Speaking for myself......Rather than see the Jags take a flyer and spend major $$$ on someone like Foles and put him behind the screen door O line and see another QB sacrifice......
Keep BB5, draft a QB......along with O Line big uglies, hire some FA....continue to build the core team. Maybe the new OC can work a miracle with blake and teach him to not aim for his receiver's
helmet.
2020 draft looks to be a better QB draft.....keep your eyes there.
The only rationale for keeping Bortles is this, IMO:
Say he returns to 2017 form with the offense bailing him out and he minimizing his game losing/win preventing plays.
Great. They beat the odds for a year, sell tickets, and maybe whatever rookie they drafted is 100% ready and the franchise moves onward and continues upward in 2020 without him as QB1.
----------------------------------------- opposite scanario ----------------------------------------------
Blake stays on and we get a repeat of 2018. Rookie isn't ready, either isn't played or the play doesn't make much difference because there's still too much to fix on offense.
They just tanked it (purposefully or not) and get an even better QB in 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Those are the only "good" reasons for keeping him on, IMO.
I still see them cutting him after June 1 (if they don't somehow, someway unload him first like Gabbert) to give more room to upcoming critical re-signings.
(02-24-2019, 12:02 AM)jaguarmvp Wrote: [ -> ]Fast forward to 2018, and the same Bortles takes the team to a 3-1 start while knocking off the future Superbowl Champs. People forget how bad the defense played in the beginning of the year with huge holes open in the secondary. Despite that this team started 3-1 until the injuries started piling up. By the Start of week 5 the Injuries started piling up.. Fournette(out), Lee (IR), Robinson (IR), Grant(IR),Mickens (IR),O'Shaughnessy(OUT),Paul(IR),Jenkins(IR),Richardson(IR), Wells(IR)
*Note how the tight end group was just obliterated and the offensive tackle position was eradicated. To be honest I believe almost any QB would struggle in the same position.
Ironically, your signature states
"I am officially in the Fire Caldwell Club!" but it appears that you listed all of the revelations of last season that prevented us from winning. So, if Blake takes us 1 game from the Super Bowl, couldn't the same rationale be used for Caldwell ?
The reason to keep Bortles is purely a financial one. If their plan is to draft the QB of the future and use a "bridge" QB for a year or so(or anytime until the rookie is ready), it's very possible that it's cheaper to draft a QB and keep Blake than it is to draft a QB, take the hit on Blake's contract, and then pay a free agent QB who is the same level as Blake. If we end up paying more money for a lesser "bridge" QB just because we are ready to "move on" from Blake, that seems dumb.
However, the idea that Blake needs one more chance or that this year may be the year the lights turn on doesnt seem overly rationale. But if we aren't going to make a big splash in free agency(ie Foles) and our plan is to draft/develop a guy, it could be rationale from a financial perspective to keep Blake. But if we think we can find a "bridge" guy who is just as good as Blake(or even better) and we end up saving money, that would seem to be the best for everyone.
(02-24-2019, 04:56 PM)Cleatwood Wrote: [ -> ] (02-24-2019, 12:16 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]I don't think this is Devil's Advocate, I think it's the more likely scenario. They signed Bortles for 2 years, and 2 years is what he'll get.
You honestly think Blake coming back is the most likely scenario?
Based on all the factors I see no reason why he's not on the roster next year, because I prefer the devil I already know in this situation and I think they're going to draft their guy. He'll be starting by the end of next season, then you move Bortles out. Moving to a different, more-costly-yet-similarly-productive veteran for one season before the new rookie takes over would be dumb IMO. I know that Bortles is a team guy who will play as hard as he can and won't be a problem in the locker room if he's benched. I also don't like any of the veteran free agent options enough (and damn sure wouldn't trade away draft picks) to pay for both him and Bortles next season, but I'm not the one writing the check or making the decision.
Yes purely financial....pay double to get rid of BB5 AND hire Foles....or ride out next year with BB5, a QB drafted (hey you never know) and keep building a tEM with the $$$
and draft one of the better QB's in 2020.
Its just our luck that when we really NEED a QB.....the draft class is thin ....i don't really want to take a "get by " qb this year.....i want t stud in 2020.
Can't wait for the team to announce that they are designating him to be released in June. It can't get here fast enough.
(02-25-2019, 01:51 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (02-24-2019, 04:56 PM)Cleatwood Wrote: [ -> ]You honestly think Blake coming back is the most likely scenario?
Based on all the factors I see no reason why he's not on the roster next year, because I prefer the devil I already know in this situation and I think they're going to draft their guy. He'll be starting by the end of next season, then you move Bortles out. Moving to a different, more-costly-yet-similarly-productive veteran for one season before the new rookie takes over would be dumb IMO. I know that Bortles is a team guy who will play as hard as he can and won't be a problem in the locker room if he's benched. I also don't like any of the veteran free agent options enough (and damn sure wouldn't trade away draft picks) to pay for both him and Bortles next season, but I'm not the one writing the check or making the decision.
Lol I see plenty of factors as to why he’s not on the team next year. Mainly because he’s not good. Who cares if he’s a team guy? He’s not a good QB and the team needs to move on. And regardless of what you say, every single person closest to the team thinks he’s gone. It would be a total shock right now if he’s still a Jag next season.
Designate him a post June 1st cut. Draft Haskins. Take the money you saved from cutting Blake and get Haskins some more weapons.
(02-25-2019, 08:07 PM)Cleatwood Wrote: [ -> ] (02-25-2019, 01:51 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]Based on all the factors I see no reason why he's not on the roster next year, because I prefer the devil I already know in this situation and I think they're going to draft their guy. He'll be starting by the end of next season, then you move Bortles out. Moving to a different, more-costly-yet-similarly-productive veteran for one season before the new rookie takes over would be dumb IMO. I know that Bortles is a team guy who will play as hard as he can and won't be a problem in the locker room if he's benched. I also don't like any of the veteran free agent options enough (and damn sure wouldn't trade away draft picks) to pay for both him and Bortles next season, but I'm not the one writing the check or making the decision.
Lol I see plenty of factors as to why he’s not on the team next year. Mainly because he’s not good. Who cares if he’s a team guy? He’s not a good QB and the team needs to move on. And regardless of what you say, every single person closest to the team thinks he’s gone. It would be a total shock right now if he’s still a Jag next season.
Designate him a post June 1st cut. Draft Haskins. Take the money you saved from cutting Blake and get Haskins some more weapons.
Regardless of what any of us say, they'll do what they want. I gave you legit reasoning, and I wont be shocked if they do what you suggest.
(02-25-2019, 07:27 PM)FBT Wrote: [ -> ]Can't wait for the team to announce that they are designating him to be released in June. It can't get here fast enough.
Yeah I'm with you It's going to happen. I would be shocked and disgusted if he is on roster still by then.
(02-25-2019, 12:49 PM)rfc17 Wrote: [ -> ]The reason to keep Bortles is purely a financial one. If their plan is to draft the QB of the future and use a "bridge" QB for a year or so(or anytime until the rookie is ready), it's very possible that it's cheaper to draft a QB and keep Blake than it is to draft a QB, take the hit on Blake's contract, and then pay a free agent QB who is the same level as Blake. If we end up paying more money for a lesser "bridge" QB just because we are ready to "move on" from Blake, that seems dumb.
However, the idea that Blake needs one more chance or that this year may be the year the lights turn on doesnt seem overly rationale. But if we aren't going to make a big splash in free agency(ie Foles) and our plan is to draft/develop a guy, it could be rationale from a financial perspective to keep Blake. But if we think we can find a "bridge" guy who is just as good as Blake(or even better) and we end up saving money, that would seem to be the best for everyone.
My thoughts almost to a point. Is Blake the answer ? No way. Is Blake at 6 mil worth the best backup on the market? HELL YEA!!! How do you guys think this is impossible lol? It’s going to happen
What is the money/contract situation with Blake right now? I forgot. What do we save/lose if he is kept or cut.
(02-26-2019, 05:50 AM)The_Franchise_QB Wrote: [ -> ] (02-25-2019, 12:49 PM)rfc17 Wrote: [ -> ]The reason to keep Bortles is purely a financial one. If their plan is to draft the QB of the future and use a "bridge" QB for a year or so(or anytime until the rookie is ready), it's very possible that it's cheaper to draft a QB and keep Blake than it is to draft a QB, take the hit on Blake's contract, and then pay a free agent QB who is the same level as Blake. If we end up paying more money for a lesser "bridge" QB just because we are ready to "move on" from Blake, that seems dumb.
However, the idea that Blake needs one more chance or that this year may be the year the lights turn on doesnt seem overly rationale. But if we aren't going to make a big splash in free agency(ie Foles) and our plan is to draft/develop a guy, it could be rationale from a financial perspective to keep Blake. But if we think we can find a "bridge" guy who is just as good as Blake(or even better) and we end up saving money, that would seem to be the best for everyone.
My thoughts almost to a point. Is Blake the answer ? No way. Is Blake at 6 mil worth the best backup on the market? HELL YEA!!! How do you guys think this is impossible lol? It’s going to happen
Because he wouldn’t cost the Jags 6 million....
It would cost them 20. They’re moving on so you might want to come to terms with it.
(02-26-2019, 07:18 AM)TearExtractor Wrote: [ -> ]What is the money/contract situation with Blake right now? I forgot. What do we save/lose if he is kept or cut.
Its like 20mil if kept and 16mil if cut somewhere around there.
(02-26-2019, 09:45 AM)Cleatwood Wrote: [ -> ] (02-26-2019, 05:50 AM)The_Franchise_QB Wrote: [ -> ]My thoughts almost to a point. Is Blake the answer ? No way. Is Blake at 6 mil worth the best backup on the market? HELL YEA!!! How do you guys think this is impossible lol? It’s going to happen
Because he wouldn’t cost the Jags 6 million....
It would cost them 20. They’re moving on so you might want to come to terms with it.
Is the cost 20, or the cap hit 20? I want to say some of that is prorated signing bonus. That's money that has already been spent, and is sunk cost whether kept or not.
(02-26-2019, 07:18 AM)TearExtractor Wrote: [ -> ]What is the money/contract situation with Blake right now? I forgot. What do we save/lose if he is kept or cut.
If cut currently the dead cap hit is 16.5 mil.
If they designate him a June 1st cut, they can split that dead money betweeen 2019/2020.
(8.25 mil per year dead hit)
If a team signs him as a free agent in 2019 then the Jags could enjoy an offset of up to 6.5 million depending on his actual salary.
The ideal financial cut scenario is:
he’s cut and signs elsewhere and the Jags save somewhere between 4 to 10.5 million in 2019.
(02-26-2019, 12:44 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ] (02-26-2019, 07:18 AM)TearExtractor Wrote: [ -> ]What is the money/contract situation with Blake right now? I forgot. What do we save/lose if he is kept or cut.
If cut currently the dead cap hit is 16.5 mil.
If they designate him a June 1st cut, they can split that dead money betweeen 2019/2020.
(8.25 mil per year dead hit)
If a team signs him as a free agent in 2019 then the Jags could enjoy an offset of up to 6.5 million depending on his actual salary.
The ideal financial cut scenario is:
he’s cut and signs elsewhere and the Jags save somewhere between 4 to 10.5 million in 2019.
While also finding a replacement close to his level that costs us less than what we save by getting rid of him....
(02-26-2019, 12:49 PM)rfc17 Wrote: [ -> ] (02-26-2019, 12:44 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]If cut currently the dead cap hit is 16.5 mil.
If they designate him a June 1st cut, they can split that dead money betweeen 2019/2020.
(8.25 mil per year dead hit)
If a team signs him as a free agent in 2019 then the Jags could enjoy an offset of up to 6.5 million depending on his actual salary.
The ideal financial cut scenario is:
he’s cut and signs elsewhere and the Jags save somewhere between 4 to 10.5 million in 2019.
While also finding a replacement close to his level that costs us less than what we save by getting rid of him....
And that replacement is Haskins.
Haskins not only saves the team money in the long run but also gives them the best chance at consistent success.
(02-26-2019, 12:55 PM)Cleatwood Wrote: [ -> ] (02-26-2019, 12:49 PM)rfc17 Wrote: [ -> ]While also finding a replacement close to his level that costs us less than what we save by getting rid of him....
And that replacement is Haskins.
Haskins not only saves the team money in the long run but also gives them the best chance at consistent success.
you actually think that a Qb who has started only 14 games in college can come in and take us to the playoffs this year?? We have a def that is primed to make another run at a SB you cant start a QB who has no experience.
(02-26-2019, 01:46 PM)JAGFAN88 Wrote: [ -> ] (02-26-2019, 12:55 PM)Cleatwood Wrote: [ -> ]And that replacement is Haskins.
Haskins not only saves the team money in the long run but also gives them the best chance at consistent success.
you actually think that a Qb who has started only 14 games in college can come in and take us to the playoffs this year?? We have a def that is primed to make another run at a SB you cant start a QB who has no experience.
It's not just about this 1 season but the many seasons after that. But to answer your question, yes I do and I also think Haskins gives the Jags a better chance at wining than Bortles does. Not only for the 2019 season but the many seasons after that.
Haskins can very easily run the ball controlled offense that Blake does with most likely less turnovers. He also has the room to grow into a franchise QB whereas Blake is who he is.... A turnover proned QB with accuracy issues. Blakes time is done and I'm ready to move on. You should be too.