No, the joke was that he said he wasn't going to hold his tongue any longer. Although, in my opinion, part of his frustration is the sucking at the QB position. If I were a young receiver on this team, and I saw these two horrible QB's getting playing time over promising prospects like Scott and Stanzi, I'd be counting down the days until my contract was up so I could get out of Jacksonville.

 

The words "Stanzi" and "promising prospects" have never been together in the same sentence. Except in maybe a time share brochure sent to his house.

---

Evaluating Stanzi and Scott will come after the season is over.  Having Henne or Gabbert in there (Henne more than Gabbert since he's been more effective in the passing game), as awful as they've been, is still better for allowing the team to get a look at the young receivers and TEs in the passing game to see where they stand.  I'd rather see them sit on the sideline watching than to toss them out there and see the entire offense take a step back.  Neither of these guys are getting reps in practice, and they're not prepared to step into the starting role.  Right now, it's not about the offense getting better as it is about identifying building blocks we can work with moving forward.  You hamper that progress by putting someone who isn't prepared to take the field. 

 

How come we can only evaluate the WRs and TEs through the plays they make on sunday, but the same doesn't apply to Scott or Stanzi?

 

The guys we have are taking the reps and they are not prepared for the starting role, how much worse can Scanzi (the anti Ghenne) be? How much will it really hurt to throw them in for a half or a quarter? Our evaluations are done for Henne and Gabbert, they suck, they will struggle to get jobs after this year. Might as well take a wild swing for the fences and actually see if either Scott or Stanzi has anything worth working with going forward.

---

Just to be different, Bortles.

No, the joke was that he said he wasn't going to hold his tongue any longer. Although, in my opinion, part of his frustration is the sucking at the QB position. If I were a young receiver on this team, and I saw these two horrible QB's getting playing time over promising prospects like Scott and Stanzi, I'd be counting down the days until my contract was up so I could get out of Jacksonville.

Awwww yeah son, Stanzi is the bombdiggity!

---

60% of the time, It works Everytime...



 

How exactly are our young recievers and TEs growing? Is Shorts growing by going the whole first half without a target? Are they growing by chasing down defensive backs that just intercepted the pass? There is absolutely no positive in running either of these two losers out here. And also, Scott and Stanzi are (I believe) the same age as Gabbert, so they've had just as much time to prepare. Gabbert is more prepared to go out and suck like he always has, but I doubt he's more prepared to succeed.

 

Since Henne has taken over, the offense has averaged more than 250 yards per game passing.  Even with all of his boneheaded mistakes, the passing game is better than it was with Gabbert regardless of how hard you're going to try to push this disturbing little man crush you have for Stanzi. 

 

Either you're related to him, his agent, or there's a restraining order somewhere with your name on it. 

 

Scott and Stanzi's ages are completely irrelevant.  Neither of them (nor Gabbert for that matter) are getting any reps in practices during the week. 

 

I know this is difficult for someone who fantasizes about sitting next to a crackling fire with Stanzi, reading poetry about what a great QB he is, telling how you plan to dedicate your life to getting him a job somewhere where he can be appreciated.  But, in the real world. Stanzi is a project at best, and right now is not the time to start messing around with anything.  He's right where he needs to be.

---

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

How come we can only evaluate the WRs and TEs through the plays they make on sunday, but the same doesn't apply to Scott or Stanzi?

 

The guys we have are taking the reps and they are not prepared for the starting role, how much worse can Scanzi (the anti Ghenne) be? How much will it really hurt to throw them in for a half or a quarter? Our evaluations are done for Henne and Gabbert, they suck, they will struggle to get jobs after this year. Might as well take a wild swing for the fences and actually see if either Scott or Stanzi has anything worth working with going forward.

 

If Stanzi or Scott were considered to be potential starters for this team, then you'd give them playing time.  Neither is being touted as anything of the sort, so there's no reason to do anything with them today. 

---

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

Awwww yeah son, Stanzi is the bombdiggity!

LOL Is that the only gif you could find of Stanzi making a mistake? An interception off the receiver's hands? Who is that stud he's throwing to right there anyway?

---

LOL Is that the only gif you could find of Stanzi making a mistake? An interception off the receiver's hands? Who is that stud he's throwing to right there anyway?

Watch that clip again, sweetheart.  It didn't touch a receiver's hands, but however you need to build up that fantasy.  He threw it right at the defender.  That's laser sharp accuracy.

---

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

I will interpret a lack of response as a concession.

---

If something can corrupt you, you're corrupted already.
- Bob Marley


 

Awwww yeah son, Stanzi is the bombdiggity!

How about watching every snap of one of his preseason games instead of a gif of a deflected interception?

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=taGz7UPQXV0

---

Prove it. You're either sadly misinformed or outright lying.

 

The 15 year time span you cite is difficult to pin down, but this NFL site lists the top 25 colleges from 1992 to 2011, and Iowa doesn't make the list. Number 25 is Miami...of Ohio. These are draftees, so unless Iowa had an inordinate number of undrafted free agents in the last 15 years, your contention doesn't hold water.

 

This site lists the top 10 of all time. Again, no Iowa.

 

This site lists the top 10 in the last 20 years. They are:

 

USC, Texas, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Michigan, Florida, Florida State, Oklahoma, Nebraska, Penn State.

 

I don't know how that lists reads through Stanzi-colored glasses, but I don't see Iowa in there anywhere.

 

So here's your chance. Present your case. Either put up, or shut up.

LOL!!!!! Wiki Answers????????

---

Watch that clip again, sweetheart.  It didn't touch a receiver's hands, but however you need to build up that fantasy.  He threw it right at the defender.  That's laser sharp accuracy.

Speaking of laser sharp accuracy. Check out this STRIKE from Teddy Bridgewater.

 

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=9948823

 

 

I guess this floating duck interception means he is going to be horrible in the NFL might as well not give him a chance to prove himself.

---

LOL!!!!! Wiki Answers????????

 

One site is an NFL site.

 

If you can dispute any of them, feel free to do so.

---

If something can corrupt you, you're corrupted already.
- Bob Marley


 

If Stanzi or Scott were considered to be potential starters for this team, then you'd give them playing time.  Neither is being touted as anything of the sort, so there's no reason to do anything with them today. 

 

Who said starters?

 

On any other team Henne wouldnt be a potential starter, should we bench him for that?

 

The point remains, Henne sucks, he gives us little to no chance to win, the absolute worst that can happen if you stick Stanzi or Scott on for a half of football is that they play worse than 4 TDs, 9 INTs and 72 QBR in 9 starts. Lets be honest, its no loss is it?

 

Call me insane, but if they manage to do something mind blowing like I don't know, throw more TDs than INTs or more than one TD every 2 games, they might even be worth keeping around next year which would make either one 100% more valuable than Henne.

 

We wont know unless we try.

---

Just to be different, Bortles.

I will interpret a lack of response as a concession.

You are listing draftees, not actual players.The bleacher report article that someone posted a couple pages ago at least focused on players that made it in the NFL. You're lists are trash.

---

You are listing draftees, not actual players.The bleacher report article that someone posted a couple pages ago at least focused on players that made it in the NFL. You're lists are trash.

 

NFL.com is trash? Scroll to the bottom, where it lists NFL starts by college.

 

Like I said, post your source.

---

If something can corrupt you, you're corrupted already.
- Bob Marley


 

One site is an NFL site.

 

If you can dispute any of them, feel free to do so.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/82147...e-football

 

Here's a list that actually focuses on players who are in the league, not just the ones who were drafted.

---

Who said starters?

 

On any other team Henne wouldnt be a potential starter, should we bench him for that?

 

The point remains, Henne sucks, he gives us little to no chance to win, the absolute worst that can happen if you stick Stanzi or Scott on for a half of football is that they play worse than 4 TDs, 9 INTs and 72 QBR in 9 starts. Lets be honest, its no loss is it?

 

Call me insane, but if they manage to do something mind blowing like I don't know, throw more TDs than INTs or more than one TD every 2 games, they might even be worth keeping around next year which would make either one 100% more valuable than Henne.

 

We wont know unless we try.

Nope. You're crazy. You're an idiot. We need to ride Henne out as long as we can! GET OFF THESE BOARDS YOU CRAZY LUNATIC!

 

 

That's the response I'm guessing you're gonna get.

---

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/82147...e-football

 

Here's a list that actually focuses on players who are in the league, not just the ones who were drafted.

 

Number 7. In Iowa, is 7 > 3 or 4? Or are you adding 3 + 4?

---

If something can corrupt you, you're corrupted already.
- Bob Marley


 

Number 7. In Iowa, is 7 > 3 or 4? Or are you adding 3 + 4?

It's close enough. And my guess is if you cut out the bench warmers, Iowa would be above half the teams on that list. The teams above have typically high draft classes and then a lot of players drafted don't pan out. My overall point is that Iowa is a much better producer of NFL talent than Missouri. Can you at least agree with that? Or is your head so far up Blaine Gabbert's butt that you don't realize it?

---

Number 7. In Iowa, is 7 > 3 or 4? Or are you adding 3 + 4?

I'd also like to point out the amount of 5 star recruits that a school like Florida (who you all think is soooooo much better apparently) has to produce NFL players compared to a school like Iowa. Iowa is top 3 or 4 in PRODUCING NFL talent. So what if some 5 star recruits stop by Florida to play for a couple years before moving on?

---