I disagree.  I think most people were of the same mindset at the time, so you can hold off on patting yourself on the back for being so far ahead of the curve.

 

Most anyone who saw him play in the preseason felt he had a lot of areas that required attention.  When Garrard was cut, nobody was clamoring for Gabbert to take over as the starter.  It was only after McCown really stunk it up that the decision was made to make the switch, and it wasn't an overwhelmingly popular decision.  People recognized at the time that Gabbert was a young QB coming out of the draft.  Wasn't he 20?  Way too young to be thrust into the position he was, but we had a head coach who was circling the drain looking for anything he thought might salvage his job. 

 

Spot on, nice try Dog.

---

Chill out a little. I think you're putting a lot of words in my mouth.


When has he ever achieved being a middle-tier QB?

 

The second half of last year, once he got some familiarity with the offensive system and his teammates.   He was ~ 85 QBR his final 8 games of the season and the Jags averaged ~ 20 points scored per game despite having probably the worst collection of talent at the skill sets in the NFL and no running game to make defenses respect play action.  That's pretty much exemplifies middle tier.  

 

If you think that's horrible, be thankful you never had to follow a team that had a Brodie Croyle, Brady Quinn or Curtis Painter the helm.   There's a whole other tier below Henne, and it's a significant distinction.  

---

Oh, and the whole "rocket surgery" thing?

 

It is a clever bit of word play that's been around for long enough to become an appliance commercial. 

 

thanks FBT just rub it in.........

---

thanks FBT just rub it in.........

Just trying to help.

---

Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

The coaches at Detroit are all trying to rework Matthew Stafford's footwork.... ..

 

 

 

 

5 seasons into his career, a new coaching staff is now having to fix  flaws in their former #1 pick in the draft QB that has prevented him from having the accuracy needed to reach a higher tier.  All because they just HAD to get him on the field as soon as possible as a rookie.    What a waste.    And what do the Lions have to show for all that impatience and haste?   How many titles did they win by rushing Stafford on the field?    

 

And Stafford as a rookie was well ahead of where Bortles currently is.   Stafford played in perhaps the #1 High School Program in the country and started as a true freshman QB in Mark Richt's pro style offense.    Bortles split time between baseball and played in a triple wing option offense in high school, and only played 2 years as a starter in college under a pistol option themed offense. 

 

I think you may be a bit confused about the Offense's that Bortles has worked in, in the past. I've never heard of a Triple Wing Offense, and I thought I remembered Bortles playing in a Wing T styled set. Also, I've never heard of George O'Leary even flirting with the Pistol, and I really don't think he ran any Option at all with Bortles.

---

I'm trying to make myself more informed and less opinionated.

Stop saying whatever stupid thing you're talking about and pay attention to all the interesting things I have to say!

Just trying to help.

 

well apparently there's a whole big world outside of my little whole in Putnam county, maybe one day I'll venture out and see what else I'm missing.........nah!

---

well apparently there's a whole big world outside of my little whole in Putnam county, maybe one day I'll venture out and see what else I'm missing.........nah!

aren't you. Scientist? You should know about rocket surgery.

---

The coaches at Detroit are all trying to rework Matthew Stafford's footwork.... ..

 

 

 

 

5 seasons into his career, a new coaching staff is now having to fix  flaws in their former #1 pick in the draft QB that has prevented him from having the accuracy needed to reach a higher tier.  All because they just HAD to get him on the field as soon as possible as a rookie.    What a waste.    And what do the Lions have to show for all that impatience and haste?   How many titles did they win by rushing Stafford on the field?    

 

And Stafford as a rookie was well ahead of where Bortles currently is.   Stafford played in perhaps the #1 High School Program in the country and started as a true freshman QB in Mark Richt's pro style offense.    Bortles split time between baseball and played in a triple wing option offense in high school, and only played 2 years as a starter in college under a pistol option themed offense. 

 

Now the Lions may not have won any titles under Stafford even if his mechanics and footwork were flawless and even if he weren't rushed.

 

But fortunately, he's been good enough for the Lions to at least have had some success with him as their passer.  He's been good enough where they are not ready to pull the plug on his tenure there.

 

What I don't want to happen here is that the team puts Bortles out there before he is ready causing him to constantly play catchup with his fundamentals, becomes dissatisfied with the early results, and prematurely pulls the plug on him without him ever coming close to reaching his fundamentals.

 

I'd rather they fix his flaws now, then, once he's had the coaching needed, put him on the field so they can see what they truy have once he's refined his skills.

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

Now the Lions may not have won any titles under Stafford even if his mechanics and footwork were flawless and even if he weren't rushed.

 

But fortunately, he's been good enough for the Lions to at least have had some success with him as their passer.  He's been good enough where they are not ready to pull the plug on his tenure there.

 

What I don't want to happen here is that the team puts Bortles out there before he is ready causing him to constantly play catchup with his fundamentals, becomes dissatisfied with the early results, and prematurely pulls the plug on him without him ever coming close to reaching his fundamentals.

 

I'd rather they fix his flaws now, then, once he's had the coaching needed, put him on the field so they can see what they truy have once he's refined his skills.

 

Agreed.  I do expect to see Bortles getting into games late in order for them to evaluate where he's at in his development.  I'm not expecting starts this year, but I do think we'll get opportunities to see him out there. 

---

Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

 I really don't think he ran any Option at all with Bortles.

 

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WYd29xlmc04#t=75

 

That's in the very first drive of the very first game I pulled up.   You should learn a little more about Charlie Taaffe's background.    Whatever you want to label it, it's certainly not an offense that's proliffic passing.    Not many coaches in the country would rank 75th in passing attempts when they had a future Top 3 draft pick playing behind center. 

---

Agreed.  I do expect to see Bortles getting into games late in order for them to evaluate where he's at in his development.  I'm not expecting starts this year, but I do think we'll get opportunities to see him out there. 

 

 

I see Bortles possibly starting under maybe three  conditions.

 

1)  Injury to Henne forces the team's hand.

 

2)  Bortles' and the OL's progress occurs at an accelerated rate and surpasses all expectations, and he takes the reigns sometimes after the bye.  I do not think this is impossible, but I do not think it is likely to happen.

 

3)  The team gets off to such a disastrous start under Henne-with a lack of competitiveness and lack of wins similar to last season-pressure buids from outside and within to put him in at some point.  To me, the fans would have to revolt and then Khan would force Bradley into the lineup.  I see this as a near impossibility.  Thankfully Khan has proven he is willing to let his football people handle the football decisions and not succumb to the flavor of the month fan favorite.  Otherwise, he would have forced a Tebow acquisition or a Manziel draft.  He did neither.  While fans are a notoriously reactionary bunch as a whole and that sentiment could change if the team starts disastrously, if this board is a cross section of the fanbase as a whole, then I think most understand the team doesn't want to rush him and are willing to wait.

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WYd29xlmc04#t=75

 

That's in the very first drive of the very first game I pulled up.   You should learn a little more about Charlie Taaffe's background.    Whatever you want to label it, it's certainly not an offense that's proliffic passing.    Not many coaches in the country would rank 75th in passing attempts when they had a future Top 3 draft pick playing behind center. 

 

My fault. The games that I've seen of him - and there weren't that many - didn't seem to feature a lot of option. I watched through about half of that link and I only saw one other Option play, but there may have been more. I never really saw a Pistol style look though, where the QB is at around five yards deep with a RB behind him. I may have missed it though.

 

Off topic, it's amazing how that inverted Veer has really seeped into just about every part of college football.

---

I'm trying to make myself more informed and less opinionated.

Stop saying whatever stupid thing you're talking about and pay attention to all the interesting things I have to say!

Now the Lions may not have won any titles under Stafford even if his mechanics and footwork were flawless and even if he weren't rushed.

 

But fortunately, he's been good enough for the Lions to at least have had some success with him as their passer.  He's been good enough where they are not ready to pull the plug on his tenure there.

 

He has a career completion % under 60% despite feeding targets to one of the greatest catch radius receivers in the history of the game.  Any "success" they've had through the passing game have come through accumulation rather than efficiency, mainly from having a generational freak  talent at WR and a former OC in Scott Linehan who is one of the founding fathers of the spread offense and would throw the ball 70 times a game if he could.

 

The Lions have had other problems, but Stafford's mechanics, and thus accuracy, have been a major issue with the team's ability to sustain drives when they can't hit the homerun with CJ.  Which is why Detroit brought almost an entire staff of highly regarded, famed QB coaches to help fix him ... Caldwell, Lombardi and Jim Bob Cooter.    And they all made Stafford's mechanics an A1 priority this offseason.  

---

I see Bortles possibly starting under maybe three  conditions.

 

1)  Injury to Henne forces the team's hand.

 

2)  Bortles' and the OL's progress occurs at an accelerated rate and surpasses all expectations, and he takes the reigns sometimes after the bye.  I do not think this is impossible, but I do not think it is likely to happen.

 

3)  The team gets off to such a disastrous start under Henne-with a lack of competitiveness and lack of wins similar to last season-pressure buids from outside and within to put him in at some point.  To me, the fans would have to revolt and then Khan would force Bradley into the lineup.  I see this as a near impossibility.  Thankfully Khan has proven he is willing to let his football people handle the football decisions and not succumb to the flavor of the month fan favorite.  Otherwise, he would have forced a Tebow acquisition or a Manziel draft.  He did neither.  While fans are a notoriously reactionary bunch as a whole and that sentiment could change if the team starts disastrously, if this board is a cross section of the fanbase as a whole, then I think most understand the team doesn't want to rush him and are willing to wait.

 

I don't see the third scenario as being realistic either.  I get no sense Gus or Dave will buckle under pressure from fans, and I think Shad Khan is going to let them do their thing. 

---

Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

He has a career completion % under 60% despite feeding targets to one of the greatest catch radius receivers in the history of the game.  Any "success" they've had through the passing game have come through accumulation rather than efficiency, mainly from having a generational freak  talent at WR and a former OC in Scott Linehan who is one of the founding fathers of the spread offense and would throw the ball 70 times a game if he could.

 

The Lions have had other problems, but Stafford's mechanics, and thus accuracy, have been a major issue which is why Detroit brought almost an entire staff of QB coaches to help fix him ... Caldwell, Lombardi and Jim Bob Cooter.    And they all made Stafford's mechanics an A1 priority.  

 

Even with <60% completion in his career (59.5%), he's still done some decent things in Detroit.  His best year saw him have a 41-16 TD-INT ratio and 5000 yards passing.  He also had a 4900 yard season too.  His overall TD-INT ratio is 109-73.

 

Is he perfect?  Obviously not, because the team made a concerted effort to fix his mechanics.

 

But he's been good enough for the team to be willing to make the investment into his development even after five years in the league, rather than the new coaching staff bring in a new guy.

 

History is replete with guys who never made it that far.  More often than not, guys with major mechanical flaws don't put up those kind of numbers and don't get the chance to fix them with a new coaching staff.

 

But I wonder how much of his completion percentage is attributable to his flaws, and how much is attributable to the offense.  If the team has emphasized deeper passes more than the typical WCO, a lower completion percentage is to be expected.  Not being overly familiar with the Lions' offensive approach in the Stafford era, I'm not qualified to say.

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

Spot on, nice try Dog.

 

No, not exactly spot on, there dude, but you've always been the kind to just agree with certain ppl, so....

 

I remember MANY posters who at the time used this sort of thinking with Gabbert - "you don't learn anything by holding a clipboard"...."the only way he's going to learn is through playing, and if he has trouble, then we drafted the wrong QB".....

 

So, no....not everybody was on board with the idea of sitting Gabbert initially and bringing him along slowly. 

 

Nor was I saying I was the only one who thought Gabbert should be brought along slowly. There was some. But many had the above mentality. 

---

The second half of last year, once he got some familiarity with the offensive system and his teammates.   He was ~ 85 QBR his final 8 games of the season and the Jags averaged ~ 20 points scored per game despite having probably the worst collection of talent at the skill sets in the NFL and no running game to make defenses respect play action.  That's pretty much exemplifies middle tier.  

 

If you think that's horrible, be thankful you never had to follow a team that had a Brodie Croyle, Brady Quinn or Curtis Painter the helm.   There's a whole other tier below Henne, and it's a significant distinction.  

That's an awfully small sample size.  If you look at his career as a whole, his QBR has always been in the 70s, he's never thrown more than 15 TDs in a year and averages an INT for every game he's played.  Obviously things can be worse (Tebow for example), but I can't see him being considered mid-tier.  That means there's probably at least 10 or 11 starting QBs in this league you'd take him over (assuming he's on the low end of the mid-tier).  Is that the case?

---

No, not exactly spot on, there dude, but you've always been the kind to just agree with certain ppl, so....

 

I remember MANY posters who at the time used this sort of thinking with Gabbert - "you don't learn anything by holding a clipboard"...."the only way he's going to learn is through playing, and if he has trouble, then we drafted the wrong QB".....

 

So, no....not everybody was on board with the idea of sitting Gabbert initially and bringing him along slowly. 

 

Actually I've vouched for you a few times in opposition of other posters so all I can say to you is the recollection skills giveth and they taketh away big boy.

 

Painting yourself as the lone voice of reason that wanted Gabbert to sit is questionable at best, and self-aggrandizement in the least.

---

aren't you. Scientist? You should know about rocket surgery.

 

nah just a simple auto guy, that rocket stuff is for the birds!

---

nah just a simple auto guy, that rocket stuff is for the birds
!

 

I thought it was for surgeons...

---

I'm trying to make myself more informed and less opinionated.

Stop saying whatever stupid thing you're talking about and pay attention to all the interesting things I have to say!