Was Leinart this bad? Here, let me answer that for you:

[chickenhead]

My only hope is that Whiz learns from this? He has 5 more years with complete power. It's Buddy Ryan all over again, hand picked favorites over drafted talent at a huge cost to the salary cap, or no cap numbers as it may be.

Well, Ryan and Whiz both started with an 8-8 season, but while Ryan dropped to 4-12, Whiz went to 9-7 and 10-6, with two division titles and one trip to the Super Bowl. Difficult to compare them, even with all the justified criticism Whiz is receiving.

 

[Pariah]

Maybe. I'm not saying that I'd rather have Jordan Palmer or Jimmy Clausen as our starting quarterback. Would you rather have David Carr? Josh Johnson?

There are a lot of bad #2 quarterbacks in the NFL. I think you could debate whether there are more than 15 #2s, but I think that we'd clearly be better with 15 of them.

Fair enough.

For the record, I'd most certainly rather have Carr. Here's my lost of #2s and 3's that I'd rather have as a starter:

Marc Bulger
Brian Broahm
Chris Redmond
Seneca Wallace
Jake Delhomme
John Kitna
Matt Leinart
Shaun Hill
Matt Flynn
Trent Edwards
Tavariaus Jackson
Brodie Croyl
Chad Pennington
Tyler Thigpen
Sage RosenFelds
Kevin Kolb
AJ Feeley
Mark Brunnell
Kellen Clemmons
Jason Campbell
David Carr
Troy Smith
Charlie Batch
Byron Leftwich
Dennis Dixon
Charlie Whitehurst
Billy Volek
Kerry Collins
Rex Grossman

 

[Rivercard]

For the record, I'd most certainly rather have Carr. Here's my list of #2s and 3's that I'd rather have as a starter:

Marc Bulger
Brian Broahm
Chris Redmond
Seneca Wallace
Jake Delhomme
John Kitna
Matt Leinart
Shaun Hill
Matt Flynn
Trent Edwards
Tavariaus Jackson
Brodie Croyl
Chad Pennington
Tyler Thigpen
Sage RosenFelds
Kevin Kolb
AJ Feeley
Mark Brunnell
Kellen Clemmons
Jason Campbell
David Carr
Troy Smith
Charlie Batch
Byron Leftwich
Dennis Dixon
Charlie Whitehurst
Billy Volek
Kerry Collins
Rex Grossman

Ugh, that's pathetic. Should we also count QB's that are not in the league anymore? As per an earlier post, I'd even take a flyer on Jamarcus Russell and just hope he's re-focused.

 

[chickenhead]

This is starting to feel like Hogeboom-Rosenbach-Tupa-Chandler-Buerlein-Schroder-McMahon-Krieg-Case-Esiason-Graham-Brown-Plummer-McCown-King-Navarre.

Between Lomax and Warner/Leinart, only Plummer really made it interesting. I don't want to go back there.

 

[john h]

That's my only point about Leinart.

I don't care if the other player thought he was Satan, he would give us a much, much better chance to win vs. any of the guys on the roster right now.

Winning would have cured any fractures in the locker room, and I think we would be winning this game right now if matty were playing.

That's all... just saying.

I "think" the Cards would have had to pay Matt somewhere around 11 million dollars had they kept him. I may be wrong on that but I certainly would have let him go rather than pay that. You can be sure the Bidwills would have done the same. He is still a third stringer with his new team which tells you something about what they think of him. If he has played this year I did not notice. Leinart was probably better than either Skelton or Hall but that is no reason to keep him if you do not think he is your long term QB. If he ever becomes a starter in the NFL then we can look back and say we made a mistake. As it is I think it was the right move. Our mistake was not going for a real QB in the off season. I would guess we were saving money. QB is not the place to save money and we will likely lose as much in ticket sales as a decent QB would have cost. Whiz has said Hall will start this weekend. I agree with that as it will likely show what most of us think. He is not the QBOTF or even this year. You cannot correct some of his shortcomings which are arm strength, height, hand size, durability. I doubt he can last the season without an injury that will take him out of the game. He seems like a nice guy and perhaps a leader. The announcers noted Sunday that a leader eventually has to produce some wins or you will no longer be considered a leader.

QBs in the NFL are going down everywhere. Last night Romo fractured his shoulder as the Cowboys lost their 5th game. There backup was no Jim Hart. The Cowboys were a favorite to win the East. The niners look good to me although their record does not show it. They have a good young QB and by next year should be the favorites in the west. The Seattle QB is on the way down. We have a lot of teams needing QBs and any team that has two good ones are in a position to get some good deals. We are the favorite to win next week according to the Vegas line. How they reached that conclusion I do not know. What are the odds that Hall will play the entire game this week? I say 50/50. We will need some turnovers, the ball bounce our way, few penalties, no fumbles, and some running that will keep the blitz off of Hall. I feel sorry for Hall. He sure wants to win and perform well but I do not think it is in the cards. All of us would like to be a star in the NFL but we do not have the talent and in the end that is what you must have. You can be likable, an underdog, and a leader but in the end if you do not have it then it will show up on the win loss record. Also to be a leader you eventually have to produce or you quickly lose the respect of your players. Things really look bad for us this year but it was sort of evident from he start with our available QBs. I still cannot get Graves off of my mind and the fact that no one blames him for anything. Most NFL team would have fired this guy years ago with his record. Only Warner gave him two good years. Other than that what has he done in the way of winning. Supposedly GM's put the team together and the Head Coach runs the team. In our organization we do not know who really does what and just what the GM does or does not do.

 

[joeshmo]

I'm not sure what you mean here. I don't follow how Whiz "cut the throat" of Breaston, Patrick and Lyle. Could you be more specific?

I dont get it either. He is apparently not a fan of the RFA rules or tender system. Apparently using RFA tenders within the rules of the CBA equals disrespecting the players.

???

 

[Joe L]

I "think" the Cards would have had to pay Matt somewhere around 11 million dollars had they kept him. I may be wrong on that but I certainly would have let him go rather than pay that. You can be sure the Bidwills would have done the same. He is still a third stringer with his new team which tells you something about what they think of him. If he has played this year I did not notice. Leinart was probably better than either Skelton or Hall but that is no reason to keep him if you do not think he is your long term QB. If he ever becomes a starter in the NFL then we can look back and say we made a mistake. As it is I think it was the right move. Our mistake was not going for a real QB in the off season. I would guess we were saving money. QB is not the place to save money and we will likely lose as much in ticket sales as a decent QB would have cost. Whiz has said Hall will start this weekend. I agree with that as it will likely show what most of us think. He is not the QBOTF or even this year. You cannot correct some of his shortcomings which are arm strength, height, hand size, durability. I doubt he can last the season without an injury that will take him out of the game. He seems like a nice guy and perhaps a leader. The announcers noted Sunday that a leader eventually has to produce some wins or you will no longer be considered a leader.

QBs in the NFL are going down everywhere. Last night Romo fractured his shoulder as the Cowboys lost their 5th game. There backup was no Jim Hart. The Cowboys were a favorite to win the East. The niners look good to me although their record does not show it. They have a good young QB and by next year should be the favorites in the west. The Seattle QB is on the way down. We have a lot of teams needing QBs and any team that has two good ones are in a position to get some good deals. We are the favorite to win next week according to the Vegas line. How they reached that conclusion I do not know. What are the odds that Hall will play the entire game this week? I say 50/50. We will need some turnovers, the ball bounce our way, few penalties, no fumbles, and some running that will keep the blitz off of Hall. I feel sorry for Hall. He sure wants to win and perform well but I do not think it is in the cards. All of us would like to be a star in the NFL but we do not have the talent and in the end that is what you must have. You can be likable, an underdog, and a leader but in the end if you do not have it then it will show up on the win loss record. Also to be a leader you eventually have to produce or you quickly lose the respect of your players. Things really look bad for us this year but it was sort of evident from he start with our available QBs. I still cannot get Graves off of my mind and the fact that no one blames him for anything. Most NFL team would have fired this guy years ago with his record. Only Warner gave him two good years. Other than that what has he done in the way of winning. Supposedly GM's put the team together and the Head Coach runs the team. In our organization we do not know who really does what and just what the GM does or does not do.

No, Leinart's base salary was less than Anderson's. He was going to make a little over 2 million. The kicker was next season but that could have just been spread out into his new contract had he merited it. If he didn't work out, you cut him and spare yourself the burden of paying or giving him a new contract. Keeping Leinart wasn't a money issue, at least not this season.

 

[joeshmo]

we knew that already... Rothlisberger stated a few times that wis hindered his development more than helped it.

The same guy who everyone including coaches, players and insiders alike called Ben an immature arse. The same guy who proved as much by his actions. the same guy who cried to his teammates this offseason telling them how he knows he needs to change his attitude about pretty much everything.

Wis does not like anyone who is in a position to argue with him about his offense,....all those cocky ass big ego having QB's.

You dont think Warner was all up in Wiz and the other staffs grill telling them his opinions up to and including aborting run plays to pass plays at the line of scrimmage. Wiz even joked about this many times. Coach has no problems with big ego's, see Dockett, Fitz, Porter, and a multitude of others.

As for Matt I wont say if he would have been better or worse for one simple reason - There is no way to prove either point. We could have actually been worse.

It all comes down to the fact that after the first 6 games of the season 4 of them on the road we are sitting at 3-3. Did anyone before the Matt demotion or cut think we were going to be any better then that when he was still here?

 

[ASUCHRIS]

Hi! I'm THE SMEL! Hey, have I told you what I think about Matt Leinart? Well...

You must be registered for see images attach

LOL, I'm just shocked that anyone takes SMEL seriously, I take everything he writes as a joke. At that tack, he's pretty damn funny.

 

[moklerman]

This might sound crazy but desperate times and all, what about Culpepper? I know he isn't what he used to be but he can still throw the ball and still wants to play. He's only 33 so it's not like he's ancient. He and Fitz would at least have some kind of connection.

 

[PACardsFan]

This might sound crazy but desperate times and all, what about Culpepper? I know he isn't what he used to be but he can still throw the ball and still wants to play. He's only 33 so it's not like he's ancient. He and Fitz would at least have some kind of connection.

He can still throw the ball, he just can't read a defense. He could never run Whiz's offense. We will not add a QB this year, unless injury necessitates it.

 

[Duckjake]

He can still throw the ball, he just can't read a defense. He could never run Whiz's offense. We will not add a QB this year, unless injury necessitates it.

I wonder is anybody other than Warner can run Whis' offense?

Leinart-NO
Scud-NO
Hall-NO

 

[JeffGollin]

A point is being missed here involving the static vs. the dynamic.

Taking a snapshot in time at the end of preseason, Leinart wasn't as bad as Anderson and Hall in the moment but the coaches must have felt he'd never be good enough for us to win with him.

While it may have been felt that Anderson and Hall were not as good as Leinart in the moment, they had enough upside potential that, in time, they could be developed to a point where we could win with them.

We're still early in that development-curve (and admittedly things look pretty gloomy) but Wiz has already observed that, in his role as a backup QB, Anderson can and is meeting expectations.

With Hall, the issues are - How good can he eventually be? How long will it take for him to get there? And can we afford to wait for that to happen?

The coaches evidently feel that (a) Hall will eventually be good enough. (b) He'll get there quickly enough so that (c) we can afford to be a bit patient.

My own take is that Hall fits a special mold (i.e. short, smart, accurate) but cannot execute the same kind of passing attack that Warner, Leinart or Anderson could. He's short (he often looks like he's throwing out of a man-hole) and has trouble locating open passing lanes (Opposing defenses teams know this, and do everything possible to make him improvise in order to force him into bad decisions). One way to remedy this is to make designed roll-outs and waggles a greater part of our playbook.

(Note - When Hall is forced to improvise under pressure, he has two options - turn left to open up a passing lane or turn right. All opposing defenses have to do is "guess." They may give up a completion 50% of the time, but they'll also crush Hall and force a lot of fumbles the other 50% of the time. If I'm an opposing DC, I like those odds).

 

[joeshmo]

He can still throw the ball, he just can't read a defense. He could never run Whiz's offense. We will not add a QB this year, unless injury necessitates it.

This may be were Wiz went wrong the most. I forgot who but an article recently by one of the local guys wrote how besides running the ball a little more, and running only 2 wide sets out of necessity the Offense is exactly the same as it was under Warner. I am not saying there should be wholesale changes or anything but shouldn't there be some tailoring of the system to your QB's strengths?

Maybe he did and I just read way to much into that article?

 

[kerouac9]

This may be were Wiz went wrong the most. I forgot who but an article recently by one of the local guys wrote how besides running the ball a little more, and running only 2 wide sets out of necessity the Offense is exactly the same as it was under Warner. I am not saying there should be wholesale changes or anything but shouldn't there be some tailoring of the system to your QB's strengths?

Maybe he did and I just read way to much into that article?

That's Urban's article from yesterday: http://www.azcardinals.com/news-and...ormation/6b550118-42f5-4358-bda5-19207eac544c

Money quote:

“We are just trying to do what we think is best for our team,” Whisenhunt said. “There are different games that call for different things, and we are trying to be flexible enough to do that.”

As Dr. Phil would say, "How's that working out for you?" You have the worst offense in the NFL, coach. It's stinktacular. You can't move the ball. The problem isn't that you're giving your rook too much (we heard the same things when #7 struggled early in the Whis regime), the problem is that you're putting your quarterback in an impossible situation.

I get that the WRs are probably the most talented overall unit on the team. The problem is that (1) your WRs haven't been healthy all season and (2) your QB can't get them the ball, anyway. So you're settling for 0 yards when you could get two or four or more 60% of the time.

 

[football karma]

This may be were Wiz went wrong the most. I forgot who but an article recently by one of the local guys wrote how besides running the ball a little more, and running only 2 wide sets out of necessity the Offense is exactly the same as it was under Warner. I am not saying there should be wholesale changes or anything but shouldn't there be some tailoring of the system to your QB's strengths?

Maybe he did and I just read way to much into that article?

One thing I noticed from this past game: when DA can run a "balanced" offensive set -- meaning one where the possibility of pass and run are balanced, he looked pretty good.

When they got in that 2 minute offense, 4 wide look and Seattle simply brought a blitzer off the edge -- things quickly broke down.

 

[freebyrd]

I wonder is anybody other than Warner can run Whis' offense?

Leinart-NO
Scud-NO
Hall-NO

warner couldn't either, thats why he audibled out of so many plays, but since he did so on the fly and made it work, he wasn't raked over the coals for it,

i never appreciated it when he was a ram, because you heard a lot about mike martz and what a genius he was he also had holt and bruce and proel to throw it too,
but i think the real genius in this whole story was and is warner,
his mind and his ability to read and react was uncanny he will make a fantastic offensive coordinator someday

 

[john h]

Yes and the best coach here now coaches KC not the Cards.

WHIZ is not as good as he thinks he is.!!!!

Well, under Whiz we won two division titles and almost won the Super-Bowl. You might say under Kurt we did all that but the fact is he was the head coach and no one in our history ever did better. Those are the facts. Whiz is not our problem. Graves or whoever assembled the team is. They did not address the QB problem when Kurt left. It was apparent to most of the people on this board before the season even started. Place the blame where the responsibility is.

 

[kerouac9]

warner couldn't either, thats why he audibled out of so many plays, but since he did so on the fly and made it work, he wasn't raked over the coals for it,

i never appreciated it when he was a ram, because you heard a lot about mike martz and what a genius he was he also had holt and bruce and proel to throw it too,
but i think the real genius in this whole story was and is warner,his mind and his ability to read and react was uncanny he will make a fantastic offensive coordinator someday

But Bulger was very successful in the same offense after Warner left, and Martz's offenses were able to put points on the board in bunches with other teams after he left the Rams (at least for a while).

I think that I personally underrated Warner's contribution to The Greatest Show on Turf, but I still don't believe that he was the #1 factor. He wasn't able to succeed in a run-first, base offense with the Giants. He wasn't willing or able to establish a running offense here, even when it gave us the best chance to win.

 

[chickenhead]

Warner's ability to read defenses and audible, plus having one of the most versatile run/catch threats to come out of a backfield in Faulk. Very difficult to counter once the lines were set.

 

[kerouac9]

Warner's ability to read defenses and audible, plus having one of the most versatile run/catch threats to come out of a backfield in Faulk. Very difficult to counter once the lines were set.

I'd rank the factors in the Greatest Show on Turf thusly:

1. Personnel around Warner. Arguably four Hall of Fame talents around him in Orlando Pace, Marshall Faulk, Torry Holt, and Issac Bruce. You could run the single wing with those guys and succeed. Add in Az-Zahir Hakim in his prime, and you have personnel that's difficult to create matchups against.

2. Warner's ability to diagnose defenses after the snap. Few if any are better at this. But Manning and Brady are (arguably) better before the snap, which allows them to be successful in a variety of offensive styles and formations.

3. A revolutionary offense. Martz's offensive system was unlike anything that anyone had ever seen. It was designed to defeat the Tampa two by essentially moving the West Coast passing tree six to eight yards downfield, deeper than linebackers and safeties can cover.

I've kind of moved Warner up from #3 to #2 in my list. It's unfair that Warner was twice NFL MVP when I think that the most valuable player on that offense was probably Faulk. But while others have operated efficiently in Martz's offense, no one was able to do it as well as Warner.

 

[azsouthendzone]

I don't get the whole "Matt lost the locker room" theory and how everyone always says that the players didn't have his back. Tim Hightower directly chimed in after the Bears preseason game saying "Matt has taken a lot of heat, and say what you want but he brought it tonight" or something to that effect. Players aren't vocal about QB changes. If they are, it is the coach's job to manage the players and put them in their place. There is a great video from the Bears debacle where the Cards were driving early in the game and one of the Cardinals linemen, forget who, told Leinart straight to his face, on the field "I have never seen this from a rookie QB. Keep it up!" This move was either money related in 2011 or because Whiz had a vendetta. And before someone says that it is time to move on, no it isn't. Talking about it won't change the situation today, but understanding why this move was made could prevent similar moves from happening in the future.

 

[nashman]

Agree azendzone I think the fans have the right to know why we went into the season with what we have at qb. And don't try to sell us the crap that the team wasn't supporting matt I would bet a large majority of the team wishes lienart was still here!

 

[Duckjake]

I dont get it either. He is apparently not a fan of the RFA rules or tender system. Apparently using RFA tenders within the rules of the CBA equals disrespecting the players.

???

I don't know what he means either but I can see how using the RFA tenders within the rules of the CBA could disrespect some players if they are given lower tenders than they feel they deserve.

 

[Bobcat]

No.

Leinart was not this bad.

Can we see Skelton? Could he be worse?

Matt was and is a lot better than any QB we have this year. PEOPLE KENT
WHISENHUNT WAS AND IS OUR BIGGEST PROBLEM. The man has an EGO so large that he has cost this team and franchise deeply.

Now we can really see why he was never really considered for the Pittsburgh Head coaching job. He really mistreated Ben.

BOBCAT