Jacksonville Jaguars Fan Forums

Build the team first. Look at how SEA got there.   This draft is deep and loaded with talent at multiple areas.  Jags can take Mettinberger late and bring in a couple undrafted guys.

Quote:Easily build the roster.   There have been many average qbs that have won it all or least made the playoffs.   And the Chances to find a manning or brady are very slim.     So as long as have the right staff to build a great roster.  Almost any qb will do.  However the exception to the rule is Chad.   He can have all the time in the world and still throw it directly to the defender.  

 

Many?

 

Name them.

 

I'll spot you Trent Dilfer, Mark Rypien, Jim McMahon and Brad Johnson.

You build your roster and wait for a Russell Wilson to appear in the 3rd round or

you trade away the farm and move up when you think Luck is there.

You can also draft a QB every year and give the accumulated roster of QBs a quarter of the season to play until you find the right guy.

Option 4 is to accumulate picks and trade up, assuming you are out of contention for a top 10 pick, hoping what you traded for is a good QB.

 

It's all a crapshoot. Just roll the dice hope you get lucky. Few teams do. 

Even in the "QB era", top defenses still win the majority of Super Bowls.  Since 2007 when Peyton won to ring in the modern "QB era" (with offense and scoring getting the benefit of rules changes, etc.) the Super Bowl winner was regular season top 5 in either total points or third down percentage the majority of the time.

 

Prior to then (I think I only looked back from 2000-2007,) the winner was usually both and many times the top defense.

 

So, as there has been an unmistakable shift towards offense, having the better defense still gives you a better chance of winning than not.

Quote:Long time follower of the board here. I don't post much but will at different times of the year cause my life will allow it lol.

The reason I asked this question is because I see way too much importance on the qb position on this tread. I want to start a healthy debate with quality answers as to why one way is better than the other

Obviously we've seen both succeed but some seem to push one more than the other. I want to know what is it that makes one more prolific than the other

I intend to play devil advocate and play both side but just want to get an idea on what everyone thinks.

It depends on the quality of the QB that's on your board. We've seen two QB changes over the last few years that instantly reverse a team's fortunes in less than a year. Andrew Luck in Indianapolis comes to mind. Alex Smith in Kansas City also comes to mind.

Interesting debate. I think you will build the roster first. If the Jags are not 100% commited to one of the top 3 QB's, they should draft someone else. You can't miss on No. 3 pick. It's also good to have at least a solid OL, if you want to get a rookie, potentially franchise QB behind there. As I've read here, you still have some holes on the OL. I was very worried about Wilson's health behind our OL last year. It's true we had injuries, but still pass protection was bad most of the times.

 

 

Quote:The pick a QB just because you need one approach is for fanboys and GMs who run their teams like fanboys. Look at Idzik's Jets. Geno Smith was the "top" QB available in a dreadful class. He's now competing with a washed-up Michael Vick. I say keep building until you find a QB worth drafting. If not, take flyers on lower-round QBs, like a team would do for a LB, until the right fit comes along. It worked for the Eagles/Nick Foles and the Seahawks/Russell Wilson, and it could work for the Jags. 

 

To be fair, they drafted Geno in 2nd round, even though they had 2 first round picks they both used on defense. I don't think they are longterm commited to Geno, if he doesn't work out now that they get him some weapons (Decker and probably another 1st or 2nd round WR in this deep WR class). Geno will get a year or two to prove, he can be a good QB, if not, they will move on. I know Vick could be the starter week 1, but I doubt he'll remain healthy more than 3-4 games, so Geno will get his chance again. 

 

If any QB was "overdrafted" last year, it was E.J. Manuel.

A quarterback will fail until the team as a whole is built.

:whistling:build roster draft Winston

Build the defense and get a QB that can win for you. He don't have to be elite.

clowney may be able to play qb too,  Its ok the man will be here soon.

I highly doubt that the Texans or Rams wont draft him or trade away the pick for another 1st round pick because the entire league wants him on their team!

Quote::whistling:build roster draft Winston

Sounds good, except that if you are too successful in building the roster too fast, and Winston continues his development into a top QB prospect, you may not be high enough in the draft order to get him without ransoming a ton of picks to trade up.

Quote:Sounds good, except that if you are too successful in building the roster too fast, and Winston continues his development into a top QB prospect, you may not be high enough in the draft order to get him without ransoming a ton of picks to trade up.

Couldn't agree more. The only draft we can think about is this one.


It would be great to have a top five pick again next season, but if that happens then the 2014 season will have gone badly wrong. (Unless we get really lucky with a trade like the Rams did.)

I've been following NFL football for some time now, and through all that observation, you pick up trends and observe how GM's build winners over the years. 

 

In most of the examples through the 80's, 90's and up to today, most teams, and most examples of successful teams usually start by selecting a QB to build around in that first offseason, whether that QB is got via the draft, FA or trade. 

 

Remember the Dallas Cowboys run in the 90's? Troy Aikman was the first pick in their new regime. In Green Bay's 90's run, I think Favre was traded for that first year of Holmgren's regime. Even with the Jags, Brunell was traded for in Coughlin's initial offseason. Even in Belichick's initial draft in New England, he drafted Tom Brady, albeit late. 

 

Now, in recent history, there is a few examples of the QB being selected several years after the core of the team being assembled by the new regime, such as with Russell Wilson. 

 

As we saw, the Jaguars did not select a QB in Caldwell's first draft. Some summize that Caldwell won't force one selected in this draft either, should that value not be there at the selection, or should better value be with another position player that falls to our pick(s). 

 

Which way is better, in your opinion? 

 

My one issue with getting the QB say 3 years into a rebuild is that the example of Russell Wilson can be looked at as unusual - most QB aren't at his level in ability and maturity as a rookie, and a lot of times, a QB will need that 2-3 years of starts before he's really hitting his stride. So, using simple math you could already be into year 5-6 of the rebuild by the time said QB is "superbowl caliber". By that time, you could already be faced with injury/ departure/ decline to some of the core. When you get the QB in year 1 of a rebuild, usually by year 3, the QB which has developed along with the core, is ready to make a serious run. Theres a synergy there. 

 

Its an interesting examination of which way is right. Perhaps theres no wrong answer, and perhaps there is. 

 

Discuss. 

Seattle didn't really wait. In Carroll's first year, they traded for Charlie Whitehurst.

You draft a QB when you find one, regardless of whether you're in year 1, 2, 3, or 10 of a rebuild.

I think a team should draft  the position every 3 years at the most, maybe every two years. Cycle Qb's in on the regular and eventually you end up with a franchise player starting and one waiting on the bench. Unfortunately, the Jags straight up ignored the position for way to long and when they have pulled the trigger it's been bust city.

Quote:You draft a QB when you find one, regardless of whether you're in year 1, 2, 3, or 10 of a rebuild.

 

using "10" is kinda ridiculous....you almost certainly won't get to year 10 as a regime waiting that long. 

Quote:using "10" is kinda ridiculous....you almost certainly won't get to year 10 as a regime waiting that long. 

It's called hyperbole. The point remains the same.

I don't pretend to be an NFL GM, nor do I even come close to knowing or assuming the right way to build franchises.

If there was a cookie cutter form of doing these things, then it would be easy.

Evaluating talent doesn't always transform from college to NFL.

There is no answer. Well... Maybe for some, but for every Kraft, there's a Jones.