New Orleans Saints - blackandgold.com

New Orleans Saints - blackandgold.com (http://blackandgold.com/community/)
-   Saints (http://blackandgold.com/saints/)
-   -   Is this logical??? (http://blackandgold.com/saints/3676-logical.html)

BillyC 01-22-2004 11:54 AM

Is this logical???
 

Quote:

Delhomme and McNair stats for their first year.
1997 Tennessee Oilers 16 16 415 216 52.0 2665 6.42 55 14 13 31/190 36 5 70.4
2003 Carolina Panthers 16 15 449 266 59.2 3219 7.17 67 19 16 23/168 46 9 80.6
Does this mean that Delhomme is a better QB than McNair? Does it make any sense to even try to suggest that? Or, does it make more sense to realize that is was 2-different QB's that were on different teams and it's no way to compare those stats and determine who was the better QB?

WhoDat is trying to tell everyone because Jakes stats were a little better than Brooks that he is the better QB, or something to that effect. Whatever he's trying to say I don't get it, and I'd love someone to clear it up for me.

Quote:

Brooks first year as a starter
2001 New Orleans Saints 16 16 558 312 55.9 3832 6.87 63 26 22 50/330 55 13 76.4

JOESAM2002 01-22-2004 04:01 PM

Is this logical???
 
Again, antagonistic. Billy!

BillyC 01-22-2004 04:18 PM

Is this logical???
 
Quote:

Again, antagonistic. Billy!
Not antaganistic at all. At least it wasn\'t meant to be. I\'m just confused at what WhoDat is trying to prove with that logic. WhoDat posted the information and I\'m just questioning it.

Anyway, I said I wouldn\'t question you and I won\'t. I\'ll try harder!!

seraph33 01-22-2004 10:01 PM

Is this logical???
 
Umm Billy you are being contradictory.

Quote:

Delhomme and McNair stats for their first year.
1997 Tennessee Oilers 16 16 415 216 52.0 2665 6.42 55 14 13 31/190 36 5 70.4
2003 Carolina Panthers 16 15 449 266 59.2 3219 7.17 67 19 16 23/168 46 9 80.6
This is exactly what you do anytime anyone questions Brooks\' abilities. If it is valid and logical for you to defend your views with statistics and comparisons in this manner then why isn\'t it logical for WhoDat?


WhoDat 01-22-2004 10:49 PM

Is this logical???
 
Good point. Billy - you said that you were positive that Delhomme made more mistakes than Brooks. You didn\'t provide any proof, but...

I contradicted that easily by comparing stats that can be construed as mistakes. If you don\'t want to comapre stats, what would you like to compare? Wins? Nope, Jake is only responsible for one of those if you ask Saintfan... or you for that matter. I wonder how many you think Brooks is responsible for.

Oh, and your claim that Stephen Davis, Steve Smith, and Mussin Muhammad helped the Panthers more than Jake... well you\'re probably right... BUT.... Deuce\'s numbers were better than Davis\' both of the last two years. Horn out caught Steve Smith. Stallworth hasn\'t even completed a single season worth of games and he has more yards and TDs than Muhammad has in 32 games over the last two seasons. Interesting huh?

BillyC 01-23-2004 07:48 AM

Is this logical???
 
WhoDat --

I heard on sports center that the panthers winning percentage is higher when Jake throws at least one interception. So, did Jake take the Panthers to the super bowl or did the Panthers take Jake to the super bowl?

As far as mistake made by Delhomme. He threw twice as many interceptions(16) and fumbled the ball 15-times. That\'s more mistakes by Delhomme than Brooks.

Look, if we want to evaluate the \"teams\" then the Panthers are better.

If we want to evaluate QB\'s then Brooks is head over heels above Delhomme.


[Edited on 23/1/2004 by BillyC]

saintfan 01-23-2004 08:04 AM

Is this logical???
 
Quote:

Wins? Nope, Jake is only responsible for one of those if you ask Saintfan...
When did I say that? I didn\'t say that. Get your facts straight before you bring me into it WhoDat? ...and stop being antagonistic. Thank Youl.

WhoDat 01-23-2004 01:47 PM

Is this logical???
 
I\'m not going to dig up the quote, but I will if need be. You claimed that in week one Jake came in off the bench and won the game for the Panthers. Otherwise, they\'ve been carrying him. My facts are straight Saintfan.

Quote:

If we want to evaluate QB\'s then Brooks is head over heels above Delhomme.
I didn\'t say that Jake was a better QB than Brooks. Read what I write. I did say that he is better suited for our team. Also, you said that Jake made more mistakes. I say that he didn\'t. You brought the topic up. Now, Billy, are you trying to say that the only mistake a QB can make is a turnover? B/c that\'s what your last post addresses - turnovers. Which, if I remember correctly, you view no differently than a false start penalty or a dropped pass. SO, your comparison, in that case, is incomplete, is it not?

saintfan 01-23-2004 03:03 PM

Is this logical???
 
Quote:

Wins? Nope, Jake is only responsible for one of those if you ask Saintfan...
Then go find it.

WhoDat 01-23-2004 04:04 PM

Is this logical???
 
Quote:

Jake came in an lit a fire under the Panthers in the second half of their first game. Even I won\'t deny that. Jake is servicable, but special or \"top 5\", as some seem to think a team requires, he is definately not.

Jake has a bad habit of underthrowing people and there are other parts of his game that defenses will have caught up to by next year.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:12 PM.


Copyright 1997 - 2013 - BlackandGold.com