NFL 2014 Season Thread

[Ben Kenobi]

Who, in the year he took over for Culpepper, had better numbers than Garrard (career rating).

If your argument is relying on Brad Johnson, then I think it says everything about the Vikings QB development.

[Sava]

If your argument is relying on Brad Johnson, then I think it says everything about the Vikings QB development.

Yes. Brad Johnson's numbers as a Vikings QB that year are better than Garrard's career numbers.

It's pretty straight forward. You said Garrard was better than any Vikings QB since Culpepper.

I proved you wrong.

The only other QB starters the Vikings had since Culpepper were Gus Ferrotte(sp) and Taveras Jackson. It's not as if they went threw a dozen or so QB's in 10 years. I really don't understand why you would make that assertion (about Garrard). It's just stupid.

[Al B. Sure!]

Where is David Garrard now, Ben? The Jaguars have only had a few starting QB's in their history: Brunell, Leftwich, Garrard, Gabbert, and Henne.

Leftwich, Gabbert, and Henne

[Ben Kenobi]

The only other QB starters the Vikings had since Culpepper were Gus Ferrotte(sp) and Taveras Jackson. It's not as if they went threw a dozen or so QB's in 10 years. I really don't understand why you would make that assertion (about Garrard). It's just stupid.

One, Brad Johnson was not developed by the Vikings. Two, sample size, sample size, sample size. Three, how did it work for the Jags dumping Garrard?

[Ben Kenobi]

Where is David Garrard now, Ben? The Jaguars have only had a few starting QB's in their history: Brunell, Leftwich, Garrard, Gabbert, and Henne.

Garrard was perfectly serviceable.

[Al B. Sure!]

One, Brad Johnson was not developed by the Vikings. Two, sample size, sample size, sample size. Three, how did it work for the Jags dumping Garrard?

How did it work out for the team Garrard got his next starting gig with? Oh wait...

Garrard was perfectly serviceable.

And Mark Brunell was legitimately a solid QB. Doesn't change the fact that Jacksonville has no better history developing QB's than Minnesota does.

Now Minnesota has one of the greatest RB's of all time, some serviceable receivers (Jennings, Patterson, Jerome Simpson, and Rudolph), and a good o-line. Jacksonville has Toby Gerhart and Cecil Shorts. And that's it.

Bridgewater is definitely in a better situation than Bortles. These things are not completely deterministic but it helps to be in a better situation.

[SlowwHand]

Turner develops young QBs well.

[Al B. Sure!]

Bridgewater's entire draft fall and Bortles' rise has to do with one thing, as I said before: their wildly different pro day performances.

The problem with pro days is they allow the more physically gifted passers to inflate their standing while not exhibiting any (or lack of) intangibles, particularly playing under pressure.

Bill Barnwell at Grantland explained in March

Unmolested in the pocket and with no coverage to read, superior athletes are going to stand out. A passer with spectacular arm strength will have all the time he needs to loft throws downfield. Fluid, mobile quarterbacks reliably show off the footwork they’ve been drilling for weeks with ease. Players who just look like they’re quarterbacks have no better canvas for their skills than a pro day. And that’s exactly the sort of prospect Bortles appears to be. While he’s certainly not without merit, his rise up the quarterback rankings this offseason has been driven by his prototypical size and above-average arm strength. He’s seen as a raw talent that the right coach could mold into a superstar. For raw talents like JaMarcus Russell, whose workout was described by Jon Gruden at the time as “Star Wars,”2 the pro day is ice.

Think about recently failed quarterback prospects and, chances are, you’ll come across a guy who had a good pro day and struggled to stay accurate under pressure. Russell is just one classic example. Blaine Gabbert had a wonderful pro day.3 Jake Locker was 40-for-42 versus air during his highly regarded performance. Samesies for Brandon Weeden and Mark Sanchez. Even Alex Smith wowed coaches with his transition from a spread offense during his pro day, a performance that very well might have pushed him ahead of Aaron Rodgers on the 49ers’ draft board. In each case, these quarterbacks struggled to handle professional pass rushes, leading to inaccuracy, higher sack rates, larger risks of injuries, and (considering Smith’s draft status) disappointing professional careers.

Now, guess what Bridgewater’s best skill is? Football Outsiders’ Matt Waldman noted, to nobody’s surprise, that it’s his preternatural ability to remain composed in the pocket and make accurate throws against pressure! He’s not a freak athlete by any stretch of the imagination, but Bridgewater’s feel for the position allows him to efficiently use his feet to elude pressure long enough to create a throwing lane and make an accurate pass. Bortles hasn’t consistently exhibited that skill. He might be the sort of athlete who can get himself out of trouble. Bridgewater’s the kind of quarterback who can avoid getting himself into trouble.

The rest of Bridgewater’s skills also show up in the fall as opposed to the spring. I’ve stolen the baseball pitching concepts of command and control in the past, and Bridgewater’s a great example of a passer who can do both. Not only does he have the functional accuracy to make catchable throws to his targets, he also has the veteran wherewithal and anticipation necessary to put passes in the exact spots his receivers would like them most. He makes the right reads at the line to set his protections and run the best possible play. He also reads the full field on every play.

[Ben Kenobi]

Bridgewater is definitely in a better situation than Bortles.

Bortles is not being asked to start, so I'm not quite sure how the on field performance of this years Jags team is relevant to Bortles' development.

By definition, Bortles is in a better situation than Bridgewater, AP's handoff machine.

[Ben Kenobi]

How did it work out for the team

That, to me speaks volumes about the decision to cut Garrard. The team did not have an adequate replacement.

[Al B. Sure!]

That, to me speaks volumes about the decision to cut Garrard. The team did not have an adequate replacement.

What?

Did you even read that entire sentence?

How did it work out for the team Garrard got his next starting gig with?

Garrard has not only not started any games in the past 3 seasons since he was released by the Jaguars... he hasn't even played a down!

In 3 years. Since he was cut by the Jaguars.

I don't think anyone in the Jaguars organization is saying 'if only we...' for a guy who hasn't played a down in 3 full seasons.

[Ben Kenobi]

How did it work out for the team Garrard got his next starting gig with?

How does it change the fact that after the Jags cut Garrard, they did much more poorly than they did with him? If Garrard wasn't providing anything to the team, then we would have seen Gabbert do as well. He did not, ergo Garrard was a serviceable if not spectacular starter.

I'm not sure how his time after this is relevant as he was not in the same role as he was not starting.

I don't think anyone in the Jaguars organization is saying 'if only we...' for a guy who hasn't played a down in 3 full seasons.

Which explains the sudden downturn of the Jags organization. I rest my case.

[Donegeal]

No you goddammed retarded ****stain! It means Garrard was better than Gabbert! They both sucked!

Dammit! Why do I EVER click on that ****ing 'view post' button!

[Tuberski]

Dammit! Why do I EVER click on that ****ing 'view post' button!

And you call him a goddammed retarded ****stain!.

ACK!

[Ben Kenobi]

It means Garrard was better than Gabbert! They both sucked!

Which means that Garrard WAS providing a service to the team as a serviceable if not spectacular starter. They cut Garrard on the assumption that Gabbart was an adequate replacement. They were wrong.