McCown

[Loyal Card 17]

good post dan

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

If that is all I have to go with, I guess I will take it, I have gone on far less for many, many years... I just have a hard time swallowing the idea that all of you true fans are sold too...

i'm far from sold. but willing to trust denny . . . for now.

 

[RugbyMuffin]

Just a couple of days ago I was explaining how good receivers can make an average QB into a great QB.

Personally I am not sold on McCown. Anyone who has watched the kid play in the last 3 years should not be. He has done some pretty pathetic things out on the football field. Including his screen pass to LJ Shelton.

Yet, he IS better than Jeff Blake, and I think he could be better than Jake Plummer. Now I know that is not much of a complement, but I am trying to say he is better than what has been available to us.

The kid has guts, heart, and is able to be a leader. He also has great mobility , a good "sixth sense" of feeling the rush comming, and is smart enough to throw it to Boldin as much as possible.

Now that has the making of a good QB. Kinda like a skinny white Dante Culpepper.

What could make him great is the fact you got Boldin, Johnson, and some stud rookie WR out there for him to throw to. A good receiver makes the un-catchable pass, catchable, he makes a accurate QB, a very accurate QB.

Again take Culpepper for example. All he has to do is get the ball in the vicinity of Moss and the ball is caught. It is fair to say Boldin has those capabilities.

And more so someone like Bodlin or Johnson can do a lot once they receive the pass. A lot of yards after the catch.

The main, overpowering reason, that I am all for sticking with McCown over drafting some rookie is that Green believes McCown can get the job done. Just from the 1st few practices you can see Green knows what he is doing so I say follow said leader!

Peace

 

[vikesfan]

Dan H Great Post!!!

Wally every QB forces the ball in. Last year Tice with the Randy Ratio taught and told DC to force the ball. This year he did it much less. Guys like Peyton and Farve force it more. Farve is the king of forcing the ball.


If Josh can't do it another QB will be brought in next year. The DG is not QB dependent. And neither is the NFL anymore.

 

[jstadvl]

good post

also by "Muff".

 

[blindseyed]

i'm far from sold. but willing to trust denny . . . for now

My sentiments pretty much to a T

 

[Skkorpion]

Dan and Muff, good arguments.

I'm still on the fence on this one. McCown didn't impress me at all through two summer camps. Then all of a sudden, when given a chance to play, he showed upside.

Rich Gannon couldn't get any coach to believe in him until Gruden did.

I'm open to convincing.

 

[seesred]

Josh acutualy looked solid in both his camps. He has a big time arm. He is very quick, he has a good feel for the pocket callapsing. He is very strong for a QB. He likes to play, not pocket scared. I like the kid. Heck he was a third round draft choice. THis is not a nobody. If we didn't take him he would have been gone in the next couple of picks. His whole family plays and his brother was just drafted.

The biggest reason to have some faith is Green likes him a lot. If he didn't we would pick Eli or Ben or Rivers. Not having to sign one of those guys will go miles in the fact that we wont have to throw QB bonus bucks and a whole lot of cap money. I can't tell anyone how this will play out, but I feel good going to war with this kid,.

GBR

 

[WildBB]

And the kid can run if he has to. That might be a challenge though for him, to hang in that extra moment for a play rather than trying to make a little by avoiding a sack.

 

[WisconsinCard]

He's big( hard to bring down unless it's a full tackle), got a good arm, mobile and can make things happen when there's nothing there, was starting to see the field better at the end of the season, believes in himself,, has fun doing what he's doing, pretty accurate, just a baby(experience is going to go a long way with this kid), is a good field commander, has the respect of the guys in the huddle!
P.S. I think Parsons can really push him because THAT kid has alot of "raw" talent.

Couldn't have said it better myself. We are just going to have to give him a chance and rest assured that if he isn't doing the job then we will see King.

 

[Dan H]

And, to add a little more fat to chew on . . .

Jake Plummer's first three starts:

41 of 80 (51.2%) for 475 yards, 3 TDs, 5 INTs, 16 carries for 102 yards. Team record 1-2, points scored: 51, points allowed: 86.

 

[40yearfan]

A lot of the people who are pushing for the Cards to take a QB at the #3 spot all say basically the same thing. McCown hasn't proven himself, he only has 3 starts, looked bad in two of them, etc.

So my question is why do you think Manning or Ben could do any better than McCown. The only time I saw Manning was in his last bowl game and he looked terrible. He was up against a good team and really had trouble adjusting to a good defense and getting into any kind of rhythm for the game. I was singularly unimpressed. Comparing him to McCown, he definetely has a long way to go to come up to McCown's level. I think putting him into the QB position without having him sit for a year could ruin his confidence and turn him into a bust. We certainly don't need a #3 expensive pick sitting on the bench for a year when we could get immediate help from another impact player (Taylor?)

Ben R. looked a lot better in his bowl game in the first half, but kind of sputtered in the second half. Comparing him to McCown though, I think it would take him 2 years to get to McCown's level. He's a raw talent who needs to be developed and it will take him time to adjust to the speed of an NFL game.

The one word that is outlawed in your response is "potential". Every time I hear that word, I want to throw up. Everyone has potential, even the water boy, but potential don't pay the bills or help you win now. We need playmakers, not someone who might be good sometime in the distant future. This club isn't in a position to be able to afford those kind of players at this time. Let's start winning first and then address the players with "potential" at that time.

 

[john h]

why is everyone sold on Josh? The feeling I get from reading everything is that he is the man, he will get it done... where is the back up for that??? I am hoping that everyone but me is correct but in my opinion this is our weakest link... Please fix this opinion for me... Input???

I do not have a clue as to why no one seems to be concerned about a QB and are quick to think Green can turn McCown into the next coming. No one including Green has seen enough of this guy in game conditions to know what he will do. What are the odds of him being a great QB. I say 100-1. A decent QB. Less than 50%. Who among us would select McCown over Manning or Ben? Probably not many. I do not understand why Green from day one pronounces McCown as the man. I would thinki he would at least say he will battle our new backup for the starting job. Most good football teams must have a decent QB. Not a great one but a decent one. That should be our #1 priority. If Green thinks McCown is it then so be it. He is not going to look real bright if McCown falls on his butt. Then he could look brilliant if McCown turns out. I think Green has been much to fast on the trigger to announce he will not draft a QB at number 3 and that McCown is his man.

 

[Savage58]

If Eli is available at #3, IMO we should jump on him. He's the ultimate management QB with the arm to make every throw, and he only makes people around him better. Something I think our team could greatly use. He's cool under pressure, but has a fire inside to win, that is contageous.

That being said, if he's gone, I don't want any other QB in the first or 2nd round. But we do need more depth at QB, someone who can show King to the door, possibly Jeff Smoker late in the draft.

McCown has all the qualities we look for in a QB, but he has a tendency to pull the ball down to soon, and run with it. Is he going to get hurt playing that way, eventually, yes. Then who do we have to back him up, some might be ready to see what Parsons has to offer, I am also, but for an extended period of time, we might just tank the season. It's risky, I'd much rather see McCown being pushed by Eli Manning throughout the season, to hold onto the starting job. If he holds Manning off, good for him, we tender him for another year, possibly trade him, and we're looking pretty with Eli.

Yes I do think Eli is going to be the best QB to come out since his brother.

 

[TILLMANFAN]

McCown, statistically speaking, put two good games together to end the season. 62.5 and 60.6 % completions, 1TD no INT and 2 TD 1INT, 91 and 88 ratings, 274 and 224 yards. If he could replicate that success throughout the season the Cards will be fine. Dennis Green keeps emphasising that his teams have offensive success because of the system. Green won games with Jeff George and an over the hill Randall Cunningham. Rothlisberger and Eli Manning are not sure things. They would cost a fortune and would need time to learn. If Elis last name were Smith would anybody be talking about him as a top 3 pick based on his performance? In his last two games, McCown showed us something. Like it or not, Josh is our QB. If you are going to root for the Cards, you are going to have to root for McCown.

 

[Capital Card]

I don't think anyone "knows" if Josh will make it or not, but from my limited observation of the kid, I would add:

1. He throws the best ball I've seen from a Cardinal QB since Boomer was chucking it all over the place.

2. I agree with the happy feet comments that have been made. I felt that he took off too early on several occasions. Also, don't let me get started on how he carries the ball when he runs. If both of these conditions continue, Josh could have us longing for the days of Plummers turnovers. That said, I think both are very coachable "faults" that can be corrected.

3. Josh seems to be able to learn from his mistakes. In his first game, he made the infamous panic pass to the OL. We haven't really seen that mistake again, and by that I mean total panic. I also felt he decided to run earlier in his first two starts than he did against Minni. (I haven't checked with the tapes, so I could very well be wrong here.)

4. Josh is exuding 100 times more confidence now than he did when he was named the started for the last few games. Maybe he is still caught up in the dramatic win against the Vikes. Maybe Coach Green has built him up to where he believes he can be great. Whatever, it is something that I think tends to carry over to team-mates. Jake had it for a while here, but then as he continued to make the same mistakes over and over, I think the team kinda started to tune him out. (Again, pure speculation on my part.)

We gave Jake 5 years to be the guy. I'm willing to give Josh more than the three starts, especially since he showed improvement with each game. I too am leary about not having a reliable alternative, but if Denny thinks Josh can do it, I'm more than willing to go along for the ride. A lot of really good QB's started their career with less potential than Josh.

Remember, the ride can be more fun than the destination!!!

Go Cards!!!

 

[CardFan67]

McCown, statistically speaking, put two good games together to end the season. 62.5 and 60.6 % completions, 1TD no INT and 2 TD 1INT, 91 and 88 ratings, 274 and 224 yards. If he could replicate that success throughout the season the Cards will be fine.

Agreed, year-end stats averaging what he did in the last two games would be awesome, 61% pass completion rate, 3984 passing yards and 24 TD’s with only 8 Picks would be awesome and put him right up there with P. Manning, T. Green, M. Bulger and M. Hasselback’s figures from the 2003 season. (figures achieved by averaging of the two games noted and multiplying by 16)

If Elis last name were Smith would anybody be talking about him as a top 3 pick based on his performance?

An Eli “Smith” with the same collegiate statistics would probably be just as likely to be in the same demand as he is with the Manning last name… 45 School records and 5th all time in the SEC says a little more to me than just a last name.

Like it or not, Josh is our QB. If you are going to root for the Cards, you are going to have to root for McCown.

I do not particularly have a problem with it; it was just that it did not seem to be a focus position of anyone. Most talk is about other positions and I was just a little curious as to why, in my mind I do not think this is the Cardinals weakest spot, but for sure it is an area of concern.

1. He throws the best ball I've seen from a Cardinal QB since Boomer was chucking it all over the place.

That is kind of what I thought but Boomer had a 56% completion rate with only 2200 yards while chucking up 14 INT and 11 TD’s… I liked Boomer but I am sure hoping for a much better performance from McCown.

2. I agree with the happy feet comments that have been made. I felt that he took off too early on several occasions. Also, don't let me get started on how he carries the ball when he runs. If both of these conditions continue, Josh could have us longing for the days of Plummers turnovers. That said, I think both are very coachable "faults" that can be corrected.

Typical traits in a QB’s early NFL career, I agree that these can be easily coached away.

3. Josh seems to be able to learn from his mistakes. In his first game, he made the infamous panic pass to the OL. We haven't really seen that mistake again, and by that I mean total panic. I also felt he decided to run earlier in his first two starts than he did against Minni. (I haven't checked with the tapes, so I could very well be wrong here.)

He looked great in the Minnesota game and even when fighting back in the last quarter he did appear to be under control and did not appear to be panicked, good points.


[QUOTE=Capital Card]
4. Josh is exuding 100 times more confidence now than he did when he was named the started for the last few games. Maybe he is still caught up in the dramatic win against the Vikes. Maybe Coach Green has built him up to where he believes he can be great. Whatever, it is something that I think tends to carry over to team-mates. Jake had it for a while here, but then as he continued to make the same mistakes over and over, I think the team kinda started to tune him out. (Again, pure speculation on my part.)
[/QUOTE]



I think Plummer was and is a good QB, not a great one, but his time here was done regardless, as you say it did appear that the rest of the team was not behind him any longer…

We gave Jake 5 years to be the guy. I'm willing to give Josh more than the three starts, especially since he showed improvement with each game. I too am leary about not having a reliable alternative, but if Denny thinks Josh can do it, I'm more than willing to go along for the ride. A lot of really good QB's started their career with less potential than Josh.

Again, I do not think that Josh is not the guy; I also think that he may be able to get it done. I just see it as a real worry spot for my hopes and aspirations for the up and coming season, maybe even more so than any other spot that we have. Maybe I would be a little more at ease if we had a much better running game to keep the opposing defenses from keying in on “the new guy” and really putting the screws to McCown. I honestly think that was a large portion of Jakes failure in the desert. It is hard to have a good game when you are always on the run or constantly getting back up from a Plummer pummel…



Come on season… Start already!!!

 

[Loyal Card 17]

to comment on the last game of the season. mccown held on to the ball to long that resulted into sacks. happy feet wasn't the case in the last game. a qb gets happy feet when the o-line doesn't protect them.

 

[Skkorpion]

Welcome, Tillmanfan.

 

[jerryp]

The franchise QB model in building NFL teams is outdated. The Colts & Eagles have their franchise QBs that are going to severely bind their financial situation for years to come (i.e. Colts can only resign either James or Harrison after this year). Build a defense and a running game and plug in a QB that won't turn the ball over while passing to a playmaker at WR; that's how you win consistently in the NFL in the 21st Century.

Mao,

I agree with your assesment that the franchise QB model is outdated and that defense is the future but I really have to disagree about the playmaking WR.

If you look at who's won the Super Bowls in the 21st you'll notice a distinct lack of playmaking WR's winning (that's the key, winning) Super Bowl rings.

2000 was the Ravens. Who'd they have? Quadry Ismail (with a whopping 49 grabs and 5 TD's)?

2001 was the Patriots. Defensive mastermind running the gameplan. Their wideouts are clutch, but none of them I'd consider playmakers. Defense also won over a team with playmaker wideouts.

2002 was the Bucaneers. Again, defense wins, over a very good passing team. The Bucs had who at WR, Keyshawn? Keyshawn had a decent year but nothing stellar. I'd say this wideout corp was consistant, since the stats are spread evenly amongst the starting wideouts.

And of course this past year was Mr. Defense again with his slightly altered group of clutch WR's that are not playmakers. They make the first down grab when they have to, and that's about it.

Now, looking back at these teams, none of them even had a WR in the Pro-Bowl the years they won the SB.

So what have the playmaker WR's actually accomplished? The Vikings and Moss choke out when they do make the playoffs. San Fran when they had Owens never made it past the divisional playoffs. The greatest show on turf has great WR's but they made the playoffs this year because of an opportunistic defense, not because of their passing game (and because they played us twice). I'm sorry man, but I just don't see the elites winning as often as everyone believes. Harrison finally got to be on the winning end of a playoff game this year.

Speaking of which. I agree that the Colts are going to get screwed on the Manning deal but I don't think Edge and Harrison are that big a deal. Harrision is going to start showing his age soon, and Edge is simply not the elite back he was before the injury. He had a good year this past year, and he's still a quality back, but he's fallen from the Tomlinson/Holmes/Portis rankings. If I were Indy, I'd cut Edge and hold onto Harrison for another couple seasons.

The problem is the Colt's won't have the cash to get Payton new weapons after Harrison retires and they won't be able to fill other needs, like a weak run defense.

Anyways, back to the talk about playmaking wideouts, I think what we need is a solid reliable corp of WR's, not a playmaker. We have Quan, and I think Johnson will turn out to be a good reciever. This draft is supposedly really deep at WR and I've already expressed my opinions on top 5 pick WR's in another thread so I'd really like to see us take a defensive player first, then try and grab a solid reliable, but not flashy, wideout. Then more defense, and oh how about some more defense. I think McCown with an improving Johnson, a 2nd round rookie, and the Quan are all we need, along with a good defense. Remember how Denny said he wants to be near the top of the league in first downs? That's what we need, guys who will get us the clutch first downs like the Pats WR's. What has five years of Randy Moss hauling in long bombs gotten the Minnesota faithful? Two embarassing NFC Championship games, thats it.

New England has proven that depth and flexibility on defense are key, we have a lack of both.

Sorry to get off topic.

 

[vikesfan]

Mao,

I agree with your assesment that the franchise QB model is outdated and that defense is the future but I really have to disagree about the playmaking WR.

If you look at who's won the Super Bowls in the 21st you'll notice a distinct lack of playmaking WR's winning (that's the key, winning) Super Bowl rings.

2000 was the Ravens. Who'd they have? Quadry Ismail (with a whopping 49 grabs and 5 TD's)?

2001 was the Patriots. Defensive mastermind running the gameplan. Their wideouts are clutch, but none of them I'd consider playmakers. Defense also won over a team with playmaker wideouts.

2002 was the Bucaneers. Again, defense wins, over a very good passing team. The Bucs had who at WR, Keyshawn? Keyshawn had a decent year but nothing stellar. I'd say this wideout corp was consistant, since the stats are spread evenly amongst the starting wideouts.

And of course this past year was Mr. Defense again with his slightly altered group of clutch WR's that are not playmakers. They make the first down grab when they have to, and that's about it.

Now, looking back at these teams, none of them even had a WR in the Pro-Bowl the years they won the SB.

So what have the playmaker WR's actually accomplished? The Vikings and Moss choke out when they do make the playoffs. San Fran when they had Owens never made it past the divisional playoffs. The greatest show on turf has great WR's but they made the playoffs this year because of an opportunistic defense, not because of their passing game (and because they played us twice). I'm sorry man, but I just don't see the elites winning as often as everyone believes. Harrison finally got to be on the winning end of a playoff game this year.

Speaking of which. I agree that the Colts are going to get screwed on the Manning deal but I don't think Edge and Harrison are that big a deal. Harrision is going to start showing his age soon, and Edge is simply not the elite back he was before the injury. He had a good year this past year, and he's still a quality back, but he's fallen from the Tomlinson/Holmes/Portis rankings. If I were Indy, I'd cut Edge and hold onto Harrison for another couple seasons.

The problem is the Colt's won't have the cash to get Payton new weapons after Harrison retires and they won't be able to fill other needs, like a weak run defense.

Anyways, back to the talk about playmaking wideouts, I think what we need is a solid reliable corp of WR's, not a playmaker. We have Quan, and I think Johnson will turn out to be a good reciever. This draft is supposedly really deep at WR and I've already expressed my opinions on top 5 pick WR's in another thread so I'd really like to see us take a defensive player first, then try and grab a solid reliable, but not flashy, wideout. Then more defense, and oh how about some more defense. I think McCown with an improving Johnson, a 2nd round rookie, and the Quan are all we need, along with a good defense. Remember how Denny said he wants to be near the top of the league in first downs? That's what we need, guys who will get us the clutch first downs like the Pats WR's. What has five years of Randy Moss hauling in long bombs gotten the Minnesota faithful? Two embarassing NFC Championship games, thats it.

New England has proven that depth and flexibility on defense are key, we have a lack of both.

Sorry to get off topic.

You cannot break it down like that. MIN missed the last 2 years because they have the worst coaching staff in the NFL and an owner to cheap to get quality FAs. You want a WR who can get double teams off Boldin. You need that Fitz will do that - that is how the chains get moved.
Yes you need defense. Each time is unique. If the refs made the correct calls INDI is probably in the SB. NE had no running game should teams forget the running game? CAR had a great running game. NE ran a 3-4 CAR ran a 4-3 which do you go with etc. The way to win in the NFL is get quality players. Quality draft picks and FAs don't make mistakes on players and then you have a chance. If you start trying to force things you are in trouble. The Cards need a defense and an offense. Both need to be built. FA was used on defense. Maybe the draft will be used on offense round 1 and defense round 2. It is a complex thing. Of course every team would love a top defense and offense but it doesn't always happen that way. The key to winning is quality players when you see them add them and worry about the rest later. The year NE won the SB the first time they had the 24th ranked defense in the NFL. Anything is possible in the NFL. In a perfect world every coach would love to have the #1 defense and #1 offense in the NFL it just doesn't happen that often - or overnight. You need to plant seeds of success. And build on success to make sure what worked last year keeps working. Boldin is going to be smothered this year what will free him up? Another QUALITY WR.
That will move the chains.
If an offense cannot score and move the chains then the defense will get tired and be on the field too much. This was TB's problem for years their offense was so inept that their defense
was on the field too much. Likewise a good defense means an offense doesn't have to try and do too much which is when mistakes happen. They work hand in hand. Improving offense can actually help defense a lot.

 

[jerryp]

I'm not talking about Minnesota the last two years. I am talking 1998 bombing teams all year long and choking out againts a Chris Chandler led Falcons. And then in 2000 bombing teams all year long and choking out against the Giants. Laying a nice goose egg. That kind of choking out.

And look at the Patriots. Did they need a blue chip reciever to draw away double teams? No, because they had no one worth double teaming but instead a group of guys you felt resonably sure were going to get that 3rd and 7. Can you say that about the Cardinals recieving corp? And you're totally right, the Patriots had no real running game, although it did pick up at the end of the season and the post season, you know, when it matters most. So a bunch of ordinary recievers, a decent QB who makes few mistakes, average at best running game, and what else? Oh thats right, a totally clutch defense. Notice I didn't say, a defense that gives up the fewest yards, I said a totally clutch defense.

Compare and contrast if you will, to the Cardinals players experience on defense this past season. The reality is they got shelled on more than one occasion. San Fran, Seashawks a couple times, the Rams, the freaking Browns. We are in a division with two good offensive teams our defense cannot hang with. It needs fixing. The Pats didn't need a dominant offense, the Bucs didn't either, neither did the Ravens, the Titans almost beat the Rams with great D. This is the past half decade of Super Bowl history. A decent offense can score more than a good offense if it's given significantly better field position. It's how the Rams lasted so long during the season despite Bulger throwing massive amount of picks. They led the league in takeaways and turnover margin I believe despite Bulger tossing it to the wrong jersey color 22 times. You know what 22 picks is dude? It's Plummeresque. So how did the Rams not only make the playoffs but record one of the best records in the league? For every pick Bulger threw, the Rams D forced a turnover at the oppenents 30. For every wounded duck he tossed up, his D forced a three and out, and returned the punt to the Rams own 47. When you're given the ball between the opponents 20 and midfield three times a day, offensive production expressed in terms of points magically skyrockets. Don't believe me, check this out.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/rams030304.php?view=message&mid=172&showcomment=1&vmid=172

The Rams weren't offensive juggernaughts, they were a very opportunistic defense. Sadly for the chumps in St. Louis, that advatage could be lost since Martz seems intent on focusing soley on offense this year again.

We have question marks at various positions. No one knows how Starks will be when he returns. No one knows if Raynoch Thompson is going to get suspended again. Is all this forgotten amongst the discussion about which Williams is how many fractions of an inch taller the other is.

I've said before, we can trade down to within the top 8 and still get one of the WR's most likely. We use the trade down to improve the defense, get more guys we can use in certain situations. Flexibility. Worst case scenerio we trade down and all three top WR's go. We still either have one of the QB's, Gallery, Taylor, or Winslow left. Nab one of them and grab another WR in the second round. Isn't this draft supposedly really deep at WR? That's got to be beyond three guys. You want to get the pressure off Quan? Get Winslow then snag the best WR in the second round. Crazy stuff happens on draft day, there could be a great WR left early in the second round.

I can't fathom how the "could be a bust" argument comes out everytime for a top 5 pick QB, but never for a top 5 pick WR. The history of WR's drafted in the top top 5 isn't exactly prettier than that of the QB's.

And just to be absolutely clear what my position is, I would not be upset about getting one of these wideouts with our first pick if they turn out just above average or average. But I'd feel alot better about it knowing we did it with a seven pick and got some more help on D rather than a three pick.

But thanks Vikesfan, you confirmed my suspicion that the mention of the Vikings would draw you in. You should understand where I am coming from, you've seen first hand in Minnesota the pain and suffering that is a bad defense.

Another marathon post, any chance of getting my post count replaced with characters typed?

 

[Duckjake]

The take on the wide receivers is way off base. There are two ways to win the big one. With a tough clutch defense or a big time wide receiver. Smith with Denver, Freeman with Green Bay, Irvin in Dallas, Rice with SF, Swann with Pitt. Even NE and Tampa had an experienced #1 WR when they won their first SB's.

The NFL today is a pass oriented league and to win you have to pass and stop the pass. Rushing is nothing other than a means to protect your lead by keeping the other team from being able to pass the ball.

 

[vikesfan]

I'm not talking about Minnesota the last two years. I am talking 1998 bombing teams all year long and choking out againts a Chris Chandler led Falcons. And then in 2000 bombing teams all year long and choking out against the Giants. Laying a nice goose egg. That kind of choking out.
-RESPONSE: Vikes lost to ATL cause their FG K mised an easy K it happens they also had 7 defenders hurt. Vs. NYG they were a 6 win team at best that year and MOSS R SMITH and CULPEPPER were all hurt for that game and Strahan said after the game Culpepper hd a physical tell so they knew every play coming up in the game!!!
There was no choking!!!

QUOTE: And look at the Patriots. Did they need a blue chip reciever to draw away double teams? No, because they had no one worth double teaming but instead a group of guys you felt resonably sure were going to get that 3rd and 7. Can you say that about the Cardinals recieving corp? And you're totally right, the Patriots had no real running game, although it did pick up at the end of the season and the post season, you know, when it matters most. So a bunch of ordinary recievers, a decent QB who makes few mistakes, average at best running game, and what else? Oh thats right, a totally clutch defense. Notice I didn't say, a defense that gives up the fewest yards, I said a totally clutch defense.
RESPONSE: There is no 1 formula. Pats almost lost to INDI. Pats are a unique team. Look at CAR completely different both were in the SB.
There is no 1 formula.

-QUOTE: Compare and contrast if you will, to the Cardinals players experience on defense this past season. The reality is they got shelled on more than one occasion. San Fran, Seashawks a couple times, the Rams, the freaking Browns. We are in a division with two good offensive teams our defense cannot hang with. It needs fixing. The Pats didn't need a dominant offense, the Bucs didn't either, neither did the Ravens, the Titans almost beat the Rams with great D. This is the past half decade of Super Bowl history. A decent offense can score more than a good offense if it's given significantly better field position.
-RESPONSE: NE had the 24th ranked defense in their 1st SB year. The STL offense made the STL better thier SB year. PATS had a unique offense.

-QUOTE: It's how the Rams lasted so long during the season despite Bulger throwing massive amount of picks. They led the league in takeaways and turnover margin I believe despite Bulger tossing it to the wrong jersey color 22 times. You know what 22 picks is dude? It's Plummeresque. So how did the Rams not only make the playoffs but record one of the best records in the league? For every pick Bulger threw, the Rams D forced a turnover at the oppenents 30. For every wounded duck he tossed up, his D forced a three and out, and returned the punt to the Rams own 47. When you're given the ball between the opponents 20 and midfield three times a day, offensive production expressed in terms of points magically skyrockets.
-RESPONSE: When you have an offense that scores on virtually every position. The other team's offense panics and that is why great offensive teams can help their defense. They defense knows the other team will try and keep up scroing wise and can tee off on the passrush and cheat for T.O.s. The great offense helped create that great defense.

-QUOTE: The Rams weren't offensive juggernaughts, they were a very opportunistic defense. Sadly for the chumps in St. Louis, that advatage could be lost since Martz seems intent on focusing soley on offense this year again.
-RESPONSE: Not true they got Lovie Smith back they signed lots of FAs and drafted defenders. Marz knows you need defense too.


-QUOTE: We have question marks at various positions. No one knows how Starks will be when he returns. No one knows if Raynoch Thompson is going to get suspended again. Is all this forgotten amongst the discussion about which Williams is how many fractions of an inch taller the other is.
-RESPONSE: I agree the Cards have a ton of holes! Even the supposed players who are not holes are questionable: Big, Shipp, Starks, McKinnon, Wilson. This team is in tough shape.


-QUOTE: I've said before, we can trade down to within the top 8 and still get one of the WR's most likely. We use the trade down to improve the defense, get more guys we can use in certain situations. Flexibility. Worst case scenerio we trade down and all three top WR's go. We still either have one of the QB's, Gallery, Taylor, or Winslow left. Nab one of them and grab another WR in the second round. Isn't this draft supposedly really deep at WR? That's got to be beyond three guys. You want to get the pressure off Quan? Get Winslow then snag the best WR in the second round. Crazy stuff happens on draft day, there could be a great WR left early in the second round.I can't fathom how the "could be a bust" argument comes out everytime for a top 5 pick QB, but never for a top 5 pick WR. The history of WR's drafted in the top top 5 isn't exactly
prettier than that of the QB's. And just to be absolutely clear what my position is, I would not be upset about getting one of these wideouts with our first pick if they turn out just above average or average. But I'd feel alot better about it knowing we did it with a seven pick and got some more help on D rather than a 3 pick.
-RESPONSE: The odds are the WR you get at 3 Fitz is less likely to bust then the one you get at 7. I agree WRs QBs and RBs bust a lot. The point is DG is picking he picked a QB who did not bust in Culpepper. He picked a WR who did not bust in Moss and 2 RBs who did not bust in R Smith and M Bennett. I trust him. I agree if Fitz is gone and you want Mike or Roy Williams trade down to 7 if you are sure they will be there. Or just take the best differencemaker on defense: Taylor.


-QUOTE: But thanks Vikesfan, you confirmed my suspicion that the mention of the Vikings would draw you in. You should understand where I am coming from, you've seen first hand in Minnesota the pain and suffering that is a bad defense.
-RESPONSE: Under DG Vikes had good defenses. Three years top 3 in run stopping and three years top 3 in pass defense. Once #1 overall and once #6 overall. Top 7 in T.O.s 7 times two times #1.

 

[MaoTosiFanClub]

Jerry -

Very good points. In my opinion, the playmaking WR is a luxury that a team should want but not a necessity for success. My original post was meant to be me pretending to be a GM and what path I would follow, and while I think good WR play is important, it should never come at the expense of the running game or the defense. Trading in your future cap flexibility for a player who touches the ball only a handful of times a game can be a very stupid financial decision to make. While the teams you mentioned do not have the prototypical "playmaker" WR in the mold of TO or Moss, they have guys who get open and get first downs in crucial circumstances. Baltimore had Sharpe, Tampa Bay had McCardell, the Pats have seemingly ten guys who always seem to make the big catch that moves the chains. Ball control (either through the air or on the ground) and defense win. Period.

You're preaching to the choir about defense, if it were up to me I'd trade down with Cleveland and take Wilfork and then package the two #2's to get Jonathan Vilma. I'm not even a Hurricane fan either I just believe that those two players would provide the stability and playmaking abilities up the middle that every good defense has. I brought up Tampa Bay's 1995 draft when they got Sapp and Derrick Brooks in the first round and Carolina's 2001 draft when they got Dan Morgan and Kris Jenkins on Day 1. These drafts provided a defensive foundation and put life into previously inept franchises. I think the same thing could be possible if we are able to bring similar players here and I believe Wilfork and Vilma will turn out to be players in the mold of the names I previously mentioned.