Jacksonville Jaguars

[Palo20]

Quote: Originally Posted by DonkeyJote

Teammates weren't surprised because many of them didn't think he was very good. He was bad in practice, and that's why he got cut. This team is not 3-2 with Garrard. And they aren't better than the Texans, with or without him. They'd be 2-3 at best, with the schedule only getting harder. Today's game was certainly not on Gabbert. I think you're way over valuing Garrard. He was very good for one year, and barely average after that. He was pretty much only good for not throwing int's and hitting slants. You aren't going to the playoffs with Garrard, so Gabbert might as well get his playing time now. Heck look at the Jaguars own website. They were saying the Jags might lose more games this year before Garrard was cut. Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk

I shouldn't bring up the Garrard thing every week, but he's still a lot better than most in Jacksonville will admit. Pro Football Focus (they grade every play) had him as their #2 QB in 2008, #9 in 2009 and #12 last year. Each of those years, he was working behind one of the bottom 10 OLines in pass protection (using their numbers). And of course, the WRs have been below average for years. The Jags had the least amount of "3 and outs" in the league last year and it wasn't even close. They moved the chains efficiently. Garrard does not get enough credit for making something out of nothing for many years.

Gabbert is PFF's lowest rated QB this year coming into this week.

Now, I'll drop the Garrard stuff, I understand if he was struggling in camp, and the team didn't want him and all that. Either way, I'll take years of production over a couple bad weeks in camp. But people in Jacksonville wanted him out for a while, and I'm just saying the grass is not always greener.

Gabbert is still a rookie, long way to go. He hasn't shown much to this point. I hope he progresses, and I'll enjoy watching the process. But again, the defense is impressive, running game is still solid. Bad quarterback play is holding this team down from winning games.

[DonkeyJote]

Quote: Originally Posted by Palo20

I shouldn't bring up the Garrard thing every week, but he's still a lot better than most in Jacksonville will admit. Pro Football Focus (they grade every play) had him as their #2 QB in 2008, #9 in 2009 and #12 last year. Each of those years, he was working behind one of the bottom 10 OLines in pass protection (using their numbers). And of course, the WRs have been below average for years. The Jags had the least amount of "3 and outs" in the league last year and it wasn't even close. They moved the chains efficiently. Garrard does not get enough credit for making something out of nothing for many years. Gabbert is PFF's lowest rated QB this year coming into this week. Now, I'll drop the Garrard stuff, I understand if he was struggling in camp, and the team didn't want him and all that. Either way, I'll take years of production over a couple bad weeks in camp. But people in Jacksonville wanted him out for a while, and I'm just saying the grass is not always greener. Gabbert is still a rookie, long way to go. He hasn't shown much to this point. I hope he progresses, and I'll enjoy watching the process. But again, the defense is impressive, running game is still solid. Bad quarterback play is holding this team down from winning games.

You realize Gabbert had a 91 QB rating today, right? 15/28, 221, 1 td, 0 int. Garrard isn't going to significantly improve on that. And I'm not sure how that site had Garrard as their #2 QB in 08 and #9 in 10 - those were his worst two years, hands down. Any site that has a qb with 15 td passes and 13 int as the #2 qb in the league has zero credibility in my book.

So far, in three starts, Gabbert has completed only 47% of his passes (which needs to improve, and did this week), has 185 yards a game, 1 td/gm, and .67 int a game. In the first six games of last year, Garrard had a 66% completion, 139 ypg, 1.5 td/gm, and 1.16 int/gm. So Gabbert has more ypg, and throws barely more than half as many ints. Garrard got careless with the ball.

Looking at their schedule, assuming Gabbert doesn't continue to improve (which I believe is unlikely), I think they go 4-12. If they had Garrard, I think they're 2-3 at this point, and probably finish 6-10. I could see them winning 6 games with Gabbert as well, but it will take some improvement. The wins I think are likely from here out are Indy (twice), and one more from Cleveland, Tampa, or San Diego. I think Garrard, they win two of those three and beat either Houston or Tennessee as well. But they still aren't a playoff team, imo. It's a good defense, not a great one. They are top 10 in yards allowed, but they are 22nd in turnovers and 23rd in sacks. And the pass offense, with Gabbert or Garrard, isn't good (Mike Thomas is not a #1). So the quandry becomes, do we play for this year, and hope we can kick, scratch and claw to 8 or 9 wins and have an outside shot, or Gabbert in, and play for next year, when the defense should be better, being so young (Kampman and Mathis are the only defensive players over 30, and Meester, Turk, Scobee, McCown, and Greg Jones are the only other players total). It also gets you another high first round pick, which always makes your team better. A good year last year raised expectations. The Jaguars got lucky with who they played and when they played them a little bit. But they were always a year away from being where they want to be. That's next year. That's the year that was targeted throughout this rebuilding process, and you don't deviate from your plan based on an 8 win season.

[Palo20]

Quote: Originally Posted by DonkeyJote

You realize Gabbert had a 91 QB rating today, right? 15/28, 221, 1 td, 0 int. Garrard isn't going to significantly improve on that. And I'm not sure how that site had Garrard as their #2 QB in 08 and #9 in 10 - those were his worst two years, hands down. Any site that has a qb with 15 td passes and 13 int as the #2 qb in the league has zero credibility in my book. So far, in three starts, Gabbert has completed only 47% of his passes (which needs to improve, and did this week), has 185 yards a game, 1 td/gm, and .67 int a game. In the first six games of last year, Garrard had a 66% completion, 139 ypg, 1.5 td/gm, and 1.16 int/gm. So Gabbert has more ypg, and throws barely more than half as many ints. Garrard got careless with the ball. Looking at their schedule, assuming Gabbert doesn't continue to improve (which I believe is unlikely), I think they go 4-12. If they had Garrard, I think they're 2-3 at this point, and probably finish 6-10. I could see them winning 6 games with Gabbert as well, but it will take some improvement. The wins I think are likely from here out are Indy (twice), and one more from Cleveland, Tampa, or San Diego. I think Garrard, they win two of those three and beat either Houston or Tennessee as well. But they still aren't a playoff team, imo. It's a good defense, not a great one. They are top 10 in yards allowed, but they are 22nd in turnovers and 23rd in sacks. And the pass offense, with Gabbert or Garrard, isn't good (Mike Thomas is not a #1). So the quandry becomes, do we play for this year, and hope we can kick, scratch and claw to 8 or 9 wins and have an outside shot, or Gabbert in, and play for next year, when the defense should be better, being so young (Kampman and Mathis are the only defensive players over 30, and Meester, Turk, Scobee, McCown, and Greg Jones are the only other players total). It also gets you another high first round pick, which always makes your team better. A good year last year raised expectations. The Jaguars got lucky with who they played and when they played them a little bit. But they were always a year away from being where they want to be. That's next year. That's the year that was targeted throughout this rebuilding process, and you don't deviate from your plan based on an 8 win season.

I'm certainly not sold on Gabbert's QB rating from Sunday. It was skewed heavily by the wide open 74 yd TD to Hill. Without that throw, he's at 66.9 rating. He hasn't made enough NFL throws. Doesn't throw well beyond 10 yards.

As for Garrard's ratings the last few years, INTs certainly do not tell the whole story. There is so much that goes into them. Garrard threw some bad ones last year, but they were not all his fault. Tipped passes, etc. always contribute to INT totals. Also, Garrard's yardage totals you cite are skewed by his getting injured in the Titans game.

Pro Football Focus grades every player on every play, and INTs are not always assigned as blame to the QB. Also, moving the chains on the ground gets graded positively, and Garrard excelled in that area. Again, I'll just conclude the discussion on my end by saying Garrard is much better than many gave him credit for. Not the best in the league, but certainly more than capable of leading a playoff team with a solid defense and running game.

Anyway, I'm still excited to watch Gabbert develop and hopefully he gets better at making some of the tougher throws that are necessary to succeed in the NFL.

[wwharton]

Quote: Originally Posted by Palo20

I'm certainly not sold on Gabbert's QB rating from Sunday. It was skewed heavily by the wide open 74 yd TD to Hill. Without that throw, he's at 66.9 rating. He hasn't made enough NFL throws. Doesn't throw well beyond 10 yards. As for Garrard's ratings the last few years, INTs certainly do not tell the whole story. There is so much that goes into them. Garrard threw some bad ones last year, but they were not all his fault. Tipped passes, etc. always contribute to INT totals. Also, Garrard's yardage totals you cite are skewed by his getting injured in the Titans game. Pro Football Focus grades every player on every play, and INTs are not always assigned as blame to the QB. Also, moving the chains on the ground gets graded positively, and Garrard excelled in that area. Again, I'll just conclude the discussion on my end by saying Garrard is much better than many gave him credit for. Not the best in the league, but certainly more than capable of leading a playoff team with a solid defense and running game. Anyway, I'm still excited to watch Gabbert develop and hopefully he gets better at making some of the tougher throws that are necessary to succeed in the NFL.

That's still ignoring that it seemed to be a significant decline in Garrard from last year to this year. As I said before, we have no idea what 2011 Garrard looks like. All we know is everyone that does know what he now looks like doesn't want him.

[DonkeyJote]

Garrard only lead a team (that always had a good run game) to the playoffs once. And that was in the best year of his career. Last year, he was 14th in ESPN's QBR. The two years before that, he was around 50. For the record, in 2008, he tied with Tyler Thigpen. And that accounts for running, and assigning values to each play as well.

I'm not arguing that Garrard is better than Gabbert at this point. But I don't think this was ever going to be a playoff team, and playing for another 8 win season isn't going to help much.

[canes6812]

I had no problem with JDR coming back this year, despite being given a young team filled with small school players he usually had them playing hard. This year I think he is getting a lot out of what talent is there, but that can not make up for bad play calling. Interior offensive line has to be the priority in the offseason.

Blaine Gabbert looks like he is going to be pretty good, but please give him a chance to win games. I know that the receivers leave much to be desired, but I rather take my chance with the passing game then run the ball 3 straight times late in the 4th quarter.

[The GIGGAS]

If JDR keeps his job after the bye week, I'll ****ing mutiny. I'll drive down to Jacksonville and... I haven't thought it out that far. Protest outside of Everbank?

[canes6812]

I think Koetter is the bigger villain at this point. I say keep both and become a player for the number one pick.