(03-20-2020, 12:53 PM)TrivialPursuit Wrote: (03-20-2020, 12:49 PM)Kane Wrote: cover was bear?
First, Garrard certainly had a habit of throwing INTs at the most inopportune times. He was benched for Quinn Gray? For what like one game? The following season Garrard was named starter and threw only 3 INTs. Good offensive coordinators his whole career? Then why were they replaced after 06?
Blake's receivers were never suspect. Allen Robinson and Hurns bailed Blake out all the time.
Great defense? In Garrards time as starter we couldn't muster a pass rush to save our lives (hence over reaching for the Harvey/Groves debacle.) After JDR was let go, everyone flamed him as a terrible coach, not a good one. Lewis literally had one really good season as a receiving TE, 07, the season Garrard played well and led us to the AFCCG with Reggie Williams and Matt Jones and Earnest Wilford at his disposal.
Yes, he had arguably one of the best RB duos of all time at his disposal.... And we leaned heavy on those guys.
But our vaunted D wasn't what it once was by the time Garrard was named starter, and our receiving weapons were some of the worst of all time.
And as I said, he was never elite... but to say a 4th round draft pick, that eventually unseated Byron Leftwich for the starting role, and led us to an AFCCG that his receivers and the defense let him down in, underachieved is just plain stupid and wrong. If anything he overachieved given the circumstances. Over rated? By rating him the 3rd or 4th best QB of our franchise?
Do you even know what that word means?
If anything, outside of inflated stats, Garrard gave us just as much as Bortles ever did, with less.
Bortles had a better D for the majority of his time, he got more starts, and had better weapons on the outside. Bortles also played during a time when the AFCS was much weaker than it used to be, when Manning led the clots and the tacks always had strong defenses.
Meanwhile Leftwhich could never stay healthy and led us to one playoff berth (which, technically Garrard led us to down the stretch winning 4 of the last 5) and lost the game.
So yeah Garrard doesn't get enough respect around here especially from people who think Bortles or Leftwich were so much better, when they really weren't.
And they were first round "franchise" QBs.
Do you remember those 4 out of 5 games? He was throwing directly to their DBs - they just dropped it. He got very, very lucky in that stretch.
God that sounds eerily similar to was often said about Blake.
I remember a lot about those years... the back and forth with Leftwich getting hurt, Garrard filling in.... Leftwich being named starter again... getting hurt again.... Fact is... come 2007 Garrard was more reliable, even with his penchant of throwing INTs or near INTs (which don't count for anything.)
In Garrards entire career, he was the actual starter for like 2 seasons. But he came in and filled in admirably as Leftys backup numerous times.
As a starter he led us to one of the best seasons I can remember when we beat Pitt in Pitt twice and were oh so close to beating the undefeated Pats.
Lefty didn't give us that. Bortles gave us something similar but with arguably a better team.
My whole point isn't to try to put Garrard in the hall. Just that fans give him hate for no good reason. Dude was a 4th rounder who outperformed outside of the stats both Leftwich and Bortles, imo.
So this whole overhyped thing is nonsense.
When ranking Jags QBs he's no lower than 4th and an argument could be made that he was 2. (Not counting Minshew at all, because of such a small resume)
Had Leftwich stayed healthy, he's probably the best QB we ever had, but he got hurt every season it seemed like and never won anything of importance. Bortles never could put together much of anything. Instead only showing flashes and padding his stats.
To act like those guys are head and shoulders above Garrard is silly.
