(03-09-2021, 06:01 PM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ] (03-09-2021, 05:44 PM)jagibelieve Wrote: [ -> ]Meh... he's the best player at his position that you have right now. IF there was somebody better on the roster at his position then the tag wouldn't make sense. There are no guarantees in FA or the draft so keep the best that you have until you acquire and sign an upgrade. Worst case scenario is that he becomes and expensive backup for one season IF the team is able to get an upgrade.
That's been the problem. We've avoided making upgrades with good players. We just settled for OT's who fell into round 2, because they were slow footed. It's time to address the position with actual "good players."
The team can still upgrade and be fine. I'll ammend my comment in that the worst case scenario is we are stuck with him for another season as the starter. A better scenario is that he's a high dollar backup... for one season... while we have cap room.
(03-09-2021, 07:01 PM)TheDuke007 Wrote: [ -> ] (03-09-2021, 01:05 PM)IndestructibleJag Wrote: [ -> ]For all those against this move, if we didn't franchise Cam, and Trent Williams signs elsewhere, where do you go? Is it a guarantee a 1st round OT is a star? Be realistic.
Question: Is it a guarantee that a 1st round OT is a star?
Answer: No.
Question: Is a first round OT likely better than Cam Robinson?
Answer: Yes and we also would have an additional $14 million to upgrade other areas of this team.
Not really a guarantee. What happens if you get a first round pick that is worse after releasing Robinson? You never, ever get rid of your best players at their position until you have a replacement.
(03-09-2021, 07:40 PM)jagibelieve Wrote: [ -> ] (03-09-2021, 06:01 PM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: [ -> ]That's been the problem. We've avoided making upgrades with good players. We just settled for OT's who fell into round 2, because they were slow footed. It's time to address the position with actual "good players."
The team can still upgrade and be fine. I'll ammend my comment in that the worst case scenario is we are stuck with him for another season as the starter. A better scenario is that he's a high dollar backup... for one season... while we have cap room.
(03-09-2021, 07:01 PM)TheDuke007 Wrote: [ -> ]Question: Is it a guarantee that a 1st round OT is a star?
Answer: No.
Question: Is a first round OT likely better than Cam Robinson?
Answer: Yes and we also would have an additional $14 million to upgrade other areas of this team.
Not really a guarantee. What happens if you get a first round pick that is worse after releasing Robinson? You never, ever get rid of your best players at their position until you have a replacement.
There's never a guarantee. You deal with likelihoods. A first round OT would likely upgrade Cam Robinson. Do you think it is smart paying Cam Robinson $14 million to be a backup?
So if you were Cam would you sign it right away?
(03-09-2021, 07:52 PM)surfon Wrote: [ -> ]So if you were Cam would you sign it right away?
Yes, because I still think we go after Trent Williams.
Cam Robinson isn't even bad.. all of you are so blind. We had Minshew and Girrafe neck holding the ball forever.. just watch what happens if T-Law lives up to the bill. Our oline will be considered top 5.
(03-09-2021, 07:01 PM)TheDuke007 Wrote: [ -> ] (03-09-2021, 01:05 PM)IndestructibleJag Wrote: [ -> ]For all those against this move, if we didn't franchise Cam, and Trent Williams signs elsewhere, where do you go? Is it a guarantee a 1st round OT is a star? Be realistic.
Question: Is it a guarantee that a 1st round OT is a star?
Answer: No.
Question: Is a first round OT likely better than Cam Robinson?
Answer: Yes and we also would have an additional $14 million to upgrade other areas of this team. Also no.
Rookie left tackles are rarely good the first season.
(03-09-2021, 08:43 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (03-09-2021, 07:01 PM)TheDuke007 Wrote: [ -> ]Question: Is it a guarantee that a 1st round OT is a star?
Answer: No.
Question: Is a first round OT likely better than Cam Robinson?
Answer: Yes and we also would have an additional $14 million to upgrade other areas of this team. Also no.
Rookie left tackles are rarely good the first season.
This, especially ones drafted 25 or later
(03-09-2021, 07:40 PM)jagibelieve Wrote: [ -> ]Not really a guarantee. What happens if you get a first round pick that is worse after releasing Robinson? You never, ever get rid of your best players at their position until you have a replacement.
Can it get worse than the worst in the league?
T CAM ROBINSON, JACKSONVILLE JAGUARS
Tag price: $13.6 million
Prediction of tag outcome: Plays on the tag
Sentiment: This one is truly a head-scratcher. Instead of opting to use an early-round pick in the 2021 NFL Draft to bring in a talented tackle or even trading one of those picks away to Baltimore for Orlando Brown Jr., the Jaguars decided to retain Robinson, who has generated negative WAR over the past two years.
In his four years in the NFL, Robinson ranks dead last among qualifying left tackles in PFF grade (56.2). That mark is seven grading points worse than the second-lowest-graded left tackle and 14 grading points worse than third place.
(03-09-2021, 08:43 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (03-09-2021, 07:01 PM)TheDuke007 Wrote: [ -> ]Question: Is it a guarantee that a 1st round OT is a star?
Answer: No.
Question: Is a first round OT likely better than Cam Robinson?
Answer: Yes and we also would have an additional $14 million to upgrade other areas of this team. Also no.
Rookie left tackles are rarely good the first season.
But Cam Robinson isn't good either. The question wasn't whether the OT would be "good". It's whether he would likely be better than Cam Robinson. He likely would and we would have an additional $14 million to upgrade other areas. The original answer is correct.
(03-09-2021, 07:52 PM)surfon Wrote: [ -> ]So if you were Cam would you sign it right away?
It guarantees more money this season. He probably doesn't get a long-term deal elsewhere. He may not be playing LT though or starting for the Jags.
If he plays LT well, he wins, if he doesn't it would be better to sign somewhere else where he could play and sign a better deal next year.
Probably better to wait and see what happens.
Sent from my SM-G781U using Tapatalk
(03-09-2021, 07:52 PM)surfon Wrote: [ -> ]So if you were Cam would you sign it right away?
If I were him, I would've signed it the minute it came out of the printer and then I'd run out the door laughing.
(03-09-2021, 09:15 PM)TheDuke007 Wrote: [ -> ] (03-09-2021, 08:43 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]Rookie left tackles are rarely good the first season.
But Cam Robinson isn't good either. The question wasn't whether the OT would be "good". It's whether he would likely be better than Cam Robinson. He likely would and we would have an additional $14 million to upgrade other areas. The original answer is correct.
No, the rookie would not likely be better than Robinson. College linemen take at least a season to grow to NFL standards, having Robinson here means we aren't running some 21 year old second or third rounder out there on opening day. Hopefully neither of these options are what happens, I'd rather have a better LT brought in if we can find one, but it's almost always better to have a vet start on season Day 1 over a rookie. Not to say we don't need to upgrade, we do, but a rookie there is not a good idea.
(03-09-2021, 10:26 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (03-09-2021, 09:15 PM)TheDuke007 Wrote: [ -> ]But Cam Robinson isn't good either. The question wasn't whether the OT would be "good". It's whether he would likely be better than Cam Robinson. He likely would and we would have an additional $14 million to upgrade other areas. The original answer is correct.
No, the rookie would not likely be better than Robinson. College linemen take at least a season to grow to NFL standards, having Robinson here means we aren't running some 21 year old second or third rounder out there on opening day. Hopefully neither of these options are what happens, I'd rather have a better LT brought in if we can find one, but it's almost always better to have a vet start on season Day 1 over a rookie. Not to say we don't need to upgrade, we do, but a rookie there is not a good idea.
5 rookie tackles started last year and they were all better than Cam (Thomas probably wasn't at first but he improved throughout the season). It's highly likely that Jenkins/Cosmi/Eichenberg/Radunz/etc would be better than Cam.
Not sure why we did franchise instead of transition, no one is gonna give a first rounder for cam. If I was Robinson I am signing that contract just as fast as I can. It’s an overpay, and it gives him a good position to negotiate from for a longer term deal if he wants.
(03-09-2021, 10:26 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (03-09-2021, 09:15 PM)TheDuke007 Wrote: [ -> ]But Cam Robinson isn't good either. The question wasn't whether the OT would be "good". It's whether he would likely be better than Cam Robinson. He likely would and we would have an additional $14 million to upgrade other areas. The original answer is correct.
No, the rookie would not likely be better than Robinson. College linemen take at least a season to grow to NFL standards, having Robinson here means we aren't running some 21 year old second or third rounder out there on opening day. Hopefully neither of these options are what happens, I'd rather have a better LT brought in if we can find one, but it's almost always better to have a vet start on season Day 1 over a rookie. Not to say we don't need to upgrade, we do, but a rookie there is not a good idea.
I'm not sure why you are talking about a second or third rounder. We do have the #25 overall pick which is a first rounder. We'll have to agree to disagree on whether that player would be better. I think he would. I understand that there's a learning curve, but it's also not that hard to play better than Robinson as he has been one of the poorer tackles in the league. We also save $14 million that could be used to upgrade other positions. I'm not saying I like the idea of relying on a rookie, but I hate the idea of relying on Cam Robinson and I hate the idea of wasting $14 million on him. Some lists don't even have Robinson ranked in the top 100 free agents. I would try very hard to sign Trent Williams, consider trades and then only rely on a rookie on as a last resort.
(03-09-2021, 10:50 PM)HandsomeRob86 Wrote: [ -> ]Not sure why we did franchise instead of transition, no one is gonna give a first rounder for cam. If I was Robinson I am signing that contract just as fast as I can. It’s an overpay, and it gives him a good position to negotiate from for a longer term deal if he wants.
I hope he does sign it. I hope he improves. I hope he proves all of us wrong. Hope not being a plan then this means at the worst he is one of our offensive linemen. If we draft someone better that beats him out then good. If we can acquire better in free agency then good too. If neither occurs then at least we know the devil we have....
(03-09-2021, 10:56 PM)TheDuke007 Wrote: [ -> ] (03-09-2021, 10:26 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]No, the rookie would not likely be better than Robinson. College linemen take at least a season to grow to NFL standards, having Robinson here means we aren't running some 21 year old second or third rounder out there on opening day. Hopefully neither of these options are what happens, I'd rather have a better LT brought in if we can find one, but it's almost always better to have a vet start on season Day 1 over a rookie. Not to say we don't need to upgrade, we do, but a rookie there is not a good idea.
I'm not sure why you are talking about a second or third rounder. We do have the #25 overall pick which is a first rounder. We'll have to agree to disagree on whether that player would be better. I think he would. I understand that there's a learning curve, but it's also not that hard to play better than Robinson as he has been one of the poorer tackles in the league. We also save $14 million that could be used to upgrade other positions. I'm not saying I like the idea of relying on a rookie, but I hate the idea of relying on Cam Robinson and I hate the idea of wasting $14 million on him. Some lists don't even have Robinson ranked in the top 100 free agents. I would try very hard to sign Trent Williams, consider trades and then only rely on a rookie on as a last resort.
The problem with that is there might be a better player at a different position than tackle at 25, so we would be passing up the best player for need, now we don't have to do that. If a tackle is the top player when we pick at 25 we can still take him. Just because we tagged Cam doesn't mean we still can't take a tackle if he is the top player on our board when we pick
(03-09-2021, 11:14 PM)Jag149 Wrote: [ -> ] (03-09-2021, 10:50 PM)HandsomeRob86 Wrote: [ -> ]Not sure why we did franchise instead of transition, no one is gonna give a first rounder for cam. If I was Robinson I am signing that contract just as fast as I can. It’s an overpay, and it gives him a good position to negotiate from for a longer term deal if he wants.
I hope he does sign it. I hope he improves. I hope he proves all of us wrong. Hope not being a plan then this means at the worst he is one of our offensive linemen. If we draft someone better that beats him out then good. If we can acquire better in free agency then good too. If neither occurs then at least we know the devil we have....
And there lies the problem. We know how bad he is and on top of that, our RT is even worse.
.gif "Laughing")
![[Image: ELWeGuCXUAE3fsM.jpg]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ELWeGuCXUAE3fsM.jpg)