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!

     

Fox Says Jake Will Most Likely Start in 2009


Cass4Carolina

Recommended Posts

Just read this article so I thought I'd share it with you guys.

"...Still, the Panthers expressed faith in Delhomme afterward. "Jake is a hell of a quarterback who had a rough night," Panthers coach John Fox said. And while Fox said he can't predict the future, he also said, "That's kind of what my thinking is," when asked if Delhomme would be his starting quarterback in 2009.

Added Smith, who didn't make his first catch until late in the third quarter: "That's my quarterback. That's the guy I stand behind."

We saw Saturday night why Kurt Warner started in front of Delhomme for the Amsterdam Admirals in NFL Europe back in 1998. Warner is a classic drop-back quarterback. Delhomme is a gunslinger. A risk taker. Often, those risks work.

Saturday, I can't remember a single one that did - not when it mattered, anyway. Delhomme fell on the sword afterward, taking the blame for everything that happened. In a matter-of-fact voice, he said he felt worse about his performance in this game than any other game he had ever played at any level.

"Not even close," he said. And: "I didn't give us a chance tonight." And: "It wasn't our night. It wasn't mine - that's for sure."

Delhomme remains the quarterback that took Carolina to the Super Bowl in 2003, the NFC Championship Game in 2005 and to a 12-4 regular-season record this season.

We all saw what the Panthers looked like without him in 2007. But we also all know that there is a Good Jake and a Bad Jake - who appeared in the playoffs once before, when Delhomme threw three interceptions at Seattle in the 2005 NFC Championship Game.

Although Bad Jake hasn't climbed out of his dungeon very often this season, he reappeared Saturday."

Here's the full article if you're interested: http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/sports/articles/2009/01/10/20090110spt-pantherscolumn.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Over and over, Arizona picked Delhomme off. Give the Cardinals defenders credit - they caught everything. If that had been the Panthers' defensive backfield, at least three of those would have been dropped."

Wow, did one of us write that article?

No, it was on an Arizona newspaper website, so they may be slightly biased (or truthful...whichever).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Congratulations do they know who the father is?
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...