Don't get me wrong, I think Mack is a good player. I don't know if he is worthy of a top 3 pick. He looks the part and was great at Buffalo. How that translates to the NFL, I don't know.
But will he be a hard sell in Jacksonville? Would taking a linebacker from SUNY-Buffalo bring calls of "same ol' Jaguars" or "I thought they fired Gene Smith?". Imagine following Mack up with Jimmy Garrapolo.
Would be interesting to watch.
Yes, absolutely.
Mack after a trade down, I'm okay with. Mack at 3 reeks of Alualu all over again.
I don't see it happening. If Caldwell and Bradley do their evaluations right, Mack won't be the pick.
Lol, many people have Mack being picked at the top of the first round. Alualu was projected in the 2nd-3rd round and we picked him at 11.
How do those picks resemble each other at all?
I had a guy on the elevator tell me that it was a Gene Smith type pick. Just because a guy went to a small school doesn't mean he will be a bad player...especially one with an upside like Mack.
Didnt Gene Smith take a guy from Cal in the first round? A guy from Missouri in the first round? A guy from Oklahoma St in the first round? All power conference schools.
If anything this is the complete opposite of a Gene Smith pick. A small school guy in the first round who is projected to go right where we are selecting.
Quote:Yes, absolutely.
Mack after a trade down, I'm okay with. Mack at 3 reeks of Alualu all over again.
It's funny because it is nothing alike.
Quote:Lol, many people have Mack being picked at the top of the first round. Alualu was projected in the 2nd-3rd round and we picked him at 11.
How do those picks resemble each other at all?
I had a guy on the elevator tell me that it was a Gene Smith type pick. Just because a guy went to a small school doesn't mean he will be a bad player...especially one with an upside like Mack.
By the time of the draft Alualu was not a 2nd' 3rd rounder, he was considered late first. Gene took him just outside the top 10 and denied a trade back that would have netted us an extra pick where we still could have selected Alualu.
Mack should probably go around pick 10. If we select him at 3, it is like the Alualu pick, just further up in the draft.
Quote:It's funny because it is nothing alike.
translation; "I want Mack!!!" (as his feet kick and he screams with his fingers in ears).
Point out the flaws in his game. Mack is readymade and a perfect fit for our system
It won't feel like a Gene Smith move to me because I always felt that Smith went 'old school' when he drafted, especially high. He took Offensive Tackles that were technically sound (Monroe), Defensive Tackles that were meant to stop the run (Alualu) and prototypical Quarterbacks that were big with big arms (Gabbert).
Mack plays LB, but he does so in what I consider a modern fashion. He lines up all over the place, hand on the ground, playing in space, Left side, Right side, you name it. He's nontraditional and that is something that I don't think Smith would ever consider.
Now, does Mack fit at #3 overall? Personally, I feel that he does but you could probably convince me otherwise. However, in the midst of that discussion I would ask you the question: "If you don't take Mack at #3 - and Clowney and Watkins are off the board - then who do you take that is going to have as big of an impact?
Mack is a guy that I feel like will instantly upgrade either Geno Hayes, Dekoda Watson, or both. He can also spell Chris Clemons, Jason Babin, Andre Branch, and Ryan Davis. Hell, he may even make Davis obsolete. What other player is out there that is going to have that kind of impact?
Quote:translation; "I want Mack!!!" (as his feet kick and he screams with his fingers in ears).
What are you even talking about?
Quote:Yes, absolutely.
Mack after a trade down, I'm okay with. Mack at 3 reeks of Alualu all over again.
Not even close. Mack is considered by everyone a top 10, even top 5 pick. Some say he should be the #1 pick.
Literally nobody was saying anything like that about Alualu.
On 1010xl yesterday, I think it was Ryan O'Halloran who described picking Mack at #3 as a big "thud".
Quote:Not even close. Mack is considered by everyone a top 10, even top 5 pick. Some say he should be the #1 pick.
Literally nobody was saying anything like that about Alualu.
Mack should go around 10 (ya know, where a BETTER player of his comparative talents was selected (Ware).
Mack at 3 is [BLEEP] and a reach.
If the Jags trade down, add picks and then select Mack, I'll have zero issue with it.
Quote:Yes, absolutely.
Mack after a trade down, I'm okay with. Mack at 3 reeks of Alualu all over again.
Come on dude. I usually don't jump on you like everyone else does but you know this isn't true.
Mack is widely considered one of the elite prospects in this draft (Robinson, Watkins, Mack, and Clowney). Alualu was no where near the top of anyones board. Mack in some cases has been mocked #1... Was Alualu ever mocked in the top 20? By anyone?!
Quote:On 1010xl yesterday, I think it was Ryan O'Halloran who described picking Mack at #3 as a big "thud".
As in, a wasted pick?
Quote:On 1010xl yesterday, I think it was Ryan O'Halloran who described picking Mack at #3 as a big "thud".
He's been pushing Watkins for months so I am not surprised.
Quote:On 1010xl yesterday, I think it was Ryan O'Halloran who described picking Mack at #3 as a big "thud".
He's right. ....Other than the few Mack fanboys we have on here it would be a waste of value to select Mack at 3. Disappointing to most.
Quote:Mack should go around 10 (ya know, where a BETTER player of his comparative talents was selected (Ware).
Mack at 3 is [BLEEP] and a reach.
If the Jags trade down, add picks and then select Mack, I'll have zero issue with it.
And if they did that draft over again, you think Ware would still last to #10? nope.
.gif "Laughing")