Can jake ruin our playoff chances?

by onlypantherfanintown on Aug 19, 2009 11:58 PM EDT

Hey i like the guy and i want him to be good, but i cant help but have doubts about him. Our run game is awesome with 3 guys to carry the ball and are threats to take in down the field, but we need jake to not turn the ball over. i was hoping to be reconvinced of his talent watchin the preseason game against the giants but that didnt really help me. He threw this one pass to smith on a fade route that was no where close. Honestly at the end of last season i was leaning towards gettin a new starter for the qb position. I looked for highlights of him and only found one game where he played like i want him to play all the time and that was the game vs the falcons where we lost 40 something to 20 something. It looks like he gets nervous in the pocket and relies on smith to catch the ball even if hes not open.

The content of these posts are those of the user/fan making the post only

Tweet Comment 13 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

true, true

I agree with you completely, but if you want to know what our current options are, check out the post “A realistic analysis of what our QB position could be”. Not everyone agrees with the whole thing, but it is a good analysis. Also, keep in mind that Jake has a winning record. The season after we lost to Seattle in the NFC Championship game (after the 2nd or 3rd series, Jamal Robertson was our ONLY RB available), we were 8-8 and missed the playoffs. We were 8-5 with Jake as the starter and 0-3 with Weinke. If Jake played all 16, I’m convinced we would have made the playoffs. The following year we were 7-9. With Jake, we were 2-1, and the one loss was in the game he got hurt, and the defense let Matt Schaub destroy us. Jake played very well in that game, too. So over the last three years, with Jake we are 22-10. If you look at how poorly our defense played down the stretch, even though the running game deserves a lot of credit, we were 6-2 with Jake at QB. I look at his stats and wanna bench him, that overthrow to Smitty on the fade route was horrible, and his fumble made no sense, either. However, when he plays, everyone plays. When he doesn’t, some other guys half-ass and we lose. So with that said, throw all that other stuff out the window and just look at our winning percentage with Jake, and without Jake. That should be all the convincing you need. I guarantee you Fox cares more about the wins than the QB rating.

by usana_gaines on Aug 20, 2009 5:41 AM EDT reply actions

Good point usana, you definately eased my worries a bit.

by onlypantherfanintown on Aug 20, 2009 12:06 PM EDT up reply actions

You need to win during the regular season before worrying about the post season.

Jake Delhomme gives us our best chance of winning games, the stats speak for themselves. While I don’t think anyone believes Jake is the future, long-term answer of the franchise he is a very solid option right now. I can think of at least 8 teams who would replace their incumbent starter with Jake in a second if they had the chance:
- 49ers
- Lions
- Buccaneers
- Raiders
- Broncos
- Bills
- Browns
- Jaguars

That’s an awful lot of teams with greater QB problems than us. I just wish people could have a memory that lasts longer than the Arizona game. Every QB in the league looked rusty game one of the preseason. Tom Brady threw a pick, Peyton Manning got sacked 3 times, Orton threw 3 INTs… lets just back off the QB position until the end of the preseason rather than saying ‘Jake will ruin us’ before the season’s even started.

by James Dator on Aug 20, 2009 8:44 AM EDT reply actions

I like your point but..

these teams don’t have a chance at postseason, we are the only member of the top 5 teams in the leauge that don’t have a qb that can win games for us. And im gonna have to disagree with the lions having trouble because Matthew Staford looks great. Him and Sanchez are going to be the Ryan and Flacco of this year. Anyway you look at these other teams that are considered just a bit better in the nfc like the giants, cardinals, and eagles; they all have these “playmaking qbs”. If jake had the talent of Kurt Warner; no doubt we would the one of the most balanced teams in the leauge and i think, the best

by onlypantherfanintown on Aug 20, 2009 12:05 PM EDT up reply actions

True, but every team needs to make a trade off.

We have one of the (if not the) best RBs in the league. I’m sure Colts, Patriots or Cardinals fans would say ‘we would have one of the most balanced teams in the league if we had DeAngelo Williams’.

Even the Steelers won without a legitimate top 5 RB. Willie Parker is awesome, no doubt, but he’s not top 5. There are only a handful of teams that come to mind (Eagles, Chargers, Falcons) who have a legitimate stud at both positions.

It’s one of the joys of the NFL.

by James Dator on Aug 20, 2009 12:18 PM EDT up reply actions

giants, eagles, cardinals

there is no way i would trade jake for eli manning. when the whole team plays well, the qb gets the mvp in the superbowl. eli has a worse qb rating than jake. their running game and defense win. they use the same strategy we do, but gave their underperforming qb a lot more money. the cards cannot run the ball. would you trade d-will and beef stew for warner and edgerrin james? how would warner do if he traded his 2 and 3 receivers for ours (boldin and breaston for jarrett and idunno)? and i just despise the eagles. westbrook and the defense have been the heart of that team, which is why aj feeley and koy detmer have winning records there, and jeff garcia led them to the playoffs after mcnabb got off to a losing start and then got hurt and chose surgery instead of coming back. i’d rather have vick than mcnabb. and i would rather have jake than pay the money paid to unproven guys like russell, stafford, freeman, sanchez, and alex smith. we would have some of their qbs if we earned the number one overall pick the way they did, but jake never had a losing record in any season in games he started.

by usana_gaines on Aug 22, 2009 6:40 AM EDT up reply actions

last season

last season was eli manning’s first season with a QB rating over 77. his qb rating in his last palyoff game was 41. jake’s was 39. in eli’s only superbowl, his qb rating was 87 and he got the mvp. jake’s qb rating in the superbowl was 114, but we kicked the kickoff out of bounds…you know the rest.

by usana_gaines on Aug 22, 2009 6:53 AM EDT up reply actions

Yes he certainly can as he showed last season

But we are apparently going to ride Jake for the season so hold on

I blog the Carolina Panthers at www.catscratchreader.com

by Jaxon on Aug 20, 2009 10:10 AM EDT reply actions

Again, win stats mean nothing for the QB position. Delhomme threw four picks against the Raiders last year but they still won despite his horrible decision making. Conversely, against TB the first time, he threw 3 TD’s but they still lost. His stats hover around 15-16th every year in the league, he’s not a top ten QB & the Panthers don’t give anyone else a chance to compete. Delhomme has all these weapons around him on offense but still manages to blow games. All he’s asked to do is make good decisions with the ball & not turn it over and most of the time he can’t do that. But, as Fox’s adopted son, he will never lose his starting position(barring injury) or get yanked from a game no matter how many turnovers he has.

by D.W.G. on Aug 20, 2009 10:19 AM EDT reply actions

Then, who do you suggest that we get? If you were Marty Hurney right now, who would our starter be and how would you acquire them?

by James Dator on Aug 20, 2009 10:30 AM EDT up reply actions

Why Tavares Jackson of course

I blog the Carolina Panthers at www.catscratchreader.com

by Jaxon on Aug 20, 2009 4:09 PM EDT up reply actions

i agree

suppose i agree with you on this one. will you then acknowledge during the season when jake plays well? there is no point trying to convince you that you’re wrong, but you should agree to look at his performances objectively. let’s be honest, jake should’ve been benched in the oakland game. let’s be honest, he played well against the giants, but in the second half when they were stuffing the run, jake should’ve been allowed to throw more (play action and a couple screens, maybe). so the loss to the giants last year was not jake’s fault, and the win against the raiders should not be thought of as his win. with those stats, that makes jake 11-3 as our starter last year. so let’s keep an open mind this year as we move forward and win it all.

by usana_gaines on Aug 22, 2009 6:45 AM EDT up reply actions

Name one available QB

Name one out there who gives us a better chance to win than Jake.

And if you’re going to blame him for losses, you need to give him credit for wins. Football is about 22 players working together, and the QB play is just fine or very good more often than not.

by Cyberjag on Aug 20, 2009 1:16 PM EDT via mobile reply actions