Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Cut Delhomme


  • Please log in to reply
52 replies to this topic

#46 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,459 posts
  • LocationAt the lake

Posted 18 February 2010 - 09:13 PM

Jake is smart knows where to go with the ball? Is that a joke? 2006- 2009 (minus 07 when he was hurt) doesn't support that statement. And why are you just focusing on the "locking on a receiver" arguement when i didn't even mention it? Is it because it's the only good thing out of the never ending list of things wrong with Jake that supports your arguement? He still hasnt done a good job of looking for the open receiver or make accurate throws so that blows that little statistic up.




Look at what you're saying. You're comparing Delhomme to two future hall of famers. 2008 was enough evidence to show that Jake was going down hill fast and needed to be replaced just like 2009 was enough evidence to show that Jake is finished.


My point is that Jake does know where the ball should go. Knowing and doing aren't the same. The last year he was healthy in 2007 he was tearing it up until he got hurt. You don't forget things just because your arm is going downhill.

Favre was arguably a Hall of Famer when he has some bad years in the mid 2000s but Warner wasn't. Still it doesn't really matter, the point is that quarterbacks can have a bad year or two and recover. I am not saying he will, just saying that it isn't a lock that he will stay bad either.

#47 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,459 posts
  • LocationAt the lake

Posted 18 February 2010 - 09:18 PM

I still say that the most likely outcome will be Jake retiring with some kinda of financial negociation being worked out. I just don't see JR allowing Jake to be the starter but at the same time I think the entire "injury" last year was a set up that would allow Delhomme not to be benched and save face. Fox, Hurney and JR are loyal to Jake but they aren't idiots and neither is Jake. I really feel that at some point before the draft Jake will announce retirement.


Sorry but that isn't even remotely close to likely. He still expects to compete for the starting role and won't walk away from 12 million dollars.

#48 Frash Brastard

Frash Brastard

    The Frashmaker

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,597 posts

Posted 18 February 2010 - 09:28 PM

My point is that Jake does know where the ball should go. Knowing and doing aren't the same. The last year he was healthy in 2007 he was tearing it up until he got hurt. You don't forget things just because your arm is going downhill.


i don't get the whole lovefest with his 2007. He had one very good game against the texans. he barely got 200 yards against the *Rams* and I remember him struggling against the Falcons (partly because of pass protection issues) before he got taken out of the game. His redzone passing was great, but partly because the pass defenses of those teams were a liability, not only those games but the entire season throughout.

Did he play well? definitely. Did he "tear it up"? Eh.

#49 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,459 posts
  • LocationAt the lake

Posted 18 February 2010 - 09:37 PM

i don't get the whole lovefest with his 2007. He had one very good game against the texans. he barely got 200 yards against the *Rams* and I remember him struggling against the Falcons (partly because of pass protection issues) before he got taken out of the game. His redzone passing was great, but partly because the pass defenses of those teams were a liability, not only those games but the entire season throughout.

Did he play well? definitely. Did he "tear it up"? Eh.

No love fest but it demonstrated that if you can make the right reads you know what to do. Even when your physical skills decline your ability to know what to do doesn't decline. Moore can learn from Jake's fire and determination. Matt has the physical skills but needs to " be more of a football guy" and work harder. Jake can help him with his attitude and preparation. He also can come in and win a few games if needed as a backup. I like him more than most of the other options and we can release him after 2010 and don't need to sign him to a long term contract like we would with a free agent.

#50 Mr. Scot

Mr. Scot

    Football Historian

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 36,817 posts
  • LocationSC

Posted 18 February 2010 - 10:51 PM

You're already setting money on fire by keeping him. He's useless. Knowing the sytem sure did us good last season :rolleyes:

You cut him because...

#1 He'll be interfering with competant QBs fighting for the starting job

#2 You don't want him teaching anyone anything

#3 He brings absolutely nothing to the table and if anything will hurt the team more if he sees the field again

#4 Other QBs on the roster will realize they have a legit shot at the starting gig without looking over thier shoulder

#5 He's taking up a roster spot that can be used for someone that can actually play QB

So in the end if it means we have to pay a lil more to get rid of a worthless QB and sign another thats worth a poo, so be it. Hurney and Fox got themselves in this mess and they'll have to bite the bullet.

1 - Doesn't make sense for cap reasons. There's no real savings from cutting him, and if you sign another vet (especially an expensive one) you're paying for two QBs, only one of which is actually on roster.

2 - Actually, yes you do. Delhomme's leadership, intangibles, work ethic and knowledge of the system are phenomenal. I'd absolutely want those passed on to Moore if at all possible.

3 - I don't generally want any backup to see the field, but you still have to have them on roster. As to why Delhomme makes sense, besides his knowing the system well, see response number one.

4 - Other than obviously Moore and McCown (who's not actually on roster) there's no one I would want to have a legitimate shot at starting.

5 - See number one. And while you're at it, see the free agent pool. There's nothing out there. And no rookie should have a legit shot either.

Lol delhomme can't read a defense well himself but at the same time he's helping Moore learn how to do it

Actually not true, as P55 pointed out.

Rip Scherer can read a defense, but if you put him out on the field he couldn't play the position. That, however, doesn't affect his ability to be a good coach. For that matter, the general rule is that average players make way better coaches than great players.

Bottom line: Sorry guys, but you sound like you're going more off emotion than reason. Yes, he played badly last year and the team suffered for it, but there's plenty of logic behind keeping him as a backup.

No, I don't want to see Delhomme have to take the field this season. I didn't want to see Rodney Peete take the field again after that awful performance against the Jags in 2003 either, but he played a valuable role as backup QB and Jake's mentor.

Jake's come full circle now, and I think he can fill the role just as well as Peete did.

(and hopefully, he'll see the field just as often as Peete did, too)

Edited by Mr Scot, 18 February 2010 - 10:53 PM.


#51 PantherDude

PantherDude

    Best of luck, Coach Fox!

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,373 posts

Posted 18 February 2010 - 11:49 PM

1 - Doesn't make sense for cap reasons. There's no real savings from cutting him, and if you sign another vet (especially an expensive one) you're paying for two QBs, only one of which is actually on roster.

2 - Actually, yes you do. Delhomme's leadership, intangibles, work ethic and knowledge of the system are phenomenal. I'd absolutely want those passed on to Moore if at all possible.

3 - I don't generally want any backup to see the field, but you still have to have them on roster. As to why Delhomme makes sense, besides his knowing the system well, see response number one.

4 - Other than obviously Moore and McCown (who's not actually on roster) there's no one I would want to have a legitimate shot at starting.

5 - See number one. And while you're at it, see the free agent pool. There's nothing out there. And no rookie should have a legit shot either.


Actually not true, as P55 pointed out.

Rip Scherer can read a defense, but if you put him out on the field he couldn't play the position. That, however, doesn't affect his ability to be a good coach. For that matter, the general rule is that average players make way better coaches than great players.

Bottom line: Sorry guys, but you sound like you're going more off emotion than reason. Yes, he played badly last year and the team suffered for it, but there's plenty of logic behind keeping him as a backup.

No, I don't want to see Delhomme have to take the field this season. I didn't want to see Rodney Peete take the field again after that awful performance against the Jags in 2003 either, but he played a valuable role as backup QB and Jake's mentor.

Jake's come full circle now, and I think he can fill the role just as well as Peete did.

(and hopefully, he'll see the field just as often as Peete did, too)


I agree.

#52 Udogg

Udogg

    Cardiac Victim since 95

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,137 posts

Posted 19 February 2010 - 02:24 AM

1 - Doesn't make sense for cap reasons. There's no real savings from cutting him, and if you sign another vet (especially an expensive one) you're paying for two QBs, only one of which is actually on roster.

2 - Actually, yes you do. Delhomme's leadership, intangibles, work ethic and knowledge of the system are phenomenal. I'd absolutely want those passed on to Moore if at all possible.

3 - I don't generally want any backup to see the field, but you still have to have them on roster. As to why Delhomme makes sense, besides his knowing the system well, see response number one.

4 - Other than obviously Moore and McCown (who's not actually on roster) there's no one I would want to have a legitimate shot at starting.

5 - See number one. And while you're at it, see the free agent pool. There's nothing out there. And no rookie should have a legit shot either.


Actually not true, as P55 pointed out.

Rip Scherer can read a defense, but if you put him out on the field he couldn't play the position. That, however, doesn't affect his ability to be a good coach. For that matter, the general rule is that average players make way better coaches than great players.

Bottom line: Sorry guys, but you sound like you're going more off emotion than reason. Yes, he played badly last year and the team suffered for it, but there's plenty of logic behind keeping him as a backup.

No, I don't want to see Delhomme have to take the field this season. I didn't want to see Rodney Peete take the field again after that awful performance against the Jags in 2003 either, but he played a valuable role as backup QB and Jake's mentor.

Jake's come full circle now, and I think he can fill the role just as well as Peete did.

(and hopefully, he'll see the field just as often as Peete did, too)


+++

#53 Panther_Fan

Panther_Fan

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 110 posts

Posted 19 February 2010 - 05:19 AM

Delhomme will not be cut till we have a new head coach.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com - IP Content Design by Joshua Tree / TitansReport.