My RELUCTANT Defense of Matt Leinart On The Occasion Of His Benching

Motivated in part - but not entirely - by this story: Matt Leinart Benched

That is right, this is the SECOND time that Leinart has been benched. The first time was last year, but it was quickly forgotten as a result of Leinart's season - ending injury. I actually thought that Leinart's getting hurt would wind up benefitting him, as he A) did not have to deal with the media asking him about getting benched every week and calling him a possible bust especially with Reggie Bush struggling as well and B) after he got hurt the media and the fans would only remember the injury, not the benching (of course the players, coaches, and front office are another matter). So Leinart had a real shot to come back, win the starting job in the offseason, and mostly conceal the fact - as far as the public is concerned - that he ever did lose his starting job to Kurt Warner in the first place.

Truthfully, this should not be portrayed as a second (or first) benching either. Why? No 7th overall pick in the draft and presumptive starter gets benched after a bad preseason outing. Instead, truthfully, this is honestly just things picking up from where they left off last year. Make no mistake: Kurt Warner and Matt Leinart competed for the job last season. And it wasn't even a fair competition ... the odds were stacked for Leinart, whom the organization had every interest in seeing claim the starting job. Warner beat Leinart in that competition, and it wasn't close (remember, it was stacked, so had Warner beaten out Leinart by a small margin Leinart would have gotten the nod anyway). Even then, Leinart was given playing time, something that would have never been done for Warner had Leinart been the starter, mind you. So, things are really just back where they were before Leinart's injury. Warner is the starter, and due to his odd career path and the way that he plays the position (relying more on accuracy and timing than arm strength), can conceivably remain so for the next several years unless he gets hurt or someone beats him out.

Now let me make something clear: as an SEC fan who generally roots for Auburn (which is the "ugly duckling underdog" in both their big rivalries to Alabama and Georgia and will never have the great advantages that Florida, LSU, or even Tennessee enjoy), I have an interest in seeing yet another member of that "greatest ever" USC 2004 team shown to be overrated by their NFL struggles while so many members of that Auburn team have played pretty well (even if Ronnie Brown and Carnell Williams have been hampered by injury). However, even one with such biases as myself feels compelled to rise up and defend Leinart.

On what basis? Why not start with a comparison between Warner and Leinart. Where is Leinart right now? A backup to a former Super Bowl and league MVP, meaning that there are no doubt some NFL situations where he would start. Where was Warner when he was Leinart's age? Playing in the Arena League and stacking groceries. Point: NFL QBs need time to develop. Some guys stink early in their careers and go on to be Hall of Famers like Steve Young and Terry Bradshaw. Other guys play well early only to later collapse like Rick Mirer and Kordell Stewart. But guys who become good players by their second year and maintain it over long careers like Dan Marino, Tom Brady, and Peyton Manning are rare.

You're currently logged into Facebook

Do you want to share your Bleacher Report activity on Facebook?