cowboyjoe
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 28,435
- Reaction score
- 757
Blaine Gabbert is another high quality prospect in what looks to be a very strong quarterback crop.
http://espn.go.com/blog/big12/post/_/id/14415/mailbag-missouri-edition
Jeremy in Fort Smith, Ark., asks: Could Blaine Gabbert end up being a better QB in Mizzou history than Chase Daniel? I don't even think Chase Daniel was that great. Gabbert seems like he could be a good one
David Ubben: Well, Chase Daniel was pretty good, first of all. You can’t short the guy who led Missouri to one of the best seasons in school history in 2007. But it’s hard to make a direct comparison between Gabbert and Daniel. Gabbert is obviously the better pro prospect and clearly built to play the position at 6-foot-5 and 240 pounds. The biggest difference between the two is that while Gabbert has much better arm strength, he lacks not only Daniel's absurd accuracy, but also Daniel’s deep knowledge of the system. Daniel ran the system during his entire football career from high school through his time at Missouri.
But they were in different situations. In Daniel’s junior year, he had three future NFL draft picks to throw to, along with a couple of other good ones behind them. Gabbert has some talented guys on his team, but he doesn’t have anyone even close to the level of Jeremy Maclin, Chase Coffman or Martin Rucker. Danario Alexander, who always had the tools to be a good receiver, surprised everyone with just how much he could produce last season. But if Maclin, Coffman or Rucker had been depended upon as heavily as Alexander, they might have produced plenty more than they already did.
Circling back to your main point, it depends on how you want to measure them. If Gabbert had the same skill players around him that Daniel had, he might be able to do what Daniel did as a junior. But Gabbert will be playing against better defenses and against a much tougher Northern division -- specifically Nebraska -- than any Daniel played against. So total wins might not even be a fair comparison.
Generally, I think Gabbert is a better “quarterback” than Daniel. But for the system and what Missouri needed -- someone who was accurate and could make plays -- Daniel might have been better. But like I said earlier, because of all the variables -- better defenses, more talent around Daniel -- it’s tough to make a definite comparison.
http://espn.go.com/blog/big12/post/_/id/14415/mailbag-missouri-edition
Jeremy in Fort Smith, Ark., asks: Could Blaine Gabbert end up being a better QB in Mizzou history than Chase Daniel? I don't even think Chase Daniel was that great. Gabbert seems like he could be a good one
David Ubben: Well, Chase Daniel was pretty good, first of all. You can’t short the guy who led Missouri to one of the best seasons in school history in 2007. But it’s hard to make a direct comparison between Gabbert and Daniel. Gabbert is obviously the better pro prospect and clearly built to play the position at 6-foot-5 and 240 pounds. The biggest difference between the two is that while Gabbert has much better arm strength, he lacks not only Daniel's absurd accuracy, but also Daniel’s deep knowledge of the system. Daniel ran the system during his entire football career from high school through his time at Missouri.
But they were in different situations. In Daniel’s junior year, he had three future NFL draft picks to throw to, along with a couple of other good ones behind them. Gabbert has some talented guys on his team, but he doesn’t have anyone even close to the level of Jeremy Maclin, Chase Coffman or Martin Rucker. Danario Alexander, who always had the tools to be a good receiver, surprised everyone with just how much he could produce last season. But if Maclin, Coffman or Rucker had been depended upon as heavily as Alexander, they might have produced plenty more than they already did.
Circling back to your main point, it depends on how you want to measure them. If Gabbert had the same skill players around him that Daniel had, he might be able to do what Daniel did as a junior. But Gabbert will be playing against better defenses and against a much tougher Northern division -- specifically Nebraska -- than any Daniel played against. So total wins might not even be a fair comparison.
Generally, I think Gabbert is a better “quarterback” than Daniel. But for the system and what Missouri needed -- someone who was accurate and could make plays -- Daniel might have been better. But like I said earlier, because of all the variables -- better defenses, more talent around Daniel -- it’s tough to make a definite comparison.
DAL @ GB
