Cardinals may “already have understanding” with Bulger


The Cardinals’ apparent intent to pass on Missouri quarterback Blaine Gabbert at No. 5 in the draft has fueled the belief that Arizona plans to sign a stopgap, free agent quarterback to be its starter in 2011.

While some have speculated about the Cardinals potentially pursuing Donovan McNabb, clued-in Arizona writers believe Marc Bulger is a far more likely option. And according to Len Pasquarelli of the Sports Xchange, a Bulger-Cardinals union may already be in the works.

“A lot of people in the league feel the Cardinals already have an understanding with pending free agent Marc Bulger,” writes Pasquarelli. “The Cardinals would have liked to sign Bulger last year, and coach Ken Whisenhunt lobbied for a deal, but Arizona had already agreed with Derek Anderson and management didn’t see a way to bring in two veterans.”

Having “an understanding” with a player is different than speaking to that player, who in this case is technically still a member of the Baltimore Ravens. So this presumably wouldn’t be tampering.

But it does sound like it could come awfully close.

Regardless, the Cardinals’ 2011 quarterback plan seems to be laid out. They’ll bring back 2010 fifth-round pick John Skelton, and attempt to develop him behind the 34-year-old Bulger.

It wouldn’t seem like a recipe for success in most NFL divisions, but the Cardinals could probably be plenty competitive with Bulger at quarterback in the NFC West.

23 responses to “Cardinals may “already have understanding” with Bulger

  1. This will make Larry Fitzgerald happy, as he supposedly got in a snit when he heard the team was looking at getting Gabbert instead of a veteran QB.

  2. Bulger seems to be taking a strangely similar career path to that of Kurt Warner. Start out with the greatest show on turf. Put up sick numbers in the first few years. Get injured. Kind of disappear for a while. Eventually become a backup to teams with no chance to start in front of younger franchise QBS (Giants with Eli, Ravens with Flacco). Land with the Cardinals and resurrect your career by tossing bombs to Larry Fitzgerald.

    It worked for Warner. It can for Bulger too.

  3. LOL blackcat, that’s the truth!
    I always thought that when they were in their primes Trent Green (the one Warner replaced… man those Rams were good at finding those guys! :D)and Marc Bulger were very underrated Qbs with similar playing styles.
    McNabb’s play OTOH would make even the ultra cool and very good guy Fitzgerald choke a b*tch.

  4. “Having “an understanding” with a player is different than speaking to that player,…”

    The understanding was arrived at by telepathy then?

  5. Wasnt Bulger less than competitive when he played with another NFC west team, or am I mistaken?

  6. Man, if the Cards were smart they’d blow it up and start over. It seems like they’re still holding on to the hopes that they’ll relive 2008/2009 over again…

    Trade Fitz for some first rounders and call it a day. Bulger isn’t going to be the answer, nor is Hall, Skelton, or Anderson.

    BUT, as a Hawks fanatic I encourage the above move. Thanks!

  7. Bet on it!

    The Cardinals want Marc.

    The team and player match up…consider it a done deal.

    They don’t want McNabb…but if things broke up with Bulger for some strange reason he’d be the backup plan.

  8. I hope the Rams have an “understanding” with Sidney Rice.
    Bulger is a good team player, above average quarterback, and a classy guy. If he is over the “yips” he acquired while being hammered with the Rams, he could make the Cards competitive. Just don’t expect him to be another Warner. Mark is a “manager” who may not be able to carry a team the way Kurt could.

  9. This is clearly tampering. For you to try and claim that its anything else is silly. They are lucky the Ravens dont have a history of pursuing teams for tampering. They could have went after the Rams a few years ago when they signed Jason Brown and they could have went after the Browns for speaking with Kokinos before they had given permission but they opted not to.

  10. wow..all these people writing off bulger just like they did warner.

    I’m a Ram fan – and I hate to see Bulger go to Arizona. I watched him this year in the pre-season with baltimore to really find out if he was the problem in st.louis, or if it was the lack of talent around him.

    And if watching him run the 1’s in preseason was any indication, he still has it. Still has more then decent accuracy and zip on the ball, with solid decision making…Especially was impressive in the 2 minute drill,throwing back to back completions for atleast 20+ yards to donte stallworth.

    The only question is – Can arizona protect him like Baltimore? I sincerely doubt it.

  11. I would like to see PFT’s list of “we have an understanding” between free agents and teams. Since there are no rules being broken with “understandings”.

  12. NFL told agents they can talk to teams but they wouldn’t be able to have their players sign with teams.

    Didn’t Bulger sign a one year deal.

    Free agents are allowed to talk to teams.

  13. How would this be tampering?? They had serious conversations last year, so both sides already know what they need to know about each other, thus they “already have an understanding” of what each side is looking for. Are they supposed to somehow erase everything from last year from their memory? Now if the Cardinals have contacted Bulger about joining them after he signed with Baltimore, then that would be tampering.

  14. How would they ‘have an understanding’ without talking THIS YEAR, and how could they talk this year without it being tampering?

    I could care less either way, but it seems pretty clear that you can’t have one without the other…if BAL wants to push a tampering case.

    Anyway, ARI better upgrade their O-line early and often…considering how fragile Bulger is.

  15. When you say, “The Cardinals would have liked to sign Bulger last year, and coach Ken Whisenhunt lobbied for a deal, but Arizona had already agreed with Derek Anderson and management didn’t see a way to bring in two veterans.”

    what you mean is that even with 3 roster QB’s stinking up the joint, the Bidwill family WOULD NOT SPEND THE MONEY. SAME OLD CHEAP-ASS CARDINAL OWNERS.

    My question is why write this favorably? Also, were the Cardinals prohibited in contacting Bulger in this contract environment? Is this a violation?

    I know this: they couldn’t have been worse w/ leinart and probably would have been better. That’s on the coach.

  16. it can’t be anything but tampering unless the cards said if it doesn’t work out this deal is open for 2 years, that clearly never happened

  17. That’s a mistake. Especially when they can get both Gabbert and have him sit behind Bulger for the 4 games he’ll play this season before catastrophic injury occurs.

  18. Take the QB at No. 5, and Bulger. How long could he last? They will find themselves in the same situation, without a starting QB, again, when Bulger is washed up in about one season or less.

  19. I’d love for someone to explain to me how a team came to an “understanding” with another team’s player without some sort of tampering.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.