Peter King says Gabbert doesnt get past the Cardinals

[football karma]

take it for what its worth --

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/peter_king/03/27/mmqb/index.html


lots of misinformation this time of year -- and all the buzz about the Cardinals and Gabbert could very well be part of a strategy to get a team to trade up into one of the top 4 slots to get Gabbert, thus ensuring one of Miller, Peterson, or Dareus fall to #5.

 

[Pariah]

I don't think Gabbert even makes it to us, but if he does I agree that we'll likely snatch him up.

 

[kerouac9]

Peter King thinks that Max Hall is AWESOME!

 

[Cardinals.Ken]

Peter King thinks that Max Hall is AWESOME!

Hey man, a woman has reserves the right to change their mind!

 

[ARZCardinals]

Peter King is no 'insider'

He's an average writer with an above average job...he also has one of the worst ability to pick games as an NFL writer.

his stats are so bad they pulled them from CBS Sportsline
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/features/writers/expert/picks/week17


He's also one of the worst radio personalities on NFL Radio on Sirius.

 

[Duckjake]

While we are on the subject of QB's.

Who is the only QB who started more than 5 games for the Cards who has a winning record as a starter? (Cards games only of course)

 

[earthsci]

While we are on the subject of QB's.

Who is the only QB who started more than 5 games for the Cards who has a winning record as a starter? (Cards games only of course)

Charley Johnson

 

[Duckjake]

Charley Johnson

Correct. Sad commentary on the franchise isn't it. Only one QB since 1960 has
led the team to more wins than losses.

Even more bizarre is that Johnson is a member of the Denver Broncos Ring of Fame but not the Cardinals Ring of Honor.

 

[Covert Rain]

Correct. Sad commentary on the franchise isn't it. Only one QB since 1960 has
led the team to more wins than losses.

Even more bizarre is that Johnson is a member of the Denver Broncos Ring of Fame but not the Cardinals Ring of Honor.

Ugh....don't remind us. It's a sad commentary.

 

[Duckjake]

Ugh....don't remind us. It's a sad commentary.

More amazing stuff on Charley Johnson. His career completion % with the Cardinals was 50.3%. In 1964 he threw 24 Interceptions with a 53% completion rate and a 69.4 QB rating and the Cards finished 9-3-2, the 3rd best record, out of 14 teams, in the NFL that season!

A different game back then. The Cards averaged 126 yards per game rushing yet only ranked 7th

OK Earthsci here's another trivia question. What Cardinal player led the team in PATs and Fgs in one season and then was named first team All-pro as a Wide Receiver for the Cards several years later?

 

[john h]

take it for what its worth --

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/peter_king/03/27/mmqb/index.html


lots of misinformation this time of year -- and all the buzz about the Cardinals and Gabbert could very well be part of a strategy to get a team to trade up into one of the top 4 slots to get Gabbert, thus ensuring one of Miller, Peterson, or Dareus fall to #5.

This from a reputable drafting service today:

We have reason to believe the Cardinals would love to draft Von Miller, as would most teams in the top ten. The Cardinals will have to settle for a franchise quarterback in Missouri's Blaine Gabbert.

Gabbert is the No. 1 quarterback on many draftnik boards. Many feel he is the safer pick between himself and Cam Newton. We agree with that statement.

Gabbert's mobility, accuracy and underrated arm strength will be a welcome addition to the Arizona offense.

Somewhere, Larry Fitzgerald is smiling.

 

[john h]

More amazing stuff on Charley Johnson. His career completion % with the Cardinals was 50.3%. In 1964 he threw 24 Interceptions with a 53% completion rate and a 69.4 QB rating and the Cards finished 9-3-2, the 3rd best record, out of 14 teams, in the NFL that season!

A different game back then. The Cards averaged 126 yards per game rushing yet only ranked 7th

OK Earthsci here's another trivia question. What Cardinal player led the team in PATs and Fgs in one season and then was named first team All-pro as a Wide Receiver for the Cards several years later?

I recall watching Charlie Johnson and always thought we had a chance of winning when he took the field. I believe it was Dr. Charlie Johson unless my memory has failed me. What he was a Dr. of I do not know as at that time all I cared about was winning.

 

[earthsci]

I recall watching Charlie Johnson and always thought we had a chance of winning when he took the field. I believe it was Dr. Charlie Johson unless my memory has failed me. What he was a Dr. of I do not know as at that time all I cared about was winning.

He received his Doctoral degree in 1971, after he was with the Cardinals.

 

[Duckjake]

He received his Doctoral degree in 1971, after he was with the Cardinals.

Chemical Engineering.

 

[earthsci]

Chemical Engineering.

http://chemeng.nmsu.edu/che_faculty_cjohnson.htm

 

[Arizona's Finest]

I don't think Gabbert even makes it to us, but if he does I agree that we'll likely snatch him up.

I agree with this.

Saying that Gabbert is growing on me. Due to the dire need at the position, and the increasing likliehood the team is hell bent to pursue Bulger one way or another, he is becoming my #1 choice for the first pick.

Wouldn't be upset with Miller or Peterson either but taking OLB at the top of the draft worries me, and although I love Peterson, to me that just means Toler goes to the bench and the Cards let DRC walk in a year. We could be much improved without another corner. We won't be much improved without a better QB or pass rush.

If your Top 5 and need a QB - and theres one you like - draft him IMO.

With the most recent buzz, I wouldn't be surprised if the Cardinals traded up to get him at this point.

 

[conraddobler]

At this point it looks like he's gone by the Bills pick at a minimum.

I don't know that I'd pay what it'll cost to move up to get him, which would be a ton.

We can't get to number one, that would cost too much, the only way you get there is basically trading LF and what would be the point of that?

Other than that we could possibly get to number 3 but it'd be approximately trading picks with the Bills plus our 2nd round pick.

That's steep but I'd consider that.

We won't know how this plays out until draft day but with the lockout there's almost no way to trade a player to move up, so I think teams are going to be putting a premium on the draft like no other year, which means it will take a huge stroke of luck to get Gabbert to fall to 5 IMO.

 

[Pariah]

I don't think you trade up for Gabbert, but you take him if he's there for you. As many have pointed out, he's not an elite-type prospect...he's just the best QB prospect in this year's draft.

I'm kind of ambivalent about taking him. I won't be super-excited if we do, and I won't be super-disappointed if we miss out or pass on him either.

 

[conraddobler]

I don't think you trade up for Gabbert, but you take him if he's there for you. As many have pointed out, he's not an elite-type prospect...he's just the best QB prospect in this year's draft.

I'm kind of ambivalent about taking him. I won't be super-excited if we do, and I won't be super-disappointed if we miss out or pass on him either.

I agree with this.

I think the team covered it's bases in case he's there they wanted to be sure they'd be ok with him since it's a premium position but I highly doubt he will be or that we'll move up to get him, seems about right.

 

[john h]

This from a reputable drafting service today:

We have reason to believe the Cardinals would love to draft Von Miller, as would most teams in the top ten. The Cardinals will have to settle for a franchise quarterback in Missouri's Blaine Gabbert.

Gabbert is the No. 1 quarterback on many draftnik boards. Many feel he is the safer pick between himself and Cam Newton. We agree with that statement.

Gabbert's mobility, accuracy and underrated arm strength will be a welcome addition to the Arizona offense.

Somewhere, Larry Fitzgerald is smiling.

If for some reason we do not take a QB in round one such as the one we want is gone I would not feel bad if we took Ryan Mallet in round 2. if he is there. I think he will go in round 1 probably to one of our enemies. I also think Von Miller will be gone when we draft. There is a possibility that the Panthers will trade down to some team than is after ???????. Newton to me is more of a risk than Gabbert or Mallet. I still hope we get Gabbert and it appears there will be no contract by the time the draft takes place.

Of interest is that the drafted players will be able to go to the teams that drafted them home city to be introduced to the fans. That was announced late yesterday. I got this feeing in my stomach that many of the NFL players are starting to get concerned about not getting a check come the time they should. Many of these guys do not have a boatload of cash put away and have payments on million dollar homes and Mercedes to make. There are probably many of us that have more net worth than many of these younger players who are making under $1 mil and paying a lot of taxes and have a lot of debt. Those diamond earrings and rolex watches do not come for free and the good times do not last forever. Some are still wondering if they will make the team or be cut. The owners still hold the best cards in this game of who blinks first. One has to wonder if guys like the rich QB's are the best ones to be representing the average joe on the team?

 

[conraddobler]

If for some reason we do not take a QB in round one such as the one we want is gone I would not feel bad if we took Ryan Mallet in round 2. if he is there. I think he will go in round 1 probably to one of our enemies. I also think Von Miller will be gone when we draft. There is a possibility that the Panthers will trade down to some team than is after ???????. Newton to me is more of a risk than Gabbert or Mallet. I still hope we get Gabbert and it appears there will be no contract by the time the draft takes place.

Of interest is that the drafted players will be able to go to the teams that drafted them home city to be introduced to the fans. That was announced late yesterday. I got this feeing in my stomach that many of the NFL players are starting to get concerned about not getting a check come the time they should. Many of these guys do not have a boatload of cash put away and have payments on million dollar homes and Mercedes to make. There are probably many of us that have more net worth than many of these younger players who are making under $1 mil and paying a lot of taxes and have a lot of debt. Those diamond earrings and rolex watches do not come for free and the good times do not last forever. Some are still wondering if they will make the team or be cut. The owners still hold the best cards in this game of who blinks first. One has to wonder if guys like the rich QB's are the best ones to be representing the average joe on the team?

No question in my mind the players are going to blink, even if you have a few weak owners who need cash they haven't got the votes to break through and cave.

It's exactly opposite IMO for the players union.

Like you pointed out the face of the union has a lot of money but the everyday players have a ton of bills to match a great income to be sure, however if you take that income away most of them would be broke very fast IMO.

That's why I can't understand what the players union is trying to accomplish here, from my understanding they weren't that terribly far off, if I was negotiating this I would of pushed the envelope for sure but I'd of never really intended to go where they did.

Their bluff got called and now they're way out on a limb IMO, and if I were them I'd secretly cave quickly rather than later.

 

[SuperSpck]

I don't think you trade up for Gabbert, but you take him if he's there for you. As many have pointed out, he's not an elite-type prospect...he's just the best QB prospect in this year's draft.

Eh, the team picks 5th. If he makes it that far I'll just assuming it's meant to be.
What I'm hoping for is that he's the 2nd QB taken.
I like the 2nd guy taken.

 

[AsUdUdE]

I like the theory of Gabbert.... not sure he is in reality what we need...

I just can't get past the fact that he threw almost 500 times and yet had only 16 TDs...

That just screams red flag to me...

 

[Duckjake]

Eh, the team picks 5th. If he makes it that far I'll just assuming it's meant to be.
What I'm hoping for is that he's the 2nd QB taken.
I like the 2nd guy taken.

I believe Leinart was the 2nd QB taken in 2006.

 

[SuperSpck]

I believe Leinart was the 2nd QB taken in 2006.

For amusement I'll throw the 1/2 combos up.
Sure, sometimes 1 is better, but 2 is alright as well.

Bradford/Tebow -- Too soon, but 1
Stafford/Sanchez -- Too soon, but 2
Ryan/Flacco -- Draw (in a good way)
Russell/Quinn -- Technically Quinn, but only because he's not Jamarcus. -2
Young/Leinart -- Young, by a nose hair. Collins was Warner lite. -1
Smith/Rodgers -- Rodgers -2
Manning/Rivers -- Draw (in a good way)
Palmer/Leftwich -- Palmer, but Leftwich wasn't the same prospect. -1
Carr/Harrington -- Harrington (more TD's in fewer years) -2
Vick/Brees -- Brees (not that #1 isn't a violent 2nd place) -2
Pennington/Carmazzi -- 1
Couch/McNabb -- 2
Manning/Leaf -- 1 (equal prospects)
Druckenmiller/Plummer -- 2
Bank/Hoying -- I got nothing.
McNair/Collins -- draw (make a case otherwise)
Shuler/Dilfer -- 2

That's enough.
So with the eyeball test:
1 = 5
2 = 8
As long gets back to winning, whatever's whatever.