PDA

View Full Version : Hall of Fame - In or Out?: Kurt Warner



KabaModernFan
08-18-2010, 04:45 PM
Ok, so this is going to be the first thread in which I'm hoping will become a successful series of threads for this forum. I got the idea from jaGmen's thread about players that he thinks he will enter the Hall of Fame. I noticed that there were quite a few players in there that sparked some debate about whether or not they truly were Hall of Famers. I figured that it would be a cool idea to start a series of threads where these discussions could really get interesting, and that is why you're reading this right now. I plan on doing a thread for a player from every team in the NFL, who is either recently retired or near the end of his career. I'll be going in alphabetical order by team, so we start off with the Arizona Cardinals!

Player: Kurt Warner - QB

Résumé:
- 12 Seasons in the NFL
- 67-49 as a starting QB (Playoffs Record: 9-4)
- 3 Super Bowl appearances, 1 Super Bowl victory (1999, 2001, 2008)
- 26th All-Time in Passing Yards (25th All-Time: Ken Anderson, 27th All-Time: Sonny Jurgensen*)
- 26th All-Time in Passing TDs (25th All-Time: Jim Hart, 27th All-Time: Randall Cunningham)
- Played for two other teams in career (St. Louis Rams and New York Giants)
- 4 Pro Bowl appearances, 9 seasons apart between first and last (1999, 2000, 2001, 2008)
- 2 First Team All-Pro selections (1999, 2001)

* - indicates player already in the Hall of Fame

Also, feel free to make suggestions for other players I should do, and if you post any other miscellaneous facts about his career that I feel to be important enough to consider, I'll add it to the Résumé section.

FLPackerFan
08-18-2010, 05:16 PM
I defiantly feel Kurt Warner should go into the HOF. The man went to three Super Bowls, one one, and was MVP of one. Also he took two teams to the Super Bowl that had never been there and one team {Cardinal} had never done anything really in their history until Warner came there. He is also a class act and handled himself very well on and off the field. I would also say that if Bob Griese is in the HOF, Warner should go in. Griese was a great QB in his day, but he missed most of the 17-0 season and maybe through the ball 13 times again. He never had stats like Warner and had to put his team on his shoulders like Warner did.

bluestree
08-18-2010, 05:22 PM
Didn't vote in the poll because you don't go into the hall as a member of a team. But I vote yes, based on talent and leadership and accomplishments. Not first ballot, but down the road. Despite some injury years, if you look back over the last dozen seasons, Warner was one of the league's best. He also had longevity, which is always a consideration.

msclemons
08-18-2010, 05:36 PM
I think Warner belongs in the HOF but not until after Kenny Anderson gets in.

DaBearsFan
08-18-2010, 05:40 PM
First off, I have no argument about Warner being a class act. He seems to be one of the most genuinely good guys to have ever played in the NFL. But, at the same time, I think Kurt Warner is one of the most overrated players to ever play the game. And, even though he is a nice guy, he doesn't have the chops to be in the Hall of Fame for the following reasons.

1) He wasn't good for long enough. I count 4 very good seasons by Warner (1999, 2001, 2008, 2009), 2 pretty good seasons (2000, 2007) and 6 forgettable/bad seasons. Look at the stats, he didn't do much of anything between 2002 and 2006, he was just kinda there, without doing anything very good.

2) Kurt Warner got so injured in St Louis that they let him go and stuck with Mark Bulger. In New York, he was so bad that they replaced him with a rookie QB (Eli Manning). In Arizona, they replaced him with rookie Matt Leinart AND started Leinart over him in 2007. Sure, Warner took back the job in 2007 and played well, but the fact remains that 3 different times, teams thought they were better off without him.

3) Let's take a look at his good years. For the Rams, they had Issac Bruce and Torry Holt, two of the great receivers of the time. And what happened when he got hurt, and ultimately left? Mark Bulger took that team and played pretty well. No, he wasn't as good as Warner in his best days, but he was still a good QB. Yes, Warner helped make those offenses play well; however, I'd argue that the receivers helped him look better (after all, they made Bulger look good) than he may have been. The last few years he's played with Larry Fitzgerald and Anquan Boldin, two of the best receivers today. I'm left wondering if some of his success the last few years has been along the same lines.


Just my 2 cents. I'll probably be in the minority, and it probably won't be close.

bluestree
08-18-2010, 06:12 PM
DaBearsFan; name a Hof quarterback who had lousy receivers? Warner did have an injury to his throwing hand that cost him. The teams he was on at the time, the Rams and the Giants, let him go because they both had their quarterback of the future. The hand injury caused a fumbling issue, so teams lost confidence, and figured might as well go with the young guy. In Arizona, he was brought in as a mentor, and was never supposed to have any more success. But lo and behold, the hand got rest, the thumb got better, the fumbling stopped, and Kurt immediately went back to being the Super Bowl QB he alway's was.
The other place you lose me is when you say "look at the stats." When they do a Fantasy HOF, you can look at the stats. Baseball is a game that's about stats. Football is about violent collisions. There isn't a stat for hits, but guys go into the Hall because of the way they hit. Dick Butkus. What were his stats?

Dave Lapham
08-18-2010, 06:17 PM
I agree Ken Anderson and Kurt Warner both deserve to be in the Hall of Fame. Anderson won back to back passing titles in different decades with different OC's and systems. 1974 and 1975 under Bill Wlash and his west coast offense, !981-82 with Lindy Infante. Everyone thought that Mike Martz made Kurt Warner. You can make a case that it was the other way around after what Warner did in Arizona with an entirely different coaching staff and system. Mike Martz has never enjoyed the level of success he had with Warner running the show.

bluestree
08-18-2010, 06:29 PM
I agree Ken Anderson and Kurt Warner both deserve to be in the Hall of Fame. Anderson won back to back passing titles in different decades with different OC's and systems. 1974 and 1975 under Bill Wlash and his west coast offense, !981-82 with Lindy Infante. Everyone thought that Mike Martz made Kurt Warner. You can make a case that it was the other way around after what Warner did in Arizona with an entirely different coaching staff and system. Mike Martz has never enjoyed the level of success he had with Warner running the show.

Didn't call it the "west coast" offense back then. I remember it as "the nickle and dime" offense, a term applied liberally to teams that took what the defense gave them, or when they didn't have a power running game or a deep passing game. "They just nickle and dime you down the field."

Polishguy00
08-18-2010, 06:54 PM
I say in as a Ram. He won the Super Bowl there, after all. I will have to watch and research Ken Anderson more, but it seems like he should be in as well.

Ragar
08-18-2010, 07:08 PM
To select a player to the Hall of Fame, he really needs to pass 3 criteria. 1) One of the top players at his position during his years playing the game. 2) Be compared favorably to the top players at his position historically. 3) Compare the apples and oranges of historicly great players at different positions.
So during the years he was playing, where would you rank him? Has to be behind Favre, Peyton Manning, and Brady. And you could argue that he is behind Donovan McNabb (going to say tied for arguments sake) (can't think of any other's right now without researching and don't have the time).
So by the first level of criteria, he is the the 4th best qb during the decade he played football. I think he is going to be hard pressed to make the Hall of Fame based upon that fact alone. We have players who have made the All-decade team at their respective positions who don;t even get a sniff of the Hall of Fame, never mind a player on the AP list of best at his postion of the first 50 years of football (Jerry Kramer) who still aren't in the all of Fame.
I'd say longshot at best, with the "likeability factor" being his best asset

DaBearsFan
08-18-2010, 07:41 PM
DaBearsFan; name a Hof quarterback who had lousy receivers? Warner did have an injury to his throwing hand that cost him. The teams he was on at the time, the Rams and the Giants, let him go because they both had their quarterback of the future. The hand injury caused a fumbling issue, so teams lost confidence, and figured might as well go with the young guy. In Arizona, he was brought in as a mentor, and was never supposed to have any more success. But lo and behold, the hand got rest, the thumb got better, the fumbling stopped, and Kurt immediately went back to being the Super Bowl QB he alway's was.
The other place you lose me is when you say "look at the stats." When they do a Fantasy HOF, you can look at the stats. Baseball is a game that's about stats. Football is about violent collisions. There isn't a stat for hits, but guys go into the Hall because of the way they hit. Dick Butkus. What were his stats?

I'll try and contend this point by point.
1) Tom Brady has never had the receiver talent that Warner has had in his best years, yet has had a much better career. No, he's not in the Hall of Fame yet but he will be. That's just off the top of my head, I can look some other guys up if you want.
2) People get injured all the time in the NFL. We can't put in hypothetical "What could have beens", we can only work with what he's seen. And that includes some seasons where he was injured.
3) Shouldn't the fact that saying, "Hey, we're going with the young guy" be considered when assessing Hall of Fame status? 3 teams decided that a young guy was better than the veteran at some point, well before he was considered old. To compare, Aaron Rodgers had to wait something like four years before their Hall of Fame QB finally got old AND burned bridges by flip-flopping a hundred times, holding the team hostage.
4) How dare you say that you can't use stats to look at how good at players are! Yes, there is an element that you need to see on the field. But, stats also tell a story. They can tell how often a QB was on target, how often a player hurt you with turnovers, among many other things. At the very least, you can look at the stats and see that Warner only had 6 seasons where he had 3000 yards or more, which is a small benchmark in a pass happy league in my opinion. If you like advanced statistics, like the ones the football outsiders guys do, you might be surprised at Warner's seasons (Hint: He's been in the Top 10 exactly once in both a per play and overall basis since 2001).
As for the element that you see on the field: I saw him play for the Giants. I saw him play for Arizona. I saw him play for St. Louis. Some of it has been great, some of it has not. Overall, it's not good enough by my mind.
And by the way, Dick Butkus has tackles, sacks (if he were playing today), and turnovers.

EDIT: As a note, I still realize I'm going to be in the minority, most likely. Just stating my opinion

bluestree
08-18-2010, 08:02 PM
Easy Bears buddy. I didn't say you couldn't use stats, I personally don't give them the weight that some people do. I think in football they can be misleading. For instance, you stated "They can tell how often a QB was on target". How can you tell that, by completion percentage? That doesn't tell you if there were drops, good coverage, tipped balls. Sure there are stats for those things too, but I find it hard to believe many people are looking that deeply when having a discussion on an internet forum. If so, time to get a life. Besides, if you crunch every number in the world and run them through the most sophisticated sim in the universe, you can not tell me who will win Sunday's game on a regular basis. If you could, you wouldn't be here, you'd be in Vegas eating grapes hand fed you by Nubian Princesses.
Anyway, your arguments have merit, but I disagree. I don't think Warner is a first ballot guy by any means, but I think he'll go in. And as far as those teams that sent him down the road, how did that youth movement work out? Not for the Rams. And the Giants, a little better, but Eli's most memorable moment was a result of the catch. Of course, as a stat, that's just one completion, no different than any other.

rxbrown86
08-18-2010, 08:52 PM
First of all, your poll is laughable because players don't go in to the HOF as a member of team. So, let's just ask the question is he in or out? In my opinion, based on his playing record alone he has earned his place in Canton. Now add in his incredible rags to riches story and he is a first ballot Hall of Famer. No doubt in my mind!

BubbaLove
08-18-2010, 09:31 PM
I think Warner belongs in the HOF but not until after Kenny Anderson gets in.

Seems kinda odd coming from a 49er fan, but I totally agree with you on Kenny Anderson obviously. It's seems like a longshot at this point though. I hope it does happen one day.

On those same teams were CBs Lamar Parrish and Ken Riley with 112 ints between them, but if KA isn't getting much interest then I doubt a couple of DBs will.

As far as Kurt Warner goes...Without a doubt he should be in the HOF. I wonder if he ever thought he might be in this situation when he was stocking shelves in a grocery store?

BubbaLove
08-18-2010, 09:35 PM
First of all, your poll is laughable because players don't go in to the HOF as a member of team. So, let's just ask the question is he in or out? In my opinion, based on his playing record alone he has earned his place in Canton. Now add in his incredible rags to riches story and he is a first ballot Hall of Famer. No doubt in my mind!

Dude, no reason to come off like that, but you are right it should be in or out.

BTW I used to live in Four Hills as a kid.

Turk Schonert
08-18-2010, 09:44 PM
Warner is definitely worthy of the Hall in my opinion. He won 1 Super Bowl, and came ever so close to winning 2 others. Not many QB's take 2 different teams to Super Bowls. He also threw for over 32,000 yds & over 200 TD's.

Wordsworth
08-18-2010, 09:51 PM
I think Warner's story make him a more attractive pick for the Hall of Fame than his actual performance. As has been said in various tones and wordings already, he had a couple great seasons with St. Louis and a couple of great seasons with Arizona, but in between is an ugly track record of mediocrity, injuries, ball handling issues and benchings. In the five seasons from 2002-2006 he only averaged 1588 pass yards a year because he only played a total of 37 games. That is not a Hall of Fame career, I'm sorry. As much as I like the guy and as much fun as he was to watch when he was good, I don't think he is a Hall of Famer, not on any ballot. He has the credit of winning a superbowl, and I know that it's impressive to have taken two different teams, but it does not overcome the fact that he only played well for six years

Ragar
08-18-2010, 10:20 PM
One other point to make on Warner, which i think will hurt his chances, is he's playing in the great qb era. I hit upon it a little with my reference to how you'ld rank him during his time period playing, but in the last 10 years, 7 qb's have been elected into the Hall of Fame (of the 23 modern era qb's). And we know at least 3 more will be inducted from the current era (Favre, Manning, Brady) I still think it's going to be very tough for him to get the traction required as he defineilty sits below those qb's, and the HoF has begun trying to get some of the other positions more spots in the last few years.

BuckeyeRidley
08-18-2010, 10:30 PM
IN! IN! IN!! I know his number don't stack up against those of other players that have succeeded him as a Top QB and gone into the hall of fame but Rich Eisen of NFL Network was saying this past winter that he's sorta like the Sandy Kolfax of the NFL. His numbers don't overwhelm you but he's got it to go into the hall of fame!! Kurt Warner is Mos Deff in even if it takes a few years! If it takes a minute, I suspect that its because of others who have waited first!

bluestree
08-18-2010, 10:37 PM
"but it does not overcome the fact that he only played well for six years"

Who we talkin' about, Gayle Sayers. Jus' kiddin'.

Polishguy00
08-19-2010, 07:05 AM
Who we talkin' about, Gayle Sayers. Jus' kiddin'.

Hold your toss sweep there, Jim Taylor.

footballgal
08-19-2010, 10:27 AM
I think what puts Warner over the top is the specific teams he took to the Super Bowl. If you take his career (with the good/Super Bowl years alternating with the bad ones) and put him on the Steelers and the Cowboys for his Super Bowl trips, I'd say no. But he managed to lead the Rams and the Cardinals to championship games, and when you look at the otherwise very depressed histories of those franchises, that's impressive. Hall of Fame caliber impressive.

iwatt
08-19-2010, 11:20 AM
He played his best in the biggest game. He owns the three top yardage totals for a QB in the Superbowl. Not the first or the second, bu the top three. Nobody put up a passing attack like Warner did in the big game.


Passing Yards Complete List
1. Kurt Warner 1999 STL 414
2. Kurt Warner 2008 ARI 377
3. Kurt Warner 2001 STL 365
4. Joe Montana 1988 SF 357
5. Donovan McNabb 2004 PHI 357

That's just ridiculous. Now take a look at his postseason winning percentage. This is a list of all qbs with at least 10 postseason starts, listed by winning percentage


Quarterback Games Started Wins Losses Percent
Bart Starr 10 9 1 0.9
Ben Roethlisberger 10 8 2 0.8
Jim Plunkett 10 8 2 0.8
Tom Brady 18 14 4 0.778
Terry Bradshaw 19 14 5 0.737
Troy Aikman 15 11 4 0.733
Joe Montana 23 16 7 0.696
Kurt Warner 13 9 4 0.692
John Elway 21 14 7 0.667
Roger Staubach 17 11 6 0.647
Phil Simms 10 6 4 0.6
Ken Stabler 12 7 5 0.583
Steve Young 14 8 6 0.571
Donovan McNabb 16 9 7 0.563
Bob Griese 11 6 5 0.546
Fran Tarkenton 11 6 5 0.546
Brett Favre 24 13 11 0.542
Jim Kelly 17 9 8 0.529
Peyton Manning 18 9 9 0.5
Craig Morton 10 5 5 0.5
Danny White 10 5 5 0.5
Mark Brunell 10 5 5 0.5
Steve McNair 10 5 5 0.5
Dan Marino 18 8 10 0.444
Daryle Lamonica 9 4 5 0.444
Matt Hasselbeck 9 4 5 0.444
Dave Krieg 9 3 6 0.333
Randall Cunningham 9 3 6 0.333
Warren Moon 10 3 7 0.3

In 20 more years, you'll still remember each of Warner's posteason games. That should be a criteria for HoF status.

GoBigOrGoHome
08-19-2010, 06:26 PM
Everyone thought that Mike Martz made Kurt Warner. You can make a case that it was the other way around after what Warner did in Arizona with an entirely different coaching staff and system. Mike Martz has never enjoyed the level of success he had with Warner running the show.

I was on the fence regarding Warner until I read this. Warner should go into the HOF. Here is a question: Is he an FPL HOF'er? Great player, even better dude.

Chompurself
08-19-2010, 06:35 PM
Kurt Warner gets into the HOF no doubt about it, I could care less about what team he goes in with the man is definately a Hall of Famer!!

williwonte
08-19-2010, 09:27 PM
Kurt Warner played on teams and took them to Super Bowls. He did not play on teams with big defenses or coaches. Had he played with NE, he easily would have surpassed any other QB. He is the Barry Sanders of QB's. Only Peyton has done more.

GoBigOrGoHome
08-19-2010, 09:56 PM
One other point to make on Warner, which i think will hurt his chances, is he's playing in the great qb era. I hit upon it a little with my reference to how you'ld rank him during his time period playing, but in the last 10 years, 7 qb's have been elected into the Hall of Fame (of the 23 modern era qb's). And we know at least 3 more will be inducted from the current era (Favre, Manning, Brady) I still think it's going to be very tough for him to get the traction required as he defineilty sits below those qb's, and the HoF has begun trying to get some of the other positions more spots in the last few years.

All good points. But Warner is already retired. Favre is likely done after this year. But Manning & Brady each have several years left. Favre goes in first in the most ridiculous ball-washing-fest seen by manknid (1st ballot, of course). Warner goes in the next year.

StaggerMcTipsy
08-21-2010, 05:41 PM
To select a player to the Hall of Fame, he really needs to pass 3 criteria. 1) One of the top players at his position during his years playing the game. 2) Be compared favorably to the top players at his position historically. 3) Compare the apples and oranges of historicly great players at different positions.
So during the years he was playing, where would you rank him? Has to be behind Favre, Peyton Manning, and Brady. And you could argue that he is behind Donovan McNabb (going to say tied for arguments sake) (can't think of any other's right now without researching and don't have the time).
So by the first level of criteria, he is the the 4th best qb during the decade he played football. I think he is going to be hard pressed to make the Hall of Fame based upon that fact alone. We have players who have made the All-decade team at their respective positions who don;t even get a sniff of the Hall of Fame, never mind a player on the AP list of best at his postion of the first 50 years of football (Jerry Kramer) who still aren't in the all of Fame.
I'd say longshot at best, with the "likeability factor" being his best asset

He led his teams to 3 Super Bowls, winning one. So he's got the same number of Super Bowl wins as Favre and Manning, and one more Super Bowl appearance than either. Ask yourself, "Would those teams have made it to the Super Bowl without Kurt Warner?" The answer is no. Think the Rams would have been "The Greatest Show On Turf" with Trent Green at quarterback? Think Matt Leinart would've taken the Cardinals to the Super Bowl?

First ballot? Depends who else is up for nomination. But he deserves to be in the NFL Hall Of Fame, for sure.

Ragar
08-21-2010, 05:55 PM
He led his teams to 3 Super Bowls, winning one. So he's got the same number of Super Bowl wins as Favre and Manning, and one more Super Bowl appearance than either. Ask yourself, "Would those teams have made it to the Super Bowl without Kurt Warner?" The answer is no. Think the Rams would have been "The Greatest Show On Turf" with Trent Green at quarterback? Think Matt Leinart would've taken the Cardinals to the Super Bowl?

First ballot? Depends who else is up for nomination. But he deserves to be in the NFL Hall Of Fame, for sure.

Winning Super Bowls is only part of an equation for defining Hall of Fame worthiness. Doug Williams, Jeff Hostetler, Mark Rypien, Brad Johnson and Trent Dilfer won Superbowls, none of them are gettting into the Hall of Fame. Fact is Warner had 4 great seasons, 2 average seasons, and 6 either forgettable seasons or non-seasons. There is a saying for being good for a short period of time, it's called a "flash in the pan". That's Warner's career. Great at times, not Hall of Fame worthy.

The "What if Game?" with Warner is interesting because are you comparing that to other qb's from his era or only Trent Green? The only thing that we know for sure was that Kurt Warner was not good enough to start for the Rams going into the season. Based upon modern era qb's, Warner is 3rd in top qb rating (i know we all hate the qb rating system as is, but i can't research by anything else right now). Of the top 32 (i stopped at Aikman as he is always a good stopping point), all but 3 made at least their championship games at least once in thier careers. Therefore we can reason that with like talent, which of the other 16 qb's that where playing in 1999 could have put up similar numbers? Whose to say, but of that 16, 4 have won at least one Superbowl, and another 7 made SuperBowls and lost.

Again Warner is talented, had great 4 seasons, is a great story, but is not Hall of Fame Worthy

StaggerMcTipsy
08-21-2010, 06:39 PM
Winning Super Bowls is only part of an equation for defining Hall of Fame worthiness. Doug Williams, Jeff Hostetler, Mark Rypien, Brad Johnson and Trent Dilfer won Superbowls, none of them are gettting into the Hall of Fame. Fact is Warner had 4 great seasons, 2 average seasons, and 6 either forgettable seasons or non-seasons. There is a saying for being good for a short period of time, it's called a "flash in the pan". That's Warner's career. Great at times, not Hall of Fame worthy.

And Dan Marino won a grand total of zero Super Bowls, as did Fran Tarkenton.

And Williams, Hostetler, Rypien, Johnson, and Dilfer didn't go to three Super Bowls with two different teams.

And there's a reason it's called a "flash in the pan," not "flashes in the pan." Can you think of another player whose best years were his earliest AND his latest? Everybody thought Warner was done after he left St. Louis, so he didn't get much of a chance during those "in-between" years. Marc Bulger took over basically the same team Warner left, and how has that panned out? The Rams are the laughingstock of the NFL and Bulger's a backup quarterback on another team.

imiweli
08-21-2010, 07:04 PM
IN

MVP, one ring, took Cardinals to their first SB, huge part in the greatest show on turf, great overall career stats

Ragar
08-21-2010, 07:46 PM
And Dan Marino won a grand total of zero Super Bowls, as did Fran Tarkenton.

And there's a reason it's called a "flash in the pan," not "flashes in the pan."

OK, we'll call Warner the "Biscotti of the NFL", it taste really good, was cooked twice, but just not that fillling of a career.

imiweli, that's just the thing, he doesn't have great overall career stats. Look at the initial post, 69 career wins? 26th in the major passing stats? Over a 12 year career. Again, Hall of Very good, not Hall of Fame worthy

Arshvender
08-21-2010, 08:29 PM
Overall Career Stats = Lazy Analysis and 1/2 the story!
Warner should be a first ballot Hall of Famer, and I base my criteria on what you did among your peers, and he did it all.
He won an MVP, he went to 3 Superbowls, and he won 1 SB.

There are a few categories I think all QBs are judged on passing yards, passing TDs, Comp % and QB Rating. I think QB rating is a bit of a lousy stat, but when you look at what Warner did in his career, he led the NFL in Comp % 3 straight seasons 1999-2001. He led the league in TDs in 1999 and 2001. Led the league in passing yards once. He was the best QB in the league for 2 years at least, and he was Top 3 in yards 3 times, Top 3 in Passer Rating 4 times, Top 10 in Passing TDs 6 times, and Top 10 in Comp % six times.
I don't see how this guy doesn't get in. It's not his fault he didn't get drafted and he didn't get a chance until someone in front of him got hurt, but he definitely made the most of it, after he got his shot. The guy is First ballot all the way.

iwatt
08-23-2010, 12:12 PM
It's not his fault he didn't get drafted and he didn't get a chance until someone in front of him got hurt, but he definitely made the most of it, after he got his shot. The guy is First ballot all the way.

I think this is one of the things that hurt him historically. He had to deal with a couple of franchise's who picked a QB highly and wanted to see their highly paid draft pick play ASAP.

Eli: the team was 5-4 with Kurt, and went 1-6 with Eli. That clearly was a dcision to give Eli the reps needed, with the pressure of a big market.
Leinert: He was a the 3 10 pick on an Arizona team desperate for some press, and hoping the highly touted Leinert of USC fame would ignite the fan base.

He had bad luck with injuries and bad situations regarding franchises hoping their #1 pick would boost their rating during rebuilding years.

Pattrick
08-23-2010, 07:01 PM
First off, I have no argument about Warner being a class act. He seems to be one of the most genuinely good guys to have ever played in the NFL. But, at the same time, I think Kurt Warner is one of the most overrated players to ever play the game. And, even though he is a nice guy, he doesn't have the chops to be in the Hall of Fame for the following reasons.

1) He wasn't good for long enough. I count 4 very good seasons by Warner (1999, 2001, 2008, 2009), 2 pretty good seasons (2000, 2007) and 6 forgettable/bad seasons. Look at the stats, he didn't do much of anything between 2002 and 2006, he was just kinda there, without doing anything very good.

2) Kurt Warner got so injured in St Louis that they let him go and stuck with Mark Bulger. In New York, he was so bad that they replaced him with a rookie QB (Eli Manning). In Arizona, they replaced him with rookie Matt Leinart AND started Leinart over him in 2007. Sure, Warner took back the job in 2007 and played well, but the fact remains that 3 different times, teams thought they were better off without him.

3) Let's take a look at his good years. For the Rams, they had Issac Bruce and Torry Holt, two of the great receivers of the time. And what happened when he got hurt, and ultimately left? Mark Bulger took that team and played pretty well. No, he wasn't as good as Warner in his best days, but he was still a good QB. Yes, Warner helped make those offenses play well; however, I'd argue that the receivers helped him look better (after all, they made Bulger look good) than he may have been. The last few years he's played with Larry Fitzgerald and Anquan Boldin, two of the best receivers today. I'm left wondering if some of his success the last few years has been along the same lines.


Just my 2 cents. I'll probably be in the minority, and it probably won't be close.

I completely agree with you. All your points are valid and well done. I'll be in the minority with you, it seems everyone has an odd love affair with Mr. Warner....

StaggerMcTipsy
08-24-2010, 08:52 PM
OK, we'll call Warner the "Biscotti of the NFL", it taste really good, was cooked twice, but just not that fillling of a career.

First you attack Kurt Warner, then biscotti?!? Have you no decency, man?!?

GoBigOrGoHome
08-24-2010, 08:57 PM
Dude took the Rams (twice) and the Cardinals to the Super Bowl and we are still debating his worthiness of HOF enshrinement? Really?

msclemons
08-24-2010, 09:01 PM
Dude took the Rams (twice) and the Cardinals to the Super Bowl and we are still debating his worthiness of HOF enshrinement? Really?

I think the problem is longevity. He had 3 good seasons, disappeared for a while and then had another 2 good seasons. If you look at the HOF QBs they were all solid for many years. Kurt basically pulled a double Mark Rypien.

I'd still like to see him in the HOF because his story is awesome but I'd vote Kenny Anderson in first.

illmatc2
08-24-2010, 09:16 PM
I think that Kurt Warner was a very good QB there is no doubt about that, but I think he falls just short of being a HOF QB. Think about the list of Qb's that beat him on the all time list and some of them aren't even in yet. Kenny Anderson included. Kurt is a great story though just short of the hall though.

Ragar
08-25-2010, 12:32 AM
First you attack Kurt Warner, then biscotti?!? Have you no decency, man?!?

I know, had to try to come with something that was done twice and had to do with food...didn't think twice baked potatoes had the same ring to it.

bluestree
08-25-2010, 11:30 AM
I know, had to try to come with something that was done twice and had to do with food...didn't think twice baked potatoes had the same ring to it.

So now you're dissing twice baked potatoes? Dude, that's Communist!

Ragar
08-25-2010, 09:15 PM
So now you're dissing twice baked potatoes? Dude, that's Communist!

The only communist thing is soccer (according to my grandfather in the 70's) There jsut aren't that many foods that I can come up with that are cooked twice that you aren't ultimately satisfied with (I lvoe some twice baked potateoes...but alas, my brain is failing on me on the food references). Maybe Warner was re-heated? So we can call him the Mac & Cheese of football? Sounds good, tastes good, but other then some great memories as a kid, you are never choosing it at a restaurant.

bluestree
08-25-2010, 10:58 PM
The only communist thing is soccer (according to my grandfather in the 70's) There jsut aren't that many foods that I can come up with that are cooked twice that you aren't ultimately satisfied with (I lvoe some twice baked potateoes...but alas, my brain is failing on me on the food references). Maybe Warner was re-heated? So we can call him the Mac & Cheese of football? Sounds good, tastes good, but other then some great memories as a kid, you are never choosing it at a restaurant.

I was watching a cooking show and this French chef did a deconstructed Mac and Cheese confit with pea puree. $28.50 ala carte.

Ragar
08-25-2010, 11:52 PM
I was watching a cooking show and this French chef did a deconstructed Mac and Cheese confit with pea puree. $28.50 ala carte.

I saw one where they laced the dish with truffles, amazing what people will pay for. Of course, a trick i learned from my sister-in-law is to puree cauliflower to put in my kids mac&cheese, then add ham...it's almost hamburger helper

Andy Freeland
08-25-2010, 11:55 PM
This thread has certainly taken an odd turn. I have both Kurt Warner and Mac and Cheese as 1st ballot hall of famers.

bluestree
08-26-2010, 12:15 AM
This thread has certainly taken an odd turn. I have both Kurt Warner and Mac and Cheese as 1st ballot hall of famers.

Yo Andy, it's Mac and freakin' Cheese! How can that not go in!

ScottDCP
08-26-2010, 08:12 AM
I saw one where they laced the dish with truffles, amazing what people will pay for. Of course, a trick i learned from my sister-in-law is to puree cauliflower to put in my kids mac&cheese, then add ham...it's almost hamburger helper

Try a dollop (which I think is 1.3 tablespoons) of sour cream per serving.

Polishguy00
08-26-2010, 08:34 AM
Mac and Cheese can be come a variety of good meals. Adding sausage to it makes it different. Also, isn't interesting has anything + eggs equals breakfast. If you eat steak at 6am, people think you are a savage. Add eggs to that steak, and you're fine.

iwatt
08-26-2010, 09:09 AM
The only communist thing is soccer (according to my grandfather in the 70's)

Seriously man? Those are fighting words. Don't go thrashing the beautiful game.

bluestree
08-26-2010, 11:10 AM
Mac and Cheese can be come a variety of good meals. Adding sausage to it makes it different. Also, isn't interesting has anything + eggs equals breakfast. If you eat steak at 6am, people think you are a savage. Add eggs to that steak, and you're fine.

Ooh, sausage! that gets the Polish side of me going. Sounds killer. What do you use, kielbasa, chorizo, Jimmy Dean? I add jalapenos to my mac and cheese, and chase it with Prilosec.

Polishguy00
08-26-2010, 11:22 AM
Kielbasa. I am the...uh....Polish...guy.

I would, of course, eat it with chorizo and Jimmy Dean, too. I am an equal opportunity meat devourer.

I like mine with a glass of milk and a side of Zantac.

bluestree
08-26-2010, 11:41 AM
Kielbasa. I am the...uh....Polish...guy.

Oh yeah, right. My bad.

ThisDougsForU
08-26-2010, 11:54 AM
Here's the deal with Warner (this coming from a Rams fan who enjoyed the tidal wave that hit St. Louis in 99). He didn't have 10 good years, but the good years he had were spectacular. I believe he holds all 3 of the best passing games in SB History. 2 Time league MVP. He was money in the playoffs. Many of the other points have been said. His great numbers aside, the story is also Hall of Fame worthy. A father should be able to tell the story of Kurt Warner when walking down the Hall.

I would not be on this website talking football if not for Kurt Warner. I was just a hockey fan until the whirlwind of the '99 season happened.

Ragar
08-26-2010, 04:54 PM
Seriously man? Those are fighting words. Don't go thrashing the beautiful game.

Trust me, I love soccer, I played soccer, I had college scholarship offers and was asked to walk on the college I graduated from (I chose not to), however, it is THE communist sport...it's easy for the masses to play, and appreciate, and all it takes is one person and one ball; the game for the people.