Warner wows his receivers - Page 4

*RealRam* · #46 (**permalink**) -12-08-2004

You're right, TX. He's gone alright. And as much as I regret the fact, he's a NYG now. Period. Sigh...

I only wish we could have kept No. 13 for THIS ... one ... last season. Best wishes KW, but we are now on a mission.

Understood.

**HUbison** · #47 (**permalink**) -12-08-2004

Quote:

Originally Posted by NickSeiler

Um, you're missing my point I think.

It's been known to happen, Nick. :redface:

Quote:

Originally Posted by NickSeiler

The fact that they cut Warner doesn't show they didn't address it, just that they didn't successfully address it.

You're absolutely right, but from a fan's perspective, is there a difference?

Quote:

Originally Posted by NickSeiler

there were other non-team factors that contributed to his being cut.

If you're referring to the cap...well you don't think that he would have been cut if this had been sorted out during the 2002 season, do you? But that is speculation in its purest form, so I guess there's really no way to know. Forget I asked.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NickSeiler

And get no where? Unless some kind of commentary comes out about everything that went down to the locker room, this will go unanswered.

You're right. And this could be said of about 98.3% of all discussions on this board. Oh well. I mean do we ever really get answers in any of these discussions? No, but it's fun to try, huh.

Bottom line: like everything else, this is going to boil down to a difference of opinions that will never cross paths. And that's okay.
I think --- that some combination of Martz and FO made poor personnel decisions that led to the release of Warner
You think --- that Warner was released because of a combination of salary cap, lack of performance & negative impact on team morale

Honestly, Nick, I hope guys like you, Tx, AR and the others are right, because your scenario is a whole lot better for me to deal with. If you're right, problem solved.

If I'm right, nothing solved.

I hope you guys are right. :ramlogo:

**txramsfan** · #48 (**permalink**) -12-08-2004

I just hope we stop the run.....

*Yodude* · #49 (**permalink**) -12-08-2004

Nice reply, HUbison.

Like you, I really hope I'm wrong and the organization made the right decision in this case.

**HUbison** · #50 (**permalink**) -12-08-2004

Quote:

Originally Posted by txramsfan

I just hope we stop the run.....

That's the answer! We should have converted Warner to DT.

Disclaimer: The preceeding comment was intended as a joke. The comment should in no way indicate an opinion of HUbison that Martz should convert any of his QBs including, but not limited to, Marc Bulger, Chris Chandler, Jeff Smoker, and/or Russ Michna to defensive tackle.

I am HUbison and I approve this message.

**Nick** · #51 (**permalink**) -12-08-2004

Quote:

Originally Posted by HUbison

You're absolutely right, but from a fan's perspective, is there a difference?

I think it does. We're talking about a difference between our FO not giving a crap and our FO trying their best and not succeeding. One is clearly better than the other.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HUbison

You're right. And this could be said of about 98.3% of all discussions on this board.

Touché. I'd just prefer to spend time debating things that we know about or at least will get an answer to at some point. I think in this case, we just have to trust our FO did everything they could and it just wasn't enough to solve whatever problems they had.

**HUbison** · #52 (**permalink**) -12-08-2004

Quote:

Originally Posted by NickSeiler

I'd just prefer to spend time debating things that we know about or at least will get an answer to at some point.

Sounds good to me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NickSeiler

I think in this case, we just have to trust our FO did everything they could and it just wasn't enough to solve whatever problems they had.

Well, I'm just not as quick to trust management in this matter. However, I will stipulate the fact that my opinion of Rams management actions or inactions in this matter have no bearing on how I feel about the team on the field.

So, I don't like it, but I can live with it. Go Rams. :ramlogo:

*Caramsfan* · #53 (**permalink**) -15-08-2004

Warner = Spilt Milk. As I watched his throws in the first Giants Pre Season match I couldn't help but notice how he seems to have lost some velocity on the ball over years past. It may have just been camp arm, but time will tell.

I, like many of us here, Wanted to see Warner compete for the starting position here with the Rams. But for whatever the reasons the team management decided this wasn't the direction to go.

So lets get behind young Bulger and hope he improves over last years version.

And sign Pace now!

**AvengerRam** · #54 (**permalink**) -15-08-2004

As I've said before, the suggestion that Warner was let go solely because of chemistry issues is nonsense. Warner was let go because, in the past two years he has either been injured or ineffective. In the same two year span, Marc Bulger, who comes at a much lower price tag, has been the more effective QB.

If Warner was still lighting it up, he could have been trying to baptize Jewish refs on the field during games, making his teammates pay him to speak with him, and referring to Coach Martz as "Mr. Satan," and he would still be this team's starter.

*rampower* · #55 (**permalink**) -15-08-2004

Here Here CA ram fan. Bashing these 2 qb's gets us nowhere, I for one will try to look at the new season with optimism as always.

Rp

*Yodude* · #56 (**permalink**) -15-08-2004

If Warner had been given a chance to work his way back from his injuries and shake off the rust last year, we would have won our second Super Bowl!

**AvengerRam** · #57 (**permalink**) -15-08-2004

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yodude

If Warner had been given a chance to work his way back from his injuries and shake off the rust last year, we would have won our second Super Bowl!

Oh really? You know that for a fact, do you?

*Yodude* · #58 (**permalink**) -15-08-2004

Quote:

Oh really? You know that for a fact, do you?

Ok, Ok...I admit...I was speculating! :redface:

**Nick** · #59 (**permalink**) -15-08-2004

Alright, I'm diggin' deep now.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yodude

If Warner had been given a chance to work his way back from his injuries and shake off the rust last year, we would have won our second Super Bowl!

If I remember correctly, Warner was given the chance to work his way back from injuries and shake off rust in 2002. Only he lied to his team about his hand being broken and cost them a game against Philly with exceptionally poor play which was related to the injury.

Furthermore, take into consideration Warner suffered a concussion against the New Orleans Saints in 2000, an injury which he rushed back from and continued to suffer symptoms nearly four months after the fact (which Warner himself admitted to). When asked during 2001's camp whether he's at 100% again, Warner said he isn't sure if he's 100% healthy or not because he's unable to tell what that is now (KFFL.com). Then we have the concussion last season, which we still don't know whether or not it was a true concussion but know Warner was suffering from the symptoms according to Martz.

Thus, I submit this into evidence. Please note researches found that "prior concussions may indeed lower the threshold for subsequent concussion injury and increase symptom severity in even seemingly mild subsequent concussions." Since a concussion is defined as head trauma brought about by blows to the head, it's logical to assume that in the Mike Martz offense, Kurt Warner has and would continue to sustain hard blows to his entire body, including his head. Therefore, for Kurt, the risk of future concussions was higher. Combine this with what we know about him from 2002 -- he'll downplay the seriousness of an injury in order to stay or get back on the field -- and it sounds to me as if we have a pretty interesting problem on our hands.

And that's not even going into the hand arthritis, which it seems we saw first hand in the Giants preseason opener, and any confidence issues or team chemistry issues. Yet despite all this, you still contend that Warner should have been worked back into the starting line-up in 2003 because he offered the best chance to win a Super Bowl? I really find that hard to believe.

*Yodude* · #60 (**permalink**) -15-08-2004

Boy, you sure did dig deep on this one...I'm surprised you didn't end up in China, or maybe you did.

Quote:

If I remember correctly, Warner was given the chance to work his way back from injuries and shake off rust in 2002. Only he lied to his team about his hand being broken and cost them a game against Philly with exceptionally poor play which was related to the injury.

You remember incorrectly. While I admit that he probably downplayed his injuries because he's a competitor, he never lied, because he didn't know that the hand was broken until the x-ray, which happened later in the season (or possibly right after the Eagles game). I find it amusing that other QB's who try to play through injuries are characterised as tough and having heart, but Warner is characterised as selfish and self-serving. To borrow your favorite word Nick, I find it "rediculous" that anyone would think that Warner knew his hand was broken but still thought he gave the team the best chance to win.

Something else about the Eagles game. Warner was sacked a rediculous 8 times...stellar offensive line play, wouldn't you say? Here's something else for your consideration...20 running plays for the game...an average of 5 per quarter...sound offensive game planning, right? Especially when your QB is getting massacred. 3 fumbles by the offense (one by Warner) certainly didn't help...and yet you contend Warner cost them the game single-handedly. Here's that word you like again...."rediculous", I say.

Funny you should use the 2001 season in your argument...the season Warner won his 2nd League MVP award, and the Rams returned to the Super Bowl. I'm lost...that served your argument how?

Quote:

, I submit this into evidence. Please note researches found that "prior concussions may indeed lower the threshold for subsequent concussion injury and increase symptom severity in even seemingly mild subsequent concussions." Since a concussion is defined as head trauma brought about by blows to the head, it's logical to assume that in the Mike Martz offense, Kurt Warner has and would continue to sustain hard blows to his entire body, including his head. Therefore, for Kurt, the risk of future concussions was higher. Combine this with what we know about him from 2002 -- he'll downplay the seriousness of an injury in order to stay or get back on the field -- and it sounds to me as if we have a pretty interesting problem on our hands.

So your saying part of reason he was let go was in consideration for future concussions and his well-being. I can't even argue with that kind of illogic.

Quote:

And that's not even going into the hand arthritis,

Maybe he should have gotten himself hooked on pain pills to counter the effects of the arthritis.

You've had some really good posts dude...but, all in all, I found this one to be quite silly.