Kurt Warner announces retirement after 12 seasons

Green and Bulger were both pretty good QBs in their own right.

So his 2 years in Giants negate the good years? What do you not like about him, other then he was able to play with good players. Watch Leinart next year and you will see what Warner brought to the team.

It just supports my theory that he can not thrive without good recievers around him. Players like Brady, Manning, Brees, and Favre are capable of making recievers look great. Players Like Palmer, Warner, Bulger, and others need a strong supporting cast.

Green and Bulger were both pretty good QBs in their own right.

Green had that window where he was doing some pretty good things without good recievers all around in KC, I admit, but he did have Holmes and Gonzales, but as far as deep threat...none so I will give you that.

Bulger was only great when he had the aforementioned Holt and Bruce in his arsenal. He has not been nearly the same without them or blocking for that matter.

You can't use circular logic here.

edit: You can't use circular logic anywhere.

Who could thrive without good receivers? Seriously...as a QB all you can do is throw the ball and trust your receivers to catch....if they can't do that, you are pretty much screwed. No QB is going to be successful on a team without good receivers.

One of the good guys is retiring today. I think he is no doubt a HOF but I don't know if he is a first ballot HOF.

Who could thrive without good receivers? Seriously...as a QB all you can do is throw the ball and trust your receivers to catch....if they can't do that, you are pretty much screwed. No QB is going to be successful on a team without good receivers.

It just supports my theory that he can not thrive without good recievers around him. Players like Brady, Manning, Brees, and Favre are capable of making recievers look great. Players Like Palmer, Warner, Bulger, and others need a strong supporting cast.

Read! The bolded gentlemen are more than capable without great wide recievers and have proven it time and time again. Try looking at the list of guys who were nobody's until these QB's got their hands on them.

You can't use circular logic here.

edit: You can't use circular logic anywhere.

It's not circular logic, its called a "control" according to the scientific method.

Warner + Great WR's= Good Warner

Warner + OK WR's = Bad Warner (Control)

Warner + Great WR's= Good Warner

Hypothesis

Leinart + Great WR's = Good Leinart

Leinart + OK Wr's = Bad Leinart

Read! The bolded gentlemen are more than capable without great wide recievers and have proven it time and time again. Try looking at the list of guys who were nobody's until these QB's got their hands on them.

You also have to look at who was throwing the ball to those WR's before the QB's you listed.

I don't like Kurt Warner as a religious prosthelytizer, but I love him as a quarterback.

He may be one of the last great throwing statues we see in this league, a guy who would stay in the pocket as long as it took for someone to get open, then release the ball in a flash, Dan Marino style. What made him so great is the guy could hit people in stride like non-other. If you look at his success, it has been with good receivers, yes, but he could place the ball where it would allow his receivers to get significant yards after the catch. Very few passes from Warner were off their mark.

If you recall, his off years in New York coincided with a serious thumb injury that kept him from gripping the ball well. It lead to his use of a glove on his throwing hand later in his career. I don't think those years should tarnish the career of a great passer. I think he is definitely HOF worthy. Will the voters put him in on the first ballot? Not sure, I guess it will depend on who he's up against (could be up against Favre, Jr. Seau, and Ed Reed if they really retire this year)