QB situation and solution

[BigRedMO]

I got a good chuckle out of your post Evil Ash. I dont agree with it but you are obviously very wound up over it. We will see this summer what happens.

 

[Stout]

Okay Evil Ash, after that nice, long, arrogant, condescending post, answer me one simple question. Why can't Josh hit open receivers? We didn't get the camera angles until that last game of the season, and when we did, we saw WR wide open all over the field that he never found. Why?

 

[WisconsinCard]

We didn't get the camera angles until that last game of the season, and when we did, we saw WR wide open all over the field that he never found. Why?

Everyone keeps talking about the camera angles. I have watched the game 2 times and I don't see any new or different angles then we get every game. The announcers were saying that there were open recievers, and once they showed an open reciever (Quan) and Josh didn't see him. It happens, but I think the anti Josh movement has created these "new" camera angles. Lets face it Josh stunk it up this last game but he still won 6 of the 13 games he started the only 6 games we won. So he was the best QB in this team this year. That said we need an up grade at that position next year.

 

[Stout]

Everyone keeps talking about the camera angles. I have watched the game 2 times and I don't see any new or different angles then we get every game. The announcers were saying that there were open recievers, and once they showed an open reciever (Quan) and Josh didn't see him. It happens, but I think the anti Josh movement has created these "new" camera angles. Lets face it Josh stunk it up this last game but he still won 6 of the 13 games he started the only 6 games we won. So he was the best QB in this team this year. That said we need an up grade at that position next year.

Actually, as I recall, they showed three or four different plays with wide open receivers that he missed.

And it's not that they're new camera angles. I'm simply talking about the wide, overhead shots that show the whole field and allow you to see the whole play develop. We didn't get to see it much over the course of the season because, I assume, we were low rated games and the coverage was pretty bad.

Saying he was the best QB on the team this year is in no way an endorsment for his play. Actually, we can't even be sure he was. Yes, he was better than King, but Navarre may actually be better---the injury didn't let us find out.

Finally, 'He' didn't win any games with the possible, possible exception of the Miami game. He 'didn't lose' the rest of the games. A QB winning a game is a QB putting his team on his back and carrying them to victory. If it's fair for Josh man-lovers to say it's a 'team' loss, then it's a 'team' victory.

 

[WisconsinCard]

Finally, 'He' didn't win any games with the possible, possible exception of the Miami game. He 'didn't lose' the rest of the games. A QB winning a game is a QB putting his team on his back and carrying them to victory. QUOTE]


Under this rule of thought then Big Ben didn't win any games either.

 

[Evil Ash]

Okay Evil Ash, after that nice, long, arrogant, condescending post, answer me one simple question. Why can't Josh hit open receivers? We didn't get the camera angles until that last game of the season, and when we did, we saw WR wide open all over the field that he never found. Why?

Did I miss something? I was talking about the whole scheme of the offense and the QB's part in it. Yet somehow you act like I said Josh was great or something. All I said was Josh was mediocre as compared to the rest of the league's starting QBs for those last 4 games as a whole ... thats it, nothing further. I didn't say he was the future of our franchise or anything. Somehow you went off and missed my point completely

You see my point is that when people are talking about the QB of a team usually two arguments occur (sometimes at the exact same time) ... the first revolves around the player and their play (i.e Josh is great, Josh is okay, Josh sucks, etc) and the other argument involves how important the QB is. I can understand the first point in the argument because thats often based on observation and people see things differently. Sometimes you see something I don't, sometimes I see something you don't ... you get the idea.

The 2nd part of the argument is where things often get so weird and out of control that logic often goes out the window. Some people will follow the hype so much that the believe that a QB should be able to overcome a lack of execution by his teammates among other things. Its the "As the QB goes so goes the team" argument. This argument usually revolves around a mentality that says something like The QB touches the ball on every play, therefore its all upon him to decide the outcome. Of course those that follow that theory must think VERY HIGHLY of the center because he touches the ball just as often as the QB.

As you can tell, I don't believe this theory one bit. I believe that a QB is just a part of the scheme and that the blame/glory should partially go to him. The whole is only as good as the sum of its parts ... and the QB is just a part of the offense.

-----------------------------------------

Back to topic...

I honestly have no idea why Josh missed the open Wrs during that last week of the year. I also don't know why Tom Brady, Big Ben, Peyton Manning, Dante Culpepper, etc missed their open receivers also. Maybe it has something to do with the fact that they are meerly mortals and can't do everything perfectly.

Does that mean I'm excusing Josh completely from his missteps? Not hardly. He has quite a few things that needs to work on to be a HOF level QB (as do quite a few of the QBs in NFL do).

I've said it before and I'll say it again ... I don't know if Josh McCown is the answer at QB for this team (nor do I know if anyone playing in college or the NFL now is). I hope we bring competition and the best man wins. I'm just not expecting much from the expected group of QBs available.

 

[az1965]

Green has promised an exciting and entertaining offense. Green has seen that Josh cannot provide that. Look for someone else to pick up the reins. Who is that going to be is a million dollar question right now. I will be shocked if Josh McCown is the starter next season.

 

[WisconsinCard]

Green has promised an exciting and entertaining offense. Green has seen that Josh cannot provide that. Look for someone else to pick up the reins. Who is that going to be is a million dollar question right now. I will be shocked if Josh McCown is the starter next season.

I wouldn't be shocked if he is the starter next year but I would be shocked if their isn't competition from a vet, for that starting position.

 

[Stout]

Did I miss something? I was talking about the whole scheme of the offense and the QB's part in it. Yet somehow you act like I said Josh was great or something. All I said was Josh was mediocre as compared to the rest of the league's starting QBs for those last 4 games as a whole ... thats it, nothing further. I didn't say he was the future of our franchise or anything. Somehow you went off and missed my point completely

You see my point is that when people are talking about the QB of a team usually two arguments occur (sometimes at the exact same time) ... the first revolves around the player and their play (i.e Josh is great, Josh is okay, Josh sucks, etc) and the other argument involves how important the QB is. I can understand the first point in the argument because thats often based on observation and people see things differently. Sometimes you see something I don't, sometimes I see something you don't ... you get the idea.

The 2nd part of the argument is where things often get so weird and out of control that logic often goes out the window. Some people will follow the hype so much that the believe that a QB should be able to overcome a lack of execution by his teammates among other things. Its the "As the QB goes so goes the team" argument. This argument usually revolves around a mentality that says something like The QB touches the ball on every play, therefore its all upon him to decide the outcome. Of course those that follow that theory must think VERY HIGHLY of the center because he touches the ball just as often as the QB.

As you can tell, I don't believe this theory one bit. I believe that a QB is just a part of the scheme and that the blame/glory should partially go to him. The whole is only as good as the sum of its parts ... and the QB is just a part of the offense.

-----------------------------------------

Back to topic...

I honestly have no idea why Josh missed the open Wrs during that last week of the year. I also don't know why Tom Brady, Big Ben, Peyton Manning, Dante Culpepper, etc missed their open receivers also. Maybe it has something to do with the fact that they are meerly mortals and can't do everything perfectly.

Does that mean I'm excusing Josh completely from his missteps? Not hardly. He has quite a few things that needs to work on to be a HOF level QB (as do quite a few of the QBs in NFL do).

I've said it before and I'll say it again ... I don't know if Josh McCown is the answer at QB for this team (nor do I know if anyone playing in college or the NFL now is). I hope we bring competition and the best man wins. I'm just not expecting much from the expected group of QBs available.

Good answer. To me, that last game was simply a culmination of how terrible he played all season long, but I realize we definitely disagree there.

 

[Stout]

Finally, 'He' didn't win any games with the possible, possible exception of the Miami game. He 'didn't lose' the rest of the games. A QB winning a game is a QB putting his team on his back and carrying them to victory. QUOTE]


Under this rule of thought then Big Ben didn't win any games either.

Granted. But, for most of the year, Big Ben did play much better than McCown, regardless of their circumstances. Like with Plummer, even if McCown had a perfect situation around him, I doubt he excels. McCown has far less savvy than Plummer, and shows far less potential than Plummer at this point in his career.

 

[Stronso]

What is Kitna's contract status? I think he has more potential than Warner or Johnson.

I was thinking that same thing.......younger, does well, cheaper, good arm and mobility.......

Does anyone know what his contract status is?

 

[john h]

What is wrong with JOHN NAVARRE??? I think Josh will be just fine and he will be the future of this franchise, but John has that chance as well. What we need, and all we need, is a replacement 3rd stringer for King. A mentor??? Possibly, either Brad Johnson or Kurt Warner could serve as a mentor to those 2, but will they suffice as 3rd stringers??? They both got replaced by younger blood this year, they should both feel fortunate for any team to give them any job of any type next season in the NFL.........

In todays NFL teams do not go through rebuilding over 3 years. Economics will not allow it. FA will not allow it as your good players will bail out if they perceive you are not trying to make immediate changes to improve the situation. McCown has had over a year and shown nothing to this point to indicate he has a big future as as starting QB. If he were in Philly his life would be in danger the way he played. I am no longer concerned he may start next year. After watching Green for a year and the way he operates there is no way Josh McCown will be a starter next year for the Cards. I have a feeling based on not much that Navarre will eventually emerge as a starting NFL QB. He only played one-half game without the hand injury but you could see a pocket presence in the guy. If we have a future QB on this team I think it is more likely John Navarre than Josh McCown. In the meantime we will sign a veteran QB and he will likely be the starter. I hope we sign a QB early and do not drag this out as the better FA QB's will go early this year because there are many teams in need. Come on Dennis pull the trigger and do not dilly dally around. Let other FA's know you have a new QB in town and the Cards are headed to the playoffs. Your ego needs this and the fans need it.

 

[Tangodnzr]

In todays NFL teams do not go through rebuilding over 3 years. Economics will not allow it. FA will not allow it as your good players will bail out if they perceive you are not trying to make immediate changes to improve the situation. McCown has had over a year and shown nothing to this point to indicate he has a big future as as starting QB. If he were in Philly his life would be in danger the way he played. I am no longer concerned he may start next year. After watching Green for a year and the way he operates there is no way Josh McCown will be a starter next year for the Cards. I have a feeling based on not much that Navarre will eventually emerge as a starting NFL QB. He only played one-half game without the hand injury but you could see a pocket presence in the guy. If we have a future QB on this team I think it is more likely John Navarre than Josh McCown. In the meantime we will sign a veteran QB and he will likely be the starter. I hope we sign a QB early and do not drag this out as the better FA QB's will go early this year because there are many teams in need. Come on Dennis pull the trigger and do not dilly dally around. Let other FA's know you have a new QB in town and the Cards are headed to the playoffs. Your ego needs this and the fans need it.

Let's just say there's not a point here that I agree with. (except for the 3 year "rebuilding" process, which is not what is going to improve this team.)
Josh was brought in here knowing he was not going to be an instant success.
Looking back over the past few years the QB's that most seemed to think had the skills and college background to possibly "be ahead of the curve" were Drew Brees, and Byron Leftwich.
Doesn't anyone remember when the Chargers traded away Michael Vick's rights. A lot of people, I think Russ was among them, can't remember who all else specifically who agreed that Brees was the one who might possibly start being productive soonest. Now, this year, finally, both he and Vick have really started to mature into the QB's and living up to their expectations.
And Leftwich, although has shown flashes, has still not really lived up to his hype yet either.

Josh will be ready next year. There is no need for anymore "rebuilding".
What baffles me, is Green still says Josh is the QB. So many of the Josh bashers seem to conveniently forget that.
In this case, I'll take him at his word.
We've got our bird in hand, there is no need to beat the bushes desperately looking for "two more". The grass is not always greener on the other side of the fence, no matter how much a small group of people may pontificate otherwise.
(notice the fan polls here, the majority still favor Josh as being our best best at QB right now. All the Josh bashers are NOT the majority, just the most vocal and prolific posters.)

(yes we need a replacement for Shaun King.).
An experienced QB maybe not so much to mentor, but as a safety valve.
Navarre might be OK, but like Josh even if he does "get it" and truely be ready its most likely not going to be before 2006, at the earliest.

 

[Stout]

Tango, what exactly are you basing your opinion that you are sold on Josh as a solid QB and our QBotF? I'm not trying to be antagonistic. I want to know.

How about this. You civilly post your reasons why you think this way, and I'll refrain from responding in disbelief and reply honestly as well. Deal?

 

[Russ Smith]

Let's just say there's not a point here that I agree with. (except for the 3 year "rebuilding" process, which is not what is going to improve this team.)
Josh was brought in here knowing he was not going to be an instant success.
Looking back over the past few years the QB's that most seemed to think had the skills and college background to possibly "be ahead of the curve" were Drew Brees, and Byron Leftwich.
Doesn't anyone remember when the Chargers traded away Michael Vick's rights. A lot of people, I think Russ was among them, can't remember who all else specifically who agreed that Brees was the one who might possibly start being productive soonest. Now, this year, finally, both he and Vick have really started to mature into the QB's and living up to their expectations.
And Leftwich, although has shown flashes, has still not really lived up to his hype yet either.


IMHO but he was a near bust this year.


.

I sure don't remember hyping Brees, I always felt he was a product of the Purdue system, his year this year really surprised me, and I STILL doubt he's as good as he looked this year. I think lightning in a bottle, refs wouldn't allow contact, Gates blows up, Brees rides him to a huge year.

Disagree on Leftwich, given the WR's he's had on that club I think he's done pretty well, hasn't set the league on fire mind you but the one problem he's had is staying healthy and that's largely this year. And I guess he fumbles too much although he cut them in half this year from his rookie year.

Assuming Reggie Williams comes on and Jimmy Smith isn't too old, I look for them to be a much better passing team next year. What I've heard is that Williams was just much more raw than they expected, he had zero understanding of NFL offenses, how to get open, how to read a defense, so they often had to take him out. That's apparently why Wilford played so much despite being picked much lower, he had the mental part of the game down much faster than Williams did. Reggie will eventually be a good player.

If you saw their game with Pittsburgh this year the announcers including Theismann were just gushing at the velocity on the throws from both Lefty and ben and Joe was just raving about the touch Byron showed too. He's still learning for sure but give him better guys to throw to and look out.

 

[john h]

Let's just say there's not a point here that I agree with. (except for the 3 year "rebuilding" process, which is not what is going to improve this team.)
Josh was brought in here knowing he was not going to be an instant success.
Looking back over the past few years the QB's that most seemed to think had the skills and college background to possibly "be ahead of the curve" were Drew Brees, and Byron Leftwich.
Doesn't anyone remember when the Chargers traded away Michael Vick's rights. A lot of people, I think Russ was among them, can't remember who all else specifically who agreed that Brees was the one who might possibly start being productive soonest. Now, this year, finally, both he and Vick have really started to mature into the QB's and living up to their expectations.
And Leftwich, although has shown flashes, has still not really lived up to his hype yet either.

Josh will be ready next year. There is no need for anymore "rebuilding".
What baffles me, is Green still says Josh is the QB. So many of the Josh bashers seem to conveniently forget that.
In this case, I'll take him at his word.
We've got our bird in hand, there is no need to beat the bushes desperately looking for "two more". The grass is not always greener on the other side of the fence, no matter how much a small group of people may pontificate otherwise.
(notice the fan polls here, the majority still favor Josh as being our best best at QB right now. All the Josh bashers are NOT the majority, just the most vocal and prolific posters.)

(yes we need a replacement for Shaun King.).
An experienced QB maybe not so much to mentor, but as a safety valve.
Navarre might be OK, but like Josh even if he does "get it" and truely be ready its most likely not going to be before 2006, at the earliest.

I would like nothing better than Josh to be a Michael Vick as it would solve our QB problems. It is what Green has not said that seems to put Josh in the background. He has not come out like last year and stated Josh is the starter next season. That says a lot. I will be totally shocked if he is the starter next year. I have, however, been shocked before as I never thought he would be the starter this year until Green announced it almost the day he was hired. We have all summer and winter to think about this. Who Green signs as a QB is going to tell us a lot. Some of the better FA QB's are going to want to be starters and I would guess tell Green as much before they sign. If Green signs one of the better QB's available you can forget Josh being the starter. I am not even sure he will be resigned as he is a FA. The Cards may offer him a minimum contract and another team may step in and offer him more. Nothing will suprise me with Green as he acts rather fast for better or worse. You can bet he is totally dissatisfied with our offense and will make some major changes this year. He already started with the OC and the players are next on the agenda.

 

[Tangodnzr]

Just for the record!

Russ on your last post you included a quote from me, the last line must have been some typo-type error on your part because the "IMHO but he was a near bust this year" is not a statement I made.
It must have been one you made, and got it pasted in the wrong spot.

And I really didn't mean to imply that you were "hyping" Brees, just that some people, and I thought you were one of them, said things like, "Brees came from a more pro-friendly program and probably has a better chance of making an impact sooner than even Vick....etc, etc." Again I'm not saying these were your words, just that that a lot of people seemed to agree with that take.

Also, once again, I think a lot of people keep overlooking or forgetting that its not only the talent of the player but the team situation (and coaching) that he comes into as a pro.
I still say you put Big Ben in Arizona this year, (or a lot of other places) and he doesn't come close to matching what he did with the Steelers. (to name just one example)

I guess it can be argued that Leftwich was "shackled" by not-so-great receivers. I'm not totally sure I buy it, but for the sake of arguement, I'll go along with it for now.
But look what Josh had to work with. And injured receiving corps, very young, a far less than stellar offensive line, Green's idiosyncracies, and some highly questionable offense planning/play callling.

My question here then would be:
Why would it be considered that the problems Leftwich had to deal with are valid "excuses" while Josh's are not?
It seems Josh had a lot more working against him that Leftwich did.

 

[Tangodnzr]

Once again, just for the record.

In no way do I intend to compare Josh to Michael Vick.

He is a totally totally unique individual. There is NO ONE like him. He's a freak.

But even he is just hitting his stride now. (his 4th year in the league, same with Brees)

Yeah, he seemed on his way there last year, but the injury derailed his progess.
And you have to wonder how much effect the new coaching staff/system has helped to benefit him this year too.

 

[Russ Smith]

Just for the record!

Russ on your last post you included a quote from me, the last line must have been some typo-type error on your part because the "IMHO but he was a near bust this year" is not a statement I made.
It must have been one you made, and got it pasted in the wrong spot.

.

Bad editing by me, I accidentally put my words before the quote sign, then cut and pasted but missed that IMHO line.

My bad.

 

[john h]

Just for the record!

Russ on your last post you included a quote from me, the last line must have been some typo-type error on your part because the "IMHO but he was a near bust this year" is not a statement I made.
It must have been one you made, and got it pasted in the wrong spot.

And I really didn't mean to imply that you were "hyping" Brees, just that some people, and I thought you were one of them, said things like, "Brees came from a more pro-friendly program and probably has a better chance of making an impact sooner than even Vick....etc, etc." Again I'm not saying these were your words, just that that a lot of people seemed to agree with that take.

Also, once again, I think a lot of people keep overlooking or forgetting that its not only the talent of the player but the team situation (and coaching) that he comes into as a pro.
I still say you put Big Ben in Arizona this year, (or a lot of other places) and he doesn't come close to matching what he did with the Steelers. (to name just one example)

I guess it can be argued that Leftwich was "shackled" by not-so-great receivers. I'm not totally sure I buy it, but for the sake of arguement, I'll go along with it for now.
But look what Josh had to work with. And injured receiving corps, very young, a far less than stellar offensive line, Green's idiosyncracies, and some highly questionable offense planning/play callling.

My question here then would be:
Why would it be considered that the problems Leftwich had to deal with are valid "excuses" while Josh's are not?
It seems Josh had a lot more working against him that Leftwich did.

Josh probably had a receiving corps better than 90% of other NFL teams regardless of Boldens 6 games he missed. The receivers are probably asking "look what we had to work with?". Yes he did have a not so good offensive line but he had a lot of problems even when he had all the time in the world. He clearly was not an accurate passer in particular on the long throws. He simply just threw a high arching pass hoping the receivers would out jump the DB's. I doubt Big Ben could have done as well with any team in the NFL. Darn he lost one game so it would be hard to top that. I think we would have been a better team with Big Ben. Would I trade Josh for Big Ben. I think so.

 

[Tangodnzr]

Josh probably had a receiving corps better than 90% of other NFL teams regardless of Boldens 6 games he missed. The receivers are probably asking "look what we had to work with?". Yes he did have a not so good offensive line but he had a lot of problems even when he had all the time in the world. He clearly was not an accurate passer in particular on the long throws. He simply just threw a high arching pass hoping the receivers would out jump the DB's. I doubt Big Ben could have done as well with any team in the NFL. Darn he lost one game so it would be hard to top that. I think we would have been a better team with Big Ben. Would I trade Josh for Big Ben. I think so.

Both Fitz and BJ were hobbled by injuries too.

The "receiving corps better than 90% of other NFL teams" may be indeed just that "on paper" but it wasn't "on the field" this year.

Yes "potential-wise" I would agree. But it was not there on the playing field most of this year.

 

[DevonCardsFan]

Once again, just for the record.

In no way do I intend to compare Josh to Michael Vick.

He is a totally totally unique individual. There is NO ONE like him. He's a freak.

But even he is just hitting his stride now. (his 4th year in the league, same with Brees)

Yeah, he seemed on his way there last year, but the injury derailed his progess.
And you have to wonder how much effect the new coaching staff/system has helped to benefit him this year too.

Tango whats up with your lovefest for QB's that cant read the field for crap. Plummer couldn't read a defense for crap and is showing it in Denver. I think McCown reads the field worse then Plummer the only reason his Ints are not very high is because the guy is too scared too throw the ball unlike Plummer, he would rather throw little dump passes that mean nothing on 3rd and long then too air it out. Unless McCown can drastically change the way he reads the field, which I doubt it's either something you have or you don't (look at Plummer he has yet to learn) McCown will never be a good NFL QB.

 

[Tangodnzr]

Tango whats up with your lovefest for QB's that cant read the field for crap. Plummer couldn't read a defense for crap and is showing it in Denver. I think McCown reads the field worse then Plummer the only reason his Ints are not very high is because the guy is too scared too throw the ball unlike Plummer, he would rather throw little dump passes that mean nothing on 3rd and long then too air it out. Unless McCown can drastically change the way he reads the field, which I doubt it's either something you have or you don't (look at Plummer he has yet to learn) McCown will never be a good NFL QB.

Balderdash!

The theories expressed above have more holes than swiss cheese.

I don't have time to respond in detail now, but I will later.


"A QB can't learn to read the field better with experience?"

Do you honestly believe that crap ?

 

[AzCards21]

OK, I'll jump in a little late.

Josh had several things going against him from the start of training camp.

1- A rookie phenom at WR who he didn't throw to for more than 1/4 of the season.

Problem- Good reciever but not really on the same page. Preseason and training camp went to hell when Q went down. Number one target gone.

2- A new phenom is drafted by coach. And coach expects him to be featured.

Problem- No chemistry, no history. The only time they got to connect was in preseason. Josh's confidence in Fitz was beginning to show up just before he got benched. Oops, another set back.

3- Josh's whole goal was to be better than Plummers TD to INT ratio. Job done.

Problem- That kind of thinking also means you will miss out on the clutch plays that make QB's the high profile media darlings.

Josh was set into a no win situation. Throw the tight ball and you have three options.

1- The superstar reciever made a spectacular play.
2- You obviously didn't throw the ball right.
3- Only an idiot would throw into that situation.

This team from day one was not predicated on Josh. His job was not to screw up or fantastic recieving corp. After being benched he showed a lot of desire and fortitude. Maybe Green saw that.


Josh will be a looser more active starter next season. No matter who else is brought in.

 

[conraddobler]

Josh won 6 games being the QB.

Was he the reason we won 6 games? No.

However he didn't lose them either and no other QB on the roster can say they helped not lose even one game.

Josh dosen't read the field all that well. That isn't suprising it was his first year starting.

Most first year starters don't read the field very well. Toward the end he was better than in the beginning and next year he will be better still.

That's basically how experience works.