The Reality of Josh McCown - and other musings . . .

[Wild Card]

WC,

We need to get some things straight here.

It is TWO SEPERATE THINGS to think that the QB has not played well and to blame him solely for the loss... For example, last night was not Brett Favre's fault (entirely) that they lost, but the defense also did not give him a chance to win it.

To take another example, Tim Rattay put the 49ers on his back and won the game this weekend. And he has 6 TD passes in 3 games. So the passing game is not the 49ers biggest weakness, whereas it most certainly is the Cardinals biggest weakness.

And in the example of Mark Brunell, I suggest you check out a Redskins Board... EVERY fan is livid that Gibbs won't switch to Ramsey.

And that is what is shocking to me here....Cardinals fans have no experience with success so they are content to have the attitude of losers...

As to your scenario about King, once again, you should know what you are talking about... >>insert Tampa Bay coaching & front office soap opera here<< ...you'll note that it was Dungy who gave Dennis Green a very positive reference on King this offseason and it was Rich McKay who made King a contract offer on the first day of free agency this year, so either way, both like King quite a bit.

T_G:

Ease up on the lectures, sport. You're not nearly as knowledgeable as you think.

You can spare me the detailed explanations about the Packers' and 49ers' poor records not being solely the fault of their QBs. I agree. It wasn't me who claimed, in evaluating Josh McCown's performance, that "the only statistics that matter are 1-4 and 3 TDs."

As for Mark Brunell, why in the wide, wide world of sports would I care what they're saying about him on a Redskins board? Oh, yeah--you're a Redskins fan who's only here because you're a Shaun King groupie.

And your comment about Cardinals fans having "no experience with success" as an explanation for having patience with McCown is the kind of cheap shot I'd expect from a Skins fan. A better explanation is that some of us have confidence in Dennis Green's ability to evaluate QBs for both talent and compatibility with his offensive system. If Green says that McCown's his starter, that's good enough for me.

Finally, in regards to Shaun King, you may be the only person in the world (outside King's immediate family) who cares about the supposed intrigue that resulted in him warming the Tampa Bay bench for the last four years. I assure you that I don't.

What I know is that, in the NFL, most coaches tend to play players who they think will help them win. And the Buccaneers coaches let King sit. When his contract expired, only three teams (Bucs, Falcons, Cards) expressed any interest in King as a free agent--and none as a starter.

Truly, I'm surprised that you're still clinging to the hope that King will establish himself as a quality NFL starter. It seems like that question got answered a long time ago.

But the verdict on Josh McCown is still out. And it makes no sense to pull the plug on a first-year starter, after five games in a new system, when his current OL has played as a unit for less than two games, and he has yet to play a single down with his best receiver.

WC

 

[conraddobler]

T_G:

Ease up on the lectures, sport. You're not nearly as knowledgeable as you think.

You can spare me the detailed explanations about the Packers' and 49ers' poor records not being solely the fault of their QBs. I agree. It wasn't me who claimed, in evaluating Josh McCown's performance, that "the only statistics that matter are 1-4 and 3 TDs."

As for Mark Brunell, why in the wide, wide world of sports would I care what they're saying about him on a Redskins board? Oh, yeah--you're a Redskins fan who's only here because you're a Shaun King groupie.

And your comment about Cardinals fans having "no experience with success" as an explanation for having patience with McCown is the kind of cheap shot I'd expect from a Skins fan. A better explanation is that some of us have confidence in Dennis Green's ability to evaluate QBs for both talent and compatibility with his offensive system. If Green says that McCown's his starter, that's good enough for me.

Finally, in regards to Shaun King, you may be the only person in the world (outside King's immediate family) who cares about the supposed intrigue that resulted in him warming the Tampa Bay bench for the last four years. I assure you that I don't.

What I know is that, in the NFL, most coaches tend to play players who they think will help them win. And the Buccaneers coaches let King sit. When his contract expired, only three teams (Bucs, Falcons, Cards) expressed any interest in King as a free agent--and none as a starter.

Truly, I'm surprised that you're still clinging to the hope that King will establish himself as a quality NFL starter. It seems like that question got answered a long time ago.

But the verdict on Josh McCown is still out. And it makes no sense to pull the plug on a first-year starter, after five games in a new system, when his current OL has played as a unit for less than two games, and he has yet to play a single down with his best receiver.

WC

P.S. That little icon can sometimes be taken either way. It was meant in a positive way and I don't think you are stupid.

I actually enjoyed reading your arguement and it saved me from having to try to express the same thing although not as well as you did.

 

[conraddobler]

OMG - I'm gone all day and this thread is still going?! I'm sure all was very civil - look forward to reading it.

This will go down in the thread hall of fame.

It was such a humble thread to begin with who'd a thunk it.

Threads are like QB's, you just never know



I had to do it...

 

[Cheesebeef]

This will go down in the thread hall of fame.

It was such a humble thread to begin with who'd a thunk it.

Threads are like QB's, you just never know



I had to do it...

Awesome! And just think how funny Tango was when he implied I was talking to myself on this one - man he just never gets tired of being wrong!

It sure is a beast of a thread though.

WC does make a great point - and something I will have to take into consideration - Q hasn't played all year and I expect this offense to get even better when he does - and that's saying something because when the hellwas the last time we scored 34 and 28 points in back to back games - no matter who we were playing. So it's not like I don't see progress - it's just that end of game thing. Very interested to see how we come out against Seattle - that game could completely make our season - at 2-4 with Q coming back and a pretty favorable schedule ahead - who knows. But if we go down 1-5 with another two game road trip ahead of us - this board's gonna be even uglier.

I still think this team totally reminds me of the 1997 team that lost all those heartbreakers at the beginning of the season (thought it was interesting in the thread whereHolian brought up the Kent Graham comparison to Josh and the inability to win close games in 1997 - but then winning most of the close games the next year with Jake).

 

[Brian in Mesa]

WC does make a great point.

Likely due to his being a casual observer. You know, a Dolphins fan who likes to keep up with what the local team is doing, but not enough to actually go to the games. Once a Dolphins' fan always a Dolphins' fan, eh?

Go Cardinals!!

P.S. Don't worry, WC. Someday the team will win at a level you accept. Then you can smile and proudly take your boy to the games and pretend that you were there all along.

 

[This_Guy]

T_G:

Ease up on the lectures, sport. You're not nearly as knowledgeable as you think.

You can spare me the detailed explanations about the Packers' and 49ers' poor records not being solely the fault of their QBs. I agree. It wasn't me who claimed, in evaluating Josh McCown's performance, that "the only statistics that matter are 1-4 and 3 TDs."

As for Mark Brunell, why in the wide, wide world of sports would I care what they're saying about him on a Redskins board? Oh, yeah--you're a Redskins fan who's only here because you're a Shaun King groupie.

And your comment about Cardinals fans having "no experience with success" as an explanation for having patience with McCown is the kind of cheap shot I'd expect from a Skins fan. A better explanation is that some of us have confidence in Dennis Green's ability to evaluate QBs for both talent and compatibility with his offensive system. If Green says that McCown's his starter, that's good enough for me.

Finally, in regards to Shaun King, you may be the only person in the world (outside King's immediate family) who cares about the supposed intrigue that resulted in him warming the Tampa Bay bench for the last four years. I assure you that I don't.

What I know is that, in the NFL, most coaches tend to play players who they think will help them win. And the Buccaneers coaches let King sit. When his contract expired, only three teams (Bucs, Falcons, Cards) expressed any interest in King as a free agent--and none as a starter.

Truly, I'm surprised that you're still clinging to the hope that King will establish himself as a quality NFL starter. It seems like that question got answered a long time ago.

But the verdict on Josh McCown is still out. And it makes no sense to pull the plug on a first-year starter, after five games in a new system, when his current OL has played as a unit for less than two games, and he has yet to play a single down with his best receiver.

WC

Wow.

Once again, NO ONE is blaming all the losses on McCown. Regardless of QB play this team is 1-4 and could also be 4-1. GB is not 1-4 completely because Favre is the QB and Arizona is not 1-4 completely because McCown is the QB.

HOWEVER, it is true that the QB is the single most important position on the field. It is true that a QB is FAR more likely to affect the outcome of any game than any other position.

That being said, it is no coincidence that guys like Warner, Favre, Pennington, Brady are the QBs with the highest winning percentages in the league. It's no coindidence that guys like Ryan Leaf and Akili Smith were not able to win many games at all.

As for why you should care about the Brunell situation, it's obvious if you are paying any attention. Like the Cardinals, the Redskins have a good defense which has put them in position to win every game thus far. The Redskins offense has been bad (yet still ranked ahead of the Cardinals) and has not been able to win more than 1 game. So even though there are problems with protection, play-calling, lack of a running game.....every Redskins fan wants Brunell benched. A QB can make that much difference in an offense, and when you are 1-4 and in a position to win every game, it is the QB's responsibility to win the game. Brunell, like McCown, has not seized any one of the opportunities and so every Redskins fan is willing to bench a QB who is FAR more accomplished than McCown who also carries a cap figure which will be more than McCown will ever pocket in his career.

I would assume that Brunell, like McCown, has very little margin for error before they find the bench.

Is it fair ? no. It's more responsibility than any other posiyion. But that's the way it is. And that's why talent alone does not get you anywhere.

As to your "confidence in Green's ability to judge"...I'm wondering what you thought about his decision to bench Shelton? How about his decision to cut Kendall? Even though everyone here knew that the line would be better with Shelton, it took Green weeks to make the change. Even Green makes mistakes...and he was the guy who went out of his way to sign King in the first place so figure out whether he signed a dud or not.

And further, since you note that the Buccaneer coaches thought King's best spot was on the bench, perhaps you can explain why Chris Simms spent the begining of the season as the #3 QB? Why did Brad Johnson have to lose 6 straight games before he got pulled (and the Bucs promptly won the next game).

You asked about King's record as a starter?----- 14-8. Don't forget that McCown's is 2-5. I guess McCown didn't have a defense that put him in position to make plays....wait...nevermind.

 

[CaptTurbo]

hey don't sell him short. Joselio Hanson, rookie FA CB 5'9" from Texas Tech. Turns out that was his 2nd game, had never heard of him until I looked him up, didn't even know he was on the 49er roster.

He was quoted as saying he was actually out of position, confused the coverage, but he said he's always been taught to get depth to take away throwing lanes so that's all he was doing when Josh threw that ball.

The 9ers had 9 guys on that defense that were lost and no clue what they were doing. In order to make them look good you would have had to have either Jay Fiedler or Josh McCown out there at QB.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

I will admit that is Josh fails it will be because he isn't a good enough leader and thanks for at least admiting he's made progress.

My only beef at all was that the guy needs more time than some want to give him it's just a matter of opinion though.

i haven't called for his benching. i think he does need more time. i've just been making the observation that thus far he doesn't seem to have the stones to lead the team. i'm just worried about that. i think he gets most of the season to show that he does have 'em.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

I really don't want to respond to you because Cheese will be two steps behind you saying " I'm the Wiz!!! An noooboooddyyy beats me" but how is 5 games enough to see if he has enough balls and mental apects of the game to succeed? And how is it that his first games he looks out of sync but in the last two has looked good in the pocket and throwing and reading defenses. This is only incremtal growth? It just tells me that you don't under stand impact positions in football and the way DG system utilizes these. He does not set guys up to fail in his system. He does expect them to play with in the system and they have to this season because they are undermanned. Work in progress means Work in progess...not no cajones after 5 games....Your agenda is to give cheese his opinions...and when he has an original thought.....like JOSH IS the ANSWER...to telll him what he really means....keep up the good fight ...it is noble work your doing out there...

wow. i'd like to see the synapses firing around those thoughts!

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

Ouchie I wasn't talking about you.

Notice in my posts I often say "some people" just because it was in response to your post doesn't mean I was talking about you.

There are people on here (not including you and your bro, both of you guys seem fair in you criticisms) that obsess about Josh McCown and they say in over generalizing form that he is single-handedly losing every game for us. To me that shows a complete lack of knowledge of the game, there is more to a win or a loss than the play of one player.

It seems that some people have had a vendetta against the guy for some reason such as winning against Minnesota last year and not getting us the first pick (which to me is a joke).

Everyone has a right here to an opinion. I don't care what side you are on. I just prefer that people stay consistent (i.e. not switching on how to rate a QB's play based on only when it is convienient for you to prove a point)

IMO Josh should at least start for 8-10 weeks this season. If he doesn't get the job done than I say fine pull him and see if someone else can get the job done.

Also folks please stay open-minded about things. When comparing other players keep things in mind such as the talent of team, the possibility that they are only good in the system that team runs (or bad in it), etc

got ya. all good. and i agree, 10 starts should be enough to prove whether or not he can lead. i sincerely hope he can, but from what i've seen i have my doubts. and i was one of the people that was pissed we won that minny game, but i never held it against josh, he was only doing what any football player would be doing, trying to win.

 

[pete]

i haven't called for his benching. i think he does need more time. i've just been making the observation that thus far he doesn't seem to have the stones to lead the team. i'm just worried about that. i think he gets most of the season to show that he does have 'em.

I was hoping King would get the start after the Atlanta game but that would have been the wrong move. McCown has developed some since then and he would have missed out on that if he were on the bench. These next 4-8 games are huge for him. If he stagnates or regresses, I wonder if Green will turn to Navarre? I get the feeling King is only here as a stop gap in case of an injury.