« Nov. 23 kickoff vs. Falcons moved to 4:15 | Main | Former Panther Haynes Joins Broncos »
November 10, 2008
Fox Press Conference Transcript
Here's a transcript of Coach John Fox's news conference Monday, one day after the Panthers' 17-6 win at Oakland in which quarterback Jake Delhomme threw four interceptions. Questions and answers are edited for clarity and brevity:
OPENING REMARKS: Really nothing to report on the injury front. Just so you guys know, (center Ryan) Kalil did leave the game and was replaced by Geoff Hangartner. I believe it was around the end of the first quarter. (He) just had a little bit of a problem pushing off. No setbacks, but that did occur.
Q: Was he reinjured?
A: No. Until you really get out in a game, sometimes you don’t totally know. Not that he was real inadequate, he just felt there was a little bit of a problem pushing. And they were pretty big inside and we needed some push.
Q: Does this mean he’ll be further delayed because of the injury?
A: We’ll evaluate it Wednesday and he’ll be day to day. That’s not sidestepping it. I have no idea.
Q: Did Julius Peppers injury his arm?
A: I didn’t notice that and there’s been no report from our training room.
Q: How do you feel about winning despite Jake playing poorly?
A: Being from a defensive background, I don’t think there’s anything ugly about a 17-6 win. Again, would I have liked our offense to have played better? Yes, but I thought we ran the ball very effectively. DeAngelo Williams had arguably one of his best games here as a Panther. He made a lot of runs on his own, a lot of runs where he made people miss. To rush for that many yards, I’m still happy with (it).
There’s no question we could’ve played better in the pass game. It wasn’t just Jake. There were a couple of drops, a couple of better routes (that could’ve been run), a couple of better protections. Jake is a standup guy. He’s going to take the responsibility. I think his teammates appreciate that about him, and I know I do as the head coach.
That’s just an area we’ve got to work (on). These games all have different personalities. We had a pretty good idea what kind of game that was going to be, that they were going to challenge us to throw. We’ve had games like that in the past here, and we’ve gotten better for it. I thought it was an outstanding job by our special teams and our defense. When you can win two out of three (areas), usually you win the game, and we did.
Q: Were your offensive struggles more a result of their play on defense, or your play?
A: It was a combination of both. I don’t want to take anything away from them. I thought they covered us down pretty good and make it tough for us to run. But we were still able to run. I think one of the real bright spots was that. Most of that was against eight-man fronts – aggressive eight man fronts. I thought that was a real bright side. We just needed to be able to take more advantage of it in the pass game.
Q: Was anything bothering Jake physically, like his arm?
A: No, no, no.
Q: Besides what the Raiders were doing, do you basically chalk it up as just a bad day for Jake?
A: No, I already said what I thought it was. I thought it was a real good day in our run game, a not-so-good day in our pass game, and it’s not just Jake.
Q: Jonathan Stewart hasn’t been finding much daylight to run recently. Is that because of his heel soreness, or has he hit a rookie wall?
A: No, it’s none of those things in my opinion. He did miss two days of practice (last) week. That never helps. He made some hard runs, and part of (the gains on) those runs were his.
There’s no doubt the bulk (of the carries went to) DeAngelo, and it goes that way. Probably about a month ago, people were wanting (Stewart) to be the starter. It’s a long season and we’re going to need him. He knows it and we know it. So it’s nothing he’s done wrong.
Q: Why has he had quite a few runs for negative yardage?
A: I don’t look at those statistics. He’s made a lot of big runs for us. And we anticipate he mades a lolt of big runs for us going forward.
Statistically, you guys were talking about the other guy (Williams) a month ago. So we don’t look at stats, except for that W.
Q: Are you satisfied that he (Stewart) is being decisive enough on his runs?
A: Yeah, I’m totally happily with Jonathan Stewart, as well as DeAngelo Williams. That hasn’t changed.
Q: Given your success against the Raiders on kickoff and punt returns, was there something you saw that you thought you could take advantage of?
A: I thought there’s no question Mark Jones did an outstanding job in both phases and has for the most part the whole season. He’s shown steady improvement. As much as it is the offensive line, fullback and tight end in the run game, it’s the same way (with) the blocking element on punt returns and kickoff returns. There were definitely some good cuts by (Jones), but also some good blocking in both those phases.
Q: Why do you think your returns and special teams in general are better this year than last season?
A: I think there is improvement. We’ve – knock on wood – stayed healthier. We’ve got a little bit more experience on returns. Earlier in the year a year ago, we had a rookie (Ryne Robinson). I thought he improved as the year went on. I think Rhys Lloyd kicking off … affects your coverage. We’ve got guys who are coaching and doing things right and doing it under pressure. I think that’s probably the biggest difference.
Q: How desperate do you expect Detroit, at 0-9, to be in the next game?
A: No more desperate than we are. We’re all trying to win. Again, we don’t look at records. We look at the tape, and that’ll be what it’s all about and who prepares Sunday.
Q: How about Jake’s ability to bounce back and put things in the past?
A: He’s done it before and I don’t anticipate any problems on him doing it again. Those (bad games) happen.
Q: Have you talked to Jake, since he is so emotional and gets so wound up with things? When a game is going like that one was yesterday, do you to have to kind of rein him in a little bit.
A: Not really, Jake handles adversity and prosperity probably as well as any player I’ve ever been around. Of course, we talk to him. I talk to just about everybody. But he doesn’t need special counseling or anything.
Posted by Observer Sports on November 10, 2008 at 02:46 PM | Permalink
Comments
EVERYONE NEEDS TO GET OFF OF JAKES D*&#!!!! HE'S NOT TOM BRADY, HE'S NOT PEYTON MANNING, HE'S NOT DREW BREES BUT HE'S OUR QB! YEA HE MAKES MISTAKES AND YEA HE HAD A BAD GAME YESTERDAY BUT DAMN PEOPLE ITS LIKE YOU GUYS ARE OUT THERE JUST WAITING FOR HIM TO F#$& UP. THEN SCREAMING I TOLD U HE SUCKS AFTER THE GAME. HE'S NOT THE BEST QB OUT THERE BUT HE IS DEFINITLY NOT THE WORST. HE'S MADE SOME HUGE PLAYS FOR US AND I CAN PROMISE U WE WOULD NOT BE 7-2 WITH OUT HIM. I WASNT THRILLED WITH HIS PERFORMANCE YESTERDAY EITHER BUT SERIOUSLY U ACT LIKE HE'S REX GROSSMAN OR SOMETHING THE MOMENT HE HAS A BAD GAME. U WONT BE ABLE TO SAY S$*# NEXT WEEK WE HE HAS A GOOD GAME BUT THEN U WILL COME OUT THE WOODWORK AGAIN WHEN HE THROWS A PICK OR TWO. DROP IT CUZ HE IS OUR STARTER SO LIKE I SAID GET OFF HIS D#*$!!!
Posted by: matt s | Nov 10, 2008 3:35:13 PM
I agree Matt. He had a horrible game. Why cant we just all agree on that. One horrible game does not make a bad season. And this is a team game, WE WON!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: Fan | Nov 10, 2008 4:18:50 PM
Why even post a Fox conference. It's the same old drivel all the time.
The man never says anything.
Posted by: Foxblock | Nov 10, 2008 4:24:27 PM
Fox is never going to speak the truth about anything anyway...The Guy came out and said how pleased!! he was with the play of foster! and how good a RB he thought he was at the end of last season then Released! im and drafted a RB in the 1st round. So all that was a lie (which most of us knew) I mean I actually don't have a problem with anything fox said in this post game interview WITH the exception of the EXCUSE!! (which he always makes) to "health" having something to do with how horrible the special teams were last year...that's total BS! but the rest...that's just fox being fox.....I don't like it....but I tolerate it as long as whatever he's doing is working and we are winning I am cool with it....but when his loyalty and conversative play calling causes us to lose...more games than not...it's time for him to go.
Posted by: cheven | Nov 10, 2008 4:41:57 PM
cheven, you're wrong about the health aspect to special teams last year. We lost very important ST core players like Salley, Goings, DeLoatch, and Wesley, which forced practice-squad fringe types who weren't as talented to important coverage/blocking roles, and the elevation of guys like Anderson and Diggs to starting roles took away their impact on St. Also, I'm confused by what you mean by Fox's coaching "causing us to lose more games than not." Last I checked, he was 58-47, a .552 mark that puts him 8th among active coaches with his experience. And that doesn't include his 5-2 mark in the playoffs, a number that ranks 4th among coaches with that much experience. Run the guy off all you want, but there isn't a better coach available.
In relevant news about something that will actually happen, the Packers--who have already been struggling to stop the run after the loss of Cullen "Baby Kris" Jenkins--just lost MLB Nick Barnett for the year, a good sign for us when we go up there in Week 13. Barnett's a talented player, and they'll need to either move one of their OLBs and play him out of position or play a far inferior player to replace him.
Posted by: Michael Procton | Nov 10, 2008 5:06:29 PM
I think what people are missing is that this team is so good - and make no mistake, this game showed how good this team can be - that even when the QB plays the worst game of his career, they can win.
Jake had an awful game. That's true.
Fox was pleased because this team was able to win in spite of Jake's mistakes. Fox would never go out in a press conference and blast his QB. And I'm glad he wouldn't, I don't need to read that crud, not about someone like Jake. We've seen what this team does without him. It's not like we've had Peyton Manning knocking at our door trying to play for us. This team is good and it can win with what it has.
Posted by: Mav | Nov 10, 2008 5:07:23 PM
God forbid cheven (his lack of caps, not mine) should cease to 'tolerate' Fox's news conferences... I guess its is by his grace and mercy that Fox still has a job. We all know that his news confereces are a load of crap - just like 99 percent of coaches in the NFL. That's part of the job. I'm sure he lays awake at night wondering if cheven approved of his performance. I think he's more full of crap than Fox is.
Posted by: cheven is an idiot | Nov 10, 2008 5:47:08 PM
and btw cheven - how many times did Pep get double teamed yesterday? Just wondering and I'm sure you know...
Posted by: cheven is an idiot | Nov 10, 2008 5:49:57 PM
The difference between the Panthers and the Giants is the offense. We are nowhere near as consistent as they are in the running or passing game. When we get that corrected i'll be ready to say we can go to the nfc championship and/or super bowl.
Fox - not that you'll EVER read this, but thank you for finally answering the reporters questions lately. you're pressers are becoming respectable whereas a couple months ago they were just down right pathetic.
Posted by: john | Nov 10, 2008 6:32:25 PM
I think I'm about ready to move on as far as Jake is concerned. I'd say 4 games a season we win because of him, and then there's a bunch we win despite him. I'd be interested in bringing in some talent to compete with him next season either through the top of the draft or through f.a.
Posted by: Stephen | Nov 10, 2008 7:46:02 PM
I don't know, Stephen. Maybe we can track down the #1 QB in this year's free agent class. That worked out really well last year, huh? When David Carr had his chance to ride in and take over, we really started lighting it up! Oh, wait...we didn't?
Posted by: Michael Procton | Nov 10, 2008 9:35:47 PM
It was obvious Jake did not look good on any throw against the Raiders. He looked hurt, not frustrated. His motion was not crisp. I would not be surprised we hear something over the next few weeks.
Posted by: par404 | Nov 10, 2008 9:46:29 PM
MP, why do you get so offended at the slightest hint of someone saying anything near negative about Jake (an appearantly Goings)? All the guy said is let's check out our options and see if we can get better, and you seemingly went ballistic about how it's impossible to get a good QB in free agency. Not only is that argument ridiculous, but so is your overprotective attitude. You come off like you really know what you are talking about most of the time, and then you go post things like that...??
Posted by: Keeping It Real | Nov 11, 2008 6:24:55 AM
Keeping it Real - Procton made a good point and one bad game out of Jake doesn't mean we should go searching for the next David Carr; especially if we still think Matt Moore has any talent.
Free agent QB's are free agents for a reason, they can't play. That position is such a high commodity that it is extremely rare that a QB with any talent for starting is going to be cut. Best thing to do is to draft a QB within the first 3 rounds of the draft and hope he progresses. It does raise a good issue though: when is the time to start grooming Jake's predecessor? He's getting older, and a rookie QB is going to take a couple years to be starter ready. Do we expect Jake to be starting for us longer than the next 2-3 years?
Posted by: Christian | Nov 11, 2008 8:26:43 AM
Christian, the high pick on a QB doesn't necessarily do anything for you. It's the highest-paid position in football, and young QBs are best served not playing. So that's a lot of money locked up in a contingency plan you don't even trust for several years.
Posted by: Michael Procton | Nov 11, 2008 8:53:39 AM
Procton, I stand by my comment. I'd rather us draft someone high, but for every 2 f.a quarterbacks who don't work out, there's 1 that does. Steve Beuerlein, and even Jake himself are a couple I can name right off the bat. Kerry Collins is a guy who didn't work out for us, but look at how he's playing in Ten. Jeff Garcia, and Brett Favre, to name a few more. Not every q.b. is a f.a. just because they suck. I respect everything Jake has done for us, but we're getting close to the time to move on. bringing guys in now gives us a good chance to do that. this is wisdom, trust me.
Posted by: Stephen | Nov 11, 2008 5:46:41 PM
I disagree Stephen. Stating our QB situation in terms such as "close to the time to move on" accounts for nothing that has happened in our past playoff runs or in the current 7-2 season. How about last season with no Jake? Was the team better or worse? How about games this season where Jake played well? As for "bringing guys in now", what specific moves should the team make?
I'm all for drafting a middle rounder with potential, or anything else that improves the team's chance at long term success. But the Panthers have had their best seasons with Jake at QB, and we're in the middle of one right now.
Posted by: rayray | Nov 12, 2008 10:26:18 AM
rayray, let me reference what I said above. we win a lot of games DESPITE jake. i would argue that we have a great record mainly because of our defense primarily, and our offense is well rounded. it's the same for the new england patriots. they've got a good record, and i'd say they're doing so despite matt cassell. jake and matt are serviceable most of the time, great sometimes, and just plain awful at other times. do you think new england is going to stick with cassell just because they have a good record? no, they want to win the championship. i don't think we can win the nfc championship with jake, not to mention the superbowl. so what do we do? we start bringing in guys to compete with jake. will some of them not work out? probably. jake will probably be good enough to start for at least 2 more years before the general consesus is that he needs to be replaced. what we need is someone to come off the bench when that happens whose been in the system and gives us a better chance at winning (like Tom Brady and Tony Romo taking over for Drew Bledsoe, like Aaron Rodgers taking over for Favre, etc, etc, etc.)This is what I mean by it's time to move on with jake. btw, how long do you think brian brohm is going to want to sit on the bench while rodgers throws the rock around.
Posted by: Stephen | Nov 12, 2008 6:07:53 PM
Ahh...now THERE'S a good one. Jake Delhomme is only as good as Matt Cassell. That despite the fact that he's got a better QB rating, has thrown for a higher TD%, has a higher YPA, has a higher YPC, and gets sacked barely half as often. What's Mr. Cassell's record in the playoffs? Jake's is 5-2. He's never won fewer than two games when he's gotten there. As for your draft pick argument, Brian Brohm's going to wait for YEARS behind Rodgers. You see that fat contract Rodgers just got? So there's a 2nd round draft pick, blown for who knows how long. You think GB would have liked to get a hold of Kevin Smith or Jamaal Charles to push Ryan Grant? You think they would have liked somebody like Pat Sims to have stepped in when Cullen Jenkins went down? Well, they can't, because they blew a SECOND ROUND PLAYER on a backup at a position where the backup DOESN'T PLAY!
Posted by: Michael Procton | Nov 12, 2008 7:29:47 PM
That last comment was a hint at a direction the Panthers could take for bringing someone in to eventually replace Jake.
Posted by: Stephen | Nov 14, 2008 11:25:32 AM
I can agree with some of your comments, Stephen, when it comes to looking at 2-3 years down the road at our QB situation. Where we differ is on Jake's on-field impact. I disagree we've won in spite of Jake - quote the opposite. He's had essentially 4 full seasons with Carolina so far, and twice we made the NFC championship game. To say the team accomplished this despite what the most important postion on the field brought, seems way lopsided. Jake is not the best QB ever or right now. But he's a better than average player and very good leader for this team.
Posted by: rayray | Nov 14, 2008 2:37:27 PM
sorry, rayray, i guess i need to specify. i totally agree jake has been great for us in the past. my comments have to do mainly with this year. i think this year we are winning despite jake (except a few here and there). start bringing guys in now so that we're not stuck with 3 or 4 bad seasons without a capable replacement
Posted by: Stephen | Nov 14, 2008 4:29:35 PM
Post a comment
Advertisements
