The case of Quinn and Bowers

Posted by Darren Urban on March 29, 2011 – 11:13 am

While everyone continues to wonder about how the first five picks of the draft will go — including me — this week could make an impact on the upper part of the round. Friday, Clemson defensive end Da’Quan Bowers is holding a private workout to show teams his knee surgery was minor and he indeed is ready to go and perform as the player who notched 16 sacks last season. The day before is North Carolina’s pro day, where teams can further scrutinize perhaps the biggest wild card that high in the draft — defensive end-who-can-be-a-linebacker Robert Quinn. Quinn (pictured below at the Scouting combine) didn’t play in 2010 after being ruled ineligible by the NCAA for improperly taking benefits from agents.

In 2009, Quinn had 11 sacks. He is athletic but raw and would have to make the transition from defensive end to linebacker if he played for the Cardinals. But he is a pass rusher to consider if Von Miller is indeed gone by pick No. 5 (The Cardinals will have multiple representatives at both Bowers’ and Carolina’s workouts).

Even if the Cards wouldn’t take them (Bowers doesn’t seem to fit the Cards’ scheme) they could be candidates to go in the top four, Bowers especially.  That, of course, could change some things.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Blog | 59 Comments »

59 Responses to “The case of Quinn and Bowers”

  1. By D on Mar 29, 2011 | Reply

    I thought a few months ago that Quinn would be a good prospect at OLB, but, I see him at 270 as a DE down lineman….but hey if Harrison in Pittsburgh can do it at that weight, maybe he could too…

  2. By EDM on Mar 29, 2011 | Reply

    Harrison weighs 242, on their team page.

  3. By John the draft guy on Mar 29, 2011 | Reply

    We’re on the same wavelength.
    In the last post I said Quinn if Miller is gone and then we have the same opinion on Peterson. Wow. We are like brothers.

    Now, watch the show on NFL network tonight and maybe you will become a Ponder fan too. Cards grab a passrusher like Miller or Quinn and then trade up with maybe New England and grab Ponder.
    Well, I’ve got a month to convince everyone on Ponder.

    Seriously now, the only thing that has Miller over Quinn is 2 years of production for Miller and Quinn was out last year. Miller is safer and besides, he is an Aggie.

  4. By Darren Urban on Mar 29, 2011 | Reply

    John the draft guy —

    RE: Quinn vs Miller

    Well, there is also the fact Miller has played LB and Quinn really hasn’t. And Miller’s overall game is considered much better.

  5. By John the draft guy on Mar 29, 2011 | Reply

    Yes, I should have said one thing instead of the only thing.
    Believe me, I’ve been banging the drum for Miller for a month now.

    I see Quinn going to Houston at pick 11. With Phillips switching to a 3-4, He needs his Shawn Merriman/Demarcus Ware like he had in SD and Dallas.

    Buffalo is in serious need for a passrusher, and Miller going to them makes lots of sense. I’m hoping for a Cam Newton pick in Buffalo and then we are safe with Miller dropping to us. If not, I don’t see Peterson. It’s got to be Quinn.

  6. By Alan on Mar 29, 2011 | Reply

    Didn’t Tom Burke lead college football in sacks in 1998? What makes one sack artist a “future stud” and others… well, Tom Burke?

  7. By Darren Urban on Mar 29, 2011 | Reply

    Alan —

    RE: Burke

    Excellent point. As for the answer, well, if I knew that, I’d be making a lot more money.

  8. By D on Mar 29, 2011 | Reply

    Quinn hasn’t played the position before or even all of last yesr, sounds risky for #5 pick that maybe a project for a year..

  9. By D on Mar 29, 2011 | Reply

    If V. Miller is gone, I would offer Philly #5 for Kolb and maybe a lower pick next year, if you can’t fill a hole at rush LB with a starter this year, might as well fill the biggest hole on the team with a player that at least has played in 10 NFL games and could start

  10. By #1CardinalFan on Mar 29, 2011 | Reply

    Quinn would be a beast pic right now

  11. By D on Mar 29, 2011 | Reply

    Great, Fiesta bowl probably just died today, I can already hear Jerry calling to get the Cotton bowl in his Jerryworld to replace it….

  12. By AndyStandsUp on Mar 29, 2011 | Reply

    If Brandon Graham and supposed Card favorite last year, Jerry Hughes could be looked at OLB and over 260 pounds, no reason to doubt Quinn couldn’t because of weight.
    As far as experience, Joey Porter played LB at Colorado State. He was DL and HB, (Ripley quote inserted here.)

  13. By AndyStandsUp on Mar 29, 2011 | Reply

    That would be * never* played LB at Colorado State.

  14. By John the draft guy on Mar 29, 2011 | Reply

    Interesting, you would not want Quinn because of the risk yet you would trade Kolb?

    Quick note, Kolb had a QB rating of 76% with 7 tds and 7 ints comp 60% of his passes. Not to mention, he was injured when given a chance.

    That would have him ranked 25th best behind guys like Donovan Mcnabb, Jon Kitna, Kerry Collins, Shawn Hill, and Alex Smith.
    Derek Anderson was 30th in the league.

    One might think Kolb is a risk. The Eagles have traded QB’s McNabb and AJ Feely who both flopped. Is Kolb the next steal by the Eagles?

    Just something to think about.

  15. By Darren Urban on Mar 29, 2011 | Reply

    John the draft —

    RE: Kolb

    Didn’t say I would trade for Kolb. If I did, it wouldn’t be spending 5th pick this year, just like I’d worry about 5th pick for Quinn.

  16. By John the draft guy on Mar 29, 2011 | Reply

    Very interesting comment. It goes to show that the NFL is a huge jump from college.

    To be fair, wasn’t Burke a 4th round draft pick? That would lead me to believe his game did not transfer well to the NFL (Not quick off the corner and not big enough to come inside)

    Better question is, will guys like Brandon Graham and Jerry Hughes: (who were talked about as great passrushers last year and they both went in the first round) come around? They both struggled. Why have they struggled and guys like Mathews, Orakpo, or Suh become forces in their rookie years.
    Now that’s what would make you rich Darren.

  17. By John the draft guy on Mar 29, 2011 | Reply

    Not you Darren, I was addressing “D”
    I know how you feel about the matter

  18. By Darren Urban on Mar 29, 2011 | Reply

    John TDG —

    RE: Oops

    My bad.

  19. By D on Mar 29, 2011 | Reply

    Why not spend # 5 on Kolb. (If it could get done. )Philly will easily get a #1 pick from Seattle for Kolb. He would be an upgrade over any rookie QB, over Bulger,over Skelton. If they don’t see any other OLB or OT worth a 5 pick (if V. Miller is gone), why waste it on a Peterson which is not a need or one of the qb’s which are projects. AZ has to find a QB. Palmer and Orten are not available, tell me who they could get better than Kolb that would entice Larry to stay and give the fans hope for the next few years?

  20. By Darren Urban on Mar 29, 2011 | Reply

    D —

    RE: Kolb

    Because I don’t know if Kolb is worth the No. 5 pick either.

  21. By Voice of Reason on Mar 29, 2011 | Reply

    Kolb is NOT worth the No. 5 pick. Not when Orton can be had for a second or third round pick. Not when Bulger can be had without compensation (and Andy Dalton will be there when the Cards pick in Round 2).

    And let’s make sure everyone in the organization is crystal clear on this — IF QUINN IS THE PICK, TRADE DOWN AND TAKE HIM AT 10. FIVE IS TOO HIGH.

    Here’s hoping Von Miller slides to five. Last time Graves overthought on trading down in the first round, it, uhem, didn’t go well. Will never forget the collective gasp at the Cardinals Draft Party at Jackson’s on Third that year…

  22. By Voice of Reason on Mar 29, 2011 | Reply

    Also, if Seattle is thinking of trading their first round pick for Kolb (and then, of course, signing him to a Whitehurst-like extension), let them.

  23. By Eazy E on Mar 29, 2011 | Reply

    Kolb is not worth that by a mile and peterson would fill a big need at cb.

  24. By Voice of Reason on Mar 29, 2011 | Reply

    And if Brandon Graham was so bad for the Eagles last year, maybe we offer up our third round pick for him?

    If they’re that low on him, they’d take that deal in a heartbeat. My guess, however, is that they’d reject the offer.

  25. By Eazy E on Mar 29, 2011 | Reply

    Bulger is done.

  26. By rody on Mar 29, 2011 | Reply

    Darren correct me if I am wrong, but I was under the impression that with all that has happened regarding the CBA and such that it would be a 2012 first round pick for kolb not our 2011 1st round? I was half asleep when gambo and ash where talking about it so i dont know if I heard it right or not.

  27. By Darren Urban on Mar 29, 2011 | Reply

    Rody —

    RE: Trade for Kolb

    If the CBA situation is not settled by the draft, then any trade for Kolb would have to be for future picks. And Kolb can’t be traded until the CBA is done in the first place either.

  28. By D on Mar 29, 2011 | Reply

    First of all Voice-who says Denver, who named Orton as the starter will trade him? Bulger- Please he should be the last option and he will options for backup jobs so, why would you get in a bidding war for Bulger? Andy Dalton is a nice qb to groom, but Skelton is above him on the depth chart…not too many options out there for a starting QB and plenty of teams are in the market. Is 5 too high for Kolb, yes, but another 5 win season without a quality qb starter is worse..

  29. By Voice of Reason on Mar 29, 2011 | Reply

    Saw this on ESPN and had to post it:

    2009-2010 Cash Spending: NFC West Salaries
    Team 2009 2010 Change
    Seattle Seahawks $92.3M $123.6M +$31.3M
    San Francisco 49ers $110.7M $134.8M +$24.2M
    St. Louis Rams $108.3M $110.5M +$2.2M
    Arizona Cardinals $119.7M $89.9M -$29.7M
    Totals $430.9M $458.9 +$28.0M

    The chart shows that everyone in the division spent more in the uncapped 2010 year than the previous year but one: our Cardinals, who spent nearly $30 million less. Yet we couldn’t sign Bulger to compete with DA, and couldn’t bring on a quarterback in Week 2 when it was an obvious need to save the season.

    And remember, a marginal quarterback would have still won the division for the Cardinals. Let’s face it, if I were GM, we’d have won the division. If ANYBODY but Graves ran things, we win the division.

  30. By Derek Anderson on Mar 29, 2011 | Reply

    C’mon guys, why all this talk about drafting a franchise QB, I’m here, HELLO!!!!

  31. By BIll on Mar 29, 2011 | Reply

    Best thing I think the Cards could do is trade down. Miller may or may not be there and they could use an OT, CB or OLB/DE.

    Names like Amukamara CB from Nebraska. Smith OT from USC or Quinn could be available from 8-14. (give or take a slot).

    Cards have more wholes than #5 round pick. Wouldn’t hurt them to slide back a few slots each round and get more players.

  32. By Scott H on Mar 29, 2011 | Reply

    Some great posts here. Whatever happens, I just hope the Cardinals have QB as their top priority. Yeah, they need help on defense. But they didn’t fall off the map in 2010 because of their defense. They fell of the map because of the TREMENDOUS drop-off at the QB position after Kurt left. A defensive end is not going to put them back on top of the division if our QB play is just as bad this year. Without significant improvement at QB, we’re going nowhere.

  33. By Jon L on Mar 29, 2011 | Reply

    Hey Darren,
    There are a lot of people out there preaching that the cards need to draft a QB early. I am not one of those people. If coach Whiz feels that Skelton is still the future then why would he draft another young QB… I’m sorry John TDG but I don’t think drafting Ponder in the second or trading back into the first to get him would be a good Idea. Although people may say that the cards don’t need a CB look at their numbers in pass defense last year… not very good. I know that that isn’t solely on the CB’s but the depth behind DRC and GT is very limited and with how many teams are going with 3 and 4 WR sets having 3 decent corners makes sense. There are a few OLB prospects out there that are currently projected to drop into the early second round/ late first round like Ayers and Houston. The cards can’t afford to have a bad draft this year, going after a QB early, in my opinion, is just too much of a risk. Does anyone know what type of mid to late round OL depth is out there?

  34. By D on Mar 30, 2011 | Reply

    Well Voice, not to support the reason for a low salary cap last year, but Warner, Rolle, Dansby and Boldin not being counted did clear out a lot of space, knowing a lockout was probably coming, I can see why they did that. Now, being a fan, I want them to spend and put a good product on the field and after watching Darren’s first video piece, M. Bidwell states they will turn it we have to take a wait and see approach…if this labor deal doesn’t get done by the draft, then we may have to rent Bulger for a year or go with Skelton next year as the starter and wait until next offseason to review the QB spot again….

  35. By Brad W on Mar 30, 2011 | Reply

    Hi Darren, do you have any insight on the reason cards spent $30m less season gone, is it just because of the talent we lost they we are yet to replace (Warner, Dansby, Boldin?) And when Free Agency does happen, since Cards have so much room, do you see them getting aggressive in FA?

  36. By Darren Urban on Mar 30, 2011 | Reply

    Brad W —

    RE: Spending

    See, these are the questions we should be saving for the live chat:

    But I think it was probably a combination of factors, with uncertainty about the labor situation, the decision by three players (Dansby, Rolle, Warner) to leave when they were hoping they would stay, and a thought process that they weren’t going to go crazy in free agency. I do think the team is ready and willing to spend more in FA, in large part because they understand they don’t want to go through a season like 2010 again.

  37. By Voice of Reason on Mar 30, 2011 | Reply

    D, I can certainly see that the loss of those four guys would explain the $30 million less spent on salaries. What it does not explain is why the Cardinals did not 1) sign Marc Bulger to compete with DA, 2) sign another veteran quarterback when it was clear, unequovacally, that we were quarterback deficient by week 2 of the regular season, or 3) TRADE for a veteran quarterback before the deadline for the same reason.

    I’m afraid the reason it did not happen was ego. Neither Graves nor Whisenhunt would admit that the quarterback situation was botched unlike anything we’ve seen since Dennis Green waived Jeff Blake, mistakenly thinking he could win with Josh McCown, Shaun King and John Navarre.

    In our division, you don’t need a great quarterback. I’m not sure you even need a good one to win it. The Cardinals needed one hopelessly average. What they had was the worst the league has seen in years. Heck, we had better quarterback play in 2007 — the year both Leinart and Warner were hurt and we had to sign OFF THE STREET, MID-SEASON Tim Rattay and Tim Hasselbeck. Yes, Warner played some that year with a brace on his elbow, but Rattay played quite a bit as well. He even started six days after being signed against Carolina, and almost won that game. We went 8-8 that year.

    The only difference was that in 2010, Anderson and Hall were not hurt. They played as if they were, but they were not. So no Rattay. And we won four games.

    So let’s repeat:

    In 2007, we signed two guys off the street and went 8-8. In 2010, we don’t and go 4-12. In 2007, Seattle and St. Louis were more talented than they are today; the Cards had less talent than they do today. In 2010, the division’s talent level was at an all time low.

    So I’ll say it again — not to cry over spilled milk — it is absolutely reprehensible that the GM of a professional football franchise does not proactively bring in a quarterback when those on staff clearly cannot get it done. Rattay or Culpepper would have cost $1 million. Maybe we don’t win and we’re no better off, but you can be sure it would not have been worse. And if you happen to steal the worst division in history with an 8-8 record (like in the Rattay year), you host a playoff game, taking in the profits that go along with that.

    Look, if you don’t want to fire Graves, get him an assistant GM that can help with the team building activities. But do something. Try. Be proactive. Don’t list excuses NOT to do something. List reasons TO do something. Especially when you have $30 million more than you had last year, with the same ticket sales and the NFL more popular than ever.

  38. By Darren Urban on Mar 30, 2011 | Reply

    Voice —

    RE: Getting a QB

    Not going to argue your point the Cards should have been more proactive.

    But let’s clarify 2007. Rattay was signed but he never started. Warner started the Carolina game, got hurt, and Rattay finished. The Cards lost that day. Warner started all the rest of the games, with Rattay playing a handful of goal line plays, but that was it. Rattay had nothing to do with 8-8.

  39. By Voice of Reason on Mar 30, 2011 | Reply


    Maybe you don’t remember the same season I do. I was at the Carolina game, as were you I am sure. Vinny Testaverde, who was signed on a Monday, started that Sunday and BEAT the Cards that day. How? By not doing anything stupid. Nothing miraculous, but nothing stupid. That exact philosophy is all we needed to win the division this year. Nothing stupid.

    You did refresh my recollection that Warner started the Carolina game, but Warner had a bad injury he played with the rest of the year. Rattay got in often, made first downs, and I can even recall some touchdown passes in short yardage situations. To say Rattay had “nothing” to do with 8-8 reflects a cloudy memory of that particular season. Perhaps you are thinking about Tim Hasselbeck? He certainly had nothing to do with 8-8. He was signed, but never took a snap. But at least the Cards were proactive and signed two guys mid season with NFL experience and, in the case of Rattay, a guy with starting experience and a 60% completion percentage in his NFL career to that point. His career qb rating — including his year with the Cards, is over 80. Smart signing when it became obvious that we had a need at the position.

    We CAN agree with the fact that DA and Hall had “everything” to do with 4-12, in a weaker division, with better talent around them.

  40. By Darren Urban on Mar 30, 2011 | Reply

    Voice —

    RE: Rattay and 2007

    Again, argue if you must about last season, but let’s not lose the “Reason” part of your handle. Now I have a “cloudy” memory or “rose-colored” glasses? I attended every game live, I was around the team daily. Comon now.

    Aside from the Carolina game, Rattay played in exactly three games. He played exactly four plays. He threw one pass in each game, each for TDs yes, 1, 2 and 2 yards, but I’m not certain Warner couldn’t have done the same (I don’t think Kurt was altogether thrilled he was taken out in those situations). The Cards lost two of those three games as well, and the win was the Detroit game in which the defense held the Lions to minus-18 yards rushing.

    So yes, I think the Cards go 8-8 with a one-armed Warner in 2007 and DA as backup, because they did go 8-8 with a one-armed Warner in 2007 because they barely used the backup. And with all due respect to Rattay, he had nothing to do with the .500 record.

  41. By Voice of Reason on Mar 30, 2011 | Reply

    Do you honestly think we go 8-8 in 2007 with a one armed Warner and DA or Max Hall (both of whom complete 10% less of their passes than Rattay) backing up? If so, you’re wearing rose colored glasses.

  42. By Voice of Reason on Mar 30, 2011 | Reply

    I’ve never lost the “reason” part of my handle. I often wonder, though, if some of your impartiality went out the window when you went in-house. We all know what criticism can do to an in-house reporter (Mike Jurecki cough). And I get that. They sign your paychecks, so you have to be careful about the way in which you levy your criticism. Some certainly aren’t as tactful in that regard (cough Jurecki).

    I suppose we will agree to disagree with regard to Tim Rattay’s effect on the team. How about player confidence? Coaches confidence? The guys that actually KNOW football put him in the game in goal line situations. Of course Warner didn’t like that — he was a competitor. But the coaches put Rattay in and he delivered. With no training camp and relatively no practice time. Again, that’s fact. To say he had “no effect” is nothing more than an overly general statement made for argument’s sake. Either that or yes, your memory has faded. That’s okay, my friend, all memories fade over time.

    Rattay threw three TD passes in four plays, as you point out. In 2010, playing what was arguably, or perhaps actually, the easiest schedule in the league, we had eight TD passes through the first 10 weeks! And the wins they did have — most of which were luck (Janikowski missed FG), or the result of freak, heads-up plays by Breaston and Levi Brown. Again, this is all against teams that were MARKETEDLY WORSE than they were in 2007. That’s fact.

    And going down the rabbit trail about the extent to which Rattay had an effect on the 2007 season doesn’t take away from the following facts: Tim Rattay (let’s use him as the example) is a quarterback available in week two, week six, or week ten for the league minumum with a career 80+ qb rating and 60+% completion percentage. That’s better than ANYONE we had on our roster. Want to argue that? Look at the statistics.

    And if the standard is as low as “anyone better than on our roster,” you can add Jeff Garcia and Duante Culpepper to the list. And I don’t have time to provide an analysis of all the backup quarterbacks on other teams’ rosters that could have been had in week 2 for a fourth round pick. You have the time, of course, but you work for the Cards, so I don’t see that analysis popping up any time soon.

    Bottom line, and something you consistently defend the organization about, is that they COMPLETELY SCREWED UP the quarterback situation in 2010, and either 1) weren’t smart enough or 2) were, but consciously decided not to address the situation in season. If it’s the latter, that’s ego. The same Dennis Green-like ego that had him flipping between McCown, King, and Navarre in 2004. Only the law firm of McCown, King and Navarre became Anderson, Hall and Skelton. And statistically, the 2010 version was worse.

    So answer the question honestly, and try your best to leave your understandable bias out: Do you think Tim Rattay would have helped this team in 2010? Look at his statistics, the way he’s played as a starter, and consider the level of competition in the NFC West.

    This really isn’t a complicated analysis.

  43. By Darren Urban on Mar 30, 2011 | Reply

    Voice —

    RE: Rattay

    OK, putting aside your insults for a moment.

    What does 2007 have to do with 2010? I already said — twice — you had a solid argument for what could have/should have happened in 2010 (and while I would have gotten another QB, it would not have been Rattay, who had been out of the league). I never was going to argue about 2010. Go back to my original response.

    You asked if the Cards would have gone 8-8 in 2007 without Rattay. I said yes. You still haven’t shown me why I should believe otherwise. And now you change to 2010 — and rip me to boot? Why are you wasting all this time breaking down 2007?

    Sorry, sorry. You’re the Voice of Reason, which means you must be right and I — especially if I am in this job — must be wrong. If I am so worthless, why do you bother reading what I write?

  44. By Voice of Reason on Mar 30, 2011 | Reply

    And sorry to pile on, but I have to address this statement in a separate post:

    So yes, I think the Cards go 8-8 with a one-armed Warner in 2007 and DA as backup, because they did go 8-8 with a one-armed Warner in 2007 because they barely used the backup. And with all due respect to Rattay, he had nothing to do with the .500 record.

    YOU KIDDING? You honestly believe DA comes in as Rattay did and complete those passes? He overthrows each of them, and then runs back to the bench with his hands on his helmet. Just like he did all season in 2010. Remember, the easy ones were the ones he missed in 2010.

    You are free to reconsider… 🙂

  45. By RelayTV on Mar 30, 2011 | Reply

    It seems clear to me, that the Cards will take Peterson with their #5 pick if he is there.

    As usual, it boils down to saving money. Our team doesn’t make a move unless it is “cost-effective.” (Not that there’s anything wrong with that.)

    1.) We already have a stud pass-rusher (#90) whom we are paying HUGE $.

    2.) Peterson is ready to play this season, we would be an immediate UPGRADE and he will cost us less $ for a first round pick than either a QB or pass rusher.

    3.) The Bidwill’s will never pay $50 million for a “project QB.” We will bring Bulger in to be our veteran QB till Skelton is ready, (Fitz has already approved that move) because, let’s face it, Bulger will be “inexpensive.”

    It almost makes sense.

    For the last 3 seasons, our secondary has been getting spanked. We lost the Superbowl because 3 of our DB’s couldn’t cover 1 of Santonio Holmes, remember?

    We have a new DC (a former DB’s coach) who has vowed that our first defensive call this season will be a blitz. If he doesn’t shore up the pass coverage, that first play will result in a huge gain or a touchdown for the other team, like it did MANY times last season.

    And the reason we also had no pass rush or run game containment last season was because we were always dropping LB’s into coverage to help our lousy DB’s instead of pressuring the QB and stuffing the run. Every team in the league knows this, and they all exploit it.

    Alex Smith threw for 276 yards and 2 TD’s against us for God’s sake! Even though we sacked him twice that game!

    Right now, we couldn’t cover a slice of bread, with peanut butter and jelly.

    But that all changes April 28th, if Peterson is still available.

  46. By DoblerFan on Mar 30, 2011 | Reply

    I love all the passion here. I see a lot of Cardinal knowledge here but why do folks keep taking about west coast QB’s like Kolb, McNabb, Ponder, or Dalton. That just not our style. Ponder also has a history of being fragile. I see SF taking him in the 2nd.

    As for Quinn, some experts say he could have been the #1 ranked player in this years draft if he’d have played.

  47. By motavaysean on Mar 30, 2011 | Reply

    @Voice … u should can it . Why are you talking up a QB like Rattay. What is a matter with you . Tim didn’t do squat in 2007 to even be mentioned . So he made a few rink a dink TD passes SFW!!!! He was garbage and so is DA why are you putting so much effort in sticking up for a QB like Rattay . It doesnt make sence and diffenetly doesn’t sound anything close to REASON. Sounds like ur bored and like to make arguments bc well ur bored . OH and it was Aaron Fransico on Santonio in that last play in the superbowl and he was gone after that year ? Also we have 1 of the best secondaries in the league . Wilson and Rohdes were geat even tho Wilson had a sub par year (4 his standards) as well as DRC but Toler stepped up and had a good year. Our offense was 3 and out all year long .Our Defense probably spent more time on the field than 90% of the other defenses in the league . We have a GREAT secondary and really only need upgrades at OLB . Ya Peterson would be Great but Von is more needed if he is available . There are a lot of CB available in FA once it starts . Not so much when it comes to top quality pass rushers . If we want our Defense to play top notch all game long we have to be better at Offense . We need to give them more than a 5 min break between making them go out there to stop opponents drives. we need to score more on offense than defense which wasn’t the case for many games last year . Thats right our Defense actually scored a ton last year but like i said they were on the field so much it didnt matter . Remember even top notch quality players will burnout if they are on the field non stop. “Voice of reason” i think you have lost ur mind with this lockout cuz thats not reason its insane babbling of boredum . We Draft the top notch pass rusher (Miller) and a quality TE , add some oline help and grab a FA QB like Bulger to be a saftey net for Skelton incase he has trouble and we should be good . At least good enough to compete in the NFC West . That sound reasonable to me

  48. By Voice of Reason on Mar 30, 2011 | Reply

    Montavaysean — the point (which you’re missing, amazingly) is simple. Tim Rattay (and I use him as an example because the notion that HE would have been our best option this year speaks volumes about how TERRIBLE our quarterback play was this year). And that’s on the GM.

    On draft strategy, I agree with you — Von Miller is the guy if he’s available. Peterson is a special player too (I don’t buy all of the Rolle references — Rolle ran in the 4.4s, Peterson is in the 4.3s). And I agree that a guy like Bulger would probably win the division. In fact, that’s my point — Bulger wins it easily last year. And he could have been had 1) in free agency or 2) via trade for a mid round pick. And we win the division. That this was not done should make any rational, reasoned fan angry.

    Darren, I have not insulted you. I just asked you to give an unbiased view, to the extent you are able given where your paycheck comes from. That’s not insulting — it’s the same for anyone who works for someone else. It is what it is.

    I’m not trying to stir emotion out of you (which it seems like that’s what I’m doing) — I’m just hoping that if I say it enough, maybe, just maybe, 2% of this will get where it needs to go, which will have a 2% effect on what decisions might get made in the future.

    NFL fans aren’t stupid. Telling us that DA was the best option, or that the Cards felt good about the quarterback situation (when that’s impossible) is as bad as Al Gore claiming he invented the internet and expecting everyone to believe him. If it was a mistake, man up and say so. Tell us it won’t happen again. Tell us what you’re doing to not let it happen again. Don’t give us spin that a fourth grader wouldn’t (or at least shouldn’t) buy.

    My two cents on this is over. Thanks for pressing the ear.

  49. By Voice of Reason on Mar 30, 2011 | Reply

    And again, I never called you worthless. Never insinuated it. That’s just an emotional reaction when it’s tough to argue the facts.

    Indeed, I wouldn’t spew what I spew on here if I didn’t think you had substantial worth. That maybe somebody in the decision making process actually reads and considers a football perspective other than their own, even from a lowly fan. And you, my friend, are the only conduit we have. So we get on these boards and talk, good and bad, about what the team is doing, what its done, and what it should be doing. We ask tough questions (like you are trained to do), like why on Earth nobody approached Alan Branch, Steve Breston, Duece Lutui, and others during the season about extending contracts. Why before the CBA expired we weren’t at least looking at the waiver wire (as other teams did, including the team with the #1 overall pick this year). These are questions you don’t appear to be able to answer. And that’s okay. As long as the team knows its fans — including die hard fans like me that sat in 100+ degree heat in SDS, that rushed the field when Chris Jacke kicked the field goal against San Diego to send us to the playoffs in ’98, that teared up at the conclusion of the NFC Championship game — actually care about what’s going on and want the team (perception and all) to do better. We see the passion in Michael. We see the ineptness of Graves. Let’s face it, I can’t do anything to spur organizational change and lesson learning. Neither can you. But if the message gets to those who can, maybe the same mistakes aren’t made more than once. And that means a better organization and a better team. Don’t we all want that?

    It’s nothing personal, and certainly shouldn’t be considered that way.

  50. By Darren Urban on Mar 30, 2011 | Reply

    Voice —

    RE: Back and forth

    See, I was going to go ahead and let you have the last word and then you keep going.

    Let’s pump the brakes on one thing: You kept interchanging what you were arguing. I gave my opinion on one point only — Rattay, his play in 2007 and what it meant to the 2007 team. You wanted to turn that into an indictment on my ability to comment on everything, including present day. You say “it’s nothing personal.” Easy to say when you’re not sitting where I am sitting. I’m quite sure you would have taken it differently had the places been switched. If it wasn’t personal, how did I get called out? That’s as personal as it gets.

    I know you never called me worthless. But remember this: I am on this page every day. Not others in the organization. I let pretty much every comment through. I let you and everyone else have their say about ownership, the GM, the head coach. If they ever read something particular and want to respond, they know where to find me to do it, but I doubt that will happen. I, on the other hand, am not going to let things toward me go without responding. No one ever questioned that you want things better. I happen to believe this blog, and the ability to interact, is one example of how things are better.

  51. By Voice of Reason on Mar 30, 2011 | Reply

    Finally — putting this in a different post so that perhaps we can let the emotion go and talk football. You said you would have signed someone else, but not Rattay. Okay. Who would you have signed? When? Would you have brought someone in early in the season when it was clear quarterbacks were the worst in the league? Would you have entertained a trade? For who? What compensation?

    These conversations are the fun part of the offseason!

  52. By Darren Urban on Mar 30, 2011 | Reply

    Voice —

    RE: QB

    I wouldn’t have let Leinart go in the first place. I think he was upset at the time and was trying to get out by the end. But I would have said, sorry, the team needs you here as a backup. I don’t know if it would have made a difference or if he would have just pouted. But that’s what I would have done.

  53. By Fresh Talks on Mar 30, 2011 | Reply

    Hey Darren,

    What do you think about picking up Vince Young whom can scramble & create problems for defenses?

  54. By Darren Urban on Mar 31, 2011 | Reply

    Fresh —

    RE: Vince Young

    As I have written many times, VY won’t be an option. He’s not fundamentally sound and much more importantly, he’s been too sketchy as a teammate and a player in terms of attitude and how he handles adversity.

  55. By Voice of Reason on Mar 30, 2011 | Reply


    You say, “see, I was going to have the last word but you kept going” — seems to me you can’t help yourself in getting just that, eh? Just joking – no reaction necessary or expected.

    Seriously – the only problem I have with your approach is when you’re asked questions that go below the surface, you can come across condescending. Doesn’t sound like that’s your intention, and I’ll bet we’d have a good, very interesting football conversation over a beer. It’s the bad part about doing it over the internet.

    You missed my point. The whole context is this: who was available that would have been better than what we had in 2010. Or put another way — would a guy like Rattay (or Garcia, Culpepper, or a backup available via trade) have helped this team in 2010? I say yes, looking only at his career statistics over multiple years (and starts) in the league. 60% completion percentage. 80+ qb rating.

    Now look at DA — 48% completion percentage. Rating terrible. Max Hall? So good nobody drafted him. He’s fun to watch in preseason (like Tyler Palko was), but when has an undrafted rookie QB come in and done anything in the first year? Just a bad decision. Skelton was easily the best quarterback we had, and the coaches’ assessment as to his “rawness” was obviously correct on the field.

    So there you are, presented with a scenario in about the second week. We are in the worst division the NFL has seen in years. We’re watching the worst quarterback play the NFL has seen in years. You have the best receiver in the league. A solid line. Good talent at the RB position. And the trade deadline is weeks away. There ARE quarterbacks on the street with 60% career completion percentages.

    Now does such a guy go to the pro bowl? Of course not? Lead us to the promised land? No. But in this terrible division, he gets us to the playoffs. We get another division banner. And the momentum — our domination of this division — continues.

    That’s my point. We can disagree — and clearly do — over the extent to which Rattay helped us in 2007. That’s fine. I don’t think, though, that there anything to indicate he would not have been better than what we had (therefore helping us) in 2010. Same goes for Garcia, Culpepper, or any other quarterback better than what we had. Again, pretty much anybody.

    And that lack of proactivity comes across to fans with a slight semblance of football knowledge as an unwillingness to try. Perhaps due to economics (garbage for reasons I’ve said before) or, more scarier, the GM’s simply missing the problem or unwillingness to bring a player in (which, in essence, admits the mistake). Stupidity or ego?

    I will admit that I probably wouldn’t have let Leinart go either, although based on his play in the preseason and his overall demeanor (just what the fans saw), he didn’t belong here. So I don’t think it was a bad move to cut him. What was bad was not bringing someone in that has the track record of winning games. Jeff Garcia could have been had for the league minumum (like in Philly a few years ago). And we go to the playoffs. Tim Rattay? Same story. ANY quarterback on the Raiders’ 2010 roster? Same story.

  56. By Darren Urban on Mar 31, 2011 | Reply

    Voice —

    RE: QB last year

    I can see where I could be seen as condescending. I try to avoid it, but there are times I don’t. You have to admit there are times it is deserved (and I am not talking about you but in general). I think — again, in general — it’s easy to sit at home and rip this and that without a willingness to address the reality of the situation, whatever it might be.

    See, I disagree on Rattay in particular. The guy didn’t show anything in 2007 to make me think that in 2010, after being out of the game a couple of years, he would have stepped in and been better than Anderson. Was Anderson bad? Of course. Was he the worst quarterback in the history of the game? No. He was a below-average QB. People say Jeff Garcia or Culpepper, OK. They were so good that every single team in the NFL didn’t want them. Garcia threw four picks in a UFL game last season. The last time Garcia was on a team, he threw a hissy fit when he wasn’t starting. I don’t see how that makes him any better than having Leinart around.

  57. By RelayTV on Mar 31, 2011 | Reply


    “We have a GREAT secondary…”

    Uhhh… No.

    We were 23rd against the pass last season, and more importantly, we gave up pass plays of 20+ yards 55 TIMES, and opponents AVERAGED over 7 yards per pass against us! (tied for 7th and 6th worst in the league respectively)

    You may think that somebody is a better pick than Peterson, so be it. But to call our secondary “GREAT” is completely insane.

    And for the record, Santonio Holmes beat 3 defenders: DRC, Ralph Brown, and Aaron Francisco. If you didn’t watch the actual game, watch the replay here:

    Our guys look like keystone cops running around back there, it was not only embarrassing, it was heartbreaking. Our SECONDARY lost us the Superbowl!



  58. By Scott H on Apr 1, 2011 | Reply

    Voice of Reason –

    You say that we ( the Cardinals ) don’t need a great QB to win their division. Maybe not. But where are they going once they get beyond the division? Say all you want but the fact is that the NFL is now clearly a QB-driven league. Period. And no team is succeeding in today’s game without a high caliber QB. Teams aren’t making the playoffs with Trent Dilfer types anymore. And even if they are, they aren’t going far. The Seahawks of last year are a perfect example. Matt Hasselbeck had nothing to do with getting that sorry team into the playoffs. They were there because SOMEONE had to win this sorry division and, well…the Seahawks were simply the best of a bad lot. The fact that they won a playoff game was amazing. BUT that game was at home for them, the weather was perfect for them that day, and the Saints looked ready to lay down and die. When they went to Chicago a week later, they had nothing and they were thoroughly exposed. That’s NOT what I want the Cardinals to be.

    But enough about the Seahawks. Yeah, you are right – a great QB is not needed to win the NFC West. But while simply winning the NFC West might be good enough for you, I have my sights set higher than that. And for that, we need a QB that is capable of doing more than beating the Seahawks, Rams, and 49ers.

    When Warner was here and back at the top of his game, the Cardinals were a bona fide SB contender and THAT is what was so exciting. We weren’t making the playoffs and feeling happy just to be there at all. We were a legit threat to go all the way because we had a QB who could take us there. THAT is where I want to be once again. But if you just want to win the NFC West and be happy with that, knock yourself out. Maybe the Cards will sign Hasselbeck and all of your dreams will come true.

  59. By brad oneill on Apr 5, 2011 | Reply

    Bowers has bust written all over him. he had good numbers for one year, but his sacks appear to have been generated more by scheme than by him overcoming offensive linemen. his knee isn’t a hundred percent. He is not built for a 3 4 defense. I just don’t see us pulling the trigger on a question mark with the number 5 pick.

Post a Comment

%d bloggers like this: