Jeff Blake will Lead Us

Sandan

Oscar
Supporting Member
Joined
May 15, 2002
Posts
24,665
Reaction score
2,146
Location
Plymouth, UK
Originally posted by Lex
I know 95% of the posters on this site are like you, holding out hope that Jake was the reason for our failure.

You really need to get a life Lex, I am part of the 95% that are glad Jake is gone after several years of saying "It takes as while to learn the QB position".

What you don't seem to get is a simple bit of english.

The quote that you are [incorrectly] attributing to me (and others) should read

"I know 95% of the posters on this site are like you, holding out hope that Jake was a reason for our failure. "

A major reason actually, but not the reason. You are oversimplifies our onpinion in order to make it look less tenable.
 

Lex

troublemaker
Joined
Jan 9, 2003
Posts
2,465
Reaction score
0
Location
Scottsdale and one-eleven
Nidan- I'm not making anything look like something it's not.

I have a life.

If your opinion is looking a little less tenable...don't blame ME for YOUR opinion.

Does it seem like people are always doing things to you?
 

Sandan

Oscar
Supporting Member
Joined
May 15, 2002
Posts
24,665
Reaction score
2,146
Location
Plymouth, UK
Chill, I was trying to make a point I didn't mean to get you worked up.

It's just that you are misquoting the point about Jake, I notice you didn't address that in your response though.

Sorry if I ticked you off, I didn't mean to.
 

Lex

troublemaker
Joined
Jan 9, 2003
Posts
2,465
Reaction score
0
Location
Scottsdale and one-eleven
Is it possible to misquote myself?

What part of "95% of the posters on this site think Jake is THEE reason for our failure" don't you understand? It's MY QUOTE-- MY OPINION.

Sorry, didn't mean to post something over your head.
 

Stout

Hold onto the ball, Murray!
Joined
Dec 30, 2002
Posts
39,698
Reaction score
23,779
Location
Pittsburgh, PA--Enemy territory!
He's right, Lex. No one has said (not that I've read) that Jake was the sole reason for our problems. The fact, and it is a FACT, is that he stunk to high heaven, and was ONE of several reasons we were a bad team.
 

Crimson Warrior

Dangerous Murray Zealot
Joined
Oct 27, 2002
Posts
8,209
Reaction score
9,382
Location
Home of the Thunder
Originally posted by Ouchie-Z-Clown
i know, i know, some of you are probably skeptical at this thread, with good reason. but i'm starting out a new trend. every week i'm gonna have at least one positive thread. so, with that, awwwwwaaaaaay i go . . .

jake's gone. that's the best thing i've said in a long time in regards to the cards. we no longer have to live with watching take his drop, lock onto the out, and drill the numbers of the opposing db who skips into the end zone. i will give jake his due, he was a leader. he had charisma. he had moxie. but he didn't have the head.

jeff's got the game and the head. and i think people shortchange his leadership skills. physically he doesn't look imposing, but his arm certainly is. as has been stated ad nauseum he throws quite possibly the prettiest long ball in the league today. it drops like manna from heaven. he's got a cannon too, and can rifle the out with the best of 'em. and, judging from his td to int ratio, his decision making, while not beyond redoubt, is at least superior to jake. he's not prone to trying to squeeze anything outta a play that is not already there.

but that's all the stuff that's been regurgitated ad infinitum. what most people don't talk about are blake's leadership skills. early in his career he deferred to the vets on his bengals squads. he was humble and quiet. he allowed carl pickens to do the talking. but silently he lead by example. the extra work that he's putting with our wrs today is no different than the extra months of preparation that he put in his first few years in the league. moreover, when you follow his career to other poor teams, he grew into the leadership role. some said that his was a malcontent because of his flutie-like desire to garner the starter's job, but i contend that's just the evidence of the fire in his belly. he's a competitor. i like that. and he didn't really even ruffle any feathers in new orleans when the keys to the car were turned over to brooks. he understands the nature of the league. it's largely a young man's game. but don't berate him for wanting to compete while he's still got life in his arm.

what we're seeing now in the offseason is heartening. but what we're gonna see during the season, as far as leadership is concerned, is going to be pretty exciting. he's the type of leader that holds others around him accountable. in my opinion he'll be the perfect qb for developing our fleet of young wideouts.

i can't wait for the blake era to start in earnest! from jake to blake, we're in for a new treat!

now thats what im talkin about!

what an excellent post.

three cheers for ouchie the clown!
 

Crimson Warrior

Dangerous Murray Zealot
Joined
Oct 27, 2002
Posts
8,209
Reaction score
9,382
Location
Home of the Thunder
Originally posted by Cbus cardsfan
I'm sorry,i said i was not going to comment anymore on Blake.But this new love-fest with him is just driving me crazy.Are you people more happy that Plummer is gone or do you REALLY think Blake is anything but a sub-mediocre QB in the league.I think it's more the fact that Plummer is gone.Which is fine,just don't make Blake out to be something he isn't.

I am glad that plummer is gone, but I also believe blake is a better qb. the stats don't lie. and I tend to agree with the original post just based on what I saw of blakes demeanor at the qb challenge. he acted mature and respectable. not a loud mouth but not quite.

I'll bet you a pizza (large, winners choice of toppings) (loser calls it in to the winners local pizza place using a credit card so its easy enough to pay up) that blake will have a qb rating higher than plummers 2002 rating.

stipulation: blake has to start and play in at least ten games.

just a friendly wager.

:wave:
 

Tashunca

Registered
Joined
May 3, 2003
Posts
223
Reaction score
0
Location
Washington, DC
Blake reply

First of all what Blake said was " I'm not here to be a MENTOR but if somebody want's to ask me something I'll tell him". He said that because some Baltimore people were referring to him as some kind of coach to their young QB talent. When the young QB talent got injured he never got back in the game and Blake kept the Ravens in playoff contention DESPITE sitting on the bench during the pre-season schedule and WATCHING the first team from the BENCH! The young QB talent never got back in the game because the coach (Billick) could SEE that the team and the young recievers were energized by the Blake ability to challenge the competitors defenses and get the ball downfield FROM ANY PLACE ON THE FIELD! Even from the five yardline... ninety-five yards away from the scoring goaline! It's going to be fun to watch us this year. How at any second Blake will unleash one of his "mortar shots" (Boomer calls them "moonballs") and we go from deep in our own territory to deep into enemy territory! One other pluses to the "mortar shots" they allow Jeff's receivers to position themselves so that either they catch the ball or cause the defender to have to "INTERFERE" and be penalized!
 

HoodieBets

Formerly azcardsfan1616
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
5,740
Reaction score
1,030
Location
Rhode Island
IMO w/out plummer this team would still not have a playoff win in the past 60 years. Im not thrilled about blake either. He IMO can not throw any kind of ball besides a long ball. He is too short to view the field and cant find anybody withing 10 yards of the line. This will be a huge problem. Freddie Jones will not be a factor now unless he runs long routes. He is not that much more accurate than plummer either. The stats are misleading. Most of plummer's INT's were due to his forcing a ball before getting sacked while blake just takes the sack. That could also be a problem. One hit and he is out and then who do we turn to? I just do not think he is any kind of savior. Im not sure about his leadership so maybe if we could find some bengals or ravens fans they can enlighten us. Until i see a change in record he will just be another QB. I could care less about the TO ratio if we still lose 10 or 11 games. What matters is winning not stats. He could have the best stats of any qb but without a change in the win column it was all for nothing. That is just my honest opinion of blake and the situation. Sorry if people disagree but this is my opinion.
 

HoodieBets

Formerly azcardsfan1616
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
5,740
Reaction score
1,030
Location
Rhode Island
Originally posted by Crimson Warrior
I am glad that plummer is gone, but I also believe blake is a better qb. the stats don't lie. and I tend to agree with the original post just based on what I saw of blakes demeanor at the qb challenge. he acted mature and respectable. not a loud mouth but not quite.

I'll bet you a pizza (large, winners choice of toppings) (loser calls it in to the winners local pizza place using a credit card so its easy enough to pay up) that blake will have a qb rating higher than plummers 2002 rating.

stipulation: blake has to start and play in at least ten games.

just a friendly wager.

:wave:

I live too far away for the pizza but ill take you up on the friendly wager. I think plummer has so many weapons he will have a good rating. Smith,Mccaffery,Lelie,Sharpe, and portis are all great players and will help jake greatly. I hope you win but i just think plummer will be the better QB due to his other players. I say plummers rating will be around 80.2 and blakes will be 75.8. Cant wait to see how it pans out. What will all you guys think if plummer makes the playoffs this year? The Broncos IMO are SB contenders. The west is a tough division though.
 

Cbus cardsfan

Back to Back ASFN FFL Champion
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
21,459
Reaction score
7,624
My "facts" on Blakehave been stated many times.I've cited the amount of Bengal coverage that is received here,both in print and on radio.That and a very good friend of mine that ranks in the Bengal organization keeps me informed on some inner workings of the team.I'm sure Jim O knows alot more than us about the Cards team just because he's on the inside.As for Blake,i can tell you that there wasn't one coach or front office person that was sad to see him go.And before everyone anoints him a great tutor for our young WR's,look at the effect he had on Carl Pickens, a great talent who became about the league's biggest malcontent,and alot of it was the influence that Blake had on him.
 

cardpa

Have a Nice Day!
Joined
Mar 14, 2003
Posts
7,400
Reaction score
4,144
Location
Monroe NC
I just don't get it. the Jake supporters (Blake bashers) are now saying Jake will succeed in Denver because he will now have weapons that he didn't have in AZ. In another thread these same people are still upset we didn't keep Boston or even consider keeping Sanders or Jenkins. Well if Jake didn't have any weapons here to throw to why would you want to keep any of those guys if they were nothing for Jake to throw to. Does this mean F Jones is a bum also? Wasn't he the one who spent alot of time waving his arms in a frantic manner trying to get Jake to see him wide open only Jake never seemed to find him.

I read about how Shanahan saids Jake made mistakes beause he was behind so much. I guess Shanahan never watched the first half of game films to see Jake was one of the principle reasons for him being in a hole the second half.

Many say Jake will now have a running game in Denver. I guess Shipp is a sub standard retread of a running back. I would suggest based on Jake's history teams will fill the box against Denver to stuff the running game and force Jake to be the one to beat them just like they did against AZ when Jake was the QB because they know Jake will make some really poor decisions resulting in turnovers. All the best receivers in the world aren't going to help if Jake can't find them. Will Jake pull out some games in Denver in the last minute, yeah he will because he's at his best when he doesn't have to work out of a controlled offensive scheme. When he doesn't have to think about his checkdowns and the routes and reads.

Can Jake have a great year in Denver, sure he can, however the real measure will be can he do it for several years on a consistent basis. I for one do not believe that will happen. Heck he had one pretty decent year here.

People here have ripped Mac for being a Rah Rah guy yet its okay for Jake to be that because it makes him a leader.

Is Blake an elite QB in this league, no. However he is a QB that can work out of a set offense and can get the most out of the players around him. He is a QB that can checkdown and see the entire field. That alone will equip the Cards with the ability to put together some time consuming drives during a game.

Add to this mix Emmitt who will gain a thousand yeards this year simply because for the first time in several years he will have a FB who will be a good lead blocker since Moose was his lead blocker in Dallas and with his ability to read these blocks I believe the 1000 yds is simply a matter of time.

I've had my say go ahead and flame away. It won't hurt because I have my flameproof suit on.
 

Red Air Force

DILLIGAFF
Joined
Aug 31, 2002
Posts
1,693
Reaction score
1
Location
U.S. Air Force
Originally posted by azcardsfan1616
IMO w/out plummer this team would still not have a playoff win in the past 60 years. Im not thrilled about blake either. He IMO can not throw any kind of ball besides a long ball. He is too short to view the field and cant find anybody withing 10 yards of the line. This will be a huge problem. Freddie Jones will not be a factor now unless he runs long routes.

Player Team G Rec Yds Yds/G Lng Avg TDs 20+ 40+

Todd Heap BAL 16 68 836 52.2 43 12.3 6 13 2

Are you saying Todd Heap wasn't a factor last year? I would say that with 68 receptions, 836 yards, and 6 TD's Blake was definetly able to SEE Heap! Plus, if you look, ONLY 15 of his 68 receptions were for more than 20 yards.


Originally posted by azcardsfan1616
He is not that much more accurate than plummer either. The stats are misleading. Most of plummer's INT's were due to his forcing a ball before getting sacked while blake just takes the sack.

That is such crap! All you are doing is regurgatating bits and peices of what everyone else has said. The only time in Jakes carrer that he has been under undue pressure was in '97 and '98. Since then he has had a decent line protecting him, and has given him PLENTY of time to find the open guy. His problem is that he cannnot SEE the open guy.

And for the record, over their carrers Jake has averaged 2.6 sacks per game, and Jeff has averaged 2.2 sacks per game.

That dosen't include the countless times that Jake stepped out of bounds 15 YARDS behind the LOS instead of just throwing it away like any QB with half a brain would do.
 

HoodieBets

Formerly azcardsfan1616
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
5,740
Reaction score
1,030
Location
Rhode Island
Originally posted by cardpa
I just don't get it. the Jake supporters (Blake bashers) are now saying Jake will succeed in Denver because he will now have weapons that he didn't have in AZ. In another thread these same people are still upset we didn't keep Boston or even consider keeping Sanders or Jenkins. Well if Jake didn't have any weapons here to throw to why would you want to keep any of those guys if they were nothing for Jake to throw to. Does this mean F Jones is a bum also? Wasn't he the one who spent alot of time waving his arms in a frantic manner trying to get Jake to see him wide open only Jake never seemed to find him.

I read about how Shanahan saids Jake made mistakes beause he was behind so much. I guess Shanahan never watched the first half of game films to see Jake was one of the principle reasons for him being in a hole the second half.

Many say Jake will now have a running game in Denver. I guess Shipp is a sub standard retread of a running back. I would suggest based on Jake's history teams will fill the box against Denver to stuff the running game and force Jake to be the one to beat them just like they did against AZ when Jake was the QB because they know Jake will make some really poor decisions resulting in turnovers. All the best receivers in the world aren't going to help if Jake can't find them. Will Jake pull out some games in Denver in the last minute, yeah he will because he's at his best when he doesn't have to work out of a controlled offensive scheme. When he doesn't have to think about his checkdowns and the routes and reads.

Can Jake have a great year in Denver, sure he can, however the real measure will be can he do it for several years on a consistent basis. I for one do not believe that will happen. Heck he had one pretty decent year here.

People here have ripped Mac for being a Rah Rah guy yet its okay for Jake to be that because it makes him a leader.

Is Blake an elite QB in this league, no. However he is a QB that can work out of a set offense and can get the most out of the players around him. He is a QB that can checkdown and see the entire field. That alone will equip the Cards with the ability to put together some time consuming drives during a game.

Add to this mix Emmitt who will gain a thousand yeards this year simply because for the first time in several years he will have a FB who will be a good lead blocker since Moose was his lead blocker in Dallas and with his ability to read these blocks I believe the 1000 yds is simply a matter of time.

I've had my say go ahead and flame away. It won't hurt because I have my flameproof suit on.

First off i am not a blake basher i just dont think as highly of him as most of you do. He does have a great spiral and can throw the long ball. I wanted to keep jenkins only and that was because we could use some people who are not getting thrown in there for the first time. You can not compare Jones,Boston,sanders and Jenkins to Smith,McCaffery,Sharpe, lelie and portis. Jake has superior weapons in Denver then he ever had in arizona i dont think anyone can argue that. IMO about the RB's portis is a better back. Did you see his numbers last year? The kid is ridiculous. IMO emitt and shipp will be a non factor unless the WR's step up and prioduce. You will see 9 in the box every down especially for the first part of the season bc the WR's havent proven themselves. You need them to produce in order to spread the field and make the DB go into double coverage or zone. I dont want people to get the wrong impression that i am a blake basher or anything but i just see him differently than you guys. I am in AFC country its the only games on so i catch the ravens maybe 5 or 6 games a year. I am just saying what i saw when i watched him.
 

HoodieBets

Formerly azcardsfan1616
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
5,740
Reaction score
1,030
Location
Rhode Island
Originally posted by CaliforniaCard
Player Team G Rec Yds Yds/G Lng Avg TDs 20+ 40+

Todd Heap BAL 16 68 836 52.2 43 12.3 6 13 2

Are you saying Todd Heap wasn't a factor last year? I would say that with 68 receptions, 836 yards, and 6 TD's Blake was definetly able to SEE Heap! Plus, if you look, ONLY 15 of his 68 receptions were for more than 20 yards.




That is such crap! All you are doing is regurgatating bits and peices of what everyone else has said. The only time in Jakes carrer that he has been under undue pressure was in '97 and '98. Since then he has had a decent line protecting him, and has given him PLENTY of time to find the open guy. His problem is that he cannnot SEE the open guy.

And for the record, over their carrers Jake has averaged 2.6 sacks per game, and Jeff has averaged 2.2 sacks per game.

That dosen't include the countless times that Jake stepped out of bounds 15 YARDS behind the LOS instead of just throwing it away like any QB with half a brain would do.

If you go to nfl.com look at heap's game log for last year. Every game he was a factor in his avg. YPC was around 15. Jake has been under pressure his whole carrer in arizona. I do not remember when he has ever had that much time. He usually has to scramble. In the last three years he played here he was sacked every game except for 5. When has this line ever been healthy enough or good enough to protect him? Is that per game stuff the actual times blake started or that blake has just been in. One game last year he was in but did not throw one attempt. His first year in the league it has him down for three games but he only threw 9 balls so is that in the per game average to? Last year Blakes sack per GS total was 3 while plummer was 2.2(i rounded up). Some people say stats dont lie and i agree but stats are misleading. My cuz is a rabid bengals fan and i was told all about him not to mention the games i did watch of him with the bengals and ravens. I say what i see. Blake is only 6 feet tall. He has never been known to throw a mid-range ball. How many games of him did u catch? Obviously none. You go by what you hear instead of actually watching him. You look up stats on nfl.com and then spit something off. Watch him play and then you will see what i am talking about. Lets make a friendly wager that F. Jones will not have more than 400 yards recieving and no more than 3 TD's. You call it crap bc it is something you dont wanna believe while others call it truth bc they have knowledge. Take your pick. Remember also that redmond threw to heap to. Blakes numbers with heap are 582 yards and one of those games heap was just flat out crazy with 146 yards recieving. He also only had 2 Td's with blake while with redmond he had 4 in 5 games. 5 out of the 9 games his long was over 20 and 7 out of the 9 games his avg. YPC was over 10. So it dosent look to me like he saw him much especially in the red zone.
 
Last edited:

Wild Card

Surfin' Bird
Joined
May 30, 2003
Posts
1,643
Reaction score
0
Location
Glendale, AZ
Originally posted by Cbus cardsfan
As for Blake,i can tell you that there wasn't one (Bengals) coach or front office person that was sad to see him go.

Cbus:

That speaks volumes about that organization's collective ability to evaluate and retain personnel. The Bengals have sure had some wonderful performance form their QBs since Blake walked, haven't they?

WC
 

Wild Card

Surfin' Bird
Joined
May 30, 2003
Posts
1,643
Reaction score
0
Location
Glendale, AZ
Originally posted by azcardsfan1616
Jake has been under pressure his whole carrer in arizona. I do not remember when he has ever had that much time. He usually has to scramble. In the last three years he played here he was sacked every game except for 5. When has this line ever been healthy enough or good enough to protect him

AZCardsFan1616:

Defending Jake Plummer's play in Arizona on the basis of his protection--or lack of it--is a crock. Oakland's Rich Gannon was sacked the same number of times (36) as Plummer was last season, and Gannon managed to have a pretty good year. Besides, isn't Plummer known for his abilities to escape pressure and throw on the move? Either he needs protection to be productive, or he doesn't. You can't have it both ways.

Think Plummer won't be under pressure in Denver? Think again. The Broncos have a great run-blocking line, but they're pretty ordinary in pass protection. Denver QBs went down 46 times last year. (Despite that pressure, Griese and Beuerlein still managed to be more efficient than Plummer has ever been, with QB ratings of 85.6 and 82.8, respectively.)

The most telling stat about Plummer is his yards-per-attempt. His YPA of 5.6 last season was 30th in the league among teams' leading passers. (Jake was only saved from the cellar by Joey Harrington and Shane Matthews.) Worse than rookies Patrick Ramsey and David Carr. Worse than journeymen like Rodney Peete, Jon Kitna and Jim Miller. Worse than a project like Chad Hutchinson. None of those players had great personnel around them, either. They still outperformed Plummer. (For the record, Jeff Blake's YPA of 7.1 tied him with Drew Bledsoe and Peyton Manning for 8th overall.)

Blake will be better than Plummer at what the Cardinals are asking their QB to do: limit turnovers, manage the offense, take occasional deep shots downfield. I'll be curious to see if Plummer is a similar upgrade in Denver.

Based on past performance, I'd doubt it.

WC
 

HoodieBets

Formerly azcardsfan1616
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
5,740
Reaction score
1,030
Location
Rhode Island
Originally posted by Wild Card
AZCardsFan1616:

Defending Jake Plummer's play in Arizona on the basis of his protection--or lack of it--is a crock. Oakland's Rich Gannon was sacked the same number of times (36) as Plummer was last season, and Gannon managed to have a pretty good year. Besides, isn't Plummer known for his abilities to escape pressure and throw on the move? Either he needs protection to be productive, or he doesn't. You can't have it both ways.

Think Plummer won't be under pressure in Denver? Think again. The Broncos have a great run-blocking line, but they're pretty ordinary in pass protection. Denver QBs went down 46 times last year. (Despite that pressure, Griese and Beuerlein still managed to be more efficient than Plummer has ever been, with QB ratings of 85.6 and 82.8, respectively.)

The most telling stat about Plummer is his yards-per-attempt. His YPA of 5.6 last season was 30th in the league among teams' leading passers. (Jake was only saved from the cellar by Joey Harrington and Shane Matthews.) Worse than rookies Patrick Ramsey and David Carr. Worse than journeymen like Rodney Peete, Jon Kitna and Jim Miller. Worse than a project like Chad Hutchinson. None of those players had great personnel around them, either. They still outperformed Plummer. (For the record, Jeff Blake's YPA of 7.1 tied him with Drew Bledsoe and Peyton Manning for 8th overall.)

Blake will be better than Plummer at what the Cardinals are asking their QB to do: limit turnovers, manage the offense, take occasional deep shots downfield. I'll be curious to see if Plummer is a similar upgrade in Denver.

Based on past performance, I'd doubt it.

WC

I never defended plummer's play i was just stating a fact. Since when did anyone besides the fans ask blake to throw downfield. We do not have the talent for that yet. From what people on this board have said in practice blake and the WR's have not been hooking up on the long ball. Did you see the starters for the last 10 games last year? Kevin Kasper was the best WR. The only weapon was shipp. Im not making an excuse for him but no QB would have any kind of good rating with the team the cards put out there the last 10 games of the year. Rating is all about enviornment and players. When everything was good 2 years ago plummers rating was around 80. I already have the friendly wager with crimsion but i can have the same one with you too. Lets bet on who will have the better QB rating this year. I'll take plummer while you can take Blake. Then we will see if a change of enviornment really helps. I hope blake is better but i just dont see it. Too many players at 1 position will have to step up.
 

Russ Smith

The Original Whizzinator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
87,496
Reaction score
38,744
Originally posted by Crimson Warrior
I am glad that plummer is gone, but I also believe blake is a better qb. the stats don't lie. and I tend to agree with the original post just based on what I saw of blakes demeanor at the qb challenge. he acted mature and respectable. not a loud mouth but not quite.

I'll bet you a pizza (large, winners choice of toppings) (loser calls it in to the winners local pizza place using a credit card so its easy enough to pay up) that blake will have a qb rating higher than plummers 2002 rating.

stipulation: blake has to start and play in at least ten games.

just a friendly wager.

:wave:

Let's be fair, Jake was a mediocre player here, but holding his 2002 rating up to a bet is unfair given all the injuries that contributed to that. No QB could have had a great rating last year throwing to our WR's after they all got hurt.

If Blake has his "normal" season, it'll be equivalent to Jake's best years of 98 and 2001, that would be fine with me. If he's any better than that it's just gravy, really depends on signing Boldin and Johnson and how quickly they are ready to play.

So sign them dammit!
 

Russ Smith

The Original Whizzinator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
87,496
Reaction score
38,744
Originally posted by azcardsfan1616
I never defended plummer's play i was just stating a fact. Since when did anyone besides the fans ask blake to throw downfield. We do not have the talent for that yet. From what people on this board have said in practice blake and the WR's have not been hooking up on the long ball. Did you see the starters for the last 10 games last year? Kevin Kasper was the best WR. The only weapon was shipp. Im not making an excuse for him but no QB would have any kind of good rating with the team the cards put out there the last 10 games of the year. Rating is all about enviornment and players. When everything was good 2 years ago plummers rating was around 80. I already have the friendly wager with crimsion but i can have the same one with you too. Lets bet on who will have the better QB rating this year. I'll take plummer while you can take Blake. Then we will see if a change of enviornment really helps. I hope blake is better but i just dont see it. Too many players at 1 position will have to step up.

yes but the first 6 games last year everything was good and Jake's rating was horrible. Boston was playing injured to be sure but basically we had most of our team intact and Jake's rating was lousy. His rating was actually higher the last 10 games than the first 6.

I agree that nobody could have put up a good rating the last 10 weeks of last year with our WR's, but I disagree that's been Jake's problem the whole time because even when he had talent around him, he didn't use it very well.
 

ajcardfan

I see you.
Supporting Member
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
38,440
Reaction score
25,312
Originally posted by Russ Smith
Let's be fair, Jake was a mediocre player here, but holding his 2002 rating up to a bet is unfair given all the injuries that contributed to that. No QB could have had a great rating last year throwing to our WR's after they all got hurt.


What's this? Don't you have your reputation as a "Jake Hater" to uphold? DC and Shadow would be very disappointed with this sort of post. :)
 

HoodieBets

Formerly azcardsfan1616
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
5,740
Reaction score
1,030
Location
Rhode Island
Originally posted by Russ Smith
Let's be fair, Jake was a mediocre player here, but holding his 2002 rating up to a bet is unfair given all the injuries that contributed to that. No QB could have had a great rating last year throwing to our WR's after they all got hurt.

If Blake has his "normal" season, it'll be equivalent to Jake's best years of 98 and 2001, that would be fine with me. If he's any better than that it's just gravy, really depends on signing Boldin and Johnson and how quickly they are ready to play.

So sign them dammit!

Couldnt agree more russ, those picks have to be signed soon!
 

Russ Smith

The Original Whizzinator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
87,496
Reaction score
38,744
Originally posted by ajcardfan
What's this? Don't you have your reputation as a "Jake Hater" to uphold? DC and Shadow would be very disappointed with this sort of post. :)

I like to throw in a curveball now and then just to keep people on their toes!

But it is silly to evaluate a player at his best or worst and I've said that for years. Along those same lines, evaluating players under the worst or best team scenario is misleading too.

I've never agreed with DC on Jake but I do completely agree that Kurt Warner was never as good as he looked with the Rams, he was in a perfect situation and played brilliantly, it's very unlikely he could have matched those numbers on any other NFL team over that 3 year period. DOesn't mean he didn't play brilliantly or he was a product of the system, just means he was in a best case situation.

Jake was in a worst case situation last year, and to blame him for his low YPA for example ignores who he was throwing to.

I'm glad he's gone but that decision was hopefully made long before the last 10 weeks of last season.
 

jtav10

Veteran
Joined
Apr 30, 2003
Posts
120
Reaction score
0
JAKE COULDNT GET IT DONE WITH THE CARDS. if jeff's team plays well and wins then he is the better qb.
 

HoodieBets

Formerly azcardsfan1616
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
5,740
Reaction score
1,030
Location
Rhode Island
Originally posted by jtav10
JAKE COULDNT GET IT DONE WITH THE CARDS. if jeff's team plays well and wins then he is the better qb.

Do you actually think the cards are better than the broncos?????
 

Latest posts

Staff online

Forum statistics

Threads
552,691
Posts
5,402,053
Members
6,313
Latest member
50 year card fan
Top