Jaguars release David Garrard

What teams do u think called already? Bengals definitely should

Originally posted by toeknee:
What teams do u think called already? Bengals definitely should

Bengals, Dolphins, Redskins and Panthers should all call.

Originally posted by HessianDud:

Originally posted by ktate14:
^^^There is a difference though...Garrard actually has been successful in this league....if it about the young guys...wouldn't you rather them learning from a guy who has been successful than a guy who just can't seem to get it right??....I've never bashed Alex and stuck with him for a long time but I'm at the point where I just want W's at any cost...I'm not expecting Garrard to be here for more than 2-3 yrs but if it gets us wins!?! I'm all for it....Whatever they plan to do I'm all for but it just amazes me how the little decisions made can change a season....If we don't draft kap we probably can pick up Garrard right now and who knows....If we don't resign Smith...same thing!...Just these little decisions can really put your franchise back.......I'm intrigued by this Tolzien as well so I wouldn't like to see him cut or try to move him to the PS cause I'm sure he would probably be picked up by someone....

what will they learn from Garrard? I don't understand the "QB as mentor idea." Garrard isn't a coach, so he's not really going to teach them much, IMO. Also, I'm not sure at this point (coming in this late, etc) that Garrard can get us more wins than Smith.

I think that just because a player has had some success in the league doesn't mean that pulling him off the scrap heap is going to lead us to more success. We would have to cut a developmental player like Ian Williams or Colin Jones or something to have a rental of a mediocre QB. Since this franchise is building for the future, and since Garrard doesn't, IMO, give us a better chance to compete than Alex, I see no reason to bring him in.

Yes it does.

Garrard >>> Smith

Originally posted by Young2Rice:

Originally posted by HessianDud:

Originally posted by ktate14:
^^^There is a difference though...Garrard actually has been successful in this league....if it about the young guys...wouldn't you rather them learning from a guy who has been successful than a guy who just can't seem to get it right??....I've never bashed Alex and stuck with him for a long time but I'm at the point where I just want W's at any cost...I'm not expecting Garrard to be here for more than 2-3 yrs but if it gets us wins!?! I'm all for it....Whatever they plan to do I'm all for but it just amazes me how the little decisions made can change a season....If we don't draft kap we probably can pick up Garrard right now and who knows....If we don't resign Smith...same thing!...Just these little decisions can really put your franchise back.......I'm intrigued by this Tolzien as well so I wouldn't like to see him cut or try to move him to the PS cause I'm sure he would probably be picked up by someone....

what will they learn from Garrard? I don't understand the "QB as mentor idea." Garrard isn't a coach, so he's not really going to teach them much, IMO. Also, I'm not sure at this point (coming in this late, etc) that Garrard can get us more wins than Smith.

I think that just because a player has had some success in the league doesn't mean that pulling him off the scrap heap is going to lead us to more success. We would have to cut a developmental player like Ian Williams or Colin Jones or something to have a rental of a mediocre QB. Since this franchise is building for the future, and since Garrard doesn't, IMO, give us a better chance to compete than Alex, I see no reason to bring him in.

Yes it does.

Garrard >>> Smith

maybe, but Smith has better command of the offense now than Garrard will have. So we'd have to wait several weeks for them to really compete. in the meantime, we would have to cut a young player at another position. I would like to think that this team is balanced between competing as well as they can this year and looking towards the next several years. Garrard wouldn't help in the long-term (in fact, his signing might hurt in the long-term if we have to lose a player that we would otherwise develop into a role-player) and I'm not sure he'd be better than Smith in the short-term.

If we did sign him (not sure why he would choose us over other options) I would be intrigued and if he started I would root for him, but I really see no reason to be excited about him today, and I still don't see the logic in signing him.

Sign Garrard give him bout a month to pick up the offense by that time anyway Smith will get benched & maybe we can salvage the season with him under center........cuz if we go towards the of Kaepernick will probably do worse then having Smith under center he's to raw...................GO FOR IT BAALKE SIGN DAVID ASAP!!!!

Garrard has no ball security. His handles are about as bad as JTO when it comes to protecting the ball.

Sign him to keep him away from Seattle.

Originally posted by smithgdwg:

Sign him to keep him away from Seattle.

I pray that Seattle takes him. It would make them a slightly better team. Then it would possibly push them out of the Luck sweepstakes. I don't mind them having Garrad. I DO NOT want them grabbing Andrew luck.

Originally posted by toeknee:
What teams do u think called already? Bengals definitely should

according to his agent 3 teams have called... I'd guess it was the Bengals, Raiders, and probably Dolphins

Originally posted by smithgdwg:
Sign him to keep him away from Seattle.

I agree with this.

Originally posted by willis7:

Originally posted by smithgdwg:
Sign him to keep him away from Seattle.

I agree with this.

Petey boy up in Sea already came out and said they are not interested in Garrad. Harbaugh meanwhile gave another non-answer answer so we'll have to see.

harbaugh call him

dont want

Want so murch better than our srubs

overrated. don't want.