Welcome to ASFN Fan Forums! We're glad to have you here. Please feel free to browse the forum. We'd like to invite you to join our community; doing so will enable you to view additional forums and post with our other members.
Registered Members don't see these ads. Register now it's free!
Originally posted by SunCardfan Why have they lost more games than they won (1-4) when he was out. They still had their running backs right? The only constant in AZ is the management. When many of our players leave they do better some place else.
I'm kind of hoping Dever wins the super bowl so it reminds us that it might not be the player that is bad but the management of that player. Most people can't admit when they might be wrong... Even if Denver wins several Super Bowls in a row none of it will be because of Plummer. No matter what he does from now on it won't matter...
Simple, and in fact I predicted it after the San Diego game. Shanahan designed the offense around Jake and Portis with a moving pocket to keep jake from sitting back in the pocket throwing picks. His backup was Steve Beuerlein, a man who makes Anthony Clement look agile. Beuerlein is a pocket passer, on a team who doesn't do pocket passing. So he failed horribly, they tried to change their system but it didn't work, without Jake their OT's were exposed with Steve back there and he was horrible. Then they tried Kanell, a guy out of football trying to play pro baseball and then in the arena league. Right now one of the threads on the Denver board is who are we going to sign at QB next year to backup Jake since it's so obvious we have to get a QB who can play "This" offense.
Denver is a very good team with Jake, replace Jake with a QB who can't play in that system and they're not very good. When Griese was the QB they didn't have that moving pocket. They also were 15th in the NFL in scoring defense last year, 4th this year. Part of that is cutting down turnovers, part of it is a new DC. Remember Denver's offense was 7th in scoring and 3rd in yardage LAST year, they're 9th in scoring and 7th in yardage this year. That includes the 4 games they didn't have Jake. It's not just the offense that's better it's the defense too.
Originally posted by SunCardfan I'd be willing to bet he doesn't
That is great. Nice to see you're a betting man. It is nice to see you like Jake Plummer.
So go watch the Donkey's and root for Plummer.
I am a Cards fan. When Plummer was here he played the sorriest football I have ever seen. AND YES! It was worse than Blake.
Blame the Management, Blame the coaches that is fine.
I want a Farve, McNair, or a Carr. Somebody who can take the team on his back and win. Plummer is not a franchise QB.
And don't give me "Jake is a comeback player!". Yeah, great. When he comes back to win after to 3 lost fumbles and 2 INT for TD's.
Stupid. He stinks.
And nobody's "enlightened comments" will turn me away from this opinion.
__________________ A-Dub on Playoffs:“You get a great sense of pride you stuck it out,” Wilson said, “now that it’s finally here.” An Out of State Fan's Guide for Seeing the Cardinals in AZ: http://www.arizonasportsfans.com/vb/blog.php?b=71
How can you hope the team will improve when you always blame the players when they are here and don't look at what they do elsewhere? I hope the management doesn't look at our past players that have done well elsewhere like you do. I want them to think, these players are doing a lot better elsewhere so we need to develop our players better. I think our main problem has been our coaches I don't think they did a good job of developing Plummer...
i'll admit it, i hated jake. not the person, the player. loved him at asu, loved him when we drafted him, still loved him in '98, learned to hate him after 20 too many outs thrown for INT-TDs. was ecstatic to see him leave. under our coaching staff he was never gonna be good. it IS that simple.
i will also admit that he's better now, under a good staff, that has crafted an offense well-suited to his talents, than i ever thought he would be. is he great? no. is he a bona fide starter in the nfl? yes.
big deal.
__________________
Been clowned by the cards since 1989!
Originally posted by SunCardfan I think our main problem has been our coaches I don't think they did a good job of developing Plummer...
I agree with that statement.
That said, doesn't it bother you that Jake never once attended offseason workouts as a Card and then did as a Bronco? Doesn't it bother you that Jurecki tells us jake rarely watched film as a Cardinal yet we keep hearing about his long hours watching film as a Bronco?
In other words isn't it possible that Jake got comfortable losing and wasn't putting in the effort necessary to get better? IT took going to Denver for Jake to learn what it took to improve, a lot of that is on the cards, and a lot of it is on Jake himself. You really think in 6 years here nobody ever told him to look off the safety, run when things were covered, and protect the ball?
He played VERY well last night save the pick for the TD, he played well against KC twice, he has played well in some big games, but the point is because he missed 4 games, 2 of which against the 2 best defenses by FAR on Denver's schedule, his stats are little more impressive than they might otherwise be. He also missed the Steelers a bad pass defense, and the Vikings(who led the NFL in picks this year tied with NE). I'm not saying Jake would be a lousy Qb if he'd played those 4 games I'm just saying his 15-7 TD to INT number would probably not be as good had he played those 4 games.
RUSS - That's the "Creative" part... interpretation of Stats.
Why couldn't it be equally argued that his STATS, with those 4 games, would be equally or more impressive?
"I want a Farve, McNair, or a Carr. Somebody who can take the team on his back and win"
I don't know how well those three players would done if they had started their careers here. I don't know if we would have been able to develop them...
He played VERY well last night save the pick for the TD, he played well against KC twice, he has played well in some big games, but the point is because he missed 4 games, 2 of which against the 2 best defenses by FAR on Denver's schedule, his stats are little more impressive than they might otherwise be. He also missed the Steelers a bad pass defense, and the Vikings(who led the NFL in picks this year tied with NE). I'm not saying Jake would be a lousy Qb if he'd played those 4 games I'm just saying his 15-7 TD to INT number would probably not be as good had he played those 4 games.
RUSS - That's the "Creative" part... interpretation of Stats.
Why couldn't it be equally argued that his STATS, with those 4 games, would be equally or more impressive?
uh, maybe because if you use deductive reasoning you come to the conclusion that he plays better against bad teams and worse against good teams and you have 2 of each in those 4, so he'd probably continue to be a mixed bag of nuts.
__________________
Been clowned by the cards since 1989!
Originally posted by SunCardfan "I want a Farve, McNair, or a Carr. Somebody who can take the team on his back and win"
I don't know how well those three players would done if they had started their careers here. I don't know if we would have been able to develop them...
I don't know if you could say that. Favre has never had any good WRs (except maybe Sterling Sharpe who was only there through '94)) and Ahman Green has only been there a few years. He has still managed to carry that team without a supporting cast.
RUSS - That's the "Creative" part... interpretation of Stats.
Why couldn't it be equally argued that his STATS, with those 4 games, would be equally or more impressive?
Because there's a reason the Patriots lead the NFL in interceptions and fewest TD passes allowed, they have a great pass defense. Sure Jake "might" have thrown for 400 yards and 5 td's, but it's unlikely he would have played all that well against NE, nobody else really has all year.
Same with the Ravens. Again, I'm not saying that would mean Jake is less of a QB, just his stats would likely not look as good if he hadn't missed the 4 games he did. Everyone plays better against bad defenses than good that's why they're called bad defenses.
I guess I mistook creative to mean misleading, look at my posts on Eli Manning I do the same thing there I question how come all his big games are against Memphis and when he plays LSU and schools like that his numbers look ordinary? The truly elite players are able to play well in some big games too, Manning(and his brother for that matter) don't seem to do that.
Originally posted by MaoTosiFanClub I don't know if you could say that. Favre has never had any good WRs (except maybe Sterling Sharpe who was only there through '94)) and Ahman Green has only been there a few years. He has still managed to carry that team without a supporting cast.
you don't think that favre's had good wrs? what about robert brooks? what about (wth is the guys name - can't believe i'm blanking - caught the ball on his back two seasons ago)? he's had good receivers. sharpe was the only great one, but he's had other very good receivers.
__________________
Been clowned by the cards since 1989!
Originally posted by Ouchie-Z-Clown you don't think that favre's had good wrs? what about robert brooks? what about (wth is the guys name - can't believe i'm blanking - caught the ball on his back two seasons ago)? he's had good receivers. sharpe was the only great one, but he's had other very good receivers.
You are thinking of freeman plus now he has driver.
Linear Mode
