kartr said:
How could you have spent so much time on this and yet still get it wrong?
When the Cowboys won in 2003, we got lucky, when we lost, it was all Carters fault, that sounds like selective memory to me. Your ending statement that Carter was not completely the blame for the 2003 season, we had a good season and Carter had his best season, duh. I've never said that Carter was a great QB, but I think he could be given a decent supporting cast. You say he was average at best, you call 12th in the Nfl in passing yardage average, which means that 20 qbs passed for less yardage than Carter, that's about 2/3, which put Carter in the top 3rd, how is that average. Carter only threw for 17 tds, but that matches Aikman's 3rd highest total and in his first full year as a starter with a average supporting cast, yet the Cowboys receivers finished in the top ten of the dropped pass category. Antonio dropped a 50 yard td bomb in the Detroit game,Jamar Martin dropped a td pass in the second Commander game and there were others.
In the Saints game, Carter's first int was attributed to Bryant running the wrong route on a timing pattern, the last one Terry Glenn's fault, because he slipped down due to wearing the wrong shoes. How can you call yourself fair, when you blame Carter for his receivers screw ups?
In the Patriots game, Galloway was injured and didn't play, so Carter only had Bryant who dropped two passes on 3rd and long in Patriot territory and Witten who dropped a pass deep in Patriot territory and batted it to Ty Law. Parcells said of Witten's drop that turned into an int,"If you can get both hands on the ball, you should catch it", so he clearly didn't blame that one on Carter. And the last int was thrown into the endzone with 12 seconds on the clock, we'd lost the game anyway.
In the Dolphins game, Carter had a qb rating of 80+ in the first game, yet the Cowboys trailed 24-14. You conveniently forget that the number #1 defense didn't show up that day and neither did Hambrick as usual. Carter's fumble was the direct result of his own offensive lineman being pushed back into him.Carter's first int came with 2 minutes left in third quarter when we were way behind.
In the second Eagles game, the weather was horrible in Philly and Hambrick had a sure touchdown run until he saw Bobby Taylor and decided to run out bounds instead. Even the Eagles fans laughed at Hambrick on that one, afraid of Bobby Taylor, who he outweighed by 30 pounds. We were 10-10 at half-time against the Eagles, how often has that happened in Philly. Carter's ints in the second half were the result of Terry Glenn not coming back to the ball, he was clearly open, but decided to stand there and wait for the ball, while Sheldon Brown was closing in. Michael Irvin always protected Aikman by coming back to the ball, every good receiver does this automatically and Glenn did the same thing last year in the Cleveland game. And Cowboys number 1 defense completely collapsed in the second half of that game. They allowed Westbrook and Buckhalter to catch short passes and dance thru their secondary at will.
But you blame everything that goes wrong on Carter, while other qbs had guys to make plays for them. And when we won, we got lucky,yeah, Carter throwing for 321 yards against the Giants or 190 yards against Detroit with 3 tds in the first half. But wait, you said that they were a bad team, so when we beat a bad team badly, we got lucky,huh. You continually show a selective memory with regards to Carter. You try to make it seem that he was no good at all,but you said average didn't you. Well, being average in your 3rd year in the NFl is a sign a progress,especially if you have only 31 starts, which is not even 2 years worth. I didn't see Harrington or Carr or Ramsey or Brees for that matter getting their teams in the playoffs in their 3rd years and they were all drafted much higher than Carter.
So why not just man up and admit that your dislike of Carter has nothing to do with his ability, but with the fact that he isn't a pocket qb. And drugs, lots of successful NFL players have substance abuse problems and some coaches too, so I'm not buying the drug thing.
Lets talk about selective memory.
You conveniently include only one passing statistic in your analysis of Carter. The truth of the matter is that in 2003, Quincy Carter was the 24th ranked QB in the NFL. That's a fact easily varifiable. 17 TDs is not the problem. 21 INTs is. This is commen sense. If you got a RB leading the league in TDs scored, you got the best RedZone offense in the league and your throwing way more TD then INTs, that's OK. I mean, this comparison to Aikman is stupid. In Aikmans first year with the Cowboys, a team that was much worse then any Carter ever played on, he only threw 14 INTs. Aikman never threw INTs like Carter. Carter may have had his best season but his best season was not very good. You say he wasn't great. That's true. You say we needed to surround him with good players. Well, I'm here to tell you that in light of his issues, the last thing we needed to do was allow our good young players to be influenced by Carter. See, that's the problem here. It's all about Carter and what was good for him. You don't look at this thing from the other side of the looking glass. What's good for the Wittens and the Ross' and the Bryants of the world. What about them? They don't count?
Drops, wrong routes, whatever. The facts are that the WRs, Bryant especially, were running there own routes. They were playing sandlot football and Carter was going right along with it. Don't tell me about drops or routes. He should have stuck to the play book. He didn't. The truth is that most of the WRs had already given up on Carter by the time the end of the season had rolled around. Carter missed so many WRs in so many games, it's not even funny. He flat out missed them. You can make excuses all day. The facts are that he was not a good QB and much of it was his own fault. It wasn't the fault of management, it wasn't the talent around him, it wasn't the league. It was his own short comings as an NFL QB.
In the Saints game, you make excuses for Bryant running the wrong route but as I mentioned before, Bryant and Carter were drawing up there own plays all year so how can you be sure? Slipping down, whatever. The guy threw three INTs. Those are the facts.
There are always excuses for Carter. The Patriots game is a perfect example. He missed his receivers all day long. That's a fact. All you need to do is watch the game.
The Miami Game, it was all the defense. OK, whatever. I've heard Hutchinson get crucified for fumbling after getting hit much harder. I've seen guys come completely free to nail that guy but when he fumbled, there were no convenient excuses. I didn't defend the defense in that game. I also made clear the fact that Hambone was not very effective in that game. Regardless, as pointed out earlier in the post, teams game planned our running game. You don't have to like it but the fact of the matter is that the passing game was forced to make plays. They didn't do that. Use any excuse but the objective was clear. Make plays in the passing game because we're going to shut down your running game.
You are full of excuses. Glenn didn't do this, or that. News flash, Irvin is not Glenn. The value of Glenn is allowing him to deliver the ball in stride so that he can use his speed. Irvin was a possesion guy, much like KJ. There different WRs. You can say it was Glenn or not but the fact is that Glenn did not seem to have any of these problems with Vinnie. You continuously bring up the fact that Glenn had his biggest season with QC. Well, which is it? Did he drop a lot of balls and was really not good or was he good? The truth is in the middle but in the end, QC is at the heart of it.
Beating Detroit, a bad team, is what your hanging your hat on? OK but that doesn't improve Carters position. It should be easy to beat the Detroits of the world. Victories over those teams are not what should mark a QBs career. Unfortunatly, it is what you use to do so with Carter. I wonder what he would think of that? No matter.
I did not say Carter was average. I said Carter was average, at best. There is a difference. Carter had 30 starts out of 48 opportunities to start. If he only has 30 starts, that's because he got himself benched for the other 16. Nobodies fault but his own and certainly not a testimate to his worth. I also think it's interesting that you pick guys like Carr or Ramsey or Harrington or Brees as comparisons. I'm not a big believe in excuses but I do think you have to try and at least keep it fair. The truth is that Carr went to an expansion team. In his third year, he is light years better then Quincy. Harrington may never be a great QB but based off his 3rd year, he is also substantially better then Carter. In 27 career starts, as of the begining of the 2004 season, Brees managed to post a 104.8 QB rating. What's that about? Even Ramsey, playing for a substantially worse team, IMO, and with only 5 starts to his credit posted better numbers then did Carter.
I think it's interesting that you would rather jump to the conclusion that I don't like Carter for reasons other then his play then to believe the fact that Carter was not a very good QB. I wonder what that says about you? The fact is that the only issue I have with Carter is the fact that he was not a very good QB. There is no hidden agenda. I think Carter pretty much sucked as a starting QB in the NFL. If Drugs or whatever issue are not important to you, then fine. That too says much about you and Carter.
Carter is gone. He will be lucky to get another chance. If he does, you can fight the good fight on whatever team board he hooks up with. In the mean time, I don't have to go any further then posting his stats. They don't lie and you can't make them.
He is what he is. Not more, not less.
