Why Garbers is "the guy"....
12,008 Views |
78 Replies |
Last: 7 yr ago by Yogi Is King
Nice article. And even nicer that Moe Ways is leading hype man for Garbers. I have been impressed with Moe's leadership as a grad transfer from a big time program. He and Bunting didn't come here trying to be the man. They just found their roles, and they seem to be like older, mature brothers who have seen it all at Michigan and are sharing their experience. They both are not world beaters on the field, but I think they're cool with it and have this calm perspective about them. I was wondering if Cal football would be too podunk for them, but they seem to more about getting degrees from two of the best public schools in the world. Wilcox talks about culture. That's the culture you need.
Definitely felt the poise and the leadership from UNC. It was different/ better than Bowers and BM, though BM had the burst and slashing runs.
Exactly. This is why some of us were clamoring for Garbers over Bowers long before the season started.upsetof86 said:
Definitely felt the poise and the leadership from UNC. It was different/ better than Bowers and BM, though BM had the burst and slashing runs.
This is all nice and very ra-ra, but eventually the offense will need to be able to function again next season, and being able to consistently complete passes downfield (not necessarily 40 yards, but at least in the 15 -30 range) is a necessary component of a functioning offense. Hopefully, Garbers can improve in that regard, and he learns to take some calculated risks. A Spring and Fall and a healthier receiving core can help him achieve that. Or perhaps Bowers retakes the reigns.
We need a quarterback up grade.
I actually think that Garbers will end up being a good qb.
I have no doubt whatsoever that Garbers will continue to improve over the next couple of years. As you noted, a deep, healthy WR corps is a critical component to the process.golden sloth said:
This is all nice and very ra-ra, but eventually the offense will need to be able to function again next season, and being able to consistently complete passes downfield (not necessarily 40 yards, but at least in the 15 -30 range) is a necessary component of a functioning offense. Hopefully, Garbers can improve in that regard, and he learns to take some calculated risks. A Spring and Fall and a healthier receiving core can help him achieve that. Or perhaps Bowers retakes the reigns.
Today, he is functioning within a very conservative offensive game plan because of several limitations - his experience level, the lack of quality of WR's, and a so-so running game - and a strong D that can keep games close regardless of the lack of offensive firepower. As Garbers gains experience and more offensive support, the game plan will open up and people will see what he is capable of producing.
And, of course, he is winning games. Beating UW and SC are accomplishments that other QB's on the team could not have produced. Of that I am certain.
Who cares about stats? The only thing that matters is wins.
Garbers is "the guy".......
>And, of course, he is winning games. Beating UW and SC are accomplishments that other QB's on the team could not have produced. Of that I am certain.
Beating Wazzu last year was effectively the equivalent of beating UW this year. So actually other QBs have accomplishments of that ilk. Beating SuC this year was huge, but let's not claim that was a QB driven event.
Said it before and will say it again, nothing I have seen in 2017 or 2018 has given me any reason to believe that anyone has a lock on this job next year.
Beating Wazzu last year was effectively the equivalent of beating UW this year. So actually other QBs have accomplishments of that ilk. Beating SuC this year was huge, but let's not claim that was a QB driven event.
Said it before and will say it again, nothing I have seen in 2017 or 2018 has given me any reason to believe that anyone has a lock on this job next year.
playmakers at running back and wide receiver will help the qb. thank you.
calgo430 said:
playmakers at running back and wide receiver will help the qb. thank you.
That and not being a 19 year old first year starter with limited reps.
Completely disagree...Cal84 said:
>And, of course, he is winning games. Beating UW and SC are accomplishments that other QB's on the team could not have produced. Of that I am certain.
Beating Wazzu last year was effectively the equivalent of beating UW this year. So actually other QBs have accomplishments of that ilk. Beating SuC this year was huge, but let's not claim that was a QB driven event.
Said it before and will say it again, nothing I have seen in 2017 or 2018 has given me any reason to believe that anyone has a lock on this job next year.
The WSU win was principally the product of scheduling. The practice of scheduling consecutive roadies with the second being on a short week has been eliminated effective this year because it created an extremely unfair disadvantage to the visiting team on the second week. WSU simply was not prepared and Cal, to their credit, took advantage of the situation.
As for beating SC and UW, it had much to do with QB play - the fact that Garbers kept his cool in tight situations and did not try to do more than that which he was capable was a key factor in the wins. In essence, while he could have thrown the game away, he didn't, and that is something I haven't seen from a Cal QB in a long, long time.
Guys like Davis and Bowers were fine when things were going well but neither had the ability to do what was necessary in difficult situations. They were "just good enough to lose".
Garbers has demonstrated a cool that is similar to (dare I say it) a Citrus Bowl champion who played for Cal. Pawlawski didn't have the greatest arm but he had the leadership qualities that are critical components in the make-up of championship QB's.
Garbers is a leader. He is the only guy who should be under consideration for QB next year.
I agree with this statement. After the UNC I felt the same way. I didn't think any of the three QBs (before knowing that BM can be careless with the football) should be given the job or ruled out. So I was perplexed why Bowers had been ruled out for the season seemingly right in the middle of the UNC game. Not sure when Bowers had his injury and when the coaches were even aware of it. That whole circumstance continues to perplex.Cal84 said:
>And, of course, he is winning games. Beating UW and SC are accomplishments that other QB's on the team could not have produced. Of that I am certain.
Beating Wazzu last year was effectively the equivalent of beating UW this year. So actually other QBs have accomplishments of that ilk. Beating SuC this year was huge, but let's not claim that was a QB driven event.
Said it before and will say it again, nothing I have seen in 2017 or 2018 has given me any reason to believe that anyone has a lock on this job next year.
I don't see that at all in comparison to Bowers. Last week, pretty much every 3rd down Garbers would drop back, panic, and run for it without making a 1st down. That's the sign of a quarterback that either doesn't know the offense, doesn't know how to read a defense, or just panics. He's young so he can improve, but that is what I see right now. Still much better than BM, who is a turnover machine.upsetof86 said:
Definitely felt the poise and the leadership from UNC. It was different/ better than Bowers and BM, though BM had the burst and slashing runs.
Hopefully BM does work on securing the ball and making better reads during spring ball and all-off season. He does seem to have the most upside of the QBs we have. I'm sure with experience and reps he can learn to be much better. But in-season is not the time to try it. That's the frustration I have with Baldwin. He kept trying this in-season when it was clear this was a disaster waiting to happen. A lot of damage was done to the team and perhaps BM's own psyche. This is why I would like Baldwin gone. That wasn't just a mistake. It was fundamentally poor judgment.dajo9 said:I don't see that at all in comparison to Bowers. Last week, pretty much every 3rd down Garbers would drop back, panic, and run for it without making a 1st down. That's the sign of a quarterback that either doesn't know the offense, doesn't know how to read a defense, or just panics. He's young so he can improve, but that is what I see right now. Still much better than BM, who is a turnover machine.upsetof86 said:
Definitely felt the poise and the leadership from UNC. It was different/ better than Bowers and BM, though BM had the burst and slashing runs.
What you say here (and what Moe Ways says in the article) makes me want to believe, but then I see Garbers pass against defenses that are DARING HIM to throw and I still have doubts. The arm talent just doesn't seem to be there. Well, I like his running ability, the minimal INTs and he had a nice fade pass to MW for a touchdown...71Bear said:Completely disagree...Cal84 said:
>And, of course, he is winning games. Beating UW and SC are accomplishments that other QB's on the team could not have produced. Of that I am certain.
Beating Wazzu last year was effectively the equivalent of beating UW this year. So actually other QBs have accomplishments of that ilk. Beating SuC this year was huge, but let's not claim that was a QB driven event.
Said it before and will say it again, nothing I have seen in 2017 or 2018 has given me any reason to believe that anyone has a lock on this job next year.
The WSU win was principally the product of scheduling. The practice of scheduling consecutive roadies with the second being on a short week has been eliminated effective this year because it created an extremely unfair disadvantage to the visiting team on the second week. WSU simply was not prepared and Cal, to their credit, took advantage of the situation.
As for beating SC and UW, it had much to do with QB play - the fact that Garbers kept his cool in tight situations and did not try to do more than that which he was capable was a key factor in the wins. In essence, while he could have thrown the game away, he didn't, and that is something I haven't seen from a Cal QB in a long, long time.
Guys like Davis and Bowers were fine when things were going well but neither had the ability to do what was necessary in difficult situations. They were "just good enough to lose".
Garbers has demonstrated a cool that is similar to (dare I say it) a Citrus Bowl champion who played for Cal. Pawlawski didn't have the greatest arm but he had the leadership qualities that are critical components in the make-up of championship QB's.
Garbers is a leader. He is the only guy who should be under consideration for QB next year.
Certainly he can be a little bit better as a passer next year, maybe even significantly better, especially if we can put more talent around him. We'll see. I'm pulling for him to succeed.
Your description of Garbers on third down is fairly accurate, and I've felt that way during both the Wazzu and USC games, but every time there was a replay that showed the receivers on a third down scramble, there was absolutely nothing for him to throw to. So even though I agree with how the events unfolded, I don't know if he was panicking or giving up on a play where nothing was going and trying to get what he could. As I mentioned previously, I'd like to see him take a few more calculated risks throwing, but I think the lessons of McIlwain overshadowed his decision making to drive him to be extremely cautious.dajo9 said:I don't see that at all in comparison to Bowers. Last week, pretty much every 3rd down Garbers would drop back, panic, and run for it without making a 1st down. That's the sign of a quarterback that either doesn't know the offense, doesn't know how to read a defense, or just panics. He's young so he can improve, but that is what I see right now. Still much better than BM, who is a turnover machine.upsetof86 said:
Definitely felt the poise and the leadership from UNC. It was different/ better than Bowers and BM, though BM had the burst and slashing runs.
Two thoughts...Big C said:What you say here (and what Moe Ways says in the article) makes me want to believe, but then I see Garbers pass against defenses that are DARING HIM to throw and I still have doubts. The arm talent just doesn't seem to be there. Well, I like his running ability, the minimal INTs and he had a nice fade pass to MW for a touchdown...71Bear said:Completely disagree...Cal84 said:
>And, of course, he is winning games. Beating UW and SC are accomplishments that other QB's on the team could not have produced. Of that I am certain.
Beating Wazzu last year was effectively the equivalent of beating UW this year. So actually other QBs have accomplishments of that ilk. Beating SuC this year was huge, but let's not claim that was a QB driven event.
Said it before and will say it again, nothing I have seen in 2017 or 2018 has given me any reason to believe that anyone has a lock on this job next year.
The WSU win was principally the product of scheduling. The practice of scheduling consecutive roadies with the second being on a short week has been eliminated effective this year because it created an extremely unfair disadvantage to the visiting team on the second week. WSU simply was not prepared and Cal, to their credit, took advantage of the situation.
As for beating SC and UW, it had much to do with QB play - the fact that Garbers kept his cool in tight situations and did not try to do more than that which he was capable was a key factor in the wins. In essence, while he could have thrown the game away, he didn't, and that is something I haven't seen from a Cal QB in a long, long time.
Guys like Davis and Bowers were fine when things were going well but neither had the ability to do what was necessary in difficult situations. They were "just good enough to lose".
Garbers has demonstrated a cool that is similar to (dare I say it) a Citrus Bowl champion who played for Cal. Pawlawski didn't have the greatest arm but he had the leadership qualities that are critical components in the make-up of championship QB's.
Garbers is a leader. He is the only guy who should be under consideration for QB next year.
Certainly he can be a little bit better as a passer next year, maybe even significantly better, especially if we can put more talent around him. We'll see. I'm pulling for him to succeed.
He will head into the off season as the clear #1.
Cal will have a much deeper and healthier WR corps and RB group next year.
Those two factors will result in a huge jump in productivity next year.
I'm not a big believer in arm talent at the college level being the determining factor of who is good and who isn't.Big C said:
The arm talent just doesn't seem to be there.
I agree.NYCGOBEARS said:
I actually think that Garbers will end up being a good qb.
Garbers will head into the spring as the clear #1 but I'm not sure that guarantees anything. Bowers was the clear #1 in spring and summer and that didn't get him through the first half of the first game. There is no guarantee he will improve. A lot of people thought Bowers would improve as well. There is no guarantee our running backs or wide receivers will be any better than they were this year. If all these other running backs were so good then why weren't they playing. Adams was hurt, Dancy was hurt for at least part of the season but everyone else was healthy. No one knows how good any of them will be until they play. A lot of our top receivers are actually graduating. We return Noa, Duncan, Hawkins and bunch of guys we hope to recruit. McCastles may end up being a good TE but at this point we don't really have any idea how good he is. Hasn't played enough. I think Garbers should go in as the #1 quarterback but I'm hoping they bring some other quarterbacks and open up the competition. I'm not confident in Garbers. Hope I'm wrong but I haven't seen anything to get me excited.
If there's one thing that doesn't worry me, it's losing some of our existing WR'sAEM80 said:
A lot of our top receivers are actually graduating.
"Bowers was the clear #1 in spring and summer and that didn't get him through the first half of the first game."
Really... What part of Bowers having a broken thumb on his throwing hand, regardless of his initial standing on the depth chart, leads you to be so dismissive about his not making it through the first half of the season opener?
Really... What part of Bowers having a broken thumb on his throwing hand, regardless of his initial standing on the depth chart, leads you to be so dismissive about his not making it through the first half of the season opener?
Yogi Bear said:I'm not a big believer in arm talent at the college level being the determining factor of who is good and who isn't.Big C said:
The arm talent just doesn't seem to be there.
Exactly. The list of great college QBs, even Heisman winners, who were failures at the next level precisely because they lacked arm talent is very long. Then there are great NFL QBs, with great arm talent, who were not overly successful at the college level.
As I understand the fancy new term, "arm talent" takes in not only arm strength, but also accuracy and touch. I like Garbers' touch on short-medium routes, but not the longer ones. Hitting his receivers in stride lately (accuracy) has been a problem on a lot of routes.Yogi Bear said:I'm not a big believer in arm talent at the college level being the determining factor of who is good and who isn't.Big C said:
The arm talent just doesn't seem to be there.
Not saying that Garbers is at Goff's caliper, but I looked up Goff's 1st year stats vs Garbers this year:
Goff: 320 completes, 530 attempts, 60.4%, 3508 yards, 18 TD, 10 INT, 123.4 rating
Garbers: 125 completes, 202 attempts, 61.9%, 1216 yards, 13 TD, 5 INT, 128 rating
Pretty comparable stat-wise! Also consider the win/loss records - Goff was 1-11 that year compared to Cal's 7-2 in the games that Garbers started.
Someone correct me, but I believe Goff had better WRs that year than Garbers this year. At the least they were healthier. Treggs, Harris, Lawler, Powe, Richard Rodgers, Ray Hudson, plus Daniel Lasco, Bigelow at RB ... though most of them were soph and fresh that year.
Goff: 320 completes, 530 attempts, 60.4%, 3508 yards, 18 TD, 10 INT, 123.4 rating
Garbers: 125 completes, 202 attempts, 61.9%, 1216 yards, 13 TD, 5 INT, 128 rating
Pretty comparable stat-wise! Also consider the win/loss records - Goff was 1-11 that year compared to Cal's 7-2 in the games that Garbers started.
Someone correct me, but I believe Goff had better WRs that year than Garbers this year. At the least they were healthier. Treggs, Harris, Lawler, Powe, Richard Rodgers, Ray Hudson, plus Daniel Lasco, Bigelow at RB ... though most of them were soph and fresh that year.
The one thing I haven't really seen Chase do is step up into the pocket to launch a ball down the field. The closest he got was against Oregon when he threw that pick, but given BB's reaction afterward it looks like it was a bad read on Chase's part.
bonsallbear said:
We need a quarterback up grade.
A QB upgrade is always welcome. In 2003, a QB upgrade was not our biggest needour starter was leading the nation in passing rating when we upgraded at the single most important position.
That is different than saying it is our biggest need. Garbers is currently our best skill player on offense (except maybe McMorris, but we barely use him).
Our skill upgrade needs in order:
1) WR
2) RB
3) TE
.
.
.
4) QB
Garbers has all the makings of an excellent college QB. If you surround him with better talent he will excel.
Like Garbers (esp his running) and he's certainly serviceable - but he doesn't have a strong arm. Gather if we got WRs who could separate, that would matter.
Garbers may or may not be our best skill player. I'm not so sure. It doesn't say a lot about the overall talent level. We won't really know until they get better supporting players, if they get better supporting players. We're losing our best running back and most of our top receivers. No one really knows if the replacements will be any better. Some players get better and some don't. Goff got better but he was special. A lot of other Cal quarterbacks never got better.
Well, does "arm talent" actually mean some good combination of arm strength, accuracy and touch? Or is it simply the latest cliche for arm strength, such as "possessing a howitzer"?calumnus said:Yogi Bear said:I'm not a big believer in arm talent at the college level being the determining factor of who is good and who isn't.Big C said:
The arm talent just doesn't seem to be there.
Exactly. The list of great college QBs, even Heisman winners, who were failures at the next level precisely because they lacked arm talent is very long. Then there are great NFL QBs, with great arm talent, who were not overly successful at the college level.
Totally agree that QB success is a lot more than arm talent. Jeff George would be an example of someone with all the arm talent in the world. But I'd also say that a Joe Montana still had arm talent, though not the greatest arm strength. (He also possessed all the other necessities... spotting open receivers, even under pressure, reading defenses, athletic instincts, leadership, etc.
SmellinRoses said:
Like Garbers (esp his running) and he's certainly serviceable - but he doesn't have a strong arm. gather if we got WRs who could separate, that would matter.
His long throws seem to flutter quite a bit. I dont follow recruiting that much but can't arm strength be one of the easiest things to assess? Why would any power 5 conference take a QBs that cant spread the field at least a little bit?
Give to Cal Legends!
https://calegends.com/donation/ Do it now. Text every Cal fan you know, give them the link, tell them how much you gave, and ask them to text every Cal fan they know and do the same.
https://calegends.com/donation/ Do it now. Text every Cal fan you know, give them the link, tell them how much you gave, and ask them to text every Cal fan they know and do the same.
I'm quite confident he wasn't leading the nation in passer rating at that point in time.calumnus said:bonsallbear said:
We need a quarterback up grade.
A QB upgrade is always welcome. In 2003, a QB upgrade was not our biggest needour starter was leading the nation in passing rating when we upgraded at the single most important position.
Yogi Bear said:I'm quite confident he wasn't leading the nation in passer rating at that point in time.calumnus said:bonsallbear said:
We need a quarterback up grade.
A QB upgrade is always welcome. In 2003, a QB upgrade was not our biggest needour starter was leading the nation in passing rating when we upgraded at the single most important position.
Maybe not, I cannot verify, and my memory is not always reliable. What I can verify is that his 154.2 passing rating for the season would have been top 10 in the country. He was a very good college quarterback, very comparable in college to Matt Leinert or even Alex Smith, both of whom he played against. Guys without particularly strong arms that are very good at calmly making a read and efficiently distributing the ball to the talent around them. It is just none of those guys is Aaron Rodgers-the most talented quarterback I have ever seen.
The point being that, yeah, an upgrade at QB is always welcome, maybe there is another overlooked phenom at a JC we can grab, but Garbers appears to have all the makings of a very good college quarterback if we upgraded the other skill positions where we are clearly more deficient and most importantly, if our OC had a good game plan and gave our players a better chance of being successful.
71Bear said:Two thoughts...Big C said:What you say here (and what Moe Ways says in the article) makes me want to believe, but then I see Garbers pass against defenses that are DARING HIM to throw and I still have doubts. The arm talent just doesn't seem to be there. Well, I like his running ability, the minimal INTs and he had a nice fade pass to MW for a touchdown...71Bear said:Completely disagree...Cal84 said:
>And, of course, he is winning games. Beating UW and SC are accomplishments that other QB's on the team could not have produced. Of that I am certain.
Beating Wazzu last year was effectively the equivalent of beating UW this year. So actually other QBs have accomplishments of that ilk. Beating SuC this year was huge, but let's not claim that was a QB driven event.
Said it before and will say it again, nothing I have seen in 2017 or 2018 has given me any reason to believe that anyone has a lock on this job next year.
The WSU win was principally the product of scheduling. The practice of scheduling consecutive roadies with the second being on a short week has been eliminated effective this year because it created an extremely unfair disadvantage to the visiting team on the second week. WSU simply was not prepared and Cal, to their credit, took advantage of the situation.
As for beating SC and UW, it had much to do with QB play - the fact that Garbers kept his cool in tight situations and did not try to do more than that which he was capable was a key factor in the wins. In essence, while he could have thrown the game away, he didn't, and that is something I haven't seen from a Cal QB in a long, long time.
Guys like Davis and Bowers were fine when things were going well but neither had the ability to do what was necessary in difficult situations. They were "just good enough to lose".
Garbers has demonstrated a cool that is similar to (dare I say it) a Citrus Bowl champion who played for Cal. Pawlawski didn't have the greatest arm but he had the leadership qualities that are critical components in the make-up of championship QB's.
Garbers is a leader. He is the only guy who should be under consideration for QB next year.
Certainly he can be a little bit better as a passer next year, maybe even significantly better, especially if we can put more talent around him. We'll see. I'm pulling for him to succeed.
He will head into the off season as the clear #1.
Cal will have a much deeper and healthier WR corps and RB group next year.
Those two factors will result in a huge jump in productivity next year.
Everyone said the same thing about Bowers
Featured Stories
See All
Friday Spring Practice Notes
by Joaquin Ruiz
From Physicality to Bagels: Meet Cal's inside linebacker room
by Joaquin Ruiz
Cal Football Spring Game Set For April 18
by Cal Athletics
4 Star Sierra Canyon Safety Myles Baker Commits to Cal
by Jim McGill