Whiz & Graves Speak at Combine Re: Campbell, Manning, etc...

[Darkside]

Oh holy lord.....



Board meltdown in 3.....2....1.....

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcwest/post/_/id/59442/cards-updates-on-campbell-qb-situation

Graves thinks we are set at QB.
They haven't discussed Kolb's bonus.
I guess we have some positives regarding CC.

I honestly don't think we have any intention of signing Manning or even going after him, unless by some fluke he shows a super-arm like he had before. I don't think they're going to take a chance on that. I think the door is always open, like Graves said, but it would take a miracle, and in the meantime it's motivation for the QB's we do have. Nothing wrong with what Graves or Whis said.

Fans are so, I don't know, inconsistent. We scream at them to develop a QB, but as soon as a shiny new thing presents itself we look away from what we have and we're like, "Grab that dude, he's awesome." Everyone wants the quick answer, like getting the answers to the test, and that doesn't happen in the NFL--even KW wasn't the answer right away when they brought him in. Even he had to be developed to play here with this team and this system and scheme, with these players. KW himself has said many many times that it takes a QB at least 2 years--and usually more--to get aligned with the system and coaches and schemes.

Kolb hasn't been developed here. Some people say he should already be developed, but truth is he came from a totally different system with a totally different scheme with totally different talent. They have to develop him to play within our system, within our scheme, with our talent. That hasn't happened, there wasn't time for it to happen.

Regarding Skelton, he's being developed. He's shown improvement since he got here, and last year showed remarkable improvement given his lack of snaps and repetitions the prior year and then this past year without training camps. That is an example of developing a QB to improve, and all signs are positive. Why ****** his development by taking snaps away from him?

Either we want to develop the QB's we have or we want the shiny thing, the quick answer, the quick hope. And no, we can't have both, because you bring in someone else and you're taking snaps away from both those guys in training camps and practice. You either develop or you plug holes.

I have no issue with anything Graves or Whis said and no issue with how they're going about it. Both QB's are young and raw. Skelton is extremely young and raw and he has shown obvious signs of improvement. Sometimes you can only see improvement on tape--the coaches see that but the fans don't. With Skelton we see it in games.

Next year we'll see it with Kolb in games. We have two young QB's who will fight it out and give everything they have to earn that starting spot. You don't ruin that for anything, I don't care how shiny or nice it once was.

 

[Buckybird]

Darkside I agree acquiring Manning will probably take a miracle healing by him, so I think wearing cardinal red is a longshot.

I can almost hear most on the board meltdown the day he signs with someone else, badmouthing ownership, the snail & even Wiz.

 

[Arizona's Finest]

How wildly off this whole thread topic is. Sando is sometimes overly conservative in his takes and this seems to be case here. Did anyone watch the comment they actually made? They essentially intimated "We will go after Manning"

I also think its hilarious how everyone refuses to give the validity of his coming here a "long shot", understandably steeling themselves to not be let down as usual by the Cardinals.

But we are the favorites. The only other option really is Miami and to me, they had two smart men in Harbaugh and Fisher essentially laugh off clown owner Stephen Ross. They also have a rookie HC who Manning doesn't know from Adam and play in a crazy tough division.

Today's presser was good news of you want PM. To me it sounds like Mike B has told Rod and KW they aRe going to go hard after Manning which was my biggest concern.

Cardinal fans are masochists by nature. We might not end up with him but it's a better then 50% chance on my estimation. Steel yourself from disappointment if you like. We got a real shot here.

 

[Darkside]

How wildly off this whole thread topic is. Sando is sometimes overly conservative in his takes and this seems to be case here. Did anyone watch the comment they actually made? They essentially intimated "We will go after Manning"

I also think its hilarious how everyone refuses to give the validity of his coming here a "long shot", understandably steeling themselves to not be let down as usual by the Cardinals.

But we are the favorites. The only other option really is Miami and to me, they had two smart men in Harbaugh and Fisher essentially laugh off clown owner Stephen Ross. They also have a rookie HC who Manning doesn't know from Adam and play in a crazy tough division.

Today's presser was good news of you want PM. To me it sounds like Mike B has told Rod and KW they aRe going to go hard after Manning which was my biggest concern.

Cardinal fans are masochists by nature. We might not end up with him but it's a better then 50% chance on my estimation. Steel yourself from disappointment if you like. We got a real shot here.

Speaking for myself personally, I'm not steeling myself against a letdown. I don't think we should go after Manning, I think it would be a huge mistake, and I think I posted that (above). I even explained the reasons, because I think we should look toward the future instead of praying for some savior to come relieve our QB situation. I think it's a ******* move and I hope they don't entertain the idea. Where we differ is you think they are, and I don't think they're even looking (unless some freak thing happens).

 

[Arizona's Finest]

Speaking for myself personally, I'm not steeling myself against a letdown. I don't think we should go after Manning, I think it would be a huge mistake, and I think I posted that (above). I even explained the reasons, because I think we should look toward the future instead of praying for some savior to come relieve our QB situation. I think it's a ******* move and I hope they don't entertain the idea. Where we differ is you think they are, and I don't think they're even looking (unless some freak thing happens).

We are on such different level planes of thinking I dont even know it would be worth commenting. Shouldnt go after Manning? Don't think they are looking? If they weren't looking they would say "we are happy with what we got" like the Texans have done with Matt Schaub. Weve been looking toward the future QB for going on 50 years now. Bottom line you take 3 years of Manning and maybe Skelton is QBOF at that point or you get someone else.

The good news is the tea leaves are saying the Bidwills agree with my line f thinking and not yours.

 

[Darkside]

We are on such different level planes of thinking I dont even know it would be worth commenting. Shouldnt go after Manning? Don't think they are looking? If they weren't looking they would say "we are happy with what we got" like the Texans have done with Matt Schaub. Weve been looking toward the future QB for going on 50 years now. Bottom line you take 3 years of Manning and maybe Skelton is QBOF at that point or you get someone else.

The good news is the tea leaves are saying the Bidwills agree with my line f thinking and not yours.

Like I said, it's my personal opinion. You're the expert though, and I guess it's good for you that the organization "agree's with your line of thinking". Perhaps they should just ask you what to do regarding all their moves. It would, actually, explain alot the last 2 years.

 

[Phrazbit]

I dont know what else they were supposed to stay. They aren't even allowed to say "We want to sign Manning", and they certainly didnt say anything to slam the door.

As for CC, I think they will franchise him. I hope I am wrong, but I think they will do the same thing they did with Dansby, franchise him for a few years before making a real effort to sign him.

And unless you think Manning is absolutely toast and that his doctors are feeding him lies then I cant comprehend how someone could be totally against signing Manning.

Seeing the way concussions have effected careers, how they become more frequent and more severe the more you've had, knowing that this is Kolb's 3rd and it took him roughly 10-11 weeks before he could even work out again, I have no expectation that Kolb will ever be a player capable of playing a full season.

So, even if you buy into his talent (which I obviously dont), Kolb's health should be forcing the Cardinals to look elsewhere for QB talent, both in the short and long term.

 

[Darkside]

I dont know what else they were supposed to stay. They aren't even allowed to say "We want to sign Manning", and they certainly didnt say anything to slam the door.

As for CC, I think they will franchise him. I hope I am wrong, but I think they will do the same thing they did with Dansby, franchise him for a few years before making a real effort to sign him.

And unless you think Manning is absolutely toast and that his doctors are feeding him lies then I cant comprehend how someone could be totally against signing Manning.

Seeing the way concussions have effected careers, how they become more frequent and more severe the more you've had, knowing that this is Kolb's 3rd and it took him roughly 10-11 weeks before he could even work out again, I have no expectation that Kolb will ever be a player capable of playing a full season.

So, even if you buy into his talent (which I obviously dont), Kolb's health should be forcing the Cardinals to look elsewhere for QB talent, both in the short and long term.

Kolb's concussions are a concern, that's a valid point, not to mention the fact that he played totally scared last year. That being said, regarding Manning, I do think he's shot, but the point is, even if he isn't, look at his age, he's what, 36? We'd get a year or two of productive play out of him at most and lose developing Kolb and Skelton, at least somewhat, due to snaps. We don't know Kolb is shot (with concussions) and Skelton definitely isn't shot. I don't see why we limit their development for a guy at that age and with that risk, I don't care who he is. We're setting our team back years, for a chance, for a maybe, for a what-if, of maybe one or two years at most. Meanwhile you lose a Kolb or Skelton for that and you lose a decade of profitable play, the window of development at their youth is only open for so long, only because we weren't willing to wait a year or two for them to develop. It makes zero sense to me.

 

[Phrazbit]

Kolb's concussions are a concern, that's a valid point, not to mention the fact that he played totally scared last year. That being said, regarding Manning, I do think he's shot, but the point is, even if he isn't, look at his age, he's what, 36? We'd get a year or two of productive play out of him at most and lose developing Kolb and Skelton, at least somewhat, due to snaps. We don't know Kolb is shot (with concussions) and Skelton definitely isn't shot. I don't see why we limit their development for a guy at that age and with that risk, I don't care who he is. We're setting our team back years, for a chance, for a maybe, for a what-if, of maybe one or two years at most. Meanwhile you lose a Kolb or Skelton for that and you lose a decade of profitable play, the window of development at their youth is only open for so long, only because we weren't willing to wait a year or two for them to develop. It makes zero sense to me.

Well, if Manning is healthy you gain the possibility of contending for superbowls during those 2 or 3 years. And I think the only player's development at risk is Skelton, and he is still young enough that he could marinate for a few years behind a talented QB.

In my opinion there is absolutely no risk. Because I dont expect Kolb to magically turn into a franchise quality QB. He is going to be 28 next year, I dont see him developing and I do see him inevitably getting injured. Between the likelyhood of Kolb getting either hurt or benched I think we will almost assuredly end up with Skelton as the starter.

So, lets say we hypothetically get Manning and worse case scenario... he gets injured again, and we end up with Skelton as the starter.

That is why I see this as a no risk situation. We stay with our current situation, a very strong chance Skelton ends up being the starter, we move on Manning, worse case scenario... Skelton ends up starting.

 

[Buckybird]

Well, if Manning is healthy you gain the possibility of contending for superbowls during those 2 or 3 years. And I think the only player's development at risk is Skelton, and he is still young enough that he could marinate for a few years behind a talented QB.

In my opinion there is absolutely no risk. Because I dont expect Kolb to magically turn into a franchise quality QB. He is going to be 28 next year, I dont see him developing and I do see him inevitably getting injured. Between the likelyhood of Kolb getting either hurt or benched I think we will almost assuredly end up with Skelton as the starter.

So, lets say we hypothetically get Manning and worse case scenario... he gets injured again, and we end up with Skelton as the starter.

That is why I see this as a no risk situation. We stay with our current situation, a very strong chance Skelton ends up being the starter, we move on Manning, worse case scenario... Skelton ends up starting.

Your logic & reasoning makes perfect sense, but I'm telling you conventional wisdom says don't do it unless he's close to being ready or shown that. The Cardinals as an organization are pretty conservative & that starts with the owner. The 7-2 finish makes them think that they can be a playoff team this year with a couple of more pieces & who knows when you get in.

Unless Manning is close to being healthy when Kolbs bonus is due, it isn't going to happen IMO given those reasons & rational football logic. JMHO

 

[Cbus cardsfan]

Plus, to add fuel to the fire, they mentioned on KTAR early today that Graves likes Trent Richardson as their first round pick if he is available

I was thinking about that yesterday. For some reason, the last week or so, I have this feeling that the Cards are going to let Wells go. I don't think they should, or don't know why they would, but I just have a suspicion that he's not going to be on the team next year.

I really like Trent Richardson and have always thought he was better than Mark Ingram but don't really want to use the #13 pick on him.

 

[Mitch]

Re: Levi Brown and how the Cardinals do contracts...

The Cardinals said they "have a figure in mind" for Levi Brown.

Chances are---that figure is not going to make Brown or his agent happy---in all likelihood, they are going to take it as an insult.

Let's look at the numbers---Brown has made over $20M the past three years. His salary last year was $8.2M.

Anyone think that Brown was a value at $8.2M?

It's likely that Brown and his agent think he was, especially in light of the kudos he received from CKW and RG.

Therefore---would Brown be willing to see a reduced figure in his game checks from last year?

Not likely.

What this means is---the Cardinals' figure needs to be in line with what Brown made last year---as in a 3 year deal worth $25M...that averages $8.3M.

So here's where the negotiations break down---and Brown gets his release---he will say he will continue to negotiate with the Cardinals---but that is a leverage ploy, because when players get offers they feel are insults, they want to go where they "feel the love."

Brown will hit the market at an optimum time. Not only is there a dearth of good, young tackles in the free agent pool (especially ones who are injury and weight issue free)---AND---with carry over cap space several teams have wads of money to parlay into free agent signings.

The combination of those two realities means that Brown will get a very good offer.

His new contract may not work out to make him an average of $8.33M a year---but it will be sizable enough to make him feel like he feels the love.

The good news for the Cardinals is that with Levi Brown the ridiculous backloaded contracts end, thanks to the new slotted rookie salaries.

But---unless the Cardinals find the means to get Demetrious Bell or Jared Gaither to feel their love---the #13 pick is going to have to be Levi Brown's replacement.

 

[LoyaltyisaCurse]

Ugh... either we overpay an underachiever or we lose yet another first round pick.

 

[LoyaltyisaCurse]

I think Richardson is a stud. Talk about toughness.

Problem is he just had a knee procedure---which is good in that he might be staring the Cardinals in the face at #13---but might be risky, especially since both Beanie and Ryan Williams are coming off knee surgeries.

If the Cardinals don't re-sign Levi Brown---this draft HAS to be for need, because you just know that the FO's efforts in free agency are going to be frustratingly fruitless and quiet.

IF THE team drafts TR I may throw a shoe through my TV.

 

[cardpa]

Kolb's concussions are a concern, that's a valid point, not to mention the fact that he played totally scared last year. That being said, regarding Manning, I do think he's shot, but the point is, even if he isn't, look at his age, he's what, 36? We'd get a year or two of productive play out of him at most and lose developing Kolb and Skelton, at least somewhat, due to snaps. We don't know Kolb is shot (with concussions) and Skelton definitely isn't shot. I don't see why we limit their development for a guy at that age and with that risk, I don't care who he is. We're setting our team back years, for a chance, for a maybe, for a what-if, of maybe one or two years at most. Meanwhile you lose a Kolb or Skelton for that and you lose a decade of profitable play, the window of development at their youth is only open for so long, only because we weren't willing to wait a year or two for them to develop. It makes zero sense to me.

I agree Darkside. Signing Manning is a bad idea and its two fold. One is you sign Manning you have to jettison Kolb. That leaves Skelton whose development halts the minute Manning is signed. The team gets 1 or 2 years out of Manning and in the meantime nothing happens (as historically has happened with this team) with the development of a replacement.

So the team makes the playoffs the next year or two and bam it is back to where it was when Warner retired. No proven replacement and another comical turnstile at the QB position again.

I would much prefer they build a long term plan so we have a QB for the next 8-10 years. Not a 1 or 2 year deal followed by chaos again. Whiz has not proven to show any ability to develop anyone at the QB position nor has his QB coaches to date.

 

[BigRedRage]

I agree Darkside. Signing Manning is a bad idea and its two fold. One is you sign Manning you have to jettison Kolb. That leaves Skelton whose development halts the minute Manning is signed. The team gets 1 or 2 years out of Manning and in the meantime nothing happens (as historically has happened with this team) with the development of a replacement.

So the team makes the playoffs the next year or two and bam it is back to where it was when Warner retired. No proven replacement and another comical turnstile at the QB position again.

I would much prefer they build a long term plan so we have a QB for the next 8-10 years. Not a 1 or 2 year deal followed by chaos again. Whiz has not proven to show any ability to develop anyone at the QB position nor has his QB coaches to date.

why is skeltons development different with manning a head of him instead of kolb?

 

[Chopper0080]

I agree Darkside. Signing Manning is a bad idea and its two fold. One is you sign Manning you have to jettison Kolb. That leaves Skelton whose development halts the minute Manning is signed. The team gets 1 or 2 years out of Manning and in the meantime nothing happens (as historically has happened with this team) with the development of a replacement.

So the team makes the playoffs the next year or two and bam it is back to where it was when Warner retired. No proven replacement and another comical turnstile at the QB position again.

I would much prefer they build a long term plan so we have a QB for the next 8-10 years. Not a 1 or 2 year deal followed by chaos again. Whiz has not proven to show any ability to develop anyone at the QB position nor has his QB coaches to date.

Here is where this arguement loses me. How will Skelton's development be any less as a #2 behind Manning than as a #2 behind Kolb? How can he get learn less behind a hall of fame QB with a similar body type and skill set, than behind an average QB who plays the game differently because he has a totally different body type and skill set?

Either way, both Manning and Kolb are medical risks, and Skelton is the guy that will play if they are not healthy. So if both risks are equal and your fall back is the same either way, why wouldn't you bet on the player with the highest potential?

 

[Duckjake]

I agree Darkside. Signing Manning is a bad idea and its two fold. One is you sign Manning you have to jettison Kolb. That leaves Skelton whose development halts the minute Manning is signed. The team gets 1 or 2 years out of Manning and in the meantime nothing happens (as historically has happened with this team) with the development of a replacement.

So the team makes the playoffs the next year or two and bam it is back to where it was when Warner retired. No proven replacement and another comical turnstile at the QB position again.

I would much prefer they build a long term plan so we have a QB for the next 8-10 years. Not a 1 or 2 year deal followed by chaos again. Whiz has not proven to show any ability to develop anyone at the QB position nor has his QB coaches to date.

The problem is that the window in the NFL is so short. And if I'm not mistaken the new rookie deals are going to make it even shorter as all but your 1st round picks will have 4 year rookie deals. You only have 2-3 years to win for most teams. Teams just can't keep their players longer than 4-5 years. You have to try to win now.

Well if you play in the NFC. If you are in the AFC you're just somebody for Pittsburgh and New England to play during the regular season.

 

[Proteus]

I really hope we don't use yet another high draft pick on a running back.

 

[daves]

And yes, count me in as worried that the FO hasn't even discussed the Kolb bonus. Um, earth to our FO--it's just around the corner. You might just want to go ahead and talk about that bonus now.

I wouldn't get my panties in a bunch over it. Last year, after weeks of speculation and rumors that DRC would be part of a trade package for Kolb, Whisenhunt said that the thought of trading DRC had "never entered his mind". The next day the trade was done.

I know Whisenhunt and Graves use "football politically correct" phrases, shade the truth, and hold back information. But until then, i didn't think either of them would blatantly lie to put up a false front (even for perfectly legitimate football reasons). But now i know that Whiz, at least, is apt to do exactly that, and this situation is quite similar to last year's in that regard. It's just not credible that the FO hasn't discussed the options around Kolb's bonus before now.

...dave

 

[Cheesebeef]

I wouldn't get my panties in a bunch over it. Last year, after weeks of speculation and rumors that DRC would be part of a trade package for Kolb, Whisenhunt said that the thought of trading DRC had "never entered his mind". The next day the trade was done.

I know Whisenhunt and Graves use "football politically correct" phrases, shade the truth, and hold back information. But until then, i didn't think either of them would blatantly lie to put up a false front (even for perfectly legitimate football reasons). But now i know that Whiz, at least, is apt to do exactly that, and this situation is quite similar to last year's in that regard. It's just not credible that the FO hasn't discussed the options around Kolb's bonus before now.

...dave

completely agreed. the idea of them mentioning that they've discussed the bonus sends a bad message to a player they might be counting on next year. no need to stir up a hornets nest if you don't need to.

 

[Darkside]

Here is where this arguement loses me. How will Skelton's development be any less as a #2 behind Manning than as a #2 behind Kolb? How can he get learn less behind a hall of fame QB with a similar body type and skill set, than behind an average QB who plays the game differently because he has a totally different body type and skill set?

Either way, both Manning and Kolb are medical risks, and Skelton is the guy that will play if they are not healthy. So if both risks are equal and your fall back is the same either way, why wouldn't you bet on the player with the highest potential?

Skelton's development will be set back because with Kolb there is a sense of competition, a sense of fighting for a position that isn't clear. You bring in Manning and that's gone. That can't be understated. He'll still work, but it isn't the same. It's also a sign that the team doesn't believe in you, they're going after outside guys, and that will hinder development. It's psychological as well as physical. The window to develop young players and men is limited, it's very small, and you have to capitalize on it.

And you'd have to get rid of Kolb to bring in Manning. Why is that worth it? Some 36 year old QB who had multiple neck surgeries, with a bad arm?

And you're getting rid of Kolb because of? You say Kolb is a medical risk, but his medical risk is nowhere near Manning's. Manning had freaking neck surgery man, and has loss of strength in the tendons in his throwing arm. Kolb has had 3 concussions that you, and others--who aren't medical doctors by the way--deem a medical risk.

Somehow you're ready to jettison a young QB for some dinosaur who has had all these surgeries because his concussions somehow worry you--yet Manning's surgeries don't worry you at all. Makes no sense. I'd take the younger guy.

I say develop our young talent. Furthermore, I also say if you give Kolb that money to bring him in you put your chips on the table, you don't hedge bets, you go all in and develop Skelton behind him. It's no time to be a wuss. They did it and now it's time to own it and man up and see what he's got. Skelton is motivated behind Kolb, he won't be as motivated behind Manning. I say develop both young guys.

 

[Stout]

completely agreed. the idea of them mentioning that they've discussed the bonus sends a bad message to a player they might be counting on next year. no need to stir up a hornets nest if you don't need to.

No, but it has to be discussed, whether you want to keep him or release him. To not discuss it at all would be stupid. If they're just using media-speak and aren't telling the truth, then that's cool. I wonder too much about this FO, however, to be comfortable in the idea that they're that clever.

 

[Cheesebeef]

Kolb has had 3 concussions that you, and others--who aren't medical doctors by the way--deem a medical risk.

man, are you TRYING to be funny with some of your comments because this is almost as laughable as the Levi's had a better career than AP comment. You don't have to be a medical doctor to know that a guy who's had 3 concussions in limited playing time is a medical risk... especially considering how long it's taken him to recover from those concussions.

 

[Cheesebeef]

No, but it has to be discussed, whether you want to keep him or release him. To not discuss it at all would be stupid. If they're just using media-speak and aren't telling the truth, then that's cool. I wonder too much about this FO, however, to be comfortable in the idea that they're that clever.

my line of thinking with this FO is this... they may be dumb, but they ain't stupid. there's no way in hell that behind closed doors they HAVEN'T talked about this yet Stout... and if they haven't, then may god rest our souls because were truly cheering for the biggest group of complete idiots ever assembled... and as much as I bash the FO, even I don't believe that!