Warner over 400 yards

[Cbus cardsfan]

because most of the time, they all suck! I wish we could have an argument about who's better instead of who's worse.

it's hard to have that argument when all our good ones are let go to play for other teams.

 

[Cbus cardsfan]

wait a minute we aways have the who is better argument between Fitz and Boldin. Too bad that is probably over after this year as well.

 

[moklerman]

this happened almost a decade ago. when will people actually start living in the present?

I think that's the difference I've been trying to identify. My belief is that you are in "don't expect to win" mode. The team isn't going to win the Super Bowl this year so what's the point of not getting Leinart experience, right?

I also hate the "so-and-so would have done..." comparisons but I don't think the Cardinals would have won yesterday regardless of who was under center. The defense is what it was for much of last year and Rackers hasn't improved either so I just don't see much optimism for this group. Not with the schedule the way that it is. The only hope they had was to come out quick and try to hold on. 4-1 or 5-0 would have been a cause for hope. 2-2 won't be enough.

But, those with comparisons of Eli dancing in their head will soon get their wish. I'm horrible at predicting games but looking at the schedule, it's hard not to imagine some losses on the horizon and it will be just as pointless as yesterday's last drive to continue starting Warner. Warner can help a team try to win but he can't help a team try not to lose.

 

[moklerman]

last year was an abberation and the only reason he's the highest anything right now is because he played our pathetic swiss cheese defense.

When he does well, it doesn't count? Last year didn't count and this year doesn't count but 2+ years ago is the truth because the Packers' and Favre's struggles had nothing to do with the absolute absence of a running game and only 1 viable WR. Okay. Got it.

 

[nashman]

I agree with Mitch, I was pleased that Warner was pissed and came out and made a game of it. Most QB's including one Matt Leinart would not have been able to put that first half behind them and come out firing like Kurt did. The end result sucks obviously but I like the fact we fought back and didn't lose 56-7 which our teams of the past would have. Hopefully this game sticks in all the players heads and they come out pissed off and take it out on Bills and Cowpukes at home. If they handle the Bills and Cowboys at home and Kurt plays well, would you all still be calling for Leinart? Just curious.

 

[Cheesebeef]

When he does well, it doesn't count?

I didn't say it doesn't count. I just think it's an abberation as two of the last three years he's been a pedestrian QB and through three games this season, he continued to look like a pedestrian QB. Sure, he looks great now because he played us, but I'm willing to bet as the season goes on, we'll see 2 of the last 3 years (and 2 of the first 3 games this year) Brett vs. last year's shining moment in the sun.

Last year didn't count and this year doesn't count but 2+ years ago is the truth because the Packers' and Favre's struggles had nothing to do with the absolute absence of a running game and only 1 viable WR. Okay. Got it.

Funny, you do realize that Favre had absolutely no running game (the worst in the league) when he put up his best numbers through the first half of last season, right? Aberration.

But here's the ultimate bottom line, it doesn't even matter what Favre does or doesn't because Warner STILL isn't close to being the player he is and hasn't been except one three year period that occurred almost a decade ago.

 

[Cheesebeef]

I think that's the difference I've been trying to identify. My belief is that you are in "don't expect to win" mode. The team isn't going to win the Super Bowl this year so what's the point of not getting Leinart experience, right?

pretty much. Warner's too much of a tease and the D can't deal with adversity. We may win 8 or 9 games, but I don't give a crap about that considering that's our ceiling with Warner. That being said, I've said a couple times I'm willing to wait another couple games to see if I'm ultimately wrong about Warner. Give him this week and next week and see if he reverts back to week 1 and 2 form or 4th quarter week 3 and 4 form. If he plays well, ride it out. If he doesn't, make the change cause the season's over anyway.

 

[Gambit]

Cheese, I really don't know what you expect from a QB. Favre just had one of his best statistical years in 07, went to the pro-bowl, NFC Championship and is currently the highest rated QB in the NFL on a new team, new system, little training camp and in a new conference.

only because he played the Cardinals.

 

[artp]

Turnovers are what we get with Warner. We knew that going in. its not going to change. The Cardinals are not a solid enough team RB, OL, Defense, etc to win with Leinart yet. Warner can put up numbers, and with our Defense, we're going to need them.

 

[moklerman]

But here's the ultimate bottom line, it doesn't even matter what Favre does or doesn't because Warner STILL isn't close to being the player he is and hasn't been except one three year period that occurred almost a decade ago.

Just as my personal bias skews my perception I hope you'll realize why I feel your bias is devaluing your opinion on the subject. I can't defend Warner's horrible first half but I'm also not going to ignore his good play either. Much like your Favre evalution, I think you are focusing on the negatives and accepting them as gospel while ignoring and/or discounting any of the positives.

Warner did implode in the first half but it was a strange game all around and the Jets were 100% ready for what the Cardinals were going to do. Warner didn't overcome the challenge in the first half but Cheese, I know you know enough about football to recognize that the coaches put the whole offense in a BAD situation. We all know Warner's mistakes because they are centered and replayed very nicely many times but when he tried to get rid of the ball quick, I can think of three different plays where the receiver didn't have his head around. That's not on Warner but it led to two interceptions.

I guess I argue with you because I generally get the impression that you feel the other 10 guys are doing their job well enough on offense and Warner's back there screwing it all up. If only that were true, I would be at the front of the line with you calling for Leinart to be in there for the good of the future. It is quickly looking like they might as well put him in there anyway and let him (hopefully) grow with the rest of them. The coaches and players certainly don't look ready or worthy of a playoff spot right now.

 

[Cheesebeef]

I guess I argue with you because I generally get the impression that you feel the other 10 guys are doing their job well enough on offense and Warner's back there screwing it all up.

WRONG. good lord man, why don't you go to any thread about Levi Brown or Edgerrin James and see that I lay plenty of blame at their feet also. How you get the above impression is all about your obsessiveness with Warner, not what my opinion is mokler. I can't say enough how much your bias clouds your judgement here. I am, and have ALWAYS been an equal opportunity offender calling out what sucks out loud on this team and to argue otherwise is laughable.

 

[LVCARDFREAK]

16 games with two different HCs ain't plenty of time. Just ask the Giants or Redskins.

Yet you were one on this board who applauded the decision even saying you like Matt but understand why Warner was named the starter.

If this team is 2-6, 2-7, sure throw Matt in there, but to give up after a 2-2 record and throw discourse into the organization by benching the starter now, is just, well, borderline ********.

 

[Russ Smith]

I agree with Mitch, I was pleased that Warner was pissed and came out and made a game of it. Most QB's including one Matt Leinart would not have been able to put that first half behind them and come out firing like Kurt did. The end result sucks obviously but I like the fact we fought back and didn't lose 56-7 which our teams of the past would have. Hopefully this game sticks in all the players heads and they come out pissed off and take it out on Bills and Cowpukes at home. If they handle the Bills and Cowboys at home and Kurt plays well, would you all still be calling for Leinart? Just curious.

We have no idea what Matt would have done after a half like that because Matt has never had a half like that.
Not many QB's have, most never get to play the 2nd half after a half like that.

 

[Arizona's Finest]

We have no idea what Matt would have done after a half like that because Matt has never had a half like that.
Not many QB's have, most never get to play the 2nd half after a half like that.

:notworthy

I am with Cheese in giving it two more weeks. If we are 2-4 (even if Warner has two perfect games) its Matt Leinart time after the bye week buckos.....

The sad thing is with the Niners going to NE (with Belichek having an extra week) and SEA going to NY next week we STILL might be in play for the division at that point.

God bless the NFC West.

 

[Cheesebeef]

Yet you were one on this board who applauded the decision even saying you like Matt but understand why Warner was named the starter.

correct. what's your point? I still think Kurt should be the starter until he completely hangs himself. I've said that many times in multiple threads the last couple days.

If this team is 2-6, 2-7, sure throw Matt in there, but to give up after a 2-2 record and throw discourse into the organization by benching the starter now, is just, well, borderline ********.

again, you're (and I'm) right - giving up NOW would be ********, which I why I've said multiple times on numerous threads that I wouldn't pull Kurt NOW, but if he looked like crap and we were 2-4 at the bye I'd make the change cause the season was over with already. Waiting for us to go into a six or seven game losing IS ******** though. The season is over if we're 2-4 with a roadie against Carolina up next so, with the bye week sandwhiched in there, you ive the kid a full week to get adjusted to being starter again and 10 games to make a decision and then either you press forward with him or you move on altogether.

 

[Cheesebeef]

:notworthy

I am with Cheese in giving it two more weeks. If we are 2-4 (even if Warner has two perfect games) its Matt Leinart time after the bye week buckos.....

yeah, this I disagree with. If this week and the fourth Q of the Skins game were aberations and Warner plays two perfect games and we lose, be all means, let him keep starting. My point was if he looks like I fear he will then we know that no matter what, we're screwed back there.

 

[Arizona's Finest]

yeah, this I disagree with. If this week and the fourth Q of the Skins game were aberations and Warner plays two perfect games and we lose, be all means, let him keep starting. My point was if he looks like I fear he will then we know that no matter what, we're screwed back there.

See this is where I take exception. I was being a little extreme about the perfect games but the name of the game is winning. Right or wrong that onus falls on Warner and its up to Wiz to see if the kid sparks the team at that point.

 

[Cheesebeef]

See this is where I take exception. I was being a little extreme about the perfect games but the name of the game is winning. Right or wrong that onus falls on Warner and its up to Wiz to see if the kid sparks the team at that point.

if Warner's playing well and putting up 25 plus points and limiting his turnovers and the D just can't stop anyone, it would be coaching suicide to pull that guy. The onus doesn't solely fall on Warner to lead this team to wins.

 

[LVCARDFREAK]

correct. what's your point? I still think Kurt should be the starter until he completely hangs himself. I've said that many times in multiple threads the last couple days.



again, you're (and I'm) right - giving up NOW would be ********, which I why I've said multiple times on numerous threads that I wouldn't pull Kurt NOW, but if he looked like crap and we were 2-4 at the bye I'd make the change cause the season was over with already. Waiting for us to go into a six or seven game losing IS ******** though. The season is over if we're 2-4 with a roadie against Carolina up next so, with the bye week sandwhiched in there, you ive the kid a full week to get adjusted to being starter again and 10 games to make a decision and then either you press forward with him or you move on altogether.

Dont disagree with that. Didnt see your earlier posts. I would probably give him a little more leeway than a few more weeks, but the principal is the same.

I think you dont start talking about Leinart until we are 2-6, 2-7. Mainly because the Cards play in the NFC west and it wouldnt suprise me if they finsihsed 8-8 and won the division. I know your take on that from the earlier posts, but damn, even if it is tainted by a poor record, making the playoffs would be a huge step. I am not willing to give up on that so early.

 

[Zeno]

Here we go.

Matt has had plenty of time to "show us".

16 starts is plenty of time?

 

[moklerman]

How you get the above impression is all about your obsessiveness with Warner, not what my opinion is mokler.

I think it has more to do with your thoughts in the threads that I do read. You have frequently discounted the good games that Warner(and Favre) has had. Now, when he's had a bad game the "I told you so" tone to your post pops up. I do think you know your stuff, especially about the Cardinals but you have some kind of bias against certain QB's.

Using Favre as an example, he had a 30 TD pro bowl year in 2004, fell off in '05 & '06 due in large part to his surrounding cast and in '07 was back to pro bowl form and has started this year pretty well. Overall, he's shown for over a year now that he's still one of the best, continuing his career of doing much the same. How is it that those two years aren't the abberation and the other 16 the norm? Even at his current age?

The predictable coaching, poor running game, poor blocking, questionable defense and lack of depth on defense not to mention the shaky kicking game are all much more important to this team right now. Warner nor Leinart will be able to stabilize or excel with any of that other stuff going on.

 

[Cheesebeef]

I think it has more to do with your thoughts in the threads that I do read.

maybe that's because most of what you read (or at least respond to) has to do with Warner as you don't care about the rest of the team.

You have frequently discounted the good games that Warner(and Favre) has had.

No I haven't. I haven't discounted them for Warner. I just think they're few and far between and have said so and why. As far as Favre, we'll see what happens the rest of this season. You continue to hammer this point home for some reason but I'm not sure what it gets you, especially considering that Warner hasn't been anywhere near even 2004 Favre's level since 2001. But keep pounding away if you must.

Now, when he's had a bad game the "I told you so" tone to your post pops up. I do think you know your stuff, especially about the Cardinals but you have some kind of bias against certain QB's.

you're right. I have bias against QBs who turn the ball over a lot because I believe if you win the battle of turnovers (see the first two games) your chances of winning are much better and when you lose the battle of turnovers (see the last two games) you've got almost no shot. Did you see the praise I heaped on Warner during the first two games? I call 'em like I see him. No bias, no nothing. He looked great and protected the ball the first two weeks. The next week, he started to look shaky and then melted down in the fourth quarter and then the week after that, he melted down on the opening drive. There ain't bias in there. It is what it is.

 

[moklerman]

maybe that's because most of what you read (or at least respond to) has to do with Warner as you don't care about the rest of the team.

Compared to some, for sure. Of course, I haven't exactly been encouraged or welcomed by quite a few too. Jocksniffer, stupid, idiotic, etc. I suppose I should have just lied and said I was a long time fan when I first showed up. That's alright, I know that post on a variety of subjects around here even though the Warner related topics are the ones that get the majority of the interaction and accusation.

No I haven't. I haven't discounted them for Warner.

I thought that you'd pretty much discounted 2007 because the turnovers he had far outweighed the production. Maybe I'm thinking of someone else. I really don't remember.

The next week, he started to look shaky and then melted down in the fourth quarter and then the week after that,

He only threw 5 passes in the 4th quarter against Washington and the interception was a fluke at best. Not to mention Washington had the ball for 10 minutes in the quarter. See, that's the type of thing that forces me to think that your thoughts on certain subjects aren't particularly clinical.

 

[Redsz]

Mokler, you mention the poor blocking - but I counted three times in which Kurt simply made the wrong choice with the ball. Those were BIG turnovers. They weren't on the line.

I wasn't thrilled with the line play on Sunday. But I think it's a bit of reach to blame the line for some of Kurt's poor choices.

 

[nashman]

Its an assumption to think KW is just going to go out and play like he did against the Jets again. Let see what happens if he plays that poorly in the next 2 by all means bench him and bring on leinart. My guess would be he as well as the team will be fired up with the way that game went and come out firing at home. The thing about KW is he is a QB he has that ability to forget about mistakes and just move on, which say what you want you have to have as a QB, can't let the mistakes linger with you all game. I feel like KW feels extremely bad with how that game played out and will be taking it out on the Bills secondary, and man if Boldin plays this team will be inspired and I for one will not be shocked to see them hand Buffalo their first loss.