A word about Delhomme comparisons
 

Hmmm...Jake is drawing comparisons to Warner and Brady nowadyas.

Well, where is Warner now...his wife cries for him and he sucks!

Last year the Patriots didn't do crap and this year Brady rode the Patriot defense into the Super Bowl (kind of like Delhomme!)

HMMMM....DOESN'T SAY MUCH FOR DELHOMME DOES IT!!!

Good luck next season Jake....your gonna need it....the honeymoon'll be over and Aaron will be gunning for you!

Not to mention Deuce! Might as well chalk up two losses for next season Jake.

GET OUT OF OUR WAY CUZ THE SAINTS ARE MARCHING OVER YOUR !!!

[Edited on 28/1/2004 by ColdFusion]

A word about Delhomme comparisons
 

You are right the saints will pay back the panthers. Atlanta swept us last year and we return the favor this year ;-)

A word about Delhomme comparisons
 

Tom Brady has well over 30 wins, three straight trips to the playoffs, two Super Bowl appearances, at least one SB win, and an SB MVP in the last 3 years. I\'d say that\'s nice company to be in.

Warner, over a three year period before injuries hampered his play had three straight trips to the playoffs (over 30 wins), two Super Bowl appearances, one SB win, and was twice the League MVP.

Delhomme, in one year, has 13 wins as a starter (14 if you give him credit for the first game of the year), three playoff appearances, all wins, and is in the Super Bowl.

In three and a half years as a starter AB has not gotten to 30 wins yet. He has one playoff appearance, and one win. I\'d say everyone of those guys above has been more successful to date then Aaron Brooks.

I mean, Delhomme is drawing comparisons to Brady and that\'s bad? Brady is being compared to Montana right now. Yeah, I\'ll take comparisons to Brady and Warner any day over comparisons to Blake and Warren Moon. There are two good QBs who never won anything. And last I checked, the object is to win, not have pretty stats to quote.

A word about Delhomme comparisons
 

WhoDat --

As I am casually reading your post, it sure seems you are crediting WINS and LOSSES to the QB, with no reguard to coaches, defense, special teams, and the rest of the TEAM.

Furthermore, you seem to be doing this to make a case that Delhomme is a great QB that is more responsible for the Panthers\' success than anyone. Do you deny any of that? If you do deny it, then I would ask you to go back and read your post. Be honest here WhoDat.

A word about Delhomme comparisons
 

How about, rather than saying, \"Do I deny that\", you ask if you are mistaken or have misconstrued my post, because that is the case.No where did I say that the QB was responsible for wins, nor did I say that Delhomme was great. Instead I compared their accomplishments both personally (things like MVP) and as part of a team.

You see, alsaints said that drawing comparisons to Warner and Brady is a bad thing. I am saying that those guys sure have won a lot of games. Not necessarily on their own, but winning is the purpose of the game right? If Brooks were on teams as successful as the Rams of the late 90\'s and early this century, or the Patties of the last few years, then some people on this board who already believe that he is the second coming of the messaih would be ready to rename the state Brooksonia.

Warner and Brady BOTH have more TEAM and PERSONAL accomplishments than most QBs in the league right now. To be compared to either is a good thing.

[Edited on 28/1/2004 by WhoDat]

A word about Delhomme comparisons
 

WhoDat --

True you didn\'t specifically say that. You did however only talk about QB\'s of specific teams as it relates to WIN/LOSSES, without mention of ANYone else on the team.

While we can split hairs about what you said, the \"message\" was that somehow comparing the win/loss record for 2 quarterbacks somehow suggest that one is the better leader or which one is more talented. How \'bout we look at Archie Manning\'s record and apply your litmus test?

You can\'t fool me, but nice try. ;)



[Edited on 28/1/2004 by BillyC]

A word about Delhomme comparisons
 

Again, you\'re wrong. If that is what YOU are ASSUMING I mean by my comments, ASSUME away, but you can\'t take them for anymore then what was actually SAID. Again, I will tell you that you are MISCONSTRUING that message. Saying that a QB with more wins to his credit as a starter is more successful than a QB with fewer wins in as many or more starts is something EVERY sports analyst, scout, personnel manager, and fan does. If you want to argue, go ahead. YET AGAIN, at no time did I say that any of those quarterbacks were better leaders or more talented. Here\'s an idea, spend as much time reading what I post ofr what IT ACTUALLY SAYS as you spend trying to INFER meaning in my comments and you might start to actually hear what I\'m saying.

A word about Delhomme comparisons
 

It\'s entirely possible I took your post out of context, but not likely.

This is what I don\'t understand --

You said everyone of those guys have been more successful than Brooks? Agreed? Did you mean that their TEAMS had been more successful? Of course, if we follow your logic, we would have to say that all those teams runningbacks were more successful.

If you meant to say TEAM was more successful, I have corrected that for you at NO CHARGE. I do however accept donations. ;)

Read the \"spirit\" of your message more closely WhoDat. :P

A word about Delhomme comparisons
 

They have been more successful than Brooks. Those guys are part of the team. You don\'t hear a lot of players yelling, \"The Panthers Won!\" after a win. You hear, \"We won.\" If you say we, you are including yourself. Thus, a player, as part of a team, can accept some level of responsibility for the win. We all do it Billy.

How can you say that Warner and Brady haven\'t been more successful than Brooks? Want to compare individual numbers? How many MVPs does Brooks have?

Billy, individual stats don\'t mean anything anyway. Don\'t believe me? Go ask Marino is he would give up all his records for a Super Bowl win. You say Peyton isn\'t good b/c he hasn\'t gotten there, despite his INCREDIBLE personal stats. If you think personal stats are more important than wins and losses, then I highly recommend that you stop calling players \"me-me\" type guys. But, if you want to challenge the validity of that statement, go right ahead. Let\'s compare their successes and failures. Want to do that? I dare you. :P

[Edited on 28/1/2004 by WhoDat]

A word about Delhomme comparisons
 

It\'s quite simple really. I DID NOT SAY THAT!!

Let\'s cut to the chase. Brooks has had helped his team win more than Jake Delhomme has helped his team win. Now, Jake\'s TEAM has helped him win more than Brooks TEAM has helped him win.

The truth has been spoken. And the truth shall set you free WhoDat :D

[Edited on 28/1/2004 by BillyC]