Jacksonville Jaguars Fan Forums

Jaguars fans are feeling pretty good about things after two days of Free agency, which netted the Jaguars arguably the best CB to be had in Bouye.  Pairing him with last year's rookie phenom Jalen Ramsey gives the Jaguars the best CB tandem certainly in the division and quite possibly the league.  In the minds of most Jaguars fans, the time has come to give attention to the offense.  Many observers feel Leonard Fournette will be the pick at 4 for us.

 

But is the defense, most notably the secondary, truly fixed?  I submit that based upon the realities of football today, a BAP analysis, and emulating what the most successful teams have done, the Jaguars best course of action in next month's draft would be to draft either Ohio State CB Marshon Lattimore or S Malik Hooker at #4 instead of offense.

 

It's undeniable that football has become more of a passing game than it has ever been.  TC and others have observed that teams play nickel defense about 70 percent of the time.  This means teams are in three WR sets, which effectively makes nickel backs starters.  In our division, The Colts offer T.Y. Hilton, Phillip Dorsett and Donte Moncrief in that personnel grouping.  The Texans offer Hopkins, Fuller, and Braxton Miller.  If you can draw upon your wildest dreams as a Jaguars fan and see us reaching the playoffs this season, certainly a playoff gauntlet of Pittsburgh and New England would be a possibility under that scenario.  When the Steelers go three wide, they have Antonio Brown, Sammie Coates, and Martavis Bryant returning from suspension.  We've seen what New England has done over the years, and this year they present 4 wide receiver packages featuring newly acquired Brandin Cooks and established Patriots Danny Amendola, Julian Edelman and Chris Hogan, to say nothing of a healthy Gronkowski and Dwayne Allen.  Do the math from there.  Assuming Bouye and Ramsey play up to expectations, we have two CBs we'd feel reasonably comfortable in winning their matchups.  But what about Colvin, who presumably moves to nickel with the departures of House and Amukumara?  Can we rely on him to win his coverage matchup?  While I like Colvin as a player, I don't think anyone believes he has been a shut down guy.  I'm not sure I like him in a matchup against a Phillip Dorsett or a Martavis Bryant.  Drafting Lattimore or Hooker would enable the Jaguars to match up even better against those formidable 3 WR sets, and would give us matchup advantages.  If we reduce opposing QBs to looking for their 4th WR option, we keep the ball out of the hands of the best WRs, help our pass rush with more coverage sacks, and generally speaking we're stopping them far more often.

 

From a BAP perspective, you could argue that a pick of Lattimore or Hooker is justified.  An examination of most of the mock drafts out now show Lattimore and Hooker as popular picks in the spots right around our pick.  The consensus is these two are possibly top 5 picks-top 8 at worst.  While a Fournette selection at four would be consistent with the mandate of giving Bortles help, the general consensus projects him as a lower draft choice than either Lattimore or Hooker, based upon their perceived value as players and the perceived devaluation of Fournette's position.  While many mocks have projected Fournette as high as four, they have also projected him as low as the teens.  I haven't seen any mock that results in Lattimore or Hooker landing outside of the top ten. I think Fournette could help Bortles and this team tremendously.  But it's possible Lattimore or Hooker are better players.

 

If you subscribe to the idea that emulating the most successful teams is a recipe for success, then there is additional justification for picking Lattimore or Hooker at 4.  The great teams have proven to be able to provide matchup problems for opponents, and they have often done this by building upon what are considered to be strengths.  It's a strategy that enabled the Giants to add Carl Banks to a LB corps that already included Lawrence Taylor, Harry Carson and Brad Van Pelt.  It's a strategy that allowed the 49ers to add Jerry Rice to a passing game that won two Super Bowls in the four years prior to his arrival.  The Bills were able to reach four straight Super Bowls by adding LB Cornelius Bennett to a LB corps that already included Darrell Talley and Shane Conlan.  Building on a strength allowed the Cowboys to add Larry Allen to an offensive line that already gave Emmitt Smith a rushing title and won back to back Super Bowls in the year prior to his draft selection.  Denver utilized that strategy by adding DeMarcus Ware to Von Miller.  Finally, we've seen the Patriots actually improve a passing game that won three Super Bowls by adding guys like Wes Welker, Randy Moss, Gronkowski, and now Brandin Cooks.  As far as focusing on the secondary, we've seen great CB tandems and great secondaries win over the years.  We saw Mike Haynes and Lester Hayes win a Super Bowl with the Raiders.  The 49ers had great players in their 1980s secondaries, including Ronnie Lott & Tim McKyer.  Dallas of the 1990s had Kevin Smith, Deion Sanders and Darren Woodson.  The Baltimore Ravens have been considered, in the words of Terrell Suggs, "a defensive kingdom," in part because they have built their secondary to include Rod Woodson, Chris McAlister, and Ed Reed.    More recently, Seattle (Thomas, Chancellor, Sherman) and Denver (Talib, Harris, Ward)both won championships in large part due to stellar secondary play.I think the Jaguars can replicate this by going the more "conventional" route by having a great player on each level of the secondary by adding Hooker, or doing something that hasn't really been done before in having three great CBs by adding Lattimore.

 

There are a lot of good options available for the Jaguars at 4.  However, I submit the recent defensive additions of Ramsey, and Bouye should not necessarily preclude the team from going secondary again at 4.

If Thomas is gone I honestly wouldn't be upset if the pick was Hooker. However if Fournette isn't the pick I would take a deep breath and take Mixon later if available.

Bullseye, you routinely produce some of the best football related content on the internet.  

 

I like your idea, but I wonder, if we can get inside the mind of Coughlin, when he was here in Jacksonville, the last time he actually had control of a draft, wasn't he more of a paint-by-numbers, fill-a-need type of drafter?   Of course it would all depend on how much he gives Dave Caldwell the power to make the choice, but I am just wondering about what would be in the mind of Coughlin. 

 

Remember Harry Deligianis?   That was pure we-must-pick-a-DL-in-round-4.  

 

Also, the win-now mandate, how much would that play into the choice?  Paint-by-numbers, fill-immediate-needs-immediately, win-now, would say we would draft offense at this point.   And that means Fournette, because in the top 10, he's about the only offensive guy. 

 

If it were up to me, I would take Hooker or Lattimore, go offensive line in round 2, and maybe offensive line in round 3, and roll with the RBs we already have.   But I think I have a higher opinion of our current RBs than a lot of other posters on the message board, and a lower opinion of Leonard Fournette and Dalvin Cook. 

 

I know Malik Jackson and Calais Campbell would love for us to take a DB at pick 4. 

Quote:If Thomas is gone I honestly wouldn't be upset if the pick was Hooker. However if Fournette isn't the pick I would take a deep breath and take Mixon later if available.

I think the short term PR hit would be tremendous in taking Mixon.

 

Given the team's lack of popularity and success overall, that would be a tough sell.

 

But talent wise, Mixon is legit.

 

P.S.  This thread was not intended to be a slight against Adams.  You could throw Adams into the mix if you think he has the range to be a FS.

Quote:Bullseye, you routinely produce some of the best football related content on the internet.  

 

I like your idea, but I wonder, if we can get inside the mind of Coughlin, when he was here in Jacksonville, the last time he actually had control of a draft, wasn't he more of a paint-by-numbers, fill-a-need type of drafter?   Of course it would all depend on how much he gives Dave Caldwell the power to make the choice, but I am just wondering about what would be in the mind of Coughlin. 

 

Remember Harry Deligianis?   That was pure we-must-pick-a-DL-in-round-4.  

 

Also, the win-now mandate, how much would that play into the choice?  Paint-by-numbers, fill-immediate-needs-immediately, win-now, would say we would draft offense at this point.   And that means Fournette, because in the top 10, he's about the only offensive guy. 

 

If it were up to me, I would take Hooker or Lattimore, go offensive line in round 2, and maybe offensive line in round 3, and roll with the RBs we already have.   But I think I have a higher opinion of our current RBs than a lot of other posters on the message board, and a lower opinion of Leonard Fournette and Dalvin Cook. 

 

I know Malik Jackson and Calais Campbell would love for us to take a DB at pick 4. 

Thanks a million, Marty!  That means a lot!

 

TC was largely a needs drafter.

 

Arguably the one time he didn't draft pure need, it paid off handsomely in 2001 when there was a huge need at RT, and instead of taking RT Kenyatta Walker out of Florida, he took Marcus Stroud in the first round, and followed it up with Maurice Williams in the 2nd round.

 

I cringe at many of TC's picks in the mid to late rounds.  Deligianis.  Cesario.  Hamilton.  Yeesh!!!

 

I think taking Hooker or Lattimore at 4 fits with the win now mandate, because either guy could be an immediate impact guy here.

 

But to me, what has to be going through TCs mind is who could help the team the most.  I have to think that if Fournette/Cook is a consideration at 4, the rationale is a stud RB helps this team more than either upgrading FS or adding a shut down nickel back. An effective running game it takes pressure off of Bortles to do too much, which gets him in trouble.   A strong running game puts Bortles and the offense in better down and distance situations, introduces the element of play action to the offense, which should result in fewer drive killing, momentum killing, and game changing turnovers.  It would keep the defense honest and should lead to better pass protection.  It would make the defense better by keeping them off the field more and giving them better field position.  Finally, it would add to the toughness that TC has been saying this team needs.

 

Of course, Fournette or Cook would not mean, by themselves, an instantly competent running game.  The OL and TE would need upgrades, too.

One more consideration about the impact that the matchup advantages a Lattimore or Hooker selection at 4 would provide.

 

Despite the proliferation of the passing game generally and 3-4 WR sets in particular, it's not likely many teams have high quality receivers at th 4th-6th WR spots.  In most cases, teams can throw three good WRs at a time.

 

Should the Jaguars take Lattimore or Hooker at 4 and hit on that pick, they might be less inclined to spread things out.  They may figure that running the ball would be a more fruitful pursuit.

 

But that plays into our hands as well. 

 

Even assuming we don't add Poe, our base 4-3 is going to be bigger than most along the DL with the addition of Campbell.  I think running would be tougher sledding against us than it has been.

 

Passing less might prove to be a safer approach, but would also invariably result in fewer points scored against us,which means less pressure on Bortles to do the impossible, which should mean fewer turnovers for the offense.

Fournette > Lattimore and Hooker. LF=BPA

One could argue the best way to negate the spread sets that we often see is to consistently pressure the QB with your front 4. This requires not only a good starting lineup but quality backups so you're able to pressure in waves.

This is a great thread!  Tons of incite that includes BAP (which I am all about), TC's past draft history (spot on perspective), and team needs on the offensive side of the ball.  Unlike the general consensus, I thought the same thing that Hooker and Adams were still in play at #4 even after the Church signing.  Are they totally happy with Gipson at FS that Hooker wouldn't be a huge upgrade?  Is Church at 29 the long term answer at SS to Adams wouldn't improve?  The answer to both is no.  So taking either Hooker of Adams would improve our defense tremendously for exactly the reasons expressed.  

 

Likewise, our new VP of Football Operations and former HC Tom Coughlin has not had the greatest success in the draft for this club.  It's unfair to evaluate him negatively since we know much of that was the result of Gene Smith.  And you're right about drafting for need.  The one that still haunts me is drafting R. Jay Soward in the first round.  It was a huge reach.  But, TC thought his speed would open up the field for Jimmy and Keenan.  Big mistake!  But, he did make the best draft move when he took BAP QB Rob Johnson in the 4th when we already had two good QBs.  Of course, he was traded away to Buffalo for the number 10 pick which ended up being Fred Taylor.

 

Which brings us to the possible selection of Leonard Fournette.  Now, IMHO Leonard Fournette is better than FT at this point coming out of college and I believe has the potential to be even better.  Wouldn't you want a player like Freddy T. in your backfield?  Don't you think FT's insane abilities created nightmares for opposing defenses?  Don't you think FT made the rest of our offense better?  I'm sure it improved the performance of Brunell and Jimmy and Keenan and Pete Mitchell and Kyle Brady.

 

Blake hasn't shown that he can be elite.  And maybe he never will be.  But, we can improve our offense with a good running game.  And I think Fournette is the guy who can do that immediately.  And it will have a trickle down effect that will improve Blake immensely.

 

The concern I have is that a RB is only as good as the OL he has to block for him.  Since we have totally ignored improving the line through FA, our 2-5 picks need to have at least 2 linemen and one TE.  We'll just to keep our fingers crossed that some of the better players fall to us in those rounds.  

I still think Solomon Thomas is the pick if he's there. He'd be the heir to Campbell and give us a rotation that should in theory be one of the best defensive lines in the league.

I think there will be a good player there at 4, forunette, adams, thomas, we will have someone good at that spot. I used to be on the Hooker train but his tackling concerns me the more I think about it. If we drafted Mixon, I would cancel my season tickets I have had since day 1 in 95, but I doubt TC wants a player like that anyways. 

Quote:This is a great thread!  Tons of incite that includes BAP (which I am all about), TC's past draft history (spot on perspective), and team needs on the offensive side of the ball.  Unlike the general consensus, I thought the same thing that Hooker and Adams were still in play at #4 even after the Church signing.  Are they totally happy with Gipson at FS that Hooker wouldn't be a huge upgrade?  Is Church at 29 the long term answer at SS to Adams wouldn't improve?  The answer to both is no.  So taking either Hooker of Adams would improve our defense tremendously for exactly the reasons expressed.  

 

Likewise, our new VP of Football Operations and former HC Tom Coughlin has not had the greatest success in the draft for this club.  It's unfair to evaluate him negatively since we know much of that was the result of Gene Smith.  And you're right about drafting for need.  The one that still haunts me is drafting R. Jay Soward in the first round.  It was a huge reach.  But, TC thought his speed would open up the field for Jimmy and Keenan.  Big mistake!  But, he did make the best draft move when he took BAP QB Rob Johnson in the 4th when we already had two good QBs.  Of course, he was traded away to Buffalo for the number 10 pick which ended up being Fred Taylor.

 

Which brings us to the possible selection of Leonard Fournette.  Now, IMHO Leonard Fournette is better than FT at this point coming out of college and I believe has the potential to be even better.  Wouldn't you want a player like Freddy T. in your backfield?  Don't you think FT's insane abilities created nightmares for opposing defenses?  Don't you think FT made the rest of our offense better?  I'm sure it improved the performance of Brunell and Jimmy and Keenan and Pete Mitchell and Kyle Brady.

 

Blake hasn't shown that he can be elite.  And maybe he never will be.  But, we can improve our offense with a good running game.  And I think Fournette is the guy who can do that immediately.  And it will have a trickle down effect that will improve Blake immensely.

 

The concern I have is that a RB is only as good as the OL he has to block for him.  Since we have totally ignored improving the line through FA, our 2-5 picks need to have at least 2 linemen and one TE.  We'll just to keep our fingers crossed that some of the better players fall to us in those rounds.  

My advocacy for Hooker should not be intended to impugn Gipson as a player.  But Hooker from a physical standpoint is a huge upgrade.  I would have more readily included Adams in this discussion had we not just spent the money on Church.

 

As for Fournette, my take is he may have been a better college player, but with FT's speed and cut back ability, I think ultimately FT will prove to be the better pro.

The shorter case for BAB:

 

It's not a friggin already hurt bad position value player at 4.

Quote:One could argue the best way to negate the spread sets that we often see is to consistently pressure the QB with your front 4. This requires not only a good starting lineup but quality backups so you're able to pressure in waves.

Well he knows from experience what a strong pass rush can do to a spread offense.

 

As it stands now, the one true Coughlinesque edge rusher that currently warrants a top 5 grade is Garrett, and he'll be long gone by 4.  Thomas is a heckuva player, but not one of those type edge rushers. Unless a guy like Taco Charlton skyrockets up the draft boards in the next month and a half, I don't think he will use a pick on a DL at 4.

 

The interesting thing about this year is that DB and edge rusher are supposedly so deep this year, they could take Fournette at 4 and supposedly capitalize on the depth at those positions and still reasonably replicate the strategy discussed here and in my OP if they draft well.