Delhomme

That made absolutely no sense. Your credibility wouldn't suffer so much if you just let some posts go. Actually, I think you proved my point.

 

or Frazier

 

It's funny to see you keep bringing up bias when you're famous for it. I agree with you when you're right even though I despise you as much as I do any human being I can think of at the moment. I can separate my feelings from my ability to reason. You can't. That's why you made a fool of yourself backing Seifert for years, and it's why you made a fool of yourself during the Oakland game when you claimed that most of the team was playing as badly as Jake.

Awareness and decision-making are just ways of rephrasing "the ability to read defenses." So no, those aren't new. You could arguably throw poise into that mix as well, since that usually involves the ability to read blitzes or other forums of pressure. Even if you want to keep it separate, poise is something Jake clearly does not have. Every one of us knows that Jake is reckless and makes horrible decisions with the football when he's under pressure. Toughness is something you can take as a separate attribute, but again, I think that sort of thing is ancillary. You don't need to be tough to be a good quarterback in the NFL, and some of the toughest are piss poor passers.

So you're now going to make a fool of yourself and say that Carr was good at reading defenses when he was with the Panthers? Don't be ridiculous. His very inability to do so is why he struggled. Like a hitter who had been beaned, his fear of being hit made him unable to consistently stand in the pocket and go through his progressions.

Yes, I'm aware that you have changed your stated opinion in the last few days.

You can keep repeating that until you're blue in the face, but it's not going to carry any weight until you start giving some reasons for your opinion. "Because magnus said so" lost credibility as far as quarterbacks are concerned back with Jeff Lewis, and certainly has not been helped since by your hyping of Kyle Boller and others. Jake has below average skills and below average talent. He was undrafted. He sat the bench for a New Orleans team that desperately wanted an upgrade at quarterback. The reality is that he did not start for anyone until he got to throw to Steve Smith. The reality is that there are more than hundred guys with equal or superior skills and talent.

 

I'm quite used to saying things that might be unpopular, only to see everyone eventually realize that I was correct all along. Unfortunately it just takes the average person that long to comprehend something my brain grasps immediately.

 

this is your argument against bias? neat.

No. Awareness is more than just who dropped deep where. Decision making isn't either.

It's not the most critical, but it's there. There are a lot of criteria for NFL starting quarterbacks. Leadership isn't "necessary", but teams choosing a quarterback instead of simply passively finding one make this a big part of their search. 27 NFL teams have a quarterback captain.



But, while we're at it, I'm glad you got around to seeing the post that prompted this little tirade: "This is such a pussy move, and one you use all the time. Just answer the god damned question and stop pretending like you've "answered it already.""

He didn't do anything well here. He did do some reading, however, and dumped off the ball, which does take reading, even if the decision making is consistently poor. But yes, if you ask whether reading defenses was his problem or not, I doubt analysts would say it was his big failing. His talent is not questioned. The three things you suggest must happen, happened and you generally defended them. The result was not at all favorable. So a guy can be a #1 overall pick and not in the 100 that would, not 'could', do as well or better, and in the next breath use "undrafted" as a major evaluation in another player's lack of talent? Wow.

I never stated I felt this iteration of Delhomme is special. I stated I felt the team does, and your statements include they never seriously threatened his job and have given him an extension that you felt was very high and in the top 10 of QBs at the time, so by your words, I'd say you would agree.

I did say he was average, and he got the job done. He isn't elite, and (again) if that's what you want, I'm good with that. I would like to know how to secure a player that's that much better, but I doubt that's the actual point.

You not liking it doesn't change it.

and though many have asked, neither you nor anyone else trying to dress down Jake have suggested realistic alternatives. Even though there are "more than hundred".

you remember all those times you tried to tell me my motivation for disagreeing with something was to try to feel superior?

 

Yes. I think you are a degenerate, but I still agree with you when I think you're right because, unlike you, I don't make those sorts of judgments based on emotion.

Sure, and it leads to dumbassery like the 49ers taking Alex Smith because they loved his "charisma" and "leadership skills." The three things that really matter for a quarterback are arm strength, accuracy, and the ability to read defenses (probably in reverse order of importance there). Other things can help, but they're ultimately extraneous.

It still applies. The next time I ask something you think you've already answered, call me a moron and repeat whatever it is you said that you believe applies. Just saying that you said it somewhere before without any elaboration or explanation is a pussy move, and one that you do use frequently.

Cool, so we can officially do away with that nonsense where you claimed that he had all three of those traits.

Carr came into the league a better quarterback than Jake has ever been, but just like a guy can improve over time, he can also get worse. Carr became gunshy due to his years in Houston and it ruined him as a quarterback. You see that more frequently in baseball than football, but it happens in both sports where a player just loses the ability to function effectively.

So you defend Delhomme and point out that the team believes that he's special, but you agree that he's not. Good grief.

Actually I did (and see, I'm actually going to repeat where I did instead of just being a bitch and insisting that it happened without any further explanation). I pointed out Brodie Croyle as one example of a player who is not succeeding in Kansas City and will presumably be available soon, but is someone with a very similar skill set to Jake and would probably do just as well. The same goes for lots of quarterbacks who are drafted and yet don't end up starting long-term for whatever reason. And obviously that doesn't even count the ones who go undrafted.

I say whatever I say because I believe it. I feel much better when other people find value in it and embrace it immediately, but as noted, I have plenty of experience in dealing with initial skepticism and it usually leads to people realizing later on that I was correct. One of the main reasons I am such an asshole is that it's incredibly frustrating to know something that other people don't, or to actually care more about objective knowledge than just defending a personal opinion while other people don't. I would be much, much happier if everyone else was just as intelligent, knowledgeable, and intellectually honest as I am.

 

Please don't make me repeat myself....

 

and you have problems controlling your emotions, and you frequently make things personal, but you're not biased. You can't look at the way you blew up for me stating something I actually had done, and think that's a rational response.

There are a lot of things that matter. You can't be Ken Dorsey in arm and expect to succeed for years, no, but teams feel like there are a lot of things that do matter besides this. Yes, the 49ers screwed up Alex Smith for various reasons, including money. That doesn't validate every quarterback decision, or that teams do look for tangibles I mentioned plus character, charisma, leadership, accountability.

No. You're on the hook for your own mistakes. I'm not going to own some half-ass deflection of "this is really your fault and you have to spoon feed me what I failed to read before, and acted like a brat about, because you wouldn't list it over and over until I responded to it."

So the coaching of Dom Capers and the awful OL kept him from being able to read defenses? Come on. I know you've gotta stick to this "three criteria are necessary" thing but he had the ability to read and lacked the toughness, the decision making, the leadership, and a number of other things. He had the talent by your own words and you're selling him down the river because he had Steve Smith and still failed.



Also, Croyle is kinda ehhh. I mean, I thought he was OK coming out, and he hasn't answered the bell. KC isn't a good football team but even a Boller or Losman starts and doesn't lose out to a very old veteran. Also, I believe he's only RFA after the year. I'm not impressed with those type choices as a real alternative to more than McCown.

But because of what you feel you must believe of me, there must be motive to it. I can't say something because I believe it, right?




At any rate, this discussion is no different than two years ago, or three years ago. Same couple people trying to actively displace, same handful saying he's good enough, and he's still here. Don't guess it'll change soon, either.

 

"All david carr needs is to get his rapport with steve smith."

LOL

 

I am a high-strung, emotional person. I am also a fair & honest person. I hated your guts back when I asked them to invite you to write on the magazine and I did it because I respect your writing and knowledge regardless of how much I dislike you personally. I can divorce my feelings from my ability to reason. You have trouble with that.

It's not a deflection, you moron. When someone asks you about something you've said or you believe you've already answered, then either repeat it or include a link to the original message. You hide behind "I said it already" because you're a coward. Always have been, always will be.

This is what I mean. You know damn well what I'm talking about regarding quarterbacks losing their nerve and no longer being able to stand in the pocket making their progressions. As I said, it happens a lot more frequently in baseball with hitters who have been beaned and just mentally can't stand there and focus the way they used to, but it happens in football as well. Carr has lost his nerve and it's kept him from being able to function. You know that, but because you're a piece of shit coward who tries to escape from arguments with spin and semantics, you're pretending that you can't understand it.

So is Jake. That's pretty much my point.

Sometimes you do, sometimes you do. Clearly you lie and say stupid shit on occasion, as evidenced by your idiotic ranting during the Oakland game about how most of the team was playing as badly as Jake. It's generally not that difficult to tell when you're sincere and when you're full of shit, although you pretend that you're always sincere.

The discussion itself has been going on a long time, but where I used to be in the minority as to my opinion of Delhomme, most people now agree with what I was saying all along.


WYDD:
I don't recall saying that and it's not coming up in any search.