It happens more often than you think.

https://mobile.twitter.com/chrisfedor/st...7323123713

More reason not to worry about what Mel Kiper has to say.

I was hoping he'd have a better day.  Hard to be excited about his pro day whether you're rooting for him or not.

I wouldn't mind him here, but he didn't do much to help himself on several fronts.

It's a situation where he's pretty much left it all to the tape.

He may not have hurt himself, but I can't point to anything that surprised or helped him further his cause from today.  For skeptics, there was nothing there that would convince them to reconsider.

I think he could bring a dynamic that's atypical, but I don't think that fits what Coughlin wants in a QB or offense.

Who knows, maybe he is open to that after seeing what Watson was able to accomplish last season.

He had some really nice throws and he had some rough ones. 

If a team thinks you can fix those bad misses, and he drops to 29, take him. He has tons of upside and will have the luxury of sitting behind Blake for a year or two.

---

Coughlin when asked if winning will be a focus: "What the hell else is there? This is nice and dandy, but winning is what all this is about."

It happens more often than you think.

https://mobile.twitter.com/chrisfedor/st...7323123713

More reason not to worry about what Mel Kiper has to say.

I was hoping he'd have a better day.  Hard to be excited about his pro day whether you're rooting for him or not.

I wouldn't mind him here, but he didn't do much to help himself on several fronts.

It's a situation where he's pretty much left it all to the tape.

He may not have hurt himself, but I can't point to anything that surprised or helped him further his cause from today.  For skeptics, there was nothing there that would convince them to reconsider.

I think he could bring a dynamic that's atypical, but I don't think that fits what Coughlin wants in a QB or offense.

Who knows, maybe he is open to that after seeing what Watson was able to accomplish last season.

If you listen to the scouts-former scouts like Bucky Brooks and other talking heads like Jermiah and Mayock anyhow-the tape should govern your decision making more than anything else.

I'm of mixed feelings when it comes to drafting a QB here, especially in the first round.

On the one hand, unless you have that in his prime Hall of Famer at QB, whenever you get the chance to invest a draft pick in a guy you think has a legitimate shot of being that franchise signal caller, you should take him.  Furthermore, there are favorable circumstances here that would enable a young signal caller like Rudolph or Jackson to develop slowly and properly, without putting too much pressure on them too quickly.

On the other, the Jaguars were 2:37 away from reaching the Super Bowl, and that was with holes on the roster like receiving TE, G, and arguably WR.  If ever there were a draft that screamed for immediate needs to be filled, this one is it.

If you draft a QB in the first two rounds, you are doing so with the hopes you will extend the window of contention for the team for a few years by sacrificing immediate benefit, unless you hit in a major way on the pick and he is an immediate star like Watson.

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

He decided to not go with an agent. Not a great decision for a rookie trying to break into the league but one that he'll have to learn to live with. Hopefully he falls to 29.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/201...t-himself/

I don't want any part of Jackson.  His accuracy is awful from what I've seen.

---

I'm mixed. I like the idea of a fast, mobile QB to complement LF27 pounding the lines plus, in the passing game, he'll probably only focus on a short game- tight ends, screens, slants, etc. so his accuracy should be decent.

But...the thing I can't get past is his size. One big hit and he could be done and have us all wishing we had taken that big, brawling offensive lineman from the University of Wherever (who also could go down at anytime). So, I will leave it to the board experts to decide.

His mother, though. Really?

---

Season Ticket holder since 2004.

 

        

6' 2 1/4" 216 is not that small. Darnold and Rosen are both less dense. Jackson has also gotten a lot of props for knowing when to get down or out of bounds and avoid big hits too. Not to mention the overwhelming majority of QB injuries come from inside the pocket. Injuries wouldn't worry me more than they do for any other QB.

---

Lamar (like Watson) is a good litmus test of who you should value as draft analysts.

---

6' 2 1/4" 216 is not that small. Darnold and Rosen are both less dense. Jackson has also gotten a lot of props for knowing when to get down or out of bounds and avoid big hits too. Not to mention the overwhelming majority of QB injuries come from inside the pocket. Injuries wouldn't worry me more than they do for any other QB.

He has acceptable height for a QB.

As for his weight, it's not so much what he's carrying but how small his lower body is, and that he's got an overall narrow frame.

That's similar to the issues Bridgewater has.  They look like they're wearing kids pads due to narrow shoulders.  It makes their melons look huge in the helmet.

That being said... it would be a good situation for him here with no pressure to start.  He could be used as a change of pace and as a weapon.  Not to mention, he could run scout team for some of the QBs we'll face as well (including Watson) who are hard to emulate.

He could grow into a starting role without being forced into it.  Unlike Gabbert and Bortles...

...but with also the opportunity to contribute in a way anyone else we possibly draft as a backup would be able to.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

Lamar (like Watson) is a good litmus test of who you should value as draft analysts.

To judge that, we'd have to be able to determine how each players' careers unfold first.

So many start quick and burn fast.  That's why I don't value analysts by whether or not they agree with me, but by whether or not they use good judgement.  Those that work out in spite of convention are the exception and should be appropriately acknowledged as such.

One example from this year's draft would be low completion percentage.  People have differing views (and Kiper differing depending on the player) of whether or not it matters.  Should a low completion percentage QB become a success... that would be exceptional and against convention.  Taking one and expecting it to improve in the NFL would be ambitious and a risk.  Teams know they'd be taking that risk, and analysts sticking their necks out in support of those QBs are, too.  You just have to be confident there's a good chance the QB you're after could be the exception.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

He is trying to make it to 29.

---

https://twitter.com/nfl/status/979406795008483328

Lamar has definitely been working out. He looks much thicker in the legs. He knows he had to. Also... I know this is just some clips of his best throws but his footwork looks to be improved. The only thing with Lamar is his footwork. That is why his accuracy is low. Any QB coach would take that challenge on. He has the arm to make all the throws and more. You can teach footwork, not arm. Anyone who just says "oh he has poor accuracy... PASS" isn't really watching him and evaluating him. It is all teachable. His upside is amazing. IMO he needed to work on size (which obviously he has been doing since stepping on the field at Louisville as a freshman... go back and look at his size then) and footwork. He stands wayyyyy too tall in the pocket and relies on his arm... thus poor accuracy. If he can keep working on his stance in the pocket ...his upside is way higher than anyone else. Now that the Jags got Kessler the pick to the Jags makes even more sense to me. If he isn't ready he doesn't even need to be the main backup, as Kessler can step in.

---

6' 2 1/4" 216 is not that small. Darnold and Rosen are both less dense. Jackson has also gotten a lot of props for knowing when to get down or out of bounds and avoid big hits too. Not to mention the overwhelming majority of QB injuries come from inside the pocket. Injuries wouldn't worry me more than they do for any other QB.

He has acceptable height for a QB.

As for his weight, it's not so much what he's carrying but how small his lower body is, and that he's got an overall narrow frame.

That's similar to the issues Bridgewater has.  They look like they're wearing kids pads due to narrow shoulders.  It makes their melons look huge in the helmet.

That being said... it would be a good situation for him here with no pressure to start.  He could be used as a change of pace and as a weapon.  Not to mention, he could run scout team for some of the QBs we'll face as well (including Watson) who are hard to emulate.

He could grow into a starting role without being forced into it.  Unlike Gabbert and Bortles...

...but with also the opportunity to contribute in a way anyone else we possibly draft as a backup would be able to.

You are being in denial if you think there's no pressure on this team if Lamar Jackson gets selected by this franchise. The National media and one third of the local fan base already despise and hate Blake Bortles so therefore, any incompletion and a game or even practice is going to create noise around this franchise that should be focusing on winning a championship. So my question to you is do you think that Tom Coughlin or anyone within the Jaguars organization will want those type of problems when they have a championship level team that's ready to win right now? I believe the answer is no so that's why they want to let him or any other QB at the 29th pick because of it and that's perfectly okay with me.

---

You know he's fast. Just watch the tape. Why should he run the 40?

---

'02

Lamar (like Watson) is a good litmus test of who you should value as draft analysts.

To judge that, we'd have to be able to determine how each players' careers unfold first.

So many start quick and burn fast.  That's why I don't value analysts by whether or not they agree with me, but by whether or not they use good judgement.  Those that work out in spite of convention are the exception and should be appropriately acknowledged as such.

One example from this year's draft would be low completion percentage.  People have differing views (and Kiper differing depending on the player) of whether or not it matters.  Should a low completion percentage QB become a success... that would be exceptional and against convention.  Taking one and expecting it to improve in the NFL would be ambitious and a risk.  Teams know they'd be taking that risk, and analysts sticking their necks out in support of those QBs are, too.  You just have to be confident there's a good chance the QB you're after could be the exception.

There were 7 dropped passes in Jackson's workout today by his WRs, which was a reoccurring theme for him all season. That played a huge part as to why his completion percentage is always brought up as a question. He definitely isn't the most accurate passer in the draft but all of his issues (mainly working on footwork and throwing base) are easily correctable with a half decent QB coach in the NFL.


https://twitter.com/PFF_Neil/status/9559...e-receiver

---

"Before you criticize a man, walk a mile in his shoes. That way, if he gets angry, he's a mile away and barefoot."

He decided to not go with an agent. Not a great decision for a rookie trying to break into the league but one that he'll have to learn to live with. Hopefully he falls to 29.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/201...t-himself/

I don't want any part of Jackson.  His accuracy is awful from what I've seen.

From what I've seen he's more accurate than the strong-armed Josh Allen. 

---

'02

Here is the good and the bad from the pro day...

https://au.sports.yahoo.com/nfl/video/wa...e-pro-day/

---

The Sporting News just leaked some Wonderlic scores and this might explain a lot. Jackson reportedly only scored a 13. That's terrible for a QB. Here are how some other QB's scored.

Josh Allen, 37

Josh Rosen, 29

Sam Darnold, 28

Baker Mayfield, 25

Lamar Jackson, 13


Either Rudolph didn't take one or he's being left out of the "top 5 " QB prospects list. I wanna know what he scored.

---

Lamar (like Watson) is a good litmus test of who you should value as draft analysts.

To judge that, we'd have to be able to determine how each players' careers unfold first.

So many start quick and burn fast.  That's why I don't value analysts by whether or not they agree with me, but by whether or not they use good judgement.  Those that work out in spite of convention are the exception and should be appropriately acknowledged as such.

One example from this year's draft would be low completion percentage.  People have differing views (and Kiper differing depending on the player) of whether or not it matters.  Should a low completion percentage QB become a success... that would be exceptional and against convention.  Taking one and expecting it to improve in the NFL would be ambitious and a risk.  Teams know they'd be taking that risk, and analysts sticking their necks out in support of those QBs are, too.  You just have to be confident there's a good chance the QB you're after could be the exception.

It's not hard to see who does their homework on prospects and who is just a media talking head. What they think of a prospect Vs what I think doesn't matter. As long as they can break down their game and stick to what the facts are then I have time for them as a draft analyst. 
That's why it's easy to see who knows what they are doing and not when divisive prospects like Lamar, Allen or Watson come up. Good analysts stick to the facts , bad ones feed into narratives for clicks.

---

The Sporting News just leaked some Wonderlic scores and this might explain a lot. Jackson reportedly only scored a 13. That's terrible for a QB. Here are how some other QB's scored.

Josh Allen, 37

Josh Rosen, 29

Sam Darnold, 28

Baker Mayfield, 25

Lamar Jackson, 13


Either Rudolph didn't take one or he's being left out of the "top 5 " QB prospects list. I wanna know what he scored.

Has no bearing on NFL success. 

Plus all the teams do new specialised QB tests these days. Unfortunately they keep the results to themselves.

---

The Sporting News just leaked some Wonderlic scores and this might explain a lot. Jackson reportedly only scored a 13. That's terrible for a QB. Here are how some other QB's scored.

Josh Allen, 37

Josh Rosen, 29

Sam Darnold, 28

Baker Mayfield, 25

Lamar Jackson, 13


Either Rudolph didn't take one or he's being left out of the "top 5 " QB prospects list. I wanna know what he scored.

Who cares?

Time to get with the times man. The test don’t mean squat when it comes to assessing football IQ.

BTW, for conversational sake, Dan Marino, Jim Kelly, and Terry Bradshaw all scored a 15 on the wonderlic. Greg McElroy and Jeff Mathews (Who?) scored a 43 and 40 respectively.

---

To judge that, we'd have to be able to determine how each players' careers unfold first.

So many start quick and burn fast.  That's why I don't value analysts by whether or not they agree with me, but by whether or not they use good judgement.  Those that work out in spite of convention are the exception and should be appropriately acknowledged as such.

One example from this year's draft would be low completion percentage.  People have differing views (and Kiper differing depending on the player) of whether or not it matters.  Should a low completion percentage QB become a success... that would be exceptional and against convention.  Taking one and expecting it to improve in the NFL would be ambitious and a risk.  Teams know they'd be taking that risk, and analysts sticking their necks out in support of those QBs are, too.  You just have to be confident there's a good chance the QB you're after could be the exception.

It's not hard to see who does their homework on prospects and who is just a media talking head. What they think of a prospect Vs what I think doesn't matter. As long as they can break down their game and stick to what the facts are then I have time for them as a draft analyst. 
That's why it's easy to see who knows what they are doing and not when divisive prospects like Lamar, Allen or Watson come up. Good analysts stick to the facts , bad ones feed into narratives for clicks.

---

The Sporting News just leaked some Wonderlic scores and this might explain a lot. Jackson reportedly only scored a 13. That's terrible for a QB. Here are how some other QB's scored.

Josh Allen, 37

Josh Rosen, 29

Sam Darnold, 28

Baker Mayfield, 25

Lamar Jackson, 13


Either Rudolph didn't take one or he's being left out of the "top 5 " QB prospects list. I wanna know what he scored.

Has no bearing on NFL success. 

Plus all the teams do new specialised QB tests these days. Unfortunately they keep the results to themselves.

Bingo

---

"Before you criticize a man, walk a mile in his shoes. That way, if he gets angry, he's a mile away and barefoot."

I am not concerned with this. If he's on the board on draft night I would still be thrilled if we selected him. I watched him enough to where I feel he's a game changer at the next level and his accuracy can be fixed. Go back and look at the FSU game from this past season. He was throwing dimes everywhere and his receivers did everything they could to drop the football. Which they did. They weren't bad throws at all. I recall two being dropped in the end zone actually. And they were on the money.

The accuracy concerns is fair. I get it. If you look at the top five prospects that most circles seem to like the most right now they've been fairly accurate throughout their collegiate careers. With the exception of Allen. If Lamar Jackson had the career accuracy and stage that Deshuan Watson had coming out of Clemson he would probably be the slam dunk pick to CLE next month. But he's not. And we all know that. But he does have speed and ability that you can't coach. But his mechanics, accuracy, reading ability and so forth can all be coached and fixed in time.

Darnold - 64.9%
Rosen - 60.9%
Allen - 56.2%
Mayfield - 68.5%
Rudolph - 63.2%

For me. Personally. He's a HUGE insurance policy with a A TON of upside. And he's potentially a steal at the bottom of RD1. Rare athletes like that don't come by very often. He's very much like Michael Vick. He's just right handed. That's the only difference. He's actually a good fit in our offense too. It's a run heavy based offense that's fixing to be putting an emphasis on getting the tight ends more involved with a few deep shots to the receivers sprinkled into the playbook. This is a good fit for him. And if he's just asked to be the back up to Blake for 2018 and then going into 2019 it's either his job or he's still a quality back up with trade potential down the road.

We could use him as a rookie in certain situations and packages too. Just a thought. With all that said. You have to weigh out the needs and wants. Would I personally pass up on a starter like Hernandez at G? Probably not. I would want an instant starter with day one impact. If we take Jackson you're setting the stage for a lot of drama during training camp. And is he really worth the chance? That's not up to me to decide.

---

"What do I know of cultured ways, the gilt, the craft and the lie? I, who was born in a naked land and bred in the open sky. The subtle tongue, the sophist guile, they fail when the broadswords sing; Rush in and die, dogs - I was a man before I was a king."

I am not concerned with this. If he's on the board on draft night I would still be thrilled if we selected him. I watched him enough to where I feel he's a game changer at the next level and his accuracy can be fixed. Go back and look at the FSU game from this past season. He was throwing dimes everywhere and his receivers did everything they could to drop the football. Which they did. They weren't bad throws at all. I recall two being dropped in the end zone actually. And they were on the money.

The accuracy concerns is fair. I get it. If you look at the top five prospects that most circles seem to like the most right now they've been fairly accurate throughout their collegiate careers. With the exception of Allen. If Lamar Jackson had the career accuracy and stage that Deshuan Watson had coming out of Clemson he would probably be the slam dunk pick to CLE next month. But he's not. And we all know that. But he does have speed and ability that you can't coach. But his mechanics, accuracy, reading ability and so forth can all be coached and fixed in time.

Darnold - 64.9%
Rosen - 60.9%
Allen - 56.2%
Mayfield - 68.5%
Rudolph - 63.2%

For me. Personally. He's a HUGE insurance policy with a A TON of upside. And he's potentially a steal at the bottom of RD1. Rare athletes like that don't come by very often. He's very much like Michael Vick. He's just right handed. That's the only difference. He's actually a good fit in our offense too. It's a run heavy based offense that's fixing to be putting an emphasis on getting the tight ends more involved with a few deep shots to the receivers sprinkled into the playbook. This is a good fit for him. And if he's just asked to be the back up to Blake for 2018 and then going into 2019 it's either his job or he's still a quality back up with trade potential down the road.

We could use him as a rookie in certain situations and packages too. Just a thought. With all that said. You have to weigh out the needs and wants. Would I personally pass up on a starter like Hernandez at G? Probably not. I would want an instant starter with day one impact. If we take Jackson you're setting the stage for a lot of drama during training camp. And is he really worth the chance? That's not up to me to decide.

The RPO was made for Lamar. He would thrive. Look how well Blake runs out of the RPO... imagine Lamar. His best throw is also the slant... heavily used in the RPO. He would be DYNAMIC in this offense, which is really hard to find considering it's a run first O. I'd take him, sit him for a year, work on footwork/base/sliding, and not look back.

---