I'm with Kane on this, no matter who we bring in, I fully support them and provide some patience to allow their plan of success to hopefully bring us our glory. I think Khan's patience has also worn out especially with us only having 1 win so far.

I think we will see both Caldwell and Marrone shown the door this offseason.

I just hope that we choose the right pairing of GM and coach after so many years of ineptitude.

---

Extremely unsure how you don't see it's not an either or. Nobody is saying to draft for need like Arians is opposed to....need is automatically factored into the process by NFL teams. 

Also included is depth of class to correctly place which position to target, the contract status of players on the roster (which the article you linked agrees with) and also positional value. Remember NFLs draft with a several year window in mind, not just the upcoming year. 

If you want to use Taven Bryan as a test case. Was Taven a need pick? Or a "BAP" pick? The reality is.. He was both! He was in the highest tier of player available for the FO but also a need as Malik was going to cut the following year. He wasn't one or the other

Not sure how you dont understand certain teams reach for a player of need because of need instead of taking the better player at another position where it is not as great of a need. Caldwell has done it numerous times as have most fired GMs. Bryan was the case of them thinking this team was built and drafting for the future, was a needs pick because as you said Malik was going to get cut, no way they thought he was the best player available.  Im a Gators fan and I didnt even feel that way or like the pick

Taven was projected to go in that range by pretty everyone. The Jags said he was on the top of their board and independent reporting indicated the same. You can call him a 'need' pick all you want but there isn't anything to suggest he wasn't drafted for being in the top tier of their board, bar him being a bust and someone you didn't like. 

The reality we he was both. I hated the Chaisson pick but it was also pretty obvious he was on the top tier of their board while also being a big need at that pick. 

People using "player ended up being bad = he was a need pick" is incredibly lazy

---

Also I'm 90% sure Caldwell stays, 80% sure Marrone and the coaching staff is gone though

---

Not sure how you dont understand certain teams reach for a player of need because of need instead of taking the better player at another position where it is not as great of a need. Caldwell has done it numerous times as have most fired GMs. Bryan was the case of them thinking this team was built and drafting for the future, was a needs pick because as you said Malik was going to get cut, no way they thought he was the best player available.  Im a Gators fan and I didnt even feel that way or like the pick

Taven was projected to go in that range by pretty everyone. The Jags said he was on the top of their board and independent reporting indicated the same. You can call him a 'need' pick all you want but there isn't anything to suggest he wasn't drafted for being in the top tier of their board, bar him being a bust and someone you didn't like. 

The reality we he was both. I hated the Chaisson pick but it was also pretty obvious he was on the top tier of their board while also being a big need at that pick. 

People using "player ended up being bad = he was a need pick" is incredibly lazy

---

Also I'm 90% sure Caldwell stays, 80% sure Marrone and the coaching staff is gone though

They always say who they take is the top player on their board. They said Chaisson was a top 4 player on their board yet they took CJ at 9, cmon man. But if what you say is true, then that has been the problem all along.  They need to throw need out the window and take BPA because ever position is a need other than RB.  Hell if we are in the 2nd or 3rd and the BPA is RB take him.

---

Its funny you think all teams draft the same and that some teams don't draft for need over BPA. Multiple GMs have talked about the need vs BPA. Hell, Dave has even talked about it in certain rounds. This has been going on forever

---

Taven was projected to go in that range by pretty everyone. The Jags said he was on the top of their board and independent reporting indicated the same. You can call him a 'need' pick all you want but there isn't anything to suggest he wasn't drafted for being in the top tier of their board, bar him being a bust and someone you didn't like. 

The reality we he was both. I hated the Chaisson pick but it was also pretty obvious he was on the top tier of their board while also being a big need at that pick. 

People using "player ended up being bad = he was a need pick" is incredibly lazy

---

Also I'm 90% sure Caldwell stays, 80% sure Marrone and the coaching staff is gone though

They always say who they take is the top player on their board. They said Chaisson was a top 4 player on their board yet they took CJ at 9, cmon man. But if what you say is true, then that has been the problem all along.  They need to throw need out the window and take BPA because ever position is a need other than RB.  Hell if we are in the 2nd or 3rd and the BPA is RB take him.

---

Its funny you think all teams draft the same and that some teams don't draft for need over BPA.  Multiple GMs have talked about the need vs BPA.  Hell, Dave has even talked about it in certain rounds.  This has been going on forever

Well teams are never going to say "this guy was further down our boards but we took him here anyway"
Every GM ends up with the exact guys they always wanted... it's coach speak for GMs.

If Caldwell's Board was Burrow, Young, Henderson, Chaisson... he's worse than anyone gave him credit for lol

---

Taven was projected to go in that range by pretty everyone. The Jags said he was on the top of their board and independent reporting indicated the same. You can call him a 'need' pick all you want but there isn't anything to suggest he wasn't drafted for being in the top tier of their board, bar him being a bust and someone you didn't like. 

The reality we he was both. I hated the Chaisson pick but it was also pretty obvious he was on the top tier of their board while also being a big need at that pick. 

People using "player ended up being bad = he was a need pick" is incredibly lazy

---

Also I'm 90% sure Caldwell stays, 80% sure Marrone and the coaching staff is gone though

They always say who they take is the top player on their board. They said Chaisson was a top 4 player on their board yet they took CJ at 9, cmon man. But if what you say is true, then that has been the problem all along.  They need to throw need out the window and take BPA because ever position is a need other than RB.  Hell if we are in the 2nd or 3rd and the BPA is RB take him.

---

Its funny you think all teams draft the same and that some teams don't draft for need over BPA.  Multiple GMs have talked about the need vs BPA.  Hell, Dave has even talked about it in certain rounds.  This has been going on forever

that's exactly my point though. You saying Taven Bryan wasn't in their top tier for that pick isn't actually backed by anything. It's not a pick independent of BPA available because you say it is. 

And no I don't think teams draft the same at all. Once again it's not one or the other, it's both! Just to varying degrees. 

For some picks they are both the best player available and the biggest need. For others they might be the best player left at a weak position in the draft, and at a valuable position so you take them ahead of other players. Sometimes there's a player you have ranked highly but know the next few players in that positional pool runs deeper so hold pat etc etc 

The need/BAP thing isn't supposed to mean a BAP pick is made independent of need or vice versa. Rather you can lean one way while still paying heed of the other. You're not just selecting players for who you need now...but rather what your roster will need over the next few years and long term

---

They always say who they take is the top player on their board. They said Chaisson was a top 4 player on their board yet they took CJ at 9, cmon man. But if what you say is true, then that has been the problem all along.  They need to throw need out the window and take BPA because ever position is a need other than RB.  Hell if we are in the 2nd or 3rd and the BPA is RB take him.

---

Its funny you think all teams draft the same and that some teams don't draft for need over BPA.  Multiple GMs have talked about the need vs BPA.  Hell, Dave has even talked about it in certain rounds.  This has been going on forever

Well teams are never going to say "this guy was further down our boards but we took him here anyway"
Every GM ends up with the exact guys they always wanted... it's coach speak for GMs.

If Caldwell's Board was Burrow, Young, Henderson, Chaisson... he's worse than anyone gave him credit for lol

Thats my point lol

---

https://thedraftnetwork.com/articles/kyl...-nfl-draft

---

https://thedraftnetwork.com/articles/kyl...-nfl-draft

Arm strength and athleticism.  Been mentioned a number of times on here.  If Peyton Manning were to come out of a draft in today's NFL, he would be talked about as a 2nd round prospect.  Why Brees fell to the 2nd, Brady fell and so on.

---

Same with Eli, he would go in the 2md round if he was to come out in today's NFL. 11 rings between the 4 guys I just mentioned

---

https://thedraftnetwork.com/articles/kyl...-nfl-draft

Arm strength and athleticism.  Been mentioned a number of times on here.  If Peyton Manning were to come out of a draft in today's NFL, he would be talked about as a 2nd round prospect.  Why Brees fell to the 2nd, Brady fell and so on.

---

Same with Eli, he would go in the 2md round if he was to come out in today's NFL.  11 rings between the 4 guys I just mentioned

For every Manning, Brees and Brady, there are many many many John Beck's, Brady Quinn's, JP Losman's....

---

https://thedraftnetwork.com/articles/kyl...-nfl-draft

Arm strength and athleticism.  Been mentioned a number of times on here.  If Peyton Manning were to come out of a draft in today's NFL, he would be talked about as a 2nd round prospect.  Why Brees fell to the 2nd, Brady fell and so on.

---

Same with Eli, he would go in the 2md round if he was to come out in today's NFL.  11 rings between the 4 guys I just mentioned

Well Eli isn’t really good so there’s that.

Also, Brady has plenty of arm strength to fit balls into tight windows. Been doing it his whole career. Arm strength isn’t just the ability to throw far.

And I’m making no judgements here. Just posting an article about the current crop of QBs.

---

https://syndication.bleacherreport.com/a...d.amp.html

---

Arm strength and athleticism.  Been mentioned a number of times on here.  If Peyton Manning were to come out of a draft in today's NFL, he would be talked about as a 2nd round prospect.  Why Brees fell to the 2nd, Brady fell and so on.

---

Same with Eli, he would go in the 2md round if he was to come out in today's NFL.  11 rings between the 4 guys I just mentioned

Well Eli isn’t really good so there’s that.

Also, Brady has plenty of arm strength to fit balls into tight windows. Been doing it his whole career. Arm strength isn’t just the ability to throw far.

And I’m making no judgements here. Just posting an article about the current crop of QBs.

Who said it was?  Have you watched any Florida games this year?  Trask doesn't have a great arm like a Allen or Herbert but its average at the very least and he fits the ball into tight windows almost every game.  We do have big WRs but its not like Ohio St where their WRs are running 5 yards in front of the defender almost every play.  Here's a good write up

https://syndication.bleacherreport.com/a...d.amp.html

---

Arm strength and athleticism.  Been mentioned a number of times on here.  If Peyton Manning were to come out of a draft in today's NFL, he would be talked about as a 2nd round prospect.  Why Brees fell to the 2nd, Brady fell and so on.

---

Same with Eli, he would go in the 2md round if he was to come out in today's NFL.  11 rings between the 4 guys I just mentioned

For every Manning, Brees and Brady, there are many many many John Beck's, Brady Quinn's, JP Losman's....

Are you trying to say most athletic QBs make it? Let's look at the rings. Athletic QBs vs your true pocket passer and see who has more

---

For every Manning, Brees and Brady, there are many many many John Beck's, Brady Quinn's, JP Losman's....

Are you trying to say most athletic QBs make it?  Let's look at the rings.  Athletic QBs vs your true pocket passer and see who has more

Athletic QB doesn’t mean a runner.

Mahomes is an athletic QB.

---

Are you trying to say most athletic QBs make it?  Let's look at the rings.  Athletic QBs vs your true pocket passer and see who has more

Athletic QB doesn’t mean a runner.

Mahomes is an athletic QB.

I dont have an issue with an athletic QB and I think its a good thing to be athletic at any position.  But when you start letting it trump the most important traits for a QB i think you are making a mistake.

---

For every Manning, Brees and Brady, there are many many many John Beck's, Brady Quinn's, JP Losman's....

Are you trying to say most athletic QBs make it?  Let's look at the rings.  Athletic QBs vs your true pocket passer and see who has more

Did I say that? No.

I'm pointing out how you cherry picked those three. It's not as easy to find those players, because if it was then every team would have one and not tractor-driving Todd's.

Also, I'm just going to point out the flawed logic in your athletic QBs vs true pocket passer statement. First, football is a team sport so there is a lot more that goes into teams that win the big one than just one piece. Obviously, the QB position is arguably the most important position and has the most impact on every play but it's also the hardest to fill in.

Furthermore, I'd go out on a limb and say that these QBs who are more athletic (or even dual-threat as well) have become a recent phenomenon - where the players are currently the biggest, fastest, strongest, and most talented that we have EVER seen. So the track record for these "athletic" QBs are not as vast as the pocket passers who have littered the league since it's inception even with the few QBs who were athletic for their times back in the day. Another thing, the game has certainly changed immensely from previous era's and is moving towards fast-paced, dynamic offenses.

Like the previous poster mentioned, athletic doesn't just denote a "running" QB. Mahomes and others like Wilson, Jackson, etc will certainly add to that tally.

---

Are you trying to say most athletic QBs make it?  Let's look at the rings.  Athletic QBs vs your true pocket passer and see who has more

Did I say that? No.

I'm pointing out how you cherry picked those three. It's not as easy to find those players, because if it was then every team would have one and not tractor-driving Todd's.

Also, I'm just going to point out the flawed logic in your athletic QBs vs true pocket passer statement. First, football is a team sport so there is a lot more that goes into teams that win the big one than just one piece. Obviously, the QB position is arguably the most important position and has the most impact on every play but it's also the hardest to fill in.

Furthermore, I'd go out on a limb and say that these QBs who are more athletic (or even dual-threat as well) have become a recent phenomenon - where the players are currently the biggest, fastest, strongest, and most talented that we have EVER seen. So the track record for these "athletic" QBs are not as vast as the pocket passers who have littered the league since it's inception even with the few QBs who were athletic for their times back in the day. Another thing, the game has certainly changed immensely from previous era's and is moving towards fast-paced, dynamic offenses.

Like the previous poster mentioned, athletic doesn't just denote a "running" QB. Mahomes and others like Wilson, Jackson, etc will certainly add to that tally.

Well said.

Allen, Mahomes, Wilson, Murray, Burrow, Herbert....

Athletic QBs who can do just about everything.

---

Are you trying to say most athletic QBs make it?  Let's look at the rings.  Athletic QBs vs your true pocket passer and see who has more

Did I say that? No.

I'm pointing out how you cherry picked those three. It's not as easy to find those players, because if it was then every team would have one and not tractor-driving Todd's.

Also, I'm just going to point out the flawed logic in your athletic QBs vs true pocket passer statement. First, football is a team sport so there is a lot more that goes into teams that win the big one than just one piece. Obviously, the QB position is arguably the most important position and has the most impact on every play but it's also the hardest to fill in.

Furthermore, I'd go out on a limb and say that these QBs who are more athletic (or even dual-threat as well) have become a recent phenomenon - where the players are currently the biggest, fastest, strongest, and most talented that we have EVER seen. So the track record for these "athletic" QBs are not as vast as the pocket passers who have littered the league since it's inception even with the few QBs who were athletic for their times back in the day. Another thing, the game has certainly changed immensely from previous era's and is moving towards fast-paced, dynamic offenses.

Like the previous poster mentioned, athletic doesn't just denote a "running" QB. Mahomes and others like Wilson, Jackson, etc will certainly add to that tally.

Cmon man, you shouldn't lump Jackson in with Wilson and Mahomes.  Nowhere near the other 2 as a passer

---

Did I say that? No.

I'm pointing out how you cherry picked those three. It's not as easy to find those players, because if it was then every team would have one and not tractor-driving Todd's.

Also, I'm just going to point out the flawed logic in your athletic QBs vs true pocket passer statement. First, football is a team sport so there is a lot more that goes into teams that win the big one than just one piece. Obviously, the QB position is arguably the most important position and has the most impact on every play but it's also the hardest to fill in.

Furthermore, I'd go out on a limb and say that these QBs who are more athletic (or even dual-threat as well) have become a recent phenomenon - where the players are currently the biggest, fastest, strongest, and most talented that we have EVER seen. So the track record for these "athletic" QBs are not as vast as the pocket passers who have littered the league since it's inception even with the few QBs who were athletic for their times back in the day. Another thing, the game has certainly changed immensely from previous era's and is moving towards fast-paced, dynamic offenses.

Like the previous poster mentioned, athletic doesn't just denote a "running" QB. Mahomes and others like Wilson, Jackson, etc will certainly add to that tally.

Well said.

Allen, Mahomes, Wilson, Murray, Burrow, Herbert....

Athletic QBs who can do just about everything.

Didn't you say Allen and Herbert sucked?  Once again, athleticism is good but its not gonna trump the more important traits to me for a QB, some it will though

---

Did I say that? No.

I'm pointing out how you cherry picked those three. It's not as easy to find those players, because if it was then every team would have one and not tractor-driving Todd's.

Also, I'm just going to point out the flawed logic in your athletic QBs vs true pocket passer statement. First, football is a team sport so there is a lot more that goes into teams that win the big one than just one piece. Obviously, the QB position is arguably the most important position and has the most impact on every play but it's also the hardest to fill in.

Furthermore, I'd go out on a limb and say that these QBs who are more athletic (or even dual-threat as well) have become a recent phenomenon - where the players are currently the biggest, fastest, strongest, and most talented that we have EVER seen. So the track record for these "athletic" QBs are not as vast as the pocket passers who have littered the league since it's inception even with the few QBs who were athletic for their times back in the day. Another thing, the game has certainly changed immensely from previous era's and is moving towards fast-paced, dynamic offenses.

Like the previous poster mentioned, athletic doesn't just denote a "running" QB. Mahomes and others like Wilson, Jackson, etc will certainly add to that tally.

Cmon man, you shouldn't lump Jackson in with Wilson and Mahomes.  Nowhere near the other 2 as a passer

---

Well said.

Allen, Mahomes, Wilson, Murray, Burrow, Herbert....

Athletic QBs who can do just about everything.

Didn't you say Allen and Herbert sucked?  Once again, athleticism is good but its not gonna trump the more important traits to me for a QB, some it will though

Herbert? No. Did I think he would be this good this fast? Also no but I didn’t hate him.

Allen. 100% yes. He’s grown a TON as a passer this year which I didn’t see coming.

I also think if Trask was athletic, your tune would change. There’s one reason your loving Trask and it’s because he’s a Gator.

---

Did I say that? No.

I'm pointing out how you cherry picked those three. It's not as easy to find those players, because if it was then every team would have one and not tractor-driving Todd's.

Also, I'm just going to point out the flawed logic in your athletic QBs vs true pocket passer statement. First, football is a team sport so there is a lot more that goes into teams that win the big one than just one piece. Obviously, the QB position is arguably the most important position and has the most impact on every play but it's also the hardest to fill in.

Furthermore, I'd go out on a limb and say that these QBs who are more athletic (or even dual-threat as well) have become a recent phenomenon - where the players are currently the biggest, fastest, strongest, and most talented that we have EVER seen. So the track record for these "athletic" QBs are not as vast as the pocket passers who have littered the league since it's inception even with the few QBs who were athletic for their times back in the day. Another thing, the game has certainly changed immensely from previous era's and is moving towards fast-paced, dynamic offenses.

Like the previous poster mentioned, athletic doesn't just denote a "running" QB. Mahomes and others like Wilson, Jackson, etc will certainly add to that tally.

Cmon man, you shouldn't lump Jackson in with Wilson and Mahomes.  Nowhere near the other 2 as a passer

I lumped him in because of the athleticism trait - and how he is on the extreme end of the spectrum. I agree with you, Lamar is definitely not in the same echelon as Mahomes or Wilson in terms of passing ability - I just included him with the other two to give you a range of these so called athletic QBs. Also, going back to my other point, while QB is a significant variable in the team success equation, it is only one part. And for that, I still think the Ravens still have a good chance of making/winning the Superbowl because of how good their team is.

But yeah, he's definitely not on the level of Mahomes/Wilson in terms of passing ability yet.

---

Cmon man, you shouldn't lump Jackson in with Wilson and Mahomes.  Nowhere near the other 2 as a passer

---

Didn't you say Allen and Herbert sucked?  Once again, athleticism is good but its not gonna trump the more important traits to me for a QB, some it will though

Herbert? No. Did I think he would be this good this fast? Also no but I didn’t hate him.

Allen. 100% yes. He’s grown a TON as a passer this year which I didn’t see coming.

I also think if Trask was athletic, your tune would change. There’s one reason your loving Trask and it’s because he’s a Gator.

I have already said I think being athlet is a good thing.  Trask don't shy away though sometimes when he runs, he looks like big Ben.  He's big and has run some defenders over even though he is kinda slow

---