't possible according to general or special relativity. Nothing with mass can travel at or faster than the speed of light, which also results in nothing being able to travel back in time.

 

[Duckjake]

Dude, I'm a graduate student in Physics. It isn't possible according to general or special relativity. Nothing with mass can travel at or faster than the speed of light, which also results in nothing being able to travel back in time.

If you are in a car traveling at the speed of light and you turn on the headlamps does anything happen?

 

[wilycoyote24]

If you are in a car traveling at the speed of light and you turn on the headlamps does anything happen?

1) A car with mass can't travel at the speed of light.

2) The entire point of RELATIVITY is that light travels at the same speed regardless of your frame of reference, afterall one can only be said to not be moving relative to some point of reference (you may not be moving on the surface of the Earth, but the Earth is moving about the Sun and the center of the galaxy).

In other words, if you were in the car traveling at the speed of light and turned on your headlights, the light would appear to travel at the speed of light away from the car to your eyes (frame #1). However, for someone stationary outside the car, the car and the light from the lamps would appear to BOTH be traveling at the same speed, the speed of light, to their eyes (frame #2).

Also, if you were moving towards light traveling towards you, the light would still appear to be traveling at the speed of light to your eyes, even though common wisdom would say that it would appear to be traveling faster than the speed of light.

 

[Duckjake]

1) A car with mass can't travel at the speed of light.

2) The entire point of RELATIVITY is that light travels at the same speed regardless of your frame of reference, afterall one can only be said to not be moving relative to some point of reference (you may not be moving on the surface of the Earth, but the Earth is moving about the Sun and the center of the galaxy).

In other words, if you were in the car traveling at the speed of light and turned on your headlights, the light would appear to travel at the speed of light away from the car to your eyes (frame #1). However, for someone stationary outside the car, the car and the light from the lamps would appear to BOTH be traveling at the same speed, the speed of light, to their eyes (frame #2).

Also, if you were moving towards light traveling towards you, the light would still appear to be traveling at the speed of light to your eyes, even though common wisdom would say that it would appear to be traveling faster than the speed of light.

Thanks. I'll pass this on to Steven Wright.