(02-28-2019, 09:55 PM)jaguarmvp Wrote: [ -> ]Just hope the team can stay healthy this year.
All of those injuries to the OL put the Jaguars in a precarious spot this draft.
How much draft capital do you spend on the OL?
Do you retain Cann and/or Parnell? If so, do you try to upgrade them or draft for depth? If not, is drafting their replacements sufficient, or do you add depth on top of that?
Do you gamble they will all be healthy next year, and focus on improving the depth?
When do you start drafting OL? What about the needs at skill positions at WR and TE?
Does your answer differ depending on whether we sign Foles or go after Haskins?
To me, I don't see much sense in coming out of this draft with fewer than 3 OLs-one or more in the early rounds, one or more in the mid rounds, and one or more in the late rounds.
(02-28-2019, 10:19 PM)Bullseye Wrote: [ -> ] (02-28-2019, 09:55 PM)jaguarmvp Wrote: [ -> ]Just hope the team can stay healthy this year.
All of those injuries to the OL put the Jaguars in a precarious spot this draft.
How much draft capital do you spend on the OL?
Do you retain Cann and/or Parnell? If so, do you try to upgrade them or draft for depth? If not, is drafting their replacements sufficient, or do you add depth on top of that?
Do you gamble they will all be healthy next year, and focus on improving the depth?
When do you start drafting OL? What about the needs at skill positions at WR and TE?
Does your answer differ depending on whether we sign Foles or go after Haskins?
To me, I don't see much sense in coming out of this draft with fewer than 3 OLs-one or more in the early rounds, one or more in the mid rounds, and one or more in the late rounds.
If the Jaguars land foles, I would not mind if the jags use their first 3 picks on the oline. If this team wants to be a rushing team we need a better line period.
Sent from my BND-L34 using Tapatalk
(02-28-2019, 08:17 PM)flgatorsandjags Wrote: [ -> ] (02-28-2019, 08:13 PM)Upper Wrote: [ -> ]“I think that the more experienced or the more knowledge your quarterback has, (the better),” Marrone said Wednesday. “The perfect scenario for me, I like it where the quarterback knows more and everyone else has to catch up to the quarterback. I think that’s what keeps people on their toes. If you are waiting for the quarterback to catch up to everyone else on offense, then you’re not going to progress the way you want to.”
That's a pretty depressing quote tbh.
What's depressing about that? I agree with everything he said
(02-28-2019, 10:04 PM)Bullseye Wrote: [ -> ] (02-28-2019, 08:17 PM)flgatorsandjags Wrote: [ -> ]What's depressing about that? I agree with everything he said
I don't understand the depressing part either. Would you like your QB to be in the huddle asking the other players what is to happen on a given play?
If you want the team to draft Haskins, this statement does not rule out the possibility of that happening.
(02-28-2019, 10:00 PM)pirkster Wrote: [ -> ]Your underwear, your wallpaper, your sunglasses are all Haskins.
Shocker.
So Pirk, who is your guy?
It's depressing because Bortles obviously wasn't ahead of everyone else and they still stuck with him this long and didn't even try to draft to replace him.
Sent from my SM-T820 using Tapatalk
(02-28-2019, 10:27 PM)jaguarmvp Wrote: [ -> ] (02-28-2019, 10:19 PM)Bullseye Wrote: [ -> ]All of those injuries to the OL put the Jaguars in a precarious spot this draft.
How much draft capital do you spend on the OL?
Do you retain Cann and/or Parnell? If so, do you try to upgrade them or draft for depth? If not, is drafting their replacements sufficient, or do you add depth on top of that?
Do you gamble they will all be healthy next year, and focus on improving the depth?
When do you start drafting OL? What about the needs at skill positions at WR and TE?
Does your answer differ depending on whether we sign Foles or go after Haskins?
To me, I don't see much sense in coming out of this draft with fewer than 3 OLs-one or more in the early rounds, one or more in the mid rounds, and one or more in the late rounds.
If the Jaguars land foles, I would not mind if the jags use their first 3 picks on the oline. If this team wants to be a rushing team we need a better line period.
Sent from my BND-L34 using Tapatalk
LOL!!...
Why stop at only 3? Why not just use all 5 of our picks in the top 109 on OL.. LOLOLOLOLOL
.gif "Laughing")
(02-28-2019, 05:56 PM)Steelers Beaches Wrote: [ -> ] (02-28-2019, 08:06 AM)Rico Wrote: [ -> ]What the hell does it matter? Why the [BLEEP] do people always want to whine about this [BLEEP]?
Because whenever every thread you start gets moved inappropriately because of insecurities, it's crap. How are subjects such as Jags' free agency and draft not valid to be on the main board? But other posts on exactly the same subjects not moved? Intellectual dishonesty is not something anyone should strive for in life.
I think your assessment of why threads are moved is flawed.
I don't even know what 'because of insecurities' means. The thread was about a kid not on the roster. It got moved. The world continues to turn. If Caldwell has a presser talking about that kid, and we want to discuss what Caldwell said, sure, that goes in the team forum.
Survey how many people create threads, and how many get moved. I wager that most of the moved threads are posted by the same cluster of members. Most people are clear as to where topics should post. If your thread gets moved, carry on with the conversation in a different thread. No matter where the thread resides, we can have some enjoyable discussion, I'm sure.
(02-28-2019, 10:00 PM)pirkster Wrote: [ -> ] (02-27-2019, 01:05 PM)Cleatwood Wrote: [ -> ]Dave said winning and completion percentage were some of the traits they’re looking at.....
Boooooy that sounds a lot like Haskins.
Your underwear, your wallpaper, your sunglasses are all Haskins.
Shocker.
How did the "weak 2017" class do?
Also... They don't even make Haskins sunglasses but the underwear fits just right. Thank you very much.
(02-28-2019, 06:06 PM)p_rushing Wrote: [ -> ]So LF is using his college S&C coach instead of using the NFL team he is on. The same one that had him too big and often hurt. I guess LF will go back to being heavy, no agility, and having hole blindness.
Top speed doesn't matter if you can't get to top speed.
Maybe the Jags need to try a new formation in the playbook. Use a long snapper and put LF 15-20 yards behind the line. That way he maybe he will have enough time to see the hole and get the diesel engine up to speed.
Sent from my SM-T820 using Tapatalk
Good read on the LF sitch:
https://www.jacksonville.com/sports/2019...in-wyoming
(02-28-2019, 10:04 PM)Bullseye Wrote: [ -> ] (02-28-2019, 08:17 PM)flgatorsandjags Wrote: [ -> ]What's depressing about that? I agree with everything he said
I don't understand the depressing part either. Would you like your QB to be in the huddle asking the other players what is to happen on a given play?
If you want the team to draft Haskins, this statement does not rule out the possibility of that happening.
(02-28-2019, 10:00 PM)pirkster Wrote: [ -> ]Your underwear, your wallpaper, your sunglasses are all Haskins.
Shocker.
So Pirk, who is your guy?
There isn't a lot to like in this draft, IMO. I didn't like a lot last season, either. The top ended up the minefield it felt it would be.
Herbert was who I saw as the best QB of this draft, but he stayed in school.
Kyler Murray intrigues me with the wildcard factor the same way Mayfield did (one of only a few including Jackson I liked) last year.
I don't see many immediate starters in this class. I think Lock and Jones could become decent starters, they just don't "wow" me with anything. There could be quality backup in there.
My take on Haskins... if they take Haskins, that's fine. I don't play the juvenile "MY QB OR BUST!!" game where I uptalk my QB and talk down QBs not mine. and troll people who don't agree with me. I certainly wouldn't trade up for him. What I see of him on the field just doesn't match the stat sheet. The warning signals echo young inexperience in the vein of Mark Sanchez. They take him and groom behind Bortles, it wouldn't surprise me to see a Ravens-like season. The long term is the real question.
Lawrence is the generational QB to watch, and to get.
With better QBs in the pipeline, there's nothing I'd like more than have a bridge vet signed, take BAP in the draft, and take the QB next year or after when pickings are much better. If we're looking to "make" a QB out of something that isn't there this season, we could be passing on better talent at other positions (like we've done with our #1 over the years again and again.) We've got to have the stones to go after the actual best player than try to force a position pick, even if QB.
Haskins would easily beat out Blake lol
(03-01-2019, 08:48 PM)pirkster Wrote: [ -> ] (02-28-2019, 10:04 PM)Bullseye Wrote: [ -> ]I don't understand the depressing part either. Would you like your QB to be in the huddle asking the other players what is to happen on a given play?
If you want the team to draft Haskins, this statement does not rule out the possibility of that happening.
So Pirk, who is your guy?
There isn't a lot to like in this draft, IMO. I didn't like a lot last season, either. The top ended up the minefield it felt it would be.
Herbert was who I saw as the best QB of this draft, but he stayed in school.
Kyler Murray intrigues me with the wildcard factor the same way Mayfield did (one of only a few including Jackson I liked) last year.
I don't see many immediate starters in this class. I think Lock and Jones could become decent starters, they just don't "wow" me with anything. There could be quality backup in there.
My take on Haskins... if they take Haskins, that's fine. I don't play the juvenile "MY QB OR BUST!!" game where I uptalk my QB and talk down QBs not mine. and troll people who don't agree with me. I certainly wouldn't trade up for him. What I see of him on the field just doesn't match the stat sheet. The warning signals echo young inexperience in the vein of Mark Sanchez. They take him and groom behind Bortles, it wouldn't surprise me to see a Ravens-like season. The long term is the real question.
Lawrence is the generational QB to watch, and to get.
With better QBs in the pipeline, there's nothing I'd like more than have a bridge vet signed, take BAP in the draft, and take the QB next year or after when pickings are much better. If we're looking to "make" a QB out of something that isn't there this season, we could be passing on better talent at other positions (like we've done with our #1 over the years again and again.) We've got to have the stones to go after the actual best player than try to force a position pick, even if QB.
I don't think the lack of an immediate starter in this quarterback group is necessarily an indictment on the quarterback class. Brett Favre was not immediate starter and he turned out pretty well. Carson Palmer was not an immediate starter and he had a very good career. Aaron Rodgers Steve McNair and Patrick Mahomes are other very successful quarterbacks who were not immediate starters. In fact I think if we were to get a Foles, it would be the ideal time to get one of those non-immediate starting quarterbacks.. I think that having a vet like Foles would provide the ideal circumstance to develop a promising Young quarterback properly as opposed to throwing him in and possibly ruining him. Besides, with a vet like Foles and taking BAP may put us too low to get one of the QBs in the next couple of years.
Don't watch college football but Haskins highlights on YouTube appear to be a guy throwing floaters with an incredibly nice pocket in front of him and all day to throw.
Some adjustment would be required in terms of line play expectations
Murray on the other hand certainly jumps out. Be an amazing swing for the fence. Everything about him on paper screams total NFL bust. But wow that speed if ever it's going to work it's the current NFL era.
This is based off 5 minutes on YouTube like The Mad Dog
(02-28-2019, 10:27 PM)jaguarmvp Wrote: [ -> ] (02-28-2019, 10:19 PM)Bullseye Wrote: [ -> ]All of those injuries to the OL put the Jaguars in a precarious spot this draft.
How much draft capital do you spend on the OL?
Do you retain Cann and/or Parnell? If so, do you try to upgrade them or draft for depth? If not, is drafting their replacements sufficient, or do you add depth on top of that?
Do you gamble they will all be healthy next year, and focus on improving the depth?
When do you start drafting OL? What about the needs at skill positions at WR and TE?
Does your answer differ depending on whether we sign Foles or go after Haskins?
To me, I don't see much sense in coming out of this draft with fewer than 3 OLs-one or more in the early rounds, one or more in the mid rounds, and one or more in the late rounds.
If the Jaguars land foles, I would not mind if the jags use their first 3 picks on the oline. If this team wants to be a rushing team we need a better line period.
Sent from my BND-L34 using Tapatalk
Maybe 2 out of the first 4, but not all 3 of 3 on OL. They have other needs. They need WR, TE and RB help just on O alone.
(02-28-2019, 04:35 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ] (02-28-2019, 04:27 PM)JagsFansince1995 Wrote: [ -> ]We should've revamped the playbook last year which is a big reason why we failed. No one should ever go into a scenario or competition in life, even if there before, where they rely on previous results to just repeat themselves. Injuries is an excuse, QB play is an excuse. Both could be fixed with correct playcalling and scheming if you really know what you are working with and not just throwing stuff at the wall hoping it sticks. RB couldnt do it all and even the backups werent getting consistent production because the playcalling was bad and not schemed to benefit them. EXCUSES. This could have been fixed before and wasnt, yet fans want to argue with other fans about the problem/solution when it seems they have NO CLUE as well. It's asinine.
Interesting.
Losing seven key players on offense to injury is just an excuse in your opinion.
I think that’s asinine.
The only thing I think I agree with you on is that they needed a better run game strategy after Fournette and Grant were hurt. The few games with the two of them playing looked like they were on a pretty good trajectory, but Hackett and company couldn’t find consistent production on the ground after that.
Yea, and I wonder why? Maybe offering such a feckless passing threat made it easier to defend the rush. After all, what did opposing Ds have to worry about defending a Bortles-led passing game? Not much.
(03-02-2019, 01:03 PM)Steelers Beaches Wrote: [ -> ] (02-28-2019, 04:35 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]Interesting.
Losing seven key players on offense to injury is just an excuse in your opinion.
I think that’s asinine.
The only thing I think I agree with you on is that they needed a better run game strategy after Fournette and Grant were hurt. The few games with the two of them playing looked like they were on a pretty good trajectory, but Hackett and company couldn’t find consistent production on the ground after that.
Yea, and I wonder why? Maybe offering such a feckless passing threat made it easier to defend the rush. After all, what did opposing Ds have to worry about defending a Bortles-led passing game? Not much.
Load the box, stop the run, and wait for Bortles to make mistakes has been the strategy of 90% of the defenses the Jags have faced since 2016.
It was effective far too many times to move forward with #5 behind center IMO.
(03-02-2019, 02:31 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ] (03-02-2019, 01:03 PM)Steelers Beaches Wrote: [ -> ]Yea, and I wonder why? Maybe offering such a feckless passing threat made it easier to defend the rush. After all, what did opposing Ds have to worry about defending a Bortles-led passing game? Not much.
Load the box, stop the run, and wait for Bortles to make mistakes has been the strategy of 90% of the defenses the Jags have faced since 2016.
It was effective far too many times to move forward with #5 behind center IMO.
And I will add to this.... Blake beating this strategy just enough to give fools good/false hope. Examples: 3 Game 2017 Stretch, Patriots Game early 2018
Man we have been QB starved forever. I really hope we get things figured out. I'm going to wait and see on everything because I just don't know enough or follow enough like I did in my 20's to have a better take on things.
(03-02-2019, 02:31 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ] (03-02-2019, 01:03 PM)Steelers Beaches Wrote: [ -> ]Yea, and I wonder why? Maybe offering such a feckless passing threat made it easier to defend the rush. After all, what did opposing Ds have to worry about defending a Bortles-led passing game? Not much.
Load the box, stop the run, and wait for Bortles to make mistakes has been the strategy of 90% of the defenses the Jags have faced since 2016.
It was effective far too many times to move forward with #5 behind center IMO.
(03-03-2019, 03:12 PM)MoJagFan Wrote: [ -> ] (03-02-2019, 02:31 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]Load the box, stop the run, and wait for Bortles to make mistakes has been the strategy of 90% of the defenses the Jags have faced since 2016.
It was effective far too many times to move forward with #5 behind center IMO.
And I will add to this.... Blake beating this strategy just enough to give fools good/false hope. Examples: 3 Game 2017 Stretch, Patriots Game early 2018
Man we have been QB starved forever. I really hope we get things figured out. I'm going to wait and see on everything because I just don't know enough or follow enough like I did in my 20's to have a better take on things.
We are letting Blake go or his days are numbered, i know. I just want to make sure its understood that i dont think Blake beat the strategy to give me false hope. I put it on Blake beating the strategy with no help at all from his coaching staff. That gave me hope that with the right staff and supporting cast he could succeed. Any QB, regardless of team, that has a run first offense and no weapons is already behind the 8 ball. Tie that in with no decent passing game plan or WR/TE that are getting separation, and he has to be almost perfect in order to carry the offense. Blake was never a world beater and he was never going to thrive with the poor offense we were running. Blame the QB for not being a first ballot HOF or blame the coaches for not even trying to make a passing game work with their drafted QB. Either way we're moving on and still have to fix the holes that werent the QBs fault and have been here for years.
(03-02-2019, 02:31 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ] (03-02-2019, 01:03 PM)Steelers Beaches Wrote: [ -> ]Yea, and I wonder why? Maybe offering such a feckless passing threat made it easier to defend the rush. After all, what did opposing Ds have to worry about defending a Bortles-led passing game? Not much.
Load the box, stop the run, and wait for Bortles to make mistakes has been the strategy of 90% of the defenses the Jags have faced since 2016.
It was effective far too many times to move forward with #5 behind center IMO.
Yep.
You hit the nail on the head.
Bortles must go. But it wasn't all him.