Darin Gant on Bill Cowher.

[grateflday]

Am I reading the several post above mine correctly?? Are there some that would be ok if Jake Delhomme was the starting QB for the Panthers next season? I am not. No way I want to see that.

[Sam Mills Fan]

But as Urry pointed out, would those stats be worth with what you would have to give up?

Two first round picks and more for cutler? Same with cassel. And obviously youd have to give up big to trade up to sanchez and stafford.

Urry's point was irrelevant because Gantt flat-out said that Delhomme was better than these guys. He never mentioned any kind of compensation needed would be too high.

[Mr. Scot]

I don't think there's a passer available, in the draft or free agency or trade (unless a Manning or Rivers or Ryan or Brady's mysteriously available), who's better than Delhomme. I'm not even sure there's an upgrade to McCown out there on the open market, for what that's worth.

Calm down, take a breath, and realize that as bad as he was last weekend, he's still pretty good (.618 winning percentage), and as he's proven, all the quarterback they need to win, if the right parts are in place."

Three sentences, all three turned out to be incorrect. Cassel, Orton, Cutler, Sanchez, and Stafford were traded or drafted and all five are better than Jake. He didn't say that it would be dumb to get one of them because of what we would have had to give up (which would have been a valid point), he just flat out said that Jake was better than them. False.

Remarkably simple minded, as was the appeal to stats :nonod:

Let's take a look at the problems.

Matt Cassel: In his last outing, Cassel went 10 of 29 for 84 yards with 2 picks and a rating of 14.2. Not surprisingly, he was benched. This is not his only bad game, mind you, and the Chiefs have him signed to a 6 year, 60 million dollar contract and had to give up a 2nd round pick just to sign him.

You're telling me you'd rather have that? Yeesh :sosp:

Mark Sanchez/Matt Stafford: Both rookies, both having their ups and their downs, neither appreciably better on the season than Delhomme on a team that's committed to running first. Getting either of them would have required giving away a lot, not to mention paying huge contracts. And all that for guys who aren't especially better now and would have been a complete gamble at the time.

How exactly was a cap-strapped team supposed to manage the kind of huge contract a high first round QB would get? And if you want to say "release Delhomme" you should probably look up what that would have meant to the cap. Given that someone had to explain to you that a restructure in the last year of his contract wouldn't create room without an extension, I doubt you'll get it.

(don't bother with "release Peppers" either; that ws never gonna happen and appealing to it is stupid)

Kyle Orton: No doubt, he's winning in Denver. He's also throwing high percentage passes and has a tandem of Brandon Marshall and Eddie Royal catching them. Is there an equivalent number two here?

Even accepting the premise that Orton would be just as good here as he is there, he was shipped out in a trade to get Jay Cutler. You think the Bears would have traded him to get Delhomme? If no, then he wasn't actually an option, was he? If yes, who do you think you're kidding?

Jay Cutler: This one's wrong on a couple of levels. One, similar to Cassel, there's a fair sized gap between what it took to obtain him and the return for investment he's giving on the field. Delhomme may be bad, but it didn't cost the Panthers two first round picks, a third, a fifth, and a player plus a huge contract to boot.

And that's not even the funniest part.

The blog you claim to be "refuting" by pointing out that Cutler and Orton - among others - were available, was posted on January 16th.

Cutler wasn't available at that time.

The drama surrounding his trade demands didn't hit the fan till after the Cassel trade went down (nearly a full month later). It still wasn't even a story till late February/early March. And it didn't really blow up till mid-March after a meeting with owner Pat Bowlen and new coach Josh McDaniels went bad.

Despite all that, the Broncos company line was that they wanted to keep him, and a lot of pundits thought they would, even right up till the day he was traded. And obviously, Orton wasn't available either. Nor was Chicago dangling him as trade bait.

So...explain to me how exactly you refute the validity of something that was said on January 16th by appealing to events that didn't take place until late February and early-to-mid March?

Or, even better, just admit you don't know what you're talking about, seeing as your attempts to make Gantt look stupid only served to make you look worse :frown2:

[Sam Mills Fan]

Does it really matter? Fine, throw out Cutler and Orton. Jake is still worse than Stafford/Sanchez/Cassel and any objective observer would agree with that. The stats are a damning thing Scotty even before you consider the following:

Cassel has nobody. Jake has 89, Double Trouble, and a great offensive line. Quick, without looking, can you name a KC receiver? Hint: They're garbage. His o-line is garbage. His backs are garbage.

Sanchez is a rookie whose top option is butterfingers Braylon Edwards. Stafford is a rookie who has a great #1 threat like Jake does, has some guy named Bryant Johnson as his #2.

So Scotty, I'm going to suggest something for you because I actually like you despite how it may appear: Stop. People like you. They think you're smart. But those stats are staring you dead in the face. I don't want you to lose credibility as a smart poster, so you're better off just abandoning this thread.

Jake Delhomme has one of the top 10 supporting casts in the league and yet has THE worst stats in the league for a starter. It doesn't get more cut and dry than that.

[Mr. Scot]

Does it really matter? Fine, throw out Cutler and Orton. Jake is still worse than Stafford/Sanchez/Cassel and any objective observer would agree with that. The stats are a damning thing Scotty even before you consider the following:

Cassel has nobody. Jake has 89, Double Trouble, and a great offensive line. Quick, without looking, can you name a KC receiver? Hint: They're garbage. His o-line is garbage. His backs are garbage.

Sanchez is a rookie whose top option is butterfingers Braylon Edwards. Stafford is a rookie who has a great #1 threat like Jake does, has some guy named Bryant Johnson as his #2.

So Scotty, I'm going to suggest something for you because I actually like you despite how it may appear: Stop. People like you. They think you're smart. But those stats are staring you dead in the face. I don't want you to lose credibility as a smart poster, so you're better off just abandoning this thread.

Jake Delhomme has one of the top 10 supporting casts in the league and yet has THE worst stats in the league for a starter. It doesn't get more cut and dry than that.

You're still not grasping that there's a larger picture here :nonod:

Going off the stats you posted, none of the guys mentioned is having an especially superior year, but the amount they're getting paid and/or what it would have taken to get them would have been outlandish. Cassel especially, seeing as he has what's likely one of the biggest gaps between salary and production in the league.

And for the record, Cassel had Dwayne Bowe before he was suspended. Bowe's far from garbage, and his being statistically down this year is as easily attributed to Cassel as it is to him.

I'd add in that another big thing you're missing is the ability to differentiate between when Gantt tells what he believes the front office will do and what he thinks they should do. He doesn't always agree with them. If you doubt that, look back at what Rayzor posted.

And thanks for the concern, but I'm not especially concerned about my message board rep suffering.

[PhillyB]

"Kiddo?" "Scotty?" piss off with the trenchant namecalling, SMF, it makes you an even less credible than you already are. Posters like Fiz gets away with it because they're knowledgeable and well-spoken. You are well-spoken but an absolute idiot.

[Mr. Scot]

Let me throw this out...

I've always wondered how people who think Gantt is strictly a mouthpiece for whatever the team says explain some of the things he says, especially a bit written around playoff time where he wrote that the Panthers needed to abandon their usual "left CB/right CB" philosophy and put Chris Gamble in Larry Fitzgerald's hip pocket.

They didn't, of course, and in his blog he asked why not.

Fast forward to this season, and he's talking about them not winning another game. He's also posted that he believes it's very possible Fox loses his job with a 6-10 record or lower.

Bottom Line: There are times I agree with Gantt, and times I disagree (Matt Moore is a big point of disagreement). But either way, I don't get emotional when he tells me something I don't like or don't agree with. I'm mystified as to why some do.

(and again, to be clear, I am not Gantt; I can prove it)

[Mesmer]

(and again, to be clear, I am not Gantt; I can prove it)

Alright let's see it, mister. :lurk5:

[Mr. Scot]

Alright let's see it, mister. :lurk5:

Okay, I can prove it, but not in this format :sosp:

There are people on here who have met me in person.

(and no, I'm not Scott Fowler either)

[Sam Mills Fan]

Have I said a word about Gantt being a Panther homer in this thread? No, I just think he's an idiot.

Also, I don't know why you keep bringing up the compensation needed to get those quarterbacks. Gantt never mentioned that. He just said Jake was better than all of them. Presumably, if someone like Matt Cassel was a cheap free agent just sitting out there, Gantt would want us to not sign him because we were already set at quarterback. I never have argued about the compensation issue in this thread either.

[Sam Mills Fan]

"Kiddo?" "Scotty?" piss off with the trenchant namecalling, SMF, it makes you an even less credible than you already are. Posters like Fiz gets away with it because they're knowledgeable and well-spoken. You are well-spoken but an absolute idiot.

What amuses me when people call me an idiot or not credible on here is that I had been right on Jake since January. I started saying after the playoff game that Jake shouldn't be here this year. I warned that the preseason *was* a harbinger of things to come this year. I warned that we were not nearly as good as people thought we were and that we seriously needed to upgrade in free agency instead of standing pat. I warned that the Peppers tag would cripple us financially. I was called an idiot when I made these predictions yet they've all come true. So if being called an idiot by the team apologists means that everything I say constantly comes true, I guess I truly am an idiot.

[Sam Mills Fan]

The only major prediction I made that turned out to be laughably wrong was when I said the Panthers would win nine or ten games this season. I should have known better though.

[Urrymonster]

Have I said a word about Gantt being a Panther homer in this thread? No, I just think he's an idiot.

Also, I don't know why you keep bringing up the compensation needed to get those quarterbacks. Gantt never mentioned that. He just said Jake was better than all of them. Presumably, if someone like Matt Cassel was a cheap free agent just sitting out there, Gantt would want us to not sign him because we were already set at quarterback. I never have argued about the compensation issue in this thread either.

Ok, if this is what it has to come to.

Here is the excerpt you keep refering to broken into segments so it's easier to explain

I don't think

Your first clue is that he is already talking about his opinion.

there's a passer available

So he is talking about someone available at this time. This automatically rules out Cutler and Orton as both were going no where at this point and both were slated to be the starters on their respective teams. This also rules out Cassell as he had already been designated their franchise player and we had no first round picks to give up, so realistically, we had no shot at getting him.

in the draft

In his mind Stafford, Sanchez and Freeman were not franchise calibre QBs and that they could end up being just average QBs, much like Jake has been his whole career. Understandable reasoning. He later references Ryan, so he would be prepared to replace Jake with a rookie, if the right one came along. This year though he does not think the QBs are all that and after their collective performances thus far, he certainly was not wrong. You have issue with him saying they are not better QBs, if these lads turn out to be average Qbs, then they are not better. As it is he felt these rookies would not be an improvement over him. Fair enough.

or free agency

Here is a list of the available QBs, take you pick, name me one who is better, obviously not including the ones who immediately re-signed with their new teams. Also consider that Favre was retired at this point and still in the possession of the Jets.

http://www.kffl.com/static/nfl/features/freeagents/fa.php

or trade (unless a Manning or Rivers or Ryan or Brady's mysteriously available), who's better than Delhomme.

Trades are difficult to predict, obviously he was unaware of the impending Cutler situation, but regardless we had no ammunition to make a trade anyway. He gives a big hint here that he is also talking about people who are available by saying 'mysteriously available'. Chances are if you offered him a good QB, he may have changed his tune. As it was, he was basing this off knowledge that the decent QBs were not going anywhere.

I'm not even sure there's an upgrade to McCown out there on the open market, for what that's worth.

To him, that free agent list means he felt there was no upgrade for our number 2 as well. Looking at the list, he is not far off the mark there.

[Urrymonster]

Double Post