Kurt Warner announces retirement after 12 seasons

He would go out a top five quarterback.

I think Warner will get his hall of fame due when he comes eligible, but I don't think people realize just how good this guy was. I don't think there have been ten better quarterbacks to ever play the game of football. Certainly not since the merger.

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.


I was never sold on Palmer when he was everyone's 3rd best QB. I did once think Bulger was going to be really good though.

But Manning could be considered in the same camp you put Warner in. He has only played with a strong supporting cast. James, Harrison, Wayne and Clark. There are 2 HOers there. I do admit that Manning is one of the best QB's of all time but he's had a ridiculous supporting cast, better then what most QB’s have worked with.

I took full offense from your post about Christians....but honestly, in the NFL as far as starters go, who else sets an example like him? A good guy who isnt an extremist...im just saying those kind of guys are hard to come by.....

I was never sold on the guy. Give me Bruce, Holt, Faulk, and Hakim, to pair with any QB and I will make him great. I will trade him to a less talented team and he will struggle. I will then pair him with Boldin, Fitzgerald, Breaston, and Arrington and watch him revive his career.

Warner was good at getting the ball out of his hands before he got hit, luckily he had some talent on the other end to do something with it. That the way I see it and you cannot change it.


Have to agree with Matty's rebuttal of this quote. Could Manning be any good without Harrison, Wayne, Clark, and Gonzalez til he got hurt? Marshall Faulk, Edgerrin James, and Joe Addai, aren't bums either. Every great QB in the NFL or college had a solid supporting cast. THat is why I am not going "gaga" over the Big 4 QB prospects in this draft. They rocked when their team had a distinct talent advantage over most of their opponents, but got roughed up when the odds were even.

I took full offense from your post about Christians....but honestly, in the NFL as far as starters go, who else sets an example like him? A good guy who isnt an extremist...im just saying those kind of guys are hard to come by.....

Sorry not trying to offend anyone. But how about Fletcher as a great example. There are tons of guys that do great things that are starters in this league. Kurt and LT both set great examples of being a Christian. Just like Pacman and Tank Johnson set great examples of being a thug. The difference is Kurt and LT are also good humanitarians. If Kurt was a atheist or a Hindu and his off the field work was otherwise the same in my eyes he would be just as classy of a guy. Being a good Christian doesn’t make you better or worse in my book.

And sorry to everyone else. I don’t want to take away from this thread anymore. I will refrain from talking about any more religious stuff in this thread……

Have to agree with Matty's rebuttal of this quote. Could Manning be any good without Harrison, Wayne, Clark, and Gonzalez til he got hurt? Marshall Faulk, Edgerrin James, and Joe Addai, aren't bums either. Every great QB in the NFL or college had a solid supporting cast. THat is why I am not going "gaga" over the Big 4 QB prospects in this draft. They rocked when their team had a distinct talent advantage over most of their opponents, but got roughed up when the odds were even.

Whenever people talk whos better Manning or Brady thats the one argument for Brady. He never had a really great WR cast around him untill 2007 when Moss and Welker showed up. MAYBE you can make the case for Deion Branch, but hes more of just a big name to me. The best offessive player behind Brady was Adam Vinatieri proir to the arrivial of Moss and Welker. Could Manning have done what Brady did coming into NE?

So i put Warner and Manning in the same camp, except Manning has had more advantages (same team, offense, players, coaches, and everyone believing in him from the start). I think Manning is better but I really believe Warner is a all time great.

If you're going to make that assumption you must also ask this question. Did Manning benefit more from having all those receivers or did all those receivers benefit from having Manning at QB? My guess is that it's a fair bit of both so it's really a non point. No QB will be succesful without good teammates. Brady didnt have elite WR's for years but he always had a great O-line that kept him upright for the most part. The ideal situation is to have a good QB with good weapons because every QB falls off to a certain extent without them.

a few of warner's stats or facts

two time nfl mvp
one time superbowl mvp
four time probowl selection
9-4 playoff record
2nd qb in history to start for two different superbowl teams
2nd qb in nfl history to throw for more than 100 tds for two different teams
has a higher completion % than any hof qb in the last 25 years
fastest player to reach 10,000 yds passing
tied dan morino as the fastest to reach 30,000 yards
top 3 passing games in superbowl history

Why Kurt Warner Is NOT a Hall of Famer | Bleacher Report (http://bleacherreport.com/articles/127644-why-kurt-warner-is-not-a-hall-of-famer)

This article talks about this and to be honest I like Warner and I think he's a good QB. Yes most of the great QBs had good WRs but Warner didn't just have good players around him he had great players that obviously helped. Even with these great players sometimes he still couldn't win as mentioned in the article. He averages 2.03 fumbles/int per start and he has had some great WRs and one of the great RB. Now imagine what his numbers would be if he wasn't blessed with GREAT talent around him? I think he's obviously better than just average which is why even Leinart can't do the same with the same talent around him cause he sucks and Warner is a good QB but I don't think we would be having any conversations of him being a HOF if he didn't have atleast 3-4 WRs that will also be HOF. I think there's a reason he gets benched by every team he plays for and if you look at his numbers he's had only around 5 good years the rest were mediocre-horrible. In my eyes he's not a HOF but I think he's a good QB who looked like a HOF with the talent around him and still sometimes looked bad with the same talent. Just read the article, it's interesting and its hard to ignore the bad parts of his career. I think without the talent around him he'd be ok but no where near where he is but he's a good story...

[QUOTE=Chevy13;659171]...[QUOTE]

do you discredit Montana for having Rice and Taylor? What about Bradshaw?

The Cardinals wouldnt have a playoff win in the last two years if Warner wasn't there.