Jerry Mac breaks down the history between Garcia and the Raiders, and then writes,
I floated the idea of signing Michael Vick under certain conditions the other day, something the Raiders probably never considered. They’ve been playing it safe and smart, having been burned by being too bold last year.
Garcia is the safe, smart choice.
You really only need to think about it for split second.
Should Russell be injured, do you want Jeff Garcia, Andrew Walter or Bruce Gradkowski?
Thought so.
By the way, I hated that Michael Vick column. Anyway.
Lowell Cohn says Good for the Raiders.
Kawakami writes,
I like the Garcia signing as a sign that Al Davis isn’t babying Russell, while at the same time still expecting the most out of him. Alex Smith could’ve used something like that a few years ago, and he never got it.David White is on vacation or something, but the Sporting Green staff is asking readers to answer a stupid question by writing the answer in the comments section.
Nationally, Denver Broncos spokesperson Bill Williamson writes that at the very least it means Garcia won't be a Bronco this year, whatever the hell that is supposed to mean. It's not like his being a Bucaneer helped Tampa last season when we played them. Then he gets Scouts, Inc.'s Matt Williamson to say that he's never liked Garcia, and that, contrary to what Kawakami and McDonald say, it's a bad fit because the playbook will have to be re-written if JaMarcus gets hurt, and they'd have been better off signing Leftwich. Personally, I'm with the locals in that a change of pace is a good thing to have in a back-up.
No comments:
Post a Comment