It's Jake's job to lose

Vagitron

@the-gipper said:
That remains to be seen. Just because he burned you in your fantasy league doesn't mean he won't be able to rebound.
AHA, perhaps THAT is the root of your prejudice. The man cost you bucks in your fantasy pool, eh?

I've never had Delhomme in my fantasy league. I had Deangelo Williams who was wonderfully successful without the help of Delhomme and Steve Smith no matter how bad Delhomme has been in the past still benefited as the best option on that offense before the terror twins in Stewart and WIlliams showed up. It also don't remain to be seen because Jake Delhomme has been progressively worse season after season for a good bit of time now. He was particularly bad last year and when they did have a nice regular season record. I believe it was 12-4 the last time they made some noise he completely blew it in the playoffs. I have zero Jake Delhomme bias. I just think he sucks and I'm not alone.

next2nothing

Homotron said:
I watch football. I watch A LOT of football. Thank you NFL Sunday Ticket. I also consider myself a pretty avid Fantasy Football guy and have been doing it for I believe 6 years now with college friends. A means to compete now that we're all separated and in different cities. Anyway I watched a lot of Browns games last season and did actually watch my fair share of Panther games because of Deangelo Williams and before Williams it was because of Steve Smith and before that Mushin Muhammad. Jake Delhomme elbow surgery or not is wildly inconsistent. After the surgery it became even more the case and I don't believe he'll experience any sort of resurgence with the Browns. Fox let him go because he was no longer helping the team on the field. You aren't going to pay a guy millions of dollars to be a inspiration in the locker room. My response. I absolutely WOULD NOT want a guy on my team that was cut from another because he couldn't produce at a high level any longer after a debilitating injury and surgery. Not only did you sign him but you signed him for what 19 million dollars? Is he just a expensive mentor to McCoy? Delhomme has been down right bad for a while now and I just don't see things getting any better. I could be wrong. I can always be wrong but I doubt I am in this instance and we're all going to find out soon enough.

I wish I could get Sunday Ticket.

Even if you think he is more inconsistent than I think he is, do you think he is a worse option then the two QB's we had on our roster? I think a lot of his problems last year was the new OC trying to change his style and how he plays. I may be wrong but I may be right about that as well. I don't expect him to have a resurgance in his career by coming here, I expect him to win us some games, keep us close in games we should be close in and be a leader at the QB position. Something this team has lacked since coming back. He was one of the best options we had to go with considering the FA options and the draft options picking at #7.

I never said we paid him that money solely to be an inspiration or to mentor. If he comes in here, starts for 2 or 3 years and we're at least an average ball club that keeps growing and getting better, while he mentors/helps/teaches/etc. our future QB then I think he is well worth the money.

Like you said, we'll find out soon enough.

EDIT: If you really think Byron Leftwich is better at QB then Delhomme you must be smoking something and it must be good so pass it.

pizzadeliveryguy

Homotron said:
I've never had Delhomme in my fantasy league. I had Deangelo Williams who was wonderfully successful without the help of Delhomme and Steve Smith no matter how bad Delhomme has been in the past still benefited as the best option on that offense before the terror twins in Stewart and WIlliams showed up. It also don't remain to be seen because Jake Delhomme has been progressively worse season after season for a good bit of time now. He was particularly bad last year and when they did have a nice regular season record. I believe it was 12-4 the last time they made some noise he completely blew it in the playoffs. I have zero Jake Delhomme bias. I just think he sucks and I'm not alone.

Actually, last year was Delhomme's only bad year. I do think he is overpaid but the Browns didn't bring him in to be Manning. He will serve as a great mentor and is a major step up from what they had last year. I got so sick of watching Quinn throw 35 yard passes into the stands. If Delhomme repeats last year's performance it will be disappointing but to say that he has gotten progressively worse is just factually incorrect.

The Gipper

Homotron said:
I've never had Delhomme in my fantasy league. I had Deangelo Williams who was wonderfully successful without the help of Delhomme and Steve Smith no matter how bad Delhomme has been in the past still benefited as the best option on that offense before the terror twins in Stewart and WIlliams showed up. It also don't remain to be seen because Jake Delhomme has been progressively worse season after season for a good bit of time now. He was particularly bad last year and when they did have a nice regular season record. I believe it was 12-4 the last time they made some noise he completely blew it in the playoffs. I have zero Jake Delhomme bias. I just think he sucks and I'm not alone.

OK, but, apparently, more accomplished men than you seem to disagree: names of Holmgren, Heckart, Mangini. All these guys have done is coached teams to Super Bowl wins, GMed teams to Super Bowl appearances, coached teams to playoff appearances. Can you match your qualifications as a talent evaluator to theirs?

Vagitron

@pizzadeliveryguy said:
Actually, last year was Delhomme's only bad year. I do think he is overpaid but the Browns didn't bring him in to be Manning. He will serve as a great mentor and is a major step up from what they had last year. I got so sick of watching Quinn throw 35 yard passes into the stands. If Delhomme repeats last year's performance it will be disappointing but to say that he has gotten progressively worse is just factually incorrect.

It wasn't his only bad year. He completely blew more than a few games most notably the one playoff loss. If you ask me I don't care how great a player or team plays if they don't make the playoffs it's not good enough. The Steelers for example had a winning season witha 9-7 record but missed the playoffs. The season was a complete and utter failure just as the Panthers season was when they went 12-4 and Delhomme completely blew the game. He's not good but he is better than Quinn or Anderson neither of which are any good. If I were the Browns Wallace would be starting day one. He did a solid job in Seattle when he had to start in Hasselbecks absence.

Vagitron

@the-gipper said:
OK, but, apparently, more accomplished men than you seem to disagree: names of Holmgren, Heckart, Mangini. All these guys have done is coached teams to Super Bowl wins, GMed teams to Super Bowl appearances, coached teams to playoff appearances. Can you match your qualifications as a talent evaluator to theirs?

First off gip. Holy commas. Secondly Delhomme is a savvy veteran. He may suck but he certainly has that veteran leadership you look for in a player. It's not like the QB market going in to the season was plentiful so honestly Delhomme was one of the few options for a starter if Quinn and Anderson had to go. The front offices hand was forced and when going in to a season with any sort of uncertainty you want to have options. Insert Wallace and Delhomme. The Browns quite simply didn't have a bunch of options. What choice did Holmgren and Co. have? You certainly don't want to throw McCoy to the wolves. Wallace could get it done but if he gets hurt or fails you want a back up plan. Who else were they going to sign Jamarcus Russell? Don't pass of his signing with Holmgren and Co's approval as some sort of Swan song season. It was slim pickings.

The Gipper

Homotron said:
It wasn't his only bad year. He completely blew more than a few games most notably the one playoff loss. If you ask me I don't care how great a player or team plays if they don't make the playoffs it's not good enough. The Steelers for example had a winning season witha 9-7 record but missed the playoffs. The season was a complete and utter failure just as the Panthers season was when they went 12-4 and Delhomme completely blew the game. He's not good but he is better than Quinn or Anderson neither of which are any good. If I were the Browns Wallace would be starting day one. He did a solid job in Seattle when he had to start in Hasselbecks absence.

Are you saying we should start calling him by another French name since he has a habit of underperforming in important playoff games: LeBron?

Vagitron

@the-gipper said:
Are you saying we should start calling him by another French name since he has a habit of underperforming in important playoff games: LeBron?

Lebron under performed once and it was this past season for one game. You cannot blame Lebron for the Cavs lack of meaningful success.

The Gipper

Homotron said:
First off gip. Holy commas. Secondly Delhomme is a savvy veteran. He may suck but he certainly has that veteran leadership you look for in a player. It's not like the QB market going in to the season was plentiful so honestly Delhomme was one of the few options for a starter if Quinn and Anderson had to go. The front offices hand was forced and when going in to a season with any sort of uncertainty you want to have options. Insert Wallace and Delhomme. The Browns quite simply didn't have a bunch of options. What choice did Holmgren and Co. have? You certainly don't want to throw McCoy to the wolves. Wallace could get it done but if he gets hurt or fails you want a back up plan. Who else were they going to sign Jamarcus Russell? Don't pass of his signing with Holmgren and Co's approval as some sort of Swan song season. It was slim pickings.

Oh, I agree, picking Delhomme up was by no means anyone's ideal plan. Getting him and Wallace may in fact have been scraping the bottom of the barrel. Still who knows. To a prospector, the bottom of the barrell is where the gold is.

The Gipper

Homotron said:
Lebron under performed once and it was this past season for one game. You cannot blame Lebron for the Cavs lack of meaningful success.

First off, LeBron means "The son of the Brown man" did you know that?

Secondly, no, it wasn't once. LeBron underperformed last year in the playoffs and pretty much the year before that. He has had three years in a row of some disappointing performances I would say.

I am not saying his supporting cast played outstanding, but he also didn't get that supporting cast to "Rise up" as was anticipated of him.

Vagitron

@the-gipper said:
First off, LeBron means "The son of the Brown man" did you know that?
Secondly, no, it wasn't once. LeBron underperformed last year in the playoffs and pretty much the year before that. He has had three years in a row of some disappointing performances I would say.

I am not saying his supporting cast played outstanding, but he also didn't get that supporting cast to "Rise up" as was anticipated of him
.

Totally disagree on Lebron. He played lights out almost all of last season despite the one playoff game against the Celtics. Look at this stats over the last 3 years if you want to use that sample size. Pretty ridiculous across the board.

pizzadeliveryguy

Homotron said:
It wasn't his only bad year. He completely blew more than a few games most notably the one playoff loss. If you ask me I don't care how great a player or team plays if they don't make the playoffs it's not good enough. The Steelers for example had a winning season witha 9-7 record but missed the playoffs. The season was a complete and utter failure just as the Panthers season was when they went 12-4 and Delhomme completely blew the game. He's not good but he is better than Quinn or Anderson neither of which are any good. If I were the Browns Wallace would be starting day one. He did a solid job in Seattle when he had to start in Hasselbecks absence.

He had a terrible playoff game and a bad 2009. That is still only one year, every other year he has been over an 80 rating. I'm not saying that Delhomme will set the world on fire but just the hint of being able to stretch the field will be better than what Wallace can do in dumping it off the majority of the time. Like I said though, if he repeats his 09 season I will be disappointed.

pizzadeliveryguy

@the-gipper said:
First off, LeBron means "The son of the Brown man" did you know that?
Secondly, no, it wasn't once. LeBron underperformed last year in the playoffs and pretty much the year before that. He has had three years in a row of some disappointing performances I would say.

I am not saying his supporting cast played outstanding, but he also didn't get that supporting cast to "Rise up" as was anticipated of him
.

You have to be joking. On what planet does averaging 30.8/8.7/7.4 = under performing. As far as his teammates go, it is hard to make chicken soup out of chicken shit.

The Gipper

Homotron said:
Totally disagree on Lebron. He played lights out almost all of last season despite the one playoff game against the Celtics. Look at this stats over the last 3 years if you want to use that sample size. Pretty ridiculous across the board.

First off, the Cavs lost 4 playoff games against the Celts. He did fairly poorly...for him...in just about all of them. Yes, for the normal player his stats look real good. But what we saw on the floor is not the LeBron that we have seen for years. Why? Don't know. He played disinterested, like he could care less if he won or loss. He may have still put up some good looking numbers, but he could put those kind of numbers up in his sleep. He may have actually been hurt. He may have been actually concerned about the rumors (probably false) that Delonte West was boffing his mama. He may have been thinking too much ahead to his free agent decision. He may have in fact tanked the game thinking that the only way that he would get to run with his posse was if he didn't win a title here. It is all speculative, but, trust me, he wasn't himself. (Even he would probably admit that)