Of course that's the exception and not the norm, but guys like Roethlisberger and Eli Manning are the exception - they're exceptional quarterbacks that don't need to sit around and watch someone else play in order to learn the pro game. Manning just as easily could have gotten the Giants to the 5-3 mark Warner did through the season's first eight weeks.
Paul Schwartz: Leave it to you, Kenny, to take the easy argument. You're the kind of guy who is called for piling on at the end of the play. You watch Kurt Warner throw two interceptions against the Bears, you watch him lose two fumbles and then you are so bold to say "He's not good, he hadn't been any good, get him out of there.'' Wow, what insight. What revisionist history. Weren't you the same clown who was writing "Giants'' and "Super Bowl'' in the same sentence a week a few weeks ago? Of course, any time you complete a full sentence with no grammatical issues it should be considered a great victory. Warner did more right than wrong in helping the Giants win five of their first seven games. Just because he stunk up the joint against the Bears doesn't change that.
KP: That's fine Paul; spend all your time bashing me. Sure sounds like you're very unsuccessfully trying to cover up the fact that you have no argument here whatsoever. I'm not taking the easy argument; I'm taking the only one. The sooner they get Manning into the lineup, the better the chances are that they will actually be able to put the words "Giants" and "Super Bowl" in the same sentence. This is not an indictment of Warner; he's a great guy and still can play a little QB. He got them this far, but we all know that this is Manning's team, and it's time to give him the reins. You think Warner would be playing in Pittsburgh ahead of Big Ben? Exactly. Even a shortsighted, tiny football mind like yours should be able to realize that this is a young man's game.
PS: Having an intelligent discussion with you about quarterbacks is futile. One day you love Kerry Collins, the next day you can't stand him. You flip and then flop on Manning and Warner back in training camp. You want to change quarterbacks as often as you change socks, which is once a week, whether you need to or not. How can you possibly state the Giants would have been 5-2 with Manning starting the first seven games? No doubt, Warner's statistics weren't anything special but leave it to you to judge everything on numbers. Shame on you. If all colleges based everything simply on numbers, your grade-point-average and SAT scores wouldn't have qualified for Penn State, that bastion of higher education and bad, boring football. Numbers alone didn't tell the tale on Warner and he was more a help than a hindrance in the Giants fast start.
KP: Typical Schwartz; can't remember back a week ago, let alone training camp. TGI was about the only pub that didn't flip-flop regarding Warner and Eli this summer. We've been all Eli, all the time. And we've always been in Kerry's corner; heck he's the last PSU QB that could throw a spiral. There you go - your Penn State jokes are getting so weak I had to hand you one. Anyway, back to the issue at hand, which is embarrassing Paul even further, we said Eli was the way to go from the day they drafted him. With all due respect (to Warner, not you, Paul), playing Warner all this time has basically been a waste of time. Manning could have done at least as well as Warner and gotten the experience along the way. Instead, whenever Manning does get in, which had better be soon, then and only then will the experience clock start ticking. You'd have to be off your rocker to think that Manning couldn't have won the games Warner did. The defense basically won most of them anyway. And you can bet your bottom dollar that someone with Manning's arm strength and field sense wouldn't have turned the ball over four times against Chicago. If Big Ben can do it, Manning certainly can.
PS: It's so typical of you to make such a simplistic comparison. Great, now every rookie quarterback in the league is going to be compared with Ben Roethlisberger. That's real creative thinking. Did you ever stop for a minute to consider that Roethlisberger has a pretty darn good team around him? No one can take away what Big Ben has done. You think Giants fans are wondering if the Giants should have traded DOWN to get Roethlisberger rather than give up draft picks to acquire Manning? Roethlisberger's success has nothing to do with Manning. Different players, different teams, different coaches. It's more likely Manning would not have been able to throw only two interceptions in his first seven games, as Warner did. Every quarterback makes mistakes and rookies make more than veterans. Roethlisberger, so far, is the rare exception. Stop harping on him.
KP: It's also almost a certainty that Manning would have thrown more than the five TD passes that Warner mustered up through eight games. Of course there are going to be growing pains, but the Giants, which have won thus far because of Tiki Barber, Tom Coughlin, the defense and special teams, and basically in spite of their passing game, would now have a lot of those growing pains out of the way had Manning taken the season's first snap. And you can bet the house that Manning, who's faster and has better instincts, wouldn't have gotten sacked 912 times so far this season like your 33-year-old sloth-like QB has. It's a shame because Warner is such a great guy, but this is a bottom-line business and the bottom line is that the franchise QB needs to be in there, and should have been from the start. The Giants would definitely be no worse off than they are now.
PS: I would have done exactly what Tom Coughlin did immediately after the dreadful loss to the Bears. The guy's smart. He didn't let Warner twist in the wind and stated that he'd be the starter the next week in Arizona. Not that Warner deserves a full-ride through the season. If he is terrible again there's nothing wrong with flipping the switch to Manning. But as long as the Giants are in the playoff chase, it's going to be difficult to hand the keys to the offense over to the kid. Let the decision be made on the field. If Warner gets back to form, he's the man. If he regresses and Manning can provide a spark off the bench, see if he can handle the load. But to say that the Giants would have been 5-3 at midseason with Manning in control is a stretch, even for you, someone who hasn't stretched anything other than his drinking arm in years.
Could Eli Manning have led Giants to same record ?
The Giants Beat Top Stories
Cruz ready to 'move on' after McAdoo meetingThe coach and wide receiver had a tee-a-tee this week and according to Victor Cruz all issues were vetted and put on the table.
The Giants BeatYesterday at 1:16 PM
Pierre-Paul out six weeks with sports herniaNo. 90 might not play again this season.
The Giants BeatYesterday at 8:59 AM
Giant Expectations: Week 14 EditionThe Giants Beat discusses what fans of Big Blue are expecting of their team this week against Dallas.
The Giants BeatYesterday at 8:53 AM
The Giants Beat Podcast: Week 13 Review ShowThe Giants Beat's writer Scott Thompson and Alex Evans recap an ugly loss for Ben McAdoo's crew.
The Giants BeatTuesday at 7:47 PM
Fantasy Prediction Week 14: Giants vs CowboysThe Giants Beat predicts the top three performers for fantasy owners in the NFC East battle on Sunday night.
The Giants BeatTuesday at 7:39 PM