Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
I could see Garropolo pushing Henne for his job by mid-season if Henne makes enough mistakes to open the door.
I'm not crazy about Garropolo at #39 in terms of value - late second/early third seems more like it to me.
I do think he can be a starting QB in the NFL though and I think his pocket presence concerns are very overblown - especially by those suffering from jaguarquarterback-a-phobia. It's a medical term. Look it up.
Comparing him to Gabbert is way offbase and lazy, IMO.
Quote:Maybe I'm from the old school of thought but years ago guys would sit on the bench for what seemed like an eternity before they were ready to play. This whole microwave culture has changed everyone's opinions of how long somes guys need before they are ready and although there have been very few to play well early the fact remains that most of these guys play to early before the time they should. The nature of the position causes these guys to get over drafted and put in situations way before they are ready.
When I look at JG I see a guy who need quite some time to develop. That's not a bad thing. If he sits for three years and becomes Aaron Rodgers it was all worth it. Don't get caught in the hype of the Luck's, Ryan's and Manning's of the world (Peyton not Eli to prove my point). These guys need time and some need a lot of time. Some need adequate situations to be in and the right system. He is one of those players and it is nothing wrong with that but if you think he will be ready after a season or two then you and I are not looking at the same player.
well i think 2 things. i think coaches are a lot better at adjusting players to the pro game quicker these days. and i think a lot of colleges are better preparing the players for the nfl. you see a lot of young qbs come in and have immediate success the past 3 or 4 years. in the past i know they sat for years and learned. now youve got all kinds of players, dalton, ryan, flacco, rg3, luck, tannehill, kaep, gabbert (just kidding) having immediately success. so I ALSO think that some of the stigma about needing to let players sit was just a precautionary myth and that coaches are starting to trust the player.
Khalil Mack in the 1st,
Marcus Martin in the 2nd..
Jimmy Garappolo in the 3rd..
Quote:well i think 2 things. i think coaches are a lot better at adjusting players to the pro game quicker these days. and i think a lot of colleges are better preparing the players for the nfl. you see a lot of young qbs come in and have immediate success the past 3 or 4 years. in the past i know they sat for years and learned. now youve got all kinds of players, dalton, ryan, flacco, rg3, luck, tannehill, kaep, gabbert (just kidding) having immediately success. so I ALSO think that some of the stigma about needing to let players sit was just a precautionary myth and that coaches are starting to trust the player.
lol. My question though is what do you consider success; being able to play, taking a team to the playoffs, putting up good numbers? Of the list I see 2 who have done that from day one. The others either sat, are still struggling or in superior situations. You are being naive if you think college coaches are preparing there players for the next level. And if anything I would argue that nowadays more players fail because NFL coaches overestimate their ability to "coach up" a player.
Also trying to use a small sample over the life of the sport is not a good way to predict future success. This is the flavor of the time but soon a decline will happen. Some qbs need time and the right situation and that's just the truth of it. If Gabbert was able to sit for 2 years I think he would have turned out better. Pressure bursts pipes and sometimes all the talent in the world can not save you from the moment. Garrard needed years before he was a solid qb. If he started from day one he would not have made it. His first pass as a NFL qb was an interception.
Quote:I remember a Matt Waldman article posted on here. I can't say i know if he's credible or not. But it certainly brought up some concerns -- whether they have merit or not, I'm not sure.
http://mattwaldmanrsp.com/2014/03/05/qb-...-knockout/
This is the article is was referring to.
Quote:lol. My question though is what do you consider success; being able to play, taking a team to the playoffs, putting up good numbers? Of the list I see 2 who have done that from day one. The others either sat, are still struggling or in superior situations. You are being naive if you think college coaches are preparing there players for the next level. And if anything I would argue that nowadays more players fail because NFL coaches overestimate their ability to "coach up" a player.
Also trying to use a small sample over the life of the sport is not a good way to predict future success. This is the flavor of the time but soon a decline will happen. Some qbs need time and the right situation and that's just the truth of it. If Gabbert was able to sit for 2 years I think he would have turned out better. Pressure bursts pipes and sometimes all the talent in the world can not save you from the moment. Garrard needed years before he was a solid qb. If he started from day one he would not have made it. His first pass as a NFL qb was an interception.
dalton, ryan, flacco, kaep, luck, even rg3 all brought their teams to the playoffs...
Quote:We've already been over how much of a misnomer the late riser junk is ad nauseum though. I also don't buy the rushed into action excuse, either. Blaine could have been given half a decade to sit and learn and would have been the exact same IMO. Just watching Bortles for even one cutup and it's painfully obvious they are polar opposites when it comes to pocket manipulation and facing a pass rush. If anything that is Bortles' best trait.
Gabbert was doomed to mediocrity and would never have been a good QB here, imo, but Del Reject didn't do him any favors by cutting Garrard, realizing how terrible Luke McCown was, then tossing Gabbert into the starting lineup in the third game of his career. And this was after a lockout cost him a chance at training camp. Gabbert had no business being on the field, let alone starting. If he'd been sitting for a year behind Garrard or McCown, his career might have been more average and less disastrous.
Quote:Sloppy mechanics under pressure, questionable pocket presence. Gabbert was drafted for his potential, as Bortles will be. I don't think Bortles will come close to Gabbert bust level, but I wouldn't be shocked if Bortles busted in the traditional sense.
I could see Bortles being a competent starter for a long time. Is that enough for a top-ten pick to be considered successful?
Quote:3+ years for what? if he needs seasoning, you can do that in 1 year. i mean maybe 2 if youre super raw. but to project 3 whole years is kind of outlandish.
Romo came from the same school, same conference, and needed three years. Garoppolo is a better prospect than Romo was, but I wouldn't be the least bit shocked if he needed a year and a half, maybe two, before he's ready to go.
Quote:
Romo came from the same school, same conference, and needed three years. Garoppolo is a better prospect than Romo was, but I wouldn't be the least bit shocked if he needed a year and a half, maybe two, before he's ready to go.
Romo also got to sit behind Drew Bledsoe who did have a good NFL career and was a franchise QB for many years in New England (even helped take the team to a superbowl in 96).
Garoppolo wont get that if drafted by us.
Quote:Gabbert was doomed to mediocrity and would never have been a good QB here, imo, but Del Reject didn't do him any favors by cutting Garrard, realizing how terrible Luke McCown was, then tossing Gabbert into the starting lineup in the third game of his career. And this was after a lockout cost him a chance at training camp. Gabbert had no business being on the field, let alone starting. If he'd been sitting for a year behind Garrard or McCown, his career might have been more average and less disastrous.
I could see Bortles being a competent starter for a long time. Is that enough for a top-ten pick to be considered successful?
Romo came from the same school, same conference, and needed three years. Garoppolo is a better prospect than Romo was, but I wouldn't be the least bit shocked if he needed a year and a half, maybe two, before he's ready to go.
did he NEED 3 years? or did he just happen to sit for three years before he got a chance? we will never know.
Quote:And Dave has said more than once that Pasztor is the starting RT. What makes Henne clear and not Pasztor?
Pasztor could slide in and play guard if needed. There's no second option for Henne.
Quote:Hes the starter going into camp. You really dont think a rookie could beat him out? Its not like hes any good... I mean it depends what round the rookie is drafted in but I bet anyone within the first 3 round can beat Henne in a competition.
I don't see any QB in this draft who is going to win the starting gig in training camp. Sorry, but Henne has a distinct advantage over any of them no matter how bad he might be, and I honestly don't think he's as lousy as some of you want to portray.
Quote:
Pasztor could slide in and play guard if needed. There's no second option for Henne.
I don't see any QB in this draft who is going to win the starting gig in training camp. Sorry, but Henne has a distinct advantage over any of them no matter how bad he might be, and I honestly don't think he's as lousy as some of you want to portray.
I just honestly think going into training camp or the start of the season with only Henne as the starter isn't going to be very wise decision, especially with only a rookie QB backing him who is supposed to be on the bench learning the system.. That's why I'd feel more comfortable with another veteran QB backing Henne for the season.. Gabbert was thrown to the wolves pretty early and that didn't turn out so well.. Never know, maybe throwing him in the game that early instead of sitting him like he was supposed to be sat, was the start of his problem of being an inept QB..
Quote:I just honestly think going into training camp or the start of the season with only Henne as the starter isn't going to be very wise decision, especially with only a rookie QB backing him who is supposed to be on the bench learning the system.. That's why I'd feel more comfortable with another veteran QB backing Henne for the season.. Gabbert was thrown to the wolves pretty early and that didn't turn out so well.. Never know, maybe throwing him in the game that early instead of sitting him like he was supposed to be sat, was the start of his problem of being an inept QB..
What's the possibility of Scott being the "oh my God, Henne's hurt and what do we do now!" backup?
Which means - might they carry three QBs?
Quote:What's the possibility of Scott being the "oh my God, Henne's hurt and what do we do now!" backup?
Which means - might they carry three QBs?
And if the Jags have to rely on Matt Scott as the backup, then they're destined for another top 5 pick.. Cause we've all seen what Henne can do..
Quote:And if the Jags have to rely on Matt Scott as the backup, then they're destined for another top 5 pick.. Cause we've all seen what Henne can do..
So you're saying that we need to start praying for Chad Henne.
I mean, this is a scenario where and if the Jags take Garoppolo.. I'd feel way more comfortable with either a Manziel, Bridgewater or Bortles backing Henne for the season.. But Garoppolo? Need more depth with him on the roster IMO.. Someone just posted that Prior is available for trade or he'll be released by the Raiders.. He'd make a nice back up for Henne for the season..
Henne, Prior and Garoppolo would be a set trio.. (If the Jags take Garoppolo)
maybe QB doesn't happen and the jags just get one early next year. Wouldn't mind clowney, Mack, Watkins in the first, van noy/dee ford/ Jordan Matthews in the second, Easley or Baptiste in the third and Marcus mariota next year with henne carrying the load this year.
Quote:maybe QB doesn't happen and the jags just get one early next year. Wouldn't mind clowney, Mack, Watkins in the first, van noy/dee ford/ Jordan Matthews in the second, Easley or Baptiste in the third and Marcus mariota next year with henne carrying the load this year.
So, in other words, you want the Jaguars to be bad enough that they land a top-five pick for Mariota next year.
Quote:maybe QB doesn't happen and the jags just get one early next year. Wouldn't mind clowney, Mack, Watkins in the first, van noy/dee ford/ Jordan Matthews in the second, Easley or Baptiste in the third and Marcus mariota next year with henne carrying the load this year.
If so, I hope it's one that'll be ready right away. Two more years of Henne would be rough.
Quote:Pasztor could slide in and play guard if needed.
.
I keep seeing this. It's just not really an option.
Do you not remember Pasztor sucking at guard? I do.
Moving him to tackle where he could go from UDFA cannon fodder to "solid" is why Caldwell has a GM job and Smith doesn't.
Regardless of anyone's ideas about RT - they shouldn't include Frenchie at guard.
Anyway....back to Garropolo stuff...
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12