I'm not super high on any of them (not even Horn or Samuel), but there are a lot of them and I think there are like 10 pretty decent ones. Just take the one that falls to 65 after loading up on the lines and hopefully a playmaker and call it a day.

---

Well you already know that those are my 5 dreams exactly.

That's exactly what I don't want to do, like Dave and reach for a position just because you feel like you need one

Who is the reach? I didn't say reach for a corner I said there are like 10 of them that I think are pretty even that will go in the late 1st to 3rd round range and we can afford to wait until 65 and just take whichever ones of them are left. It's not going to be a reach.

Taking Samuel at 33 when there's no way Stokes, Newsome, Robinson, Campbell, Meli, Gowan, Molden, or Joseph (or probably more...) all go before 65 is the reach.

---

That's exactly what I don't want to do, like Dave and reach for a position just because you feel like you need one

Who is the reach? I didn't say reach for a corner I said there are like 10 of them that I think are pretty even that will go in the late 1st to 3rd round range and we can afford to wait until 65 and just take whichever ones of them are left. It's not going to be a reach.

Taking Samuel at 33 when there's no way Stokes, Newsome, Robinson, Campbell, Meli, Gowan, Molden, or Joseph (or probably more...) all go before 65 is the reach.

I never said taking Samuel at 33, I said I would look at him in the 2nd, if there is a player I think is better and have higher on my board I'm taking that player.  45 is probably a better spot for Samuel I'd look at.  Just throwing out a position and taking whoever is available is reaching for need, it's one of the main reasons Dave got fired, drafting positions to fill a hole instead of taking the BPA

---

You are dense as a cinder block. There is no way you are innocently this incapable of reading and comprehending what people say.

---

You are dense as a cinder block. There is no way you are innocently this incapable of reading and comprehending what people say.

It not that hard, im quoting exactly what you said and want to do.  Just like at 25 you want to take a tackle regardless.  " I think there are like 10 pretty decent ones. Just take the one that falls to 65"

That's exactly what Dave used to do, look at a single position and draft one to fill a hole/need regardless if there are better players at other positions.    If they are the BPA then I hope Urban takes one, but I'm not drafting a position to fill a need because we can use an upgrade at almost every position, hopefully we let the draft come to us. 

---

And I've said twice now that they aren't reaches at that point, they are values that have fallen to 65. I don't get how that is so hard to understand.

Maybe it will help to reference Caldwells best pick since you want to try to twist my words. Caldwell was quoted as saying that he took Linder because he wanted an inside olineman and he just waited until the last one they had graded as a starter was left and then they took him.

That's pretty much exactly what I am saying with this group of cornerbacks. I think there are 2 really good ones that will be gone way before pick 25, there is Horn who is good and may or may not be there at 25, and then the next group has like 7 corners that are graded pretty equally to me that could go anywhere from 33 to 65. I am saying that we should simply wait and take the best value one that falls to 65 and use picks 33 and 45 on better valued players. It's really not that complicated.

---

Barmore was my top guy I felt could maybe realistically fall, but being we are moving to a 3-4 I'm not sure that would be the best fit. 3 tech in a 4-3 I think is the perfect fit for him

---

Barmore was my top guy I felt could maybe realistically fall, but being we are moving to a 3-4 I'm not sure that would be the best fit.  3 tech in a 4-3 I think is the perfect fit for him

So you’re not BAP?

You’re passing on him because he doesn’t fit your scheme? Lol

This is why just saying “I’m gonna take the BAP” is never true.

---

Barmore was my top guy I felt could maybe realistically fall, but being we are moving to a 3-4 I'm not sure that would be the best fit.  3 tech in a 4-3 I think is the perfect fit for him

So you’re not BAP?

You’re passing on him because he doesn’t fit your scheme? Lol

This is why just saying “I’m gonna take the BAP” is never true.

It's BAP for the system you run. It's always been that way. If you draft a great player that doesn't fit your scheme, that's not a good pick. Period. Chaisson was not a good pick for the scheme we ran last season. He is in no way, shape or form a 4-3 DE.

---

So you’re not BAP?

You’re passing on him because he doesn’t fit your scheme? Lol

This is why just saying “I’m gonna take the BAP” is never true.

It's BAP for the system you run. It's always been that way. If you draft a great player that doesn't fit your scheme, that's not a good pick. Period. Chaisson was not a good pick for the scheme we ran last season. He is in no way, shape or form a 4-3 DE.

That’s the point though. BAP is subjective. So criticizing a draft pick because they’re not YOUR BAP doesn’t mean the draft selection was a reach.

And if Barmore is there at 25, he should be the pick regardless of scheme. He’s got Chris Jones ability and if the Jags can’t find a way to make him “fit” they have bigger issues.

---

Barmore was my top guy I felt could maybe realistically fall, but being we are moving to a 3-4 I'm not sure that would be the best fit.  3 tech in a 4-3 I think is the perfect fit for him

So you’re not BAP?

You’re passing on him because he doesn’t fit your scheme? Lol

This is why just saying “I’m gonna take the BAP” is never true.

I dont think he is BPA in a 3-4 which is the defense we are moving to, cmon now

---

So you’re not BAP?

You’re passing on him because he doesn’t fit your scheme? Lol

This is why just saying “I’m gonna take the BAP” is never true.

It's BAP for the system you run. It's always been that way. If you draft a great player that doesn't fit your scheme, that's not a good pick. Period. Chaisson was not a good pick for the scheme we ran last season. He is in no way, shape or form a 4-3 DE.

Exactly lol, it's a little hard for some to grasp

---

It's BAP for the system you run. It's always been that way. If you draft a great player that doesn't fit your scheme, that's not a good pick. Period. Chaisson was not a good pick for the scheme we ran last season. He is in no way, shape or form a 4-3 DE.

That’s the point though. BAP is subjective. So criticizing a draft pick because they’re not YOUR BAP doesn’t mean the draft selection was a reach.

And if Barmore is there at 25, he should be the pick regardless of scheme. He’s got Chris Jones ability and if the Jags can’t find a way to make him “fit” they have bigger issues.

BPA for who you feel is BPA.  Saying there are 10 good CBs so just take one at 65 isn't the BPA on his board, im not talking about my board.  He's taking one at that because of need, I doubt he has everyone of those CB there higher rated than every player left available.  Just like he said he want a LT at 25 regardless because he likes 10 LTs.  I doubt he has all of those 10 LTs rated higher than every other player in the draft.  That is needs drafting, some people like to draft like that I just disagree with it

---

So you’re not BAP?

You’re passing on him because he doesn’t fit your scheme? Lol

This is why just saying “I’m gonna take the BAP” is never true.

I dont think he is BPA in a 3-4 which is the defense we are moving to, cmon now

---

It's BAP for the system you run. It's always been that way. If you draft a great player that doesn't fit your scheme, that's not a good pick. Period. Chaisson was not a good pick for the scheme we ran last season. He is in no way, shape or form a 4-3 DE.

Exactly lol, it's a little hard for some to grasp

Sorry but I’m not eliminating players strictly because they may not fit my “scheme”. Not to mention, the Jags haven’t declared they’re a 3-4 and this narrative that they’re strictly a 3-4 is false. They are going to run both all year.

Barmore is a top 20 player in this draft regardless of scheme. If he falls to 25, that’s great value. 

Lastly, why are you trying to say it’s hard for some to grasp when you had someone else make the point for you? Its called a difference of opinion. You may eliminate drafting players because they don’t fit your scheme but I’m not willing to do that. I’m grabbing elite talent and then making a scheme to maximize that talent.

---

My perfect first 5 are:
1. TLaw
2. Horn/Bateman/Rosseau
3. Moore/Ojulari
4. Nixon/Friermuth/McNeil
5. Melifonwu/Brevin Jordan/Holland/Cisco

---

Barmore would definitely fit in a 3-4, but he is very unlikely to be there at 25.

---

I dont think he is BPA in a 3-4 which is the defense we are moving to, cmon now

---

Exactly lol, it's a little hard for some to grasp

Sorry but I’m not eliminating players strictly because they may not fit my “scheme”. Not to mention, the Jags haven’t declared they’re a 3-4 and this narrative that they’re strictly a 3-4 is false. They are going to run both all year.

Barmore is a top 20 player in this draft regardless of scheme. If he falls to 25, that’s great value. 

Lastly, why are you trying to say it’s hard for some to grasp when you had someone else make the point for you? Its called a difference of opinion. You may eliminate drafting players because they don’t fit your scheme but I’m not willing to do that. I’m grabbing elite talent and then making a scheme to maximize that talent.

I was one of the first people on here to say Id like Barmore but i don't think he is elite.  I never said I would eliminate drafting him but I think he would be better suited playing in a 4-3 and have more guys rated over him than if we stayed a 4-3.    I think we will see much more 3-4 this year than a 4-3.  No team runs just 1 defense but I think our base will be a 3-4  especially when they find out Allen and Chassion are better standing up as OLB in a 3-4.  Certain players are better suited in different defenses and I think the defensive players we draft this year they look towards a 3-4.  Urban is gonna go in this draft and draft players that fits what he likes to do.

---

Why do you think Barmore wouldn't make an excellent 3-4 DE?

---

Why do you think Barmore wouldn't make an excellent 3-4 DE?

I just think he would be a better 3 tech and would be better penetrating up the middle in a 4-3.  You like him better as a 3-4 end?

---

I think 3/5 techs do pretty much the same thing no matter what front it is. What do you think Donald and Watt do in their 3-4s? They sure aren't nose tackles. I think Barmore will make a great 3 or 5 tech in any defense.

---

I think 3/5 techs do pretty much the same thing no matter what front it is. What do you think Donald and Watt do in their 3-4s? They sure aren't nose tackles. I think Barmore will make a great 3 or 5 tech in any defense.

Cmon man lol, you're really comparing Donald and Watt to Barmore?  Lmao

---

I want my 5 tech a little more athletic and quicker, different gaps,
something I feel Barmore is not. You probably think 4-3 DEs and 3-4 OLBs are the same as well. They are similar but they are not the same

---

I want mine to be versatile. 3-4 DE need to be able to play both the 3 and 5 gaps, and in Barmore's case I think he can be killer as a 0/1 on clear passing downs too.

---