If you could have any of these QB's Who would it be?

Alex Smith

 

Derek Anderson is Jake Delhomme, just a younger, ganglier, less amusing version.

 

yeah, he's overated too. and he's not rated all that high, either.

 

fixt.

 

heres the deal...i like Jake, the leadership, being able to pull a victory out his ass at times and so on. The thing is I think hes run his course. He never was very accurate, but go and really look at alot of his throws mid to late season. He cant make the kind of throws he used to get away with. Hed make a risky decsion earlier in his career and fit a ball into coverage. Look at the superbowl game where he was hitting those big throws and look at now. I, personally, think since the surgery he doesnt throw the same. The running game took off about mid season and it helped, but you cant hide your QB. Im glad hes been here. Say what you want but hes the best QB we ever had. All that said if they get someone else, get a proven starter. We've got plently of project guys. McNabb with 89 would be sick. ID rather shell out good cap money for a guy like him than overpay Gross or pay Peppers top DE money

 

Franchise QBs are not available until they look washed up. We are not going to get one in free agency. It is either Jake or some unproven guy next year.

With Delhomme in 2008 we go 12-4 win the division and have an ugly home playoff loss

Without him in 2007 we go 7-9.

 

Good call. Time Warner Cable is lucky to have you on their payroll.

 

Two games, yes. Numerous other games we were up and both continued to pass and continued to succeed. The Giants game, because of the weather, was a specific circumstance, but certainly we did pull it back late in the year to fairly poor success. Granted a two score lead should be somewhat safe with seven minutes to go.

Sorry, I don't look at what we did offensively and say "wow, we underachieved" from a season standpoint.

 

I'm OK with Simms as an option, but not "the" option. A number of guys on the supposed 100 are of that ability - good enough to have a shot if we needed someone to earn a shot. But not inspiring enough to suggest before earning a longer shot that it wouldn't mean continued ineffective play and constant, unending turnover that would inevitably lead us to far, far overpay for an expensive but potentially only marginally more sure thing. I imagine the question should be of players who are as good or better than Moore, McCown. McCown easily gets a camp to prove something, whereas Moore's uninspiring camp might make him the guy on the bubble (whch makes that potential other 3rd guy a pick, and I don't know we'd do that...and it'd have to be after the 4th).