With Warner Signed, Teams Should Go After Leinart

Before you call me crazy, or you tell me that I have no idea what I'm talking about, let me remind you that I've proven I'm crazy for the last three months on this site. Now I present my new outrageous thought that maybe isn't so outrageous after all.

Every team that needs a quarterback should get the Arizona Cardinals on the phone. Now that Kurt Warner has signed on for the next two years, Matt Leinart is useless in Glendale. All he's going to do is hold a clipboard, barring an injury to Warner. That's why Matt Leinart could be available, and why teams without a clear solution at QB should be starting their next call with area code 623.

I'm talking to you, Minnesota Vikings, Detroit Lions, Tampa Bay Buccaneers, and Chicago Bears.

I know what you're thinking.

Jordan, are you nuts? This has already been established. But Leinart stinks! His career passer rating is 71.7. He's appeared in just nine games over the last two seasons. And when he started 12 games in 2006, he threw more picks than touchdowns (12 INT, 11TD) and completed just under 57% of his passes. Not to mention the fact that his arm strength is suspect, his mobility is in question, and he has never proven over a full season he can get the job done.

I hear you. But here's my thinking. Matt Leinart was a great quarterback in college. A phenomenal quarterback in college. And if given the chance, he could be a serviceable option for a team without a quarterback. He's only had one full season to prove himself in the NFL, and that was his rookie year. How many quarterbacks are actually good their first year? I know, I know. Matt Ryan. But he's the exception not the norm.

Think about it. How could Leinart be worse than Daunte Culpepper, Drew Stanton, or Drew Henson? According to Yahoo sports, those are the three quarterbacks listend on the Lions depth chart. The answer is, it's highly unlikely Leinart would be worse.

Same thing with the Vikings. You're telling me Leinart couldn't be better than Sage Rosenfels or Tarvaris Jackson? If you're the Bears, he couldn't compete with Kyle Orton for the starting job? And couldn't he compete with Luke McCown or Brian Griese in Tampa?

Leinart might be the best option in any of these four situations. In fact, if the Broncos are forced to trade Jay Cutler, maybe Leinart would be a good option in Denver.

He's not great. No one is saying he is. But he hasn't had the chance yet to truly prove whether he can be great. Knowing his track record in college, and the fact that he's had the chance to learn under Kurt Warner, conventional wisdom would suggest that he's probably a viable option for an NFL team with a quarterback in need.

Just a thought. Still think it's so crazy?

USC = Duke?

Well, on its face, the comparison seems quite obvious. Both are powerhouses in college sports, the former more so in college football, the latter decidedly in college basketball.

So yeah, on that level, sure. But, after Mark Sanchez decided to go pro last week, I got to thinking: is this perennial Pac-10 powerhouse putting out a comparable amount of great pro players? (Enough p-words?)

For a school nicknamed "Tailback U", for a school that has a reputation, at least in recent history, for being know for its great offense, the answer isn't as favorable as you might think.

Let's take a quick look at some of the offensive skill players drafted in recent years.

2007

2nd Round - Dwayne Jarrett, Steve Smith

2006

1st Round - Reggie Bush, Matt Leinart

2nd Round - LenDale White

2005

1st Round - Mike Williams

2004

2nd Round - Keary Colbert

2003

1st Round - Carson Palmer

2000

1st Round - R. Jay Soward

1996

1st Round - Keyshawn Johnson

Out of that list, there's only two that I could say have been or were good pro's: Keyshawn Johnson and Carson Palmer. But, both come with asterisks. Johnson's being that he truly was a disappointment, having been a Heisman Trophy winner, and (more importantly) a number one overall pick (only four thousand yard seasons and one 10 TD year in 11?). Then again, if he was a disappointment, then fellow number one pick Palmer would have to be as well. Thus far in his young career, he has been with only having had two really good seasons, the rest either average-poor or injured.

Of the rest, how many do you remember being very good at USC? Having a ton of potential, being highly rated, having bigtime college careers? Most, if not all of them (and that's not even including the John David Booty's and Chauncey Washington's)

Most of those guys haven't been nearly as good (nor project to be) in the pro's. Jarret and Smith have been average receivers early on. Bush has developed a rep as being a soft player, in addition to being a largely useless player. As far as Leinart's concerned, two words sum up his value: Kurt Warner. LenDale White seemed more likely to eat his way out the league before gobbling up all of Chris Johnson's TD's this year. Mike Williams' is obviously the biggest bust as he barely has even played, and Keary Colbert, unfortunately continues to play, just at a very poor level. Finally, Soward never did much in the NFL because of a little thing called reefer.

So, back to the title, USC = Duke? Well, yes. Because, as I've just shown you, USC seems to have developed a reputation for putting formerly great college players into the professional ranks and watch them disappointment.

Duke? Well, we all know their history...William Avery, Jason Williams, Trajan Langdon, Bobby Hurley, J.J. Reddick, Christian Laettner, Shelden Williams...I think I've made my point there.

And thus, my overarching theme here is, don't get crazy over Mark Sanchez because he's leaving early and bucking trends and any of that nonsense. Get crazy because, frankly, USC hasn't produced a ton of great offensive pro's in recent memory. Kind of like Duke.