For those wanting a new QB

[thefuzz]

HARVEY? UGH. So basically this draft isn't going to be really good for filling the defensive needs then either huh? Man, Pep & his agent are really gonna cash in big. On the flipside if they franchise him for trading purposes, they may get more for him than they would in a normal DE/DL class even though he says he most wants to play in a 3-4. I still am not 100% sure that's the truth of why he wants to leave.

I am not buying the 3-4 comment, I think that was said to him by his agent to run up the $$$$$, with so many team now running that scheme, it might be good in the bidding process.

One good thing to come from that statement, if we are able to franchise him and trade him, is we can now have more trading partners in the AFC. Pats, Chargers, Ravens, Steelers, Jets, etc......

In my opinion this is a perfect year for Pep to say and do what he is doing. Really weak D line draft, and no big players in FA sans Haynesworth. Very smart move, IMO.

[Fox007]

HARVEY? UGH. So basically this draft isn't going to be really good for filling the defensive needs then either huh? Man, Pep & his agent are really gonna cash in big. On the flipside if they franchise him for trading purposes, they may get more for him than they would in a normal DE/DL class even though he says he most wants to play in a 3-4. I still am not 100% sure that's the truth of why he wants to leave.

That is just what I think from all the games I watched this year(I have college gameday) so it is just my opinion.

However, I don't hear or see the media touting many defensive linemen like they did last year, at least yet.

Last year 3 DT's were selected in the first round, Dorsey, Ellis, and Balmer.

The only one who really did sh*t was Dorsey, even though I have heard people say he was a bust or that he sucked or whatever. But he had comparable stats to both our DTs and had better stats than Maake.

Ellis was injured and didn't play terrible, but a top 10pick?.

(balmer moved to DE in the 3-4)

I only bring that up because we need DT(s).

Last year had 3 DE's taken in the first round as well, not a single one of them played like a first rounder.(or even good imo)

Merling went at 32 and was a scrub as well.

So yea sure we need help on the Dline, but if this years draft is anything like last years, we are going to be sorely disappointed.(im not saying it will be, just that it reminds me of last years draft)(and that is if we get a first from peppers)

Those players certainly can become good or play well later, but I was just going off their first round player success or failure.

Edit: The 'best' DE in this draft is Orakpo going at 13th in the mock draft, and he is one of those physical guys. Or at least he is definitely a better athlete/physical person than actual football player.(I call him peppers jr.)

[Fireball77]

I am not buying the 3-4 comment, I think that was said to him by his agent to run up the $$$$$, with so many team now running that scheme, it might be good in the bidding process.

One good thing to come from that statement, if we are able to franchise him and trade him, is we can now have more trading partners in the AFC. Pats, Chargers, Ravens, Steelers, Jets, etc......

Hmmm...you could be right...but Steelers don't traditionally spend the farm on FAs (and they have a bunch of guys they have to make contract decisions on this year like most of the OL, Foote, maybe Ward etc). Pats have stated over and over one of their main things is that a guy has to LOVE the game of football and it has to be very important to them and I am DEFINITELY not convinced that description fits Pep. Jets I could see as a nice fit schematically with Ryan and how he uses guys creatively, but they are up against it cap wise even after ridding themselves of Mr. Diva. SD, Balt or Dallas may be the only "real" possibilities. Note, all this is assuming he wants to be a 3-4 weakside OLB which is the position I think he would fit best in the 3-4. If he wants to be a 3-4 DE, I am not so sure many 3-4 two gap teams will come a calling.

[pantherclaw]

Well, you made laugh out loud, as I do gamble and i do well on futures bets and on the week in week out NFL bets in Vegas.

Look, I like John Fox. I like jake Delhomme. Ask me if i'd bet that combination would win a Superbowl and i'd place a bet in Vegas that they would, futures or otherwise, no, I would not.

I made the statement about 9-7 at best, based on the trending of Fox since his tenure here.

When the schedule is 'easier' due to a sub-par season, he does well. When the schedule is 'tougher', higher quality opponents week-in and week-out, he doesn't do well, 8-8 or 7-9. its not hard to predict.

It also goes along with his philosophy. Playing not to lose may get a team by the Lions, it won't get that team by the Patriots, Giants et al.

I also no longer believe that Delhomme scares anyone. He has become a sitting duck in that pocket. He refuses to just throw the ball away.

Do I hope i'm wrong, you bet I do. I'd love to come back here in February 2010, and say i was absolutely wrong, and if I am wrong, I'll say before someone says I need to.

Playing not to lose? I didn't see that at all this last season.

I hate that Jake won't throw the damn ball away. If he'd do that, our offense would be more consistent.

Jake can win a Superbowl...not only on this team either. Does that mean I'm not open for another QB. Actually, I am, but last I checked, don't make those decisions.

[thefuzz]

Hmmm...you could be right...but Steelers don't traditionally spend the farm on FAs (and they have a bunch of guys they have to make contract decisions on this year like most of the OL, Foote, maybe Ward etc). Pats have stated over and over one of their main things is that a guy has to LOVE the game of football and it has to be very important to them and I am DEFINITELY not convinced that description fits Pep. Jets I could see as a nice fit schematically with Ryan and how he uses guys creatively, but they are up against it cap wise even after ridding themselves of Mr. Diva. SD, Balt or Dallas may be the only "real" possibilities. Note, all this is assuming he wants to be a 3-4 weakside OLB which is the position I think he would fit best in the 3-4. If he wants to be a 3-4 DE, I am not so sure many 3-4 two gap teams will come a calling.

He will not go play as a 3-4 DE, not enough use of his talents, and not the same paycheck. Pats, I doubt will go after him, nor will the Steelers, that however does not mean that they won't run up the cost of him, IMO.

Jets would be a good landing spot, but they have Gholston, and are in cap hell already.

SD cannot afford him with Rivers' Merriman, VJ, needing extensions now, and Cromartie, needing one in a year or so....

Peppers has Dallas written all over him, but for some reason i don't see that happening either.

In all honestly he will go to a team that none of us are even considering, but I would like some thought on the matter from you Fireball.

[frash.exe]

I don't agree with that notion, eff up in a playoff game and you should be gone. In my opinion, you have to look at the big picture. Making a long term decision based on one playoff game isn't a big enough sample. There have been a lot of QBs who have had a bunch of horrendous playoff games who have never been nor ever will be benched. Should the NYG have replaced Eli for the 2006 season after his game vs the Panthers in the playoffs? Or the Colts or GB replaced Manning and Favre after their numerous bad playoff games? I say no (except for Favre after maybe 2004 when I think he probably should have retired and after many, many absolute killer plays).

Eli has upside. He was young, he had a whole career to get better and the Giants knew it then. How old was he? (24?) Even Peyton, during his career, he had some very bad games, but that's a whole different offense. Peyton's always throwing the ball constantly, so you're risking more interceptions that way.

And no, I am not comparing any of these QBs or their careers to Jake's, I am just debating the notion you proposed above of using one playoff ame to make a decision.

I do understand. Again, I don't get specific enough sometimes. Given the same criteria, QB just like Jake and just as old as he is now puts out the same performance he did on any other team in a playoff game, do you still disagree?

This is probably the crux of a lot of the disagreements.....the notion he has many very bad games this past year. I just don't agree with that. The AZ playoff game is absolutely, definitely a game you can point him out as the major goat (and he would have been in the Raiders game as well had they lost it), but the Seahawks playoff game it was more understandable why he struggled. The defense was bad in that game, they had no run game and they had one WR. It caught up with them in that game.

Jake had everything he needed this year. He had the benefit of one of the most dominant running games in the league, an offensive line that was great at pass pro, he had his Steve Smith, and he also had Moose, another WR he's probably had the best chemistry with besides Smith. He was 22nd out of starting QBs in pass attempts, having more than only these guys...

Matt Schaub

Jeff Garcia

Trent Edwards

Ryan Fitzpatrick

Jamarcus Russell

Gus Frerotte

Shaun Hill

Derek Anderson

Dan Orlovsky

Seneca Wallace.

None of those guys started more than 15 games, and only two started 14 or more. As far as attempts/game goes, Jake drops to 29th, with only Wallace, Orlovsky, and Russell behind him.

Jake had A LOT of help this year, on offense at least, but every time we saw the run game get stopped, he was exposed. In Minny he was very ineffective despite no interceptions. Two of those guys you used as examples, Peyton, Favre, they've had to make do with a below average running game for most, if not their entire careers, and Eli only threw 3 picks in his first rodeo. He picked himself up by his bootstraps and improved. (and it's funny to mention Eli got more heat for that one game in the NY media than Jake got probably for these last two playoff games combined here). Nobody was calling Edgerrin James and Dominic Rhodes any nicknames in indy.

And if we're a team that puts a lot of focus on the running game, that we only need a "game manager", how many game managers have helped their team to a superbowl win in the last 15 years? Off the top of my head I can say Trent Dilfer. Brad Johnson doesn't count because he threw for 3800 yards and 26 TDs in his run with the Bucs in 03, and his #s have been wildly inconsistent year to year (one time throwing for 4000+ with Washington.

[mantal]

Eli has upside. He was young, he had a whole career to get better and the Giants knew it then. How old was he? (24?) Even Peyton, during his career, he had some very bad games, but that's a whole different offense. Peyton's always throwing the ball constantly, so you're risking more interceptions that way.

I do understand. Again, I don't get specific enough sometimes. Given the same criteria, QB just like Jake and just as old as he is now puts out the same performance he did on any other team in a playoff game, do you still disagree?

Jake had everything he needed this year. He had the benefit of one of the most dominant running games in the league, an offensive line that was great at pass pro, he had his Steve Smith, and he also had Moose, another WR he's probably had the best chemistry with besides Smith. He was 22nd out of starting QBs in pass attempts, having more than only these guys...

Matt Schaub

Jeff Garcia

Trent Edwards

Ryan Fitzpatrick

Jamarcus Russell

Gus Frerotte

Shaun Hill

Derek Anderson

Dan Orlovsky

Seneca Wallace.

None of those guys started more than 15 games, and only two started 14 or more. As far as attempts/game goes, Jake drops to 29th, with only Wallace, Orlovsky, and Russell behind him.

Jake had A LOT of help this year, on offense at least, but every time we saw the run game get stopped, he was exposed. In Minny he was very ineffective despite no interceptions. Two of those guys you used as examples, Peyton, Favre, they've had to make do with a below average running game for most, if not their entire careers, and Eli only threw 3 picks in his first rodeo. He picked himself up by his bootstraps and improved. (and it's funny to mention Eli got more heat for that one game in the NY media than Jake got probably for these last two playoff games combined here). Nobody was calling Edgerrin James and Dominic Rhodes any nicknames in indy.

And if we're a team that puts a lot of focus on the running game, that we only need a "game manager", how many game managers have helped their team to a superbowl win in the last 15 years? Off the top of my head I can say Trent Dilfer. Brad Johnson doesn't count because he threw for 3800 yards and 26 TDs in his run with the Bucs in 03, and his #s have been wildly inconsistent year to year (one time throwing for 4000+ with Washington.

And yet, who you gonna get? I've not defended Jake other than to say we don't have any better options and aren't gonna get any this year. What is your agenda for the constant trashing? Just want to know. You must have an answer, but you haven't presented any...

I seriously would want to know what it is, I'm not trolling here, just looking for answers.

[frash.exe]

And yet, who you gonna get? I've not defended Jake other than to say we don't have any better options and aren't gonna get any this year. What is your agenda for the constant trashing? Just want to know. You must have an answer, but you haven't presented any...

I seriously would want to know what it is, I'm not trolling here, just looking for answers.

Every team asks themselves that question. Who's out there? Well there's no easy answer, but it doesn't mean just because it's hard to answer we shouldn't even try. While I'm at it, I might as well live a "don't try if it's too hard" lifestyle. Yea, that should get me a nice career at Denny's. Seriously, WTF kind of outlook is that? That's just a bait question at best, you're only waiting for me to suggest someone and then follow up with a cynical "YOU SHOULD BE GM THEN!" kind of reply.

And I don't know what the "trashing" constitutes. Last I checked even if I did trash him and I'm not going to scan my previous posts it's been hardly constant, and the video I posted last week, well, I was trying to get a video of Jake's poor performance without all the music and sped up lyrics and festive borders and all that other crap. You think what I did was trashing, come to New York and we'll show you how they trash players up here. Eli's face was on the paper with a condescending headline like every game the Giants lost in his career until he won superbowl 42. Jake hardly meets any criticism compared to a lot of other players in the league.

[thefuzz]

At the end of the day, if we are looking for Jakes replacement, then we are failing as a football team.

It has nothing to do with bad playoff games, it has everything to do with age.

[top dawg]

I believe that the question of Jake is valid considering all of the above.

[panthers55]

Jake had everything he needed this year. He had the benefit of one of the most dominant running games in the league, an offensive line that was great at pass pro, he had his Steve Smith, and he also had Moose, another WR he's probably had the best chemistry with besides Smith. He was 22nd out of starting QBs in pass attempts, having more than only these guys..

As far as attempts/game goes, Jake drops to 29th, with only Wallace, Orlovsky, and Russell behind him.

Jake had A LOT of help this year, on offense at least, but every time we saw the run game get stopped, he was exposed. In Minny he was very ineffective despite no interceptions. Two of those guys you used as examples, Peyton, Favre, they've had to make do with a below average running game for most, if not their entire careers, and Eli only threw 3 picks in his first rodeo. He picked himself up by his bootstraps and improved. (and it's funny to mention Eli got more heat for that one game in the NY media than Jake got probably for these last two playoff games combined here). Nobody was calling Edgerrin James and Dominic Rhodes any nicknames in indy.

And if we're a team that puts a lot of focus on the running game, that we only need a "game manager", how many game managers have helped their team to a superbowl win in the last 15 years?

Passing attempts prove what? That we have a balanced offense? Great.

It doesn't say anything about Jake just like it doesn't say anything about Matt Ryan who you listed below him.

You frequently make sweeping statements which are patently incorrect. Lets look at your statement that every time the running game was stopped he was exposed.

Against Minnesota for example we rushed for 45 and he threw for 191.

Against SD we rushed for 130 yards and Jake threw for 250

Against Chicago we ran for 120 and Jake threw for 130.

Against Atlanta we ran for 109 and Jake threw for 294

Against KC we ran for around 200 and passed for 236.

Against TB we ran for 40 yards and Jake threw for 242.

Against NO we ran for 135 and passed for 195.

Against Arizona we ran for 120 and Jake threw for 248.

Against Oakland we ran for 160 and Jake threw for 72.

Against Detroit we ran for 265 and jake threw for 102.

Against Atlanta part 2 we ran for 140 and we passed for 295

Against GB we ran for 130 and passed for 177.

Against TB we ran for 300 and Jake passed for 171.

Against Denver we ran for 140 and passed for 253.

Against NY we ran for 150 and passed for 185.

Against New Orleans we ran for 125 and Jake passed for 250.

No, I didn't look at passer rating, Ints, or other issues just yards. But what did we see?

We were stymied in only 2 games (ran for less than 100 yards). In both cases Jake threw for 191 and 242 yards and we lost both games. Yes he threw 4 picks against Tampa but 3 of those were tipped balls and not directly his fault.

Jake threw for less than 200 yards in 8 games. Our record in those 8 games was 6-2. In those 2 losses he threw for 191 yards and 185 yards (Tampa and Giants).

When Jake threw for more than 200 yards our record was 6-2.

In the two games all year that Jake threw for around 100 yards we won them both.

I know, I went a long way to show that Jake wasn't the main problem this year. In our losses Jake has 1 bad throwing game that we lost in the regular season- Tampa the first time.

Otherwise the 3 games we lost were not due to Jake but more likely the defense giving up tons of yards.

The bottom line is that despite your frequents criticisms and sweeping accusations, Jake had a good year and won many more than he lost. He wasn't the cause of even our four losses and rallied the team time and time again.

I get real tired of debating ad nauseum since you will just continue to make more sweeping statements with no evidence or proof. But occassionally I need to set the record straight. It gets old hearing the same old saw particularly when it just isn't true.

BTW how many games were run by game managers in the superbowl? Roethlesberger three years ago springs to mind right off the back. He was awful in that game but they still won on defense.

[frash.exe]

Passing attempts prove what? That we have a balanced offense? Great.

It doesn't say anything about Jake just like it doesn't say anything about Matt Ryan who you listed below him.

Wow, you just completely ignored what I said. I don't know if you read these with your eyes closed or not, just save us the time and say you have a point because you're being an optimist and I actually admire that believe it or not and we'll be good. I was actually replying to something someone said about him coming off reconstructive elbow surgery like 414 pass attempts in a season was really what you'd call "airing it out" for a QB.

And yea, isn't it something that a balanced offense puts less pressure and focus on the QB than a pass heavy deal? Oh wait a minute, you're wrong, we didn't run a balanced offense. Last I checked 414=/=504 by my math. Oh and that 504 is how many times the Panthers ran the ball.

You frequently make sweeping statements which are patently incorrect. Lets look at your statement that every time the running game was stopped he was exposed.

Against Minnesota for example we rushed for 45 and he threw for 191.

Against SD we rushed for 130 yards and Jake threw for 250

Against Chicago we ran for 120 and Jake threw for 130.

Against Atlanta we ran for 109 and Jake threw for 294

Against KC we ran for around 200 and passed for 236.

Against TB we ran for 40 yards and Jake threw for 242.

Against NO we ran for 135 and passed for 195.

Against Arizona we ran for 120 and Jake threw for 248.

Against Oakland we ran for 160 and Jake threw for 72.

Against Detroit we ran for 265 and jake threw for 102.

Against Atlanta part 2 we ran for 140 and we passed for 295

Against GB we ran for 130 and passed for 177.

Against TB we ran for 300 and Jake passed for 171.

Against Denver we ran for 140 and passed for 253.

Against NY we ran for 150 and passed for 185.

Against New Orleans we ran for 125 and Jake passed for 250.

You put up these stats that I already looked up and proved my point for me. Yes he was ineffective when the running game was stopped, what are you reading that would suggest otherwise? The Minnesota game he was ineffective, the TB game he was ineffective, and the Arizona game in the postseason he was ineffective. Oh, BTW, that last game, against NO, that was actually more like 225, not 125.

You just like to throw out these baseless claims that I'm wrong but you can't back it up. Since when is passing yards the sole statistic of judging a player?

No, I didn't look at passer rating, Ints, or other issues just yards. But what did we see?

We were stymied in only 2 games (ran for less than 100 yards). In both cases Jake threw for 191 and 242 yards and we lost both games. Yes he threw 4 picks against Tampa but 3 of those were tipped balls and not directly his fault.

Jake threw for less than 200 yards in 8 games. Our record in those 8 games was 6-2. In those 2 losses he threw for 191 yards and 185 yards (Tampa and Giants).

Here's another example of where your research is faulty. Jake didn't throw 4 picks in Tampa he threw 3, then I loved the little cop out you put there. "well he threw a few interceptions but he really didn't." what the hell? Why the hell does Dante Rosario have to dive to catch a pass anyway? Because he was covered well by one of TBs linebackers, he wasn't open. Delhomme actually forced that one if you look at the tape, led him to far, to low, and he couldn't grab it. I mean since when do we expect Dante to be Lynn Swann?

Watch his first INT in the video and tell me he wasn't being covered by 55 I (think it was), which would be Brooks, over the middle.

EDIT: Forgot the linky. Panthers at bucs gamecenter

In the two games all year that Jake threw for around 100 yards we won them both.

I know, I went a long way to show that Jake wasn't the main problem this year. In our losses Jake has 1 bad throwing game that we lost in the regular season- Tampa the first time.

Otherwise the 3 games we lost were not due to Jake but more likely the defense giving up tons of yards.

We won them both largely because of him? Let me tell you something, one of those games he threw for less than 100, he threw 4 damn picks, and that defense you like to use as a scapegoat so much was what actually played well. So did the running game, ....in both games actually. Hence when I said "he got a lot of help this year". What part of that don't you understand?

The bottom line is that despite your frequents criticisms and sweeping accusations, Jake had a good year and won many more than he lost. He wasn't the cause of even our four losses and rallied the team time and time again.

Here's a bottom-bottom line. When the Panthers win, it was Jake who won the game. But when the Panthers lose, it's never "Jake lost that game" to some people. So he can single-handedly win games and at the same time be completely devoid of responsibility when the Panthers lose, ....even if he turns the ball over multiple times? Oh and I don't know if your aware, but there's more to bad QB play than just throwing interceptions. How about not making good, quick decisions? How about not being able to complete a pass? Hey, here's an example. Jake went 11/19 against New York. In the second half + overtime, he went 4-6 for 50 yards and no touchdowns.

2-4-NYG 49 (13:07) 17-J.Delhomme pass incomplete short left to 28-J.Stewart.

3-4-NYG 49 (12:55) 17-J.Delhomme pass incomplete short left to 87-M.Muhammad.

3-5-NYG 43 (9:56) 17-J.Delhomme pass incomplete short middle to 87-M.Muhammad (23-C.Webster).

1-10-CAR 37 (:54) 17-J.Delhomme pass incomplete deep middle to 89-S.Smith.

3-4-CAR 43 (:09) 17-J.Delhomme pass short left to 87-M.Muhammad to 50 for 7 yards (23-C.Webster).

3-9-NYG 49 (13:43) 17-J.Delhomme pass deep middle to 80-D.Jarrett to NYG 30 for 19 yards (23-C.Webster)

1-10-CAR 38 (3:15) 17-J.Delhomme pass short middle to 28-J.Stewart to NYG 49 for 13 yards (97-M.Kiwanuka).

2-9-NYG 48 (2:00) 17-J.Delhomme pass incomplete deep middle to 89-S.Smith (23-C.Webster).

3-9-NYG 48 (1:54) 17-J.Delhomme pass short left to 87-M.Muhammad to NYG 37 for 11 yards (23-C.Webster).

Overtime

3-3-CAR 46 (12:39) 17-J.Delhomme pass incomplete short right to 87-M.Muhammad (35-K.Dockery)

I get real tired of debating ad nauseum since you will just continue to make more sweeping statements with no evidence or proof. But occassionally I need to set the record straight. It gets old hearing the same old saw particularly when it just isn't true.

BTW how many games were run by game managers in the superbowl? Roethlesberger three years ago springs to mind right off the back. He was awful in that game but they still won on defense.

I'm not the one fronting faulty evidence myself. You constantly claim "you have no proof" at the same time you don't explain why, and when you do, you just prove my point like you did.

You call Big Ben a game manager, that's how you describe his entire postseason. He threw 7 touchdowns in that postseason, he was a major reason the Steelers got to the superbowl in the first place that year, and his regular season stats may look pedestrian for a starting QB (2400, 17tds-9ints) but that was because he missed 4 games.

Please stop making idle accusations that you can't back up. It's not fooling me and it's not making you look any smarter. Just admit you're not in this debate to offer logic or concrete thought, you're just in here to defend Jake, and that's what it all comes down to.

[Fox007]

The only thing panther55 has in his arsenal is "you're wrong", so if that doesn't sway you he's got nothing.

Oh yea and statistics are also for losers, unless he is trying to use them

then it's for winners.

[Mr. Scot]

Sorry guys, but this whole idea of letting Delhomme go even if you don't have a viable alternative is just insane.

Any coach who did that would likely be looking for a job the next year.