Because it's the offseason and, why not...
1. Trade up to #1, take Myles Garrett
2. Take a QB at #4
3. Joe Mixon
4. Jabril Peppers
5. O.J. Howard
Outside looking in: Forrest Lamp
Because Jags almost always shock and awe (or ouch) in the first round...
I'll go with:
1. Jaguars messageboard is up and functional.
Trade the pick away for a 1st rounder next year. So no pick in round 1 at all.
1. Browns shock everyone and take Jamal Adams .... Jaguars beat out several teams looking to trade up to #2 and pick Myles Garrett
2. Saints trade up ahead of Texans to get Mahomes <---wait, this might actually happen
3. Browns actually do draft a QB at #12 <--I'm starting to think they will despite virtually every mock picking a different position
4. Joe Mixon goes undrafted
5. Jags fail to get OL in top three rounds, but get 1. Leonard Fournette 2. Evan Engram 3. DE DeMarcus Walker <--Jags appear to like Walker
Quote:Because it's the offseason and, why not...
1. Trade up to #1, take Myles Garrett
2. Take a QB at #4
3. Joe Mixon
4. Jabril Peppers
5. O.J. Howard
Outside looking in: Forrest Lamp
I think you covered a lot of them lol. However, taking Howard at 4 is not as shocking as the others. Not a value pick at 4, but I could see it happen.
I would add that we miss the time cut off and miss out on Fournette :\...... #becauseJaguars
No value at picking any running back at four. We do not have a line to create holes for any of these great backs. Plus we have not seen Ivorys production with a decent line. And based on Marrones short time here. Grant really excelled.
While I am a fan of cook. Not even sure if a shifty back would help this year. Now we could take Lamp. But at 4 that is a huge gamble.
And beyond all the things said in past. We select Fournette and who blocks for him? A 5th round to not drafted Fb? And he will be the best of all the backs? You must be kidding me. To ask a rookie fb to help carry the load for Fournette?
On any team. When was the last time that worked?
Quote:No value at picking any running back at four. We do not have a line to create holes for any of these great backs. Plus we have not seen Ivorys production with a decent line. And based on Marrones short time here. Grant really excelled.
While I am a fan of cook. Not even sure if a shifty back would help this year. Now we could take Lamp. But at 4 that is a huge gamble.
And beyond all the things said in past. We select Fournette and who blocks for him? A 5th round to not drafted Fb? And he will be the best of all the backs? You must be kidding me. To ask a rookie fb to help carry the load for Fournette?
On any team. When was the last time that worked?
Ivory might not make the team.
1. Jags on the phone with a trade and miss the pick (Ravens 2003)
2. Jags fill out two cards - their preferred choice somehow does not make it to the podium (Oscars 2017)
3. Jags draft who they think is the best QB, hold it for a ransom, and get that ransom later in trade (Chargers 2004)
Quote:No value at picking any running back at four. We do not have a line to create holes for any of these great backs. Plus we have not seen Ivorys production with a decent line. And based on Marrones short time here. Grant really excelled.
While I am a fan of cook. Not even sure if a shifty back would help this year. Now we could take Lamp. But at 4 that is a huge gamble.
And beyond all the things said in past. We select Fournette and who blocks for him? A 5th round to not drafted Fb? And he will be the best of all the backs? You must be kidding me. To ask a rookie fb to help carry the load for Fournette?
On any team. When was the last time that worked?
I'm not taking your advice, and neither should the team, at four. Or any pick.
Quote:I'm not taking your advice, and neither should the team, at four. Or any pick.
That's the beauty of it no one has to. However it is as valid as any other argument.
Browns take fournette
Jags take mccaffrey
Trubisky and Watson go 1 & 2
Thomas falls to 4
Quote:That's the beauty of it no one has to. However it is as valid as any other argument.
"valid" in that it belongs to you and you alone own it... yes
"valid" in that it is rational and earns merit... certainly not
Quote:Cam Robinson
I could see this