(01-21-2018, 10:38 PM)HandsomeRob86 Wrote:

(01-21-2018, 09:41 PM)SamusAranX Wrote: No no no no.

We have seen this song and dance before. He’s inconsistent and he could easily go back to bad Bortles. You keep him and bring in a ton of competition for him. But you don’t just hand him the keys.

---

He meant giving Garrard a huge contract after stringing together some solid games. That didn’t work out in the long term and it won’t now.

Garrard was very consistent, that wasn't his issue. He is the only QB in recent times that I ever felt like we had a consistent shot of making 3rd and longs. I think he was better than Blake is due to higher completion percentage and better TD:INT ratio.

But that doesn't matter, we are looking at Blake on his own. I think we are going to let Blake play out the 5th year option and make the decision then while drafting a new backup/future QB this April. If he puts up a simular or better year to this year, I think you are pretty much forced to extend him, because the floor is much lower in the nfl.

(01-21-2018, 10:59 PM)jagsfaninvan Wrote:

(01-21-2018, 10:47 PM)spacecoastjag Wrote: Lol yeah because Garrard threw for 4500 yards and 35 TDs at age 23 and took his team to the AFC championship at age 25. 

Some of you people need to get a clue.

---

Bahahahahahha. Bortles is the best QB in franchise history and he's only 25.

Take a look around the league. You're so used to watching garbage football for a decade that getting to the AFC championship is enough for you. You can't have a neutered offence because the coaches don't trust their QB and expect to ride it to a Super Bowl. Hopefully the people in charge have bigger things in mind.