Flavor of the Day - Jake Delhomme
by Adam T on Jan 14, 2009 1:39 PM CST
31 comments
So yesterday's flavor didn't do much to satisfy your appetitie? Today we bring you another QB Flavor of the day here at Lov and Jerry's QB Shop.
Today's flavor is Jake Delhomme.
In a recent NFL.com article that I am still working to locate was posted, some speculated that the Panthers may part ways with Delhomme. Obviously the 6 turnover game versus the Arizona Cardinals didn't help. But Delhomme is scheduled to cost the Panthers 11 million against their 2009 cap. If they cut him it would save them 6.3 million. The Panthers would need all the money they could find if they have any hopes to sign both Julius Peppers and Jordan Gross.
Delhomme did not have a bad year, in fact going into the AZ game he had the hightest QB rating of all QBs in the first playoff round at 95.
So how does this sit with you?
0 recs |
31 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Ugh
This sits about as well as if I ate every single bite of ice cream in that picture. Delhomme is far from his prime years, and he won’t have the same offensive weapons as he did on Carolina. While his performance against Arizona this past week was not an indicator of him as a player, I still don’t see any reason bringing him here if we can’t upgrade our offensive line and get some capable receivers.
by purpleliner on Jan 14, 2009 1:47 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
To be fair none
of the other guys Collins, Warner, McNabb are near their prime. And to that not a single QB in the league could come here and have the same offensive weapons they had at wherever they are coming from.
Who are you endorsing?
Being Who You Thought We Were Since 2005!
by Adam T on Jan 14, 2009 1:48 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Tough call
This is tough to say. And you are absolutely correct when pointing out that the Bears are towards the bottom of the pack in terms of overall offensive personnel. Am I saying that I would be upset with bringing in Delhomme? Not quite…I’m all for anything that our owners do to improve the Chicago Bears. However, I think that if upgrades can be acquired at multiple positions, it really takes the pressure off of the quarterback situation. I don’t want to see a one, two, or even three year band-aid at the position for the sake of pleasing everybody right now. The teams with the best success are the ones that know how to build their offense and put together a solid core of players for the long term. I live in Indianapolis now, and while I certainly know that we can’t approach what the Colts have in just one offseason, but I think that they have shown how important it is to have a team with great chemistry and a solid core at every position.
Haha…I hope that makes sense. It was a long day at work.
by purpleliner on Jan 14, 2009 1:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I think it is fair to say
that there is nobody we are likely to bring in that will replace Orton. If Delhomme is brought in as a backup, would that be good by you?
Being Who You Thought We Were Since 2005!
by Adam T on Jan 14, 2009 1:59 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
I’d take Delhomme as a backup, but would he agree to that type of role? Even if he was brought in to ‘compete’, it looks like Orton would win out anyways because of his familiarity with the system and the value of initial stability of keeping a quarterback year-to-year. But at what price to we pay to bring in someone like Delhomme, regardless of his role?
I don’t think our answer is in the draft, but it wouldn’t hurt to take a chance on somebody who we can develop and test out in Turner’s offense. I haven’t had a chance to familiarize myself with some of the QBs who will be available in the draft, I’ll be sure to take a look soon.
As far as a veteran back-up goes, I’d be thrilled with the majority of the names out there. However, players like Collins have made it clear that they want the starting nod, and Chicago would really have to commit to an ‘open competition’ to bring in some of the better free agent players.
by purpleliner on Jan 14, 2009 2:07 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
(I didn’t mean to throw off the post, I meant to hit ’reply’)
by purpleliner on Jan 14, 2009 2:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
It would depend
he would obviously try to get a starting gig, but if you can’t Chicago is the best option for backups finding their way into the starting job.
Being Who You Thought We Were Since 2005!
by Adam T on Jan 14, 2009 2:18 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
And that is why we will probably get our man. I could really see somebody who has started before and is looking to make an impact again in the league come to the Bears with hopes of taking over our offense. Perhaps someone like Simms?
by purpleliner on Jan 14, 2009 2:30 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Delhomme No
He has been inconsistent of late and frankly I don’t like any of the guys who keep getting tried as the flavor of the day. We need to get younger, not older at that position. Draft or try to pick up a Simms or Orvlosky guy not a 33+ who is passed his prime.
Fire Ron Turner!!!
Fire Angelo!!
by GallopingGhost on Jan 14, 2009 2:14 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Delhomme is a decent QB
Any QB can thrive in a system that fits his strengths and provides him protection. Is that system the Bears? I am not sure. I’m banking on Orton, he’s tough, he’s confident and he’s our only hope. I just can’t see management bringing in a big time QB.
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Jan 14, 2009 2:18 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Orton as our only hope....
That comment makes me shiver right down my spine.
Any coach or GM that thinks that Kyle Orton is our best option in the NFL going forward should be fired on the spot.
by sabbath999 on Jan 14, 2009 2:44 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I know, it's hard to swallow...
but I’ve been swallowing it for over 20 years now. I wish management would prove me wrong. But that’s just the way it is in Chicago. We don’t bring in big time QB’s.
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Jan 14, 2009 3:06 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Jake the Snake is over the hill
You think Grossman has trouble with the ball, wait until you get a load of Jake – he looks, he fades…d’oh! Granted, when he’s on a hot streak, he can be quite effective – but tell me what QB doesn’t look a lot better when he has Steve Smith to throw to.
by Waylon on Jan 14, 2009 3:08 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
these posts are making me lactose intolerant
any of the guys the bears might bring in via FA are backup-type talent, not starting-type. that is sad considering orton is setting the bar. I think the bears need a decent veteran backup as insurance and a young rookie to develop. out of all the suggestions so far i like david carr as the vet and josh freeman or pat white as the rook. maybe stafford or bradford fall to #18 …
by No It All on Jan 14, 2009 3:10 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I hate to only comment on one part of your post,
but Pat White ain’t going to be a QB in the NFL, in my opinion. He’ll definately throw some passes, but it’ll be as a slot/wing/tailback/placeholder.
Things will get better as they improve...
by Dane Noble on Jan 14, 2009 3:14 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
God no
he is awful..Did anyone watch the game against the cardinals?? He is brutal and has had many bad games this year. The only he looks decent is one Smith breaks 5 tackles and runs for a 70 yrd td. He would be a terrible pick up. He is Rex without the shaky feet..
by tfrabotta on Jan 14, 2009 3:51 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
yea...
…. i heard that it made a lot of sense to make judgments of a player based on one game.
Bringing moderation to a place I don't moderate.
visit the mindful mission
by big_lowitzki on Jan 16, 2009 9:17 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
you havent paid
much attention to his play during the year have you..
by tfrabotta on Jan 16, 2009 1:34 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
take away his bomb to smith every game (or screen for 50 yards)
1 @SD W 26-24 23 41 247 56.1 6.02 37 1 0 82.0
2 CHI W 20-17 12 21 128 57.1 6.10 33 0 1 55.3
3 @MIN L 20-10 17 29 191 58.6 6.59 29 0 0 78.
4 ATL W 24-9 20 29 294 69.0 10.14 56 2 0 124.8
5 KC W 34-0 14 22 236 63.6 10.73 47 2 1 111.2
6 @TB L 27-3 20 39 242 51.3 6.21 48 0 3 38.6
7 NO W 30-7 14 22 195 63.6 8.86 39 2 0 122.4
8 ARI W 27-23 20 28 248 71.4 8.86 65 2 0 122.3
9 Bye Week
10OAK W 17-6 7 27 72 25.9 2.67 27 1 4 12.3
11DET W 31-22 10 19 102 52.6 5.37 16 1 0 85.9
12ATL L 45-28 21 35 295 60.0 8.43 41 1 0 96.7
13GNB W 35-31 12 17 177 70.6 10.41 54 0 0 104.3
14 TB W 38-23 14 20 173 70.0 8.65 38 1 2 73.5
15 DEN W 30-10 17 26 253 65.4 9.73 38 1 1 93.9
16NYG L 34-28 11 19 185 57.9 9.74 60 0 0 90.9
17NO W 33-31 14 20 250 70.0 12.50 54 1 0 129.2
by the way we dont have steve smith…
by tfrabotta on Jan 16, 2009 1:47 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I see 11 games with a rating of over 80, and 9 over 90.
Orton had 9 games over 80, and 3 over 90.
Things will get better as they improve...
by Dane Noble on Jan 16, 2009 3:00 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Besides, you take away any team's top receiver for every game,
their QB’s numbers wouldn’t look good either.
Things will get better as they improve...
by Dane Noble on Jan 16, 2009 3:02 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
foolish
take away his bomb to smith every game (or screen for 50 yards)
That is silly. It is kinda’ like saying, take away his good games, and he was bad in his bad games.
You can’t take away a QB’s best receiver and act like it is an objective way to analyze the QB.
Bringing moderation to a place I don't moderate.
visit the mindful mission
by big_lowitzki on Jan 17, 2009 1:32 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
If that's an argument,
then why were some people this year taking away Forte’s one large gain of the game and THEN calculating his YPC?
I'M A MAN! I'M 22!
by ChiFan13 on Jan 18, 2009 11:35 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
because...
… they are foolish.
Bringing moderation to a place I don't moderate.
visit the mindful mission
by big_lowitzki on Jan 18, 2009 12:16 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Eli Manning's contract is up after next season.
Although I don’t think we’d get into a bidding war with someone willing to pay him over $100m…
Things will get better as they improve...
by Dane Noble on Jan 14, 2009 4:10 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Gotta love the New York Football Yankees Giants. Now all they need to do is find some more superstar receivers who know how to work a safety on a gun.
by purpleliner on Jan 14, 2009 4:20 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
hehe
$100M ?!?! Absolutely not.
Bringing moderation to a place I don't moderate.
visit the mindful mission
by big_lowitzki on Jan 16, 2009 9:19 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Especially for an average QB.
Things will get better as they improve...
by Dane Noble on Jan 16, 2009 1:42 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Nope we have him already in Rex Grossman
Just doesn’t get the same publicity. Plus he was god awful in the playoffs..
Erm, well if we are going to call Milton Bradley nicknames, mine is Fischer Price: yes, you heard it here first..
by Chanman25 on Jan 14, 2009 6:52 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
No.
For those children who claimed they’ve been a fan of their favorite team all their life, or even since they were about four or five years old: bullshit. There’s always that certain event or certain player that draws to the sport and draws you to a team. For me, Nomar Garciaparra was that reason. - Nick Coviello: I Try To See Rocco, But All I Think Is Nomar; 1/9/09
by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Jan 14, 2009 7:05 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
