Yea they are a dime a dozen, that's why we don't have one. Oh wait we'll catch lightning in a bottle and draft one for the cheap in the 5th round. Draft a QB in the first! He might turn into Leftwich or Gabbert. Oh OH he's not Andrew Luck....ahhh [BAD WORD REMOVED] he going to suck!

I'm agreeing with you. I'm saying the ones who think we don't need a QB are delusional.

---

I think Bridgewater at 3 is better value than Mack at 3, yes.

 

<div> 
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL. Clown.
</div>
 
 
 

I'm sure the Seahakws would have still won the Super Bowl with Blaine Gabbert as their QB, guys.  So we should stick with this guy for at least 6 more years.  Then maybe we will be ready to draft a Quarterback.  In the meantime we can enjoy our 32nd ranked offense.

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

I'm sure the Seahakws would have still won the Super Bowl with Blaine Gabbert as their QB, guys.  So we should stick with this guy for at least 6 more years.  Then maybe we will be ready to draft a Quarterback.  In the meantime we can enjoy our 32nd ranked offense.

sure if srs

---

You're right.   You need a QB to win in this league.   And yet, not one of the final 4 teams used a first round draft pick to acquire their QB.  

 

Seattle- Russell Wilson- 3rd round

Denver- Peyton Manning- free agent

San Francisco- Colin Kaepernick- 2nd round

New England- Tom Brady- 6th round

 

So it is possible to get a great QB without using a first round pick on one.   The final four teams have proven it.  

Yes, they proved that if you find the outliers you're in really great shape. However, none of them banked on those guys. Seattle gave big FA money to Flynn. New England had a #1 overall draft pick there first. The Niners gave Alex Smith a big 2nd contract. 

 

The point is, it's great to find the outlier franchise QBs late in the draft, of course. However, if that is your plan you are more than likely going to lose your job because the stats are overwhelmingly against finding a true franchise QB after the first round.

---

The point he's trying to make is that it isn't as simple as just getting a good QB. There's way more to the game than having an elite QB. If last night's game wasn't proof of it, there's nothing anyone can do to convince someone of it. I think it's sort of a "look, I told you so" thread to all of the QB sack hangers who think that simply getting a good QB will fix all the woes of the Jaguars. Those people are either delusional, or just ignorant of what football is about.

The question is do you want to build up for a brief run of greatness, or do you want to contend for a decade? If you want long term success you have to have an elite QB. 

 

There's a reason you don't hear much about the '01/'02 Ravens, the '03/'04 Bucs, and probably why you won't be hearing much about the Seahawks defense in a couple more years. Sherman, Thomas, Chancellor, Wagner, Irvin...they are all going to get huge contracts very soon and only a couple of them will be by the Seahawks. Then you have Bryant, Mebane, and Clemons all 30 or older. You just can't hang on to an elite set of 11 guys in the salary cap age.

 

The stars get very expensive and you can only keep a couple, some of them get old, some of them get hurt. It's just impossible to sustain the level of all world defense you need to win a title w/o an elite QB. 

 

However, if you have an elite QB then your formula is complete. You can makes runs for a SB every single year if all you have is an elite QB and an average surrounding cast. I know which formula I'm choosing.

---

So to sum up, yes teams win super bowls with defense a lot. Unfortunately, it's this teams defense one year, and that teams defense the next time, and yet another teams defense the next time. That tells me all I need to know, give me the elite QB every time and I'll be knocking on the door of a super bowl every year, and not just for a one or two year push like those other teams.

---

Some people just don't seem to grasp that you can't take a conclusion, and then work backwards to get your initial condition.

 

Like "look at the final 4 QBs...none of them were acquired through 1st round picks" and then implying that we should also draft a QB in the lower rounds of just pick one up in free agency, because obviously it worked for those teams.

---

<FONT face="Comic Sans MS" size=3><B><FONT face=Verdana color=#ff6600 size=4></FONT></B></FONT>

So to sum up, yes teams win super bowls with defense a lot. Unfortunately, it's this teams defense one year, and that teams defense the next time, and yet another teams defense the next time. That tells me all I need to know, give me the elite QB every time and I'll be knocking on the door of a super bowl every year, and not just for a one or two year push like those other teams.

 

Agreed to an extent..

We have neither a franchise QB nor an elite defense, a good start would be getting 1 out of the 2 mentioned.

---

<FONT face="Comic Sans MS" size=3><B><FONT face=Verdana color=#ff6600 size=4></FONT></B></FONT>

I think. The Jaguars, should draft. The best! Available player because,


Then we will. Have. A better player on our,, team and. Not, the, other, teams

That sounds as if written in the way Obama would speak it.. I see what you did there too and I lol

---

Some people just don't seem to grasp that you can't take a conclusion, and then work backwards to get your initial condition.

 

Like "look at the final 4 QBs...none of them were acquired through 1st round picks" and then implying that we should also draft a QB in the lower rounds of just pick one up in free agency, because obviously it worked for those teams.

 

I wasn't trying to make that implication.   My point was a lot narrower than that.   My point was, it is wrong to say we must take a QB this year and we must take him at the top of the first round.   I'm not saying we shouldn't.   I'm saying it's wrong to say we absolutely have to.   

 

I just don't want us to force the pick and waste a high draft choice.  

---

Agreed to an extent..

We have neither a franchise QB nor an elite defense, a good start would be getting 1 out of the 2 mentioned.

Right, it's just the reasoning as to why you always take the QB if you are on the clock and a player you have graded as a franchise QB is available, no matter who else is still available. 

---

... 
 

However, if
you have an elite QB then your formula is complete. You can makes runs for a SB every single year if
all you have is an elite QB and an average surrounding cast. I know which formula I'm choosing.

 

Therein lies the rub, and what makes all of this so very fascinating. Yes, teams with elite QB's have a better shot than teams that don't, but not many teams have elite QB's. In my opinion, the reason for this is because it's really, really, really hard to find one. I'm not proposing that teams should stop trying to find them or to settle for not having one, but you must have a plan of action for when you don't have one since odds are, you probably won't.

 

While you're looking for that elite guy, what do you do? If the elite guy that you acquired turns out to not be elite, how do you overcome that?

---

I'm trying to make myself more informed and less opinionated.

Stop saying whatever stupid thing you're talking about and pay attention to all the interesting things I have to say!

The Jaguars has to win a few because they dont want to pay for the 1st overall pick...

---

Therein lies the rub, and what makes all of this so very fascinating. Yes, teams with elite QB's have a better shot than teams that don't, but not many teams have elite QB's. In my opinion, the reason for this is because it's really, really, really hard to find one. I'm not proposing that teams should stop trying to find them or to settle for not having one, but you must have a plan of action for when you don't have one since odds are, you probably won't.

 

While you're looking for that elite guy, what do you do? If the elite guy that you acquired turns out to not be elite, how do you overcome that?

It's true, it is hard to get an elite QB. However, I would argue it's easier to get an elite QB than it is to get an all time great '00 Ravens, '02 Bucs, '13 Seahawks level defense. Those are super hard to get and they go away quick. 

---

It's true, it is hard to get an elite QB. However, I would argue it's easier to get an elite QB than it is to get an all time great '00 Ravens, '02 Bucs, '13 Seahawks level defense. Those are super hard to get and they go away quick. 

 

But why does it have to be one or the other exclusively? It's not a situation of "either we pick a QB or DE, every time". You're allowed to add a WR, a LB, a cover guy, or even a top notch Offensive Lineman. Another point is that those Defenses didn't really fade as much as you assert. Baltimore maintained a Top 10 defense in terms of scoring and yardage with the exception of 2002, all the way through 2006. Tampa Bay did the same thing, including the one outlier season, through 2008. It remains to be seen what will become of the Seattle Defense.

 

I agree with you that an elite level QB trumps pretty much everything else, but there's nothing wrong with trying to build as strong of an overall roster until one becomes available either.

---

I'm trying to make myself more informed and less opinionated.

Stop saying whatever stupid thing you're talking about and pay attention to all the interesting things I have to say!

I'm agreeing with you. I'm saying the ones who think we don't need a QB are delusional.

I agree the team needs a QB because Blaine & Chad are not the answer but either is reaching and taking one 3rd overall that will still be there in 2nd the round or later.

---

I'm agreeing with you. I'm saying the ones who think we don't need a QB are delusional.

 

Who is saying this?  I haven't seen the first person say this.  Lying doesn't win an argument, rather, it's a sign of defeat.

---

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

So to sum up, yes teams win super bowls with defense a lot. Unfortunately, it's this teams defense one year, and that teams defense the next time, and yet another teams defense the next time. That tells me all I need to know, give me the elite QB every time and I'll be knocking on the door of a super bowl every year, and not just for a one or two year push like those other teams.

 

Sorry, but Luck is getting no further until there's a better team built around him.  And there's certainly no Luck in the draft this year.  So, don't get your hopes up that anything will be "solved" in a single offseason regarding the QB position.

---

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

While you're looking for that elite guy, what do you do? If the elite guy that you acquired turns out to not be elite, how do you overcome that?

 

You don't stop looking.  Just because you find a guy capable of leading you to the playoffs, doesn't mean you stop looking for a better Quarterback.  The position is too important, and it's part of the reason the Jaguars are as bad as they are right now.  We went far too long between drafting Quarterbacks.  From 2003 to 2010 we didn't draft a single Quarterback.  Not in round 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, or 7.  You can't do that.  Even when you have Peyton Manning.  

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

Sorry, but Luck is getting no further until there's a better team built around him.  And there's certainly no Luck in the draft this year.  So, don't get your hopes up that anything will be "solved" in a single offseason regarding the QB position.

I don't expect any QB to come in an be elite in their rookie year. I think Teddy, Bortles, and Carr all have elite potential after developing though, and if Dave agrees you can bet one will be taken at 3. 

---