Panthers.com profiles Gabbert

[Mr. Scot]

Gifts of Gabbert

Gabbert doesn't feel at all like he's ill-prepared for the next level. He excelled in a pro-style offense in high school, and aspects of Missouri's offensive approach should transfer as well.

"We didn't just dink and dunk. We threw it everywhere on the field," Gabbert said. "That was an instrumental part of our offense, hitting the seams, hitting the verticals on the sideline. That's how we beat teams.

I had to make those throws. I was willing to make those throws. And I did make those throws."

Still, Gabbert knows that there's lots to learn in his transition. The key for him and the other quarterbacks coming from spread systems could be that they're willing to learn and they have the mental acumen and physical tools that will allow them to learn.

"It takes more in the NFL. It's a full-time job, and I realize that," Gabbert said. "I love the game of football, and that's been my goal - to only do football. I'm going to be in the film room, going to be in the weight room just preparing as hard as possible.

"I'm going to outwork everybody. That's how I was raised. Nothing's ever going to be given to you in life. You've got to earn everything you get."

It was last January when I noticed (and posted) that then Panthers.com scribe Andrew Mason had penned three different articles in short order, all saying the same thing. That thing being "Jake Delhomme struggled last year, but Matt Moore looked pretty good."

I took this as a preview of coming attractions, but resident irritant 'Gman was Right' argued trollfully that there was no way the Panthers would bench Delhomme for Moore. That particular debate ended with his user name no longer being appropriate (not that it had been before).

As I recall, Meat was the only one who took it a step further to say that Delhomme might be gone. I wasn't ready to buy that notion, but it turned out he was correct. Within fairly short order, Delhomme was sent packing while Matt Moore was offered a high tender contract and slated to be the next season's starter.

The omen had indeed been a valid one.

Fast forward to today, and just over a week before the draft we have a front-page story on Blaine Gabbert.

It can be assumed that the material was gathered by new writer Brian Strickland during Gabbert's recent visit. The content of the story is interesting as it revolves around how effectively he can transfer from a college spread offense to the pros, and ends with him saying that in the process of doing so, he will "outwork everybody."

Interestingly, the article's title also contains a play on the QB's name. Why is that interesting? Because that sort of play on words has become a bit of a tradition with the site, dating back a ways. Articles with Brian Strickland's commentary are "Strickly Panthers" (replacing "Mason's Minutes") while PR man Charlie Dayton posts "Dayton Fliers". Delhomme pressers were encapsulated under "Cajun up with Jake" whereas Coach John Fox's non-answers came from "The Foxhole".

And now we have the "Gift of Gabbert".

So, remembering that the official site's prominent coverage of Matt Moore (and willingness to admit Delhomme's struggles, something rarely acknowledged prior) was a portent of the future last season, should we now take this article as meaningful toward next week's draft decision?

[mav1234]

probably just an author that was putting something about Gabbert out because so few have heard much about him.

[tarheelpride]

If we traded down, I'd buy that theory

[Ja Rhule]

Smoke screen!

[Ruff]

Smoke screen!

:willy_nilly:

[Mr. Scot]

probably just an author that was putting something about Gabbert out because so few have heard much about him.

I'd actually agree.

In the past, Panthers.com has profiled numerous prospects that we've never drafted (a lot of them local guys). And we've already seen prior stories on some of this year's guys. Add in that they followed this one with one about Newton.

So to answer my own question (which I normally don't like to do until further into the thread) I don't necessarily take this as an omen, although I acknowledge that it could be.

After all, there is still the question of whether the stories carry the same tone, right? :devil:

[tarheelpride]

to me it seems like they're saying Gabbert "lucked" into the top 10 with a perfect storm of sorts

While precise timing is paramount in NFL offenses, no one can question Gabbert's timing when it came to his decision to leave college with one year of eligibility remaining.

Scouts already had their eyes on Gabbert, and then everything fell into place. Elite quarterback prospect Andrew Luck of Stanford decided to stay in school, and NFL teams can't currently consider free agent options at quarterback, even as a multitude of teams in the top half of the draft need help under center.

"That was definitely a big factor in my decision," Gabbert said. "You look at the top 15 teams, and potentially 10 could use a quarterback. I know every quarterback in this draft looked at that - not only me.

"This opportunity doesn't come around very often. It's a once in a lifetime chance, and I'm going to make the most of it and just have fun doing it."

It also shows he takes advantage of opportunities, if that means anything

[Mr. Scot]

If you want to put your tinfoil hat on, there is this from the Newton article:

He's also the talk because of off-the-field questions stemming from an NCAA investigation into his father's alleged solicitation of money in exchange for Newton's football services as well as a burglary charge at the University of Florida.

And this...

Only time will tell if Newton's best will be good enough on the NFL level. It certainly was in college.

As opposed to this in Gabbert's...

Gabbert also understands, however, that teams near the top of the draft order aren't looking at him with the idea of putting him in the shotgun on every play and spreading five receivers out wide.

And scouts simply don't have the benefit of seeing how Gabbert can operate in a pro-style offense – as is the case with half the quarterbacks that could be taken in the first two rounds.

You could say that the Newton article has a more negative tone in that they acknowledge some negatives, where all of the questions posted in the Gabbert piece are about the system and transition, not so much Gabbert himself. Add in that each one of those questions is followed by a positive affirmation from Gabbert that he can, indeed, make the jump:sosp:

(or you could say that I'm in a bit of a naughty mood today)

[Ricky Spanish]

i think we're all bored, want the draft to get here and are reading WAY too far into stuff right now.

[Troy17289TD]

Seems to me they are building up by QB. A few days prior to the Gabbert article, they had a Mallett article. My guess is that they will feature another QB next week. Have they done one on Newton yet? If not, he would likely be next.

[Mr. Scot]

Seems to me they are building up by QB. A few days prior to the Gabbert article, they had a Mallett article. My guess is that they will feature another QB next week. Have they done one on Newton yet? If not, he would likely be next.

If they had a Mallett article, I missed it (and I did do a site search).

They used his pic as the front page shot for the quarterback position preview, but I didn't see a specific Mallett profile.

If I missed it, anyone feel free to link it.

[Sword]

http://www.panthers.com/news/article-2/Newton-driven-by-will-to-win/6bd96860-7bab-46bf-b9dd-6c1cf3e632e3

boom, theory busted..last week they stated they would be doing QB previews all through the week.

[Mr. Scot]

http://www.panthers.com/news/article-2/Newton-driven-by-will-to-win/6bd96860-7bab-46bf-b9dd-6c1cf3e632e3

boom, theory busted..last week they stated they would be doing QB previews all through the week.

Already posted: And now, the flipside

And look again, chief. Did I say that was what they were doing or did I ask people if they thought they were? :sosp:

[Sword]

Already posted: And now, the flipside

And look again, chief. Did I say that was what they were doing or did I ask people if they thought they were? :sosp:

you're not my chief, guy.

I know what you are saying because I thought what happened with the Moore stories last year was right..It just seems like they are just posting articles about the top players at each position. They had one of Robert Quinn and we know the Panthers never talked to him(at his Pro Day). I think it would be more telling if there were multiple articles on one player.