Patterns of Thought

[Russ Smith]

How many QBs in the history of the game won 2/3rds of them? But I get what you are saying.

However there were a lot of successful QBs in that range. Most of them before the rule changes moved the game from running and D to passing and rushing the passer the last 15-20 years however.

Terry Bradshaw was 107-51 with a career completion % of 51.9. Bart Starr's was 57.4. Charley Johnson played 15 years in the NFL and Jim Hart 18 years with completion % of 51. CJ went 30-15 from '63 to '66 never getting over 54%. Jim Hart was 31-11 during the Cardiac Cards run with a high of 56.2%.

John Elway 56.9 career Fran Tarkenton 57. Roger Staubach 57.0 (85-29) Bob Griese 56.2 was 12-1 one season with a 53.0 percentage. Joe Theisman 56.7%. Jim Plunkett 52.5%. Six of the Eleven QBs with multiple SB wins are on that list. Daryle Lamonica's career % was 49.5 and he was 66-16 as a starter.

John Skelton (151/275) to raise his % last season above 60% would only had to have completed one more pass per game! (167/275) Two more passes per game and he goes over 65%. (183/275) I think Double Deuce could very well improve enough to complete one or two more passes per game.

Right I should have said in the last 15 years or so since obviously completion % have gone up dramatically with rules changes and the advent of the WCO etc.

You just don't see too many good teams with a QB that inaccurate.

If he can fix that, and again he played at Fordham so it's not fair to compare him to everyone else, he has a chance to make it. He's got the physical talent he has to get much more accurate, value the ball more, and figure out how to read defenses. he's significantly better already than I ever expected so maybe he'll continue to surprise me.

 

[Duckjake]

Just noticed my numbers were off on Skelton. He'd need to complete two more passes per game to get to 60% and 3 for 64%. I was using 16 games instead of 8 in my original calculations.

I still think he can do that.

 

[THESMEL]

now check the run stats

I know I'm on the outside of the popular peoples on sports center- but the run stats marriage to the pass stats are still next to importance to turnovers

WHICH EXPLODE in the pass game - not just INT's! look at Favres career fumbles, you'll see that he has more QB fumbles than Kurt Warner! But like Kurt He was a streaky big game QB! with a lot more games- yet few in history have the resilency to come back and actually get a chance to redeem themselves- They earned it by having premium
BUILT IN FORGETTORS!

link
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/leaders/fumbles_career.htm

Right I should have said in the last 15 years or so since obviously completion % have gone up dramatically with rules changes and the advent of the WCO etc.

You just don't see too many good teams with a QB that inaccurate.

If he can fix that, and again he played at Fordham so it's not fair to compare him to everyone else, he has a chance to make it. He's got the physical talent he has to get much more accurate, value the ball more, and figure out how to read defenses. he's significantly better already than I ever expected so maybe he'll continue to surprise me.

 

[john h]

Skelton

These are the patterns that I would like to put in question:

1. Fans leaning toward the higher status, more highly hyped, more highly paid, more highly drafted players.

2. Fans jumping to conclusions about players in their first two or three years---essentially writing a player off.

Questions:

1. Who are the top 3 QBs in the NFL today?

2. Do you feel a sense of desperation for the team when one of the top draft picks or most highly paid free agents doesn't perform?

3. If you could re-claim three Cardinals who got away---who were either traded or left as free agents, who would they be?

Likely Answers:

1. Rodgers, Brady and Brees. Fact: only one of them was a first rounder---and he plummeted in the first round---and did not start until his 4th year in the NFL.

2. Perhaps this is why you wanted Leinart over Warner?

3. Would it be Anquan Boldin, Karlos Dansby and Calvin Pace?

Fact: Pace was the only 1st rounder---and he didn't develop until his 4th year (similar to Alan Branch---only much more noticeably).

My points:

1. Thank goodness we have a head coach who stresses competition, and is willing to start a rookie 5th rounder in front of a veteran like Edgerrin James, if the rookie is looking better in practice. Or is willing to start a washed up veteran (Warner) in front of a top ten draft pick.

2. John Skelton applies to BOTH questions. When teams draft a QB in the 5th round these days, it's expected to be for the #3 QB spot, right? And---hey--despite going 8-4 as a rookie and sophomore having been given as little reps and preparation with the first team as possible, the fact that he was inconsistent means---the jury is in, right?---he will ALWAYS be inconsistent...forget about him...because there is no chance for improvement?

Lastly---what's so funny to read these days on the board is NOT the usual excuses for highly hyped players not getting the job done (like---"he was from Philly and didn't understand the new offense")---but excuses for players who DO get the job done, as in "the defense carried him."

If 8-4---when the rest of games were 5-15 isn't good enough for you and you want more glorified stats---that's a pattern of thinking that defies logic.

Mitch: I am not sure I am reading your post on John Skelton right or wrong. Anyway, here are my thoughts. He is still a mystery. He can go either way-up or down this year. He has the size, the arm strength, and the heart. We do not know how much he will improve on reading defenses. Logically he should be better. Accuracy is the biggest question in my mind. Some QB's seem to never improve in this area. Others do. If we have a better offensive line he should have more time which should improve his accuracy but that is not always the case. We are not going to know the real John Skelton until he gets a full season under his belt. He may be beat out by Kolb which would be a good thing but Kolb still must overcome his concussion problems that I think still bother him in his mind at least. Will he still have the tendency to jump out of the pocket and run backwards and to the side? He has been in the league long enough that if he does not make it this year he is a lost cause. Our entire season depends on our QB this year. We can win the division or be lucky to go 8-8 depending on how the QB does. We were lucky in a few of those wins near the end of the season winning 4 overtime games. We are not going to be that lucky two years in a row. I would sure be disappointed to have to start a QB search all over again. If Kolb and Skelton do not make it we are in for a long season.

 

[DoTheDew]

Right I should have said in the last 15 years or so since obviously completion % have gone up dramatically with rules changes and the advent of the WCO etc.

You just don't see too many good teams with a QB that inaccurate.

If he can fix that, and again he played at Fordham so it's not fair to compare him to everyone else, he has a chance to make it. He's got the physical talent he has to get much more accurate, value the ball more, and figure out how to read defenses. he's significantly better already than I ever expected so maybe he'll continue to surprise me.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/stats/_/id/5526/eli-manning

58.4%. Was at 56.1% the year he won his first superbowl. Skelton is actually very similar to him after 2 seasons, with a better YPA and completion percentage than Eli had his 2nd year.

 

[Mitch]

http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/stats/_/id/5526/eli-manning

58.4%. Was at 56.1% the year he won his first superbowl. Skelton is actually very similar to him after 2 seasons, with a better YPA and completion percentage than Eli had his 2nd year.

Thank you for this astute tidbit, Dew. Many players actually mature...which was exactly the point of this thread. This is why the pattern of thinking that players will stay exactly as they are year in and year out is thoroughly flawed....and I have to chuckle as I write this because if John Skelton stays exactly as he has been and wins 67% of the games he takes the most snaps in (8-4), displaying an uncanny ability to deliver down the stretch when it matters most, who should give a fig about all the other numbers?

 

[Duckjake]

Thank you for this astute tidbit, Dew. Many players actually mature...which was exactly the point of this thread. This is why the pattern of thinking that players will stay exactly as they are year in and year out is thoroughly flawed....and I have to chuckle as I write this because if John Skelton stays exactly as he has been and wins 67% of the games he takes the most snaps in (8-4), displaying an uncanny ability to deliver down the stretch when it matters most, who should give a fig about all the other numbers?

A very important point when you consider the conventional wisdom that the most improvement in a players career comes from year one to year two and we have two key defensive players, PP21 and Acho, in that situation. And really if you consider the knee injury Schofield as well.

Add in that the D has now had plenty of time to digest the crazy stuff Horton wants to run and it makes my future of the Defense post from last year look even more astute.

 

[Russ Smith]

Thank you for this astute tidbit, Dew. Many players actually mature...which was exactly the point of this thread. This is why the pattern of thinking that players will stay exactly as they are year in and year out is thoroughly flawed....and I have to chuckle as I write this because if John Skelton stays exactly as he has been and wins 67% of the games he takes the most snaps in (8-4), displaying an uncanny ability to deliver down the stretch when it matters most, who should give a fig about all the other numbers?

I agree Eli Manning is a great counter, how many more like him are out there though?

And while I'm not going to figure out how many wins were his and how many were Warner(first year) they had 35 wins in his first 4 years when he was completing under 60%, that does include an 11 and 10 win year but the point is you don't typically win 2/3 of your games with a QB under 60%.

Unless you have a great D, the Giants did, the Ravens have done it etc.

I love our young D but I don't think we're at that level yet so it'll sure help if Skelton and Kolb become better QB's.

Skelton is really tough to look at statistically because so few NFL QB's come up the way he did from a school like Fordham, makes it much tougher to guess where he's going to end up as a player.

 

[DoTheDew]

I love our young D but I don't think we're at that level yet so it'll sure help if Skelton and Kolb become better QB's.

Skelton is really tough to look at statistically because so few NFL QB's come up the way he did from a school like Fordham, makes it much tougher to guess where he's going to end up as a player.

This is definitely true, but I think the thing too many people over look is how Skelton has performed late in games when the stress level rises. There are lots of QBs, like Kyle Orton, who can have a solid completion percentage but they can't win games. They don't have a 2nd level they can shift to when the game is on the line. Then there's guys like Eli and seemingly Skelton, who don't have to play great the entire game, but always seem to shine brightest when they need to.

I'm not suggesting that Skelton will ever be Eli, but he can definitely improve to a poor man's Eli and that's more than good enough to be in the playoffs on a regular basis when he has the best WR in the game to throw to.

Looking at Skelton's wins from last season here are some of the late game drives he had:

The Rams OT game, he drove us 84 yards on 5/6 passing with 2 10+ yd scrambles in there to tie it up.
Eagles game in the 4th he had a 4/5 passing drive of 89 yards for TD and a 5/8 87 yard drive for TD.
2nd Rams game we were ahead most of the 4th quarter, he wasn't a significant factor.
Niners win he was 3/3 on an 80 yard drive with a TD pass early in the 3rd, 4/4 with a TD pass on a 78 yard lead clinching drive early in the 4th.
Browns game he was 6/7 on a 87 yard touchdown drive late in the 4th, 1/1 in OT to set up the game winning FG.
Seahawks game he was 6/6 on an 80 yd TD drive late in the 3rd to put us back ahead, 3/4 to set up a FG to send us to OT late in 4th, 4/4 in OT to set up game winning FG.

Also, the Bengals loss he was 1 Doucet not tripping over his own feet away from tying the game up from down 23-0 going into the 4th quarter.

He did have plenty of bad drives mixed in with those, but still if you only took his 4th quarter and overtime stats, you'd have a franchise QB. It's going to be up to him to learn to play at the level he's proven he's capable of for entire games instead of just late in games.

 

[Mitch]

This is definitely true, but I think the thing too many people over look is how Skelton has performed late in games when the stress level rises. There are lots of QBs, like Kyle Orton, who can have a solid completion percentage but they can't win games. They don't have a 2nd level they can shift to when the game is on the line. Then there's guys like Eli and seemingly Skelton, who don't have to play great the entire game, but always seem to shine brightest when they need to.

I'm not suggesting that Skelton will ever be Eli, but he can definitely improve to a poor man's Eli and that's more than good enough to be in the playoffs on a regular basis when he has the best WR in the game to throw to.

Looking at Skelton's wins from last season here are some of the late game drives he had:

The Rams OT game, he drove us 84 yards on 5/6 passing with 2 10+ yd scrambles in there to tie it up.
Eagles game in the 4th he had a 4/5 passing drive of 89 yards for TD and a 5/8 87 yard drive for TD.
2nd Rams game we were ahead most of the 4th quarter, he wasn't a significant factor.
Niners win he was 3/3 on an 80 yard drive with a TD pass early in the 3rd, 4/4 with a TD pass on a 78 yard lead clinching drive early in the 4th.
Browns game he was 6/7 on a 87 yard touchdown drive late in the 4th, 1/1 in OT to set up the game winning FG.
Seahawks game he was 6/6 on an 80 yd TD drive late in the 3rd to put us back ahead, 3/4 to set up a FG to send us to OT late in 4th, 4/4 in OT to set up game winning FG.

Also, the Bengals loss he was 1 Doucet not tripping over his own feet away from tying the game up from down 23-0 going into the 4th quarter.

He did have plenty of bad drives mixed in with those, but still if you only took his 4th quarter and overtime stats, you'd have a franchise QB. It's going to be up to him to learn to play at the level he's proven he's capable of for entire games instead of just late in games.

You are DOING THE DEW! Great post!

 

[RugbyMuffin]

There is a reason why I said Eli Manning was the 2nd best QB in the league right now.

Again I have

1. A.Rogers
2. E. Manning
3. D.Brees

Rogers is an absolute freak. The 2nd coming of Steve Young, and then some. He is so good, and has almost every asset you want from a QB.

But, getting back to Eli. He wins. Throw the stats out the window, cause the guy wins football games. He has won 2 Superbowls already, and I doubt anyone on this board (well, I take that back), any SANE person on this board would complain how their team won a Superbowl, just as long as it happened.

Eli wins games. Eli wins Superbowls.

*** I say that as a generality, since I have a thread recently posted that I believe no single QB can win a Superbowl all by himself, he needs help from his team.
http://www.arizonasportsfans.com/vb/f4/ot-random-question-does-peyton-manning-181840.html

 

[Darkside]

Utter nonsense with the old QB analogies. Terry Bradshaw, Bart Starr, Charley Johnson, Jim Hart, Tarkenton, Staughbach, Plunkett and Griese all played with old-time rules where you could chuck the WR after 5 yards all down the field. With basically no roughing the QB penalties and no motion for the WR. All those QB's played during an era when RB's were dominant and owned the NFL.

Bart Starr? Really? When we have to compare Skelton to Bart Starr we're in serious trouble, since they optimized the power sweep and there were no rules against abusing WR's or QB's back then. If you have to even go back so far as to compare Skelton to Elway then you're in serious trouble.

Going back 20 or more years to justify Skelton's completion percentage is a joke. Even relatively minor rules like hitting the QB in his knees, which they did regularly back then, had an effect on the QB. Terry Bradshaw, for example, was the most abused QB I ever saw. Had to be rattled, you'd think. Nowdays, a player like Skelton, after being dealt that kind of punishment, would be taken out after just a few plays. Bradshaw played the whole game.

You can't compare a QB's completion percentage now with anyone back then. It's a different league. You have to compare them with contemporary players to get a true gauge of ability.

 

[Phrazbit]

I posted this in another thread from last week where the conversation went the same direction:

Not saying Skelton will or wont get more accurate, but the idea that its almost impossible to improve a QBs accuracy is a flat out falsehood.

Just among starting QBs from last year that have improved by 5% or more from their first few seasons: Eli Manning, Michael Vick, Alex Smith, Matt Stafford, Drew Brees, Matt Hasselbeck. 6 guys, some stars, some just solid QBs, and you gotta factor in that there are a ton of teams with QBs in their first couple seasons right now that cant be factored into the equation.

I dont think its a stretch to imagine the raw dude from the small school could conceivably get more accurate.

 

[Russ Smith]

This is definitely true, but I think the thing too many people over look is how Skelton has performed late in games when the stress level rises. There are lots of QBs, like Kyle Orton, who can have a solid completion percentage but they can't win games. They don't have a 2nd level they can shift to when the game is on the line. Then there's guys like Eli and seemingly Skelton, who don't have to play great the entire game, but always seem to shine brightest when they need to.

I'm not suggesting that Skelton will ever be Eli, but he can definitely improve to a poor man's Eli and that's more than good enough to be in the playoffs on a regular basis when he has the best WR in the game to throw to.

Looking at Skelton's wins from last season here are some of the late game drives he had:

The Rams OT game, he drove us 84 yards on 5/6 passing with 2 10+ yd scrambles in there to tie it up.
Eagles game in the 4th he had a 4/5 passing drive of 89 yards for TD and a 5/8 87 yard drive for TD.
2nd Rams game we were ahead most of the 4th quarter, he wasn't a significant factor.
Niners win he was 3/3 on an 80 yard drive with a TD pass early in the 3rd, 4/4 with a TD pass on a 78 yard lead clinching drive early in the 4th.
Browns game he was 6/7 on a 87 yard touchdown drive late in the 4th, 1/1 in OT to set up the game winning FG.
Seahawks game he was 6/6 on an 80 yd TD drive late in the 3rd to put us back ahead, 3/4 to set up a FG to send us to OT late in 4th, 4/4 in OT to set up game winning FG.

Also, the Bengals loss he was 1 Doucet not tripping over his own feet away from tying the game up from down 23-0 going into the 4th quarter.

He did have plenty of bad drives mixed in with those, but still if you only took his 4th quarter and overtime stats, you'd have a franchise QB. It's going to be up to him to learn to play at the level he's proven he's capable of for entire games instead of just late in games.

He definitely has played well late in games. Lets just say I have a long history on this board of stating I'd rather have a QB who plays well early and gets me the lead, than plays well late and gets comeback wins. The reason is I prefer to play from ahead.

Skelton is already much better than I figured he'd be at this point in his career so I readily admit I am not ver sure what he's going to look like when his career is further along.

I'm just of the opinion that his w/l record today is deceptive and if he doesn't play better, especially early, he won't continue to win 2/3 of his games.

Hopefully he gets better because I have the distinct fear Kolbs' concussions are going to be a problem.

 

[Russ Smith]

I posted this in another thread from last week where the conversation went the same direction:

Not saying Skelton will or wont get more accurate, but the idea that its almost impossible to improve a QBs accuracy is a flat out falsehood.

Just among starting QBs from last year that have improved by 5% or more from their first few seasons: Eli Manning, Michael Vick, Alex Smith, Matt Stafford, Drew Brees, Matt Hasselbeck. 6 guys, some stars, some just solid QBs, and you gotta factor in that there are a ton of teams with QBs in their first couple seasons right now that cant be factored into the equation.

I dont think its a stretch to imagine the raw dude from the small school could conceivably get more accurate.

Who said it was almost impossible? I said it's not that common and that winning 2/3 of your games while being THAT inaccurate is extremely rare.

Maybe Skelton is the rare guy who just wins with mediocre stats but my guess is he's not and he's going to have to get a lot better to be a QB who can win that high a percentage of his games going forward. Unless the Cards D continues to get much better.

Basically I'm saying if he's the QB he's got to get better, improve his footwork so he's not always throwing off his backfoot, learn to not force balls into coverage, learn to read coverage, learn to stop missing high so much, which is really his biggest sin. That's why he throws so many INT's, when you throw into coverage often, and miss high, you throw tons of picks.

It's very unlikely we're going to win 10-11 games with a QB completing under 55% and a sub 70 passer rating.

 

[Phrazbit]

Who said it was almost impossible? I said it's not that common and that winning 2/3 of your games while being THAT inaccurate is extremely rare.

Maybe Skelton is the rare guy who just wins with mediocre stats but my guess is he's not and he's going to have to get a lot better to be a QB who can win that high a percentage of his games going forward. Unless the Cards D continues to get much better.

Basically I'm saying if he's the QB he's got to get better, improve his footwork so he's not always throwing off his backfoot, learn to not force balls into coverage, learn to read coverage, learn to stop missing high so much, which is really his biggest sin. That's why he throws so many INT's, when you throw into coverage often, and miss high, you throw tons of picks.

It's very unlikely we're going to win 10-11 games with a QB completing under 55% and a sub 70 passer rating.

I certainly wont argue that our method of victory last year was not sustainable. We were a lot closer to being a 6-10 team than being a 10-6 one.

 

[Duckjake]

Utter nonsense with the old QB analogies. Terry Bradshaw, Bart Starr, Charley Johnson, Jim Hart, Tarkenton, Staughbach, Plunkett and Griese all played with old-time rules where you could chuck the WR after 5 yards all down the field. With basically no roughing the QB penalties and no motion for the WR. All those QB's played during an era when RB's were dominant and owned the NFL.

Bart Starr? Really? When we have to compare Skelton to Bart Starr we're in serious trouble, since they optimized the power sweep and there were no rules against abusing WR's or QB's back then. If you have to even go back so far as to compare Skelton to Elway then you're in serious trouble.

Going back 20 or more years to justify Skelton's completion percentage is a joke. Even relatively minor rules like hitting the QB in his knees, which they did regularly back then, had an effect on the QB. Terry Bradshaw, for example, was the most abused QB I ever saw. Had to be rattled, you'd think. Nowdays, a player like Skelton, after being dealt that kind of punishment, would be taken out after just a few plays. Bradshaw played the whole game.

You can't compare a QB's completion percentage now with anyone back then. It's a different league. You have to compare them with contemporary players to get a true gauge of ability.

You could have saved yourself a lot of typing if you'd paid attention. Both myself and Russ Smith acknowledged that the 55% completion rule would only apply in the last 15-20 years.

 

[Duckjake]

I certainly wont argue that our method of victory last year was not sustainable. We were a lot closer to being a 6-10 team than being a 10-6 one.

I don't know about that. The Cards lost 3 games they could have won in about the same fashion as the comeback wins. Arizona scored more TDs than their opponents and held several teams below their scoring average last season and came from behind enough times to show, to me at least, they weren't flukes. K9 likes to throw the Rams up as evidence of our D being overrated. Yet the Rams offense only managed one TD in 8 quarters vs Arizona last season. The Cards were a horrible call away from beating the eventual Super Bowl Champions. We had 3.5 bad games last season and 12.5 competitive games. That's not a 6-10 team.

At least half the teams in the NFL are 8-8 teams. The difference between 6-10 and 10-6 is very slim and, I agree with Rugby on this, often dependent on breaks and injuries moreso than talent.

 

[DoTheDew]

He definitely has played well late in games. Lets just say I have a long history on this board of stating I'd rather have a QB who plays well early and gets me the lead, than plays well late and gets comeback wins. The reason is I prefer to play from ahead.

Skelton is already much better than I figured he'd be at this point in his career so I readily admit I am not ver sure what he's going to look like when his career is further along.

I'm just of the opinion that his w/l record today is deceptive and if he doesn't play better, especially early, he won't continue to win 2/3 of his games.

Hopefully he gets better because I have the distinct fear Kolbs' concussions are going to be a problem.

I agree completely, but at the same time, recent history has shown that QBs need to be able to step up their play in late game situations to win the big one. It's rare that you can get all the way through the playoffs without coming from behind once or twice. Nearly every great QB in the league has had to do it to get a championship ring.

You need to play well early and late in games to be a great QB. Most games in the NFL are decided in the 4th quarter.

 

[Duckjake]

I agree completely, but at the same time, recent history has shown that QBs need to be able to step up their play in late game situations to win the big one. It's rare that you can get all the way through the playoffs without coming from behind once or twice. Nearly every great QB in the league has had to do it to get a championship ring.

You need to play well early and late in games to be a great QB. Most games in the NFL are decided in the 4th quarter.

I think too much is being made of how Double Deuce played early in games. There were only a couple of games where the Cards were way behind early in the games he started. It's not like 2009 when the Cards would get up 21-3 and win 28-24. The guy is resilient. Against Philly he throws the pick 6 to Samuel and comes right back and ties the game with a TD toss to Larry capping an 84 yard drive with 4/6 passing. What a game. 84 Yard drive to tie. 89 yard drive to tie again. 87 yard drive to win. In Philadelphia!!!!!!!!!!

Sure he struggled early vs Cincy but even Warner wasn't perfect. Remember the Farve Jets game? When Warner threw 3 picks and got us in a 34-0 hole.

 

[Phrazbit]

I don't know about that. The Cards lost 3 games they could have won in about the same fashion as the comeback wins. Arizona scored more TDs than their opponents and held several teams below their scoring average last season and came from behind enough times to show, to me at least, they weren't flukes. K9 likes to throw the Rams up as evidence of our D being overrated. Yet the Rams offense only managed one TD in 8 quarters vs Arizona last season. The Cards were a horrible call away from beating the eventual Super Bowl Champions. We had 3.5 bad games last season and 12.5 competitive games. That's not a 6-10 team.

At least half the teams in the NFL are 8-8 teams. The difference between 6-10 and 10-6 is very slim and, I agree with Rugby on this, often dependent on breaks and injuries moreso than talent.

But we won 8 out of those 12.5 games. 4 in OT. We didnt soundly beat anyone. We won a game because the other team iced their own kicker, we won another on a 98 yard kick return. Its almost impossible to imagine us being better in close games than we were last season.

I honestly think we will have to seriously improve to even get to 8-8 again, especially with the harder schedule.

 

[Darkside]

But we won 8 out of those 12.5 games. 4 in OT. We didnt soundly beat anyone. We won a game because the other team iced their own kicker, we won another on a 98 yard kick return. Its almost impossible to imagine us being better in close games than we were last season.

I honestly think we will have to seriously improve to even get to 8-8 again, especially with the harder schedule.

Totally agree with this but I'm pretty much a koolaid-aholic. I think those close games last year made us mentally tougher. I think that mental toughness is what allowed us to win 7 of 9. Also think, however, that we had a soft schedule and significantly softer the latter part of the season. Don't you think we've improved, on paper at least, from last year? It's hard to imagine our QB play getting any worse. Really hard to imagine. Our schedule is hella-tough but I think the lessons we learned from all those close games (especially the ones we lost) will offset some of that. I could see us going 8-8 again but I'm thinking we win the division and go to the playoffs.

 

[Russ Smith]

I certainly wont argue that our method of victory last year was not sustainable. We were a lot closer to being a 6-10 team than being a 10-6 one.

Especially if teams stop punting to Peterson.

 

[Duckjake]

Totally agree with this but I'm pretty much a koolaid-aholic. I think those close games last year made us mentally tougher. I think that mental toughness is what allowed us to win 7 of 9. Also think, however, that we had a soft schedule and significantly softer the latter part of the season. Don't you think we've improved, on paper at least, from last year? It's hard to imagine our QB play getting any worse. Really hard to imagine. Our schedule is hella-tough but I think the lessons we learned from all those close games (especially the ones we lost) will offset some of that. I could see us going 8-8 again but I'm thinking we win the division and go to the playoffs.

This is exactly right. The key thing is the Cards beat all those soft teams and beat 3 teams that were better than they were on paper.

The Cards showed last season that they can shut down the other team and then go 70-80 yards to win or tie when the $ is on the line. When have we ever seen a Cardinal team that could do that? So we won two games on breaks going our way we lost 4 with breaks going against us. That doesn't prove we can't sustain what we were doing last season. Especially if you are right and the team has learned that they can win games against anyone anywhere. Just think what happens if our QB play improves!

 

[Phrazbit]

Totally agree with this but I'm pretty much a koolaid-aholic. I think those close games last year made us mentally tougher. I think that mental toughness is what allowed us to win 7 of 9. Also think, however, that we had a soft schedule and significantly softer the latter part of the season. Don't you think we've improved, on paper at least, from last year? It's hard to imagine our QB play getting any worse. Really hard to imagine. Our schedule is hella-tough but I think the lessons we learned from all those close games (especially the ones we lost) will offset some of that. I could see us going 8-8 again but I'm thinking we win the division and go to the playoffs.

I do think we're improved and I like a ton about this current team. But given our offensive philosophy and our current QB situation, I dont see us being that successful next year. I dont think our QB play will be worse than it was last year, but, as mentioned, I cant imagine us being that successful despite being that bad on offense again.

I really hope Skelton makes a big leap, but if he does not and assuming Kolb is who he is, then I hope the Cards are scouting QBs like mad for next year's draft.

IMO worst case scenario for us is that Kolb plays 8-12 games, plays below average, gets hurt and probably cut after the year. Then Skelton takes over and we kinda tread water. Because then we probably go into 2013 with the mindset of "Now Skelton deserves a full season to prove himself", and its probably 2014 before we get down to finding a QB again.

Given Kolb's cap hit in 2013 it will be very hard to justify keeping him unless he really really breaks out this year, so if he "wins" the starting job he should have about a 2 inch leash from the coaches. There is no point in riding out another rocky season with him on the hopes he becomes average. Give the reigns to Skelton so we can actually see what he has sooner rather than later.