Every NFL season features quarterbacks getting benched and, ultimately, coaches getting fired.
As training camp approaches and with every team in the valley of 0-0 and having a one-in-four chance (in theory) of winning the division and hosting a playoff game, optimism causes many fans to believe that their quarterback can -- and will -- not only survive but even thrive.
In some cities, the handwriting is already on the wall, plain to see for anyone who cares to notice. Let's look at where the powers-that-be should pull the trigger now instead of later on benching their starting quarterbacks.
Jake Delhomme, Browns
Coach Eric Mangini recently said the starting job in Cleveland is Delhomme's to lose. The sooner he does lose it, the better off the team will be.
Delhomme lost his fastball at some point during the 13 days between Week 17 of the 2008 regular season and the divisional round of the playoffs. Though the Browns regard it as an aberration, it's unlikely that a guy would simply fall off the horse at an advanced stage of his career then find the stirrups again.
Of course, the Browns can't simply bench Delhomme after signing him in the offseason and paying him $7 million. Maybe they just shouldn't have signed him.
David Garrard doesn't have much support from the Jaguars after two seasons with 15 TD passes and double-digit interceptions.
David Garrard, Jaguars
The coach doesn't really believe in him. The owner doesn't really believe in him. So why in the heck is Garrard the Jaguars' starting quarterback?
Of course, Garrard might be better than Luke McCown. But even if Garrard remains at the top of the depth chart, he should be on a short leash for 2010.
In turn, the Jaguars should have found a better option in the offseason. They clearly don't love the guy. It makes no sense to keep him around.
Kyle Orton, Broncos
The decision to trade for Brady Quinn and to ...
Read Complete Article at Latest Sporting News Articles for NFL