My Garrard Argument
by Surteal on Oct 12, 2010 5:51 PM EDT
Email
Print
via cache.boston.com
Alfie, my comment got long again....
I was reading the comments in this article and i commented........
Oh, some music
I think there's some frustration, but this conversation was a great read
My thoughts (if you care to read, and i wont yo-yo* anything)--I think David is an above average QB in a run-first offense. the lines were ignored and the team reached a point where they couldnt control the lines. they were forced to pass. wr's were largely inept and didnt make plays. Garrard did what he always does and tried to be the hero. Remember when he first started back in 06 or whenever. JDR said he was "trying to do too much". Thats what any QB would do with that group of WR's. We fast forward and the interior o-line is still an issue but its not radical, so in certain situations we see Garrard doing too much. When he doesnt have to do too much. He is a great QB. However, He is not a Hall of Fame QB. He is, more particularly, not Peyton Manning.
The Manning Argument. Lets accept two things: 1)The Colts offense is more geared for the pass than the Jaguars offense. Fact. 2) Peyton Manning is rare and to assume that we also have rare is False. Fact.
Summary: Garrard is a good QB that has never truly had a great support cast. He is not Manning. He is Garrard. Manning was given good circumstances and has been able to make the most of his ability, which is greater than Garrards, but Garrard was never allowed to make the most of his ability.
The End.
Also, others that werent allowed include: David Carr, Joey Harrington, Jason Campbell, Alex Smith....
Its all about those first few years and I maintain that Alex Smith can turn it around. He is making Crabs look good right now. Which is another argument. Save that for another discussion.
*yo-yo--->in reference to the spinning of a yo-yo. Yo-Yo journalism was coined today. by your own Surteal, to represent what is known as "spin journalism". A way of angling facts to meet your own agenda. Yo-Yo is meant for fun, like the yo-yo.
-Surteal
87 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
FP’ed,
though I whole heartedly disagree he’s a “Good QB who’s never had a great supporting cast” or that his lines were ignored. Good QB’s make their cast better, not rely on them.
I also think people throw around the word “great” way too much and too liberally. Garrard is far from a great QB, ever.
He’s mediocre. He’s better when he’s not required to think, and that should tell you a lot.
i agree with most of what you say
it just goes down to this: Does Peyton Manning make Marvin Harrison, or vice versa?
theres always that question with any good QB, even Unitas.
Actually, Brady may be the exception.
Thank for the front page, i appreciate it. Maybe the discussion gets deeper. Garrard is hot-topic and when people use logic, its worth reading
And all those who look down on me I'm tearing down your balcony
re: Harrison: Manning hasn’t skipped a beat since he left.
by Alfie Crow on Oct 12, 2010 7:38 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
which is in part to reggie waynes emergence
And all those who look down on me I'm tearing down your balcony
garcon is just a speed guy (IMO)
collie is developing well, im really impressed.
But he was a rookie last year.
I’ll pull up stats later tonight and prove one of us wrong.
But the QB does improve the team around. Those, however, are rare
And all those who look down on me I'm tearing down your balcony
I don’t think stats will really prove much. Though, IIRC Manning is off to his best start ever this year.
You’ve also got to consider the Colts lack of running game and relatively weak offensive line.
it would be interesting to look up the pass attempts per game
Bill Polian really has put together an underwhelming offensive line and Peyton’s unique ability to read the coverage at lightspeed and then release the ball almost as quick as Unitas aids the line.
I just want to re-iterate that I’m not saying Garrard could’ve ever been Manning, I’m just saying that Manning was given the best of opportunities and that Garrard was not. You may say Mannings line didn’t give a good opportunity but his abilities dont need the line, whereas Garrard’s do warrant a good line.
And all those who look down on me I'm tearing down your balcony
Well, one of the biggest arguments for Garrard at the time was his mobility didn’t require a great offensive line like Leftwich would have.
I think I get what you’re saying, I just disagree.
well
i was looking at him as a pocket passer (crazy, i know) and its more due to them/him making him into a pocket passer (debatable if he’s good at it). Garrard takes longer to go through reads than Manning and his release is not as fast which leaves the organization needing a better O-line to allow Garrard to max out abilities.
The crazy part is where the line is between what you need and what you want. I think that’s what varies between the two. Garrard really does need more. Now, where it gets bad is that sometimes he “wants” more.
And all those who look down on me I'm tearing down your balcony
This week's Sunday nighter will be real interesting
The Skins defense is no joke. Manning is going to get hit quite a bit.
by Joe Fisher on Oct 12, 2010 9:20 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
my 2 cents
DG is a good QB, he has absolutely all the physical tools to be a great QB. He is built like a horse, which makes him durable, he’s mobile, which helps him escape the rush and make plays with his feet, he has a powerful arm, which enables him to make all the throws, and he is somewhat accurate (which could get better with practice). Now the only physical tool he does not have is height, I think he is a little short to be a QB in the NFL and that is why he gets so many passes batted down at the line of scrimmage.
Now, DG’s biggest problem imo is that he unfortunately is not “football smart” enough to understand and read coverages fast enough to get rid of the ball and make his progressions faster. thus making him a worse QB than he possibly could be.
If he had the “football IQ” of Peyton, Brady, Warner, Brees, Rivers, Rodgers, or any other elite QB, he too would be in that category.
and that’s my opinion of him.
I was just thinking today
that the Jaguars offense at least, is gameplanning more like they did in 2007, and its showing in the numbers. If you take out the San Diego game Garrard has thrown 8 TDS and just 2 INTs which is phenomenal numbers. In any respect I think that Garrard is a great game controller quarterback. He has his moments of greatness, but these only occur when the run game is dominant. Now of course, there are a few times when he does a lot by himself,but when the run game is weak the Jaguars usually lose. Now that doesnt mean that MJD gets over 100 yards, more of the collective team effort. IF the jaguars can run the ball, Garrard excels at the game controller, he throws TD passes and almost no picks. Now a game controlling QB isn’t always a terrible thing, but the last few years the JAguars have tried to make Garrard a winning QB, based on his 2007 season, but after the disaster of the eagles an chargers they have made him back to a game controller and he has excelled. thats my take
About the poll
I’m a little confused by the poll: Do you mean would you still draft Garrard in the 4th round?
Yeah, sure.
Would I still sign him to a long-term deal like in 2007? Like I said then, nope.
specifically the draft
i would have given him a longer deal, but i woulda waited till the bye week of the following year and it wouldnt have been that type of money. if he woulda had an issue. i would have then traded him and recouped value.
And all those who look down on me I'm tearing down your balcony
Yeah, that was my argument in 2007. It was one full season, should wait till mid-season like the Cowboys did with Romo. Might have paid more, but you’d be sure.
Oh well.
yeah, its too bad
Have you watched any QB’s this year in NCAA?
And all those who look down on me I'm tearing down your balcony
i don't know Foles. heres my QB talks. I dont know all names
I like Luck a lot. I dont like Mallet.
I like Ponder. I don’t like Pryor
I like Boise St’s. I dont like Miami’s
I doubt Alabama’s ability to actually lead a team when they need him.
Don’t like Florida so far.
I might like USC
And all those who look down on me I'm tearing down your balcony
Boise State’s is Kellen Moore and many don’t think he’s got the NFL tools (arm/size).
USC’s is Matt Bakley, but I believe he’s a true freshman. I think he’ll be an easy first rounder.
by Alfie Crow on Oct 12, 2010 9:28 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Barkley is a sophomore
started last year. Moore runs the spread, right? I’m still waiting for that one spread qb who has had consistent success.
I don’t think the book is closed on Locker just yet.
This McGregor kid from JU, whadda you think?
I think he'd take that
The numbers they’re putting up are pretty stout. Only 1 loss and that was against App State. Gotta learn how to put opponents away though.
I have no idea who that McGregor guy is
I was saying Drew Brees is one spread QB who has had consistent success. I wrote some stuff underneath the subject line, but it didn’t show up for some reason.
Follow me on Twitter
by Adam Stites on Oct 12, 2010 10:32 PM EDT up reply actions
good call on Brees
Although in the Tiller spread, the quarterback was not as much of a run threat as in the other iterations of the Spread.
Can't believe I'm saying this,
but Kyle Orton ran a spread at Purdue (like Brees). Aside from those two, the only one I can think of is Donovan McNabb. My god, I still can’t believe I just used Kyle Orton as an example of anything positive.
The Tiller spread is a "true" spread
not this bastardized Urban Meyer/Rich Rodriguez spread where the qb is just as likely to run as pass.
Guess I should have clarified. Makes it all the more puzzling why Alex Smith has been so damn erratic. Smith ran a system that was as close to the Tiller spread as anyone not in the Purdue system and it has not to date translated to NFL consistency.
and yes I know Smith was in the Urban spread
Urban just seemed to turn it into a glorified Wildcat in the Tebow era.
but you have to wonder
if Tebow played in a pro style offense, like at Bama or Arkansas or USC, would he be a Sam Bradford?
That’s why I often say Urban Meyer stunted Tebow’s growth as a quarterback and never forced him to fix his bad habits. But I guess I’m kind of contradicting myself when I’d like someone like Tebow to change his game but then I say I’m happy if we win games and Garrard only airs it out 20 times.
Romo....comical
The Cowboys wayyyyy over paid for Romo. he is an absolute joke. 1 PLayoff win with all that talent around him.
Romo=Garrard
Both way overpaid for what they are, which is a role type QB……Problem with the Cowboys is they have game plans that think Romo is P. Manning and can sling it around 45-50 times a game, reality is he CAN’T…..he will throw 3+ picks a game.
Isn’t it funny how Romo’s 1 playoff win is a joke, but Garrards is a bug prop?
by Alfie Crow on Oct 13, 2010 1:34 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
I think he just called the playoff wins for both QBs a joke, hence the “Romo = Garrard” comment. Personally, I think they’re both pretty good. Nothing exceptional, but certainly above average.
I thought Romo was a pretty cool guy from what I have heard
Character is overrated unless the guy is publicly killing teammates and coaches or selling drugs or hookers on the side IMO.
Garrards biggest obstacle is his brain.
He cant make quick enough decisions in time to get rid of the ball. I dont buy into the height thing because he isnt really that short. Hes like 6’1 isnt he? Brees is short and he has no problems with tipped passes. Thats on Garrard for not being able to see everything at once like a Manning, Brady, Rogers etc. I would take Garrard as my backup anytime, but we will never be an elite team with him under center. I would spend a 4th on him again but it would be because I was drafting him to back my starter up.
Yeah, different era though.
I agree with what you pointed out about no huddle, however.
by Alfie Crow on Oct 12, 2010 9:29 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
for what we currently do, he's sufficient.
I think you can agree with that statement. He has the tools that everyone said he’s not had and he’s had good and efficient days, and he’s had horrible days. I think you brought out the fact that this year when he attempts 23 passes or less we win and when he attempts more we’ve lost. Obviously those are skewed because we were blown out and we had to abandon the running game thus DG had to go to the air. I think there were legitimate concerns that he lost his confidence after the Philly game. Fortunately he found it in Indy and his play reminded me of the Pittsburgh playoff game, minus the obvious hold.
The fact of the matter is his inconsistency is what has created the polarization of the opinions on him. Is he as bad as Prisco says he is ( I feel a lot of people formulate their opinion of Garrard based on what Prisco says and his conversations with unnamed players)? No. He has been several times, but as I said before the season started, this is the “No Excuses” year for quite a few players and the coaching staff. DG can pass for 250 and 2 to 3 tds and an odd pick every now and again and I think we can do well.
He’s going to have to be something more than a game manager for us to take than next step. Monday will show us quite a bit about both he and VY.
you know that holding call was for us
but hines ward had offensive pass interference in the form of pushing brian williams facemask up and then scoring a short yardage td
it never gets brought up… just the hold
And all those who look down on me I'm tearing down your balcony
true
yes I knew the hold was in our favor. I recall the Hines play as well, but that’s the “honors” you get when you’re at that level.
imj ust glad someone else remebers :)
And all those who look down on me I'm tearing down your balcony
yeah i think they were evened out that way. Pitt got a free TD, we got a free FG. Only difference? Win
Waber-Jaguar
we want winners
we want people who want to win
And all those who look down on me I'm tearing down your balcony
Actually
JagSoldier, Drew Brees does have problems with tipped passes, even more so than Garrard. But he just doesn’t get as scrutinized for it. Just goes to show you how perception isn’t reality. And one you wouldn’t think would have problems with it is McNabb, who is actually pretty tall, and I think he’s the worst in the league.
I remember seeing
Jeff Lagamen talking about QB height several years ago and he was like “I’m 6’6” and when I have my arms up, there’s not a QB in the league who’s passes won’t get tipped"
DG is the best we have and help is not on the way. I realize he's not perfect, but I feel a lot better about him at QB than I do the O-Line, DB's, or LB's ability to cover a TE.
by pksiv on Oct 14, 2010 10:20 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
If by brain
You mean decision making… I agree. He doesn’t have NFL level decision making.
by ifjaguarwaco on Oct 14, 2010 12:05 PM EDT up reply actions
I think
he can make good decisions. He knows what the correct decisions are. I think the speed at which he makes his decisions however, is a little slow when compared to players like Peyton.
But that's true
for 99% of QB’s who’ve ever taken an NFL snap, isn’t it ?
DG is the best we have and help is not on the way. I realize he's not perfect, but I feel a lot better about him at QB than I do the O-Line, DB's, or LB's ability to cover a TE.
I just think we were trying to do what Garrard can't...
and that is be a true pocket passer. Didn’t the commentators say that DG’s wife cornered Koetter at their son’s birthday party and tell him like it is. Make Garrard do what he does best. I loved it……. We have to play to Garrard’s strengths. DG you sure do have a strong woman for a companion!
frankDUBZ aka Frank Silba
"I'm smacking you with the truth......" - Me
heard Prisco making a big deal about it
was going to call in and ask Pete why he’s still trying to angle for that Jim Rome – Jim Everett moment, but I blew a tire on Roosevelt.
I'd draft Garrard again without thinking about it
and every other team probably would to. He was a 4th round pick and hes been an above average to average quarterback in the league. He isn’t an elite passer but hes very accurate on shallow to intermediate routes when he has time. He isn’t elite running but hes certainly way above average. Hes all around a pretty good quarterback, he just struggles a bit when hes pressured and has trouble going deep. I don’t really buy that he isn’t a smart quarterback, when he can survey the field a little bit he generally makes good decisions.
The issue seems to be that some want to trash him because he isn’t elite and some seem to want to treat him like he is elite. In my mind only Brady and Manning are elite guys and then there are probably 5 or 6 damn good guys and after that theres some pretty good quarterbacks which is where I think Garrard is. The good news is that we have a top tier running back and some good developing talent, so we don’t have to rely on David to carry us and be a world beater.
by jstnblke41 on Oct 13, 2010 12:24 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
maybe if we don’t run the option or the “just Kill MJD up the middle” play and run a naked bootleg from 2007, maybe then we could have something with DG as a runner. he was #2 among QB rushing last year, right?
Waber-Jaguar
That bootleg for a touchdown at Buffalo was a great example.
Garrard made it look like that would work every time. Either he hits Lewis or tucks and runs it in.
by Jags-Fan-In-Chicago on Oct 13, 2010 12:26 PM EDT up reply actions
in regards to the poll
That’s really a loaded poll question. Would I draft Garrard? Yes. First round? Maybe not. 2nd? probably not.
For where we drafted him and how long he’s been here, we’ve gotten quite a return on investment. Think how many 1st and 2nd rounders who have not panned out.
The extension was premature, but it is what it is. Garrard couldn’t control the decimation of his line in 2008, nor the blown up roster of 2009. All he could control was his performance. And in 2008 and 2009, he underperformed for the money he was paid. BUT you could also say in 2007 he overperformed for the money he was paid as well.
yeah - I voted no BUT...
that was the assumtion of drafting him as the starting QB. I think David would be an excellent backup and under THAT assumption I would draft him in the later rounds. – But he’s not going to take us to the ‘promised land’ as the ‘franchise QB’.
all we can do as fans...
is let this year play out. If DG game manages the team to a division title, I’m happy as hell! The key thus far has been the return game and starting field position. If someone has an average starting position of the Jaguars and their opponents, I’d love to see it. I bet we’re at least 15 yards better.
I mean look at the bright side. Could you imagine being a Bengals fan? You’ve got a guy (Palmer) who was supposed to be the best thing up there since Boomer Esiason and he has had offensive weapons his entire career and nothing of substance to show for it. We can debate how Palmer would be if not for the knee injury, but like I pointed out last year in the Jets game, he truly is scared of another hit. He did not step into any throws in that game and it showed.
Now THAT would piss me off more than Garrard.
oh I agree - we're stuck this year as DG is clearly the best option we have
‘Game manager QBs" typically take you nowhere. The exceptions are when teams have rediculously GREAT defenses (i.e. Ravens, Bucs, and maybe this year’s Jets). But those are the exceptions. Typically, the teams that win division titles or compete for championships have excellent QB play. Those QBs make up for team defficiencies and are not themselves a difficiency – i.e. they can carry teams. DG simply cannot do that.
Is he better than other QBs in the league – absolutley. My God, we could have Jake Delhome back there bumbling around.
What I think will be interesting is to do a similar poll after the Monday night game....
If we stick to game plans that highlight his abilities (not just be a pocket passer) and the o-line can establish the run, I feel he will continue to be effective. I have a theory on the pocket passer situation too. Last year, when the o-line was really struggling, DG was accused of taking off a bit sooner than necessary. It was hard to blame him as he was getting the heck knocked out of him on a pretty regular basis. Did the coaching staff force him to stay in the pocket to break that habit that had been developed over all of last season? To me it was very obvious in the San Diego game when Drew missed a block on the right, and David stood in the pocket throwing to his right. There was no way he did not see that guy coming, but he just stood there. He got rocked, and I believe the pass was intercepted. It just seems now that the habit is broken, he is moving more free and he is being more effective as the QB that he truly is.
I pretty much agree
with everything you said Surteal.
He’s not great, he’s certainly not Manning, and not performing like Manning shouldn’t cause fans to question his intelligence.
Going forward the entire offense is going to have to step up because we’re going to be facing a lot better defenses than we did against IND & BUF.
DG is the best we have and help is not on the way. I realize he's not perfect, but I feel a lot better about him at QB than I do the O-Line, DB's, or LB's ability to cover a TE.
by pksiv on Oct 13, 2010 11:43 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
I feel like awareness is what separates the good from the great.
The great ones can feel the pocket collapse around them and move accordingly. Also, they can look DBs off of receivers. Neither of these are things that Garrad has shown he can do.
Although right now he is playing like an above-average QB. So I’ll take that any day. At least until we can draft someone who could be elite.
by Jags-Fan-In-Chicago on Oct 13, 2010 12:29 PM EDT reply actions
Dear Joe Fisher
in regards to the poll. It is the same scenario that was presented to the Jaguars. Garrard is on the board, 4th round. Do you draft him with the knowledge you have now?
I was just curious at the degree at which people were dissapointed in him. If i would have made the poll about offering him the contract all over again. It would have been at least 90 percent no
And all those who look down on me I'm tearing down your balcony
thanks for the clarification
Yes. Without a doubt I’d take him in the 4th, maybe even the third. You asked me 2 weeks ago today, I’d say 5th. Some poster, really threw out a point that as an objective observer, you’ve got to tip your cap to.
The dude takes a beating and seldom misses time!
In our brief history, we’ve been steps from the trophy but our trigger man, whether it was Brunell or Leftwich, well, they broke down physically. Brunell’s game had to change and Leftwiches game it was never a matter of if but when he’d be on IR. Dude was and is a statue. It’s a big man’s game and that big man is not the quarterback even if he’s Daunte Culpepper or Jamarcus Russell.
Bottom line, we’re always going to be hard on the starting quarterback. It’s human nature to think the guy behind him is as good or better, especially when the only time we see them typically is in preseason against other 2nd and 3rd stringers or in garbage time when the opposition calls off the dogs or is so overmatched anyone looks good.
he overperformed at his old pay and under at his current pay. however give him 75% of what he gets then give him back 2008 with a good OL and then 2009 without the 08 shellshock, and i say he would be a gamechanger now
Waber-Jaguar
by jawsaints on Oct 13, 2010 7:23 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Yes
David Garrard isn’t awful. I think the stat is that the Jaguars win games as long as he only attempts 22 or under passes. That is enough to get the Jags to a Super Bowl, ONLY as long as the Defense is excellent and the running game is great, a la Ravens 2000. So, while he isn’t great he is a good QB as long as he only has to manage a game and NOT carry the team.
I would draft him, but definitely pay him less and focus on his supporting cast with the extra money.
We need to get a handle on
this 22 pass attempts statistic.
The games he threw more than that were because the other team was leading big and the team HAD to abandon the running game.
We didn’t lose because we threw the ball, we threw the ball because we were losing.
In the Eagles game the score at the end of the first half was 14-3 and during that half the Jaguars had run the ball 15 times and passed it 12.
It was only because of the big lead they got that the Jags were forced into throwing the ball 30 times. Had the Jaguars been in the lead or the game even close, I’m fairly certain they would’ve been running it late, not throwing it.
DG is the best we have and help is not on the way. I realize he's not perfect, but I feel a lot better about him at QB than I do the O-Line, DB's, or LB's ability to cover a TE.
Would prefer
Us not to have to run a Bootleg play to have our QB get production. It is a good way to injure your starter for the season with one great hit.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Big Cat Country
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- All reports positive after Peyton Manning’s first OTA in Denver
- Ryan Tannehill won’t start right away, according to Dolphins’ owner
- Lions WR Titus Young barred from practice after starting fight with teammate
- Winslow move could be a costly one for Bucs in the short term
- Matthew Stafford spends $15,000 to win auction package, then gives it to a young fan’s family
