Christmas dinner over. Half-sleeping from the tryptophan. Don’t know why I’m posting…oh yeah, because of Kevin Seifert’s story about how noncommittal Brad Childress is about Tarvaris Jackson‘s future (a story linked by PFT, who never miss the opportunity to paint Childress as a buffoon). Seifert says in his piece:
"Jackson has won eight of his 11 starts while accounting for 10 touchdowns and 14 turnovers this season. Monday, coach Brad Childress proved noncommittal about Jackson’s long-term future, citing his recent spate of turnovers and terming his decision-making as “decent.”“His record as a starter speaks for itself,” Childress said. “I’d like [him] to do a little bit better job with that ball security, and that ends up being the premium. By and large, he’s been decent [in] decision-making. I always want to see us make the routine plays routinely. [Sunday,] I thought we left a couple throws on the field. … But then, I think he has made some very, very good throws.“But I’d just like to do a better job of securing the football. And some of that is on him and some of that is on other people.”Childress has spoken often this season about evaluating Jackson based on a “body of work” before deciding about next season and beyond. If the past six games have led Childress to a decision, however, he wasn’t saying so Monday.“I want to see the rest of the season, obviously, and I’m not looking at [Denver] as our last game,” Childress said. “But the best thing I think to do is, we always talk about it. [Vice President of Player Personnel] Rick [Spielman] and I will talk about it. The coaches will talk about it. And you’re always better served just to step away and look at things from a distance.”"
It’s always been Childress’s stated position that you never rule anything out and if the organization decides to make a change at QB then they’ll look at QBs once the season has ended. So, what’s changed from then to Childress’s most recent reiteration of said position? Nothing that I can see. He’s been consistent – boringly consistent. That’s Childress. A guy I wouldn’t want to play poker with. Or be stuck in an elevator with for six hours (unless his monotone has some kind of soothing effect after awhile, perhaps even acting as a soporific).