The Cardinals are going to regret drafting Kyler Murray

[Scooby-Doo]

I don't know...which one of the voices in your head was it?

Keep making shit up. It might justify your point to yourself.

 

[gob]

Keep making shit up. It might justify your point to yourself.

You said this:

"And, they will be running Kingsbury's air raid offense which is predicated on getting the ball out quickly with a freakishly mobile QB."


You got part of that right, but his offenses obviously don't require really mobile QBs. Otherwise he wouldn't have been recruiting pro-style ones in college.

 

[Scooby-Doo]

You said this:

"And, they will be running Kingsbury's air raid offense which is predicated on getting the ball out quickly with a freakishly mobile QB."


You got part of that right, but his offenses obviously don't require really mobile QBs. Otherwise he wouldn't have been recruiting pro-style ones in college.

My post was with regard to the oline and why it wasn't as important with the air raid offense and a freakishly mobile QB. I didn't mean the air raid offense required a freakishly mobile QB.

I can see how that might be misinterpreted.

Personally, I thought Rosen could do a fine job in Kingsburys offense.

 

[shopson67]

I know you hope it goes horribly bad. As you said, we shall see.

I can't recall a situation where a losing college coach was hired as head coach of an NFL team. Strange days. If it fails, sure, that's good for the Rams, but not my driving reasoning here...

 

[GhostOfPoverty]

Honestly, he'll be a bust on some level if he doesn't become a top ~10 GOAT QB by the time his career is done. How many other QB's have been taken 1st overall in the draft the year immediately the same team traded up to draft a different "QB of the future" in the top 10 overall picks?

But even forgetting all of that and just basing him on his own merits as a 1st overall pick - they ultimately need to get a title with him at some point for it to have been "worth it". If he's anything short of a perennial top 3 QB of his era starting by his 3rd season or sooner, along with being the type of guy who can will a possibly bad team into playoff contention because he's just that good, he'll be a dissapointment.

If Cardinals fans would be content with him simply being a very good but not great QB who ends up with a Donovan McNabb type career, then good for them. But he's still a bust if he doesn't end up being one of the absolute best in the league for ~15+ years.

 

[Shanemansj13]

I can't recall a situation where a losing college coach was hired as head coach of an NFL team. Strange days. If it fails, sure, that's good for the Rams, but not my driving reasoning here...

They are definitely trying to do something not one team has ever done before.

Hire a college coach that wasn't a very successful coach and then start an undersized, mobile, athletic QB. Ballsy.

I mean look at Saban (the best college coach ever), he tried coaching in the NFL. Actually had one good season but other than that he wasn't good. Coaching in college is completely different than the NFL, but for his sake at least NFL offenses are kinda floating more towards college.

 

[Shanemansj13]

Honestly, he'll be a bust on some level if he doesn't become a top ~10 GOAT QB by the time his career is done. How many other QB's have been taken 1st overall in the draft the year immediately the same team traded up to draft a different "QB of the future" in the top 10 overall picks?

But even forgetting all of that and just basing him on his own merits as a 1st overall pick - they ultimately need to get a title with him at some point for it to have been "worth it". If he's anything short of a perennial top 3 QB of his era starting by his 3rd season or sooner, along with being the type of guy who can will a possibly bad team into playoff contention because he's just that good, he'll be a dissapointment.

If Cardinals fans would be content with him simply being a very good but not great QB who ends up with a Donovan McNabb type career, then good for them. But he's still a bust if he doesn't end up being one of the absolute best in the league for ~15+ years.

LOL this made me laugh but no.

There is a BIG difference between McNabb and a top 10 QB of all-time

 

[Scooby-Doo]

I can't recall a situation where a losing college coach was hired as head coach of an NFL team. Strange days. If it fails, sure, that's good for the Rams, but not my driving reasoning here...

True, but success in college doesn't necessarily translate to success in the NFL either.

Steve Spurrier, Nick Saban, Paul Spinelli,Bobby Petrino, Dennis Erickson, Butch Davis, Lou Holtz. Heck, even Pete Carroll failed his first time around.

I look a Kliff as more of a OC. They have Vance Joseph to run the defense. It is uncharted turf. Neither of know if it will work.

 

[Scooby-Doo]

They are definitely trying to do something not one team has ever done before.

Hire a college coach that wasn't a very successful coach and then start an undersized, mobile, athletic QB. Ballsy.

I mean look at Saban (the best college coach ever), he tried coaching in the NFL. Actually had one good season but other than that he wasn't good. Coaching in college is completely different than the NFL, but for his sake at least NFL offenses are kinda floating more towards college.

Someone has to be the trendsetter

 

[gob]

My post was with regard to the oline and why it wasn't as important with the air raid offense and a freakishly mobile QB. I didn't mean the air raid offense required a freakishly mobile QB.

I can see how that might be misinterpreted.

Personally, I thought Rosen could do a fine job in Kingsburys offense.

Fair enough. That's a valid point

 

[shopson67]

Show me the list.

There isn't one in modern times. Short QBs of any note whatsoever:

Russell Wilson is taller at 5'11. Doug Flutie was 5'10 and had to go to Canada, was a mediocre sometime starter/backup in the NFL. If you want to go way back, Sonny Jurgensen and Jim Finks were successful and the only sub-6' QBs in the HOF, both at 5'11. Sean Payton was 5'11 and did his best work holding up a clipboard until he became a coach. At 5'9, Eddie LeBaron was successful in the 50s. Davey O'Brien at 5'7 is the namesake of the college QB of the year award, yet only lasted two seasons (albeit successful seasons) in the NFL after his Heisman season in 1938.

Only 1 QB under 6' has been drafted in the past 10 years before Kyler (Russell Wilson). He also has the only Super Bowl title led by a QB under 6'.

There have been 9 QBs in the NFL under 6' since 1970, 51 before 1970, yet only 2 in the HOF (possibly 3 with Wilson).

There is little to no precedent for Kyler to be successful in the NFL, ignoring the fact that he needs a gimmick offense to succeed, which will be led by a losing college coach. It could all go splendidly, but the odds are against it.

 

[shopson67]

Honestly, he'll be a bust on some level if he doesn't become a top ~10 GOAT QB by the time his career is done. How many other QB's have been taken 1st overall in the draft the year immediately the same team traded up to draft a different "QB of the future" in the top 10 overall picks?

But even forgetting all of that and just basing him on his own merits as a 1st overall pick - they ultimately need to get a title with him at some point for it to have been "worth it". If he's anything short of a perennial top 3 QB of his era starting by his 3rd season or sooner, along with being the type of guy who can will a possibly bad team into playoff contention because he's just that good, he'll be a dissapointment.

If Cardinals fans would be content with him simply being a very good but not great QB who ends up with a Donovan McNabb type career, then good for them. But he's still a bust if he doesn't end up being one of the absolute best in the league for ~15+ years.

I don't know about all that. If he's significantly better than Rosen going forward, that eliminates the back-to-back 1st round QB discussion IMO.

 

[GhostOfPoverty]

LOL this made me laugh but no.

There is a BIG difference between McNabb and a top 10 QB of all-time

You don't think a QB picked 1st overall the year after his team drafted a different QB in the top 10 before shipping him out for the new guy could have expectations as high as top 10 all-time, or somewhere in that range? How about top 25 all-time, would that be too lofty of hopes considering his draft status and following another top 10 pick going into his 2nd year in the NFL?

Think back to other 1st overalls like Peyton Manning and Andrew Luck. Those guys weren't picked up immeidately after other top 10 pick QB's were abandoned after their rookie season, and people were still speculating that they'd be top 10 all-time. Peyton clearly achieved that, and Luck has been good with flashes of greatness, but bogged down by injuries and being on an awful team year after year, making his chances of doing that slim. Why should it be any different for a guy who was apparently such an incredible prospect that it was worth booting another top 10 QB immediately after his rookie year?

As for the McNabb comment, I'm not sure what you're getting at. I mentioned him as a guy who had a very good career, also as mobile (and much taller) QB back when NFL defenses weren't as adjusted to the concept, but obviously wasn't some HOF guy. I mentioned that because the way some people are acting ITT suggests that they think Kyler Murray turning out to be in that "very good, but not great" category would somehow save enough face to consider the pick less than a flop. I am arguing the he absolutely needs to be significantly better than that to have been worthy of his draft status.

 

[GhostOfPoverty]

I think the line is pretty long with people thinking this will end badly for AZ. Back to Back top 10 draft picks at the QB position? This was probably the most daring move I've ever seen in 40+ yrs of watching the NFL.

I think the better comparison is the guy that played at OU the year before he did...Baker Mayfield...same OFC, same style of play. Yeah, I get that he's a little taller/bigger, but if you're under 6'3" playing QB in the NFL, you're short by NFL standards and will have issues finding passing lanes that 6'5" guys won't have nearly as much.

Mayfield is 6'1", 209 lbs. Kyler Murray is 5'10", a solid 3" shorter than Mayfield.

In terms of size, 6'1" Murray is a lot more comparable to someone like 6'2" Brett Favre than Murray's 5'10". Russell Wilson at 5'11 and thicker than Murray is literally the only sub-6'0" QB to succeed among the best of his time in the modern era. The next closest is Doug Flutie at 5'10" in the 90's, who was a backup tier QB in the NFL. Let's also not forget Murray had 1 legit quality college season in his senior year, whereas Wilson had 3 before being taken in the 3rd round.

Again, I have nothing against Murray personally. If he succeeds, then good on him, and I'll be happy to admit I was mistaken. But to act like the odds aren't drastically stacked against him with all factors considered is just nonsensical. In fact, I would argue that Murray living up to his hype would be almost as unprecidented as Tom Brady at 6'4" with a traditional QB frame becoming a legend as a 7th rounder. That's how historical Murray becoming a legit NFL legend would be.

 

[Shanemansj13]

You don't think a QB picked 1st overall the year after his team drafted a different QB in the top 10 before shipping him out for the new guy could have expectations as high as top 10 all-time, or somewhere in that range? How about top 25 all-time, would that be too lofty of hopes considering his draft status and following another top 10 pick going into his 2nd year in the NFL?

Think back to other 1st overalls like Peyton Manning and Andrew Luck. Those guys weren't picked up immeidately after other top 10 pick QB's were abandoned after their rookie season, and people were still speculating that they'd be top 10 all-time. Peyton clearly achieved that, and Luck has been good with flashes of greatness, but bogged down by injuries and being on an awful team year after year, making his chances of doing that slim. Why should it be any different for a guy who was apparently such an incredible prospect that it was worth booting another top 10 QB immediately after his rookie year?

As for the McNabb comment, I'm not sure what you're getting at. I mentioned him as a guy who had a very good career, also as mobile (and much taller) QB back when NFL defenses weren't as adjusted to the concept, but obviously wasn't some HOF guy. I mentioned that because the way some people are acting ITT suggests that they think Kyler Murray turning out to be in that "very good, but not great" category would somehow save enough face to consider the pick less than a flop. I am arguing the he absolutely needs to be significantly better than that to have been worthy of his draft status.

I'm not sure what you are getting at. "Honestly, he'll be a bust on some level if he doesn't become a top ~10 GOAT QB by the time his career is done"

^^^That comment just doesn't make sense bc you have to take in a bunch of factors. Just bc he was a #1 pick and was picked by the same team that also picked a top 10 QB the previous year doesn't mean he will be a bust if he doesn't become a top 10 QB. (The fact that a team took another QB the previous year has nothing to do with Murray. Nothing.)

Lets look at #1 picks that aren't top 10 QB's of all-time and that weren't busts:

Aikman isn't a top 10 QB and he won multiple SB's. Wasn't even the best player on his team. He wasn't a bust.
Terry Bradshaw (some might have him as top 10, I don't) Also, not a top QB. Won a handful of SB's.
Eli Manning. Not close to a top 10 QB. Won two SB's.
Jim Plunkett. Not close to a top 10 QB.
Carson Palmer. Not close again but had a pretty successful career. Took his team to the playoffs 3 times but he didn't really have a very good teams around him for the most part.
Drew Bledsoe. Not a top 10 or close. Took his team to the playoffs 3 times and to one SB.
Matthew Stafford. He is actually underrated. Never had very good teams around him but either way, he isn't a bust.
Alex Smith. 3 time Pro Bowlers and a pretty solid QB. Made the playoffs 5 different years. 1 conf championship game.

 

[Shanemansj13]

Mayfield is 6'1", 209 lbs. Kyler Murray is 5'10", a solid 3" shorter than Mayfield.

In terms of size, 6'1" Murray is a lot more comparable to someone like 6'2" Brett Favre than Murray's 5'10". Russell Wilson at 5'11 and thicker than Murray is literally the only sub-6'0" QB to succeed among the best of his time in the modern era. The next closest is Doug Flutie at 5'10" in the 90's, who was a backup tier QB in the NFL. Let's also not forget Murray had 1 legit quality college season in his senior year, whereas Wilson had 3 before being taken in the 3rd round.

Again, I have nothing against Murray personally. If he succeeds, then good on him, and I'll be happy to admit I was mistaken. But to act like the odds aren't drastically stacked against him with all factors considered is just nonsensical. In fact, I would argue that Murray living up to his hype would be almost as unprecidented as Tom Brady at 6'4" with a traditional QB frame becoming a legend as a 7th rounder. That's how historical Murray becoming a legit NFL legend would be.

Who is acting like this? I think everyone and their mom thinks the odds are stacked against him. Even Zona fans.
He doesn't have to be GOAT Top 10 to be a successful QB or be a success to this Cardinals organization. Not sure why you are getting that notion.

 

[GNG]

I can't recall a situation where a losing college coach was hired as head coach of an NFL team. Strange days. If it fails, sure, that's good for the Rams, but not my driving reasoning here...

Kingsbury was not a good college coach and I doubt he'll be a good NFL coach.

 

[mcnabb7542]

If Cardinals fans would be content with him simply being a very good but not great QB who ends up with a Donovan McNabb type career, then good for them. But he's still a bust if he doesn't end up being one of the absolute best in the league for ~15+ years.

I don't know some fan base might get excited about their team playing in four conference title games and a Super Bowl in 10 years!

 

[ATL96Steeler]

Mayfield is 6'1", 209 lbs. Kyler Murray is 5'10", a solid 3" shorter than Mayfield.

In terms of size, 6'1" Murray is a lot more comparable to someone like 6'2" Brett Favre than Murray's 5'10". Russell Wilson at 5'11 and thicker than Murray is literally the only sub-6'0" QB to succeed among the best of his time in the modern era. The next closest is Doug Flutie at 5'10" in the 90's, who was a backup tier QB in the NFL. Let's also not forget Murray had 1 legit quality college season in his senior year, whereas Wilson had 3 before being taken in the 3rd round.

Again, I have nothing against Murray personally. If he succeeds, then good on him, and I'll be happy to admit I was mistaken. But to act like the odds aren't drastically stacked against him with all factors considered is just nonsensical. In fact, I would argue that Murray living up to his hype would be almost as unprecidented as Tom Brady at 6'4" with a traditional QB frame becoming a legend as a 7th rounder. That's how historical Murray becoming a legit NFL legend would be.

I think we're in the same place, maybe saying it differently.

What I'm saying is there is not much difference in a 5'10" QB and a 6'1" QB, you're still short by NFL standards and will have issues finding passing lanes. I don't think that 3" hurts him that much unless they plan on him taking 5-7 step drops 35-40 times a game.

This is the biggest thing...I don't think you're making a bold statement here...I said the same thing about RW, Baker Mayfield and to date both have proven me wrong...I feel the same way about Murray...I have a bias towards 6'4" + QBs and they fail all the time...this was an incredibly bold move for AZ to make.

 

[Scooby-Doo]

There isn't one in modern times. Short QBs of any note whatsoever:

Russell Wilson is taller at 5'11. Doug Flutie was 5'10 and had to go to Canada, was a mediocre sometime starter/backup in the NFL. If you want to go way back, Sonny Jurgensen and Jim Finks were successful and the only sub-6' QBs in the HOF, both at 5'11. Sean Payton was 5'11 and did his best work holding up a clipboard until he became a coach. At 5'9, Eddie LeBaron was successful in the 50s. Davey O'Brien at 5'7 is the namesake of the college QB of the year award, yet only lasted two seasons (albeit successful seasons) in the NFL after his Heisman season in 1938.

Only 1 QB under 6' has been drafted in the past 10 years before Kyler (Russell Wilson). He also has the only Super Bowl title led by a QB under 6'.

There have been 9 QBs in the NFL under 6' since 1970, 51 before 1970, yet only 2 in the HOF (possibly 3 with Wilson).

There is little to no precedent for Kyler to be successful in the NFL, ignoring the fact that he needs a gimmick offense to succeed, which will be led by a losing college coach. It could all go splendidly, but the odds are against it.

That is my point, there isn't a lot of comparisons. 9 QB's under 6' and 2 HOFers with the potential of 3. That's 33% of QB's under 6' that make the HOF. I'll take those odds

What do you think the percentage is of QB's over 6' that make the HOF? A lot less than 33%?

The air raid offense is a philosophy based on the RPO. That's all it is. You can call it a gimmick, but a lot of NFL teams run the RPO including the Rams.