Delhomme

Of course, you're parsing. Teams that view their quarterback as a success and a starter pay those players. You view Delhomme as a career backup, even though he's started over half his career and Carolina clearly determined that he was their starter and paid him to keep him.

How special for you. Look at that, it's a long argument and you're putting down the guy who dared engage you. Shocking.

Was making fun of Miami and Cassell. My main objective was to make fun of Miami for being shitty. I never said "Cassell is untalented." You're the one trying to downplay his talent so you can make a point. You're the one all but stating as if he came from the street and he just lucked into being on the Patriots because they're swell guys. Not that he was talented and learned under some great coaches, or that he was talented enough to be recruited to a QB factory championship level school.

He's talented. He has your three criteria as well as very few weaknesses in the areas I've determined need to be there. He's done well at this level, which gives him a legit shot at starting. Should he get huge money? Maybe, maybe not. Will someone decide he's a starter and pay him as such beforehand? Probably so. A big part of that is that he played at this level and succeeded, regardless of why he did so, and regardless of whether they can recreate the elements of success, they'll pay expecting the player to do as well.

You might have a problem with that layout of money. You probably have a problem with all of pro sports, then, and definitely the draft. This isn't isolated to QBs, the NFL, Jake Delhomme, or the Carolina Panthers by any means.

As an aside, I do enjoy how you'll entirely ignore valid parts of arguments so you can spend more time continuously bringing up the same points - like Cassel - as if, somehow, the second time I'll say, oh, wow. I said x two years ago and that means exactly what you're stretching it to mean. This time, but not the other time.

Protect myself from what? From being wrong? I'm wrong all the time. Not necessarily when you say it to try to "win", which is why you're saying this.
From embarassment? I guess you could say I'm embarassed I get caught arguing with someone as devoid as you, but I got over that fast too. I'm not protecting myself from anything, but you spend much more time trying to come up with conspiracy theories as to why you need to fit something in a particualr reasoning than actually adding anything.

Sure. And a few openly say "we need to replace him at all costs." Most still understand his flaws and want to know where we can actually do better, which is where you're failing us.

Yes, I stated you gave one example after stating you gave nothing. You state 100 and gave 1.

remind me when those first five names are available, and then remind me what year from now they'll actually be ready to play. Sure, we could draft a guy, and we'll probably get better or equal talent. And there's an OK shot that we could get equal production. I and most still have a problem with "would". And John Fox himself has had a fairly significant problem with young QBs. Your own statements suggest veterans first but you can't offer up readily available veterans. Wow - maybe in a year we could trade out our actual starting quarterback for a dumpoff artist that couldn't beat out one of many Huards! I can't wait!

Also - nothing says 'would do better" than "longshot".

because you'd always, 100% know exactly how a QB will fit into a situation up to three or four years away. Right. After all, you say you do. And that makes your opinion valid and no one else gets to have one. Including, apparently, the team.

I didn't say "Jake has good mechanics." I also said sometimes he has bad mechanics. You're unwilling to acknowledge my point because you know all this is opinion, and you're stating every bit of it as fact.

 

Hey, fuck you asshole.

 

I find it funny that you somehow find a way to disagree with both magnus and myself, as if you're actually trying to be wrong in every way possible. I do deny the effect of any supposed leadership quality with Jake. Meatpile claimed that Delhomme makes other players better, but that's obviously bullshit since Steve Smith and Muhsin Muhammad are the only receivers who have ever had success with him at quarterback. The idea that confidence and leadership make players play better is something common fans believe because common fans are idiots who don't understand the skills or subtleties involved with high level athletic performance. When the 49ers drafted Alex Smith #1 overall, they raved about his leadership and presence in the huddle. Where is he now? Players succeed because of talent and execution, not leadership or cajun mojo or any other bullshit reasoning you want to give.

You believe that because you're an idiot who knows nothing. You don't have the slightest clue what makes an elite QB prospect. Not even an inkling. You have about as much skill at evaluating quarterbacks as you do 16th century Chinese literature.

I say that not only because you've proven yourself to be a know-nothing moron over the years, but because Stafford is a prime example of the mistakes the media makes in valuing quarterbacks. He has a big arm, he looks the part, and he has charisma. That's why he's being talked about as a potential #1 overall pick. Someone like me who actually knows what he's talking about looks at Stafford and sees a lot of troubling flaws. He has some of the Grossman in him, as he will try to force the ball into coverage on certain plays, especially on third downs or when trailing. He's also prone to staring down his receivers and doesn't seem to be adept at reading defenses. Based on his physical talent, I can understand why someone would draft him in the first round, but I personally would not take him in the top 15 picks. He'll need to be broken of bad habits and given years to develop if he's going to become a great quarterback.

No, I wasn't, you fucking retard. Just because you're jealous that I obviously know what I'm talking about and you're utterly clueless to the point that no one ever asks your opinion on anything because no one thinks you've ever had a single thought worth sharing with any other human being doesn't mean that you have the right to lie about what I've said.

I said that Matt Ryan would not be a franchise type quarterback, but would be a solid starter in the NFL. That's exactly what he was this season - solid.

What I tire of is fucking morons such as yourself not knowing your place. Seriously, what enlightening points have you ever made in all your posts on this board? Point to one time where you said something legitimately intelligent. Meanwhile I can point to numerous examples of you saying something embarrassingly stupid because you're a moron, but unfortunately you're not aware of being a moron and therefore you don't act like a moron should. Someone like you should sit in the corner and be silent until you have a question to ask of someone who actually knows something. Your own opinion is worse than useless, as it both runs the risk of confusing someone who doesn't know enough to recognize your stupidity as well as getting in the way of discussions between people with knowledge.

 

Perhaps, my asshole -> retard translator is on the fritz.

I completely understand what you're saying - I just found it ironic that you'd say "they usually don't pay big money to career backups" right next to a list of guys who were backups who got paid.

Actually, could you give us a list of guys who came in where there was no entrenched starter, had a good year (and I don't mean "didn't completely suck ass"), and then were sent packing?

Most of the guys I can think of off the top of my head were kept around. Kitna and Derek Anderson are the first two come to mind, and they didn't get jettisoned.

 

Leadership is not the ability to levy up those around you to make them better than they are, it's the ability to take the skills of those around you and maximize them by giving direction, but you aren't a leader, you never have been and therefore wouldn't understand. Your posts prove that. Continuing to make statements to the contrary of the very players in the huddle, shows that you live in your own fantasy world. But, you already know that and so does EVERYONE on this board.

Right.....he's not a franchise QB. They won't build a team around him.

Morons meet to settle internet grudges, so you certainly are the expert there. AT least, hopefully you've learned something from your experience.

Nope.

Nope, clearly you don't.

 

People talking shit about miami can fight me.

 

Actually he has not started for over half of his career, as he spent six seasons not starting, while this is his sixth as the starter here. Regardless, you're intentionally missing the point. Delhomme was not a quarterback being developed, he was a body on the roster specifically to be a backup. Other QBs like Shaun Hill, Matt Cassel, Sage Rosenfels, Damon Huard, Todd Collins, etc have been in the same situation and posted solid numbers after the starter went down. Most teams choose not to reward those players with huge contracts.

Piper and I disagree. Meatpile and I disagree. I don't despise either one of them because they aren't dishonest. You're a piece of shit, though. You're the worst person on this board, even worse than erpi, because you actively waste god-given intelligence. To me, it is much, much worse to know the truth and lie about it because you don't want to admit that you're wrong than it is to just be a dick like erpi or stupid like Thelt.

Sure. "A QB so elite he took pitching back up to pass the time" is really a way of saying that Matt Cassel actually is talented and it's just a matter of time before he has success. You weren't mocking him or saying that he took up pitching because he had no future as a quarterback. This is exactly what I mean. You know you're full of shit and you don't care. You will lie, even when the lie is as obvious as this one, just to avoid admitting that you're wrong. You care about yourself, not knowledge or "truth."

No, you stupid fucking moron, I am not "downplaying his talent." He's a perfect example of what I've been saying for years, that there are lots of guys with enough talent to be effective quarterbacks in the NFL. There are more guys good enough to play than there are spots for quarterbacks on NFL teams. I've said that for years, you lying piece of shit. Cassel is just the latest example proving what I've said all along that tons of guys can do what Jake Delhomme has done if they were just given the right opportunity with the right team.

Because you're so willing to lie about and distort any argument you feel is making you look bad, I can't always tell if you're being dishonest again or just stupid. I don't have a problem with all contracts, I have a problem with overpaying relative to other contracts. Whether or not any quarterback "deserves" $10+ million or if Alex Rodriguez "deserves" $25 million isn't my concern. The market sets those conditions. My point is that you should not pay top dollar for mediocre players. You should pay elite money for elite players. That's what the Patriots and the Eagles do, and it's why they've had consistent success. Meanwhile we overpay for mediocre talents like Delhomme, Kemoeatu, Wahle, etc. Jake is far from the only example, as I've bitched about plenty of Hurney's overly generous contracts.

What valid parts?

Obviously you can't admit the truth about yourself, but you also know that I'm far from the only one who says this shit about you. Lots of people see you as a condescending, arrogant prick who says stupid shit whenever you're caught in a losing argument because you're pathologically incapable of admitting that you're wrong.

Bullshit. I have explained repeatedly how we can do better, you just refuse to believe it because you're the same guy so busy dreaming about sucking Jake's dick that you pretended that "most of the team" played as badly against Oakland as he did.

Many of those guys were available with late draft picks that we spent on players who are no longer with the team.

John Fox has a fairly significant problem with change. He stayed with Stephen Davis long after it was clear that he needed to be replaced, and he stayed with Foster long after it was clear that DeAngelo would do better. It's a pattern with him, so you hiding behind his reluctance to challenge Jake isn't an argument at all.

Simms and Gradkowski were both available, as was Leftwich. I have no doubt whatsoever that Simms and Leftwich would do as well as Jake. None.

Gutierrez and Johnson are a longshot to get a chance, you moron. If they do, they'll succeed.

You're more than welcome to express your opinion as long as you know your place. You get pissy with people like Thelt who express uninformed opinions about the draft, but then you want to babble about quarterbacks when you've been humiliatingly wrong on just about every quarterback you've ever hyped. People mock you frequently about how you've backed terrible quarterbacks, but you're still running your mouth on the subject. That makes you no better than Thelt babbling about draft prospects.

There is a commonly accepted definition of "bad mechanics" for professional quarterbacks. Jake unquestionably fits that definition, but you want to hide behind semantics because you're a coward. Whenever you feel like you're getting your ass kicked in an argument, you always try to hide behind "opinion."

 

Unless they're free agents and want a lot of money, they generally aren't sent packing. Most teams just bring in competition or a more established starter.

Sure, I was never a leader, that's why I was chosen to be captain of my teams in high school. Leadership matters in kicking a guy's ass when he's not doing his job. Leadership doesn't make bad players good or good players great. Jake has not elevated anyone on the team with his supposed "leadership." He's had some success because he has decent skills and he's on a team with some great playmakers.

Matt Ryan is getting paid like a franchise QB and he's certainly getting hyped as one, but we're talking about a guy who had a QB rating of 87.7 and threw for 16 touchdowns. He's getting hyped because the Falcons unexpectedly made the playoffs, but do you remember similar hype about Vince Young in 2006 when the Titans won 6 out of their last 7 games with him as the starter? Ryan is a much better quarterback than Young and I said he would be, but because the media hypes someone doesn't make them elite. Maybe Matt Ryan will end up being better than I expected him to be, but I have not been wrong about him so far. In seven years of projecting college quarterbacks to the NFL, you could argue that I've been wrong about two - Leinart & Leftwich. And even those two I still believe are capable of being above average starters.

 

Oh....you're THAT guy? How was your 20 year reunion? You break out your old jersey?

In his rookie season, he outperfomed many at the highest level of the sport.....didn't take long.

 

I don't know what you consider "performing at a high leve," but shouldn't it involve being top 10 in something? Anything? Matt Ryan has had a good year, and has done very well for a rookie. But his '08 season was nowhere near elite, or superstar, or franchise, or whatever else you want to claim. It was solid, although certainly a big reason why the Falcons are in the playoffs.