Garthshort
ASFN Addict
So let me see. I can have the guy who's good in practice or good in games? Give me a couple of weeks to think about it.
I think Whiz has mostly made his decision to go with Skelton, but he is acting like it is open because why would he criticize Kolb or say he prefers Skelton to the media?
There isn't really any advantage, it's not like we have a QB who is playing spectacularly, we have one that is playing really badly and one who is playing adequately. Putting down and already low Kolb reduces any lucky chance of a bounce back or even creates an opportunity of regression in confidence from Skelton. Honestly I don't see an advantage of him picking a starter now, so why would he say anything? He said it was an open competition and no one wins until it is over, even if he has his winner already he wouldn't pick now since there is no reason to.
What is the downside to naming a quarterback right now? Delaying the embarrassment of folding up shop on another starting QB?
well, if they name Kolb, everything you listed as a benefit, would be a downside once he gets shattered in his first hit and Skelton comes in with the less reps/comfort/etc.
I'm pretty sure that's the concern of myself, Cheesy, and others.
I don't really understand the idea that Skelton hasn't exactly ripped it up in the preseason. He's had 15 attempts in 3 preseason games. 8 of his 10 completions have resulted in first downs. He's keeping pace with Phillip Rivers and Tony Romo on the stat sheet.
Why name a starter when neither QB has won the job? I've said all along that the QB winner will likley be decided in practices and that the games are somewhat meaningless. From what I, and almost everyone else, has seen Skelton should be the starter. But, if he is constantly stinking it up in practice, I can see where that is an issue. I look at it this way, if Kolb is better in the 25, or so, practices and Skelton is better in 5 glorified scrimmages, I could see them going with Kolb. The coaches are grading every play and every throw, they know what's going on. If Skelton had practiced better. I'm sure Whiz would have named him by now. I still think he will name Skelton but I don't think it's the slam dunk some are making it out to be.
while I understand that that is what's being reported and all we really have to go on. I find it hard to believe that Skelton is God-awful in all these practices yet is still the guy that the players want to lead em...Why name a starter when neither QB has won the job? I've said all along that the QB winner will likley be decided in practices and that the games are somewhat meaningless. From what I, and almost everyone else, has seen Skelton should be the starter. But, if he is constantly stinking it up in practice, I can see where that is an issue. I look at it this way, if Kolb is better in the 25, or so, practices and Skelton is better in 5 glorified scrimmages, I could see them going with Kolb. The coaches are grading every play and every throw, they know what's going on. If Skelton had practiced better. I'm sure Whiz would have named him by now. I still think he will name Skelton but I don't think it's the slam dunk some are making it out to be.
Agree, they haven't clarified much in relation to practice other than Kolb has played better. Does that mean Skelton has been stinking it up in practice and Kolb has been "less awful"? Or, has Kolb looked very good while Skelton has been so-so? I guess the only thing I can derive from it is that Skelton hasn't practiced very well and that's a concern. It's a legitimate concern too. I know he's nowhere near these guys, but I'm sure guys like Manning, Rodgers, Rivers, Brees, et al, aren't stinking it up in practice.An issue with actually naming him the starter, or an issue with deciding to name him the starter? I think those are two different things.
Neither of these guys are Derek Anderson and Max Hall learning the offense, at this point. There's tons of film available on both; both have more than 400 career attempts, and both have at least 250 attempts in this offense from last year.
If there's a recency bias going on because they've seen Kolb playing well on practice film (and I don't think that anyone's said that Kolb looks AWESOME in training camp inasmuch as they've said that he looks like he belongs on the field), while Skelton has struggled, that's a problem.
while I understand that that is what's being reported and all we really have to go on. I find it hard to believe that Skelton is God-awful in all these practices yet is still the guy that the players want to lead em...
I continue to be baffled that you think that the best coach in Arizona Cardinals history has little or even no control over the talent that gets brought in to this team. Don't you think that the Head Coach has direct input into at least the top 3 picks that a team makes in the draft? Do you think that after the Anderson debacle that the front office doesn't give the head coach even more input into who he has playing under center?
In most organizations, the head coach is able to evaluate the top 50 or so players on the draft board, and then the scouting staff takes over and has a lot more of the input on the later guys. I'm surprised that you're happy to credit Whis for guys like LSH, Acho, Toler, Hightower, etc., but the first and second round disasters are out of his hands.
Top free agent targets have a lot of input from the coaching staff. Bottom-of-the-roster guys are usually the scouting departments' fault.
It's amazing that you think that the most successful head coach in the organization's history probably isn't also the most powerful since at least Buddy Ryan.
You find it hard to beliece? Every report but 1 that I can think of backs it up. Like i said the practice I went to and was giving a play by play of Skelton was terrifyingly awful. Worst qb performance at practice I gave seen in over a decade of attending TC.
He was missing wide open WRs 5 yards in front of him for goodness sake and threw like 3 ints all with zero pressure. It was astonishingly bad!
Where have I given him any real credit on drafting players? I have consistently stated that a head coach doesn't spend his time scouting players. He has some input, but to claim that all these personnel failures are whisenhunt's fault are ridiculous.
BTW It will be nice to see yet another draft pick that you panned (Ryan Williams) join the list of guys from the past that you panned (Daryl Washington and Larry Fitzgerald among others).
I continue to be baffled that you think that the best coach in Arizona Cardinals history has little or even no control over the talent that gets brought in to this team. Don't you think that the Head Coach has direct input into at least the top 3 picks that a team makes in the draft? Do you think that [especially] after the Anderson debacle that the front office doesn't give the head coach even more input into who he has playing under center?
I don't get the player loyalty then if he sucks 90% of the time they see him take snaps...
What player loyalty? Have you seen quotes of a player coming out and saying Skelton is the guy for them and outright bad mouthing Kolb? Because I haven't?
I said the same thing yesterday; here: http://www.arizonasportsfans.com/vb/showpost.php?p=2671824&postcount=5The ultimate Cardinals sweetness. I downloaded TuneIn radio on my superphone, and can listen to Cardinals sports radio on the way home from work here in NJ.
Anyway, the word out of Doug & Wolf is that the reason the Cardinals still have a QB battle right now, and not a named starter is:
"Kevin Kolb has won the competition per practice performance, and John Skelton has won the competition per game performance."
Supposidely Skelton has been horrible in practice, and Kolb has been "acceptable".
As for the games? Well, the fans get to watch the games so we know the story there.
Interesting....................
The ultimate Cardinals sweetness. I downloaded TuneIn radio on my superphone, and can listen to Cardinals sports radio on the way home from work here in NJ.
Anyway, the word out of Doug & Wolf is that the reason the Cardinals still have a QB battle right now, and not a named starter is:
"Kevin Kolb has won the competition per practice performance, and John Skelton has won the competition per game performance."
Supposidely Skelton has been horrible in practice, and Kolb has been "acceptable".
As for the games? Well, the fans get to watch the games so we know the story there.
Interesting....................
Really?
1) Increased practice and game reps with the 1st unit offense
2) Increased comfort with the starting quarterback's cadence
3) Increased reps with signals between QB and receivers
4) Increased comfort from offensive line about where a QB will or won't be in his dropback
5) More reps for timing between starting receivers and the quarterback on routes
6) Certainty to increase reps on plays the quarterback is most comfortable with
7) Increased reps for starting quarterback with starting receivers
8) Increased leadership from a real decision on who the starting quarterback is
9) End of questions from media/fans on who the starting quarterback is decreases distractions
10) Increased reps with QB gets receivers consistency with ball release point/placement from starter.
There are more. What is the downside to naming a quarterback right now? Delaying the embarrassment of folding up shop on another starting QB?
I dont necessarily agree with Doug & Wolf. Has anyone actually seen Kolb play better in camp? I was there for two days and Kolb was awful. I havent herd anyone report differently..
This
I hadnt heard any reports from camp or practices that made it sound as thought Kolb looked particularly good there either.
Bunch of nervous nannies up in here. You're no different than Kolb, only it's forums. Even the chance of someone not starting and you're running right to hit the post or reply button.