Abandoning the QBBC Plan (1 Viewer)

[Otis]

I followed my GB Chase's QBBC article this year and drafted Rodgers and Garrard wherever possible. As it stands, it looks like a genius move, as Rodgers is the #2 QB in my scoring thus far, and per Chase's instructions you would have started him all three weeks.

However, we are coming up to a time soon when you would begin to spot-start Garrard (although Rodgers gets more starts throughout the season than Garrard). Garrard is sitting at QB #27 in my scoring system.

Given the unexpectedly high level of play we've seen from Rodgers, and the unexpectedly low level from Garrard, do we completely abandon the QBBC and just play Garrard on Rodgers's BYE? How are folks departing from other QBBC plans thus far?

TIA

 

[a_troll00]

I followed my GB Chase's QBBC article this year and drafted Rodgers and Garrard wherever possible. As it stands, it looks like a genius move, as Rodgers is the #2 QB in my scoring thus far, and per Chase's instructions you would have started him all three weeks.However, we are coming up to a time soon when you would begin to spot-start Garrard (although Rodgers gets more starts throughout the season than Garrard). Garrard is sitting at QB #27 in my scoring system.Given the unexpectedly high level of play we've seen from Rodgers, and the unexpectedly low level from Garrard, do we completely abandon the QBBC and just play Garrard on Rodgers's BYE? How are folks departing from other QBBC plans thus far?TIA

Even in QBBC, you continue to ride the hot hand. If there's no need to start Garrard (other than a bye week), then why bother?

 

[Ozymandias]

Ya gotta remain flexible. Look at some of the other pairings. Is Griese available?

Also, Jax had a tough early schedule. But later, they get (after Pit in wk 5), DEN, bye, CLE, CIN, DET, MIN, HOU. Ride Rodgers for now, and feast on DET.

 

[Bri]

I would think it's time to get a better 2nd option than Garrard.

64 or 66 QBs started games last year, averaging out to more than 2 per team.

Take a look at the opportunities out there of each QB on the WW, schedule-offense etc.

Your 2nd option, as of now, is to backup Rodgers not to be in a committee. In essence you have Peyton or Romo or Brees from last year now(can't recall who was #2 this early). You're not going to go away from the #2 QB.

Chase's theory begins with the notion that you have less than one of the top QBs on your team.

Will Rodgers stay at #2? Maybe not but those WRs sure make a strong case for him to do well and you're coverred with a backup QB

 

[Uber]

Do you dress yourself in the morning?

 

[Pip's Invitation]

Do you dress yourself in the morning?

His girlfriend does.

 

[Otis]

Do you dress yourself in the morning?

It was more of a theoretical question. I'm not asking for you personally to tell me what to do.I know that at this rate I go Rodgers until he gives me reason not to. Just wondering if others with this plan -- since it was fairly popular --- were doing the same thing. I assume that's the advice Chase would give.

 

[scientist]

I did the same thing and started panicking. Instead of making any drastic moves, I've since picked up O'Sullivan and Cassel for a 4 QBBC (league's roster depth allowed for it without passing on better value).

 

[AnonymousBob]

It's not quite QBBC but I've been switching between Brees and Rodgers. I'm looking to move Brees because I have so much faith in Rodgers for the rest of this season.

 

[Philo]

I tried to do this, but someone in my league snapped up Rodgers way early. Went with the next best QBBC pairing for Garrard that was available when my draft spot came up--Marc Bulger Had to quickly abandon and trade for a better QB, and Garrard's on my pine.

Hence the problem with QBBC, sometimes it's just placing two bets on guys with upside hoping that one will rise up to dominate. Same as with the Minny DST in the DTBC last season, eventually you were just playing them every week and ignoring the other D. Same as the DTBC combo this year, you just wanna ride the Bills every week and NO isn't showing much of anything.

Anyone who used the earlier spot on Garrard instead of just picking Rodgers there ended up wasting a draft round.

 

[Chase Stuart]

I tried to do this, but someone in my league snapped up Rodgers way early. Went with the next best QBBC pairing for Garrard that was available when my draft spot came up--Marc Bulger Had to quickly abandon and trade for a better QB, and Garrard's on my pine.Hence the problem with QBBC, sometimes it's just placing two bets on guys with upside hoping that one will rise up to dominate. Same as with the Minny DST in the DTBC last season, eventually you were just playing them every week and ignoring the other D. Same as the DTBC combo this year, you just wanna ride the Bills every week and NO isn't showing much of anything.Anyone who used the earlier spot on Garrard instead of just picking Rodgers there ended up wasting a draft round.

I know some people see it that way, but I disagree. Last year Ten/Min scored more FP/G than Min alone, and by a good margin. Min was the star of the committee, but Ten was very important, and of course, matched up at the right times. Even this year, the one week (so far) where the advice was to start NO over Buf, the NO D outscored the Buffalo D.I'll be writing Goose Chase regularly starting this week. Jacksonville plays Houston this weekend, while Green Bay plays Tampa Bay. Roethlisberger shredded the Houston D, and Kerry Collins did pretty well. Meanwhile, Drew Brees lit up the Bucs, Matt Ryan did terribly, and Kyle Orton did very well outside of some pics. The Tampa Bay D looked like a very tough matchup in the pre-season, but they haven't looked so great so far this year. Garrard's taking some bad sacks this year, and his OL looks shaky. He's been less accurate and less confident than he was last year. I'm not ready to give up on him, and would still consider starting him this week. But seeing as how the Bucs D looks less than amazing, I'd probably continue playing Rodgers this week. I'm not a believer in the 'hot hand' theory, but I think injuries to the Jaguars + a weaker than expected Bucs D makes a Garrad start too risky for week four. Full discussion in Goose Chase.

 

[Vikes Fan]

I was going to post this same question Otis!



I am going back and forth on this! I stuck with Gerrard as my bench guy through these three weeks. He has a soft matchup against Houston this week while Rodgers has a much tougher matchup against Tampa. While Rodgers final numbers last night looked good for fantasy purposes (the rushing TD helped) I did not think that he performed all that well against Dallas. I am leaning toward starting Gerrard this week...

That may change, but those are my thoughts right now.

 

[aburt19]

I went with a 2 man QBBC in leagues with small rosters. In the first Garrard went in the 6th round, so I had to settle for Delhomme/Rodgers. In the other

league I got Garrard/Rodgers.

In both cases, unless Rodgers plays an absolute shut down pass defense, is on bye, is injured or suddenly loses effectiveness, I'm going with Rodgers.

 

[Resident A]

You would have to be partially insane to start Garrard over Rodgers, or about 20 other QBs for that matter.

I drafted Schaub/Eli for my QBBC, and I also quickly abandoned the switching idea...

 

[buster c]

I've tended to the QBBC approach in prior seasons (last year it was Kitna/Eli), but I must say that life is so much easier being able to plug in Brees every week and not worry about it (well, at least thru 3 weeks).

He came at a high price - selected him #13 overall - but it was after Brady/Manning were off the board and our QB scores 6 for TD's.

I am no longer a proponent of the QBBC

 

[Otis]

I tried to do this, but someone in my league snapped up Rodgers way early. Went with the next best QBBC pairing for Garrard that was available when my draft spot came up--Marc Bulger :X Had to quickly abandon and trade for a better QB, and Garrard's on my pine.Hence the problem with QBBC, sometimes it's just placing two bets on guys with upside hoping that one will rise up to dominate. Same as with the Minny DST in the DTBC last season, eventually you were just playing them every week and ignoring the other D. Same as the DTBC combo this year, you just wanna ride the Bills every week and NO isn't showing much of anything.Anyone who used the earlier spot on Garrard instead of just picking Rodgers there ended up wasting a draft round.

I know some people see it that way, but I disagree. Last year Ten/Min scored more FP/G than Min alone, and by a good margin. Min was the star of the committee, but Ten was very important, and of course, matched up at the right times. Even this year, the one week (so far) where the advice was to start NO over Buf, the NO D outscored the Buffalo D.I'll be writing Goose Chase regularly starting this week. Jacksonville plays Houston this weekend, while Green Bay plays Tampa Bay. Roethlisberger shredded the Houston D, and Kerry Collins did pretty well. Meanwhile, Drew Brees lit up the Bucs, Matt Ryan did terribly, and Kyle Orton did very well outside of some pics. The Tampa Bay D looked like a very tough matchup in the pre-season, but they haven't looked so great so far this year. Garrard's taking some bad sacks this year, and his OL looks shaky. He's been less accurate and less confident than he was last year. I'm not ready to give up on him, and would still consider starting him this week. But seeing as how the Bucs D looks less than amazing, I'd probably continue playing Rodgers this week. I'm not a believer in the 'hot hand' theory, but I think injuries to the Jaguars + a weaker than expected Bucs D makes a Garrad start too risky for week four. Full discussion in Goose Chase.

Interesting GB that you would still consider starting Garrard this week.

 

[barista]

It's not quite QBBC but I've been switching between Brees and Rodgers. I'm looking to move Brees because I have so much faith in Rodgers for the rest of this season.

I would trade Rodgers... you should get value that overcomes the difference in results (Brees is still way better than Rodgers depending on scoring).

 

[aburt19]

I've tended to the QBBC approach in prior seasons (last year it was Kitna/Eli), but I must say that life is so much easier being able to plug in Brees every week and not worry about it (well, at least thru 3 weeks). He came at a high price - selected him #13 overall - but it was after Brady/Manning were off the board and our QB scores 6 for TD's. I am no longer a proponent of the QBBC

What has happened this season has been the same thing that seems to happen most seasons. I draft a QB late and he turns in top 5 to 8 numbers for theposition. Considering I'm drafting that QB in the 7th round or later, I think that the decrease in production at QB down to the 5-8 range is not as much asthe decrease from ignoring another position early in the draft.

 

[Everclear333]

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...howtopic=425391

It seems there are some viable options on the wavier wire in most leagues, depending on roster limits and the size of the league, you probably see some of the following options:

Kyle Orton

Brian Griese

JaMarcus Russell

Matt Ryan

Kerry Collins

Gus Fererotte

Matt Cassell

Are you sticking with Garrard? Or do you give in now, and take a flier on the wire? And if so, who?

My thought, after grabbing JT O’Sullivan last week, take Brian Griese (Seattle, Dallas, Kansas City, and Detroit) or Gus Fererotte (Tennessee, Houston, Arizona, and Detroit twice).

Chase?

 

[Wooderson]

I did the same thing Otis. Having rogers makes me look like a genius. With the way garrad has played I dropped him this week for a ww rb. I just could not see myself starting garrad

at this point.

 

[menobrown]

Kyle OrtonBrian GrieseJaMarcus RussellMatt RyanKerry CollinsGus FererotteMatt CassellAre you sticking with Garrard? Or do you give in now, and take a flier on the wire? And if so, who?My thought, after grabbing JT O’Sullivan last week, take Brian Griese (Seattle, Dallas, Kansas City, and Detroit) or Gus Fererotte (Tennessee, Houston, Arizona, and Detroit twice).Chase?

I'd stay with Garrard over all of those guys. This is often debated here but I think a healthy Jerry Porter will be the best WR he's had to throw to. Troy Williamson can't hurt as a #3 or #4 WR considering what he is working with now. The guy basically lost the interior of his OL and has very little weapons to work with. I think if you can allow a little time for his WR's to return and get in sync Garrard will reward you in the second half of the season.

 

[glock]

Didn't quite go with QBBC this year, opting instead for the "Late Stud QB/Bye Week Cover" plan with Hasselbeck/Garcia...

I picked up O'Sullivan for the pine riding Garcia and hope to have caught enough lightning in a bottle to see me through the Seahawks WR woes with a new QBBC.

 

[Everclear333]

For those of you that followed Chase Stuart’s “QBBC” approach to the draft, many shelved a spot for David Garrard on their roster.

The Problem:

After week 3, Garrard’s stat line:

547 YDS

1 TD\4 INT

Granted, he had a tough schedule, facing Tennessee, Buffalo, and Indy. But looking at the remainder of the season it doesn’t get much better (exception being Detroit):

Pitt, Denver, Bye, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Detroit, Tennessee, Minnesota, Houston, Chicago, Green Bay

The point of the “QBBC” is to start your QB against the weaker matchups, and find another QB with a complimentary strength of schedule. But will Garrard even be worth a start in those weeks? Will he really be able to crack the top 10 in those weeks?

I’m skeptical, like many. Chase Stuart’s take on the situation, “Garrard's taking some bad sacks this year, and his OL looks shaky. He's been less accurate and less confident than he was last year.”

So is the situation salvageable? Depending on who you drafted to compliment Garrard, you’re either breathing a sigh of relief (since you drafted Rodgers) or you are scrambling to find a solution (since you drafted Vince Young). I happen to belong, as you probably guessed, to the latter.

It seems there are some viable options on the wavier wire in most leagues, depending on roster limits and the size of the league, you probably see some of the following options:

Kyle Orton

Brian Griese

JaMarcus Russell

Matt Ryan

Kerry Collins

Gus Fererotte

Matt Cassell

Are you sticking with Garrard? Or do you give in now, and take a flier on the wire? And if so, who?

My thought, after grabbing JT O’Sullivan last week, take Brian Griese (Seattle, Dallas, Kansas City, and Detroit) or Gus Fererotte (Tennessee, Houston, Arizona, and Detroit twice).

Chase?

 

[Andrew74]

I would like to hear thoughts on this, too. I waited late and took Garrard and Schaub and thought they would be serviceable QBs. I also have Garrad in another league taking up a roster spot. I can't decide if I should just dump him or if this is a situation that has any hope.

 

[nxmehta]

I'd like to hear about this too. I took Garrard in both of my leagues late (one of the leagues is a 2QB league where I also took Brady and Young, yikes!) and he's absolutely killing me.

The Cleveland-Cincinnati-Detroit stretch may help him, but their line is really banged up. However, I haven't had a chance to watch any JAX games this year... is their line really that bad that they could beat the Colts?

JAX homers and Garrard experts please chime in.

 

[Sweetness_34]

I went with QBBC approach....but not with Garrard. I took a combo of Warner, Favre, Rodgers and Delhomme in most leagues....sitting pretty ....QBBC works, you just need to pick the correct QBs

 

[Everclear333]

I went with QBBC approach....but not with Garrard. I took a combo of Warner, Favre, Rodgers and Delhomme in most leagues....sitting pretty ....QBBC works, you just need to pick the correct QBs

Thank you for pointing out that you drafted a better QB. I hope that comment provides a boost to your ego, that way you no longer have to compensate with a name like "Sweetness".

 

[hakjak]

I tried out the QBBC also, went with Garrard and Schaub

I dropped Garrard before week 3. Looking at the QB's you list I'm not sure I would drop him for any of those.

 

[big0mar]

Thankfully I got Rodgers with Gerrard.

I will say this though, the 2008 Jaguars remind me a lot of the 2007 Jaguars. Gerrard scored 20+ fantasy points for something along the lines of 9 of the final 10 games.

Meester should be returning after the bye, and last year he gave the team a big boost when he returned from injury. If you are going to give up on Gerrard, I would atleast wait until after the Detroit game.

 

[Philo]

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...howtopic=425272

 

[Bri]

Interesting GB that you would still consider starting Garrard this week.

warning, Chase has some serious man love for Garrard. Search summer posts(I'm off on my share too but...this is his oops IMO)

 

[Bri]

I know some people see it that way, but I disagree. Last year Ten/Min scored more FP/G than Min alone, and by a good margin. Min was the star of the committee, but Ten was very important, and of course, matched up at the right times.

Titans were like 5th ranked D last year in NFL. Can't recall what they were for FF.I figure here you had very good predraft notions of getting two top 10(maybe top 5) Ds. Good call for the draft.During the season though, two top 10 at one position is apples and oranges to Rodgers at 2 and Garrard at 28 or so.

 

[Otis]

Honda

 

[FavreCo]

The clock has struck midnight for this bum's fantasy. Last year was a fluke and you are now seeing what this guy is capable of, which is not much.

 

[Mr. Brownstone]

This excerpt is from an article today from Vic Ketchman of Jaguars.com:

“We have a desire to be explosive but most of all we have a desire to win,” Del Rio said.Translation: Until the Jaguars find a way to throw the ball downfield successfully, they will continue to lean on their running game.

 

[AllVolUT]

I'd like to hear about this too. I took Garrard in both of my leagues late (one of the leagues is a 2QB league where I also took Brady and Young, yikes!) and he's absolutely killing me.The Cleveland-Cincinnati-Detroit stretch may help him, but their line is really banged up. However, I haven't had a chance to watch any JAX games this year... is their line really that bad that they could beat the Colts?JAX homers and Garrard experts please chime in.

Its been painfully obvious that Garrard has been forcing the ball into his receivers. The pocket has been collapsing too early for him to make the necessary reads. In Game 1, the Jags lost two starting OL for the game and coupled with the Collier shooting and Titans defense, obviously led to a poor performance all around. A lot of this was due to poor protection; its hard to blame Garrard when the line loses three starters (their C was previously lost) and hasn't had the time gel. The line played slightly better in Game 2, but still not good enough. Poor line play or not, Garrard did not look like Garrard of 2007 through his first 2 and a half games. However there are positives to look forward: a) The line looked a lot better in the Indy game. I didn't get a chance to fix in on the Naeole signing, but he played. I know the Indy defense is below average, but it was still an inspiring performance. With more time to gel, the line will get better as the season goes on. b) Per sirius radio, Porter is due to return week 4. Running will open up the passing game for the Jags, just like it did last year. Garrard showed great patience in the final drive of that Indy game - taking what the defense gave him. I think that final drive will boost his confidence and give the Jags some serious momentum. He is not a sell high IMO...more of a buy low. I'm in the process of trying to acquire him right now.

 

[gregjcross]

The clock has struck midnight for this bum's fantasy. Last year was a fluke and you are now seeing what this guy is capable of, which is not much.

Garrard's a bum. Interesting.

 

[Everclear333]

I'd like to hear about this too. I took Garrard in both of my leagues late (one of the leagues is a 2QB league where I also took Brady and Young, yikes!) and he's absolutely killing me.The Cleveland-Cincinnati-Detroit stretch may help him, but their line is really banged up. However, I haven't had a chance to watch any JAX games this year... is their line really that bad that they could beat the Colts?JAX homers and Garrard experts please chime in.

Its been painfully obvious that Garrard has been forcing the ball into his receivers. The pocket has been collapsing too early for him to make the necessary reads. In Game 1, the Jags lost two starting OL for the game and coupled with the Collier shooting and Titans defense, obviously led to a poor performance all around. A lot of this was due to poor protection; its hard to blame Garrard when the line loses three starters (their C was previously lost) and hasn't had the time gel. The line played slightly better in Game 2, but still not good enough. Poor line play or not, Garrard did not look like Garrard of 2007 through his first 2 and a half games. However there are positives to look forward: a) The line looked a lot better in the Indy game. I didn't get a chance to fix in on the Naeole signing, but he played. I know the Indy defense is below average, but it was still an inspiring performance. With more time to gel, the line will get better as the season goes on. b) Per sirius radio, Porter is due to return week 4. Running will open up the passing game for the Jags, just like it did last year. Garrard showed great patience in the final drive of that Indy game - taking what the defense gave him. I think that final drive will boost his confidence and give the Jags some serious momentum. He is not a sell high IMO...more of a buy low. I'm in the process of trying to acquire him right now.

Thanks for the insight. The Porter news is definetely a plus. I'm still worried without an OL, Garrard is not going to get any time in the pocket. He has Houston this week and hopefully a healthy Porter, so I'll give him one more. What do you think the Over/Under value is on Garrard versus Griese?

 

[Mr. Brownstone]

I'd like to hear about this too. I took Garrard in both of my leagues late (one of the leagues is a 2QB league where I also took Brady and Young, yikes!) and he's absolutely killing me.

The Cleveland-Cincinnati-Detroit stretch may help him, but their line is really banged up. However, I haven't had a chance to watch any JAX games this year... is their line really that bad that they could beat the Colts?

JAX homers and Garrard experts please chime in.

Its been painfully obvious that Garrard has been forcing the ball into his receivers. The pocket has been collapsing too early for him to make the necessary reads. In Game 1, the Jags lost two starting OL for the game and coupled with the Collier shooting and Titans defense, obviously led to a poor performance all around. A lot of this was due to poor protection; its hard to blame Garrard when the line loses three starters (their C was previously lost) and hasn't had the time gel. The line played slightly better in Game 2, but still not good enough. Poor line play or not, Garrard did not look like Garrard of 2007 through his first 2 and a half games. However there are positives to look forward: a) The line looked a lot better in the Indy game. I didn't get a chance to fix in on the Naeole signing, but he played. I know the Indy defense is below average, but it was still an inspiring performance. With more time to gel, the line will get better as the season goes on. b) Per sirius radio, Porter is due to return week 4.

Running will open up the passing game for the Jags, just like it did last year. Garrard showed great patience in the final drive of that Indy game - taking what the defense gave him. I think that final drive will boost his confidence and give the Jags some serious momentum. He is not a sell high IMO...more of a buy low. I'm in the process of trying to acquire him right now.

Thanks for the insight. The Porter news is definetely a plus. I'm still worried without an OL, Garrard is not going to get any time in the pocket. He has Detroit this week and hopefully a healthy Porter, so I'll give him one more.

What do you think the Over/Under value is on Garrard versus Griese?

The Jags play the Texans this week.

 

[ThePittbully]

The clock has struck midnight for this bum's fantasy. Last year was a fluke and you are now seeing what this guy is capable of, which is not much.

Ridiculous, he has a terrible O line and no receivers, you play as well as Garrard did last year by accident. He'll bounce back and so will that team

 

[Everclear333]

I'd like to hear about this too. I took Garrard in both of my leagues late (one of the leagues is a 2QB league where I also took Brady and Young, yikes!) and he's absolutely killing me.

The Cleveland-Cincinnati-Detroit stretch may help him, but their line is really banged up. However, I haven't had a chance to watch any JAX games this year... is their line really that bad that they could beat the Colts?

JAX homers and Garrard experts please chime in.

Its been painfully obvious that Garrard has been forcing the ball into his receivers. The pocket has been collapsing too early for him to make the necessary reads. In Game 1, the Jags lost two starting OL for the game and coupled with the Collier shooting and Titans defense, obviously led to a poor performance all around. A lot of this was due to poor protection; its hard to blame Garrard when the line loses three starters (their C was previously lost) and hasn't had the time gel. The line played slightly better in Game 2, but still not good enough. Poor line play or not, Garrard did not look like Garrard of 2007 through his first 2 and a half games. However there are positives to look forward: a) The line looked a lot better in the Indy game. I didn't get a chance to fix in on the Naeole signing, but he played. I know the Indy defense is below average, but it was still an inspiring performance. With more time to gel, the line will get better as the season goes on. b) Per sirius radio, Porter is due to return week 4.

Running will open up the passing game for the Jags, just like it did last year. Garrard showed great patience in the final drive of that Indy game - taking what the defense gave him. I think that final drive will boost his confidence and give the Jags some serious momentum. He is not a sell high IMO...more of a buy low. I'm in the process of trying to acquire him right now.

Thanks for the insight. The Porter news is definetely a plus. I'm still worried without an OL, Garrard is not going to get any time in the pocket. He has Detroit this week and hopefully a healthy Porter, so I'll give him one more.

What do you think the Over/Under value is on Garrard versus Griese?

The Jags play the Texans this week.

Fixed. Thanks for the heads up.

 

[AllVolUT]

I'd like to hear about this too. I took Garrard in both of my leagues late (one of the leagues is a 2QB league where I also took Brady and Young, yikes!) and he's absolutely killing me.The Cleveland-Cincinnati-Detroit stretch may help him, but their line is really banged up. However, I haven't had a chance to watch any JAX games this year... is their line really that bad that they could beat the Colts?JAX homers and Garrard experts please chime in.

Its been painfully obvious that Garrard has been forcing the ball into his receivers. The pocket has been collapsing too early for him to make the necessary reads. In Game 1, the Jags lost two starting OL for the game and coupled with the Collier shooting and Titans defense, obviously led to a poor performance all around. A lot of this was due to poor protection; its hard to blame Garrard when the line loses three starters (their C was previously lost) and hasn't had the time gel. The line played slightly better in Game 2, but still not good enough. Poor line play or not, Garrard did not look like Garrard of 2007 through his first 2 and a half games. However there are positives to look forward: a) The line looked a lot better in the Indy game. I didn't get a chance to fix in on the Naeole signing, but he played. I know the Indy defense is below average, but it was still an inspiring performance. With more time to gel, the line will get better as the season goes on. b) Per sirius radio, Porter is due to return week 4. Running will open up the passing game for the Jags, just like it did last year. Garrard showed great patience in the final drive of that Indy game - taking what the defense gave him. I think that final drive will boost his confidence and give the Jags some serious momentum. He is not a sell high IMO...more of a buy low. I'm in the process of trying to acquire him right now.

Thanks for the insight. The Porter news is definetely a plus. I'm still worried without an OL, Garrard is not going to get any time in the pocket. He has Houston this week and hopefully a healthy Porter, so I'll give him one more. What do you think the Over/Under value is on Garrard versus Griese?

I think you meant Houston instead of Detroit...but either way, it should be a solid game. Upcoming games: HOU, PITT, @DEN, bye, CLE, @CINN, @ DET. I like 5 out of those 6 matchups, and fully expect Garrard to put up better numbers in the upcoming games. I think people are putting way too much stock into Griese after last game. Between the 4th quarter and OT, Griese was 20-38/227yds/TD. If you're on the side that thinks he'll keep that up, then hold on to him. IMO, however, Garrard>>Griese.

 

[Bri]

The clock has struck midnight for this bum's fantasy. Last year was a fluke and you are now seeing what this guy is capable of, which is not much.

Ridiculous, he has a terrible O line and no receivers, you play as well as Garrard did last year by accident. He'll bounce back and so will that team

Is it?This is his 7th year in the league and he has only thrown for more than 1750 yards once. He averages 153 ypg passing.Oh and his best WR is Matt Jones.

 

[Bri]

Texans are 6th best pass D allowing an average of 155 ypg

Last year Garrard threw for 221 yards and 2 TDs. The year before 214 yards 0 TDs 4 INTs

 

[AllVolUT]

The clock has struck midnight for this bum's fantasy. Last year was a fluke and you are now seeing what this guy is capable of, which is not much.

Ridiculous, he has a terrible O line and no receivers, you play as well as Garrard did last year by accident. He'll bounce back and so will that team

Is it?This is his 7th year in the league and he has only thrown for more than 1750 yards once. He averages 153 ypg passing.Oh and his best WR is Matt Jones.

C'mon man...last year was his first real shot at a starting gig and he performed great. His receivers this year are no worse than last year. The Jags lost Wilford, but gained Mike Walker off the IR, Porter, and Williamson. Nothing phenomenal, but adds decent depth. The drop off in performance this year equates to losing three starters on the OL. Good thing its only week 3, he has 13 more games to improve.

 

[Bri]

The clock has struck midnight for this bum's fantasy. Last year was a fluke and you are now seeing what this guy is capable of, which is not much.

Ridiculous, he has a terrible O line and no receivers, you play as well as Garrard did last year by accident. He'll bounce back and so will that team

Is it?This is his 7th year in the league and he has only thrown for more than 1750 yards once. He averages 153 ypg passing.

Oh and his best WR is Matt Jones.

C'mon man...last year was his first real shot at a starting gig and he performed great. His receivers this year are no worse than last year. The Jags lost Wilford, but gained Mike Walker off the IR, Porter, and Williamson. Nothing phenomenal, but adds decent depth. The drop off in performance this year equates to losing three starters on the OL. Good thing its only week 3, he has 13 more games to improve.

started 10 games in 06, 12 in 07. That's really not much of a jump.He wasn't great he was the 16th rated QB in Fantasy. That's right in the middle-average.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/G/GarrDa00.htm

His 18 to 3 TD to INT ratio was excellent for NFL play but it's bearing is sorely minimized in FF.

Oh and Mike Walker is the most talked about dud I've heard of in years. Last year Del Rio put him on IR a move that made many think was odd. He did play all last preseason on that old injury. This year Del Rio doesn't even activate him for 2 of 3 games. Porter's out, Williams is out and yet Walker is inactive. I fell for the Walker love too man, but if the coach won't activate the player that says enough for me.

 

[AllVolUT]

The clock has struck midnight for this bum's fantasy. Last year was a fluke and you are now seeing what this guy is capable of, which is not much.

Ridiculous, he has a terrible O line and no receivers, you play as well as Garrard did last year by accident. He'll bounce back and so will that team

Is it?This is his 7th year in the league and he has only thrown for more than 1750 yards once. He averages 153 ypg passing.

Oh and his best WR is Matt Jones.

C'mon man...last year was his first real shot at a starting gig and he performed great. His receivers this year are no worse than last year. The Jags lost Wilford, but gained Mike Walker off the IR, Porter, and Williamson. Nothing phenomenal, but adds decent depth. The drop off in performance this year equates to losing three starters on the OL. Good thing its only week 3, he has 13 more games to improve.

started 10 games in 06, 12 in 07. That's really not much of a jump.He wasn't great he was the 16th rated QB in Fantasy. That's right in the middle-average.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/G/GarrDa00.htm

His 18 to 3 TD to INT ratio was excellent for NFL play but it's bearing is sorely minimized in FF.

Oh and Mike Walker is the most talked about dud I've heard of in years. Last year Del Rio put him on IR a move that made many think was odd. He did play all last preseason on that old injury. This year Del Rio doesn't even activate him for 2 of 3 games. Porter's out, Williams is out and yet Walker is inactive. I fell for the Walker love too man, but if the coach won't activate the player that says enough for me.

The difference between '06 and '07 is that the Jags turned to Garrard as a starter and leader. IMO, there is a big difference between coming in as a backup to an injured starter, and being handed the reigns of a team. And in the 12 games he played last season, finishing 16th is not too shabby. Walker has been pretty darn highly touted and yet to live up to expectations, but has been activated. He was targeted in endzone last week against the Bills on the Garrard INT before half IIRC. Sirius radio also reported that Porter will start Week 4. I'm just trying to say that what Garrard has shown is not the 'true' Garrard, and he will improve. Don't abandon hope yet.

 

[notdarkyet]

Garrard and Schaub here.

Panicking... I think I am going to make a play for Rivers this week.

 

[Bri]

I have much love for Chase and his by committee theories. Long thread/discussion this summer(bumped a week ago) and...yeah well I think I overreacted here. One wrong is one wrong, sorry if I came on to strong Chase

 

[Otis]

Turns out abandoning the QBBC plan was a bad idea, and sticking with Chase's plan was on the money. Garrard had his first nice game of the season, and Rodgers flubbed it.

Nice work Chase.