Johnathan Jones of the Charlotte Observer: Impressions after Day 3

[Zaximus]

Jake wasn't a bad QB.  He probably wasn't great on the fundamental side, but I'd say he was a good QB.  The problem is that everyone has an opinion of him from the 5 turnover game onward, or even Tommy John and onward.  He was a different QB before all of that.  Like someone mentioned, this guy had TWO different WR's that had the best WR stats in a year, in a RUN first offense.   Moose never touched that season he had.  I think yes, half of the Smith catches bailed him out, but I also think half of the throws were meant to be where they were.   Not to mention Jake's intangibles, the guy was pure class, maybe the classiest I've seen, and a great teammate.   He geniunely cared about winning for the fans and his team.  Was he great?  No.  Was he bad?  No.  He was pretty good.

[top dawg]

You aren't giving Jake the respect he earned early on....go back and read the list of guys you just named as better. That is comical.

Jake's best individual in the NFL....Smitty didn't play. I don't buy Smith made Jake. Did he help? Sure he did. What people never acknowledge is Jake's style of play also aided Smith. Jake was an aggressive feed the stud type QB. Saw it in 2004....even without Smith. Moose never had a year like that in his long career.

Jake was a damn good QB prior to Tommy John. He wasn't a Peyton Manning...he played the game the way Favre did.

 

It may have been a stretch, sure, but "comical", no. Culpepper had a better career passer rating, and Kitna wasn't that far off, though Kitna did throw for way more yards.  Culpepper was definitely better in my opinion.

 

Bottom line is that no football aficionado will mistake Jake Delhomme for an elite QB, and his stats belie that point, while Smitty is arguably a HOFER.  No one except Panthers fans even really respected Delhomme as anything more than a glorified back-up, while Smitty was, and still is, known league wide for being a guy that you always have to account for on every single down. Delhomme was a game manager, while Smitty has always been a game-breaker.

 

[Gucci Mane]

He wasn't a Peyton Manning...he played the game the way Favre did.

 

Wow, i knew you werent very "football-intelligent" before...but you just hit an all time low.

 

Jake and Favre are opposite ends of the spectrum as far as QBs go... Favre was a gun slinger, jake was a game manager.

[The NFL Shield At Midfield]

Wow, i knew you werent very "football-intelligent" before...but you just hit an all time low.

 

Jake and Favre are opposite ends of the spectrum as far as QBs go... Favre was a gun slinger, jake was a game manager.

 

so opposite that their career YPA and INT % are almost identical

 

edit:

 

fun with stats

 

jake career INT % , YPA: 3.44%, 7.15

 

favre career INT %, YPA: 3.30%, 7.06  

 

if anything jake is more gunslingery because he has a higher INT % and higher YPA amirite

[Car123]

Come on, man. I don't think Frizzy was trashing Delhomme by calling him a "limited" QB. That's exactly what he was. I learned to respect Jake over time, but Delhomme was never a great QB---never Hall material. Ever. Now I will give him this, he was aggressive, had a great attitude, and was perhaps the greatest game manager that you'll ever see. On many teams today---and even back then---Delhomme of 8 years ago is a back-up, straight up! His play did not rise to the level of Matthew Stafford's, Daunte Culpepper's, and arguably Jon Kitna's. Even Dan Orlovsky, Drew Stanton and Shaun Hill could best Delhomme's play on any given Sunday, That's just how I see it. That being said, Delhomme was a blue-collar QB from Cajun country that many Carolina fans fell in love with. I get it.

But, don't let your love for Jake blind you to the fact that Smitty made Jake in a sense. It wasn't the other way around. Smitty was making the acrobatic catches and earning YAC in historic proportions. Smitty is a legitimate prospect for a bust in Canton, notwithstanding having to fight his way (no pun intended) off the bench into the starting rotation. Megatron never had to do this. Don't get me wrong, Megatron is perhaps the greatest we'll ever see when it's all said and done, but neither he nor Jerry Rice would refer to Steve Smith and poo, or any derivative thereof, within the same sentence. Give 25-year-old Smitty or any-age Smitty a QB that consistently slings the rock around 4000 to 5000 yards a season, and particularly one that's accurate, and Smith is a lock HOFER.

To be fair Delhomme's best season was without Smith.

[top dawg]

so opposite that their career YPA and INT % are almost identical

 

edit:

 

fun with stats

 

jake career INT % , YPA:

 

3.44%, 7.15

 

favre career INT %, YPA:

 

3.30%, 7.06  

 

if anything jake is more gunslingery because he has a higher INT % and higher YPA amirite

 

Well, TBH, I enjoyed Favre's shtick. He's a good ol' boy, blue-collar type much like Jake, but I always thought that his personality in many ways made people rate him higher than they should. I hate how the term "gunslinger" was adopted by the NFL, and irrationally (imo) attributed to Favre. When I thought of true gunslingers back in the day, I thought of experts who didn't make mistakes, and Favre made plenty of them. In the NFL sense, Dan Marino and Dan Fouts were the gunslingers imo. I look at Favre's successor as more of a gunslinger than Favre ever was because Favre was too cavalier with the ball. So I was never able to reconcile the term with the carelessness. 

 

In reference to Jake, I really believe that Jake was more careful with the ball, but he just didn't have Favre's talent or arm. I believe that Favre was a more accurate passer in real terms, but Favre's penchant for taking chances---just throwing the ball up for grabs in an effort to win, thinking he was Super Man or something---dropped certain stats of his down to Jake's level, more than Jake played up to Favre's level (if that makes sense). Moreover, Favre's attempts, completions and sheer yards stands for something---not to mention the ring.

 

[CRA]

Wow, i knew you werent very "football-intelligent" before...but you just hit an all time low.

 

Jake and Favre are opposite ends of the spectrum as far as QBs go... Favre was a gun slinger, jake was a game manager.

LMFAO

 

Jake wasn't a game manager....he was a poor man's Favre QBing in a running offense.  Game manager's don't make the throws Jake did....they get sat down on the bench rather quick.   Jake was a big time gambler.  A gun slinger doesn't mean you have to be able to break fingers b/c you throw it so hard.

 

Do you know what a game manager is? Alex Smith's last full season in SF was an example of being a game manager....that wasn't Jake.  Funny you question football IQs and claim Delhomme was a game manager.

[Car123]

Jake was a game manager in 2003. (Although he wasn't a game manager in 4th quarters. He won a lot of games for us late in games.)

He was a gunslinger from 2004-2007. (One pro bowl year plus a 29 td/almost 4000 yard season)

Then he became a game manager again from 2008-present

[CRA]

It may have been a stretch, sure, but "comical", no. Culpepper had a better career passer rating, and Kitna wasn't that far off, though Kitna did throw for way more yards.  Culpepper was definitely better in my opinion.

 

Bottom line is that no football aficionado will mistake Jake Delhomme for an elite QB, and his stats belie that point, while Smitty is arguably a HOFER.  No one except Panthers fans even really respected Delhomme as anything more than a glorified back-up, while Smitty was, and still is, known league wide for being a guy that you always have to account for on every single down. Delhomme was a game manager, while Smitty has always been a game-breaker.

 

Culpepper sucked.  He averaged a fumble a game and lobbed balls to Moss.  Jake could play in his prime without his #1 threat on the field.

 

Jake's postseason/clutch play elevates him.  Pre Tommy John it simply gives him an edge over too many of the guys you are mentioning with him.

[CRA]

Jake was a game manager in 2003. (Although he wasn't a game manager in 4th quarters. He won a lot of games for us late in games.)

He was a gunslinger from 2004-2007. (One pro bowl year plus a 29 td/almost 4000 yard season)

Then he became a game manager again from 2008-present

 

Not even discussing post Tommy John Jake.  Different man, injury made him a different QB.

 

2003-2007 - he was a poor man's Favre...approached the position the same. 

[CRA]

Well, TBH, I enjoyed Favre's shtick. He's a good ol' boy, blue-collar type much like Jake, but I always thought that his personality in many ways made people rate him higher than they should. I hate how the term "gunslinger" was adopted by the NFL, and irrationally (imo) attributed to Favre. When I thought of true gunslingers back in the day, I thought of experts who didn't make mistakes, and Favre made plenty of them. In the NFL sense, Dan Marino and Dan Fouts were the gunslingers imo. I look at Favre's successor as more of a gunslinger than Favre ever was because Favre was too cavalier with the ball. So I was never able to reconcile the term with the carelessness. 

 

In reference to Jake, I really believe that Jake was more careful with the ball, but he just didn't have Favre's talent or arm. I believe that Favre was a more accurate passer in real terms, but Favre's penchant for taking chances---just throwing the ball up for grabs in an effort to win, thinking he was Super Man or something---dropped certain stats of his down to Jake's level, more than Jake played up to Favre's level (if that makes sense). Moreover, Favre's attempts, completions and sheer yards stands for something---not to mention the ring.

 

maybe gambler is a better term than gunslinger.

 

Jake/Favre where gamblers....it was a big part of there success.  Gamblers aren't game managers.

[rayzor]

Wow, i knew you werent very "football-intelligent" before...but you just hit an all time low.

 

Jake and Favre are opposite ends of the spectrum as far as QBs go... Favre was a gun slinger, jake was a game manager.

 

bwahahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaa.........

 

jake a game manager? lol you must not have really paid attention. the dude was nothing but a risk taker as a passer, always airing it out way down field in some really reckless situations just trusting that smitty or whoever would be able to grab it.

 

game manager = safe and controlled ≠ jake delhomme

[CRA]

 

Bottom line is that no football aficionado will mistake Jake Delhomme for an elite QB, and his stats belie that point, while Smitty is arguably a HOFER.  No one except Panthers fans even really respected Delhomme as anything more than a glorified back-up, while Smitty was, and still is, known league wide for being a guy that you always have to account for on every single down. Delhomme was a game manager, while Smitty has always been a game-breaker.

 

No one is arguing Jake is elite or a HOFer.  But people claiming Jake in his prime would be a backup to Drew Stanton need to get there head checked.

 

Smitty is a HOF talent....who won't have a HOF resume if his career ended today.

[top dawg]

To be fair Delhomme's best season was without Smith.

 

That's true, but I wouldn't say that's a knock on Smith. In fact, it begs a lot of questions.

 

 

 

 

To be honest, like I said earlier, I learned to respect and appreciate Jake, but never placed him on a pedestal because I never saw true greatness. But, my remarks---evocative, and perhaps provocative as they seem---are more about 89 at age 25, or any age, being shitted on by Megatron. It's just not really within the scope of reality. Smitty could never be shitted on by any WR in NFL history in terms of his play,and  historical value to the team and the league. His play is just too competitive. The actual catches that he has made and the yards after the catch that he gained are what legends are made of, and definitely worthy of a true pedestal in Canton.