Jacksonville Jaguars Fan Forums

(02-09-2018, 03:28 PM)TheSchmidt Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-09-2018, 02:37 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]I'm saying I'd support a decision by the team to move ahead of Buffalo if there were a QB they deemed worthy of the pick(s).

I haven't analyzed what it would cost them to do so. But I'd support it if they don't get hosed from a typical trade value perspective.  I also think there will be some very intriguing prospects available at the Jags first and second round picks w/o having to move up. 

The main point I'm trying to emphasize is that developing QB talent rather than signing it changes the landscape of the Jags' salary cap situation and I wouldn't hesitate to take a guy early.

Wouldn't developing talent at positions on defense currently filled with high salary and older players be a more realistic move for the Jags salary cap situation than gambling on the most difficult position to find a long term solution for? 

If we're moving up in the draft, it'd have to be for Jackson, Allen, or Rudolph. Don't see how they can realistically get one of the other three without mortgaging the next 2-4 drafts. And I'm not comfortable giving up multiple picks for the first three guys I listed.

It's certainly an alternative, and they'll have to do it to some extent regardless, but I'm not eager to replace guys like Ngakoue, Ramsey, and Jack. I'd rather keep them than replace them. 

I'm also a little bit more optimistic about the crop of QBs coming out than you are apparently, so that colors my opinion differently.

(02-09-2018, 03:52 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-09-2018, 03:28 PM)TheSchmidt Wrote: [ -> ]Wouldn't developing talent at positions on defense currently filled with high salary and older players be a more realistic move for the Jags salary cap situation than gambling on the most difficult position to find a long term solution for? 

If we're moving up in the draft, it'd have to be for Jackson, Allen, or Rudolph. Don't see how they can realistically get one of the other three without mortgaging the next 2-4 drafts. And I'm not comfortable giving up multiple picks for the first three guys I listed.

It's certainly an alternative, and they'll have to do it to some extent regardless, but I'm not eager to replace guys like Ngakoue, Ramsey, and Jack. I'd rather keep them than replace them. 

I'm also a little bit more optimistic about the crop of QBs coming out than you are apparently, so that colors my opinion differently.

Even if the Jags sign Cousins, they will not lose Ngakoue, Ramsey and Jack.

(02-09-2018, 04:01 PM)Cleatwood Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-09-2018, 03:52 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]It's certainly an alternative, and they'll have to do it to some extent regardless, but I'm not eager to replace guys like Ngakoue, Ramsey, and Jack. I'd rather keep them than replace them. 

I'm also a little bit more optimistic about the crop of QBs coming out than you are apparently, so that colors my opinion differently.

Even if the Jags sign Cousins, they will not lose Ngakoue, Ramsey and Jack.

His contract will make keeping all of them difficult IMO.   All three are due to be paid in 2020.

(02-08-2018, 03:40 PM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ]You're right, if you're going to get shown a variety of balanced advanced stats and just throw them out the window then there isn't much point in talking.

They should be thrown out the window.  Using nerdy advanced stats and analytics is a dumb way to evaluate players and always will be, the eye test will forever be number 1.  “Advanced stats” had people(dumb people) preaching James Bradberry was better than Jalen Ramsey.  Where are they now?

(02-08-2018, 11:53 AM)Cleatwood Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2018, 11:33 AM)leopold332002 Wrote: [ -> ]That's where we different because you actually think Kirk Cousins is a franchise quarterback when the evidence say otherwise especially when he can't carry his team into the playoffs. True franchise quarterback can do that under the same circumstances but Kirk Cousins hasn't shown he can do those things especially in clutch moments.

I don't think he said Cousins is a franchise QB. There is only like 3 or 4 in the whole league. And that means, a QB who can lead their team to the playoffs with little help.

There a plenty of very good QBs who, if put in the right situation, can lead their team to a title. I think Cousins is one of those QBs.

If the team pursues Cousins, they're going to have to pay him like he's a franchise QB.  I think people are putting way too much stock in a guy who is really a marginal upgrade over Bortles, and paying him like he's a Brady or Rogers.  There's a lot of risk involved in such an upgrade. 

(02-08-2018, 12:51 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]One year option for #5 and draft a guy early to potentially take over in 2019.

When the dust settles, I think this is the most likely scenario.  Bortles has progressed, and I don't think we've seen his ceiling yet.  At $19 million, he'll be a bargain in comparison unless he takes a step back.  

(02-08-2018, 03:08 PM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2018, 02:53 PM)JagJohn Wrote: [ -> ] Obviously, Blake becoming a franchise top 10 NFL QB is a terrible option. It would be such a disaster if our QB that we drafted and developed, who knows the system and is respected by his teammates improves.

Do you recall how close we came this season? The "reward" if Blake takes a significant step forward is probably winning a Superbowl.

You are seriously overthinking things.

I think you're underthinking it. If Blake takes a step forward he will be around Cousins level, that's great but not any better than just signing Cousins now. Hence no reward.

If he doesn't then we wasted another year and next offseason we're right back to questioning what we're going to do about a franchise QB.

Why take that gamble? Just sign Cousins now and remove the wasted year option.

So, pay Cousins $30 million per year for potentially the same production we might get from Bortles at a third the price?

(02-08-2018, 03:27 PM)JagJohn Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2018, 03:08 PM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ]I think you're underthinking it. If Blake takes a step forward he will be around Cousins level, that's great but not any better than just signing Cousins now. Hence no reward.

If he doesn't then we wasted another year and next offseason we're right back to questioning what we're going to do about a franchise QB.

Why take that gamble? Just sign Cousins now and remove the wasted year option.

Personally I think giving the richest contract in NFL history to a QB who has shown to be marginally better than average is a much bigger gamble. I know you're gonna throw some stats at me, but watching Cousins play he simply is not 'elite'. I'm not willing to put all my eggs in that basket.

Let Blake start on the 19mil, and draft a rookie high to develop behind him, that's my preferred approach.

Agreed.  Despite all the love for Cousins, there are no guarantees he'd be a big enough upgrade over Bortles to warrant a contract that would be at or near the biggest in the league.  Wait until Rodgers gets a new contract, and the bar will be set even higher for Cousins.  He's not worth that kind of money in my opinion, and the team would ultimately have fewer resources to continue adding weapons around him.

(02-09-2018, 03:28 PM)TheSchmidt Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-09-2018, 02:37 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]I'm saying I'd support a decision by the team to move ahead of Buffalo if there were a QB they deemed worthy of the pick(s).

I haven't analyzed what it would cost them to do so. But I'd support it if they don't get hosed from a typical trade value perspective.  I also think there will be some very intriguing prospects available at the Jags first and second round picks w/o having to move up. 

The main point I'm trying to emphasize is that developing QB talent rather than signing it changes the landscape of the Jags' salary cap situation and I wouldn't hesitate to take a guy early.

Wouldn't developing talent at positions on defense currently filled with high salary and older players be a more realistic move for the Jags salary cap situation than gambling on the most difficult position to find a long term solution for? 

If we're moving up in the draft, it'd have to be for Jackson, Allen, or Rudolph. Don't see how they can realistically get one of the other three without mortgaging the next 2-4 drafts. And I'm not comfortable giving up multiple picks for the first three guys I listed.

EDIT: Just remembered KC moved from 27 to 10 last year for Mahomes and it cost them 27, their 3rd that year, and a 2018 first. If Mayfield falls out of the top 10, seems like something that could be doable.

No. Most of the best QB's in the NFL were drafted by their current teams. QB is the face of the team, Brady, Rodgers, Roethlisberger, Wilson, Stafford, Ryan, Rivers and Newton were all drafted by their current teams and allowed to develop. Our defense is a unit made up of a nice mix of guys we drafted, (Ramsey, Smith, Jack, Ngakoue) and guys we signed in free agency, (Campbell, Bouye, Dareus, Gipson and Church.) You need a healthy dose of both to balance the unit. It's not a single position like QB is. 

We wouldn't have to trade up for Jackson he'll go in round 2. Rudolph should fall to our pick, so we likely wouldn't have to trade up for him either. I wouldn't want Allen. He's as inconsistent as Bortles is. We could realistically move up into position to get Rosen, Mayfield or Darnold (if we want him), without setting this team back. I used the trade value chart to figure up the totals, so here is a hypothetical deal we could do to possibly move up to the Colts #3 pick. Stay with me here. The Colts #3 overall pick has a value of 2200 points. That's the goal we much reach. What if we offered our first round pick, #29 overall (640 pts.), our 3rd rounder (128 points), our first round pick in 2019 (640 pts) our third round pick in 2019 (128 points, a 2nd round pick in 2020 (292 pts.), Abry Jones (I approximated the value of a mid 4th round pick 70 pts), Allen Hurns (I approximate the value of a mid 2nd rounder 420 pts.), T.J. Yeldon (I approximate the value of a mid 4th rounder 70 pts.) and a 2nd round pick in 2020 (128 pts.)

Colts 

#3 pick 2200 pts.


Jags 

#29 pick 640 pts.
#93 pick 128 pts.
2019 first rounder 640 pts.
2019 3rd rounder 128 pts.
Allen Hurns (420 pts.)
Abry Jones (70 pts.)
T.J. Yeldon (70 pts.)
2020 3rd rounder (128 pts.)

Total 2224 points


I know that looks like a lot on paper, but in reality we wouldn't give up a crippling amount. I hate to get rid of Hurns, but if it lands us a QB, I can take it. It just means Cole and Westbrook would need to take on bigger roles. Jones and Yeldon are spot starters at best, so Dareus and Grant can step up and take larger roles. With that said, Hurns and Yeldon would likely serve key roles in Indy as the likely #2 WR and a guy to compete for the starting RB job. Jones should immediately fill a starters role at DT, as the Colts have a hard time stopping the run. We'd would basically only be give up a 3rd rounder this coming draft, as the swap of first rounders cancels each other out. We could then use our existing 2nd rounder to either fill a need at TE or OG and use picks in rounds 4-7 to upgrade areas of need. In 2019, we would be giving up our 1st and 3rd round picks, but I would expect us to be almost a complete team with no glaring needs, if everything goes to plan. Finally we would give up a 2020 3rd round pick, but our 1st and 2nd rounder would still be in our possession. I know this is a hypothetical, but trading up high enough to get Rosen or Mayfield is not out of the realm of possibility. It can be done without mortaging the future, as long as we get creative.

(02-09-2018, 03:30 PM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-09-2018, 02:55 PM)atburg Wrote: [ -> ]As a fan of Alabama football for 35 years, I can tell you Aj is a hell of alot better than you give him credit for! Just because the fans on a message board have been calling for him to start, that means what? If it was up to armchair front offices such as yourself, Chad Henne would have started week 3 this year.

I never said McCarron was a bad QB. I just simply stated a fact that he couldn't beat out an average starter like Dalton. With that said, I still view McCarron as one of the better backups in the NFL. I just wouldn't want him as an everyday starter. 

As for Henne, you must not know me very well. I've hated Henne for a long time. I've wanted to cut him for at least 3 years. He's been a waste of a roster spot and offered absolutely no competition to Bortles.

The Henne comment was not directed your way. I am actually semi in your corner regarding a rookie quarterback,  I would however like to draft one to duke it out with Blake in camp or take over in 2019 if Blake regresses, or levels off.

(02-09-2018, 05:17 PM)FBT Wrote: [ -> ]So, pay Cousins $30 million per year for potentially the same production we might get from Bortles at a third the price?

A third of the price what? It's ~10 mil less for one year only, and then if Blake takes the step forward it will be pretty much the same...or hell Blake may even get more with another year of inflation/cap rise. That's IF he takes the step forward. If he doesn't then bye bye championship window.

(02-09-2018, 05:32 PM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-09-2018, 03:28 PM)TheSchmidt Wrote: [ -> ]Wouldn't developing talent at positions on defense currently filled with high salary and older players be a more realistic move for the Jags salary cap situation than gambling on the most difficult position to find a long term solution for? 

If we're moving up in the draft, it'd have to be for Jackson, Allen, or Rudolph. Don't see how they can realistically get one of the other three without mortgaging the next 2-4 drafts. And I'm not comfortable giving up multiple picks for the first three guys I listed.

EDIT: Just remembered KC moved from 27 to 10 last year for Mahomes and it cost them 27, their 3rd that year, and a 2018 first. If Mayfield falls out of the top 10, seems like something that could be doable.

No. Most of the best QB's in the NFL were drafted by their current teams. QB is the face of the team, Brady, Rodgers, Roethlisberger, Wilson, Stafford, Ryan, Rivers and Newton were all drafted by their current teams and allowed to develop. Our defense is a unit made up of a nice mix of guys we drafted, (Ramsey, Smith, Jack, Ngakoue) and guys we signed in free agency, (Campbell, Bouye, Dareus, Gipson and Church.) You need a healthy dose of both to balance the unit. It's not a single position like QB is. 

We wouldn't have to trade up for Jackson he'll go in round 2. Rudolph should fall to our pick, so we likely wouldn't have to trade up for him either. I wouldn't want Allen. He's as inconsistent as Bortles is. We could realistically move up into position to get Rosen, Mayfield or Darnold (if we want him), without setting this team back. I used the trade value chart to figure up the totals, so here is a hypothetical deal we could do to possibly move up to the Colts #3 pick. Stay with me here. The Colts #3 overall pick has a value of 2200 points. That's the goal we much reach. What if we offered our first round pick, #29 overall (640 pts.), our 3rd rounder (128 points), our first round pick in 2019 (640 pts) our third round pick in 2019 (128 points, a 2nd round pick in 2020 (292 pts.), Abry Jones (I approximated the value of a mid 4th round pick 70 pts), Allen Hurns (I approximate the value of a mid 2nd rounder 420 pts.), T.J. Yeldon (I approximate the value of a mid 4th rounder 70 pts.) and a 2nd round pick in 2020 (128 pts.)

Colts 

#3 pick 2200 pts.


Jags 

#29 pick 640 pts.
#93 pick 128 pts.
2019 first rounder 640 pts.
2019 3rd rounder 128 pts.
Allen Hurns (420 pts.)
Abry Jones (70 pts.)
T.J. Yeldon (70 pts.)
2020 3rd rounder (128 pts.)

Total 2224 points


I know that looks like a lot on paper, but in reality we wouldn't give up a crippling amount. I hate to get rid of Hurns, but if it lands us a QB, I can take it. It just means Cole and Westbrook would need to take on bigger roles. Jones and Yeldon are spot starters at best, so Dareus and Grant can step up and take larger roles. With that said, Hurns and Yeldon would likely serve key roles in Indy as the likely #2 WR and a guy to compete for the starting RB job. Jones should immediately fill a starters role at DT, as the Colts have a hard time stopping the run. We'd would basically only be give up a 3rd rounder this coming draft, as the swap of first rounders cancels each other out. We could then use our existing 2nd rounder to either fill a need at TE or OG and use picks in rounds 4-7 to upgrade areas of need. In 2019, we would be giving up our 1st and 3rd round picks, but I would expect us to be almost a complete team with no glaring needs, if everything goes to plan. Finally we would give up a 2020 3rd round pick, but our 1st and 2nd rounder would still be in our possession. I know this is a hypothetical, but trading up high enough to get Rosen or Mayfield is not out of the realm of possibility. It can be done without mortaging the future, as long as we get creative.

I like what you've done here, but we'd have to give up significantly more than what you are indicating. You gave 2019 and 2020 draft picks the same points as if they were 2018 draft picks. Future draft picks are not valued the same. The general rule of thumb is that you lose a round's worth of value for the following year's picks.

(02-09-2018, 05:36 PM)atburg Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-09-2018, 03:30 PM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ]I never said McCarron was a bad QB. I just simply stated a fact that he couldn't beat out an average starter like Dalton. With that said, I still view McCarron as one of the better backups in the NFL. I just wouldn't want him as an everyday starter. 

As for Henne, you must not know me very well. I've hated Henne for a long time. I've wanted to cut him for at least 3 years. He's been a waste of a roster spot and offered absolutely no competition to Bortles.

The Henne comment was not directed your way. I am actually semi in your corner regarding a rookie quarterback,  I would however like to draft one to duke it out with Blake in camp or take over in 2019 if Blake regresses, or levels off.

Agreed. 

(02-09-2018, 06:05 PM)Gettin\ Jaggy with it Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-09-2018, 05:32 PM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ]No. Most of the best QB's in the NFL were drafted by their current teams. QB is the face of the team, Brady, Rodgers, Roethlisberger, Wilson, Stafford, Ryan, Rivers and Newton were all drafted by their current teams and allowed to develop. Our defense is a unit made up of a nice mix of guys we drafted, (Ramsey, Smith, Jack, Ngakoue) and guys we signed in free agency, (Campbell, Bouye, Dareus, Gipson and Church.) You need a healthy dose of both to balance the unit. It's not a single position like QB is. 

We wouldn't have to trade up for Jackson he'll go in round 2. Rudolph should fall to our pick, so we likely wouldn't have to trade up for him either. I wouldn't want Allen. He's as inconsistent as Bortles is. We could realistically move up into position to get Rosen, Mayfield or Darnold (if we want him), without setting this team back. I used the trade value chart to figure up the totals, so here is a hypothetical deal we could do to possibly move up to the Colts #3 pick. Stay with me here. The Colts #3 overall pick has a value of 2200 points. That's the goal we much reach. What if we offered our first round pick, #29 overall (640 pts.), our 3rd rounder (128 points), our first round pick in 2019 (640 pts) our third round pick in 2019 (128 points, a 2nd round pick in 2020 (292 pts.), Abry Jones (I approximated the value of a mid 4th round pick 70 pts), Allen Hurns (I approximate the value of a mid 2nd rounder 420 pts.), T.J. Yeldon (I approximate the value of a mid 4th rounder 70 pts.) and a 2nd round pick in 2020 (128 pts.)

Colts 

#3 pick 2200 pts.


Jags 

#29 pick 640 pts.
#93 pick 128 pts.
2019 first rounder 640 pts.
2019 3rd rounder 128 pts.
Allen Hurns (420 pts.)
Abry Jones (70 pts.)
T.J. Yeldon (70 pts.)
2020 3rd rounder (128 pts.)

Total 2224 points


I know that looks like a lot on paper, but in reality we wouldn't give up a crippling amount. I hate to get rid of Hurns, but if it lands us a QB, I can take it. It just means Cole and Westbrook would need to take on bigger roles. Jones and Yeldon are spot starters at best, so Dareus and Grant can step up and take larger roles. With that said, Hurns and Yeldon would likely serve key roles in Indy as the likely #2 WR and a guy to compete for the starting RB job. Jones should immediately fill a starters role at DT, as the Colts have a hard time stopping the run. We'd would basically only be give up a 3rd rounder this coming draft, as the swap of first rounders cancels each other out. We could then use our existing 2nd rounder to either fill a need at TE or OG and use picks in rounds 4-7 to upgrade areas of need. In 2019, we would be giving up our 1st and 3rd round picks, but I would expect us to be almost a complete team with no glaring needs, if everything goes to plan. Finally we would give up a 2020 3rd round pick, but our 1st and 2nd rounder would still be in our possession. I know this is a hypothetical, but trading up high enough to get Rosen or Mayfield is not out of the realm of possibility. It can be done without mortaging the future, as long as we get creative.

I like what you've done here, but we'd have to give up significantly more than what you are indicating. You gave 2019 and 2020 draft picks the same points as if they were 2018 draft picks. Future draft picks are not valued the same. The general rule of thumb is that you lose a round's worth of value for the following year's picks.

I don't think so. I just pulled up a trade value chart from 2014 and it has the same value points as the one from this year. Not to mention that we would be giving them 3 potential veteran starters and I may have undervalued them. To a team like the Colts who are desperate for any type of starters outside of QB, they would be worth their weight in gold. I really do think everything would even out and that's if we went all the way up to #3. You never know. We may not even have to trade up that far. Say the Browns decide on taking Allen or Darnold, the Giants decide to keep Manning and address OT with the #2 pick, opting to wait until rounds 2 or 3 to address QB and Denver trades for Kirk Cousins. That would only leave us to worry about the Jets selecting either Rosen or Mayfield and we potentially wouldn't have to trade up inside the top 10. We could do a deal with anyone from Pick #11 to #14 (Miami, Cincinnati, Washington or Green Bay), to stay ahead of Arizona and select whichever QB the Jets didn't take.

(02-09-2018, 06:26 PM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-09-2018, 06:05 PM)Gettin\ Jaggy with it Wrote: [ -> ]I like what you've done here, but we'd have to give up significantly more than what you are indicating. You gave 2019 and 2020 draft picks the same points as if they were 2018 draft picks. Future draft picks are not valued the same. The general rule of thumb is that you lose a round's worth of value for the following year's picks.

I don't think so. I just pulled up a trade value chart from 2014 and it has the same value points as the one from this year. Not to mention that we would be giving them 3 potential veteran starters and I may have undervalued them. To a team like the Colts who are desperate for any type of starters outside of QB, they would be worth their weight in gold. I really do think everything would even out and that's if we went all the way up to #3. You never know. We may not even have to trade up that far. Say the Browns decide on taking Allen or Darnold, the Giants decide to keep Manning and address OT with the #2 pick, opting to wait until rounds 2 or 3 to address QB and Denver trades for Kirk Cousins. That would only leave us to worry about the Jets selecting either Rosen or Mayfield and we potentially wouldn't have to trade up inside the top 10. We could do a deal with anyone from Pick #11 to #14 (Miami, Cincinnati, Washington or Green Bay), to stay ahead of Arizona and select whichever QB the Jets didn't take.

The trade value charts are the same from year to year, since they are based on Jimmie Johnson's charts from the 90's. What I am saying is that for the 2018 draft, the 29th pick for the 2019 draft is not worth 640 points. In the 2019 draft, it will be. Teams expect a heavy premium if they are giving away current draft value for future draft value. For example, if we wanted someone's round 2 pick this year straight up, say pick 79 (round 2 #15), they would want a mid-round 1 in 2019 in compensation. It doesn't always follow as neatly as the trade value chart indicates, of course, but future picks never carry nearly the same weight of current picks.

Your scenario of moving up to #11-14 is definitely more palatable as it entails about 1000 fewer trade points, and the draft has a reasonable chance of falling that way.

Blake isn't a savings. Make believe he plays better but shows the same tendencies and is bailed out again by the defense, then what? You going to franchise him? After this year, the QB franchise number is going to be insane. Honestly, if all you think the defense will all need to be resigned because none of them get hurt or drop off in performance then you are way more optimistic then me. Thankfully the Front Office will have to chart this course out. If they pay now, they will have to work out the other guys down the road.

I really hope they don't get Lombardi in their eyes and they build for continual improvement and get shots at the playoffs.

(02-09-2018, 05:43 PM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-09-2018, 05:17 PM)FBT Wrote: [ -> ]So, pay Cousins $30 million per year for potentially the same production we might get from Bortles at a third the price?

A third of the price what? It's ~10 mil less for one year only, and then if Blake takes the step forward it will be pretty much the same...or hell Blake may even get more with another year of inflation/cap rise. That's IF he takes the step forward. If he doesn't then bye bye championship window.

When Cousins goes to Denver, or the Jets, will you be switching teams?

(02-08-2018, 11:29 AM)Cleatwood Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2018, 11:20 AM)leopold332002 Wrote: [ -> ]Okay Ryan my good man I'll play this game with you. Is Kirk Cousins better than Blake Bortles? In my opinion yes based on his floor Kirk Cousins is better than Blake but Blake Bortles has a higher ceiling than Kirk Cousins with proper development. For you and Cleatwood to say Kirk Cousins is better than Blake and is not even close it's not only fabrication but irresponsible to the other readers on this forum. Their statistics are very similar and please don't give me that Kirk Cousins had less to work with on the offensive side of the ball because Blake weapons was similar if not worse than him and he still was productive but none of you want to give him credit for it. If Kirk Cousins was this significant upgrade then why his all team don't want him and did not want him for the last 3 years. Please don't tell me about the Washington Redskins are dysfunctional and don't know how to run a stable franchise although you are right about that team but remember they see Kirk Cousins practice every day so they have the best evaluation on him overall. I just think Kirk Cousins is upgraded and I would rather go internet season with Blake and put legitimate weapons around him and see if he can be successful.

They saw Kirk in practice every day and they franchise tagged him twice.... How many QBs have been franchised twice? The Skins botched the situation and that's not even really debatable.

If you believe Cousins is better than Blake (which you said) then why not try to get him? The QB position isg yhou the most important position and if you can upgrade it, you do it. This team needs consistency. I mean if the Jags D doesn't hold the Bills to 3 points, you wouldn't be saying "Let's bring Blake back." You would be throwing him out the door and you wouldn't think twice.

What is the cost of getting him?  This year Ivory, Hurns, Colvin?  What about next year who goes to get/keep Cousins?  The year after?  We have been through this trading the future for immediate success before.  It didn't work out so well.  

Like it or not, Bortles IS Jacksonville.  Under appreciated, bring your lunch pail to work, bust your tail, show up hurt or sick, give it everything you got while most of those around you make fun of you, and no one values your worth.  Yup sounds exactly like Jacksonville.

We're not going after cousins. We are pretty low on cap space. Still gotta resign Arob. Will cut Ivory and a few back end WRs to get a little more. But we're still really low. We will be drafting a QB to sit behind and progress. We'll probably carry three qbs to prevent playing the rookie if something happens, so Henne will stay. Jackson seems like the most likely candidate. If they feel more confident in Bortles being the guy for years to come, might not draft one until day 2 or 3. TE and o line will be big priority in draft. Just don't see cousins coming here.

(02-09-2018, 07:14 PM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2018, 11:29 AM)Cleatwood Wrote: [ -> ]They saw Kirk in practice every day and they franchise tagged him twice.... How many QBs have been franchised twice? The Skins botched the situation and that's not even really debatable.

If you believe Cousins is better than Blake (which you said) then why not try to get him? The QB position isg yhou the most important position and if you can upgrade it, you do it. This team needs consistency. I mean if the Jags D doesn't hold the Bills to 3 points, you wouldn't be saying "Let's bring Blake back." You would be throwing him out the door and you wouldn't think twice.

What is the cost of getting him?  This year Ivory, Hurns, Colvin?  What about next year who goes to get/keep Cousins?  The year after?  We have been through this trading the future for immediate success before.  It didn't work out so well.  

Like it or not, Bortles IS Jacksonville.  Under appreciated, bring your lunch pail to work, bust your tail, show up hurt or sick, give it everything you got while most of those around you make fun of you, and no one values your worth.  Yup sounds exactly like Jacksonville.

So you think Bortles isn't going to want to get paid?

(02-09-2018, 06:51 PM)Gettin\ Jaggy with it Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-09-2018, 06:26 PM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ]I don't think so. I just pulled up a trade value chart from 2014 and it has the same value points as the one from this year. Not to mention that we would be giving them 3 potential veteran starters and I may have undervalued them. To a team like the Colts who are desperate for any type of starters outside of QB, they would be worth their weight in gold. I really do think everything would even out and that's if we went all the way up to #3. You never know. We may not even have to trade up that far. Say the Browns decide on taking Allen or Darnold, the Giants decide to keep Manning and address OT with the #2 pick, opting to wait until rounds 2 or 3 to address QB and Denver trades for Kirk Cousins. That would only leave us to worry about the Jets selecting either Rosen or Mayfield and we potentially wouldn't have to trade up inside the top 10. We could do a deal with anyone from Pick #11 to #14 (Miami, Cincinnati, Washington or Green Bay), to stay ahead of Arizona and select whichever QB the Jets didn't take.

The trade value charts are the same from year to year, since they are based on Jimmie Johnson's charts from the 90's. What I am saying is that for the 2018 draft, the 29th pick for the 2019 draft is not worth 640 points. In the 2019 draft, it will be. Teams expect a heavy premium if they are giving away current draft value for future draft value. For example, if we wanted someone's round 2 pick this year straight up, say pick 79 (round 2 #15), they would want a mid-round 1 in 2019 in compensation. It doesn't always follow as neatly as the trade value chart indicates, of course, but future picks never carry nearly the same weight of current picks.

Your scenario of moving up to #11-14 is definitely more palatable as it entails about 1000 less trade points, and the draft has a reasonable chance of falling that way.

From what I've been reading, Rosen does not want to go to Cleveland and I believe he wouldn't report, much like Eli Manning did to San Diego, forcing a trade with the Giants. I've also been reading that the new Giants HC is a big fan of Eli Manning and wants to work on stabilizing the offensive line before making a judgement on his current QB. Denver is said to be all in on Kirk Cousins, so things are starting to look a little more positive than they were a few weeks ago.

(02-09-2018, 07:14 PM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2018, 11:29 AM)Cleatwood Wrote: [ -> ]They saw Kirk in practice every day and they franchise tagged him twice.... How many QBs have been franchised twice? The Skins botched the situation and that's not even really debatable.

If you believe Cousins is better than Blake (which you said) then why not try to get him? The QB position isg yhou the most important position and if you can upgrade it, you do it. This team needs consistency. I mean if the Jags D doesn't hold the Bills to 3 points, you wouldn't be saying "Let's bring Blake back." You would be throwing him out the door and you wouldn't think twice.

What is the cost of getting him?  This year Ivory, Hurns, Colvin?  What about next year who goes to get/keep Cousins?  The year after?  We have been through this trading the future for immediate success before.  It didn't work out so well.  

Like it or not, Bortles IS Jacksonville.  Under appreciated, bring your lunch pail to work, bust your tail, show up hurt or sick, give it everything you got while most of those around you make fun of you, and no one values your worth.  Yup sounds exactly like Jacksonville.

Hurns and Ivory are most likely gone whether the Jags sign Kirk or keep Blake. Colvin is most likely gone too regardless of the QB position..

And next year? The Jags will either have to pay Blake big money or make a QB change. 

Blake is inconsistent and he needs to make major strides to earn a new contract.

(02-09-2018, 07:49 PM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-09-2018, 06:51 PM)Gettin\ Jaggy with it Wrote: [ -> ]The trade value charts are the same from year to year, since they are based on Jimmie Johnson's charts from the 90's. What I am saying is that for the 2018 draft, the 29th pick for the 2019 draft is not worth 640 points. In the 2019 draft, it will be. Teams expect a heavy premium if they are giving away current draft value for future draft value. For example, if we wanted someone's round 2 pick this year straight up, say pick 79 (round 2 #15), they would want a mid-round 1 in 2019 in compensation. It doesn't always follow as neatly as the trade value chart indicates, of course, but future picks never carry nearly the same weight of current picks.

Your scenario of moving up to #11-14 is definitely more palatable as it entails about 1000 less trade points, and the draft has a reasonable chance of falling that way.

From what I've been reading, Rosen does not want to go to Cleveland and I believe he wouldn't report, much like Eli Manning did to San Diego, forcing a trade with the Giants. I've also been reading that the new Giants HC is a big fan of Eli Manning and wants to work on stabilizing the offensive line before making a judgement on his current QB. Denver is said to be all in on Kirk Cousins, so things are starting to look a little more positive than they were a few weeks ago.

Not a big Mayfield believer , but if Rosen is there around 11-14 it should happen