(01-27-2018, 06:42 AM)DragonFury Wrote: [ -> ] (01-26-2018, 10:33 PM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ]They can't run like Bortles, obviously, but they could absolutely throw drag after drag with a screen and dump off sprinkled in. They could also re-add some of the quick developing tight window stuff like slants that Bortles can't do.
The reason we don't use slant and other short stuff is because the running game already brings the linebackers and safeties down towards the box. Having McCown or Hoyer at QB wouldn't change anything about that.
Nah it's been a long term problem, as evidenced by all of the tipped slant INTs off Marqise's hands throughout the years. Blake has consistently thrown them late and inaccurate for his whole career. It's just part of the deal when you have a slow release, not great anticipation, and spotty (to put it kindly) ball placement.
(01-27-2018, 07:25 AM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ] (01-27-2018, 06:42 AM)DragonFury Wrote: [ -> ]The reason we don't use slant and other short stuff is because the running game already brings the linebackers and safeties down towards the box. Having McCown or Hoyer at QB wouldn't change anything about that.
Nah it's been a long term problem, as evidenced by all of the tipped slant INTs off Marqise's hands throughout the years. Blake has consistently thrown them late and inaccurate for his whole career. It's just part of the deal when you have a slow release, not great anticipation, and spotty (to put it kindly) ball placement.
not everything is Blake's fault...If a receiver can get his hands on the ball he should catch it...there have been many dropped balls by receivers that were not on Blake...Not defending Blake, just trying to be fair
(01-27-2018, 08:04 AM)wrong_box Wrote: [ -> ] (01-27-2018, 07:25 AM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ]Nah it's been a long term problem, as evidenced by all of the tipped slant INTs off Marqise's hands throughout the years. Blake has consistently thrown them late and inaccurate for his whole career. It's just part of the deal when you have a slow release, not great anticipation, and spotty (to put it kindly) ball placement.
not everything is Blake's fault...If a receiver can get his hands on the ball he should catch it...there have been many dropped balls by receivers that were not on Blake...Not defending Blake, just trying to be fair
That's what made AROB (and Hurns in prior seasons) so effective and valuable to the passing game. Their ability to "contort" and catch passes that aren't thrown perfectly is a real benefit to Bortles.
Bortles is back next season. I don't think there's an immediate plug and play upgrade to be had. The Jags have already come close to advancing to the Superbowl with BB at the helm.
Draft a QB and let him develop behind Bortles.
Next season will be pretty telling. The schedule looks much tougher next season (I know, good teams one season may not be good the next). If these teams are playing at a high level like this year, we'll definitely see how it's going with Bortles.
Titans X2 (lost both games to them this year)
Patriots
Steelers
Eagles
@Chiefs
@Bills
@Cowboys
If they look good getting through that, Bortles will be the guy moving forward (rightfully so).
(01-27-2018, 09:26 AM)jagherd Wrote: [ -> ] (01-27-2018, 08:04 AM)wrong_box Wrote: [ -> ]not everything is Blake's fault...If a receiver can get his hands on the ball he should catch it...there have been many dropped balls by receivers that were not on Blake...Not defending Blake, just trying to be fair
That's what made AROB (and Hurns in prior seasons) so effective and valuable to the passing game. Their ability to "contort" and catch passes that aren't thrown perfectly is a real benefit to Bortles.
Bortles is back next season. I don't think there's an immediate plug and play upgrade to be had. The Jags have already come close to advancing to the Superbowl with BB at the helm.
Draft a QB and let him develop behind Bortles.
Next season will be pretty telling. The schedule looks much tougher next season (I know, good teams one season may not be good the next). If these teams are playing at a high level like this year, we'll definitely see how it's going with Bortles.
Titans X2 (lost both games to them this year)
Patriots
Steelers
Eagles
@Chiefs
@Bills
@Cowboys
If they look good getting through that, Bortles will be the guy moving forward (rightfully so).
I like the idea of drafting a QB if one worthy of a pick is there, but I don't want to see the Jaguars passing on guys like Linder, Telvin, Ngakoue, ARob, or Jack to take a flyer on a guy that they aren't convinced will develop. Picking QBs that turn out to be no ones doesn't help the team, but all the guys I just listed were drafted after the first round and they've had a major impact. Take great players, and if Russell Wilson or Dak Prescott or David Carr or Jimmy Garoppolo is there outside of the first round then take them, but don't reach on guys like Matt Barkley because you just want to take a guy regardless of whether he's just another guy that will never have a chance of being any good.
(01-27-2018, 09:56 AM)SeldomRite Wrote: [ -> ] (01-27-2018, 09:26 AM)jagherd Wrote: [ -> ]That's what made AROB (and Hurns in prior seasons) so effective and valuable to the passing game. Their ability to "contort" and catch passes that aren't thrown perfectly is a real benefit to Bortles.
Bortles is back next season. I don't think there's an immediate plug and play upgrade to be had. The Jags have already come close to advancing to the Superbowl with BB at the helm.
Draft a QB and let him develop behind Bortles.
Next season will be pretty telling. The schedule looks much tougher next season (I know, good teams one season may not be good the next). If these teams are playing at a high level like this year, we'll definitely see how it's going with Bortles.
Titans X2 (lost both games to them this year)
Patriots
Steelers
Eagles
@Chiefs
@Bills
@Cowboys
If they look good getting through that, Bortles will be the guy moving forward (rightfully so).
I like the idea of drafting a QB if one worthy of a pick is there, but I don't want to see the Jaguars passing on guys like Linder, Telvin, Ngakoue, ARob, or Jack to take a flyer on a guy that they aren't convinced will develop. Picking QBs that turn out to be no ones doesn't help the team, but all the guys I just listed were drafted after the first round and they've had a major impact. Take great players, and if Russell Wilson or Dak Prescott or David Carr or Jimmy Garoppolo is there outside of the first round then take them, but don't reach on guys like Matt Barkley because you just want to take a guy regardless of whether he's just another guy that will never have a chance of being any good.
I don’t think you have to worry about that.
The FO and Marrone seem like they have a good handle on how this team should be built. For the first time in a long time, I have faith they will do what’s best for the team. If that means dumping Blake, I’m good. If it means keeping him and making the off season about improving his weapons, I’m good too.
(01-27-2018, 10:28 AM)Cleatwood Wrote: [ -> ] (01-27-2018, 09:56 AM)SeldomRite Wrote: [ -> ]I like the idea of drafting a QB if one worthy of a pick is there, but I don't want to see the Jaguars passing on guys like Linder, Telvin, Ngakoue, ARob, or Jack to take a flyer on a guy that they aren't convinced will develop. Picking QBs that turn out to be no ones doesn't help the team, but all the guys I just listed were drafted after the first round and they've had a major impact. Take great players, and if Russell Wilson or Dak Prescott or David Carr or Jimmy Garoppolo is there outside of the first round then take them, but don't reach on guys like Matt Barkley because you just want to take a guy regardless of whether he's just another guy that will never have a chance of being any good.
I don’t think you have to worry about that.
The FO and Marrone seem like they have a good handle on how this team should be built. For the first time in a long time, I have faith they will do what’s best for the team. If that means dumping Blake, I’m good. If it means keeping him and making the off season about improving his weapons, I’m good too.
I wouldn't say I'm worried about what the team will do, but I'm talking on the board about the idea of taking positions instead of taking players.
Taking positions is how you end up with Fournette and Smoot instead of Lattimore and Hunt, and it was this regime that made those picks. It seems like it worked out fine, but who knows if we take another elite DB and a running back that doesn't have a history of severe ankle problems how it works out.
(01-27-2018, 09:56 AM)SeldomRite Wrote: [ -> ] (01-27-2018, 09:26 AM)jagherd Wrote: [ -> ]That's what made AROB (and Hurns in prior seasons) so effective and valuable to the passing game. Their ability to "contort" and catch passes that aren't thrown perfectly is a real benefit to Bortles.
Bortles is back next season. I don't think there's an immediate plug and play upgrade to be had. The Jags have already come close to advancing to the Superbowl with BB at the helm.
Draft a QB and let him develop behind Bortles.
Next season will be pretty telling. The schedule looks much tougher next season (I know, good teams one season may not be good the next). If these teams are playing at a high level like this year, we'll definitely see how it's going with Bortles.
Titans X2 (lost both games to them this year)
Patriots
Steelers
Eagles
@Chiefs
@Bills
@Cowboys
If they look good getting through that, Bortles will be the guy moving forward (rightfully so).
I like the idea of drafting a QB if one worthy of a pick is there, but I don't want to see the Jaguars passing on guys like Linder, Telvin, Ngakoue, ARob, or Jack to take a flyer on a guy that they aren't convinced will develop. Picking QBs that turn out to be no ones doesn't help the team, but all the guys I just listed were drafted after the first round and they've had a major impact. Take great players, and if Russell Wilson or Dak Prescott or David Carr or Jimmy Garoppolo is there outside of the first round then take them, but don't reach on guys like Matt Barkley because you just want to take a guy regardless of whether he's just another guy that will never have a chance of being any good.
I agree.
I'd prefer they drafted a really good Guard with their first or 2nd picks before taking a young QB, assuming there are guards worth taking there (I honestly don't know).
(01-27-2018, 11:45 AM)jagherd Wrote: [ -> ] (01-27-2018, 09:56 AM)SeldomRite Wrote: [ -> ]I like the idea of drafting a QB if one worthy of a pick is there, but I don't want to see the Jaguars passing on guys like Linder, Telvin, Ngakoue, ARob, or Jack to take a flyer on a guy that they aren't convinced will develop. Picking QBs that turn out to be no ones doesn't help the team, but all the guys I just listed were drafted after the first round and they've had a major impact. Take great players, and if Russell Wilson or Dak Prescott or David Carr or Jimmy Garoppolo is there outside of the first round then take them, but don't reach on guys like Matt Barkley because you just want to take a guy regardless of whether he's just another guy that will never have a chance of being any good.
I agree.
I'd prefer they drafted a really good Guard with their first or 2nd picks before taking a young QB, assuming there are guards worth taking there (I honestly don't know).
Yeah, it's always about the player, not the position. If it's a choice between another Cann or another Myles Jack then take the linebacker and find a way to make it all work. The team has spent too many years wasting picks because they think they can make a lesser talent great just because they want someone in that position.
Reggie Williams was the poster child for talking a position instead of a player with Roethlisberger staring them in the face.
(01-27-2018, 01:07 PM)SeldomRite Wrote: [ -> ] (01-27-2018, 11:45 AM)jagherd Wrote: [ -> ]I agree.
I'd prefer they drafted a really good Guard with their first or 2nd picks before taking a young QB, assuming there are guards worth taking there (I honestly don't know).
Yeah, it's always about the player, not the position. If it's a choice between another Cann or another Myles Jack then take the linebacker and find a way to make it all work. The team has spent too many years wasting picks because they think they can make a lesser talent great just because they want someone in that position.
Reggie Williams was the poster child for talking a position instead of a player with Roethlisberger staring them in the face.
Its usually a mixture of factors including the position they play. Positional value and depth of talent in a draft class is pretty important.
(01-27-2018, 01:09 PM)JackCity Wrote: [ -> ] (01-27-2018, 01:07 PM)SeldomRite Wrote: [ -> ]Yeah, it's always about the player, not the position. If it's a choice between another Cann or another Myles Jack then take the linebacker and find a way to make it all work. The team has spent too many years wasting picks because they think they can make a lesser talent great just because they want someone in that position.
Reggie Williams was the poster child for talking a position instead of a player with Roethlisberger staring them in the face.
Its usually a mixture of factors including the position they play. Positional value and depth of talent in a draft class is pretty important.
That's a good point, the perceived talent at a position in the draft makes a difference, which is part of why taking Fournette in the top five was such a bad move.
(01-27-2018, 01:13 PM)SeldomRite Wrote: [ -> ] (01-27-2018, 01:09 PM)JackCity Wrote: [ -> ]Its usually a mixture of factors including the position they play. Positional value and depth of talent in a draft class is pretty important.
That's a good point, the perceived talent at a position in the draft makes a difference, which is part of why taking Fournette in the top five was such a bad move.
Ridiculous. Look at our leading rusher for 2016 for crying out loud.... like 400 some yards. Getting Fournette changed the entire Offense, despite not having their only top receiving threat all year.
Fournette, in my view, was worth 3-4 games by himself. Adding a few more pieces on O will make things better.
Our whole team changes on O, and this is a "bad move".............Just No.
(01-27-2018, 01:24 PM)nate Wrote: [ -> ] (01-27-2018, 01:13 PM)SeldomRite Wrote: [ -> ]That's a good point, the perceived talent at a position in the draft makes a difference, which is part of why taking Fournette in the top five was such a bad move.
Ridiculous. Look at our leading rusher for 2016 for crying out loud.... like 400 some yards. Getting Fournette changed the entire Offense, despite not having their only top receiving threat all year.
Fournette, in my view, was worth 3-4 games by himself. Adding a few more pieces on O will make things better.
Our whole team changes on O, and this is a "bad move".............Just No.
You're fooling yourself. Fournette has talent, but he definitely wasn't the difference between 10-6 and 6-10.
I'm not even sure the Jaguars don't win another two or three games with my suggested draft picks instead of him.
The guy was hobbled by injury for most of the season and in the games he was healthy for the defense did more to secure the wins than he did.
Plus the team arguably had better games with him not in the lineup. Whether that's because he's not as good as his backup or because the coaches get stupid when he's in the game you can decide, but it's still a fact.
(01-27-2018, 01:43 PM)Jaguarmeister Wrote: [ -> ] (01-27-2018, 01:09 PM)JackCity Wrote: [ -> ]Its usually a mixture of factors including the position they play. Positional value and depth of talent in a draft class is pretty important.
Usually?
Yep. Some teams have completely disregarded this notion in the past.
(01-27-2018, 01:13 PM)SeldomRite Wrote: [ -> ] (01-27-2018, 01:09 PM)JackCity Wrote: [ -> ]Its usually a mixture of factors including the position they play. Positional value and depth of talent in a draft class is pretty important.
That's a good point, the perceived talent at a position in the draft makes a difference, which is part of why taking Fournette in the top five was such a bad move.
Yep. Thats not to say Fournette was a bad prospect, he was a very good one (bar injury concerns), just that it doesn't make sense value wise when you consider the depth of talent + positional value of a running back like Fournette.
(01-27-2018, 01:44 PM)SeldomRite Wrote: [ -> ]Plus the team arguably had better games with him not in the lineup. Whether that's because he's not as good as his backup or because the coaches get stupid when he's in the game you can decide, but it's still a fact.
Unfortunately this is true. The Field Gull guys did a break down leading up to our Seahawks game showing how our yards per carry went up marginally when Fournette was off the field, but more importantly how all of Blake's numbers were far better when Fournette was off the field.
One of the worries people had when we were debating whether LF would be a good pick was how he and Blake's were so different stylistically, and thus far that has proven to be the case. If the FO does keep Blake around longer figuring out how to help those two mesh needs to be priority number one.
(01-27-2018, 08:56 PM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ] (01-27-2018, 01:44 PM)SeldomRite Wrote: [ -> ]Plus the team arguably had better games with him not in the lineup. Whether that's because he's not as good as his backup or because the coaches get stupid when he's in the game you can decide, but it's still a fact.
Unfortunately this is true. The Field Gull guys did a break down leading up to our Seahawks game showing how our yards per carry went up marginally when Fournette was off the field, but more importantly how all of Blake's numbers were far better when Fournette was off the field.
One of the worries people had when we were debating whether LF would be a good pick was how he and Blake's were so different stylistically, and thus far that has proven to be the case. If the FO does keep Blake around longer figuring out how to help those two mesh needs to be priority number one.
Cmon now..
Teams played without Fournette:
Awful colts team
Awful Texans team
Bengals team with a decent defense but was in awful form at the time.
If we're being real our numbers were better because we played awful teams and Bortles was in better control of the offense.
Plenty of ways to critique Fournette. This one doesn't hold much weight.
(01-27-2018, 09:27 PM)JackCity Wrote: [ -> ]Cmon now..
Teams played without Fournette:
Awful colts team
Awful Texans team
Bengals team with a decent defense but was in awful form at the time.
If we're being real our numbers were better because we played awful teams and Bortles was in better control of the offense.
Plenty of ways to critique Fournette. This one doesn't hold much weight.
It wasn't limited to only the games Fournette missed it was the whole season when he was on/off field. At least the whole season before the Seahawks game.
(01-27-2018, 09:37 PM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ] (01-27-2018, 09:27 PM)JackCity Wrote: [ -> ]Cmon now..
Teams played without Fournette:
Awful colts team
Awful Texans team
Bengals team with a decent defense but was in awful form at the time.
If we're being real our numbers were better because we played awful teams and Bortles was in better control of the offense.
Plenty of ways to critique Fournette. This one doesn't hold much weight.
It wasn't limited to only the games Fournette missed it was the whole season when he was on/off field. At least the whole season before the Seahawks game.
Apologies, link me if you can.
My immediate guess would be that Bortles simply throws better in shotgun yeah? Perhaps we should run more pistol with LF7.
(01-27-2018, 09:45 PM)JackCity Wrote: [ -> ] (01-27-2018, 09:37 PM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ]It wasn't limited to only the games Fournette missed it was the whole season when he was on/off field. At least the whole season before the Seahawks game.
Apologies, link me if you can.
My immediate guess would be that Bortles simply throws better in shotgun yeah? Perhaps we should run more pistol with LF7.
We should Play-Action or simply pass more on 1st downs. Hackett was feast or famine. He had really good games/stretches and some really bad ones. The bad ones were middle-draw, middle-draw, pass...you can't do that in the NFL unless your O-Line is pushing the D back 5 yards every single down.
(01-27-2018, 11:24 PM)Jest101 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-27-2018, 09:45 PM)JackCity Wrote: [ -> ]Apologies, link me if you can.
My immediate guess would be that Bortles simply throws better in shotgun yeah? Perhaps we should run more pistol with LF7.
We should Play-Action or simply pass more on 1st downs. Hackett was feast or famine. He had really good games/stretches and some really bad ones. The bad ones were middle-draw, middle-draw, pass...you can't do that in the NFL unless your O-Line is pushing the D back 5 yards every single down.
Hackett was great in the first quarter for most of the year on the opening script. When he got on a roll the offense clicked beautifully but yeah definitely some barren spells.
Honestly feel Jaguars fans have a bit of a distorted view of how good a coordinator should be though.
Theres probably only a handful of fanbases who are consistently happy with their OC.