So, why the kid gloves with McCown?

[This_Guy]

!

Russ,

Good take, but we will agree to disagree.

And one of the reasons they blitzed so freely on passing downs is they had no fear of King beating them downfield.

With a mediocre OL and Keyshawn (possession receiver) and Jacquez Green what defensive coordinator wouldn't blitz every down? Keyshawn won't get behind anyone and Green was a joke and couldn't get off the line against press coverage.

Like most young QB's who can move, King got sacked quite a bit, 37 times. Maybe the OL wasn't very good as you say, but maybe it was also King holding the ball to avoid making mistakes?

It most certainly was King holding the ball too long, but as you noted all young QBs do that. That's why you should expect McCown to have that problem this year and why I believe in an open competition King would win hands down.

That year they lost to Philly 21-3 in the playoffs and that's why he lost his job. Philly shut down their run game and dared King to throw, he was 17-31

Very true, but this is the point I've been trying to make. BUCS HISTORY ALERT. The Glazers wanted to fire Dungy for having an inept offense, and hire Bill Parcells. Rich McKay convinced the owners that the team just needed a veteran QB to steady the ship. He did this because if the Glazers hired Parcells as they wanted, Parcells would have become the GM as well and pushed McKay out the door. This eventually happened with Gruden anyway, but I digress. The coaching staff did not want to replace King.

...And what were the results?

2000 under King: 10-6, 24ppg, lost in the first round to Philly 21-3
2001 under BJ: 9-7, 20ppg, lost in the first round to Philly 31-9

King is a "safe" QB and I do like that,

Not at all the case, he just hasn't been able to play in an "agressive" offense yet. I think you'll agree eventually.

very low YPA and if you look Quan's YPC dropped dramatically after Blake was benched. In Josh's case it's not the arm so I'm hoping it's just experience.

The same reasons King's early career numbers were mediocre, all QBs have to go through a learning curve.

I'd hate to see us turn into a conservative team and I think that's what King does to an offense.

I think you'll find that King, with weapons he's never had before, you will see a very exciting offense. King's best asset is his ability to improvise, and he'll create extra time for Q and Fitz to get open. It will be scary.

Again, my point is that a lot of these "opinions" on King are based on misinformation. Preseason can't get here soon enough!

 

[Russ Smith]

Russ,

Good take, but we will agree to disagree.

With a mediocre OL and Keyshawn (possession receiver) and Jacquez Green what defensive coordinator wouldn't blitz every down? Keyshawn won't get behind anyone and Green was a joke and couldn't get off the line against press coverage.

It most certainly was King holding the ball too long, but as you noted all young QBs do that. That's why you should expect McCown to have that problem this year and why I believe in an open competition King would win hands down.

!

Good points. The one thing is remember Gruden came in to install a more open offense and he was so enamored with King that he stuck with Brad Johnson, and then brought in Rob Johnson to compete for the backup job, Rob played more than King that year. Gruden liked what everyone likes about Rob, arm strength and athletic ability, but came to hate what everyone hates about him, holds the ball too long and gets sacked too much.

But the point was Gruden came in wanting to open things up and even he didn't think enough of King to consider him part of that.

I DO hope you're right and obviously if the offensive system calls for being safe, it's hard to blame it on the QB, but I just know every game I saw it seemed like King looked pretty mediocre trying to get the ball out to his WR's.


But I agree we just don't agree and hopefully you'll turn out to be right because that would be good for this team. I think McCown is going to get sacked a LOT this year unless DG really changes the scheme to get rid of the ball quickly, and if that's the case, King will be playing early and often this year.

 

[This_Guy]

But the point was Gruden came in wanting to open things up and even he didn't think enough of King to consider him part of that.

Yes, and that's why Gruden is known as a genius playcaller and a horrible talent evaluator.

Every Tampa fan wents nuts with all the opportunities Gruden gave Rob Johnson. Gruden fell in love with RJ's measureables and brought him in thinking he could polish that turd. Look at the other QBs Gruden has brought to Tampa: RJ, Shane Matthews, Jim Miller, and Brian Greise.

And Brad J was named the starter because he had years of experience in the WCO. King only had two years experience in the Dungy offense which was said to be a high-school offense, a far cry from Gruden's encyclopedia playbook.

I do look forward to pre-season when we can look back and see what happens.

 

[Russ Smith]

Yes, and that's why Gruden is known as a genius playcaller and a horrible talent evaluator.

Every Tampa fan wents nuts with all the opportunities Gruden gave Rob Johnson. Gruden fell in love with RJ's measureables and brought him in thinking he could polish that turd. Look at the other QBs Gruden has brought to Tampa: RJ, Shane Matthews, Jim Miller, and Brian Greise.

.

I'm not a huge Gruden fan either.

I used to be a big Rob Johnson believer but eventually even I realized it's not by accident he gets sacked and hit so much. Great talent, really should be a near Pro Bowl level QB, but he just has this "block" about pass rush he just holds the ball too long.

I've always felt the biggest problem the Bucs offense had beyond Dungy being conservative, was someone in that organization did and apparently still does think Mike Alstott is a great NFL RB. I just don't get it 1 year over 4 YPC, doesn't block, receiving numbers on the decline. I just never got why they seemed so insistent on taking carries away from Dunn in favor of Alstott?

I think Alstott is one of the more overrated players in recent NFL history, he doesn't even score a lot of TD's for a power RB, he's ok in that area but not great. I really expected Gruden to show him the door when he took the job.

 

[This_Guy]

Interestingly enough, those are the two biggest debates among TB fans:

Whether or not King was a scapegoat?

and

Is Alstott a feature back?

Those arguements will draw 10 page threads with people taking hard positions on either side.

 

[BigRedMO]

The radical swing in the importance of the QB position to some posters I believe is at least partly a product of the Plummer experience. We have gone fron the position being the most important on the team to suit anybody up. I think Plummer is going to be a star and was not in a situation conducive to his skills and abilities. That said I feel like some fans feel burned by the high profile expensive QB so refuse to consider any other expensive high profile QB to avoid that situation. I remember the excitement about Plummer, the comparisons with Montana and the national media paying attention to the Cardinals for first time in a long time. Jeff Blake did not help alleviate this "burned " feeling with his play. I never had confidence in him. I like the home grown player who is drafted and developed by the club. I guess I like those guys because the two best I saw Lomax and Hart( free agent) were developed that way. If a team is willing to let Plummer, Blake or King go the question is why can we succeed where they failed? In Plummer I could see the upside of a guy who showed glimpses of great play with lots of coordinator and coaching changes, offensive schemes that did not emphasize his talents and most importantly with little help in the running game. I did not see the potential in Blake and I do not see it in King.

 

[Russ Smith]

The radical swing in the importance of the QB position to some posters I believe is at least partly a product of the Plummer experience. We have gone fron the position being the most important on the team to suit anybody up. I think Plummer is going to be a star and was not in a situation conducive to his skills and abilities. That said I feel like some fans feel burned by the high profile expensive QB so refuse to consider any other expensive high profile QB to avoid that situation. I remember the excitement about Plummer, the comparisons with Montana and the national media paying attention to the Cardinals for first time in a long time. Jeff Blake did not help alleviate this "burned " feeling with his play. I never had confidence in him. I like the home grown player who is drafted and developed by the club. I guess I like those guys because the two best I saw Lomax and Hart( free agent) were developed that way. If a team is willing to let Plummer, Blake or King go the question is why can we succeed where they failed? In Plummer I could see the upside of a guy who showed glimpses of great play with lots of coordinator and coaching changes, offensive schemes that did not emphasize his talents and most importantly with little help in the running game. I did not see the potential in Blake and I do not see it in King.

The thing with Jake was it was hard to argue he didn't get a chance to shine here, he played week after week with no threat of benching. If anything that was bad for him, but it's a very atypical situation for a young QB in the NFL to not have to worry about losing his job.

Jake and King are really polar opposites, Jake's first 6 years were exciting plays sandwiched around horribly disastrous decisions and long periods of mediocre play. He didn't elevate the play of his team, he didn't improve anywhere near what you hoped, and he drove Cards fans nuts with mistakes and then the same I gotta stop doing that comments.

King from what I saw was completely opposite, not a lot of mistakes, but he didn't do ANYTHING to make you think you were looking at a potentially really good player. Not compelling at all, sort of like what I had for dinner, it was ok but not something I can't wait to eat again.

As much a Jake basher as I'm supposed to be even I was gushing about his potential during his rookie year when he did so well. I was just a lot quicker than most to jump off the bandwagon when he didn't follow through on the early excitement and promise.

I still am somewhat skeptical of how his career in Denver will play out but he clearly proved he can be a better player in an offense tailored for him, if he can stay healthy in that offense. Nobody was more surprised than me at how he played last year. Certainly didn't hurt to play in a division with 3 of the weaker defenses in the NFL as opponents, but he was a totally different player last year after the bengal game.

My fear with King is he's going to be playing a LOT more than we're used to with backups because of the number of hits Josh is going to take if he doesn't learn to get rid of the ball.

 

[Mr.Dibbs]

King is good. He's young and experienced. I think it's good competition for both guys. Josh knows the job is his, but if he doesn't live up to Green's hype, King is just waiting for his shot. It's a good scenario.

 

[BigRedMO]

Plummer did not shine here because he had no running game. All you have to do is look at what he did in Denver. In 1998 he had a good year. In 98 there was a running game. Plummer threw too many interceptions in 98 in comparison with TD passes but the team did not really come together untill midway 98. If he had had a running game that whole year his stats would have been even better. No QB can win without a running game. It is too easy for a defense to defend a one dimensional attack. I think the Cards went with King was because he would work cheaper than a veteran starter. Even when Plummer was here Bidwill would not invest in a good backup in case Plummer got hurt. Bidwill is just too cheap for that. With injuries I believe it is essential to have a back up who has been a recent starter and can come in and win. I think a veteran starter caliber back up on the team would have helped Plummer develope too just like it would help McCown. Competiton pushes players to perform. A quality veteran back up is competition on the practice field even if coach says the job belongs to the rookie. Team wins and the young QB wins. Everybody wins.

 

[jmr667]

I say McCown gets the kid glove treatment just because everyone in Cardinals land got completely burnt out on even discussing QB's over the last couple years. Just hearing Plummer good/bad talk makes me tired all over.
I hope McCown is in the top 5 in QB stats this year so we won't have to go over the same arguments about whether its the QB or OL, or RB, or defense, or OC, or color of the grass in the stadium...

 

[40yearfan]

Plummer did not shine here because he had no running game. All you have to do is look at what he did in Denver. In 1998 he had a good year. In 98 there was a running game. Plummer threw too many interceptions in 98 in comparison with TD passes but the team did not really come together untill midway 98. If he had had a running game that whole year his stats would have been even better. No QB can win without a running game. It is too easy for a defense to defend a one dimensional attack. I think the Cards went with King was because he would work cheaper than a veteran starter. Even when Plummer was here Bidwill would not invest in a good backup in case Plummer got hurt. Bidwill is just too cheap for that. With injuries I believe it is essential to have a back up who has been a recent starter and can come in and win. I think a veteran starter caliber back up on the team would have helped Plummer develope too just like it would help McCown. Competiton pushes players to perform. A quality veteran back up is competition on the practice field even if coach says the job belongs to the rookie. Team wins and the young QB wins. Everybody wins.

Holy cow, we're still talking about Bidwill being cheap? Where have you been the past two years?

 

[Russ Smith]

Plummer did not shine here because he had no running game. All you have to do is look at what he did in Denver. In 1998 he had a good year. In 98 there was a running game. Plummer threw too many interceptions in 98 in comparison with TD passes but the team did not really come together untill midway 98. If he had had a running game that whole year his stats would have been even better. No QB can win without a running game. It is too easy for a defense to defend a one dimensional attack. I think the Cards went with King was because he would work cheaper than a veteran starter. Even when Plummer was here Bidwill would not invest in a good backup in case Plummer got hurt. Bidwill is just too cheap for that. With injuries I believe it is essential to have a back up who has been a recent starter and can come in and win. I think a veteran starter caliber back up on the team would have helped Plummer develope too just like it would help McCown. Competiton pushes players to perform. A quality veteran back up is competition on the practice field even if coach says the job belongs to the rookie. Team wins and the young QB wins. Everybody wins.

I don't want to turn this into another Jake debate but it's a common myth that 98 we had a run game, team won, jake played well end of story. We actually rushed for more yardage at a MUCH higher YPC in 2002 for example than we did in 98, yet we went 5-11 in 2002. We absolutely DID have more rushing yards and a better YPC in 98 than in 97 or 99 but alot of that was because an injured Jake played so badly in 99 we were always behind and throwing, and always running against stacked lines wanting to force us into passing situations. Jake should not have been playing in 99 he clearly wasn't healthy and it showed. Jake in 97 was a rookie and predictably up and down.

There are 2 ways to look at 98, run game took off when Jake started to play better and cut back on picks, or Jake started to play better and cut back on picks when the run game improved. Frankly it's impossible to prove which is correct.

All QB's are better with a run game but the whole the only year Jake had a 1000 yard rusher in Arizona he took them to the playoffs stuff is really just semantics. The defense was the reason that team went to the playoffs, all the forced turnovers, and a weak schedule. The team rushed for more yards in 2002 without the luxury of being in close games where they were running to run game clock. We were a better running team that year but it didn't improve Jake.

last year Jake played a lot better and obviously had a much better run game, I frankly expected Denver's run game to struggle with Jake but Shanahan was smart enough to use Jake's feet to help the run game by forcing defense to account for him. If he can stay healthy that will probably work again this year, just don't personally believe ANY NFL QB can be used that much out of the pocket without getting hurt.

So while I agree that we need a better run game, I don't think that's the only explanation for Jake's career, he had a lot to do with his own struggles here. I personally think Shanahan is the first coach he ever respected enough to listen and get the coaching he needed, he improved immensely in one year in Denver.

 

[BigRedMO]

I will give you an example of cheap. The last couple years Plummer was in AZ going through his ups and downs the Cards had no back up that had seen any real game time despite the uneven play. Why was that? That was because Plummer was making 7 million a year. That was pretty much all that Bidwill was going to spend on that position. The last year Plummer was there it was obvious he was leaving but still Plummer started even though the season was over. Why didnt the Cards start McCown to see what he had?

Bidwill is willling to pay the first stringers good but will not invest much in the reserves. That is a way to cut expenses but appear to the general public as not being cheap. You sign a few flashy stars for big contracts like Smith to generate fan interest. That is my perception. I think King is a cheap backup. The Giants paid Warner a great deal of money to backup Manning. Warner may think he is going to be the starter and he might be for a brief period. In reality Manning is the starter and will get most of the snaps this year. Still the Giants are willing to pay Warner good money as an insurance policy and as a mentor for a young QB. Bidwill is not willing to do that.

Sorry for bringing up Plummer. I know it is a sore point with some.

 

[BigRedMO]

I dont really blame Bidwill for trying to cut corners on expenses. His franchise is a family owned team and does not have as deep pockets as compared with other teams with their stadium luxury box revenues. At one point last year I believe they were $20 million under the cap. I think things will get better when the stadium is completed.

There are some areas that Bidwill has paid a lot of money and got nothing in return. The D line back in the Rice, Swann, Mark Smith and Wadsworth days. Due to injuries and bad attitudes he did not get a return on his investment. In recent years Bidwill has spent a lot of money on the O-line. Of all the Cardinals poor performers these are the guys I am most disgusted with. They cant generate a surge for a running back and they cant pass protect. Maybe part of it was coaching. I would love to see The Cards coax Hanifan away from the Rams to coach the line. I guess Plummer and lack of a run game is like chicken and the egg. He did well in Denver last year though. By the way who is Green's O-line coach?