Mr. WEO Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 I'll admit it. I was one of those people that wanted us to get Gabbert. I also believed that Cam Newton wouldn't do well in the NFL - just shows you how much I know . Bravo mea culpa, but worry not, Mr. Mike Mayock. There are still many on this board who revere your every utterance... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rico Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 "Now for the bad. In my 20-plus years in the NFL, I don't think I have seen a high first-round pick look as scared or as out of place as Blaine Gabbert. The game looks entirely too big for him. When the ball is in his hand, he treats it like a hot potato. His play was embarrassing, considering he was a top 10 pick. I believed Gabbert was a good prospect and wrote about it leading up to the draft. When everyone was concerned about his down-field throws, I thought he would be able to adjust. But never did I think his eye level would be this low, his unwillingness to hang in the pocket this bad. I readily admit my mistake. Now the Jags need to do the same. The longer they play him, they run the risk of losing the team. How can they expect the players around him to buy in? Gabbert cannot fool his teammates. If he continues to play like this, no one will want to play with him. Now, I understand it is really early in Gabbert's career, and the Jags have a pedestrian offense and no receivers around him. But his play borders on that of an undrafted free agent. Organizations that are the most successful are the ones that ignore draft status and evaluate the players on how they play. I realize the Jags have a significant investment in Gabbert, but they have a bigger one in winning games. Jags GM Gene Smith has a huge problem. He has to lure a coach into Jacksonville and convince that potential coach that what he is seeing on tape is not the player who Gabbert really can become. Who would want the job saddled with a first-round bust? Smith can find anyone to agree to becoming an NFL head coach, but the good candidates will walk away, or won't even interview."from NFL.com Sounds like JP. Oh well, the Meathead has experience there, maybe he will know what to do this time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Linen Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 I agree on gabbert and tannehill. It seemed since january their evaluation didn't change but how far a team has to reach for a chance just to get any qb is what changed. Couple that with top ten, start from day one expectations: disaster. How can you say this? Tannehill hasn't been drafted yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 How can you say this? Tannehill hasn't been drafted yet. Perhaps under his case it should have been potential disaster. I stand by the rest though. It's a terrible situation to place top 5-10 expectations on a qb that isn't one of the ten best prospects in the draft, especially if its because your that desperate for elite qb play to reach on a guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HornellBillsFan Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 Yes, it was Mayock. And if I'm not mistaken, he had Cam Newton as his 21st best prospect in last year's draft. "At quarterback, Missouri junior Blaine Gabbert sits at No. 5 on Mayock's list, while Jake Locker (No. 20) and Cam Newton (No. 21) are a bit further down the list. Mayock has long been high on Gabbert, and has previously implied that any team in need of a franchise quarterback shouldn't pass on him." OUCH. Maybe Mayock really isn't all that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPicc2114 Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 god... people love to over react don't they?? It was his friggin rookie season and he had no receivers. Peyton Manning had like 30 INTs his first year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HornellBillsFan Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 god... people love to over react don't they?? It was his friggin rookie season and he had no receivers. Peyton Manning had like 30 INTs his first year. Naahh, he really sucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 (edited) Players don't "shoot up" the draft boards of NFL teams. They only "shoot up" the draft boards of idiot "draftniks" and mock drafters. Blaine Gabbert wasn't a mid round pick that all of a usdden became a top 10 pick after the season was over. Only in the mind of fans did this happen. NFL teams had all the film on him and didn't move him from #100 to #10 based on an interview and the combine. He was most likely ranked much higher than most "draftniks" had him rated early on in the process. Edited April 19, 2012 by Ramius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordio Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 I respectfully disagree that there is a formula or a case study to be used with Gabbert. I think putting yourself in that box can be just as dangerous as what you propose. Roethlisberger shot up the board too. I think in this context it's best to evaluate players individually and worry less about drawing comparisons. In other words I don't believe Gabbert and Tannehill should have anything to do with each other. I think your thinking of Rivers. He was the one that shot up the boards. Big Ben was always going to be a top 15 pick. Rivers was projected to go in the 2nd round all during his last season at NC State due to his funky delivery. With that being said, I agree with Hindsight. Rivers is the exception not the rule. I could see Gabbert was going to be a bust a mile away. I can not believe some of the pro scouts could not see the same thing. He played @ Missouri in about as QB friendly offense as there is in the country & still could not put up any type of numbers. There year before Daniels(who I think everybody could agree was going to be a marginal NFL prospect at best) put up ridiculous numbers, something like 45 tds/6 ints. Gabbert never came close to matching that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 Players don't "shoot up" the draft boards of NFL teams. They only "shoot up" the draft boards of idiot "draftniks" and mock drafters. Blaine Gabbert wasn't a mid round pick that all of a usdden became a top 10 pick after the season was over. Only in the mind of fans did this happen. NFL teams had all the film on him and didn't move him from #100 to #10 based on an interview and the combine. He was most likely ranked much higher than most "draftniks" had him rated early on in the process. I think, especially at qb, teams stray away from bpa and reach terribly at times. I think gabbert was one of those times. I think tannehill will likely be one of those Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 I'll admit it. I was one of those people that wanted us to get Gabbert. I also believed that Cam Newton wouldn't do well in the NFL - just shows you how much I know . Are you Tom Modrak? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Linen Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 Perhaps under his case it should have been potential disaster. I stand by the rest though. It's a terrible situation to place top 5-10 expectations on a qb that isn't one of the ten best prospects in the draft, especially if its because your that desperate for elite qb play to reach on a guy. Ok but is it a reach if you draft a guy where the experts say to draft him and he doesn't work out? What's the difference? In the end you evaluate a guy, if you think he's a franchise guy you draft him. I promise you pro GM's won't be drafting Tannehill because of pressure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Hindsight Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 I think your thinking of Rivers. He was the one that shot up the boards. Big Ben was always going to be a top 15 pick. Rivers was projected to go in the 2nd round all during his last season at NC State due to his funky delivery. With that being said, I agree with Hindsight. Rivers is the exception not the rule. I could see Gabbert was going to be a bust a mile away. I can not believe some of the pro scouts could not see the same thing. He played @ Missouri in about as QB friendly offense as there is in the country & still could not put up any type of numbers. There year before Daniels(who I think everybody could agree was going to be a marginal NFL prospect at best) put up ridiculous numbers, something like 45 tds/6 ints. Gabbert never came close to matching that. Exactly. i remember looking at his stats and watching that offense and wondering how he got those stats out of that offense It made no sense and was a huge red flag Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 Ok but is it a reach if you draft a guy where the experts say to draft him and he doesn't work out? What's the difference? In the end you evaluate a guy, if you think he's a franchise guy you draft him. I promise you pro GM's won't be drafting Tannehill because of pressure. I don't doubt he's the 3rd best qb in the draft, but because he's best qb available as of pick 3, some team will take higher than his skill would otherwise dictate. That team will in turn be pressured to handle him in a way that is not proper as a top 10 qb pick is so closely tied to gm and coach jobs by media, fans and ownership. I think I trust nix and gailey to not pull the trigger just to get a warm body, but I also think nfl GMs talk themselves into bad ideas when desperate (say Miami with tannehill as a possible example next week). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 (edited) Bravo mea culpa, but worry not, Mr. Mike Mayock. There are still many on this board who revere your every utterance... Yes, it was Mayock. And if I'm not mistaken, he had Cam Newton as his 21st best prospect in last year's draft. "At quarterback, Missouri junior Blaine Gabbert sits at No. 5 on Mayock's list, while Jake Locker (No. 20) and Cam Newton (No. 21) are a bit further down the list. Mayock has long been high on Gabbert, and has previously implied that any team in need of a franchise quarterback shouldn't pass on him." OUCH. Maybe Mayock really isn't all that... I think that if a guy like Mayock doesn't have at least one major screw up....that's he's either not trying very hard, or simply reading what everybody else is saying and regurgitating. I am willing to give him a pass on this.... ...even though I thought Gabbert was Ryan Leaf 2 last year, and would have crapped a brick had we taken him at #3....or appeased the morons and traded down to take him and some other guy, neither of which individually, or combined, had any hope of approaching Dareus's value. Players don't "shoot up" the draft boards of NFL teams. They only "shoot up" the draft boards of idiot "draftniks" and mock drafters. Blaine Gabbert wasn't a mid round pick that all of a usdden became a top 10 pick after the season was over. Only in the mind of fans did this happen. NFL teams had all the film on him and didn't move him from #100 to #10 based on an interview and the combine. He was most likely ranked much higher than most "draftniks" had him rated early on in the process. The reason they "shoot up" "draftnik" boards is that: sooner or later draftniks get tipped off to how NFL teams actually have players rated, and have to immediately react to the new info, hence the "shoot up" effect. Kiper just basically admitted that in his latest piece. That's why i laugh when I hear "this guy picked the whole draft accurately", as though his talent evaluation skills are better than his phone call/email from NFL source receiving skills. Edited April 19, 2012 by OCinBuffalo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zow2 Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 He might be the next Tim Couch, brought along too soon and ruined any shot of developing him. I'll disagree there. A good NFL QB will rise above that. If Brady, Manning(s), Rodgers, etc... all were thrown in too soon, they'd still be elite today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dollars 2 donuts Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 I was incredibly how on Gabbert going into the draft and I was stunned at how bad he played. I watched a few of his games and I mean...really...just...terrible. IT wasn't "let him grow into the position" it was "this guys has no place on an NFL field." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 He had 16 td passes in a spread offense in COLLEGE. The only thing he had going for him was he looked the part. I make a ton of mistakes but I was dead on about him and Clausen. Personally, between Mularkey, Gabbert, Robinson as your #1 wr, and the tarps, J-ville will be in LA in 5 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 (edited) This sort of goes to my value rant. If you pick a player, does it matter if you reached or got value? If they can't play he's a bust. It's also worth remembering that so-called draftniks are influenced by agents to fluff up their clients. PTR Edited April 19, 2012 by PromoTheRobot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VanCity Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 Gabbert was, quite obviously, over-hyped and over-drafted. Comparing him with Tannehill isn't really being as evaluative as you need to be. Tannehill is a better pro prospect, IMHO. He has a far better pocket presence and has not shied away from contact in the least, a tendency that Gabbert was showing in the college game. Gabberts arm is decent, while Tannehill shows superior arm strength. I am not a big fan of either, but my expectations of Tannehill, if allowed to develop behind a veteran QB, are higher than I have ever had for Gabbert. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts