Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

What does Fox like so much about Delhomme?


Kevin Greene

Recommended Posts

Still, some can’t understand why Fox remains so loyal to Delhomme, whose interceptions drive fans crazy. To comprehend that, it’s first necessary to understand what Fox looks for in a quarterback. Earlier this week, I asked him just that question.

His reply?

“The way I look at it, I think one of the most important qualities is a guy that's got some command, got some leadership,” Fox said. “The second thing would be smarts. And third might be how he throws and all those measurable things. That's how I look at the quarterback position. Everybody's different. I feel like Jake's all those, and he's won a lot of games.”

...

Even with this year’s rough start, Delhomme has won better than 60 percent of his starts (57-37) with the Panthers and only once since 2003 has he finished the season with a losing record.

More:

http://www.carolinagrowl.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=248:what-does-fox-like-so-much-about-delhomme&catid=1:articles

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats a bunch of BS. Fox sticks with his cause he is a Vet, plane and simple. Jake would have to go the route of Foster and Moore would have to go the route of Dwill for Fox to change anything. If he was looking for all those things he would atleast try to draft QBs. Let me put it this way. Rodney Pete was Foxes QB, Jake Delhomme was Hennings. I think that enplanes it self.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats a bunch of BS. Fox sticks with his cause he is a Vet, plane and simple. Jake would have to go the route of Foster and Moore would have to go the route of Dwill for Fox to change anything. If he was looking for all those things he would atleast try to draft QBs. Let me put it this way. Rodney Pete was Foxes QB, Jake Delhomme was Hennings. I think that enplanes it self.

I don't think that enplanes a damn thing. I think that Fox knows his job is on the line, I think that Fox would be willing to do anything to help him keep his job. Anybody that thinks different does not understand the amount of money on the line.

If you think that Fox is starting Jake even though he knows Moore is better, just because HURNEY gave Jake an extension is a dumbass. It is readily apparent that Moore is incapable of running this team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do believe that it is readily apparent that Matt Moore is a dumbass. I wish it wasn't so but I can not imagine another scenario in which he wouldn't be getting the start.

I can think of one: That Fox is a dumbass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or maybe Delhomme actually is the best option.

I highly doubt Fox would trade in winning games and a better team for blind loyalty towards one player. I mean that ould disreagrd all the other vetran players he coaches and loves

If fox truly thought Moore gave them a better shot at winning then Im sure he would.

But he's seen Moore in every training camp, in every practise since he's gotten here, and reviewed every preseason game he's played in with us. Not to mention the fact that Moore lost his job this year to Mcown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Peete was a vet, and what happened?

I think that the fire in Fox isn't what it used to be. He's got comfortable, as opposed to being fiery when taking on a team that won 1 game

Different situation. Peete never was really above average, and Delhomme was impressive during the offseason before the start of the season.

In fact if I remember right, Bill Cowher went to up to Fox after a preseason game versus Pittsburgh and said " You'd be crazy not to start him"

I think it's simply the matter of Fox beliving moore is not a good option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Peete was a vet, and what happened?

I think that the fire in Fox isn't what it used to be. He's got comfortable, as opposed to being fiery when taking on a team that won 1 game

Really its more of the opposite. He is on the hot seat to win right now and Jake gives him the best chance to do that. We as fans see the long term impact but Fox dose not see that cause he want be around if he dose not make the playoffs. Everyone knows if Moore was to start right now he would have some bad spells and Fox thinks Delhomme will make less. Still if he keeps giving balls away Fox will make the move because he has too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really its more of the opposite. He is on the hot seat to win right now and Jake gives him the best chance to do that. We as fans see the long term impact but Fox dose not see that cause he want be around if he dose not make the playoffs. Everyone knows if Moore was to start right now he would have some bad spells and Fox thinks Delhomme will make less. Still if he keeps giving balls away Fox will make the move because he has too.

Delhomme hasn't had one good spell this season. He's had meltdown spells and not complete suck spells. All the QBs playing as badly as him have been replaced or are young QBs on bad teams. He's thrown a seasons worth of interceptions in under half a season and we are 30th in pass attempts. When in this season has he shown himself to be the best option? Even young QBs on horrible teams don't turn it over as much as him. Moore would basically have to be the worse starting QB in the league to make Jake look like the best option. What makes people think that would be the case considering the talent he would have to help him?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
    • Get any shot you can at humane society, so much cheaper
×
×
  • Create New...