Fezmid Posted February 2, 2009 Posted February 2, 2009 He threw for 377 yards against the best defense in football. 12 incompletions. 3 TDs. 73% completion percentage. I'll take that skittish, poor reading, hurtful performance. He had 4 TDs -- one to the Steelers. If he played for Buffalo, this board would be roasting him right about now.
Simon Posted February 2, 2009 Posted February 2, 2009 Roethlisberger played great. However, he didn't take advantage of many Red Zone situations against a weak Arizona Defense. He threw 2 TD passes in 4 trips to the RedZone. On the one trip that ended in a FG he didn't throw a single pass and on the other trip there were 2 dropped balls, one of them a brutal one from Heath Miller. What exactly did you expect him to do? Change the play calls on the first possession and then jump 30 feet through the air and hand it to his WR's on the other one?
the cat in portland Posted February 2, 2009 Posted February 2, 2009 He also lost.And spent all night playing from behind because of his poor decisions and his fear. I'll take Roethlisberger's performance instead. The numbers may not be as pretty but he was 10X the QB Warner was tonight. No more beer for you.
the cat in portland Posted February 2, 2009 Posted February 2, 2009 I'll have to stop at 0. maybe you should start
Simon Posted February 2, 2009 Posted February 2, 2009 maybe you should start Maybe. But it would probably make me fool enough to believe that Warner's shaky performance should even be mentioned in the same breath as Roethlisberger's fantastic outing. Or flat out stupid enough to suggest it out loud.
RLflutie7 Posted February 2, 2009 Posted February 2, 2009 He threw 2 TD passes in 4 trips to the RedZone.On the one trip that ended in a FG he didn't throw a single pass and on the other trip there were 2 dropped balls, one of them a brutal one from Heath Miller. What exactly did you expect him to do? Change the play calls on the first possession and then jump 30 feet through the air and hand it to his WR's on the other one? Big Ben made the hall of fame tonight with a career defining drive, but yes he could have changed the play calls. He's an experienced QB.
PushthePile Posted February 2, 2009 Posted February 2, 2009 I thought both quarterbacks played well. Warner made a few mistakes and one of them cost his team the game IMO. A fourteen point swing on the last play of the first half is a nightmare scenario. At the very least they tie the game and get the ball back after halftime. He played great in the second half and set the record for completions in the fourth quarter. I don't understand how he's being questioned today? On top of his statistics take into account the situation, down to the number one defense and playing from a pass only position. Ben played okay for most of the game and great when he needed to. He was under just as much pressure as Warner. He had an advantage of only playing from behind on one drive of the game. He got it done though, so can't fault him on anything.
Gary M Posted February 2, 2009 Posted February 2, 2009 Yes and I hope he comes back to play next year. I think it's the best Superbowl I've seen. Warner was why they were able to come back with 16 points in the 4th quarter. I just wish the Cardinals would have went to their 2 min. offfense a little earlier. I wish they would have taken the ball after the coin toss to start the game. The defense played good enough to win until the last drive. The defense kept them in it until Kurt got hot. Kurt made a killer mistake, but if the Cardinals would have gotten one more stop they would have won. UMM their D kept them in the game while the offense struggled and they scored two points. Once they switched to the two minute drill the offense was in a rythem.
John Adams Posted February 2, 2009 Author Posted February 2, 2009 Maybe.But it would probably make me fool enough to believe that Warner's shaky performance should even be mentioned in the same breath as Roethlisberger's fantastic outing. Or flat out stupid enough to suggest it out loud. Shaky performance: 2nd most yards passing in SB history. 73% completion rate. 3 TDs. Against the #1 defense. Could he have done better? Sure. He could have had a 100% completion rate. But you try getting that completion percentage to 100% with Mike Gandy "guarding" your back and no running game. You should ban yourself for making such absurd statements.
Alphadawg7 Posted February 2, 2009 Posted February 2, 2009 Maybe.But it would probably make me fool enough to believe that Warner's shaky performance should even be mentioned in the same breath as Roethlisberger's fantastic outing. Or flat out stupid enough to suggest it out loud. Wow, your assesment of Warners play is as bad as you trying to say that Isaac Bruce didnt clearly outplay Bryant Johnson in SF this year in that other thread despite outproducing in all recieving categories by nearly 50%. Think about this for a second...Look at Kurt Warners stats...they were basically from ONLY 3 quarters...the Cards only had 5, yes just 5 snaps the ENTIRE 1st quarter...not 5 passes, 5 SNAPS because the Pitt O ate the clock up...this had nothing to do with Warner... The guy is one of the best of all time...yes, Ben stepped up in the end, not taking anything away from him, but Warner was tremendous yesterday and it only cements his first ballot HOF voting...
RayFinkle Posted February 2, 2009 Posted February 2, 2009 I wonder what Kurt did to piss off Jesus and make the Cards lose? PTR He bought his wife some new boobies.
murra Posted February 2, 2009 Posted February 2, 2009 Maybe.But it would probably make me fool enough to believe that Warner's shaky performance should even be mentioned in the same breath as Roethlisberger's fantastic outing. Or flat out stupid enough to suggest it out loud. Haha...What!?!? You're totally overlooking the fact that Ben Roethlisberger's team is 10x better than Arizona's. I'm not talking WRs here, but then again Warner utilized them greatly, and Big Ben won the game because he has a defense that earned a touchdown, and a tough team all around that makes it his game to lose. Same breath? Yes he won, but let's not jump off the bridge here. It was a slight improvement of his last outing in the SB. He is not better than Jim Kelly, that I can assure you.
vincec Posted February 2, 2009 Posted February 2, 2009 So where were all of the Kurt Warner lovers last year or the year before? Arizona was trying to turn their offense over to Matt Leinart. This just goes to show the "what have you done for me lately" spirit of the NFL and its fans. As Al Davis once said, great players don't just forget how to play in the offseason.
Alphadawg7 Posted February 2, 2009 Posted February 2, 2009 So where were all of the Kurt Warner lovers last year or the year before? Arizona was trying to turn their offense over to Matt Leinart. This just goes to show the "what have you done for me lately" spirit of the NFL and its fans. As Al Davis once said, great players don't just forget how to play in the offseason. Um, dont know about anyone else...but I always thought Warner should be the starter in AZ from when he first got there. I even said it was a colossal mistake to bench warner in NY when he was 5-3 and just starting to settle in, but with all the pressure to start Eli after all NY gave up to get him, they caved. NY blew the rest of the season and likely makes the playoffs with Warner at the helm, and once there, who knows what he could have done. I mean the guy is money in the playoffs.
RLflutie7 Posted February 3, 2009 Posted February 3, 2009 Um, dont know about anyone else...but I always thought Warner should be the starter in AZ from when he first got there. I even said it was a colossal mistake to bench warner in NY when he was 5-3 and just starting to settle in, but with all the pressure to start Eli after all NY gave up to get him, they caved. NY blew the rest of the season and likely makes the playoffs with Warner at the helm, and once there, who knows what he could have done. I mean the guy is money in the playoffs. I thought the same thing also. And I never understood the moves. Both teams caved in to media pressure.
RLflutie7 Posted February 3, 2009 Posted February 3, 2009 Wow, your assesment of Warners play is as bad as you trying to say that Isaac Bruce didnt clearly outplay Bryant Johnson in SF this year in that other thread despite outproducing in all recieving categories by nearly 50%. Think about this for a second...Look at Kurt Warners stats...they were basically from ONLY 3 quarters...the Cards only had 5, yes just 5 snaps the ENTIRE 1st quarter...not 5 passes, 5 SNAPS because the Pitt O ate the clock up...this had nothing to do with Warner... The guy is one of the best of all time...yes, Ben stepped up in the end, not taking anything away from him, but Warner was tremendous yesterday and it only cements his first ballot HOF voting... Great posts and the Cardinals coaching staff was on acid for deferring the kickoff.
The Dean Posted February 3, 2009 Posted February 3, 2009 Great posts and the Cardinals coaching staff was on acid for deferring the kickoff. I'm guessing the Steelers would have deferred, too, as they want their D on the field to start the game. So, if the Cards take the ball, it's just like the Steelers won the toss. There is nothing to show that deferring is a bad thing, and some evidence to suggest it may give an advantage, from what I understand.
RLflutie7 Posted February 3, 2009 Posted February 3, 2009 I'm guessing the Steelers would have deferred, too, as they want their D on the field to start the game. So, if the Cards take the ball, it's just like the Steelers won the toss. There is nothing to show that deferring is a bad thing, and some evidence to suggest it may give an advantage, from what I understand. It's my guess with Joe Montana, Bill Walsh wanted the ball. Get a 21 point lead and then run the ball to take time off the clock. Backwards thinking, but it also works.
Recommended Posts