Jacksonville Jaguars Fan Forums

Quote:If Teddy and Johnny are both gone, I would pick the best available tight end, wide receiver, or outside linebacker, depending on who the most talented player is of those three.

a TE at #3?! a WR?! Really? Wow...

Manziel would be a sexy pick, but not the smartest

Quote:A TE at #3?! a WR?! Really? Wow...

 

If he is the most talented of the three positions that I listed, it would be OK at #3.

Quote:Manziel would be a sexy pick, but not the smartest

 

Would who be the smartest pick?

Quote:Would who be the smartest pick?

Clowney or Dee Ford

Quote:Clowney or Dee Ford

 

Dee Ford is better for #39.

 

No to Clowney.

Quote:against the number 3 draft pick? I don't get it especially with today's NFL where the success and failures of a franchise is depended on the quarterback position. It's the one position on the team that I don't fix with a Band-Aid and for people who are waiting for the Andrew luck type prospect will be waiting forever because they are once in a generation talent. So why people shouting out Jimmy G, David Fales, or AJ "pistol pete" McCarron with our later draft picks so we can get a pass rusher in the first round just please give me Teddy B, Blake Brotles, or Johnny Football with the number 3 pick because I think they can upgrade this team in a heartbeat.  

 

Because people are afraid of picking a QB in the first round.  They give you examples of guys like Russel Wilson, Tony Romo, Tom Brady, etc as their excuse as to why you shouldn't take a QB in the first round.  What they fail to realize is that those guys are the exception, not the rule.  First round QB's have more success rates than first round DE's like everybody is clamoring for us to get this year.  

 

Basically, it's just QB fear.

Quote:If he is the most talented of the three positions that I listed, it would be OK at #3.

So you think that TE, WR and OLB are more important and have more of a need for this team than one of the best DE's to come along in recent memory? You realize we had 31 sacks last year right? Which was lowest in the league?

Quote:Clowney or Dee Ford

Dee Ford at #3?  Really?  That sounds like something Gene Smith would do.  Fall in love with a player and take them at #3.  I like Dee Ford.  A lot better than Alualu.  But I don't think at #3 he'd be good value.

Quote:Dee Ford is better for #39.

 

No to Clowney.

 

You're only saying this because you've made up your mind that he's lazy.  Maybe didn't see that he spent most of last week at the senior bowl?  Even though he wasn't on the field, he was there talking and networking.  Doesn't sound lazy to me.

Quote:You're only saying this because you've made up your mind that he's lazy.  Maybe didn't see that he spent most of last week at the senior bowl?  Even though he wasn't on the field, he was there talking and networking.  Doesn't sound lazy to me.

 

I am saying that because he publicly admitted he is lazy and Gil Brandt agrees.

Quote:I am saying that because he publicly admitted he is lazy and Gil Brandt agrees.

Again you are wrong. He never publicly admitted to this because once i asked you to prove it with a link you couldn't do so. Then i showed you how you misinterpreted his statements before his sophmore season where he said he never worked out in the off season (which tons of physically gifted athletes do all over other sports... Lebron, Kobe, Randy Moss Miguel Cabrera) then it takes them a few years to realize they need extra work. Clowney figured this out in his sophmore year of college.

 

Stop making up lies to try and justify your point that you don't like Clowney. Many analysts view him as the best prospect in this class by a long shot.  Some people look at his low numbers this year and call him "Lazy" without actually looking at the fact he was double and triple teamed this year.

Quote:Dee Ford is better for #39.


No to Clowney.

Dee Ford could easily be a top 10 prospect after the combine

Quote:Dee Ford at #3? Really? That sounds like something Gene Smith would do. Fall in love with a player and take them at #3. I like Dee Ford. A lot better than Alualu. But I don't think at #3 he'd be good value.

You sound like gene smith

Quote: 

 

No to Clowney.

 

Quote:I am saying that because he publicly admitted he is lazy and Gil Brandt agrees.

 

Publicly admitted it = wrong.

 

Gil Brandt agrees = who cares?  He's wrong just as much as any other "expert".  I, and most other people not employed by the NFL, could care less what he thinks of another person's mindset.

Quote:None of the quarterbacks in this draft are going to grade out as elite, franchise quarterbacks. Yet, some team is going to ignore prudence in favor of the perception of need.

 

Any quarterback taken in the top five of a draft is going to be thrown in right away on teams impetuously seeking one in the top five.

 

It will be a real test of patience to resist the temptation to get the hook and yank out the starter once the fan meltdown begins thirty minutes after the veteran throws his first interception of the year in the first game of the year.

 

Drafting a non-elite quarterback in the top five has been discussed at length. Included was a comprehensive review of the results of taking a non-elite quarterback at the top of the draft. It does not make sense to over-draft quarterback.

 

Define elite QB. Gabbert was considered an elite QB prospect. Why was that so? 

Quote:You sound like gene smith

 

No, you do.  You fell in love with Dee Ford, and would take him at #3.  Much like Gene Smith fell in love with Alualu.

Quote:No, you do. You fell in love with Dee Ford, and would take him at #3. Much like Gene Smith fell in love with Alualu.

You didnt fall in love with Dee Ford much like Gene didnt fall in love with JJ Watt

Quote:You didnt fall in love with Dee Ford much like Gene didnt fall in love with JJ Watt

 

That's not a good comparison at all.  

 

Dee Ford isn't a Top 10 pick.  You'll see when the draft comes.  Gene Smith did fall in love with players.  Not doing something doesn't equate to being exactly like someone else.  Doing something does.