Election's over, but readers 'vote' on Palmer

Several e-mails arrived from readers on Tuesday, Election Day, in the hours after my analysis was published in the Enquirer that said benching quarterback Carson Palmer now would be a big mistake. The topic of debate became the decision of who plays quarterback for the Bengals, Palmer or Jon Kitna.

Question, from Jim in Lockland: After reading today's article (Nov. 2), I have come to the conclusion you must be a democrate (do you mean Democrat?) It's called dumbing down the Bengal fans. I think all Bengals fans should take it as a smack in the face: your comment you don't know if Kitna could be doing better than Palmer.

Some of Kitna's stats from 2003: second most completions in Bengal history, fifth in team history for passing yards, 26 touchdown passes, completion percentage highest since 1984.
The Bengals need to keep their defense off the field, and Kitna's ability to sustain drives and provide his leadership is sorely needed. Having said this, Kitna should not be used NOW. Their chance for the playoffs is gone this year, so let Palmer finish this season. If he doesn't do any better than he has, next training camp the job should be won by the best guy, not given to him. If you would like to print this letter, fine.

Answer: Consider it done.

I guess Jim and I found some common ground on the folly of benching Palmer now. We'll just have to agree to disagree otherwise about the initial decision.

As for the election and political parties, since you bring them up, it's now about 10:15 a.m. Thursday. I'm still in awe of the voter turnout. My hope is that we all stay as engaged in the life of our country, and debate its place as a world citizen, as we have the last several months.

To quote the hugely talented singer-songwriter Steve Earle, "No matter what anybody tells you, it is never, ever unpatriotic or un-American to question anything in a democracy."

And now, to paraphrase broadcaster Bob Costas, let's get back to the Toy Department of Human Affairs: What follows are a few more e-mails from readers who disagreed with my position that Palmer needs to keep playing. I'll let them roll before getting to the readers who, gasp, actually agreed with me.

Question, from Bryan: You miss the point. The Bengals had a chance to be successful this year. They have chosen to throw the season away to build for what might be a great career for Palmer. Could it be possible that the Bengals running game has not been good this year because of no threat at quarterback? I think so.

Come on, Peter Warrick is an average wide receiver. They have replaced him easily. The problem is Palmer, plain and simple. No matter what kind of career Kitna has had or if he is the player of the future or not, he was the guy who could of made a difference for the Bengals. Right now Kitna is better than Palmer and it's a disservice to Bengals fans and players that management and coaches played this season for what might happen down the road. I, for one, can't predict the future. And in the NFL business, the time is now. Nice article but not a very convincing one. Thanks for your time.

Answer: Good letter. But I could not disagree with you more about Warrick. He is almost irreplaceable. He opens the running game and blocks well down field. He creates another big headache for defenses and helps Chad Johnson get single coverage. I've written many times that Warrick is the offensive MVP.

But the theme today is the importance of respecting all opinions.

Question, from Joe in Endwell, Ky.: Is it my imagination or is Carson Palmer the most emotionless QB in the league? For a guy who was supposed to be a great leader, he seems to exude very little emotion and doesn't seem to fire up the team like other great NFL QBs.

He always seems to have a look of bewilderment on his face. Am I reading him correctly?

Answer: You are misreading him. A highly respected and valued trait in a quarterback is an even temperament. Teammates say Palmer has plenty of fire in the huddle. People on the outside might not see it.

Question, from Anonymous: OK, Mark, we realize that you are a big Carson Palmer fan, but take it easy on Kitna because where he is right now he can't defend himself.

Answer: I normally don't run anonymous e-mails, but I couldn't pass this one up.

Kitna is a fine quarterback and one of the finest people I have known in any line of work. Kitna would say he doesn't need me to defend him. He has his Christian faith, which he lives even better than he talks it.

I respect Jon Kitna more than any athlete I've covered in five years on the Bengals beat or in the year-plus I covered the White Sox and Cubs in Chicago. The only other players who approached the Kitna level in my mind were former Bengals safety Marquand Manuel and former White Sox outfielder Ron Kittle.

Kittle was/is a solid, mature person whose father, a former Gary, Ind., steel mill worker, died from lung cancer during the 1990 season. Ron never forgot where he was from, who he was or how fortunate he was to be a professional athlete and didn't have to follow his dad into the mills.

Jon Kitna has that similarly admirable perspective on life.

So many high-profile athletes, as we know, are not worthy of their status as role models for youth. Jon Kitna is. His eloquent behavior since the Bengals drafted Palmer first overall in 2003 is a lesson for all of us. Instead of pouting, he went out and had a career season. He knew what was coming. He has done nothing but support Palmer and has not let his personal disappointment affect the team negatively. He is the ultimate team player.

Question, from David in Mount Adams: Your defense of Marvin Lewis' decision to not start the best player was straight out Bengal Management 101. The logic was sound: If you don't start the best player, there's a better chance of losing, which is the one thing the Bengals are great at.

The way the NFL does salary caps and the draft, it is almost impossible to be as consistently bad as Mike Brown's teams have been unless you employ Bengal logic. You have not only sipped the Kool-Aid, you've chugged the whole pitcher: Shame on you.

For the record, (David) Carr and (Joey) Harrington stepped into either no offense or broken offenses. Palmer, as a second year player, stepped into an explosive offense. If he can't handle it, call him out. And call Marvin Lewis out too. Some people are made to be good assistants; some don't get it done as head coaches. This is his second year, and he has had free agents and draft picks to shape his team. He has failed. In his defense, it was Katie and Troy (Blackburn) that wanted Lewis, not Brown. He wanted Tom Coughlin. And in case you haven't noticed, (the Giants) are doing fine, thanks.

Answer: I would point out the Bengals were ranked 13th in offense in 2003, hardly what one would call "explosive." In losing three of their final four games, and blowing a shot at the playoffs, the Bengals offensive scored 13, 10 and 14 points. (The Bengals had earlier scored 10, 10 and 14 points in three other losses.)

Boom.

And in the victory against Kansas City, the difference was Warrick's 68-yard punt return.
Lewis is 10-13 as a coach, having taken over a 2-14 team from 2002. Twelve players have been lost for the season because of injuries. Some of his personnel decisions are open to questioning, but he is clearly qualified to lead the team. It's almost ridiculous to state a fact that obvious.

There's no denying Coughlin's success at Jacksonville and early work in New York, but at what price? He might peak a team quickly but leaves it in disarray.

Brown, by the way, dismissed Coughlin as a candidate when Coughlin demanded a massive investment of people in the scouting department. And while the details are sketchy, Brown was enamored by then-Steelers offensive coordinator Mike Mularkey. How is Mularkey doing as head coach in Buffalo these days?

Question, from Ben in Colerain: Just wanted to say I enjoyed your article on not benching Palmer. I've been arguing with a few friends since Week 2 regarding the same issues you discussed. Let's just hope they all read your article.

Answer: Even better, let's hope they all buy the newspaper. But thanks.

Question, from Robin in the UK: It's so reassuring to read your column and think, finally, some sense. I've been following the Bengals since the mid '80s from the UK. The more I see Palmer the more I am reassured. His performance against Denver was spot on. Given a solid offensive line, Carson could be as good as eitherManning or Culpepper.

(Look for my Union Jack on the top tier on the Bengal side of the stadium Sunday.)

Answer: Those are lofty comparisons, but Palmer clearly has the look and potential to be the best Bengals quarterback since Boomer Esiason in the 1980s.

Question, from Roger in Goshen: You finally say something that is positive. I know you follow this team closely and have watched in horror at how this organization fails. You are right when you say Carson Palmer is not the problem.

He will not be the answer, either. He is a very good quarterback. He needs time to develop into a premium pro passer and become more of a leader.

Answer: Positive is not my concern. Accuracy and fairness are. I see Palmer as the best choice to play quarterback right now for the Bengals and long into the future.

Question, from Adrian in Hoffman Estates, Ill.: After being initially frustrated by the Bengals most likely not finishing 8-8, I have to agree the future is next year and beyond with Palmer playing. Though getting a one new run-stuffing DT for next would be nice, too.

Answer: The defense is the team's biggest problem.