Is this logical???
 

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.

Is this logical???
 

Again, antagonistic. Billy!

Is this logical???
 

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!!

Is this logical???
 

Umm Billy you are being contradictory.

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?

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?

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]

Is this logical???
 

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.

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.

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?

Is this logical???
 

Then go find it.

Is this logical???
 

Is this logical???
 

Nice try, but that quote does not in any way indicate that I thought that Jake was only responsible for ONE of Carolina\'s wins.

You said
Now if you can find that quote then post it. If you can\'t be a man and just say you were mistaken. I won\'t hold it against you! ;)

Is this logical???
 

Interesting, so how many wins do you feel Delhomme was responsible for then?

Is this logical???
 

I haven\'t thought about it really. I\'d say more than one without blinking tho, which is why I\'ve asked you to locate that quote! ;)

Is this logical???
 

Hhhmm. How many games was AB responsible for winning this year?

Is this logical???
 

Are you trying to deflect from your inability to locate that quote?

:P

Is this logical???
 

Are you avoiding the question? ;)

How come it\'s always you asking the questions and me answering. C\'mon Saintfan, make a statement for once. ;)

Is this logical???
 

Hard stat to figure Whodat, but I\'ll try, just as soon as you deal with the issue on the table...something to do with a quote you\'re supposed to be looking for as I recall.

Let me save you some time and suggest you be a man and admit you made it up. The quote doesn\'t exist. Careful what you type Whodat...cause it might come back and reflect accurately on ya. ;)

LMAO

Is this logical???
 

It simply means that Delhomme had comparable stats his first year starting as McNair had his first year starting. That\'s all it means.
By the same token, bringing Brooks stats to prove he\'s better than someone else doesn\'t hold water either.

I have seen dozens of comparisons made between Brooks\' stats his first seasons with those of Elway, Marino, Montana, to try proving he\'s a s good as they were.
Up until this year, I saw many a post in other boards on how Brooks was better than Peyton because Brooks won a playoff game, and it is all about the wins...

The thing is, don\'t be upset when someone uses the same argument as you, to prove his point.
Don\'t try proving Brooks is the next Elway by comparing their stats their first years, but then dismiss a post that compares Brooks\'s and Delhomme\'s stats their first year.
Don\'t say \"it\'s all about the wins, he won a playoff game\", and then turn around and say \"but he\'s got defense\"..

Is this logical???
 

Fantastic post 47. I like you already.

OK Saintfan, I will be happy to admit that I misconstrued one of your posts. That has happened to all of us at one point. If that\'s not what you meant, I\'ll be happy to say that I was mistaken.

Now, on to the more important issue. That being why you cannot answer a simple question simply put without deflecting attention to another topic. I think you know that you just painted yourself into a corner and you don\'t want to admit that you can\'t get out.

You said that you would credit Delhomme with more than one of Carolina\'s victories without blinking. I ask AGAIN, how many Saint wins to you credit to Brooks this season?

Think you can answer the question this time?

Is this logical???
 

Why, thank you!
I aim to please :)

Is this logical???
 

What you want me to do, Whodat, is come up with a number. You\'re a numbers guy when it suits you. I could ask you the same question about Jake and what would you say?

I\'ll say that, based entirely on YOUR logic, Brooks must be responsible for all the wins the Saints had this year, since he touches the ball more than any other player. But that can\'t really be true can it? Of course it can\'t, since it takes a running game, and recievers, and blockers, and coaches. See how deformed your logic can be?

And to think it was YOUR question that pointed it out.

Is this logical???
 

So then how did YOU determine that Jake had won the Panthers more than one game this season?

That whole long post is little more than yet another attempt to AVOID THE QUESTION. Why can you not answer a simple question? B/c you shot yourself in the foot and you know it.

That\'s OK Saintfan, I\'ll have the crow sent to your house - I won\'t make you eat it here in front of everyone.

Skewed logic or not, you used it to credit Delhomme with numerous Carolina wins. I didn\'t make that logic up - in fact, your post was one meant to counter my previous comments. So that logic is entirely yours. Now, I ask you to apply the same logic to Aaron Brooks. Knowing full well that if you were to do that you could not honestly credit Brooks with more wins than Delhomme, you choose to avoid the question rather than admit that Jake might have anything that Aaron does not. Now whose agenda is clear?

Is this logical???
 

Whodat, you sound more like 08 with every post. Funny...

All I said was I DIDN\'T say Jake was only responsible for one of the Panthers wins. You then started spewing as normal. I challenged you to verify a quote you failed to verify. You deferred and rather than admit (initially) that you posted nonesense you asked me a silly question. Anyone who reads the whole thread knows why.

A QB, as we all know, must perform for his team to win; HOWEVER, as we (most of us anyway) all know it takes more than JUST the QB to win the game. I watched Jake move his team down the field this year more than once, so OBVIOUSLY he\'s had more to do with more than just one win. I\'d say the same thing about Brooks. You won\'t, however, because you can\'t. Fairplay isn\'t in your makeup.

Your whole question was designed to be antagonistic...and way to keep from admiting you pulled a quote out of thin air...go ahead and admit that while you\'re at it...k?

Is this logical???
 

Ease up boys.

Is this logical???
 

WhoDat: \"Interesting, so how many wins do you feel Delhomme was responsible for then?\"

Saintfan: \"I haven\'t thought about it really. I\'d say more than one without blinking tho...\"

OK, so by \"I\'d say more than one without blinking\" as an answer to my question about how many wins YOU FELT DELHOMME WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR, you DID NOT in fact mean that he was responsible for any? That\'s what I\'m supposed to get out of the last post. That even though you said that Delhomme was responsible for \"more than one\", you in fact meant none. Just trying to clarify here Saintfan b/c your last statement stands in stark contrast to some of the previous posts earlier in this thread.

You are right about one thing though, anyone who reads the thread will see what has happened. I already apologized for misconstruing a quote that I DID produce. You say you meant something different than how I interpreted it. Fine. I\'ll admit that I misconstrued it. Can you please now explain how I am misconstruing \"I\'d say more than one without blinking tho...\"?? Thanks.

Is this logical???
 

when I was young, it seemed life was so wonderful, a miracle, oh it was beautiful, magical...

Is this logical???
 

...but then you grow older, more cynical, and start hating the human race.

Is this logical???
 

Still no answer I see.

Is this logical???
 

The answer is 6. That leaves one for Duece and one for the defense.

Is this logical???
 

And how did you arrive at this number of six?

How did you arrive at the opinion of \"more than one\" for Jake?

Is this logical???
 

\'Cause I\'m smart Whodat. You\'ll realize that eventually.

Is this logical???
 

So by that post I will conclude that you cannot make any intelligent comment to support your previous statements. Funny how I can at least always backup my logic, and the one person on the board always attacking my comments the most cannot support his own statements. Way to go Turbo. It\'s real easy to attack what someone else says, or even just contradict it, but it takes a little more to form your own opinion and support it doesn\'t it? I guess you\'re learning that though. GLad I could help school you in that regard.

Is this logical???
 

The big difference between me and you is I don\'t post my opinion as fact. If you\'d type a little disclaimer that says the stuff you\'re about to type is you OPINION you wouldn\'t get so much grief, but you haven\'t learned that yet...and how long has it been.

By the way, I\'d watch the name calling if I were you. I\'d sure hate to see you get banned. ;)

Is this logical???
 

Who did I call a name?

If you perceive what I post as fact, or as me attempting to pass my opinion off as fact, that is an issue of your perception, not my posts. I\'ve repeatedly posted that everything on here is opinion. I\'ve made comments to that effect numerous times THIS WEEK. CLEARLY, you only read what you want to, and not what is there. Do you have a disclaimer that says that what you post is opinion? Of course not. Everyone here knows that everything being posted is opinion. Of course, now you\'re attacking me and the validity and purpose of my posts because you could not provide any support to backup one of your own. How that makes sense, I\'m not sure, but go with it, it\'s been working well for you ever since you got here. Deflect attention, don\'t give straight answers.