Or a Scouting Department???!!!!An NFL consultant to help identify QBs and Wide Receivers? I think most teams call them a General Manager!
Join the discussion below, or Read more at Chicago Tribune.
#224 Jan 22, 2009
#225 Jan 22, 2009
Are THESE the stats where he stunk?
2004 NYG 10-9 277-174 2,054 .628 6 4 62 39-196 86.5
39 sacks? Must have been GREAT throwing behind that!
still...62.8% & a 86.5 rating...
#226 Jan 22, 2009
Warner's 2004 86.5 would put him 13th this year , ahead of Eli( Warner's 3rd with a 96.9 this year) and ahead of Orton's 79.6 , his career best.
#227 Jan 22, 2009
was that the 21-28 279 yd 4 td 145.7 rating going to the Super Bowl throwing it up for grabs?
#228 Jan 22, 2009
It's truly inexplicable on why Angelo didn't offer Warner a contract. Why not just lie about the competition factor? He had to of known that Rex would get hurt, and/or be ineffective as a starter. Thus giving Kurt to take over as the starter, because obviously he wouldn't have lost it...ever!!!
#229 Jan 22, 2009
I get your point; however, you still have to look at the coaching staff and the way the Bears use quarterbacks. The Bears couldn't coach a quarterback to save their lives and haven't had a coach for the offense, probably ever. Do you honestly think that Kurt Warner or any other quarterback, even the sainted Peyton Manning, could succeed in the Bears offensive scheme? Yes, the Bears need wide receivers. No, I don't think Kyle Orton is uncoachable, but you have to have coaches and an offensive scheme that can maximize the talents of your players. The Bears have neither, and I don't expect them to have them in the near future. It won't matter who they draft or who they bring in from free agency until the coaches and the schemes change.
#230 Jan 22, 2009
You are engaging in the worst of revisionist history.
The fact remains, Kurt Warner played only 19 games over a three year period, and threw more interceptions over that span than touchdowns.
Warner also had developed a reputation as an oddball with primadonna tendancies.
It's very easy for you, Morrisey and Rosenbum to sit back and call the Bears stupid for not signing him, but the fact is, few teams wanted to hand a 34-year-old QB with a history of injury problems a starting job.
That is why he ended up in the worst franchise beyond Detroit.
And you both IGNORE the fact that, even though he was so great, he STILL didn't manage to have a very productive year until he had been with the Cardinals for THREE YEARS.
In other words, it took him SIX YEARS to regain his form that made him an MVP.
And you also ignore the fact that it is pretty easy to chuck balls up to the most dominant WR in the league, and a No. 2 who would be a No. 1 on about 27 teams.
Present-mindedness. Looking at a current situation without any true analysis of history.
Fact is, Warner was seen as damaged goods, and he did nothing to prove otherwise until last season.
He's been a very mediocre QB, and that certainly was the case in 2005.
After bringing in Chandler and Stewart, I completely understand why you wouldn't want to offer anything to another aging, injury-prone QB who thought too highly of himself.
#231 Jan 22, 2009
How do you know that?
Once again, Warner had only played 19 games over a three year period, and didn't light the world on fire.
Moreover, Grossman, while always injured, had shown flashes of talent.
By your logic, it was a given that Grossman was going to get hurt and stink, but automatic that Warner would ahve shined in Chicago.
Based upon what historical precindent?
Fact is, Warner, at that time, was probably just as likely to get hurt, and there was no reason to think that he would be anything better than average based on his immediate history.
The only thing that is inexplicable is how you and other want to rewrite history.
#232 Jan 23, 2009
I'll sum it up simply for you:
My guy is Drew Brees.
But, if I hear Bear fans -me,a Bear fan too- PUTTING DOWN WARNER?
Warner's supposed "Bad" years?
Better- by a lot- that Orton's Career year.
Would he have been horrible on the Bear? likely.
But, don't use a team record to judge the QB - like when they said Manning couldn't win in College?-well, how many tackles for loss did he make on D? oh, he doesn't PLAY d? well, that's irrelevant ...
the Giants were bad --don't blame Warner for that...39 sacks!
Go back and look for yourself if you don't beleive me.
#233 Jan 23, 2009
I could see the need for hiring a quarterback consultant to assist the scouting staff and GM. We have quarterback coaches to assist the offensive coordinator and head coach.
This is an era of specialization, in all businesses. An outside consultant can see things more clearly than the coaches and staff who fall in love with certain players.
#234 Jan 23, 2009
I know a little about History -I have a BA in the disipline...
While true, it is a error to apply post-event knowledge to decision-making of the period in question...
use the data they DID have... like his Career stats, which were exponentally better than anyone they had... proven track record...look it up ...injury? NFL injury rate = 100%never a rotator or ulnar...never a bad knee ...
Again- LOOK AT THE STATS in AZ -
1st 3 years? 7507 yds ( 2502 avg) QB ratings of 85.8/89.3/89.8 compl % 64.5/64.3/62.3
You tell me, how does that compare with the rest of the League, or with the Bears?
#235 Jan 23, 2009
"He's been a very mediocre QB, and that certainly was the case in 2005."
Ok, let's see...
Warner: 14th in QB rating ( Orton 34th, Last place -min 14 att. per game played)
2005 Arizona 375-242 2,713 .645 11 9 63 23-158 85.8
14th of 34 would be 41.2%...better than avg, but not by alot.
Again I state for the record:
these "Bad" years Warner supposedly had? Better than the BEST the Bears produced...
I GET IT !!!
YOU DON'T LIKE WARNER!!!
YOU WIN !!
#236 Jan 25, 2009
Morrissey correctly assesses the problem of the Chicago Bears. There's a saying in biology that "like begets like"! The current edition of the Bears is a direct reflection of Angelo...a collection of uninspired, overpaid losers!
#237 Jan 25, 2009
This is ridiculous. Anyone who thinks qb is the issue on this bears team, obviously didn't watch the whole season. Orton was one of the best qbs through the first half of the year. Then he got hurt and never fully recovered. Surround Orton w/ more than devin hester at #1 receiver and see what he can do. The Bears receivers last year were TERRIBLE and Orton did just about as well as Grossman did w/ Berrian and Moose. Give Orton a playmaker and he'll do wonderful.
#238 Jan 26, 2009
In 2008 Kurt Warner played 13 outdoor games. 511 att. 338 comp. 66.1% and a 91.3 passer rating. Has Rex or Orton even came close to this? Hell no. They could only dream of this kind of stat. Know you're stuff before you speak.
#239 Jan 27, 2009
Chippy is right.
Warners' "Worst" seasons were far better than the Bear QB Career years.
Add your comments below
|Chiefs vs. Saints Preseason Preview: TV Schedul... (Aug '13)||Aug '13||fagar||1|
|Man faces charges in school bus accident (Feb '13)||Apr '13||james9785||6|
|Kansas City Chiefs Can't Ignore Need At Wide Re... (Feb '13)||Feb '13||Laughing Bear Fan||1|
|NFL Draft 2013: Where do the Kansas City Chiefs... (Feb '13)||Feb '13||Joe||1|
|4 Best Free Agents for Andy Reid, Kansas City C... (Jan '13)||Jan '13||badnews59||1|
|Why The Kansas City Chiefs Are Also AFC Favorites (May '12)||May '12||Peyote||2|
|Palko somehow kept Chiefs in game until the ver... (Nov '11)||Nov '11||Screech||7|
Find what you want!
Search Steve Breaston Forum Now
Copyright © 2017 Topix LLC