Brian Billick Likes Gabbert - Page 6

jrdrylie · 12-21-2011, 10:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by prock

The issue here is your video proof isn't proof. In fact, it's proof of my side. But throw your all your faith into some no-name analyst.

Jeff Lageman isn't really a no-name analyst. He has been around Jacksonville for years and is very highly respected in the area. Just because he isn't on ESPN doesn't mean he sucks and just because a person is on ESPN doesn't mean the have credibility. I mean, Emmitt Smith and Trent Dilfer have been or still are on ESPN.

With all that said, he had time. The pocket was pretty clean. A good QB would have stood there made the throw and possibly taken a hit. Gabbert decided to piss his pants like the ***** he is and curl up in the fetal position.

DraftSavant · 12-21-2011, 10:14 AM

People will see what they want to see.

hockey619 · 12-21-2011, 10:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DraftSavant

People are in denial and incredibly oblivious.

corrected for accuracy.

KLima878 · 12-21-2011, 10:27 AM

Not in denial or seeing what i want to see. If he doesnt improve dramticly next year I will be back here leading the charge to dump him and move on. I'm just not throwing him out to pasture after 13 games.

DraftSavant · 12-21-2011, 10:38 AM

You can see in the endzone shot of that footage that he got to the top of his drop, planted, and then sidestepped into the pressure. That ball needs to come out hot at the top of the drop and be thrown with anticipation.

BeerBaron · 12-21-2011, 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DraftSavant

People will see what they want to see.

You know, this could be turned around on us too. Maybe because we predicted and expected failure, that is what we're....

pshhhhhhffffffttttttttttttt, hahaha. Couldn't say that all with a straight face.

Gabbert is terrible. Abhorrent. Appalling. Dreadful. A bloody period stain on the sport of football.

WCH · 12-21-2011, 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DraftSavant

You can see in the endzone shot of that footage that he got to the top of his drop, planted, and then sidestepped into the pressure. That ball needs to come out hot at the top of the drop and be thrown with anticipation.

That's what I saw, also.

jrdrylie · 12-21-2011, 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeerBaron

You know, this could be turned around on us too. Maybe because we predicted and expected failure, that is what we're....

pshhhhhhffffffttttttttttttt, hahaha. Couldn't say that all with a straight face.

Gabbert is terrible. Abhorrent. Appalling. Dreadful. A bloody period stain on the sport of football.

Even if you could say it with a straight face, it still would be wrong. Draft Savant and I are both Jaguars fans. We would love to see Gabbert succeed. We could easily make excuses (his line sucks, his receivers suck). But we don't. We call it as we see it. And what we see (and what everybody should see) is that Gabbert has good tools. He has prototypical size, a good arm, and good athleticism. But he can't read defenses, he has the worst pocket precense in the league, and he is the cowradly lion in the pocket. Reading defenses can imporve. Pocket precense can probably improve too. But being a coward in the pocket? That can't improve. you either have a sack or you don't.

BeerBaron · 12-21-2011, 10:54 AM

Accuracy. He's also wildly inaccurate. Some of that could be improved if he actually stepped into his throws and anticipated where his receivers would be...but I've never seen a QB improve accuracy significantly over a career.

Donovan McNabb got by being one of the most inaccurate "successful" QBs I've ever seen, aided in large part by an offense that inflated completion percentage by throwing to the backs and TEs a lot, and also because he'd scramble around in his younger days until someone became so wide open he couldn't miss.

Like, look at the most successful QBs in the league any given year. Rodgers, Brees, Brady, the Mannings...what do they have in common? All are highly accurate passers.

Saints-Tigers · 12-21-2011, 10:55 AM

I've honestly never seen what people loved so much. His flaws were TERRIBLE and obvious in college, and his "tools" weren't so good that you really want to take a risk. He's far far far far far behind where most scramblers, option, spread, gimmick, etc QBs are in development.

I never thought he had the accuracy to be great, even if all his other flaws were fixed, but his inability to handle pressure(Or the fact that he creates his own pressure) is just hilarious.

I dunno, he looks better than Alex Smith did as a rookie, so maybe he can be an average starter in 6-7 years.

This is one of those cases where draftniks nailed it perfectly methinks, because most people weren't big fans...

DraftSavant · 12-21-2011, 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jrdrylie

Even if you could say it with a straight face, it still would be wrong. Draft Savant and I are both Jaguars fans. We would love to see Gabbert succeed. We could easily make excuses (his line sucks, his receivers suck). But we don't. We call it as we see it. And what we see (and what everybody should see) is that Gabbert has good tools. He has prototypical size, a good arm, and good athleticism. But he can't read defenses, he has the worst pocket precense in the league, and he is the cowradly lion in the pocket. Reading defenses can imporve. Pocket precense can probably improve too. But being a coward in the pocket? That can't improve. you either have a sack or you don't.

Pretty much. He showed some decent flash in the preseason (I'm assuming the non-contact nature of practice and slow/poor practice squad defenses he faced in PS games helped his confidence a little) - enough to give me a little hope.

And then he was named the starter going into a CIN/PIT/BAL/HOU 4-game stretch, and I knew it was over for him there. That's just an insane lineup to put your incredibly raw and still-scared-of-pressure QB through, and I don't think he'll ever really recover from that.

Again, though, that's why I'm in favor of playing guys their rookie year and seeing what they're made of. You need to see how they deal with adversity.

DraftSavant · 12-21-2011, 10:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeerBaron

Accuracy. He's also wildly inaccurate. Some of that could be improved if he actually stepped into his throws and anticipated where his receivers would be...but I've never seen a QB improve accuracy significantly over a career.

Donovan McNabb got by being one of the most inaccurate "successful" QBs I've ever seen, aided in large part by an offense that inflated completion percentage by throwing to the backs and TEs a lot, and also because he'd scramble around in his younger days until someone became so wide open he couldn't miss.

Like, look at the most successful QBs in the league any given year. Rodgers, Brees, Brady, the Mannings...what do they have in common? All are highly accurate passers.

It's funny that you mention McNabb, because I was thinking last night that there are a lot of similarities in their games. McNabb obviously got much better development from his coaching staff early in his career (and also used his athleticism better) and, most importantly, didn't play timid. But the style of passer is very similar. They're very much "see it - throw it" type of guys. Neither is really comfortable at throwing into tight windows or with anticipation; you have to conceptually design the offense around giving them easily-defined reads or else they're really uncomfortable.

Saints-Tigers · 12-21-2011, 11:09 AM

I really can't think of a GREAT QB who I think would have been "broken" by early pressure. I think the real greats overcome that, no matter how bad it looks early on (Brees for instance...)

Aaron Rodgers benefited greatly from sitting, but I think he would have gotten there regardless, maybe not so seamlessly.

Short version, I don't think you can break a really good QB prospect, or they would have never really been great no matter what happens.

BeerBaron · 12-21-2011, 11:12 AM

Does anyone really think David Carr would have been any good if he hadn't been beaten up in Houston? Or Trent Edwards?

The great ones will find a way to be great regardless of circumstances.

DraftSavant · 12-21-2011, 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saints-Tigers

I really can't think of a GREAT QB who I think would have been "broken" by early pressure. I think the real greats overcome that, no matter how bad it looks early on (Brees for instance...)

Aaron Rodgers benefited greatly from sitting, but I think he would have gotten there regardless, maybe not so seamlessly.

Short version, I don't think you can break a really good QB prospect, or they would have never really been great no matter what happens.

I generally agree with this. That's why I'm in favor of playing guys their rookie seasons. Would rather see them fail and get it over with as quickly as possible instead of having the dude sit for a few years, finally start against a weak schedule with a pretty good team behind him. It just leads to him fooling you for a few seasons while you give him chance after chance (Matt Cassel and Kevin Kolb, you are the poster boys for this).

the natural · 12-21-2011, 12:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WCH

I know what you were talking about. I'm saying it's disingenuous, at best, to cut off most of the available dataset and then say "hey, look, he's the hottest QB in the NFL!"

Tebow didn't really play the first half. Is the obvious reason. There is no less obvious reason required.

the natural · 12-21-2011, 12:46 PM

Long and short of it is, I told you pinheads that this was a good quarterback class back in March or whatever. Matter of fact I think I even said that this would be one of the best ever. It has been. I told you that Tebow should be starting in the league and that he throws well enough to win, even if you disregard the running threat. That has happened.

Now I'll tell you that Gabbert will be the best quarterback out of the class in the long haul. I never said he would step in and excel, my thought was that the big advantage to him going to Jacksonville was that he would be able to work in slowly behind Garrard. But that isn't how it worked out, which still makes no difference to the long term picture. Blaine has seen the worse that can be thrown at him and isn't too bothered. He is cool. You can't teach cool, you can't buy it, and you can't fake it. Gabbert has it like no one that has come along in the time I've been following football. It will carry him through and carry him to the top of the heap. Sooner or later.

Brothgar · 12-21-2011, 12:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the natural

Tebow didn't really play the first half. Is the obvious reason. There is no less obvious reason required.

Well he really played for 8 weeks why not extend the data set to 8 weeks? or 9 weeks? the reason is obvious You are forcing the data to match your hypothesis any scientist will tell you that is bad science.

The great dawkins taught us that we can't tolerate those who don't use reason.

the natural · 12-21-2011, 01:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by broth223

Well he really played for 8 weeks why not extend the data set to 8 weeks? or 9 weeks? the reason is obvious You are forcing the data to match your hypothesis any scientist will tell you that is bad science.

The great dawkins taught us that we can't tolerate those who don't use reason.

Whatever, makes no difference. Tebow has been HOT, is the point. Probably even the great Dawkins is aware of him.

DraftSavant · 12-21-2011, 01:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jrdrylie

Jeff Lageman isn't really a no-name analyst. He has been around Jacksonville for years and is very highly respected in the area. Just because he isn't on ESPN doesn't mean he sucks and just because a person is on ESPN doesn't mean the have credibility. I mean, Emmitt Smith and Trent Dilfer have been or still are on ESPN.

With all that said, he had time. The pocket was pretty clean. A good QB would have stood there made the throw and possibly taken a hit. Gabbert decided to piss his pants like the ***** he is and curl up in the fetal position.

He's not a no-name analyst, but he's still the same guy who said Gabbert had "perfect mechanics" coming out and compared Derrick Harvey to Tony Brackens and Larry Hart to James Harrison.

He can be a homer at times.

the natural · 12-21-2011, 01:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DraftSavant

It's funny that you mention McNabb, because I was thinking last night that there are a lot of similarities in their games. McNabb obviously got much better development from his coaching staff early in his career .

McNabb was 23 when he made his first NFL start. Or very close to it. Gabbert was 21. Donovan finished his rookie season with a 49% compl and 60 passer rating, which are both worse than Blaine has at the moment. So the "better development" wasn't all that obvious.

DraftSavant · 12-21-2011, 01:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the natural

McNabb was 23 when he made his first NFL start. Or very close to it. Gabbert was 21. Donovan finished his rookie season with a 49% compl and 60 passer rating, which are both worse than Blaine has at the moment. So the "better development" wasn't all that obvious.

Better development meaning the coaching staffs.

And the difference in completion percentage is less than 49.1 vs 50.6. The TD/INT ratios are 8-7 vs 11-10, which, when you consider the amount of games started (6 vs 13) explains the discrepancy in passer rating.

the natural · 12-21-2011, 01:37 PM

McNabb had a pretty good career. Which may or may not be over. But he started later and less impressively in the league than Gabbert. I've been trying to say that Blaine's numbers are average for a rookie starter, and he is younger than most. So, why all the Doomsday Prophecies? Seems to me, if you go by the numbers, he is slightly ahead of schedule in terms of having a long and successful NFL: career. Unless he has a total collapse in the last two games, Blaine will finish with better passer rating than Stafford, Sanchez, and Freeman from the 2009 draft. No one is writing those three off as NFL quarterbacks.

Saints-Tigers · 12-21-2011, 01:42 PM

Lmao. It's laughably easier to pass this year than it was when McNabb was a rookie.

Sanchez sucks, and Stafford/Freeman didn't play as many games as Gabbert.

Plus, eyeball it, at least we've seen flashes of big things from them at points, Gabbert hasn't had consecutive moments where we say "damn, that was nice!"

He's inaccurate, terrified of pressure, and just not smart. He's kinda like Tebow, most of his passes are so far off the mark, there is no shot at a catch or an interception.

DraftSavant · 12-21-2011, 01:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the natural

McNabb had a pretty good career. Which may or may not be over. But he started later and less impressively in the league than Gabbert. I've been trying to say that Blaine's numbers are average for a rookie starter, and he is younger than most. So, why all the Doomsday Prophecies? Seems to me, if you go by the numbers, he is slightly ahead of schedule in terms of having a long and successful NFL: career. Unless he has a total collapse in the last two games, Blaine will finish with better passer rating than Stafford, Sanchez, and Freeman from the 2009 draft. No one is writing those three off as NFL quarterbacks.

Because it's not about the numbers, it's about the eye-test. And he's failing that (miserably).

For example, everyone likes to retardedly use Peyton Manning's rookie season as an example for young QBs struggling. Sure, Peyton set a record for the most turnovers, but he also had the most passing yards for a rookie ever, threw 21 TDs, showed multiple flashes even while struggling, and was running the offense REALLY well by the 2nd half of his rookie season.

This isn't baseball. Raw statistics don't really provide any sort of analysis whatsoever.