So you all want to fire someone?

[Lex]

I think we should fire the people that determined Terrell Suggs was the 16th best player available in this years draft. Ironic, that we had the 17th pick at that time, eh?

Terrell Suggs is the first player in NFL history to record a sack in each of his first four games.

Terrell Suggs has DOUBLE the sacks of our entire team. Let's face it, we have no sacks, the two recorded sacks by Ronnie Mac, were just stats, not real sacks, we actually have zero sacks.

Dave McGinnis is the only reason most players come here, or stay, the players love Mac, and if he's not here, we're in worse trouble.

We lost that game yesterday on the first play of the game. A sack, and 15 yards for grounding, 2nd and 25 from the 6 yard line. We must run the ball, from the start of the game. Once we get in trouble like that, we can't run the ball.

I've seen a lot of "give up" in this team, that we didn't have the last 5 years. We've given up the most points in the league, and we've given up in three of our 4 games, that's why the margins were so big. I feel the players don't think we can come back like we used to, so we give up.

But not Mac. he didn't give up, he was calling timeouts at the end of that fiasco in st. louise.

I wish we would "give up" running good people out of town.

 

[RLakin]

Originally posted by Lex
I think we should fire the people that determined Terrell Suggs was the 16th best player available in this years draft. Ironic, that we had the 17th pick at that time, eh?

Terrell Suggs is the first player in NFL history to record a sack in each of his first four games.

Terrell Suggs has DOUBLE the sacks of our entire team. Let's face it, we have no sacks, the two recorded sacks by Ronnie Mac, were just stats, not real sacks, we actually have zero sacks.

Dave McGinnis is the only reason most players come here, or stay, the players love Mac, and if he's not here, we're in worse trouble.

We lost that game yesterday on the first play of the game. A sack, and 15 yards for grounding, 2nd and 25 from the 6 yard line. We must run the ball, from the start of the game. Once we get in trouble like that, we can't run the ball.

I've seen a lot of "give up" in this team, that we didn't have the last 5 years. We've given up the most points in the league, and we've given up in three of our 4 games, that's why the margins were so big. I feel the players don't think we can come back like we used to, so we give up.

But not Mac. he didn't give up, he was calling timeouts at the end of that fiasco in st. louise.

I wish we would "give up" running good people out of town.

I'm with you on Suggs. A running game, however, is (and will be) a moot point when your starting corners are Barrett and Hill.

 

[Lex]

Mac was coach of the week LAST WEEK.

 

[Pariah]

Why don't McKinnon's sacks count?

 

[Russ Smith]

Originally posted by Lex
I think we should fire the people that determined Terrell Suggs was the 16th best player available in this years draft. Ironic, that we had the 17th pick at that time, eh?

Terrell Suggs is the first player in NFL history to record a sack in each of his first four games.

Terrell Suggs has DOUBLE the sacks of our entire team. Let's face it, we have no sacks, the two recorded sacks by Ronnie Mac, were just stats, not real sacks, we actually have zero sacks.

I've seen a lot of "give up" in this team, that we didn't have the last 5 years. We've given up the most points in the league, and we've given up in three of our 4 games, that's why the margins were so big. I feel the players don't think we can come back like we used to, so we give up.

But not Mac. he didn't give up, he was calling timeouts at the end of that fiasco in st. louise.

I wish we would "give up" running good people out of town.

Umm if LB sacks don't count, then Suggs has ZERO sacks too Lex.

Or do only MLB sacks not count?

We didn't give up against Detroit or Seattle we moved the ball easily in both games we just made turnovers. Yesterday I would tend to agree with you we essentially gave up.If you promise not to complete 60 yard passes we'll let you get 12 yards a pop all game.

I'm not sure what calling timeouts was supposed to prove, he'd have been better served to tell his DC to do something else. Mac has clearly placed the blame for this loss on defense, said at halftime, said it after the game.

 

[green machine]

If we're blaming Graves for not drafting Suggs (I'm not sure if that's what you're doing or not), isn't it then fair to give tons of credit to Graves for picking another record setter, Anquan Boldin?

adam

 

[Lex]

The two sacks we have, happened when the QB's gave up on the play, and tried to run, but didn't quite make it past the line of scrimmage. Ronnie fell on top of them.

 

[Russ Smith]

Originally posted by Lex
The two sacks we have, happened when the QB's gave up on the play, and tried to run, but didn't quite make it past the line of scrimmage. Ronnie fell on top of them.

And Suggs himself said his first 3 sacks happened when the QB decided the guys weren't open, "pulled it down" and he sacked them.

So Suggs has 1 sack this year by your criteria.

Next redefinition of sack please.

 

[PACardsFan]

The HC is ultimately responsible & accountable for the success or failure of a football team. This team has NOT demonstrated that it has improved one iota since Mac took over the reins. Good people get fired all the time, usually because they are BAD coaches. Good coaches WIN, that's why they're good coaches. Coach Mac is a GREAT guy, but a bad HC. If Bidwill has any chance to turn this franchise around, he needs to start by bringing in someone with NFL Head Coaching credentials. It will cost him plenty of money & even a few draft picks if necessary. Otherwise, I'm afraid he'll go to his grave watching a **** team year in & year out. This isn't rocket science guys, that's the ONLY choice he has.

 

[RLakin]

Originally posted by green machine
If we're blaming Graves for not drafting Suggs (I'm not sure if that's what you're doing or not), isn't it then fair to give tons of credit to Graves for picking another record setter, Anquan Boldin?

adam

Yes, because Boldin (the #54 pick) defintely wouldn't have been available at #37. Makes sense.
Of course, I'm sure I'll get the Bryant Johnson counter. But ask yourself, would you rather use a 1st Round pick on a WR that isn't as good as your 2nd Round pick or the 6th one on a guy who is better than your other 1st Rounder.

 

[Wild Card]

Originally posted by Lex
Mac was coach of the week LAST WEEK.

Lex:

The Cardinals pulled off a big upset last week because the Green Bay Packers collectively collapsed from heatstroke and, for a single Sunday, made the Cards look better than they are. The national press--not to mention local observers--probably gave both the team and the coaching staff more credit for that win than they deserved.

Play that game again on a neutral field (i.e., one where the gametime temperature on the field is somewhere in the double-digits) and the Cards are 0-4.

WC

 

[earthsci]

Originally posted by RLakin
But ask yourself, would you rather use a 1st Round pick on a WR that isn't as good as your 2nd Round pick or the 6th one on a guy who is better than your other 1st Rounder.

That's horsecrap. Put Suggs in the same position as Pace on our line and he would have zero sacks. Pace is getting double teamed because he is the only serious threat on our line. Also, Pace plays the run better than Suggs. That's why Suggs doesn't play running downs for the Ravens.

 

[Russ Smith]

Originally posted by RLakin
Yes, because Boldin (the #54 pick) defintely wouldn't have been available at #37. Makes sense.
Of course, I'm sure I'll get the Bryant Johnson counter. But ask yourself, would you rather use a 1st Round pick on a WR that isn't as good as your 2nd Round pick or the 6th one on a guy who is better than your other 1st Rounder.

So what're you saying, Suggs and Boldin would be better than Pace, Johnson and Boldin?

Johnson has done remarkably well given being thrown in when the coaches all admit he's not ready.
17 catches 201 yards, close to a TD each of the last 2 weeks.

At this pace Johnson will catch 68 balls for 800 yards, I think we all would have taken that when the season started?

I don't think it's a bad thing that Boldin turned out to be so good, that's sort of how I'm taking your post so I must be misreading it.

Pace has to play better but I still feel him AND Johnson is better than just getting Suggs for the long term of this team.

 

[jmr667]

Originally posted by earthsci
That's horsecrap. Put Suggs in the same position as Pace on our line and he would have zero sacks. Pace is getting double teamed because he is the only serious threat on our line. Also, Pace plays the run better than Suggs. That's why Suggs doesn't play running downs for the Ravens.

I agree. What has Suggs done against the run. Who would we put in on running downs if Suggs was here.

Besides, even if Suggs were here he wouldn't have time to get to the QBs before they zipped the ball into ANOTHER hole in the zone coverage.

 

[SunCityCarl]

Well fortunately I missed the game on TV yesterday due to previous commitments, but I did get to hear the Dexter Jackson pic & fumble call on the radio.

With 1/4 of the season gone this seems to be the same ol' Cardinals.. (Note: My Sig!) But after some thought since most of us are PO'ed with Marmie why can't Mac take over the Defense? Remember last year when Jim Fassel took over offensive play calling from his OC? Should he be that concerned? After reading Walter's article & most of the posts here maybe "firing" is good but could "demotion" be better? Curious....

 

[Russ Smith]

Originally posted by SunCityCarl
Well fortunately I missed the game on TV yesterday due to previous commitments, but I did get to hear the Dexter Jackson pic & fumble call on the radio.

With 1/4 of the season gone this seems to be the same ol' Cardinals.. (Note: My Sig!) But after some thought since most of us are PO'ed with Marmie why can't Mac take over the Defense? Remember last year when Jim Fassel took over offensive play calling from his OC? Should he be that concerned? After reading Walter's article & most of the posts here maybe "firing" is good but could "demotion" be better? Curious....

Good point, might be the best way to save his job.

 

[JeffGollin]

Lex - I don't care if Terrell Suggs plays safety and Calvin Pace plays middle linebacker.

The point is - Suggs is sacking QB's. Our entire defensive unit is having a little problem with that.

If our objective going into the draft was to increase pressure on the QB, drafting Suggs and putting him at LB would - based on 4 weeks of game evidence - have accomplished this.

If our defensive coaching staff failed to figure this out, it's a reflection on them.

Apparently, some coaching staffs have better abilities to think outside the box and make "right" (rather than appropriate) moves - than do other coaching staffs

 

[Lex]

Boy am I getting sick and tired of the denial around here.

"If Suggs was here, he wouldn't have any sacks, and he can't stop the run, so we'd be worse off."

"If Pace was on the Ravens, he'd have 4 sacks too."

"You can't compare numbers between a linebacker, and a defensive end."

"Suggs is a 3-4 guy, and we play a 4-3, so you can't compare...

What a load of crap.

EVENTUALLY people, we're going to need to get some players in here that can play ball. You've gotta start somewhere.

And I didn't even bring up the guy in Colorado that would be 1-3 if he was still here.

 

[Cbus cardsfan]

I don't know who to blame.I used to always think it was the front offices' fault for getting crappy players but you look at PLummer and Chavous this year and they look like they're going to the pro bowl.Jamir Miller and Simeon Rice have been to the pro bowl and Darwin WAlker is pretty damn good.You can blame the front office for letting those guys go but they weren't playing at a pro bowl(other than Rice,once)level when they were receiving this coaching staff's attention.

 

[Stout]

Originally posted by Russ Smith
So what're you saying, Suggs and Boldin would be better than Pace, Johnson and Boldin?

Johnson has done remarkably well given being thrown in when the coaches all admit he's not ready.
17 catches 201 yards, close to a TD each of the last 2 weeks.

At this pace Johnson will catch 68 balls for 800 yards, I think we all would have taken that when the season started?

I don't think it's a bad thing that Boldin turned out to be so good, that's sort of how I'm taking your post so I must be misreading it.

Pace has to play better but I still feel him AND Johnson is better than just getting Suggs for the long term of this team.

Okay, one last time, folks. It's NOT SUGGS AND BOLDING vs PACE, JOHNSON AND BOLDIN!!! For crying out loud, this is NOT ROCKET SCIENCE!!!

It's basically Suggs (Or, IMO, Lefty) AND a 4th rounder OR Johnson and Pace. Period.

Boldin we would have gotten regardless. We actually had LESS of a chance to get him after the trade. We traded BACK in the second round.

I'm not trying to dredge up whether or not the trade was good or not. I'm just trying to set the record straight, once and for all, about what we could have gotten had we NOT traded. Why can't anyone get this right?

Sorry for yelling, Russ, but I'm sick and tired of folks getting this wrong, either accidentally or purposefully.

 

[RLakin]

Originally posted by Russ Smith
So what're you saying, Suggs and Boldin would be better than Pace, Johnson and Boldin?

Johnson has done remarkably well given being thrown in when the coaches all admit he's not ready.
17 catches 201 yards, close to a TD each of the last 2 weeks.

At this pace Johnson will catch 68 balls for 800 yards, I think we all would have taken that when the season started?

I don't think it's a bad thing that Boldin turned out to be so good, that's sort of how I'm taking your post so I must be misreading it.

Pace has to play better but I still feel him AND Johnson is better than just getting Suggs for the long term of this team.

I would rather have had had Suggs, Boldin and a 4th Round pick than Pace, Johnson, and Boldin. Yes. There is no question in my mind that top 10 prospects are bigger impact makers than those falling into the "no mans land" portion (in Dick Vermeil's words) of the draft. If all things were equal I would take 2 1st Round prospects over 1. But they're not. In the estimation of most Suggs was the best pass rusher available in this draft. So far that's proving to be true. So in the end, I'd rather have 1 impact maker with the 6th pick than two good players with two others.

 

[mdsisquo]

Originally posted by RLakin
Yes, because Boldin (the #54 pick) defintely wouldn't have been available at #37. Makes sense.
Of course, I'm sure I'll get the Bryant Johnson counter. But ask yourself, would you rather use a 1st Round pick on a WR that isn't as good as your 2nd Round pick or the 6th one on a guy who is better than your other 1st Rounder.

OK, thats enough. This whole "Suggs vs. Pace" convo is simply a waste of time, a monumental waste of time. We all need to stop compairing them, they are really apples and oranges. Suggs is a OLB, Pace is a RDE. If we drafted Suggs, he would be playing on the d-line. We have NO idea what he would be like there at the pro level. I repeat, NO IDEA. Suggs plays on a team who has one of the best, if not THE best defense in the leauge. He plays on a defense with a single player who requires several people to pay attention to him on every play. And 3-4 other people that are so good, they required special attention as well. Everyone is so busy trying to watch J. Lewis and co. that Suggs has only 1 person to beat on every play, just 1. If he was in AZ, playing DE, he would be double or tripple teamed on every play, just like what is currently happening to Pace.
Stop making comparisons between these two guys! They play different positions, on different teams, with a different surrounding cast. They have different D-coordiators. Need I go on? This debate is rediculous! If some of you want to waste valuable time and effort compairing two players that have no similarities, go right ahead. You can debate it untill you turn blue in the face, it's really really pointless. So go on, keep doing it. Curse this team all you want. Curse graves, Curse Pace. But this is one poster who won't get caught up in such nonsense. I've got better things to do, I've got a LIFE!

PEACE!

 

[Russ Smith]

Originally posted by Stout
Okay, one last time, folks. It's NOT SUGGS AND BOLDING vs PACE, JOHNSON AND BOLDIN!!! For crying out loud, this is NOT ROCKET SCIENCE!!!

It's basically Suggs (Or, IMO, Lefty) AND a 4th rounder OR Johnson and Pace. Period.

Boldin we would have gotten regardless. We actually had LESS of a chance to get him after the trade. We traded BACK in the second round.

I'm not trying to dredge up whether or not the trade was good or not. I'm just trying to set the record straight, once and for all, about what we could have gotten had we NOT traded. Why can't anyone get this right?

Sorry for yelling, Russ, but I'm sick and tired of folks getting this wrong, either accidentally or purposefully.

now I'm confused, all I said was I prefer the 3 we got, to Suggs and Boldin, which is what we MIGHT have wound up with had we stayed pat. Given the apparently discussiong over Quan at 54(from last weeks post saying Tolbert convinced us to take him) it's entirely possible we'd have passed on him at 37 and taken someone else.

 

[Lex]

Ok mr. "I've got a life."

Answer me this. Is Baltimores defense that good because they're just lucky, or do they have someone in thier front office that can spot good defensive talent like Lewis and company, and Terrell Suggs?

Perhaps if we would have drafted Suggs, we would have a good defense like thiers someday.

This thread is about firing the people that decided Suggs was the 16th best player in the draft. Clearly wrong.

 

[Russ Smith]

Originally posted by RLakin
I would rather have had had Suggs, Boldin and a 4th Round pick than Pace, Johnson, and Boldin. Yes. There is no question in my mind that top 10 prospects are bigger impact makers than those falling into the "no mans land" portion (in Dick Vermeil's words) of the draft. If all things were equal I would take 2 1st Round prospects over 1. But they're not. In the estimation of most Suggs was the best pass rusher available in this draft. So far that's proving to be true. So in the end, I'd rather have 1 impact maker with the 6th pick than two good players with two others.

OK but given that Tolbert apparently had to convince us to take Boldin at 54, how do you know we'd have taken him at 37? We may have taken Taylor Jacobs or Bethel Johnson, both taken AFTER 37, but before 54 and both rated ahead of Boldin on most boards. It's impossible for us to know we'd have gotten Quan if we took Suggs.

That's hindsight plain and simple because Boldin is playing so well. Originally when this stuff came up after the draft people were saying we could have got Johnson at 37, now because Boldin is so good we're saying Boldin instead.

I'd take the 3 we got over Suggs and Boldin FYI, what we have now at WR is thin enough without Johnson we'd be ridiculously bad.