See TMD I would consider your argument against Mariota, had you not been all excited over the prospect of having him on this team before seeing him play and saying he reminds you of Gabbert. 

 

It appears it's you that's arguing for the sake of arguing. 

I don't think it's arguing for the sake of arguing.  Being excited at the prospect before seeing someone play (after hearing opinions on them) and then watching them play, you can be disappointed.

 

Really not getting the Mariota hype myself.  I'd rather have Boyd or Mettenberger tbh.  Though Bridgewater is Choice 1 easily.

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

I've been lambasted for saying this on Twitter but I am genuinely curious what Gabbert would have been like in college his final season if he was playing for this Oregon team instead of Mizzou.

Mariota is a better prospects with better downfield accuracy but I think Gabbert would have been a good fit for the offense.

 

I agree, Gabbert would have been a good fit to that Oregon offense.....would have also been hyped even more than he already was....and some other poor sap might have selected him ahead of us...

---

I agree, Gabbert would have been a good fit to that Oregon offense.....would have also been hyped even more than he already was....and some other poor sap might have selected him ahead of us...

 

Based on what exactly?

---

;

;

Based on what exactly?

 

Based on the fact that as a prospect he is A LOT like Mariota. And he thrived on spread offense/read option plays as well as screen and swing passes. So basically everything Oregon does.

 

Mariota is less built and slightly faster though.

---

TEST

Based on the fact that as a prospect he is A LOT like Mariota. And he thrived on spread offense/read option plays as well as screen and swing passes. So basically everything Oregon does.


Mariota is less built and slightly faster though.

Thrived? He didn't thrive at Missouri. He was adequate.

---

Thrived? He didn't thrive at Missouri. He was adequate.

 

His numbers were adequate because he didn't get to play on the best team in the nation like Mariota.

 

Neither of these guys are a Teddy Bridgewater who is the heart of his team. Last year Mariota was just another Oregon QB running that silly Oregon offense putting up insane point totals.

---

TEST

And for the record I am not saying Mariota will be like Gabbert. I am just saying they are similar in size/tangibles and played in similar offenses.

 

We have no idea if Mariota will become a huge girl like Gabbert

---

TEST

His numbers were adequate because he didn't get to play on the best team in the nation like Mariota.


Neither of these guys are a Teddy Bridgewater who is the heart of his team. Last year Mariota was just another Oregon QB running that silly Oregon offense putting up insane point totals.

2007- 4306 yards, 68.2%, 7.65 YPA, 33 td, 11 int

2008- 4335, 72.9%, 8.21 YPA, 39 td, 18 int

2009- 3593, 58.9%, 8.07 YPA, 24 td, 9 int

2010- 3186, 63.4%, 6.71 YPA, 19 td, 9 int


He was not good at Missouri. I can't believe I am even arguing that.


No he doesn't put the team on his back like Teddy. That's why I and many other still prefer Teddy.

---

2007- 4306 yards, 68.2%, 7.65 YPA, 33 td, 11 int

2008- 4335, 72.9%, 8.21 YPA, 39 td, 18 int

2009- 3593, 58.9%, 8.07 YPA, 24 td, 9 int

2010- 3186, 63.4%, 6.71 YPA, 19 td, 9 int


He was not good at Missouri. I can't believe I am even arguing that.


No he doesn't put the team on his back like Teddy. That's why I and many other still prefer Teddy.

 

No idea what argument you are trying to make. My entire point was that I would like to see how Gabbert would do on this Oregon team since he would have fit into the system well. I think his numbers would have been much better playing on a vastly superior team.

 

Obviously he would have still been an awful NFL qb.

---

TEST

No idea what argument you are trying to make. My entire point was that I would like to see how Gabbert would do on this Oregon team since he would have fit into the system well. I think his numbers would have been much better playing on a vastly superior team.


Obviously he would have still been an awful NFL qb.

Chase daniel did just fine in that offense. Why couldn't Gabbert? It's a spread designed to pick up yards and Gabbert was bad in it. He was a horrible prospect with great measurables.

---

Chase daniel did just fine in that offense. Why couldn't Gabbert? It's a spread designed to pick up yards and Gabbert was bad in it. He was a horrible prospect with great measurables.

 

Still not sure what point you are trying to make. No one is trying to argue that Mizzou is the reason why Gabbert sucked. I am saying, for funzies, I would like to see Gabbert in this Oregon offense.

---

TEST

2007- 4306 yards, 68.2%, 7.65 YPA, 33 td, 11 int

2008- 4335, 72.9%, 8.21 YPA, 39 td, 18 int

2009- 3593, 58.9%, 8.07 YPA, 24 td, 9 int

2010- 3186, 63.4%, 6.71 YPA, 19 td, 9 int


He was not good at Missouri. I can't believe I am even arguing that.


No he doesn't put the team on his back like Teddy. That's why I and many other still prefer Teddy.

The only QB prospect he really knows any thing about is Teddy.

---

The only QB prospect he really knows any thing about is Teddy.

 

I have watched footage extensively on about 11 QBs in college right now.

 

You are just upset that you had to learn how mediocre Aaron Murray is the hard way.

---

TEST

Still not sure what point you are trying to make. No one is trying to argue that Mizzou is the reason why Gabbert sucked. I am saying, for funzies, I would like to see Gabbert in this Oregon offense.

I'm saying why couldn't Gabbert be successful in Missouri? The qb before him was. It's a similar offense to Oregon designed to put up stats. Why couldn't he do it?

---

I'm saying why couldn't Gabbert be successful in Missouri? The qb before him was. It's a similar offense to Oregon designed to put up stats. Why couldn't he do it?

 

Because Missouri wasn't the best team college football? I still do not understand the point you are trying to make. Is it that Gabbert sucks? Because no one is arguing against this. At all.

---

TEST

Because Missouri wasn't the best team college football? I still do not understand the point you are trying to make. Is it that Gabbert sucks? Because no one is arguing this. At all.

But why did Chase Daniel have success? Maybe because Gabbert couldn't run that style of offense very well?

---

I have watched footage extensively on about 11 QBs in college right now.

 

You are just upset that you had to learn how mediocre Aaron Murray is the hard way.

When did I learn that.  Murray will be one of the best QB's to come out of this class.

 

You say I don't know how to evaluate a QB and then you compare Gabbert to Mariota lol.

---

But why did Chase Daniel have success? Maybe because Gabbert couldn't run that style of offense very well?

 

Because Chase Daniel is better than Gabbert...still not sure what you are getting at.

---

TEST

When did I learn that.  Murray will be one of the best QB's to come out of this class.

 

You say I don't know how to evaluate a QB and then you compare Gabbert to Mariota lol.

 

Because they are almost identical in size, and played in very similar offenses. Mariota is clearly far better.

---

TEST

Because Chase Daniel is better than Gabbert...still not sure what you are getting at.

I'm just saying he wouldn't be that successful at Oregon either. He'd have better stats but not that much better. He's not accurate and see ghosts in the pocket.

---