Matt Leinart vs Kurt Warner (1 Viewer)

[billjohnson]

I think this is the year that Leinart takes over in Arizona. Anyone agree/disagree??

 

[IM666]

I think this is the year that Leinart takes over in Arizona. Anyone agree/disagree??

I'm going to need a few more drinks for this statement to make sense.

 

[Chaka]

I think he'll get his shot, maybe not early in the season but he will get his shot.

Warner has put up mad passing numbers over the years but he hasn't won a lot of games in a long time.

 

[billjohnson]

I'm going to need a few more drinks for this statement to make sense.

Well, stop typing, crawl out of your lazy boy (i know it's been awhile but you will make it), make your way throught the empty pizza boxes all over your floor, open up the fridge, take out a can of natural light and start drinking!

 

[IM666]

Well, stop typing, crawl out of your lazy boy (i know it's been awhile but you will make it), make your way throught the empty pizza boxes all over your floor, open up the fridge, take out a can of natural light and start drinking!

Well then, I guess my statement was made simply because your question seemed to be the combination of:Will this be the year Leinart break out? And Will Warner take over?It's been Leinart's job last year, and until confirmed, still is. So, I guess my confusion is based on your question.Then again, maybe the smarter course of action would be just to gloss over your posts and not waste my time who knows?

 

[billjohnson]

Well, stop typing, crawl out of your lazy boy (i know it's been awhile but you will make it), make your way throught the empty pizza boxes all over your floor, open up the fridge, take out a can of natural light and start drinking!

Well then, I guess my statement was made simply because your question seemed to be the combination of:Will this be the year Leinart break out? And Will Warner take over?It's been Leinart's job last year, and until confirmed, still is. So, I guess my confusion is based on your question.Then again, maybe the smarter course of action would be just to gloss over your posts and not waste my time who knows?

Understood. My apologies for the confusion.

 

[IM666]

Well, stop typing, crawl out of your lazy boy (i know it's been awhile but you will make it), make your way throught the empty pizza boxes all over your floor, open up the fridge, take out a can of natural light and start drinking!

Well then, I guess my statement was made simply because your question seemed to be the combination of:Will this be the year Leinart break out?

And

Will Warner take over?

It's been Leinart's job last year, and until confirmed, still is. So, I guess my confusion is based on your question.

Then again, maybe the smarter course of action would be just to gloss over your posts and not waste my time who knows?

Understood. My apologies for the confusion.

No worries. And for the record, I am sitting in my office, listening to a meeting I don't to, and taking calls from my cell phone

 

[Modog814]

I think he'll get his shot, maybe not early in the season but he will get his shot.

I agree 100% that he gets a shot.

I am actually a believer that he'll be decent this year. He's not going to put up what Warner is capable of putting up (numbers wise) but I think he's improving. Let's also keep in mind that he's only played in 17 regular season games.

In an interview on Sirius NFL I recall Leinart stating that the coaches have had him work this preseason on checking down to his 2nd and 3rd receivers instead of forcing it (which explains all the checkdowns in wk's 1 and 2 of preseason). Also Whisenhunt has stated that Leinart has showed drastic improvement in audibling and playing in the red zone. Here

And Yes Warner put up some huge numbers the last 8 games of the season but let's remember:

1) Who they played : Det, Cin, SF, CLE, Sea, NO, Atl, Stl

2) That they threw an average of 39 times per game in those games.

3) He threw 12 interceptions in those games.

4) He was only 5-5 in the games that he started (5-6 really but he got hurt after 2 passes in the Carolina loss).

5) Leinart was 3-2 in the 5 games he started (although it was a joint effort between the 2QB's), with the 2 losses by a combined 6 points

6) He's 37 years old now.

So, personally I'm not really buying that Warner gives them that much of a better shot at winning than Leinart does.

 

[gianmarco]

And Yes Warner put up some huge numbers the last 8 games of the season but let's remember:1) Who they played : Det, Cin, SF, CLE, Sea, NO, Atl, Stl2) That they threw an average of 39 times per game in those games. 3) He threw 12 interceptions in those games.4) He was only 5-5 in the games that he started (5-6 really but he got hurt after 2 passes in the Carolina loss). 5) Leinart was 3-2 in the 5 games he started (although it was a joint effort between the 2QB's), with the 2 losses by a combined 6 points 6) He's 37 years old now.

1) So did other teams and other QB's. Most others didn't put up the #'s he did.2) What changed from last year to this year to change this "problem"?3) He threw 18 TDs in that same time frame for a 1.5 TD/INT ratio. Is that a problem? He also threw 5 in one game, so aside from that one game, his INTs were not abnormally high.4) There are more players than Warner on the team. Warner wasn't the reason for most of those losses5) There are more players than Leinart on the team. Leinart wasn't the reason for most of those wins.6) He was 36 years old last year when he threw for 27 TDs in despite only starting slightly more than half a season.

 

[Chaka]

And Yes Warner put up some huge numbers the last 8 games of the season but let's remember:

1) Who they played : Det, Cin, SF, CLE, Sea, NO, Atl, Stl

2) That they threw an average of 39 times per game in those games.

3) He threw 12 interceptions in those games.

4) He was only 5-5 in the games that he started (5-6 really but he got hurt after 2 passes in the Carolina loss).

5) Leinart was 3-2 in the 5 games he started (although it was a joint effort between the 2QB's), with the 2 losses by a combined 6 points

6) He's 37 years old now.

1) So did other teams and other QB's. Most others didn't put up the #'s he did.2) What changed from last year to this year to change this "problem"?

3) He threw 18 TDs in that same time frame for a 1.5 TD/INT ratio. Is that a problem? He also threw 5 in one game, so aside from that one game, his INTs were not abnormally high.

4) There are more players than Warner on the team. Warner wasn't the reason for most of those losses

5) There are more players than Leinart on the team. Leinart wasn't the reason for most of those wins.

6) He was 36 years old last year when he threw for 27 TDs in despite only starting slightly more than half a season.

Follow the money.~McNulty

 

[Mordraken]

Re: The winning percentage comments - if one QB is better than the other (dictated by equal turnover/attempt, higher completion percentage (.624 vs. .536), higher touchdown percentage (.060/att vs. .018), higher yards/attempt (7.5 vs. 5.8) - how is it possible to put the loss of a team on the shoulders of the QB with the better stats? It seems to me that there are 22 other guys on the field - plus special teams - that may contribute to that.

I mean - if the defense allows only 14 points when the poorer QB (Leinart) plays but allows 28 points when the better one (Warner) plays... does that justify switching QBs?

I'm a Lienart fan from seeing him in a few college games, and think the Arizona offense is QB friendly, but I'm not so sure that Lienart is a better pick than Warner for as long as they're chasing a playoff spot.

 

[Modog814]

1) So did other teams and other QB's. Most others didn't put up the #'s he did.

Um....Brees? Then Hasselbeck put up 26ypg with 20 TD's and only 8 Int's in starts against these opponents. Hell, even Chris Redman put up 288 ypg 8td's and only 3 Int's in his 3 starts against these opponents. I'm sure there are more we can probably find more.

2) What changed from last year to this year to change this "problem"?

This wasn't so much a problem as a statement, "If you throw 40 times a game the numbers will be there for any decent quarterback. Check Chris Redman again.

3) He threw 18 TDs in that same time frame for a 1.5 TD/INT ratio. Is that a problem? He also threw 5 in one game, so aside from that one game, his INTs were not abnormally high.

One, you can't just exclude a game. Otherwise let's just exclude his 484 yard passing performance and one of his 3 TD performances as well. Two, I'm not saying it was bad, just that it he turned the ball over and turning the ball over doesn't help your team win.

4) There are more players than Warner on the team. Warner wasn't the reason for most of those losses

Very true, he's not the only player on the team, and I didnt' say he was the sole reason for the losses. But 5 INT's in a loss to Seattle is a reason. I'm not going to go looking through the games to see whose fault a loss was, but just as you can't give him fault, can you really give him the credits for the wins?

5) There are more players than Leinart on the team. Leinart wasn't the reason for most of those wins.

Same as number 4. I get your point, but my point isn't taht Leinart was better because he won more, it's that people think Warner gives them a better chance at winning today, and I don't see anything that necessarily supports that.

6) He was 36 years old last year when he threw for 27 TDs in despite only starting slightly more than half a season.

Yup. And don't forget his 17 Int's.

My point isn't that Leinart is better than Warner. At this point, I do believe that Warner is the better QB, but Leinart has more potential, and I just don't believe that Arizona increases their chances of winning simply by putting Warner in.

 

[David Yudkin]

I pointed out in other threads that Warner has been nearly as effective in his other seasons in Arizona. So it's not like the last 8 games were a fluke. In the 23 games Warner played the whole game (remember, he came in in relief quite a few times), he averaged nearly 290 yards passing with 1.75 TD per game. (I forget the exact numbers, but those are pretty close).

And pinning wins and losses on the QB is really misleading. There are 10 other guys on offense, the defense, and special teams to consider.

If you look at how many points the Cards have scored and the yardage they have gained with Warner at QB, those numbers lap the numbers they've produced with Leinart under center.

If Arizona fashions themselves as a playoff contender, their best chance to make the post season likely lies with Warner. If they want to throw in the towel and go into a rebuilding/development mode, then they should just take their lumps and stick with Leinart.

 

[gianmarco]

My point isn't that Leinart is better than Warner. At this point, I do believe that Warner is the better QB, but Leinart has more potential, and I just don't believe that Arizona increases their chances of winning simply by putting Warner in.

Then I don't think you've watched them play or can tell a good QB from a bad one if you believe the statement you wrote.

 

[Chicago Hooligan]

The team is kinda forced to invest more playing time in Leinart, though I can't guess when it will happen during this season. But I can't give him the benefit of the doubt (that I might otherwise) considering how badly he's played in the preseason games. I think Warner has the advantage in terms of giving ARI a better chance to win (slight) and in putting up startable FF stats (significant).

 

[stevegamer]

As a Seahawks fan, I want them to play Leinart. Take a look at his last preseason effort - I'd say it was horrid, but that's being kind.

Leinart is not yet a decent NFL QB, and if Arizona wants to do anything this year, he won't play unless Warner is hurt or the game is decided.

 

[Modog814]

Re: The winning percentage comments - if one QB is better than the other (dictated by equal turnover/attempt, higher completion percentage (.624 vs. .536), higher touchdown percentage (.060/att vs. .018), higher yards/attempt (7.5 vs. 5.8) - how is it possible to put the loss of a team on the shoulders of the QB with the better stats? It seems to me that there are 22 other guys on the field - plus special teams - that may contribute to that.

I mean - if the defense allows only 14 points when the poorer QB (Leinart) plays but allows 28 points when the better one (Warner) plays... does that justify switching QBs?

I'm a Lienart fan from seeing him in a few college games, and think the Arizona offense is QB friendly, but I'm not so sure that Lienart is a better pick than Warner for as long as they're chasing a playoff spot.

Very true, and I wasn't attributing all the losses or wins to one or the other. Nor was I saying that that alone justifies switching QB's. People assume that Warner gives the Cards a better chance at winning, but I have yet to see any proof of that. Sure Warner put up big numbers but he was only .500 in his starts and I gave other reasons why you might discount those stats. In answer to your first questions : It's possible if the QB makes untimely mistakes. Not saying that's the case here but just saying that's when it's possible.

In the end I think they give Leinart a shot because:

a) They have to see what they really have in him. 17 games is not enough to make a judgement IMO.

b) They know Warner isn't the Long term answer, while Leinart may be.

 

[Chaka]

Re: The winning percentage comments - if one QB is better than the other (dictated by equal turnover/attempt, higher completion percentage (.624 vs. .536), higher touchdown percentage (.060/att vs. .018), higher yards/attempt (7.5 vs. 5.8) - how is it possible to put the loss of a team on the shoulders of the QB with the better stats? It seems to me that there are 22 other guys on the field - plus special teams - that may contribute to that.I mean - if the defense allows only 14 points when the poorer QB (Leinart) plays but allows 28 points when the better one (Warner) plays... does that justify switching QBs?I'm a Lienart fan from seeing him in a few college games, and think the Arizona offense is QB friendly, but I'm not so sure that Lienart is a better pick than Warner for as long as they're chasing a playoff spot.

Warner is 15-25 as a starter (or getting at least 20 attempts) since 2002. 2001 is also the last time he started 16 games, which he has only done twice in his career (1999).Say what you want about bad situations but I am bearish on the guy being in for 16 games even if he is winning, and if he isn't winning then the money is on Leinart seeing plenty of action. Either way I am not counting on a full season from Warner.

 

[millertyme1]

Leinart is the new David Carr.

He's not the QB of the future of AZ Cardinals.

 

[Gopher State]

Leinart is the new David Carr. He's not the QB of the future of AZ Cardinals.

Or Leinart is the same as Alex Smith 49's

 

[Modog814]

My point isn't that Leinart is better than Warner. At this point, I do believe that Warner is the better QB, but Leinart has more potential, and I just don't believe that Arizona increases their chances of winning simply by putting Warner in.

Then I don't think you've watched them play or can tell a good QB from a bad one if you believe the statement you wrote.

That's your opinion. I have seen him and I agree he hasn't looked great, but I don't think that you can accurately judge him or his ability based on 17 games in the NFL, he essentially completed a rookie season and you people want to just write him off. I have seen Warner and he has looked good at times but I've also seen him make some mistakes. And because of this I feel like Leinart will get a good share (most) of the playing time. You may disagree which is fine.

 

[Keepers]

The Warner/Leinart debate is so similar to the Favre/Rodgers one, the big difference being that Favre and Rodgers are on different teams now. Pretty well everyone agrees that the vet is the better play in both GB and Arizona for this year and the only way Rodgers would be able to start all year is if Favre wasn't there, the same for Leinart but with Warner there it will be hard to keep Leinart in when he struggles.

 

[fantasy stud]

Did you see Leinart last weekend? He definitily hit rock bottom. The guy couldn't do anything right. Even the one time he tried to run he tripped on the turf. He obviously has lost any confidence he ever had.

 

[Phurfur]

Did you see Leinart last weekend? He definitily hit rock bottom. The guy couldn't do anything right. Even the one time he tried to run he tripped on the turf. He obviously has lost any confidence he ever had.

Yes, he even looked bad on his hand offs.

 

[bryan215]

Most Cards fans, like me, would much rather have Aaron Rodgers than Matt Leinert.

At least he can throw the ball more than 30 yards without it being a floating duck

 

[kutta]

My point isn't that Leinart is better than Warner. At this point, I do believe that Warner is the better QB, but Leinart has more potential, and I just don't believe that Arizona increases their chances of winning simply by putting Warner in.

Then I don't think you've watched them play or can tell a good QB from a bad one if you believe the statement you wrote.

That's your opinion. I have seen him and I agree he hasn't looked great, but I don't think that you can accurately judge him or his ability based on 17 games in the NFL, he essentially completed a rookie season and you people want to just write him off. I have seen Warner and he has looked good at times but I've also seen him make some mistakes. And because of this I feel like Leinart will get a good share (most) of the playing time. You may disagree which is fine.

So why do you think he has more potential?

 

[coolice]

Based on my first team, it better be Warner.

Based on Ari team, it better be Warner.

 

[Modog814]

My point isn't that Leinart is better than Warner. At this point, I do believe that Warner is the better QB, but Leinart has more potential, and I just don't believe that Arizona increases their chances of winning simply by putting Warner in.

Then I don't think you've watched them play or can tell a good QB from a bad one if you believe the statement you wrote.

That's your opinion. I have seen him and I agree he hasn't looked great, but I don't think that you can accurately judge him or his ability based on 17 games in the NFL, he essentially completed a rookie season and you people want to just write him off. I have seen Warner and he has looked good at times but I've also seen him make some mistakes. And because of this I feel like Leinart will get a good share (most) of the playing time. You may disagree which is fine.

So why do you think he has more potential?

The mere fact that he is younger and has only started 17 games gives him potential compared to a 37 year old at the end of his career. I'm not saying that Leinart is great or the next Manning or Brady. What I'm saying is that I believe that Arizona will give him a shot (he's only had 17 games played...it's equivalent to drafting a qb in the 1st round, starting him that year and then saying hmm no it was kind of rough with you in there, I think we're going to get rid of you)

I thought he looked decent his first 2 preseason games and has played well in a few games in the past. He's still young and hasn't had the experience of learning by playing.

Personally, I think given the chance he'll be a pretty good qb. Will there be stretches of bad play? Of course, but i think with each snap he takes and each game he plays he'll get better and better. Just My Opinion.

 

[Hipple Long Ware & Peete]

alias check in aisle 4.