Create Account



The Jungle is self-supported by showing advertisements via Google Adsense.
Please consider disabling your advertisement-blocking plugin on the Jungle to help support the site and let us grow!
We also show significantly less advertisements to registered users, so create your account to benefit from this!
Questions or concerns about this ad? Take a screenshot and comment in the thread. We do value your feedback.
I think Garoppolo is the guy.

#41

Quote:Matt Scott is not nearly as talented as Jimmy, that being said I wish Scott would have gotten a shot as a backup instead of Henne. 
 

He did get a shot in training camp and in the preseason and he was brutally awful. Much worse than Henne or Gabbert.

;

;
Reply

We show less advertisements to registered users. Accounts are free; join today!


#42

Quote:Gabbert was damaged goods regardless.  Had he sat for a couple of years, he'd have still been terrible.  He's a terrible quarterback.

 

If you draft a QB in the first round, he's the day one starter.  The days of sitting a guy for a season or two are over.
 

Disagree on both points.  The first can't be proven either way.  And the second to me is an empty mantra, especially since rookie contracts aren't the ridiculous ones they used to be.  You play the guy when he's ready, and there's no use setting artificial and arbitrary timelines for it, long or short.

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."
Reply

#43

Quote:He did get a shot in training camp and in the preseason and he was brutally awful. Much worse than Henne or Gabbert.
 

One game (not sure which... perhaps the last) they even kept him in longer than usual/necessary.

 

I assume it was to see how he'd react to such a bad outing.

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."
Reply

#44

Garoppolo has one plus trait and a bunch of average to below average ones. QB purgatory at best to me.

 

If we are taking a QB after the 1st round I will only really be happy with Brett Smith and Logan Thomas.


Reply

#45

Quote:Year one - He learns the system - Some pre-season action - clipboard as the number three 

Year two - He learns to run the plays in the system - extended pre-season action - mop up duties

Year three - he learns details of play-making, personnel and is the back-up QB - pre-season action - mop up duties - second QB

Year four - he enters the season as the viable starting quarterback - open camp competition for the starting job
couldn't agree more...signed the 1960s

Reply

We show less advertisements to registered users. Accounts are free; join today!


#46

Quote:couldn't agree more...signed the 1960s
Hahaha nice.


Wait 4 years to start your QB when you dont have a good QB in place? Sounds brilliant!
Reply

#47
(This post was last modified: 02-27-2014, 05:50 PM by Jungle Cat.)

Quote:Your four year plan is not realistic considering guys like Andy Dalton play day one.
Aaron Rodgers ring a bell? 

 

Dalton is being discussed on ESPN right now. It seems they aren't "happy" with his development? 

 

Go figure???


First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win. - Mahatma Gandhi

 

http://s6.postimg.org/vyr2ycdfz/Teddy_Br...cked_4.gif
Reply

#48
(This post was last modified: 02-27-2014, 05:53 PM by Jungle Cat.)

Quote:Disagree on both points.  The first can't be proven either way.  And the second to me is an empty mantra, especially since rookie contracts aren't the ridiculous ones they used to be.  You play the guy when he's ready, and there's no use setting artificial and arbitrary timelines for it, long or short.
The QB development formula I provided above is ideal. It doesn't make sense because we are forever without a quarterback.

 

Catch-22. You have to have a veteran quarterback to groom his replacement. You don't get a veteran quarterback without grooming one, or drafting an elite QB prospect.

 

You can draft a quarterback pretending he's elite, but he's really not.


First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win. - Mahatma Gandhi

 

http://s6.postimg.org/vyr2ycdfz/Teddy_Br...cked_4.gif
Reply

#49
(This post was last modified: 02-27-2014, 06:06 PM by HIGH SCORE.)

Quote:He's got nothing to hide and nothing to be ashamed of.


I beg to differ...

[Image: mcccarronchesttat_original_original_orig...1357603981]
Reply

We show less advertisements to registered users. Accounts are free; join today!


#50

Quote:Garoppolo has one plus trait and a bunch of average to below average ones. QB purgatory at best to me.

 

If we are taking a QB after the 1st round I will only really be happy with Brett Smith and Logan Thomas.
You just lost all credibility. 

Reply

#51

Quote:I beg to differ...

[Image: mcccarronchesttat_original_original_orig...1357603981]
 

Whatever tattoo artist did that should have their license revoked.

;

;
Reply

#52

I also noticed something small, he has "happy feet" reminds me of Peyton Manning so much. Idk I just have a gut feeling he's going to be good. 


Reply

#53

Quote:Garoppolo hands are very small like Bridgewater.   He's a 5th to 7th rounder.
 

Bridgewaters hands were measured at 9 & 1/4. 

 

Not small. 

 

Not big, either...

 

 

Hands are considered/ labeled "small" for QB when they are sub 9"

Reply

We show less advertisements to registered users. Accounts are free; join today!


#54

Quote:Whatever tattoo artist did that should have their license revoked.


License? They ain't got time for licenses
Reply

#55
(This post was last modified: 02-27-2014, 10:31 PM by The Mad Dog.)

Quote: 

If we are taking a QB after the 1st round I will only really be happy with Brett Smith and Logan Thomas.
 

I wouldn't feel happy drafting either of those above round 6. 


Reply

#56

Quote:I wouldn't feel happy drafting either of those above round 6. 
Those weren't particularly strong endorsements on my part, either. Smith I would take w/ a 4th, Logan one of the 5ths. They're both unlikely to be franchise QBs, but outside of the top 4 they are the only two QBs that I think have the potential to break the QB purgatory threshold (maybe 10% each) so I'd gamble a third day pick on em. 

Reply

#57

Quote:Those weren't particularly strong endorsements on my part, either. Smith I would take w/ a 4th, Logan one of the 5ths. They're both unlikely to be franchise QBs, but outside of the top 4 they are the only two QBs that I think have the potential to break the QB purgatory threshold (maybe 10% each) so I'd gamble a third day pick on em. 
 

What about a QB like Tom Savage with a late rounder? 

Reply

We show less advertisements to registered users. Accounts are free; join today!


#58

Quote:Aaron Rodgers ring a bell?


Dalton is being discussed on ESPN right now. It seems they aren't "happy" with his development?


Go figure???


The Packers had Brett Favre.... we have Chad Henne
Reply

#59
(This post was last modified: 02-28-2014, 12:24 PM by badger.)

Quote:The QB development formula I provided above is ideal. It doesn't make sense because we are forever without a quarterback.


Catch-22. You have to have a veteran quarterback to groom his replacement. You don't get a veteran quarterback without grooming one, or drafting an elite QB prospect.


You can draft a quarterback pretending he's elite, but he's really not.
Your formula is irrelevant. Ideal would be for a guy to come in and play at an all-pro level.


A guy like Dalton was the best option for Cincy and his development is miles further than it would be if he were riding the bench.
Reply

#60

Quote:What about a QB like Tom Savage with a late rounder? 
 

I endorse this.  All I saw of him were the two cutups on draftbreakdown, but I was pretty impressed.

Reply




Users browsing this thread:

The Jungle is self-supported by showing advertisements via Google Adsense.
Please consider disabling your advertisement-blocking plugin on the Jungle to help support the site and let us grow!
We also show less advertisements to registered users, so create your account to benefit from this!
Questions or concerns about this ad? Take a screenshot and comment in the thread. We do value your feedback.


ABOUT US
The Jungle Forums is the Jaguars' biggest fan message board. Talking about the Jags since 2006, the Jungle was the team-endorsed home of all things Jaguars.

Since 2017, the Jungle is now independent of the team but still run by the same crew. We are here to support and discuss all things Jaguars and all things Duval!