Gantt: Delhomme here to stay

[Fox007]

One name has gone pretty much unmentioned in the thread to this point, but it's definitely one that should be in the discussion.

Rip Scherer.

I'm a longtime critic of Mike McCoy. This season, I'll be extremely interested to watch how all the QBs on the roster look under Scherer's tutelage.

I think people have that in the back of their minds, and no one seems to be writing off what he MAY do.

Sure he may be able to help Jake, if even a little. A little improvement can go along way, such as merely throwing the ball out of bounds when the WR isn't open.

That one little thing could make all the difference.

[carolinarolls]

You'd also have to have hated Brady's performance in 2007. Percentage shows he pretty much locked onto Randy Moss all the time.

Guy must suck, huh?

Randy was also open and/or had an obvious advantage, they had little to no running game and Tom B. is just a little bit better of a QB that Joke Delhomme.

Also, Tom B. does not have a long history of doing that. When he did it it helped the team. he has proven to be a very good QB who can read the defense and make the smart play for many years with average receivers. Not so for Jake. Jake has lived off of prayer that Smith has made outstanding plays on and smoke routes that Smith has taken to the house.

That tandem had an advantage over every DB scheme in the league

jake and Smith do not...mainly because of jake

[carolinarolls]

I think people have that in the back of their minds, and no one seems to be writing off what he MAY do.

Sure he may be able to help Jake, if even a little. A little improvement can go along way, such as merely throwing the ball out of bounds when the WR isn't open.

That one little thing could make all the difference.

if not then it will be R.I.P. Rip

another coach killing chalked up to Jake love

[Fox007]

Randy was also open and/or had an obvious advantage, they had little to no running game and Tom B. is just a little bit better of a QB that Joke Delhomme.

Also, Tom B. does not have a long history of doing that. When he did it it helped the team. he has proven to be a very good QB who can read the defense and make the smart play for many years with average receivers. Not so for Jake. Jake has lived off of prayer that Smith has made outstanding plays on and smoke routes that Smith has taken to the house.

That tandem had an advantage over every DB scheme in the league

jake and Smith do not...mainly because of jake

LIES, Brady has 3 rings because he focuses in on and forces it to Moss.......

Wait a minute................

[carolinarolls]

LIES, Brady has 3 rings because he focuses in on and forces it to Moss.......

Wait a minute................

Xactly...maybe Scot and Gantt ARE the same.

Who else would think this kind of bullshit would get a pass

[Mr. Scot]

Randy was also open and/or had an obvious advantage, they had little to no running game and Tom B. is just a little bit better of a QB that Joke Delhomme.

Also, Tom B. does not have a long history of doing that. When he did it it helped the team. he has proven to be a very good QB who can read the defense and make the smart play for many years with average receivers. Not so for Jake. Jake has lived off of prayer that Smith has made outstanding plays on and smoke routes that Smith has taken to the house.

That tandem had an advantage over every DB scheme in the league

jake and Smith do not...mainly because of jake

Again, ignoring what Jake did without Smith in 2004.

And how do you explain Cassel choosing Welker over Moss a disproportionate amount of the time. As I recall, weren't you on the "trade for Cassel" bandwagon?

[Mr. Scot]

LIES, Brady has 3 rings because he focuses in on and forces it to Moss.......

Wait a minute................

The Brady-Moss connection didn't win a Super Bowl.

Point being that part of the job of a smart QB is to get the ball into the hands of a great receiver as often as possible.

If you want a QB who'll only throw to Smith when it's "safe", then your ideal guy is a fellow who's currently backing up Eli Manning.

I suppose we could try trading for him, but his last stint here wasn't so hot.

But hey, anybody else would be better than Jake, right?

[carolinarolls]

Again, ignoring what Jake did without Smith in 2004.

And how do you explain Cassel choosing Welker over Moss a disproportionate amount of the time. As I recall, weren't you on the "trade for Cassel" bandwagon?

Trade Pep for Cassel...OK

Trade other stuff...not sure what you are talking about.

I think Matt chose Welker more because Welker worked harder and made things easier for him.

It has nothing to do with why Jake throws into double coverage 40 yards down the field when we need 6 and a RB is open on the seam or in the flat so stop trying to mak your bullshit makes sense.

Usually I somewhat respect your comments but today you are...reaching

[carolinarolls]

what jake did without Smith in 2004

missed playoffs

got 4 huge games in a row from Nick Goings

looked lost

[Fox007]

The Brady-Moss connection didn't win a Super Bowl.

Point being that part of the job of a smart QB is to get the ball into the hands of a great receiver as often as possible.

If you want a QB who'll only throw to Smith when it's "safe", then your ideal guy is a fellow who's currently backing up Eli Manning.

I suppose we could try trading for him, but his last stint here wasn't so hot.

But hey, anybody else would be better than Jake, right?

Yea and usually that involves leading a WR, or "throwing the WR open".

QB's can do that, you know that right?

I understand we don't see it often in our games, but watching almost all the games, it sure is nice to see it actually happen for some teams at least.

[carolinarolls]

The Brady-Moss connection didn't win a Super Bowl.

Point being that part of the job of a smart QB is to get the ball into the hands of a great receiver as often as possible.

If you want a QB who'll only throw to Smith when it's "safe", then your ideal guy is a fellow who's currently backing up Eli Manning.

I suppose we could try trading for him, but his last stint here wasn't so hot.

But hey, anybody else would be better than Jake, right?

The voice of reason is not being very reasonable here.

that is not the role of the QB at all..not even close. Not in the John Fox offense anyway. And surely you don't mean doing that without mitigating risk. Do you? Because I don't think jake mitigates risk very well at all but the numbers can't show you that. You have to actually watch the games to see what we are talking about.

....this FACT makes the rest of your post pure garbage.

[Fox007]

Usually if Jake leads anyone at all, he leads them straight out of bounds.

[Zaximus]

Again, ignoring what Jake did without Smith in 2004.

And how do you explain Cassel choosing Welker over Moss a disproportionate amount of the time. As I recall, weren't you on the "trade for Cassel" bandwagon?

When he found someone else to ZERO in on? Yeah... I remember. He did look good that year compared to some others, honestly I think Smith hurts Delhomme in a way. Possible that Smith has a grasp over Jake. When Smith was out last year for suspension Jake looked much better actually.

[monstercat]

When he found someone else to ZERO in on? Yeah... I remember. He did look good that year compared to some others, honestly I think Smith hurts Delhomme in a way. Possible that Smith has a grasp over Jake. When Smith was out last year for suspension Jake looked much better actually.

Really, Jake was no different in 04...he just threw it to Moose most of the time instead of Smitty. I don't know why that's such a bad thing anyway. Usually the #1 WR is gonna catch the most balls on any team....that's why he's the #1 guy in the first place.