Watching Kurt Warner a football life

[EliDaMANning]

Its a good point.
But my real point here was a response to a poster who suggested that 2004 Eli was somehow better than Warner. Now Eli has certainly developed into a fine player, but 2004 Eli was absolutely horrible. There was already talk about Eli being a bust after the Baltimore game (which may have been the worst performance by a Giants QB ever).

Its just another example of how some of these folks take this Eli thing way too far.

I didn't say he was better than Warner in 04 and the record would suggest it. If you read my post, clearly I was saying Eli was already better than Warner in different aspect of the QB position. He was able to take less sacks, call audibles at the right time, set up protection better etc.

When the Giants made the change to Eli, Kurt was already a lost cause by that time. He was hearing footsteps on every dropback and had lost the team by then. They probably would've been 1-6 with him instead of Eli the way he was playing.

Your reading comprehension skills are just as bad as Kurt's ability to throw away the ball.

[Morehead State]

I didn't say he was better than Warner in 04 and the record would suggest it. If you read my post, clearly I was saying Eli was already better than Warner in different aspect of the QB position. He was able to take less sacks, call audibles at the right time, set up protection better etc.

When the Giants made the change to Eli, Kurt was already a lost cause by that time. He was hearing footsteps on every dropback and had lost the team by then. They probably would've been 1-6 with him instead of Eli the way he was playing.

Your reading comprehension skills are just as bad as Kurt's ability to throw away the ball.

Fight with yourself. I'm not biting.

[Delicreep]

Makes me hate tiki barber even more. Dirtbag acts like he would rather have had Warner over Eli. I do respect Warner for not wanting to start a controversery with Eli. Still wont forgive him for dissing Eli.

There is no part of this that I don't disagree with.

1) Tiki naturally wanted a seasoned and wily vet over a rookie. If he was thinking that he was nearing the end of his career, why wouldn't he want the guy whom was most ready to play?
2) Warner is a better man than Collins, and a lot of other vets. Collins wanted out because he didn't want to babysit Eli; Warner knew the deal ahead of time and still played his guts out.
3) the HOF line from Warner was horrible timing - guy just won his second MVP, again in dramatic fashion - it was Eli's moment. At best, he should have been more delicate. To me, the line felt more like he was trying to shore up his own case for the hall, and not a shot at Eli per se.
Besides, he did kinda walk it back that same conversation - I think he realized it was bad to timing as soon as he said it.

[Morehead State]

There is no part of this that I don't disagree with.

1) Tiki naturally wanted a seasoned and wily vet over a rookie. If he was thinking that he was nearing the end of his career, why wouldn't he want the guy whom was most ready to play?
2) Warner is a better man than Collins, and a lot of other vets. Collins wanted out because he didn't want to babysit Eli; Warner knew the deal ahead of time and still played his guts out.
3) the HOF line from Warner was horrible timing - guy just won his second MVP, again in dramatic fashion - it was Eli's moment. At best, he should have been more delicate. To me, the line felt more like he was trying to shore up his own case for the hall, and not a shot at Eli per se.
Besides, he did kinda walk it back that same conversation - I think he realized it was bad to timing as soon as he said it.

Give me a player who wants to start and play instead of "babysitting" another player any day of the week.
Collins went on to play some very good football for several years after leaving us.

Why on earth would you conclude that one guy is a "better man" than another because he wants to play football., and not just accept a role as second fiddle.
I don't get your point at all.

[gmen46]

Its a good point.
But my real point here was a response to a poster who suggested that 2004 Eli was somehow better than Warner. Now Eli has certainly developed into a fine player, but 2004 Eli was absolutely horrible. There was already talk about Eli being a bust after the Baltimore game (which may have been the worst performance by a Giants QB ever).

Its just another example of how some of these folks take this Eli thing way too far.

You're correct about Eli having an atrocious game vs the Ravens, with only 27 (or close) passing yards, and around 30%completion rate.

On the other hand, the very next week, against the 12-1 eventual SB Champion Steelers, Eli had a very good game--out performing Roethlisberger (not in yards but in completion rate, TDs and TD/Int ratio, and even outran the "mobile" Ben), barely losing to them by 3 points. Followed by a decent game vs Bengals, losing by a couple points, and finishing the season the next week with a win vs Cowboys.

Point is, Eli--as poorly as he appeared to perform his rookie year of 7 starts--already was revealing his ability to learn from mistakes, his ability to improve from one game to the next, and his now-established ability to shake off a poor performance and follow with a good-to-great performance the next game.

Would that be an example of my taking "this Eli thing" too far?

[gumby74]

You're correct about Eli having an atrocious game vs the Ravens, with only 27 (or close) passing yards, and around 30%completion rate.

On the other hand, the very next week, against the 12-1 eventual SB Champion Steelers, Eli had a very good game--out performing Roethlisberger (not in yards but in completion rate, TDs and TD/Int ratio, and even outran the "mobile" Ben), barely losing to them by 3 points. Followed by a decent game vs Bengals, losing by a couple points, and finishing the season the next week with a win vs Cowboys.

Point is, Eli--as poorly as he appeared to perform his rookie year of 7 starts--already was revealing his ability to learn from mistakes, his ability to improve from one game to the next, and his now-established ability to shake off a poor performance and follow with a good-to-great performance the next game.

Would that be an example of my taking "this Eli thing" too far?

Not at all. Eli definitely showed flashes. But as a whole, his rookie season was less then stellar - as was expected..

[BuffyBlueII]

thats not true buffyblue. technically, what happened, is right after sb 46, some writers were commenting that the win would solidify a HoF spot when his career ended. they werent saying "eli manning, HOF right now lets vote him in." So, IF warner was actually coming from that perspective, itd be unwarranted, as no one had claimed eli manning was ending his career, and 5 yrs theyd be voting on him, so for warner to then remark about eli not being HoF wasnt based on the premise that he still had to play out his career, it was that the 2 sb mvps and all, werent worthy of a HoF...thats why he backtracked like immediately the next day into a more PC, "he still has his career to finish out" but he had already made it clear he had objected to the notion he was HoF worthy...but to be fair, imho, it coulda been anyone not named kurt warner and he woulda had an issue about their being discussed as HoF and not him, which is what i believe ultimately triggered him to respond in the first place...and fwiw, imho, eli makes the HoF whether he hangs em up tomorrow r plays 10 more yrs and breaks every record...2 sb mvps carry way more weight with the voters than some realize

I also think Eli makes the HoF of he were to retire now. However, I have no issue with Kurt Warner stating his opinion. He is an analyst and it wasn't like he demeaned Eli.

[Morehead State]

You're correct about Eli having an atrocious game vs the Ravens, with only 27 (or close) passing yards, and around 30%completion rate.

On the other hand, the very next week, against the 12-1 eventual SB Champion Steelers, Eli had a very good game--out performing Roethlisberger (not in yards but in completion rate, TDs and TD/Int ratio, and even outran the "mobile" Ben), barely losing to them by 3 points. Followed by a decent game vs Bengals, losing by a couple points, and finishing the season the next week with a win vs Cowboys.

Point is, Eli--as poorly as he appeared to perform his rookie year of 7 starts--already was revealing his ability to learn from mistakes, his ability to improve from one game to the next, and his now-established ability to shake off a poor performance and follow with a good-to-great performance the next game.

Would that be an example of my taking "this Eli thing" too far?

1. Pittsburgh was NOT the eventual SB winner.
2. Eli played better the last 2 weeks. There is no doubt. He played well against Cincy as well. But a poster claimed that the 2004 version of Eli was better than the 2004 version of Warner and I completely disagree.
By ANY standard, Warner was a far better QB than Eli in 2004.
We were 5-4 vs. 1-6. He had afar better production than Eli.

And Ben had 316 yards in that game vs. 182 for Eli and won the game on the road. (if winning counts)

[BuffyBlueII]

Once again, MS has devolved this topic in to his usual Eli nonsense.

[Morehead State]

Kurt Warner is whack. He'll go into the HOF but he wasn't even that much better than a rookie Eli while he was in his own prime. As a matter of fact, a rookie Eli was better than a prime Warner in many aspects as a QB. Protection, audibles, pocket awareness etc. Kurt played like a deer in headlights in his final starts as a Giants and my eyes bled just by watching.

Really.....
Well I didn't write this nor did I do anything to prompt it.