Thoughts On the "Red Zone" Debate
by Brian Fullford on Aug 30, 2010 12:33 PM EDT
Email
Print
This does not warrant front page. I am writing this as a fan and not an associate editor.
Let me first state that the evidence strongly supports a valid and justified concern with respect to execution in the Red Zone with Garrard at quarterback. Is it playcalling or is it execution? Is it route running or is it pass protection? Is it a problem with the qb seeing the field or is it good coverage? Those are the questions we should be considering.
I read the evilboy128 vs. Alfie Crow dialogue and it appears that either there is more information than what we saw in the "debate" or that a degree of it is pure subjective interpretation. I literally re-read the piece five times to ensure I was being fair because I didn't want to be labled as "supporting the editors". Three items which bothered me.
1) The red zone question was never answered.
2) Where was the personal attack by Alfie?
3) Where was it stated that the troll comment was qualified due to disagreement?
I read ruffdaddys fan shot and I agree we should have a modicum of respect. If someone is going to qualify someone as something then the evidence should back it up. I don't believe for one second evilboy128 is a troll. In turn, he never answered Alfie's questions and did nothing more than throw accusations back at him: Unsubstantiated at that.
There will those who like Garrard and those who do not. The discourse on the topic will only work when evidence of opinion is supplied. If someone likes or does not like (X), and the have always done so, continued support of that position does not necessarily make them biased. Either you can deconstruct their position or you can't.
I quit posting at Jaguars.com because it litterally became a place for some to flaunt their ego: especially some of the moderators. Jacksonville.com has never had a quality message board. BCC offered an oasis from the mess.
The point should go to adults as much as it should any "youth" come here. As Jon noted, if you wouldn't say it someone's face, don't type it. No one cares how much of a bad ass you think you are, even if you can back it up. I can assure you that I'm not getting into a bar fight over a disagreement related to a NFL quarterback. If being right is that important to you, go get therapy.
The "Garrard Homer" argument is tired. The "Alfie is biased" argument is tired. If you attack the person you automatically lose. It is akin to envoking the Reductio ad Hitlerum fallacy. Try to think of this site as you're favorite sports, your house or a friend's house. We come here because we enjoy talking football.
I'm off my cross. :)
41 comments
|
2 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Thank you
I’ve given up getting involved in the Garrard debate(s). It seems that just about everyone has lost perspective on the issue and it is no longer possible to converse on the matter without it getting heated.
To Me, It All Boils Down to This
The Jags should have drafted a QB since 2003. They should have drafted several QBs since 2003. We passed on Aaron Rodgers in 2005, which was a HUGE mistake.
1. Is David the long term answer at QB? My answer is no. He’s 32 years old. That right there is enough for me to say pull the trigger on a qb or two next year.
2. With under 5:00 left in the game, do you trust David to drive the offense 60 yards for the winning? Yes, he’s done it before. But every time I see that situation I cringe.
3. Should David be benched this year? NO. I like McCown as a backup, but I think he’d be more inconsistent. David is BAP at QB for the Jags right now. Nobody is better on the QB tree out back. Next spring it’ll be full of QBs, but right now it’s bare.
I got into it with viator over Tim Tebow this spring, and after smoking on it I felt like a jackass. Anonymity leads some of us to shoot off our mouths when in a social setting we wouldn’t. We, as Jag fans, are here together on this site for one thing; a place to intelligently discuss Jaguars football. At times we get passionate, but we should watch what we say.
Ignore the hype; look at the results.
Agreed
Good post, and good comments after. We are all fans of the same team, and Lord knows we Jaguar fans take enough heat from other fans/media. Even if we don’t agree on every player/play call, we need to remember we all want to party together at a Jaguar Super Bowl Fiesta.
GO JAGUARS!!!
but did you hear the new umpire posisitioning peed off the colts? they made an official complaint, because they got called on Snap Infringement
Waber-Jaguar
TEE HEE!
The NFL should be ashamed of itsself, making a rule that impedes the offense. What they should say is that the defense can only play the Colts with 10 men on the field.
Ignore the hype; look at the results.
I did hear
It was slowing down their tempo and they got PWNED with that penalty. I love it. NFL is standing up to the elite teams being pansies.
"HULU: An evil plot to destroy the world. Enjoy"
Real fans don’t need a reason.
Gamertag: xXTealNinjaXx
That latest thread was just
one in a long line of commentary’s on the subject.
Basically it boils down to those of us who believe that Alfie’s distaste for DG is so great he could go 29-30 with 400 yards and 5 TD’s and Alfie would write an article about the 1 pass that was incomplete.
I don’t think anybody thinks David is an elite QB and or that we shouldn’t draft a QB next year. We’re just tired of Alfie’s negative writing where DG is concerned. I’ve been to a few other Jaguars forum sites and on and the results are the same where Alfie is concerned. He’s constantly bashing DG and fighting with posters on the site.
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 and LB's ability to cover a TE.
I used to think the same
I always felt he was an apologist for BL while not affording DG the same standard of measurement. As long as there is evidence to support the slant then there should be no gripe. But if the sentiment is strictly based on feeling then it really has no grounding.
Love this:
DB’s and LB’s ability to cover a TE.
Since 1995 I’ve watched tight ends break our hearts.
The greatest accomplishment is not in never falling, but in rising again after you fall.
Vince Lombardi
My personal blog:
by Brian Fullford on Aug 30, 2010 3:39 PM EDT up reply actions
And here is my issue: What do you have to support that belief?
You act as if I go out of my way to unjustly “bash” Garrard and that’s simply false.
by Alfie Crow on Aug 30, 2010 3:40 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
I just found an article from June 2007
where you were actually arguing that point that the Jaguars should keep Quinn Gray over DG.
http://jac.scout.com/2/653040.html
I bet you must have felt pretty stupid during the 2007 playoff run.
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 and LB's ability to cover a TE.
You do realize the point of a “point/counterpoint” story, right?
by Alfie Crow on Aug 30, 2010 3:55 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Sure I do
but was certainly not surprised that you had the anti-Garrard side of things.
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 and LB's ability to cover a TE.
You’re making a lot of assumptions based on things you have no idea about.
by Alfie Crow on Aug 30, 2010 4:04 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
And here’s me “bashing” Garrard in 2008 after beating Houston in OT:
by Alfie Crow on Aug 30, 2010 4:02 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
so you had to go back 2 years to find a positive article
thanks for making my point.
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 and LB's ability to cover a TE.
Thanks for making your point? Wouldn’t that nullify your point that no matter what Garrard does I’ll bash him?
Honestly, what has there been since I came on to BCC overly positive to write about with Garrard? You act as if I’m ignoring all of these positive things he’s done and I’m the only one “bashing” him. Take a look around the web.
David Garrard – WOW! I called David Garrard a robot a few weeks back. He was anything but that. You could see a quarterback trusting his protection and finding open receivers. Pressure bother David? Not anymore. After 2008 and 2009, When David feels very well protected, he can make the right reads. Constantly he picked up blitzes and made them pay. Rashead Jennings was a great outlet. David even threw across his body to the left right on target. David lapsed once into old David, locking on to Mike Thomas for a pick. Once he let down. Fix that and it was a fantastic game.
http://blackandteal.com/2010/08/29/jacksonville-jaguars-vs-tampa-bay-game-
impressions/
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 and LB's ability to cover a TE.
Point?
I didn’t say he played horrible. I said his statistics were good. I said dinking and dunking down the field is fine if you score in the redzone.
Do you disagree he has issues in the redzone?
This is getting bad
Pksiv, you have an example here, but Garrard would help this team a lot by improving his game. Alfie, I can see the counter that you didn’t say he was horrible. I don’t think that was the point though. The point was that you tend to have a negative view. You aren’t calling him horrible, but your tone matters almost as much as what you say. We are looking at a Fallacy of Composition vs a Red Herring. No one can win that.
DUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUVAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAL!
by DownTownJax on Aug 30, 2010 5:55 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Honestly
What is there about Garrard that warrants being positive?
If we need to go back to 2007, the only reason he had a great year is because we had the 2nd best running attack, and he completed very easy short passes all year.
We won the Steelers playoff game not because David had a stellar game but because DG got away with a 32 yard run at the end of the game. Take that away and we go home, and never play the Pats.
He's a damn good running quarterback
But he has serious flaws. I’m not pushing one side or another. I’m middle of the road on him. I really don’t care about the debate that has been going on though. It became a pissing contest when it could have stopped with somebody just saying " point taken, but I disagree overall." Look on Google for Logical Fallacies and you can find a lot of what is going on.
DUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUVAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAL!
by DownTownJax on Aug 30, 2010 9:45 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Why does it matter whether his viewpoint on garrard is negative? Express a viewpoint and respect each others.
"HULU: An evil plot to destroy the world. Enjoy"
Real fans don’t need a reason.
Gamertag: xXTealNinjaXx
I don't think it does
But fair reporting calls for a neutral tone. Like I said before, this argument had little substance and a lot of back and forth. I’ve done it over Tebow before, but not now. I’m trying to stay neutral.
DUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUVAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAL!
by DownTownJax on Aug 31, 2010 11:47 PM EDT up reply actions
you have nothing to apologize for or explain
you have formed a point of view based upon the evidence on the field. Frankly, I share your view on DG as do many others. His play (and others) directly impacts the success of this team and as such, is fair game for open and honest scrutiny.
As Jags fans, we all pull for him and want him to succeed. To only say positive things about a given player and NOT look at the body of work in it’s entirety is frankly dishonest, one sided, and cowardly. And to be pissed with someone becuase they hold a different opinion or DARE to question the overall ability of a player is BS in the extreme.
That's just it
and I’ve said this to Alfie before. I honestly don’t believe he wants him to succeed. And fair coverage would include at least an occasional article about what’s happened that is good.
As I tried to show in my earlier post, where DG is concerned, Alfie ALWAYS looks for the negative to write about.
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 and LB's ability to cover a TE.
I wrote about Garrard playing well against Miami and how he needed to continue it this week, but you got upset about my tongue in cheek comment about nit picking.
The fact that you actually believe I want anyone to fail on the Jaguars is downright ridiculous and personally insulting.
by Alfie Crow on Aug 30, 2010 4:08 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
ASK YOUR SELFS....
Do you want the down right dirty truth…..or the polished up, not so much but kinda blinding truth…..i for one want the real story, and ifs talking about how bad or how great DG is bring it on, its the truth that journalist are suppost to report any ways……RIGHT?
Mess With the Best Die like the Rest
Devil's Advocate
pskiv,
Just out of curiosity do you believe David Garrard is the answer to the Jags QB issue? Or do you believe David is a better quarterback than the talent around him has allowed him to be?
Ignore the hype; look at the results.
I believe he is the answer at QB this season. Yes.
I believe that DG is a better than average QB and will certainly benefit from having better receivers this season and, hopefully, a more reliable offensive line.
I even put my feelings in my signature so that people wouldn’t think I was simply a Garrard homer. I’m not.
I try and stay out of these now as I’ve let Alfie know my feelings before. I only posted in this thread because the author stated "I read the evilboy128 vs. Alfie Crow dialogue and it appears that either there is more information than what we saw in the “debate” and I was pointing out that its been going on for a while.
I fully support the Jaguars drafting a QB next year. My concern is that there is far from a guarantee that whomever they draft will be any better than DG is. And there certainly shouldn’t be an expectation that he’ll be better than David as a rookie.
The Jaguars had the records they’ve had over the past 2 season for a lot of reasons not named David Garrard. But hey, why not take the easy way out and blame the QB.
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 and LB's ability to cover a TE.
brian
its a shame they argued under your post
i grew weary of their drama and thought they were equally idiotic.
your piece here and the other day were nice reads and thank you for the objectivity
And all those who look down on me I'm tearing down your balcony
+1
I think the whole point of Brian’s post was lost on some people.
You can't reason with unreasonable people.
I’ve held my tongue on many occasions, but when I feel I’ve been slighted by some glib remark, I will fight back.
I really think we should get together more often, thereby learning more about each other, even if it’s over wings, beer, soda, nachos (mmm… nachos) or whatever. It doesn’t have to be some tailgate party planned out months in advance or have to be before or after a game. Maybe get together at the pub near the stadium… or Sneakers on Baymeadows or at Jax Beach… Any takers on this Friday or Saturday night at Sneakers in Jax Beach? email me. cuffs007@hotmail.com
My two cents.
Sean
Pax Armis Acquiritur
You guys are all missing the point.
It’s about having fun. If you’re on a sports site and not having fun because this or that or the other bothers you, you’re probably on the wrong site. And not to get all 3rd grade on you guys, but if you don’t have anything nice to say, you probably shouldn’t say anything at all.
No one is forcing anyone to read this site or to read any one particular writer’s articles. No one wants to read about how much you think a certain editor is a douche. If that’s your opinion, then simply don’t read or comment on his stuff. Then that guy doesn’t get your readership, and you are not lowering the level of discourse for the rest of the community. There’s a reason I’ve been a ghost on BCC lately. Please people: make this a fun place again.
In Gene We Trust.
by MoveThoseChains on Aug 31, 2010 12:44 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
