PDA

View Full Version : If Kurt Warner Retires...



SteelTorch
01-19-2010, 08:25 PM
...Do not be surprised if we see a sudden collapse from the Cards. And I'm talking a significant collapse.

Because Warner is easily a top 5 QB, and the real reason behind Whiz's success. And all those people who found themselves pining for Whizenhunt at HC will be left biting their tongues. You watch. :wink:

feltdizz
01-19-2010, 08:39 PM
...Do not be surprised if we see a sudden collapse from the Cards. And I'm talking a significant collapse.

Because Warner is easily a top 5 QB, and the real reason behind Whiz's success. And all those people who found themselves pining for Whizenhunt at HC will be left biting their tongues. You watch. :wink:

They are toast with Leinart and the D sucks too... no injuries either

papillon
01-19-2010, 08:43 PM
I hope that doesn't happen I like Whisenhunt and hope he's successful. Larry Fitz is a class act, Whiz and Grimm served the Steelers well. I'd hate to see him crash and burn.

Pappy

feltdizz
01-19-2010, 08:48 PM
I hope that doesn't happen I like Whisenhunt and hope he's successful. Larry Fitz is a class act, Whiz and Grimm served the Steelers well. I'd hate to see him crash and burn.

Pappy

I guess you are right... Fitz was a Panther and I have no real hate towards the guy... it's the homer fans who use him vs Tomlin that get to me...

If he loses Warner the Cards go 2004 game manager...I was surprised Whiz passed with Leinart before the half.

NW Steeler
01-19-2010, 08:49 PM
:Agree (with Pappy)

SteelTorch
01-19-2010, 09:01 PM
I hope that doesn't happen I like Whisenhunt and hope he's successful. Larry Fitz is a class act, Whiz and Grimm served the Steelers well. I'd hate to see him crash and burn.

Pappy
I'm definitely not a hater of Whiz, but I'm not really a fan either. He lost points in my book when he shook every Steeler's hand except Ben's in our first matchup. The second time I lost some respect for him was when he made Superbowl 43 all about himself - it was all about his agenda and "proving" to the Steelers that they should have went with him as their HC. It came across as selfish, and I didn't like that.

Sugar
01-19-2010, 09:02 PM
I have a feeling you're right. I have no ill-will toward the Card's, but I'm thinking that if Warner is gone, Leinart won't have the goods to help them. They become a .500 team or worse overnight.

SteelerNation1
01-19-2010, 09:12 PM
If Warner retires, the NFC west division champ might be 5-11 team. :shock:

feltdizz
01-19-2010, 09:13 PM
I hope that doesn't happen I like Whisenhunt and hope he's successful. Larry Fitz is a class act, Whiz and Grimm served the Steelers well. I'd hate to see him crash and burn.

Pappy
I'm definitely not a hater of Whiz, but I'm not really a fan either. He lost points in my book when he shook every Steeler's hand except Ben's in our first matchup. The second time I lost some respect for him was when he made Superbowl 43 all about himself - it was all about his agenda and "proving" to the Steelers that they should have went with him as their HC. It came across as selfish, and I didn't like that.

If he didn't shake Ben's hand it's because Ben didn't cosign for him as the HC....

Whiz looks just like Cowher anyway.. that was weird in itself.

Shoe
01-19-2010, 09:21 PM
Matt Leinart's solution to becoming a better NFL QB this past offseason = train in mixed martial arts. :loser

SanAntonioSteelerFan
01-19-2010, 09:24 PM
I half remember something about Whiz not shaking Ben's hand.

What was the bottom line on that? Without a good excuse, it does make him look like a churl.

steelfin
01-19-2010, 11:08 PM
Not a Whiz homer but as I have stated before wouldn't have an issue with him as HC...

Let me ask you this question, how would Tomlin and the Steelers do if Ben retired today?

How would Jim Caldwell and the Colts do if Peyton Manning retired today?

First off, no one knows the answer for sure. However many would conclude that most coaches / teams would struggle if their top 5 QB retired or was out for season. It isn't rocket science....A top 5 QB makes it a lot easier to win in the NFL...

So what makes a good HC...Based on the argument of this thread it would be a coach that can consistently win with or without a top QB....

Bill Cowher comes to mind....Only a few of his 15 or so seasons with a quality QB... :stirpot

I just dont see the point of this post as it would hold true for the majority of coaches / teams...

steeler_fan_in_t.o.
01-19-2010, 11:20 PM
If Warner retires, the NFC west division champ might be 5-11 team. :shock:

With all 5 wins coming within the division. :lol:

feltdizz
01-19-2010, 11:24 PM
Matt Leinart's solution to becoming a better NFL QB this past offseason = train in mixed martial arts. :loser
:Hater martial arts is a great cardio workout and does wonders for reading defenses...

SteelTorch
01-19-2010, 11:38 PM
Not a Whiz homer but as I have stated before wouldn't have an issue with him as HC...

Let me ask you this question, how would Tomlin and the Steelers do if Ben retired today?

How would Jim Caldwell and the Colts do if Peyton Manning retired today?

First off, no one knows the answer for sure. However many would conclude that most coaches / teams would struggle if their top 5 QB retired or was out for season. It isn't rocket science....A top 5 QB makes it a lot easier to win in the NFL...

So what makes a good HC...Based on the argument of this thread it would be a coach that can consistently win with or without a top QB....

Bill Cowher comes to mind....Only a few of his 15 or so seasons with a quality QB... :stirpot

I just dont see the point of this post as it would hold true for the majority of coaches / teams...
Cowher never won a Superbowl without Big Ben... :stirpot

And one of the arguments has been that Whiz did a lot more with pretty much no talent around him - when in fact, he DID have a lot of talent, albeit mostly at offense. The fact that the Cards made the Superbowl last with Warner as the starter with no coincidence.

Anyhoo, a good HC is one who, in my opinion, is smart, gets the best out of his team and can put a winning team together on a consistent basis. :wink:

feltdizz
01-19-2010, 11:48 PM
Whiz was smart enough to replace Leinart with Warner...

Lonbull
01-20-2010, 03:09 AM
I disagree with a number of ideas in this thread - but the top one has to be that Kurt Warner is a top 5 QB in the NFL.....ummmm - No - :nono

On his best days he needed a ton of talent to produce (i.e. Greatest Show on Turf, followed by Fitzgerald / Boldin / Breaston / even Hightower).

But Warner is barely a top 10 QB in this league right now.

In regards to the Cardinals dropping - well they are the Cardinals - however I think with their young emerging defense and with Beanie Wells getting his rookie season out of the way - a modest QB could still get them into the playoffs. Maybe it's Leinart, maybe it's someone else (Kyle Orton / Daunte Culpepper / Byron Leftwich...etc).

Keep in mind I'm just talking football here - I trust the Steelers got the guy (Tomlin) they wanted and they got him for the right reasons. I'm pulling for Whizenhunt, because he's a former coach of the Steelers and as long as we don't play him - I hope he wins games and helps the terrible franchise he became the head coach of.

But again - to reiterate - Kurt Warner Top 5 - :nono

L.B.

RuthlessBurgher
01-20-2010, 11:13 AM
I mentioned this general idea in another thread, but it seems appropriate to expand on it here...

If Warner retires, I don't think that Whis will want to rely on Leinart to be his starter (if he does, just hand the division title to the Niners right now). I think he will want another veteran to lead this established offense.

Pete Carroll up in Seattle wants a young QB to develop, but he probably should use the #6 pick to get an OT to replace Walter Jones (somelike Russell Okung, Bruce Campbell, or Anthony Davis) instead of spending that pick on a QB like Jimmy Clausen or Sam Bradford and getting him killed behind that line. Carroll would love to have his old QB Leinart again (he's probably the only guy coaching the NFL who feels that way), so a trade that involves Leinart going to Seattle and Hasselbeck going to Seattle could be in the works.

Sure, Hasselbeck is 34 and has been brittle recently, but Warner is now 38 and came to the desert 5 years ago with a reputation of being somewhat brittle as well. The o-line in Arizona is better than the o-line in Seattle, so Hasselbeck could last longer in the desert, plus with better weapons around him, he could likely get the ball out quicker and preserve his body. The Cardinals could continue winning for a few more years with Matt Hasselbeck at QB.

If such a trade were on the table, which team would blink first? If Warner retires, I think Whis would prefer Hasselbeck to Leinart, and I think Carroll would prefer Leinart to Hasselbeck.

Oviedo
01-20-2010, 11:24 AM
...Do not be surprised if we see a sudden collapse from the Cards. And I'm talking a significant collapse.

Because Warner is easily a top 5 QB, and the real reason behind Whiz's success. And all those people who found themselves pining for Whizenhunt at HC will be left biting their tongues. You watch. :wink:

Whis is smart enough to know his goose is cooked when Warner leaves which is why they took Beenie Wells. He is setting up for the offense to devolve into old style "Cowher ball" when Warner hangs it up. Warner is a unique talent who probably reads defenses as well as anyone and gets rid of the ball as fast as any QB I have ever seen.

Anyone who doesn't give him his due is deluding themseleves. He has single handedly carried on his back two franchises who were prerennial losers to the Super Bowl. He showed the league that Fitz had All Pro abilities. Think Fitz gets the attention he gets now if Leinert is QB?

The Cards will have real issues when Warner leaves even playing in the weakest of weak NFC West which has inflated their success rate exponentially. Playing in the NFC West has spotted the Cards 4 or 5 wins each of the last 3 years.

feltdizz
01-20-2010, 11:27 AM
I disagree Lonbull... Kurt Warner is definitely a top 10 QB in the NFL... He is top 5 actually. What is so wrong with a good QB having good WR's and producing? Maybe I read it wrong but it sounds like a QB has to have average talent surrounding him to be considered good?

Marino, Montana, Elway... You name them and they all had great WR's. It's no different then those who said Ben was a game manager... Why the hell couldn't all these other game managers win?

Warner is really good, but he is also old and should retire after that last hit.

RuthlessBurgher
01-20-2010, 12:23 PM
...Do not be surprised if we see a sudden collapse from the Cards. And I'm talking a significant collapse.

Because Warner is easily a top 5 QB, and the real reason behind Whiz's success. And all those people who found themselves pining for Whizenhunt at HC will be left biting their tongues. You watch. :wink:

Whis is smart enough to know his goose is cooked when Warner leaves which is why they took Beenie Wells. He is setting up for the offense to devolve into old style "Cowher ball" when Warner hangs it up. Warner is a unique talent who probably reads defenses as well as anyone and gets rid of the ball as fast as any QB I have ever seen.

Anyone who doesn't give him his due is deluding themseleves. He has single handedly carried on his back two franchises who were prerennial losers to the Super Bowl. He showed the league that Fitz had All Pro abilities. Think Fitz gets the attention he gets now if Leinert is QB?

The Cards will have real issues when Warner leaves even playing in the weakest of weak NFC West which has inflated their success rate exponentially. Playing in the NFC West has spotted the Cards 4 or 5 wins each of the last 3 years.

I think Larry Fitzgerald is a freak of nature no matter who his QB is. Fitz plus Johnson & Johnson (Andre and Calvin) are amazingly talented (and surprisingly humble) WR's in a league where we are used to having our star wideouts be insufferable divas.

Iron Shiek
01-20-2010, 12:45 PM
Boldin is still looking for a contract too. Is his deal up? If not, I could see a trade to the Ravens (finally). They need a playmaker at WR bad. This would help Cards reload their defense a bit.

SteelAbility
01-20-2010, 12:49 PM
If Warner retires, the NFC west division champ might be 5-11 team. :shock:

You may not be far off. 3-13 is the theoretical lower limit for division champ. :mrgreen:

Oviedo
01-20-2010, 12:55 PM
Boldin is still looking for a contract too. Is his deal up? If not, I could see a trade to the Ravens (finally). They need a playmaker at WR bad. This would help Cards reload their defense a bit.

Boldin has one year left on his contract and has stated he will not request a trade this off season. Doesn't mean it won't happen, but Boldin is developing chronic injury issues every season. Not a good trend for a guy looking for a big payday.

Oviedo
01-20-2010, 12:57 PM
...Do not be surprised if we see a sudden collapse from the Cards. And I'm talking a significant collapse.

Because Warner is easily a top 5 QB, and the real reason behind Whiz's success. And all those people who found themselves pining for Whizenhunt at HC will be left biting their tongues. You watch. :wink:

Whis is smart enough to know his goose is cooked when Warner leaves which is why they took Beenie Wells. He is setting up for the offense to devolve into old style "Cowher ball" when Warner hangs it up. Warner is a unique talent who probably reads defenses as well as anyone and gets rid of the ball as fast as any QB I have ever seen.

Anyone who doesn't give him his due is deluding themseleves. He has single handedly carried on his back two franchises who were prerennial losers to the Super Bowl. He showed the league that Fitz had All Pro abilities. Think Fitz gets the attention he gets now if Leinert is QB?

The Cards will have real issues when Warner leaves even playing in the weakest of weak NFC West which has inflated their success rate exponentially. Playing in the NFC West has spotted the Cards 4 or 5 wins each of the last 3 years.

I think Larry Fitzgerald is a freak of nature no matter who his QB is. Fitz plus Johnson & Johnson (Andre and Calvin) are amazingly talented (and surprisingly humble) WR's in a league where we are used to having our star wideouts be insufferable divas.

No one is doubting Fitz is a remarkable talent. The point was that he would not be producing the stats he has now without Warner. Lots of great talents at WR rot because the have poor ro mediocre QBs. That was the point being made about Fitz without Warner.

RuthlessBurgher
01-20-2010, 01:13 PM
Boldin is still looking for a contract too. Is his deal up? If not, I could see a trade to the Ravens (finally). They need a playmaker at WR bad. This would help Cards reload their defense a bit.

Boldin has one year left on his contract and has stated he will not request a trade this off season. Doesn't mean it won't happen, but Boldin is developing chronic injury issues every season. Not a good trend for a guy looking for a big payday.

With Boldin's yearly injuries piling up, plus the fact that they have all-world WR Larry Fitzgerald, plus solid complementary pieces like Steve Breaston, Jerheme Urban, and Early Doucet, who really emerged in these playoffs, they can afford to trade Boldin to improve their team elsewhere.

I agree that Baltimore would be a likely destination (trade for draft picks).

However, what about, if Warner retires and the Leinart-for-Hasselbeck trade that I proposed earlier does not come to fruition, how about a trade with the Eagles with Boldin and McNabb as the principals? Arizona would get an established veteran QB with playoff experience. Philly would have Kolb throwing to Desean Jackson, Jeremy Maclin, and Anquan Boldin in a 3 WR set with Celek at TE and Shady McCoy at RB (I think Westbrook may be done with his concussion issues). I'd be happy to take UFA Leonard Weaver off their hands if they don't feel the need to re-up their FB since they will be using primarily single back sets with Boldin on board.

feltdizz
01-20-2010, 01:34 PM
Boldin is still looking for a contract too. Is his deal up? If not, I could see a trade to the Ravens (finally). They need a playmaker at WR bad. This would help Cards reload their defense a bit.

Boldin has one year left on his contract and has stated he will not request a trade this off season. Doesn't mean it won't happen, but Boldin is developing chronic injury issues every season. Not a good trend for a guy looking for a big payday.

With Boldin's yearly injuries piling up, plus the fact that they have all-world WR Larry Fitzgerald, plus solid complementary pieces like Steve Breaston, Jerheme Urban, and Early Doucet, who really emerged in these playoffs, they can afford to trade Boldin to improve their team elsewhere.

I agree that Baltimore would be a likely destination (trade for draft picks).

However, what about, if Warner retires and the Leinart-for-Hasselbeck trade that I proposed earlier does not come to fruition, how about a trade with the Eagles with Boldin and McNabb as the principals? Arizona would get an established veteran QB with playoff experience. Philly would have Kolb throwing to Desean Jackson, Jeremy Maclin, and Anquan Boldin in a 3 WR set with Celek at TE and Shady McCoy at RB (I think Westbrook may be done with his concussion issues). I'd be happy to take UFA Leonard Weaver off their hands if they don't feel the need to re-up their FB since they will be using primarily single back sets with Boldin on board.

with AZ's issue's on D I think it would be smart to treat Leinart like Ben... run the ball and limit his chances at mistakes... then chuck a few up to Fitz...

Philly isn't letting McNabb go.... I don't think Reid stays with Kolb.

JTP53609
01-20-2010, 01:39 PM
i just dont get why so many people have a grudge with the cardinals, i could really care less if they are good or not, i dont hate them like i do the rats or cowboys, if we did not have our qb than i bet we would not be a good team either, just like the cards.....

SteelTorch
01-20-2010, 02:08 PM
I disagree with a number of ideas in this thread - but the top one has to be that Kurt Warner is a top 5 QB in the NFL.....ummmm - No - :nono

On his best days he needed a ton of talent to produce (i.e. Greatest Show on Turf, followed by Fitzgerald / Boldin / Breaston / even Hightower).

But Warner is barely a top 10 QB in this league right now.

In regards to the Cardinals dropping - well they are the Cardinals - however I think with their young emerging defense and with Beanie Wells getting his rookie season out of the way - a modest QB could still get them into the playoffs. Maybe it's Leinart, maybe it's someone else (Kyle Orton / Daunte Culpepper / Byron Leftwich...etc).

Keep in mind I'm just talking football here - I trust the Steelers got the guy (Tomlin) they wanted and they got him for the right reasons. I'm pulling for Whizenhunt, because he's a former coach of the Steelers and as long as we don't play him - I hope he wins games and helps the terrible franchise he became the head coach of.

But again - to reiterate - Kurt Warner Top 5 - :nono

L.B.
You do realize that both the Rams and Cardinals - historically bad teams - have both gone to the Superbowl with Warner at the helm? By the way, he has a .750 record in the playoffs. That's second only to Big Ben and Tom Brady among active QBs. He was also a league MVP twice. As far as the talent around him, yeah, it's true he's had talent to work with. But even great wide receivers need a great quarterback to make their production truly stand out. Would you say Peyton Manning was nothing without Marvin Harrison? Or that Ben wouldn't be good without Hines Ward and Santonio Holmes? Do you see now why that argument doesn't work here?

And the Cardinals had almost the same personnel in '07 - including Larry Fitzgerald - but didn't even muster a .500 record. The year after, with Warner as the starter, they go to the Superbowl. Not a coincidence.

If you want to talk stats, we can do that too. He has a career rating of 93.7. That's better than Ben Roethlisberger, Tom Brady, and Drew Brees. He has the second-best career completion percentage in history (65.5%), and a career YPA of 7.9 - again, top 10 in NFL history.

So yeah, Warner = top 5 QB. :P

RuthlessBurgher
01-20-2010, 02:14 PM
with AZ's issue's on D I think it would be smart to treat Leinart like Ben... run the ball and limit his chances at mistakes... then chuck a few up to Fitz....

You mean treat Leinart like we treated Ben 5 years ago. Or how the Jets are treating fellow Trojan Sanchez now.

feltdizz
01-20-2010, 02:16 PM
Warner has the 3 highest passing yards in SB's...

The guy is a beast.. and if he comes back and they shore up the D we may meet again next year.

It's almost like both DB coaching staffs got the memo to play prevent all game to let other teams in.

Lonbull
01-20-2010, 04:54 PM
I disagree Lonbull... Kurt Warner is definitely a top 10 QB in the NFL... He is top 5 actually.


Feltdizz - Top 10 is very possible - top 5 = you on crack.

Consider that Warner has three very solid WR's - in fact one of them Larry Fitzgerald is a top 3 / 4 WR.

Now compare the offense talent that Warner has too....

Brett Favre - who had better numbers this season
Matt Schaub - who had better numbers this season
Aaron Rodgers - who had better numbers this season
Peyton Manning -
Tom Brady -
Drew Brees -
Philip Rivers -

Even Tony Romo had a better season this year than Kurt Warner (see Passer Rating this season).

And I think I'm forgetting someone....hmmm.... oh well :tt2

Sorry kids - Warner has more talent at the WR and running backs than most of these guys and (this season) he didn't produce. Switch any of these guys with Warner and I believe the Cardinals would be better and Warner's new team would be worse.

Was he a top 5 ten years ago? Probably - but that was ten years ago and of course that was when he was surrounded by great talent - seems many of you are forgetting that as soon as that talented thinned - Warner was benched by the Rams and then let go. He went to the Giants and sucked. The only reason he got a shot with the Cardinals is because Leinart wouldn't step up.

I still respect the guy - I certainly was still concerned at the end of the last Super Bowl, but there's no way he's a top 5 QB at the end of 2009/2010.

And there is certainly no way he's a Top 5 QB of all time.

L.B.

SteelTorch
01-20-2010, 05:42 PM
You do realize that both the Rams and Cardinals - historically bad teams - have both gone to the Superbowl with Warner at the helm? By the way, he has a .750 record in the playoffs. That's second only to Big Ben and Tom Brady among active QBs. He was also a league MVP twice. As far as the talent around him, yeah, it's true he's had talent to work with. But even great wide receivers need a great quarterback to make their production truly stand out. Would you say Peyton Manning was nothing without Marvin Harrison? Or that Ben wouldn't be good without Hines Ward and Santonio Holmes? Do you see now why that argument doesn't work here?

And the Cardinals had almost the same personnel in '07 - including Larry Fitzgerald - but didn't even muster a .500 record. The year after, with Warner as the starter, they go to the Superbowl. Not a coincidence.

If you want to talk stats, we can do that too. He has a career rating of 93.7. That's better than Ben Roethlisberger, Tom Brady, and Drew Brees. He has the second-best career completion percentage in history (65.5%), and a career YPA of 7.9 - again, top 10 in NFL history.

So yeah, Warner = top 5 QB. :P

Lonbull
01-20-2010, 06:34 PM
You do realize that both the Rams and Cardinals - historically bad teams - have both gone to the Superbowl with Warner at the helm?

True - however if he was so good why was he eventually benched in St. Louis, and sucked in New York - is it because he went from stellar surrounding talent to mediocre surrounding talent - why else would such a Top 5 QB (in your terms) have such problems?



By the way, he has a .750 record in the playoffs. That's second only to Big Ben and Tom Brady among active QBs. He was also a league MVP twice.

Was he a top 5 QB ten years ago when he was MVP twice in the league - yeah probably. But that was ten years ago. Now (end of 2009) he's in the top 1/3rd, and probably no higher.

If you're saying he's a Top 5 QB in NFL history....that's absurd considering his lack of overall production. If you're just going to use a few seasons to justify best of all time - we could probably do that with Kordell Stewart or Tommy Maddox.


As far as the talent around him, yeah, it's true he's had talent to work with. But even great wide receivers need a great quarterback to make their production truly stand out. Would you say Peyton Manning was nothing without Marvin Harrison? Or that Ben wouldn't be good without Hines Ward and Santonio Holmes? Do you see now why that argument doesn't work here?

The talent he had surrounding him with the Rams and the WR's he has with the Cardinals are better than what Peyton Manning has now - and certainly better than what Ben Roethlisberger has now (although Michael Wallace could change that). But again - I feel very confident that if you put Ben or Peyton on that Arizona squad - Arizona would be a better team.



And the Cardinals had almost the same personnel in '07 - including Larry Fitzgerald - but didn't even muster a .500 record. The year after, with Warner as the starter, they go to the Superbowl. Not a coincidence.

In 2007 Warner started 11 games for the Cardinals and his record was 5-6. Leinart started 5 games that year and was 3-2. The Cardinals (obviously) went 8-8 that season with Warner starting the bulk of the games. The following year they went 9-7 (just 1 game better in the regular season).



If you want to talk stats, we can do that too. He has a career rating of 93.7. That's better than Ben Roethlisberger, Tom Brady, and Drew Brees. He has the second-best career completion percentage in history (65.5%), and a career YPA of 7.9 - again, top 10 in NFL history.

So yeah, Warner = top 5 QB. :P

Interesting that you're missing a number of key stats -

How about Passes Completed - 26th overall

Kurt Warner is 4th in Active QB's with Interceptions - However he's started less games then Matt Hasselbeck, Drew Brees, and consider that Donovan McNabb has more TD's and Less INT's than Warner.

If we're going strictly on "Career Passer Rating" than Kurt Warner STILL doesn't make the Top 5 list - as he's currently behind Aaron Rodgers, Steve Young, Philip Rivers, TONY ROMO, and Peyton Manning. :nono

He's in the TOP 3 for Active QB's with most fumbles - behind Favre who's started in nearly 164 more games than Warner, and Kerry Collins who's started in nearly 60 more games than Warner.

In 2002 - Kurt Warner went 0-6 with the Rams coming off of a Super Bowl, he was replaced by Marc Bulger who in turn went 18-4 with the same team (in 2002 and 2003).

Wind the clock back to 2001 - you certainly would have a solid arguement for Warner being a top 5 QB in the league - but certainly not top 5 all-time.

L.B.

SteelTorch
01-20-2010, 10:17 PM
You do realize that both the Rams and Cardinals - historically bad teams - have both gone to the Superbowl with Warner at the helm?

True - however if he was so good why was he eventually benched in St. Louis, and sucked in New York - is it because he went from stellar surrounding talent to mediocre surrounding talent - why else would such a Top 5 QB (in your terms) have such problems?



By the way, he has a .750 record in the playoffs. That's second only to Big Ben and Tom Brady among active QBs. He was also a league MVP twice.

Was he a top 5 QB ten years ago when he was MVP twice in the league - yeah probably. But that was ten years ago. Now (end of 2009) he's in the top 1/3rd, and probably no higher.

If you're saying he's a Top 5 QB in NFL history....that's absurd considering his lack of overall production. If you're just going to use a few seasons to justify best of all time - we could probably do that with Kordell Stewart or Tommy Maddox.


As far as the talent around him, yeah, it's true he's had talent to work with. But even great wide receivers need a great quarterback to make their production truly stand out. Would you say Peyton Manning was nothing without Marvin Harrison? Or that Ben wouldn't be good without Hines Ward and Santonio Holmes? Do you see now why that argument doesn't work here?

The talent he had surrounding him with the Rams and the WR's he has with the Cardinals are better than what Peyton Manning has now - and certainly better than what Ben Roethlisberger has now (although Michael Wallace could change that). But again - I feel very confident that if you put Ben or Peyton on that Arizona squad - Arizona would be a better team.



And the Cardinals had almost the same personnel in '07 - including Larry Fitzgerald - but didn't even muster a .500 record. The year after, with Warner as the starter, they go to the Superbowl. Not a coincidence.

In 2007 Warner started 11 games for the Cardinals and his record was 5-6. Leinart started 5 games that year and was 3-2. The Cardinals (obviously) went 8-8 that season with Warner starting the bulk of the games. The following year they went 9-7 (just 1 game better in the regular season).



If you want to talk stats, we can do that too. He has a career rating of 93.7. That's better than Ben Roethlisberger, Tom Brady, and Drew Brees. He has the second-best career completion percentage in history (65.5%), and a career YPA of 7.9 - again, top 10 in NFL history.

So yeah, Warner = top 5 QB. :P

Interesting that you're missing a number of key stats -

How about Passes Completed - 26th overall

Kurt Warner is 4th in Active QB's with Interceptions - However he's started less games then Matt Hasselbeck, Drew Brees, and consider that Donovan McNabb has more TD's and Less INT's than Warner.

If we're going strictly on "Career Passer Rating" than Kurt Warner STILL doesn't make the Top 5 list - as he's currently behind Aaron Rodgers, Steve Young, Philip Rivers, TONY ROMO, and Peyton Manning. :nono

He's in the TOP 3 for Active QB's with most fumbles - behind Favre who's started in nearly 164 more games than Warner, and Kerry Collins who's started in nearly 60 more games than Warner.

In 2002 - Kurt Warner went 0-6 with the Rams coming off of a Super Bowl, he was replaced by Marc Bulger who in turn went 18-4 with the same team (in 2002 and 2003).

Wind the clock back to 2001 - you certainly would have a solid arguement for Warner being a top 5 QB in the league - but certainly not top 5 all-time.

L.B.
*sigh* I hate it when people split up quotes. But okay, fine.

1. Yeah, he had a bad couple years in St. Louis. That's it. Every quarterback has had bad seasons - even Tom Brady and Big Ben. But he was never given a chance to improve. As far as his "outright sucking" in New York, I don't see how you can even say that. He finished the season with 62.8%, 7.4 YPA, and a 86.5 rating. Maybe not stellar, but he certainly didn't "suck". Since then, he hasn't had a season with a rating below 85. In fact, he's had only one truly bad season. In '03, he only played in two games, and '98 was his rookie season, where he only played in one. Even if you count all of his seasons, the good ones still vastly outnumber the bad ones.

2. What do you mean "lack of overall production"? He's one of the most productive QB's in the league. And yes, he has won a Superbowl, so you can't say he's never won in the big games. And no, I'm using his entire career numbers as my guidelines. Last time I checked, YOU were the one who was trying to judge Warner based off 2009 alone. Hypocrite, much?

3. No, his record was 7-6 if you count the games where he attempted at least 20 passes. He still was a factor in some of those those wins even though he wasn't the official starter. You can't count the game where they lost against Carolina - he attempted 2 passes in that one. Even then, the records dont' tell the whole story. he finished with a rating of 89.8, 62.3%, 7.6 YPA 27 TD's and 17 int's - way better than Leinart, who finished with a 61.9 rating, 53.6%, 5.8 YPA, 2 TD's and 4 int's.

4. Since when do "passes completed" alone matter? All they're really useful for are telling us how many times a QB threw the ball. Please, save that crap for someone else. :lol: As for Aaron Rodgers, he has started in only 2 seasons, and last time I checked, Warner beat him in the playoffs, and still has a better career YPA and completion %. Wait a few years before crowning Rodgers a better QB.

5. You're just cherry-picking stats. I never said we're going off of career rating alone. You're looking at each individual stat and trying to say because 'so and so' has a better [insert single stat here], that must mean he's better. Nope. We're looking at the whole package here, Shirley. Sure, Romo may have a better career rating - but how many Lombardis does he have? How does he fare in the post-season? No comparison. Give me Warner over Tony Romo or Hasselback any day. :nono

6. So I say again - Warner = top 5. :moon


By the way, I never said he was top 5 of all time - I said he was top 5 of QB's in the league today. Stop putting words in my mouth. :nono

feltdizz
01-20-2010, 10:34 PM
McNabb is a great QB.. but you can't use his low INT stat against Warner. He misses way too many easy underneath routes because he throws in the dirt half the time because he is afraid of getting picked. He also has a ton of yards throwing screens to Westbrook.

Warner has won a SB and put up incredibly productive numbers on his way to SB appearances. It seems as though the young QB's who have fresh stats are getting the new love while Warners career stats are swept under the rug.

It's not like Warner had a chance in NY... They were going to Eli regardless. Warner is going to be a top 10 QB when it's all said and done IMO. There is no way a QB with his back story ends up with the 3 highest SB passing yards. He will always be in the conversation until someone knocks him off the top of the list.

MeetJoeGreene
01-21-2010, 03:03 PM
I hope that doesn't happen I like Whisenhunt and hope he's successful. Larry Fitz is a class act, Whiz and Grimm served the Steelers well. I'd hate to see him crash and burn.

Pappy

I guess you are right... Fitz was a Panther and I have no real hate towards the guy... it's the homer fans who use him vs Tomlin that get to me...
If he loses Warner the Cards go 2004 game manager...I was surprised Whiz passed with Leinart before the half.

I am with the dizzmeister. I do loke Whiz, but find myself rooting against him just so I don't have to hear the blah blah overpaid janitor blah blah Rooney Rule blah blah Whiz do more with a crappy team blah blah.

(For the record: I actually wanted Whiz for the Steelers coach.. but have moved on).

feltdizz
01-21-2010, 03:23 PM
I hope that doesn't happen I like Whisenhunt and hope he's successful. Larry Fitz is a class act, Whiz and Grimm served the Steelers well. I'd hate to see him crash and burn.

Pappy

I guess you are right... Fitz was a Panther and I have no real hate towards the guy... it's the homer fans who use him vs Tomlin that get to me...
If he loses Warner the Cards go 2004 game manager...I was surprised Whiz passed with Leinart before the half.

I am with the dizzmeister. I do loke Whiz, but find myself rooting against him just so I don't have to hear the blah blah overpaid janitor blah blah Rooney Rule blah blah Whiz do more with a crappy team blah blah.

(For the record: I actually wanted Whiz for the Steelers coach.. but have moved on).

I wouldn't have minded Whiz but I wasn't surprised... same thing happened when Cowher was hired. Everyone was like "WHO?"

On paper I think Tomlin had a better resume than Cowher when he was hired.. I think.

Cowher didn't back Whiz either... what was that about?

Lonbull
01-21-2010, 04:28 PM
2. What do you mean "lack of overall production"? He's one of the most productive QB's in the league. And yes, he has won a Superbowl, so you can't say he's never won in the big games. And no, I'm using his entire career numbers as my guidelines. Last time I checked, YOU were the one who was trying to judge Warner based off 2009 alone. Hypocrite, much?

Actually YOU are the one who pointed out his -

MVP status from almost 10 years ago
His success with the Rams almost 10 years ago.
His Super Bowl Victory almost 10 years ago.
His overall playoff performance from his entire career.

All of those are things you brought up - hence why I thought you must be writing about Top 5 overall - because none of that has anything to do with 2009. And from what I'm reading you ARE using his history as the guideline for your debate.

My original statement was that when he's been surrounded with talent (like the Cardinals now, and the Rams back in the day) he's been either very productive or (in this case) in the top 1/3rd of the league.



By the way, I never said he was top 5 of all time - I said he was top 5 of QB's in the league today. Stop putting words in my mouth. :nono

Since we now both agree that the basis of the debate is how good Warner was in 2009 I'll focus solely on Kurt Warner being a Top 5 QB in 2009.

Kurt Warner was NOT a Top 10 QB in passing yards.

Kurt Warner was tied for 10th in Touchdowns this season (with Ben and Tony Romo).

Kurt Warner was 10th in Passer Rating this season.

Kurt Warner was 6th in Pass Completion %

Kurt Warner was 7th in Passing TD %

He's tied for 10th in how many victories his team produced.

Again - as you can see there isn't any statistical proof that he cracks the Top 5 - in fact there isn't even a stat where he breaks the Top 5 in 2009. And I would certainly argue that he has better WR's than most QB's in the league - so it certainly isn't regarding his surrounding core.

My question to those who are telling me he is a Top 5 QB - is what guidelines are you using?

L.B.

feltdizz
01-21-2010, 06:05 PM
2. What do you mean "lack of overall production"? He's one of the most productive QB's in the league. And yes, he has won a Superbowl, so you can't say he's never won in the big games. And no, I'm using his entire career numbers as my guidelines. Last time I checked, YOU were the one who was trying to judge Warner based off 2009 alone. Hypocrite, much?

Actually YOU are the one who pointed out his -

MVP status from almost 10 years ago
His success with the Rams almost 10 years ago.
His Super Bowl Victory almost 10 years ago.
His overall playoff performance from his entire career.

All of those are things you brought up - hence why I thought you must be writing about Top 5 overall - because none of that has anything to do with 2009. And from what I'm reading you ARE using his history as the guideline for your debate.

My original statement was that when he's been surrounded with talent (like the Cardinals now, and the Rams back in the day) he's been either very productive or (in this case) in the top 1/3rd of the league.



By the way, I never said he was top 5 of all time - I said he was top 5 of QB's in the league today. Stop putting words in my mouth. :nono

Since we now both agree that the basis of the debate is how good Warner was in 2009 I'll focus solely on Kurt Warner being a Top 5 QB in 2009.

Kurt Warner was NOT a Top 10 QB in passing yards.

Kurt Warner was tied for 10th in Touchdowns this season (with Ben and Tony Romo).

Kurt Warner was 10th in Passer Rating this season.

Kurt Warner was 6th in Pass Completion %

Kurt Warner was 7th in Passing TD %

He's tied for 10th in how many victories his team produced.

Again - as you can see there isn't any statistical proof that he cracks the Top 5 - in fact there isn't even a stat where he breaks the Top 5 in 2009. And I would certainly argue that he has better WR's than most QB's in the league - so it certainly isn't regarding his surrounding core.

My question to those who are telling me he is a Top 5 QB - is what guidelines are you using?

L.B.

intangibles I guess...

_SteeL_CurtaiN_
01-21-2010, 08:22 PM
I hope that doesn't happen I like Whisenhunt and hope he's successful. Larry Fitz is a class act, Whiz and Grimm served the Steelers well. I'd hate to see him crash and burn.

Pappy

I agree, especially seeing how I just found out Fitz and I are alumni of Valley Forge Military Academy. I can't hope for one of my corp brothers to fail! Unless he is playing against the Stillers

SteelTorch
01-24-2010, 04:49 PM
2. What do you mean "lack of overall production"? He's one of the most productive QB's in the league. And yes, he has won a Superbowl, so you can't say he's never won in the big games. And no, I'm using his entire career numbers as my guidelines. Last time I checked, YOU were the one who was trying to judge Warner based off 2009 alone. Hypocrite, much?

Actually YOU are the one who pointed out his -

MVP status from almost 10 years ago
His success with the Rams almost 10 years ago.
His Super Bowl Victory almost 10 years ago.
His overall playoff performance from his entire career.

All of those are things you brought up - hence why I thought you must be writing about Top 5 overall - because none of that has anything to do with 2009. And from what I'm reading you ARE using his history as the guideline for your debate.

My original statement was that when he's been surrounded with talent (like the Cardinals now, and the Rams back in the day) he's been either very productive or (in this case) in the top 1/3rd of the league.



By the way, I never said he was top 5 of all time - I said he was top 5 of QB's in the league today. Stop putting words in my mouth. :nono

Since we now both agree that the basis of the debate is how good Warner was in 2009 I'll focus solely on Kurt Warner being a Top 5 QB in 2009.

Kurt Warner was NOT a Top 10 QB in passing yards.

Kurt Warner was tied for 10th in Touchdowns this season (with Ben and Tony Romo).

Kurt Warner was 10th in Passer Rating this season.

Kurt Warner was 6th in Pass Completion %

Kurt Warner was 7th in Passing TD %

He's tied for 10th in how many victories his team produced.

Again - as you can see there isn't any statistical proof that he cracks the Top 5 - in fact there isn't even a stat where he breaks the Top 5 in 2009. And I would certainly argue that he has better WR's than most QB's in the league - so it certainly isn't regarding his surrounding core.

My question to those who are telling me he is a Top 5 QB - is what guidelines are you using?

L.B.
Okay, first off, when someone says top 5 QB of "all time", they usually mean as in the history of football. You said top 5 QB of "all time". What I'm talking about are QB's who are currently active in the league today. And no, I'm not JUST using his stats from "10 years ago" I'm using his entire career - and even now, he's a very productive QB. I've backed that fact up many times. I even point to his playoff success from LAST YEAR, yet you still bring up this "10 years ago" stuff over and over. So tell me: are you deliberately trying to be difficult, or are you just stupid?

Secondly, I stand by what I said. I said you have to judge a QB by the whole picture. I never said you have to judge him based off of 2009 stats alone. While he may not have had the best 2009 season out of the whole league, that still doesn't mean he's not a top 5 QB. Big Ben was not even in the top 10 quarterbacks in a lot of stats in '08. Would you have said he's not a top 10 QB?

And way to ignore all my other points. Seems like you just want to ignore everything that doesn't fit your argument.

Finally, as far as what "guidelines" I'm using - again, are you stupid? I've made that clear a lot of times. I'm using the whole package: rating, %, YPA, wins, playoffs, etc.

papillon
01-24-2010, 05:41 PM
I hope that doesn't happen I like Whisenhunt and hope he's successful. Larry Fitz is a class act, Whiz and Grimm served the Steelers well. I'd hate to see him crash and burn.

Pappy

I guess you are right... Fitz was a Panther and I have no real hate towards the guy... it's the homer fans who use him vs Tomlin that get to me...
If he loses Warner the Cards go 2004 game manager...I was surprised Whiz passed with Leinart before the half.

I am with the dizzmeister. I do loke Whiz, but find myself rooting against him just so I don't have to hear the blah blah overpaid janitor blah blah Rooney Rule blah blah Whiz do more with a crappy team blah blah.

(For the record: I actually wanted Whiz for the Steelers coach.. but have moved on).

I wouldn't have minded Whiz but I wasn't surprised... same thing happened when Cowher was hired. Everyone was like "WHO?"

On paper I think Tomlin had a better resume than Cowher when he was hired.. I think.

Cowher didn't back Whiz either... what was that about?

Actually, Cowher had 3 years (I think) of being a defensive coordinator with the Chiefs before he took the job. He definitely had the better resume; I wanted Whiz, we have Mile Tomlin and I like him.

Pappy

Lonbull
01-25-2010, 07:00 PM
Okay, first off, when someone says top 5 QB of "all time", they usually mean as in the history of football. You said top 5 QB of "all time". What I'm talking about are QB's who are currently active in the league today. And no, I'm not JUST using his stats from "10 years ago" I'm using his entire career - and even now, he's a very productive QB. I've backed that fact up many times. I even point to his playoff success from LAST YEAR, yet you still bring up this "10 years ago" stuff over and over. So tell me: are you deliberately trying to be difficult, or are you just stupid?

Secondly, I stand by what I said. I said you have to judge a QB by the whole picture. I never said you have to judge him based off of 2009 stats alone. While he may not have had the best 2009 season out of the whole league, that still doesn't mean he's not a top 5 QB. Big Ben was not even in the top 10 quarterbacks in a lot of stats in '08. Would you have said he's not a top 10 QB?

And way to ignore all my other points. Seems like you just want to ignore everything that doesn't fit your argument.

Finally, as far as what "guidelines" I'm using - again, are you stupid? I've made that clear a lot of times. I'm using the whole package: rating, %, YPA, wins, playoffs, etc.

Steel Torch - I'm certainly interested in a good debate - however I'm not interested in your line of name calling - perhaps we don't agree, perhaps I'm not quite sure where you're coming from - but to insult me (being called a Hypocrite or Stupid) just because we disagree is again something I'm not interested in.

Perhaps it would be easiest if you listed who you think are the Top 5 Quarterbacks in the league at this time.

Statistically (and in my opinion) I can name 7 or 8 quarterbacks that I think would be an improvement over Kurt Warner as the Cardinals Quarterback - and that seems to be where our disagreement stems from.


L.B.

SteelTorch
01-28-2010, 09:44 PM
Okay, first off, when someone says top 5 QB of "all time", they usually mean as in the history of football. You said top 5 QB of "all time". What I'm talking about are QB's who are currently active in the league today. And no, I'm not JUST using his stats from "10 years ago" I'm using his entire career - and even now, he's a very productive QB. I've backed that fact up many times. I even point to his playoff success from LAST YEAR, yet you still bring up this "10 years ago" stuff over and over. So tell me: are you deliberately trying to be difficult, or are you just stupid?

Secondly, I stand by what I said. I said you have to judge a QB by the whole picture. I never said you have to judge him based off of 2009 stats alone. While he may not have had the best 2009 season out of the whole league, that still doesn't mean he's not a top 5 QB. Big Ben was not even in the top 10 quarterbacks in a lot of stats in '08. Would you have said he's not a top 10 QB?

And way to ignore all my other points. Seems like you just want to ignore everything that doesn't fit your argument.

Finally, as far as what "guidelines" I'm using - again, are you stupid? I've made that clear a lot of times. I'm using the whole package: rating, %, YPA, wins, playoffs, etc.

Steel Torch - I'm certainly interested in a good debate - however I'm not interested in your line of name calling - perhaps we don't agree, perhaps I'm not quite sure where you're coming from - but to insult me (being called a Hypocrite or Stupid) just because we disagree is again something I'm not interested in.

Perhaps it would be easiest if you listed who you think are the Top 5 Quarterbacks in the league at this time.

Statistically (and in my opinion) I can name 7 or 8 quarterbacks that I think would be an improvement over Kurt Warner as the Cardinals Quarterback - and that seems to be where our disagreement stems from.


L.B.
*sigh* Sorry about the namecalling, I can get pretty emotional debates, as you can see. :P But the reason I was angry in this one was because it seemed as though you were either ignoring or misconstruing everything that I said.

As far as top 5, that's fairly easy. In this order:

1. Peyton Manning
2. Drew Brees
3. Kurt Warner
4. Ben Roethlisberger
5. Brett Favre (vomits)

Even though I wanted to give the last spot to Aaron Rogers, I have to hold off until he gets at least one post-season win. I'm not going to rank him the top five based off two seasons, and certainly not until he goes further. I know he can, I'm just waiting for him to do it.

Now who would your top five be?

Matt Schaub? Please. Tony Romo? The guy is an epic choker. The only one I may even consider adding to the list is Tom Brady because he quite recently set new records and is the only one, aside from Ben, with multiple SB wins. Kurt Warner however is the only one out of Schaub, Rogers, Romo, or Rivers who has made it to the SB in recent memory.

As far as Warner being surrounded by talent - please, don't try to pull that one. Of course Warner's had talent to work with, but you act as though Manning, Brees, Brady, and even Big Ben have had to work with scrubs. Trying to claim that Warner's had "more" talent to work with is pure speculation, nothing more. Fact is, all of those QB's have had great talent to work with. It's called being a team. And did it ever occur to you that maybe one reason that those receivers did look so good was also because they had Warner throwing to them? You need both a good QB and good receivers to make a truly effective offense.

Lonbull
02-01-2010, 05:49 PM
Steel Torch - I seriously can't believe you don't have Tom Brady as a Top 5 QB in this league.

Statistically in 2009 Tom Brady was a better Quarterback than Kurt Warner - in Passing Yards / Passer Rating / Passing TD's....and even in their careers Tom Brady has been a much better Quarterback - let's not forget Kurt Warner has lost more Super Bowls than any other active QB.

Tom Brady has more Super Bowl victories than any other active QB in the league - including one over Kurt Warner's Rams.

Outside of your own opinion there isn't any category (that I'm aware of) where Kurt Warner is a better QB than Tom Brady - in my opinion that's absurd.

In regards to Wide Receiving talent - I think Fitzgerald / Boldin and Breaston make up one of the best WR tandems in the NFL - as you said without giving another Quarterback (like Ben) an equal chance to work with them it is mostly speculation as to how much influence the Quarterback has - however I think if you polled the message board most fans would put Arizona's group as one of the top groups (however Fitz is from Pittsburgh U.)

To respond to your question here at the Quarterbacks that if you put them on the Cardinals right now I believe they would be better than Kurt Warner

In no particular order:

Peyton Manning
Tom Brady
Brett Favre
Drew Brees
Ben Roethlisberger
Matt Schaub
Aaron Rodgers
Philip Rivers

In my opinion these guys are better players right now - and statistically they are better players right now -

Again to me it's now far more surprising that you have Tom Brady NOT on the Top 5!

Regardless - he's now retired and we'll definitely see how Whizenhunt will handle the situation - (which of course was the orginal concept to this thread).

L.B.

SteelTorch
02-01-2010, 10:08 PM
Steel Torch - I seriously can't believe you don't have Tom Brady as a Top 5 QB in this league.

Statistically in 2009 Tom Brady was a better Quarterback than Kurt Warner - in Passing Yards / Passer Rating / Passing TD's....and even in their careers Tom Brady has been a much better Quarterback - let's not forget Kurt Warner has lost more Super Bowls than any other active QB.

Tom Brady has more Super Bowl victories than any other active QB in the league - including one over Kurt Warner's Rams.

Outside of your own opinion there isn't any category (that I'm aware of) where Kurt Warner is a better QB than Tom Brady - in my opinion that's absurd.

In regards to Wide Receiving talent - I think Fitzgerald / Boldin and Breaston make up one of the best WR tandems in the NFL - as you said without giving another Quarterback (like Ben) an equal chance to work with them it is mostly speculation as to how much influence the Quarterback has - however I think if you polled the message board most fans would put Arizona's group as one of the top groups (however Fitz is from Pittsburgh U.)

To respond to your question here at the Quarterbacks that if you put them on the Cardinals right now I believe they would be better than Kurt Warner

In no particular order:

Peyton Manning
Tom Brady
Brett Favre
Drew Brees
Ben Roethlisberger
Matt Schaub
Aaron Rodgers
Philip Rivers

In my opinion these guys are better players right now - and statistically they are better players right now -

Again to me it's now far more surprising that you have Tom Brady NOT on the Top 5!

Regardless - he's now retired and we'll definitely see how Whizenhunt will handle the situation - (which of course was the orginal concept to this thread).

L.B.
Wow....I cannot believe you just posted this. First off, did you seriously use Superbowl losses as a criteria for judging a QB? Really? But you still rank QBs higher who never even sniffed the Superbowl??? :lol:

Secondly, there you go again. This is the reason why I got angry in the first place and called you stupid. How many times do I have to mention we're not going by '09 alone here? How many times? Yet you keep pointing to stats from just ONE SEASON. I seriously don't know if you're just being difficult or if you really are just ignoring everything I'm posting. Seriously, this is a waste of my time.

Why do I not have Tom Brady as top five? He'd probably come in at 6, that's for sure. But if yo uask why, once you took away the cameras and his phenomenal offensive talent, Brady became a much more human quarterback. And if you ask what statistical categories Warner is better at, that's not hard. How about rating, completion %, YPA? Three pretty significant statistical categories right there.

And seriously...Matt Schuab? You're ranking Matt Schuab over Warner? The guy hasn't won jack yet! And Phillip Rivers? Mr. Chokesalot? And if Aaron Rogers had more experience, I'd concede, but the guy's only played in 2 seasons and has yet to win a playoff game! As for the rest of your post about "offensive talent", it's all pure concture. I'm sorry, that's not going to fly here. Not when other QBs today are also surrounded by a lot of talent.

That's all I'll say. This debate is pointless anyway. Good day to you, sir.