There's No Defending Kyler

Kyler Murray has been a big story in the NFL over the off season after pouting to get a contract extension and trying to strong arm the Arizona Cardinals into giving him the bag. He got his money but then it was leaked that he's required to do independent study on film to receive his bonuses. Now, this is an embarrassment for both sides but there's no defending Kyler Murray.

Colin Cowherd tried to defend Murray by saying 'there are multiple ways to do it.' Cowherd sited Big Ben and Brett Favre, while also throwing out Michael Vick and even grasping for straws at Jay Cutler, as those that were not big film studiers and relied on their athleticism. Those last two don't really provide a strong argument as Vick's tenure, granted a QB well ahead of his time that his coaches and coordinators couldn't figure out, was up and down seasons. I'm a Bears fan and there's no logical way that you can use him as any sort of argument to prop up 'it's a different way, but it worked.' Cutler's MO was having a difficult to work with personality, which we'll come back to, and being disappointing.

Now, there's no denying they are talented quarterbacks and were definitive starters during their professional careers, but is that the mark we're reaching for? You're giving a guy a quarter of a billion dollars, granted the going rate now, to be a solid starter? I don't think so, but in fairness we'll toss out those asinine attempts to try and prop up a bad point.

Let's instead focus on Big Ben and Favre, definitive Hall of Famers and Super Bowl winners. Between the two of them they have three rings and five total Super Bowl appearances, and Colin is right that they relied on their ability to make things happen; Favre the gunslingining and Big Big his mobility and big stature. However, if you dive just one iota further what really is there evaluation? Favre is remembered for seasons constantly ending on interceptions and Ben held on too long but his last Super Bowl? 2010. Brett Favre played until 2010 and his last Super Bowl appearance was 1997, with an asterisk for Bounty Gate. In their first Super Bowls they didn't even win MVP.

Now, the drama with Ben's receivers, looking at AB, buys him a little leeway but how much of his poor habits set the culture for at least the offensive side? There's no denying he had talented teams. That'd be the same for Favre. Instead let's focus on something glaringly obvious. When you think of premiere franchises in the NFL who are some of the teams at the top of the list? The Pittsburgh Steelers and Green Bay Packers ought to quickly come up for everyone. Could it be possible, while talented, those poor study habits were covered up a bit by great organizations? Isn't it possible that the play of Big Ben and Favre, especially once their athleticism began to slip, became more detriments in the biggest moments?

In his argument Colin Cowherd mentions Russell Wilson, Tom Brady, Peyton Manning and Drew Brees as film junkies but glosses over some very important facts. Isn't 11 Super Bowls and six other appearances worth mentioning? How about Brady, Manning and Brees all being first ballot Hall of Famers and trading the most prolific passing records? It'd be hard to ignore that when you're talking about 'what works.'

There is a point Colin gets right, which is Kyler Murray is still young but his conclusion that “it's working” is short sighted. This is where the criticism heaped on the Arizona Cardinals is apt. Yes, there is protection for the organization but it brings about criticism for handing over that kind of money, when they could go the Franchise Tag route, to a QB you think is too immature to lead you where you want to go. However, this is where the conclusion of “it's working” is shortsighted. Especially because it's based, in part, on what he did before he got to the league. For someone who criticizes Baker Mayfield for his attitude, but also relying on what he could do in college, that seems to be arguing both sides. And Cleveland is not a well respected franchise either but did win a road playoff game.

In three seasons Murray has a 66.9% completion percentage, 11,480 yards, 70 touchdowns to 34 interceptions to go along with 314 rushes for 1,786 yards and 20 more scores but also 27 fumbles. There's no denying he was awful in the playoff game, his first and against the eventual Super Bowl champs. It is true that he has taken a team with the number one overall pick to a playoff birth in three seasons, but the Cardinals have also hit a wall part way through the season, as if teams are catching up to him.

While I agree there's some criticism that a franchise that is not well respected put this clause in to protect, but also embarrass their franchise QB, can you not also make the argument they're using a strong hand to guide their QB to get them to a Super Bowl victory? Even in Colin's point he makes this case; Jay Cutler and Michael Vick as outstanding talents who weren't big film studiers. Their talent took them to being an above average starter but did they really do anything when it comes to winning big time? No, in fact they were sources of frustration to their teams because they couldn't deliver more.

This is where we come back to that hard to work with personality. It's not just the film study, the attitude is part of a new wave of star players. In the NFL it hasn't been seen as much, but Aaron Rodgers would be a prime example, but it has really shown itself in recent season in the NBA with James Harden and Ben Simmons. They are great talents who haven't put in the work and have left fans and their franchises disappointed. That has to be a legitimate fear when your young QB says “I think I was blessed with the cognitive skills to just go out there and see it before it happens. I'm not one of those guys that's going to sit there and kill myself watching film. I don't sit there for 24 hours and break down this team and that team and watch every game because, in my head, I see so much.”

Again, Kyler Murray is young enough that you can't lock him in somewhere or to say he can't fix his issue, but the signs are there and he is without defense. I'm not saying Murray can't have a solid career if he doesn't change his study habits because there's no denying Vick in Atlanta was the most exciting player to watch in the league but the goal is to win. All of this just frames Murray as a kid who was a vastly superior athlete who didn't put in the work to take it to another level and, I'm sorry, but every professional league has a history of tantalizing talents who flamed out as disappointments. The pressure is on Murray to deliver as eyes will be on him and maybe that's what Arizona's goal was after the pouting over the contract.