Report: Garrard will be 100% by spring

I'd take this dude as a backup.

There are worse QBs holding down starting jobs. I'd be interested to see what Garrard can do on a team with some decent receivers.

QUOTE(#3):

Originally posted 09:10 AM ET  01.24 by Devi8ed

There are worse QBs holding down starting jobs. I'd be interested to see what Garrard can do on a team with some decent receivers.

+1

The key word here is backup. I'd be fine with that. On the other hand, some foolish GM will sign this 33-year-old as his Quarterback of the Future.

QUOTE(#5):

Originally posted 09:20 AM ET  01.24 by Debbie Does

The key word here is backup. I'd be fine with that. On the other hand, some foolish GM will sign this 33-year-old as his Quarterback of the Future.

If I were drafting my QB of the Future, I'd take Garrard as a veteran stand-in for a year or two. The fact is, the Jags screwed themselves badly by cutting him. They wound up with the rushing champion and a top-five defense. The only thing that held them back was the utter lack of a passing game. Garrard would've been hard-pressed not to contribute more than Gabbert did.

QUOTE(#6):

Originally posted 09:24 AM ET  01.24 by Devi8ed

If I were drafting my QB of the Future, I'd take Garrard as a veteran stand-in for a year or two. The fact is, the Jags screwed themselves badly by cutting him. They wound up with the rushing champion and a top-five defense. The only thing that held them back was the utter lack of a passing game. Garrard would've been hard-pressed not to contribute more than Gabbert did.

But Garrard couldn't play at all this season. He needed surgery.

QUOTE(#7):

Originally posted 09:44 AM ET  01.24 by Debbie Does

But Garrard couldn't play at all this season. He needed surgery.

See? That's fewer INTs right there.

QUOTE(#8):

Originally posted 09:53 AM ET  01.24 by Devi8ed

See? That's fewer INTs right there.

You're right! And I bet that's what Carson Palmer was doing too, before his plan was ruined by Oakland!

Dallas, please look at this guy.

His first move is to Stay away from Jacksonville!!!

QUOTE(#10):

Originally posted 11:12 AM ET  01.24 by FAMU RATTLER

Dallas, please look at this guy.

+1

QUOTE(#6):

Originally posted 09:24 AM ET  01.24 by Devi8ed

If I were drafting my QB of the Future, I'd take Garrard as a veteran stand-in for a year or two. The fact is, the Jags screwed themselves badly by cutting him. They wound up with the rushing champion and a top-five defense. The only thing that held them back was the utter lack of a passing game. Garrard would've been hard-pressed not to contribute more than Gabbert did.

The real reason that offense did as bad as it did wasnt Gabbert. The offensive coordinator, the line and the lack of talent as the wide receiver position was too much for any quarterback to overcome. Regardless of who it was

Plenty of teams could use Garrard. I have no idea where he'd end up, but my top landing spots are:

1) Denver Broncos - John Elway is in a sticky situation with Tim Tebow. He can't exactly draft a quarterback to groom without alienating and enraging the Broncos fan base. So the best thing to do would be to bring in a backup who can take the wheel if Tebow doesn't develop into a good passer. Definitely a better situation than having to use Brady Quinn.

2) Carolina Panthers - Does anyone here think that, should Cam Newton go down, Derek Anderson or Jimmy Clausen could keep it going? Anyone? Anyone? I think that Garrard has enough left in the tank to be a good failsafe in that kind of emergency situation.

3) New York Giants - The Giants have proven that they have a team that can make it to the Super Bowl. This offseason, regardless of how the game turns out, I want a better backup than David Carr.

4) St. Louis Rams / Atlanta Falcons - Neither of them have backups worth mentioning.

5) Oakland Raiders - They love them some quarterbacks. Kidding.

QUOTE(#13):

Originally posted 03:23 PM ET  01.24 by yungpyro

The real reason that offense did as bad as it did wasnt Gabbert. The offensive coordinator, the line and the lack of talent as the wide receiver position was too much for any quarterback to overcome. Regardless of who it was

I agree the line didn't protect well and Jax (still) has no quality at WR, but a lot of incompletions came out of Gabbert slinging the ball too soon, and often off his back foot, in the face of the rush. Gabbert gets happy feet and doesn't let routes develop. Some of that comes back to poor protection and moving the pocket more would have helped, but the fact is he's too quick on the trigger because he doesn't want to get hit.

QUOTE(#14):

Originally posted 03:45 PM ET  01.24 by RickRoll'd

Plenty of teams could use Garrard.
1) Denver Broncos
2) Carolina Panthers
3) New York Giants
4) St. Louis Rams / Atlanta Falcons

I think the teams that need a QB the most - Washington, Miami, and perhaps Cleveland - need to take a look at Garrard. If one team drafts RG3, and another team signs Matt Flynn, then the loser should probably take a look at Garrard.

Other teams that seriously need a QB could be Seattle and the New York Jets.

The guy certainly isn't great, but there are a few teams in the NFL right now - his old team, the Jaguars, included - that start players inferior to Garrard.

That said, if I was one of these team's GM, I would have Peyton Manning on speed dial.

QUOTE(#19):

Originally posted 08:16 PM ET  01.24 by DJRoxalot

Manning will end up a Jet.

You mean on a Jet Plane,no way he plays for that dysfunctional organization, Niners should be his first choice since Indy is going to have default on there bonus, he could play for pocket change!