Tie goes to the incumbent or the rookie?

I’d be more inclined to say Garrard. It may help Gabbert to start getting experience immediately, but it has the potential to hurt his growth as well. Keeping him from starting a few more weeks may not help him but it most certainly wont hurt him. If Garrard plays and has good games then great he may have gained a little bit of trade value, and we could make playoffs. If he doesn’t play well then he’ll eventually be benched, anyways, and Gabbert can have his chance then.

There are 16 games to be played. I think 8 or more games would be a good amount of time for him to get quality development this year. If they’re playing at a similar level, I’d side with allowing Garrard to start. Besides, I’d like to see Gabbert come up and win his spot, not get it handed to him for being “good enough.”

If so, then I think that has to come into consideration. Say, for instance, SF or Miami were willing to give the Jags a 3rd or 4th round pick for Garrard then they should trade him and get the value for him. If, on the other hand, Jags can only get a 6th or 7th round pick for Garrard, then I think the Jags should start Garrard to begin the season and bring Gabbert in after he’s had a few games to absorb more. Of course, if Garrard and the Jags start out hot, 5-0 or 4-1, then you stay with Garrard until they are out of the playoff race.

I would have to say a game of Rock, Paper, Scissors would be the best option at that point.

If they’re really judged to be equal and one being a rookie and the other being more expensive is left out of it, I’d definitely start the rookie.

Of course we all know that I didn’t see 2 QB’s who were anywhere near equal last night.

Having Gabbert stand on the sidelines and observe for how ever long, then get in and make the mistakes all rookies make and then get better, or put him in now and make those mistakes learn and get better. To me if he has IT and will replace Gerrard then lets get the growing pains over with and move on to the other parts of the team that need to be addressed.

because even with his flaws he gives us a legit shot at the playoffs. Not that Gabbert couldn’t possibly get us there, but I think our odds go down a bit.

In particular his footwork. I think that he has some fundamental QB skills to learn. I think that some of this stuff he can get while working with the QB coach. He can work on timing and the little things like planting better to make your throws. Although he does have a cannon of an arm.

So, I wonder if it makes sense to slow down on Gabbert because of those skills that need some work.

then definitely start Gabbert. But that’s not and wont be the case.

only because out of the two of them, he’s the one who realizes and has seen how fast Freeney or Mathis can be in his face when we play the Colts. That might be a silly metric, but we haven’t seen how Gabbert is going to react yet when we hit some of the world class pass rushes on our schedule this year.

Gabbert or Garrard?

Gabbert has a nice upside. But he is a rookie, you cant win with him, teams with rookie QBs never have any success.

Garrard has been the starter and lead us to the playoffs and a playoff win! He went to the pro-bowl! He had a franchise record in TD throws! He has to be the guy if they are equal!

But then I used my memory for a second and remembered how good the Defense was during that run and how the Jags run game was so dominate during that run. I recalled that he only really threw about 15-18 times a game during that run. Then I remembered that about 4 QBs turned down the opportunity to go to Hawaii before they called Garrard during his pro bowl year. I then jogged back even further on my memory track and discovered that the Jacksonville Jaguars have almost always been a run first team, so the franchise TD record was only about 20, a number good QBs surpass yearly. Plus his TD/INT ratio was about 1.5/1, and thats not that great.

I started to think to myself, why do I have so much confidence in this guy? When you really look at his “accomplishments” they aren’t that impressive.

After I gained an appropriate view of Garrard’s talents, I went with Gabbert since he has the upside to get better during the season

We say that a QB’s height is important for seeing the field. I have noticed that both Garrard (6’1") and Gabbert (6’5") squat in the pocket easily losing 3" or more off of their height. McCown (6’3"), on the other hand, stands up straight with legs together taking full advantage of his height. Brady and Ryan also do this. Is this just a bad habit for DG and BG? One that can’t be broken? Have you seen the coaches try to correct that?

His career record is above .500. He is 39-37. So much for that argument, huh?
 
For me personally, if someone would just say, “Garrard is an above-average QB who could be more consistent” and that “Gabbert offers more for the future and has more upside”, I would agree.

Instead I read a lot of people making extreme comments about Garrard’s ability, and I think it is short-sighted and fails to take into account the situation he has been in the past few seasons. I maintain he has had one great season and it was the only season he played with a good team, 2007. If you say something about being a checkdown QB, I am gonna pepper you with stats that debunk it, so don’t. He hasn’t even been bad the past two seasons. He has been pretty good. Gabbert could be great.

Having a bad/mediocre team isnt an excuse. It is a reality. If you didn’t realize the Jags have been at a major disadvantage in terms of talent and experience the past three years, you didn’t watch many games.

I didnt make the argument that his record mattered. I just said he didnt have a losing record.
So make sure to read what I am responding to.

And incidentally, that helps my point.

Over the same period of time:

Young is a below-average QB who played with a very good team.

Garrard is an above average QB playing with a mediocre team.

Overall record= not indicative of QB quality. Thanks for the assist Joe.

OK.

I wont say everything cuz no one will read it.

Last season, in spite of a very high sack-rate (33 in 330+ attempts) Garrard managed a career high in TDs (23) and TD percentage (6.3, good for 2nd in the league). Furthermore, his YPA (7.5) and completion percentage (64%) were well above average.

As far as ratio, according to the ESPN ratings, PFF ratings, and traditional league ratings, he was an above average-good quarterback. I know that isnt everything, but you can’t just discount it.

In 2009, he didnt throw many TDs, but MJD accounted for an inordinate amount of the team’s redzone scores, and Garrard’s int% was 1.9, which is very good. His YPA was decent at 7.0, as was his completion percentage, but given the pressure he was under, I think it was passable. Furthermore, he led 9 game winning drives over the course of both seasons.

2008 was not good for anyone. He didnt throw many picks. Thats about all I can say.

2007 was spectacular. 7.7 YPA, 5.5 TD% .9 INT% 63% complete. 18 TDs, 3 picks. Two playoff games. Great performance in the divisional game.

I see three good seasons and one bad one. Maybe 2009 was just average. I admit he is inconsistent, but he is not average.

Overall, his INT% is seventh best among active QBs.

Yea well stats aren’t everything, anyone who knows football knows that. However, that doesn’t make them irrelevant. And I agree with you, Garrard is fine as a starter.

…I believe