As per usual with new regimes, I'm cautiously optimistic, but we've all seen maiden voyages crash violently upon the rocks a few times now. 

Regarding the red bit on NT:  I think Fatukasi should be a notable upgrade over Hamilton vs the run at nose tackle. Hamilton may have better upside on creating QB pressure/pocket collapse in the pass game though. Hopefully they find the optimum ways to distribute and rotate those guys.

Man...don't Jaguars fans knit it about maiden voyages?!?

I could see that run stuffing vs pass rushing distinction.  To me, I would think that means Fatukasi would start and maybe Hamilton might be moved to end, since the coaches have repeatedly stated the defensive emphasis will be on stopping the run.

Yep.

Fatukasi at nose and Hamilton at one of the 3-4 DE spots on run sets makes sense to me. 
If they are still in 3-4 and want to get after the QB, then Hamilton at nose with Key and Smoot on either side will work. 

In the 4-2 look they'll have a wide range of options to line up in the front 4.  Excited about that.

---

OLM, why do you think TE need would be prioritized ahead of ILB or Safety? 

Just curious. All three spots have at least one good player with with some questions around their counterparts at the position, so do you think the draft class at TE dictates a pick in the first 3 rounds, or do you think the need at TE supersedes the need at the other two spots?

Quite simply, Pederson's offense revolves around the TE. We signed Evan Engram, but the reality of the situation is that he has only started every game in a season, just once in his career and he's only on a 1 year deal. If he can stay healthy, I believe he could be our most significant offseason acquisition, but even if he does, he probably leaves for greener pastures after the season. In Pederson's offense, he uses a lot of 2 TE sets. I'm not sold on Dan Arnold. He dropped several key passes last season and had fumble issues as well. I believe Pederson will want to draft a TE early on that fits his style of play to be the centerpiece of the future. This is a very good TE class and we need to take advantage of the talent rich pool. You normally don't see TE classes this deep. It would be beneficial for us to get our TE of the future from this class. Having Engram and Arnold would allow us to bring the rookie along slowly and allow him to develop without rushing him into a starting role, which could be very important in the long run. TE's normally take a while to reach their peak. 

As far as ILB and Safety goes, my expectations are tempered. We cannot fix every major hole in one season. We have a major upgrade at ILB with the signing of Foye Oluokun and I believe the team is very high on Dylan Moses if he is 100%. I don't think we will completely ignore the ILB position, I just think we will wait until day 3 to address it. I think there will be very solid ILB's still available on day 3. They may not end up being superstars, but they could probably be significant upgrades over Damien Wilson and Myles Jack. One player to keep an eye on is how far Damone Clark falls. He was one of my top ILB prospects in this entire draft, but just had surgery to repair a herniated disc and will miss the entire 2022 season. I thought he would be taken anywhere from the late second round to somewhere in round 3, before the surgery. Now, if he falls into round 4, do we pull the trigger? I know Baalke has a reputation for taking injured players and in this case, I would see the benefit. I also like less heralded linebackers like Mike Rose of Iowa State, Diego [BLEEP] of Navy, D'Marco Jackson of Appalachian State and Kyron Johnson of Kansas who I have seen projected to move inside. I believe all of these guys could be in play on day 3.

As far as Safety, I believe this position is just less of a priority. The addition of Darious Williams should make our secondary better as a whole. I expect very good things from Andre Cisco now that Urban Meyer is gone. Cisco should've been starting last season. I also really like Rudy Ford as our top backup. He did some nice things last season. IMO, he should be starting opposite Cisco. I know Rayshawn Jenkins was a liability before getting injured, but he is still on a significant contract and I cannot see Baalke ditching him after one season. I believe this is an area that will have to wait until next season to be fully addressed. I think the addition of Williams and Cisco to the secondary should minimize the poor play of Jenkins. I believe we will draft a Safety very late, but we could still get production from that player. Guys like Tycen Anderson of Toledo, Bryan Cook of Cincinnati, Smoke Monday of Auburn, Yusuf Corker of Kentucky, J.T. Woods of Baylor and Dane Belton of Iowa could be targets in the later rounds.

Strongly agree with your TE analysis.  Though we fans largely viewed Arnold as an upgrade last year, i think Arnold is a 3rd TE under Pederson.  As for ILB, I'm torn on Dylan Moses.  i want to be excited about what he can do, but I don't want to get too excited about a guy who has not played a down of NFL football and hasn't played in over a year.  Sucks to hear about Clark.  I do think Baalke can find LBs and this is a pretty deep ILB class.  Provided Cisco moves into the starting lineup, I don't see S as any real need.  If they stumble across a S later on, fine, but I don't necessarily list it as a need.

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

Quite simply, Pederson's offense revolves around the TE.

I am hoping Pederson is a flexible coach that will mold his offense around his personnel and not try to shoehorn our personnel into his old Eagles' offenses.

Simply put, if Pederson forces this team to run a lot of 12 personnel it's going to be a bad time.

---

Replying to Bullseye

I still like Laviska, Treadwell, and Agnew.    Do they keep 7 WRs?  If they keep only 6, who is the odd man out?  Probably Laviska since his skill set is redundant with Kirk (and maybe Moore from my example)?  Or if you cut Agnew, who takes over return duties?  Of the traded and free agent WRs, Cooper was the one I really wanted.  He's a true #1 and his cost in dollars and picks would not have broken the bank.  Apparently, the Cowboys accommodated his wishes to some extent.  And the reporting was that Baalke was being a cheapskate about taking on the entire salary.  That's really the main ding in free agency on the front office this time.  Other than that one transaction, I don't see how it could have gone much better. I'm cautiously optimistic about the draft because of Pederson's influence.

And to your other point, yes there could have been a middle ground between 0 new starters and 12-13 new starters.  I'm sorry I didn't write clearly about that.  If we had gotten only 4 or 5, I would regard that as disappointing and ineffectual.  We needed (and need) good churn for at least one more off season.

---

Fix the O-Line!

I will also start with Marty's as the base as I largely agree.  My additional comments:

1.  If we're using over 50% as the definition of a starter, I would predict Zay Jones as well.  He'll surpass it as I think he'll likely start early in the year over a rookie and even if beat out mid-season, would still get significant playing time as a top reserve and a situational player

2.  I agree with 2 immediate starters in the draft.  I think we take Hutchinson who will start.  I think an inside linebacker taken early would also be an immediate starter.  I think a wide receiver and an interior offensive lineman would eventually become starters but may not win the job immediately against a veteran.

3.  I would add Walker Little to the list of draft picks from last year that will probably move into a starting role this year.

4.  The new starters this year are a combination of being a bad team last year and the fact that we had a lot of resources this year including a ton of salary cap space for free agents, extra draft picks and drafting first in each round.  I don't see scheme change as a major factor.  I largely see these as positions we would have wanted to upgrade anyway regardless of scheme.

5.  I don't like Baalke, so I would consider Pederson's influence as a good thing, but I'm not sure I'm too focused on it.  I'm confident that it will be a collaboration, so I think we're talking about shades of grey here.

6.  I hated the decision to keep Baalke and will discuss it in a thread specifically related to him.  However, I don't like being a "Negative Nancy".  The decision on Baalke has been made.  At this point, I largely work on the assumption that he will do the right thing.  If he doesn't, I'll criticize him on draft day.  As much as I dislike Baalke, honestly, my answer to these questions likely wouldn't be significantly different right now if we had someone else.  You have to assume that the current GM will do the right thing.

7.  Although I think we draft our center of the future, I don't think we draft our left guard of the future.  I know you said one position, but I would also note for those that want us to draft a replacement safety for Jenkins that I don't think that is addressed either.

1.  I would say based solely upon his prominence as a free agent, Jones could be a starter, though I don't have much faith in him (Zay Jones) at this stage.

2.  We are in agreement about ILB.  I think one thing Baalke has proven able to identify over the years, especially in the middle rounds, is linebacker (Navarro Bowman).  As I theorized in a different thread, ILB is deep in this draft.

3.  Agreed.

4.  Agreed mostly with your analysis, here, with minor differences regarding the relationship between scheme and the changes in starters.  The roster was so bad, we would have wanted to upgrade the positions anyway, I think scheme played a role in terms of the importance placed on different positions (i.e. Pederson's offense emphasizing the TE position).  How long as this team needed to improve the TE position?

5.  Fair answer, though I might caution against putting too much faith in the collaboration between Baalke and Pederson.  Baalke supposedly did not collaborate with many of the other coaches in San Francisco.

7.  That answer is somewhat curious, especially since Pederson has placed so much emphasis in the trenches throughout the offseason thus far.  But of course, we have so many needs and, at the moment only 4 picks in the first three rounds, some position might go lower than one might think.

What do you find curious?  Drafting a center or not drafting a guard?  I see center as a big need.  I think Shatley is a good backup caliber player, but not a quality starter.  He will also be 31 by the time the season starts.  Even if the rookie center can't beat out Shatley initially, he would provide valuable depth which we also desperately need at that position.  It would also allow Shatley to move to guard if an injury were to occur.  As far as not drafting a guard, it is a case of too many needs and not enough picks.  I would take Hutchinson with the #1 overall pick.  We then have 3 day two picks.  I would predict wide receiver, inside linebacker and center in whatever order made sense.  Which one of those positions would you replace with a guard?

---

---

Replying to Bullseye

I still like Laviska, Treadwell, and Agnew.    Do they keep 7 WRs?  If they keep only 6, who is the odd man out?  Probably Laviska since his skill set is redundant with Kirk (and maybe Moore from my example)?  Or if you cut Agnew, who takes over return duties?  Of the traded and free agent WRs, Cooper was the one I really wanted.  He's a true #1 and his cost in dollars and picks would not have broken the bank.  Apparently, the Cowboys accommodated his wishes to some extent.  And the reporting was that Baalke was being a cheapskate about taking on the entire salary.  That's really the main ding in free agency on the front office this time.  Other than that one transaction, I don't see how it could have gone much better. I'm cautiously optimistic about the draft because of Pederson's influence.

And to your other point, yes there could have been a middle ground between 0 new starters and 12-13 new starters.  I'm sorry I didn't write clearly about that.  If we had gotten only 4 or 5, I would regard that as disappointing and ineffectual.  We needed (and need) good churn for at least one more off season.

no way they keep 7 WRs.  I think it's more likely they keep 4 TEs.Odd man out assuming only 6 WRs kept?  Tough to say...depending on what you mean by odd man out.  Pederson values versatility...not only positional, but I would think ability to play special teams would factor in as well.  On that basis I think Agnew is kept.  Perhaps not as a WR, but he would still have enough value to the team to be kept on the roster assuming he's healthy.    He's not a true WR, but he offers a ton in the return game so his value is enhanced.  Treadwell can play outside, perhaps better than Shenault.  I seem to recall he has also played in STs. Shenault showed some promise his rookie year and regression last year.  He seems like he might be able to play RB in a pinch, and if Pederson agrees, that aids his cause.

Don't worry about not being clear on these questions, given the assignment.  I asked some broad open ended and speculative questions.

---

1.  I would say based solely upon his prominence as a free agent, Jones could be a starter, though I don't have much faith in him (Zay Jones) at this stage.

2.  We are in agreement about ILB.  I think one thing Baalke has proven able to identify over the years, especially in the middle rounds, is linebacker (Navarro Bowman).  As I theorized in a different thread, ILB is deep in this draft.

3.  Agreed.

4.  Agreed mostly with your analysis, here, with minor differences regarding the relationship between scheme and the changes in starters.  The roster was so bad, we would have wanted to upgrade the positions anyway, I think scheme played a role in terms of the importance placed on different positions (i.e. Pederson's offense emphasizing the TE position).  How long as this team needed to improve the TE position?

5.  Fair answer, though I might caution against putting too much faith in the collaboration between Baalke and Pederson.  Baalke supposedly did not collaborate with many of the other coaches in San Francisco.

7.  That answer is somewhat curious, especially since Pederson has placed so much emphasis in the trenches throughout the offseason thus far.  But of course, we have so many needs and, at the moment only 4 picks in the first three rounds, some position might go lower than one might think.

What do you find curious?  Drafting a center or not drafting a guard?  I see center as a big need.  I think Shatley is a good backup caliber player, but not a quality starter.  He will also be 31 by the time the season starts.  Even if the rookie center can't beat out Shatley initially, he would provide valuable depth which we also desperately need at that position.  It would also allow Shatley to move to guard if an injury were to occur.  As far as not drafting a guard, it is a case of too many needs and not enough picks.  I would take Hutchinson with the #1 overall pick.  We then have 3 day two picks.  I would predict wide receiver, inside linebacker and center in whatever order made sense.  Which one of those positions would you replace with a guard?

---

Okay that clarifies things (like why the priority of C over G).  I have to think on some level, given the needs at both position and Pederson's valuing of versatility, if Zion Johnson is on the board at 33, he has to be strongly considered because he can play both C and G.

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

https://twitter.com/e_dilla/status/15107...oby4hpfX1Q

Big jump for Trevor coming.

---

For the purposes of these questions, assume the following conditions:

A.  A top slot WR and top nickel/slot CBs are considered starters, given the prevalence of 11 personnel and nickel defenses.

B.  There will be no trades up or down in any round, nor will there be any trades for or away of players existing on rosters, so there will be no trading away Shenault or trading for DK Metcalf.  What you now see as far as draft picks is what we will utilize in this draft.

With the above conditions in place:

1.  How many new starters do you expect to come out of our free agency haul?  Who are they?

2.  How many immediate starters do you expect to come out of this draft?

3.  Are there any guys drafted last year that did not start for whatever reason last year to be starters this year?  Name them and if applicable, name their positions.

4.  Given the number of new starters combined from the questions listed above, would you say that is a good or bad total?  Why?  Do you think the number of new starters is a reflection of a job well done in terms of player acquisition, a function of how bad the roster was in the first place, the need for newer players to fit the new schemes, or some combination? Will the players be clear upgrades or scheme fillers?

5.  Do your expectations rise or fall depending upon who has the most sway in the draft room between Baalke or Pederson?

6.  Would your expectations be any higher if Baalke had been fired or an EVP beeh placed above him as promised by Khan?

7.  Of all of the positions deemed to be needs on this team, what's the one position you somehow think will not be addressed by round 3?

I will give my answers a little later.  I want to hear your thoughts.

1. I expect there to be 5 free agents who will be starters: Kirk, Scherff, Williams, Oluakun and Fotukasi. Engram would make 6 if he stays healthy. Key and Zay Jones will play about half of the snaps.

2. I expect the draft to add 2 or 3 additional starters. Hutchinson (if no trade), a linebacker taken by round 3 and possibly a receiver who'd likely be a rotational player.

3. Cisco, Little and Etienne should all start. If they all perform well, last season's draft would be a success. It would be great if just one of Dylan Moses and Jordan Smith could contribute at linebacker.

4. If all those named above become starters, it would indicate that the front office did a solid job with these selections. I expect the majority of new free agents to have good seasons and be big upgrades from last season. The level of success of last season's draft class is much less certain. We should know by early in the season whether these 2nd year Jaguars have the chance to become important parts of the nucleus of the team.

5. I have no idea about Pederson's skills at talent evaluation. Baalke's history at this has had it's ups and downs, but the major knock on him is how badly he relates to others.

6. I was hoping Spielman would be hired in some capacity. I stopped being a season ticket-holder after 26 years due to Khan's change of heart about hiring someone in place of or over Baalke.

7. This is a difficult question since much depends on whether particular players they are targeting are still on the board. However, based on your no-trade scenario, I'd say the 4 positions addressed by the end of round 3 are Edge rusher, wide receiver, linebacker and offensive line. They may wait until round 4 to take a tight end.

---

I saw someone mention kicker.  I will say that I would predict that the Jaguars use a late round pick on a kicker and he wins the job.  I didn't include him in my number because I don't consider kickers or punters to be starters.  I'm not Gene Smith.

---

I saw someone mention kicker.  I will say that I would predict that the Jaguars use a late round pick on a kicker and he wins the job.  I didn't include him in my number because I don't consider kickers or punters to be starters.  I'm not Gene Smith.

This year's draft class of kickers are uniformly rated as UDFA material and it's unlikely any are drafted.

I was also hopeful we might draft a kicker late (222 or 225) and solve that issue, but folks here pointed out this news to me and I think they are correct.

---

For the purposes of these questions, assume the following conditions:

A.  A top slot WR and top nickel/slot CBs are considered starters, given the prevalence of 11 personnel and nickel defenses.

B.  There will be no trades up or down in any round, nor will there be any trades for or away of players existing on rosters, so there will be no trading away Shenault or trading for DK Metcalf.  What you now see as far as draft picks is what we will utilize in this draft.

With the above conditions in place:

1.  How many new starters do you expect to come out of our free agency haul?  Who are they?

2.  How many immediate starters do you expect to come out of this draft?

3.  Are there any guys drafted last year that did not start for whatever reason last year to be starters this year?  Name them and if applicable, name their positions.

4.  Given the number of new starters combined from the questions listed above, would you say that is a good or bad total?  Why?  Do you think the number of new starters is a reflection of a job well done in terms of player acquisition, a function of how bad the roster was in the first place, the need for newer players to fit the new schemes, or some combination? Will the players be clear upgrades or scheme fillers?

5.  Do your expectations rise or fall depending upon who has the most sway in the draft room between Baalke or Pederson?

6.  Would your expectations be any higher if Baalke had been fired or an EVP beeh placed above him as promised by Khan?

7.  Of all of the positions deemed to be needs on this team, what's the one position you somehow think will not be addressed by round 3?

I will give my answers a little later.  I want to hear your thoughts.

I'm not as worried about starts. I'm more concerned with performance. Guys taken earlier in the darft or signed to big contracts should be able to win out any competition for a starting spot, and also produce when the snaps starts counting. If they aren't starting or producing because we found someone later in the darft or as a cheaper FA pick, I ain't gonna complain if we're doing what it takes to be competitive. Period.

For 5, unless Doug2.0 says "I have the conn", or someone above him asserts the same, I don't see how any of us can even allege the level of sway he has. My only hope is that if he has a type, he makes that known to Baalke and the scouts, and they don't send him a bunch of mis-fit players that force him out of his comfort zone. Again, I don't care who is ultimately making the choices, so long as we're not compromising the foundation we've already begun building and the team shows promise.

6 is a good Q. Thusfar in 2022, I can't say Baalke has been the nightmare some clamor him to be. Coach and GM appear to be playing nicely together, the team is working to address need, and we're not mortgaging the future to build in the present. Would it be much different if we brought in Spielman? I don't think so. A lot of the spending we've done was likely at the direction of the owner, or with his approval to open the coffers, so all Spielman would have done was relay the message and oversee the strategy we deployed. I don't think an EVP changes that strategy or the targets, honestly.

Now if we rolled with Lefty and Wilson? First, would there have been an EVP in the mix too, or would that have been a further dealbreaker? I dunno. But just with the two of them working in conjuction, I think it would have taken a little more time to build the scouting and evaluation teams. Had we acted in early Jan, though, that's plenty of time for the coach and GM to review prior footage to evaluate the present roster, understand who does or does not fit in the future plans, and shape their plan. FA may have been different, and would Khan have been so open to release the checkbook with a new GM that was essentially foisted upon him by his HC hire? I suspect not, although the wiser move is to spend now and allow the team to begin setting aside future cap for the big hits that should come if our recent picks are deemed long-term fixtures.

7 will probably be Center. I don't see Linderbaum falling, and I think the remaining prospects fit better from 4 or later. WR might be the dark horse answer. If we're not moving around, I think a lot of the WR that will be available when we pick are similar to guys we already have on the roster and would be redundant. That, and I see a lot of the runs will likely leave a lot of value picks at other positions, so the patient or not desperate drafters will come away with steals this year, but maybe not at the flashiest position.

Apologies for the textwall

---

Quite simply, Pederson's offense revolves around the TE.

I am hoping Pederson is a flexible coach that will mold his offense around his personnel and not try to shoehorn our personnel into his old Eagles' offenses.

Simply put, if Pederson forces this team to run a lot of 12 personnel it's going to be a bad time.

Do you think this because we don't have the number of TEs in quantity and quality to run it?

If so, how many more TEs does this team need?

If it's some other position(s), what positions are needed?

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

For the purposes of these questions, assume the following conditions:

A.  A top slot WR and top nickel/slot CBs are considered starters, given the prevalence of 11 personnel and nickel defenses.

B.  There will be no trades up or down in any round, nor will there be any trades for or away of players existing on rosters, so there will be no trading away Shenault or trading for DK Metcalf.  What you now see as far as draft picks is what we will utilize in this draft.

With the above conditions in place:

1.  How many new starters do you expect to come out of our free agency haul?  Who are they?

2.  How many immediate starters do you expect to come out of this draft?

3.  Are there any guys drafted last year that did not start for whatever reason last year to be starters this year?  Name them and if applicable, name their positions.

4.  Given the number of new starters combined from the questions listed above, would you say that is a good or bad total?  Why?  Do you think the number of new starters is a reflection of a job well done in terms of player acquisition, a function of how bad the roster was in the first place, the need for newer players to fit the new schemes, or some combination? Will the players be clear upgrades or scheme fillers?

5.  Do your expectations rise or fall depending upon who has the most sway in the draft room between Baalke or Pederson?

6.  Would your expectations be any higher if Baalke had been fired or an EVP beeh placed above him as promised by Khan?

7.  Of all of the positions deemed to be needs on this team, what's the one position you somehow think will not be addressed by round 3?

I will give my answers a little later.  I want to hear your thoughts.

1. I expect there to be 5 free agents who will be starters: Kirk, Scherff, Williams, Oluakun and Fotukasi. Engram would make 6 if he stays healthy. Key and Zay Jones will play about half of the snaps.

2. I expect the draft to add 2 or 3 additional starters. Hutchinson (if no trade), a linebacker taken by round 3 and possibly a receiver who'd likely be a rotational player.

3. Cisco, Little and Etienne should all start. If they all perform well, last season's draft would be a success. It would be great if just one of Dylan Moses and Jordan Smith could contribute at linebacker.

4. If all those named above become starters, it would indicate that the front office did a solid job with these selections. I expect the majority of new free agents to have good seasons and be big upgrades from last season. The level of success of last season's draft class is much less certain. We should know by early in the season whether these 2nd year Jaguars have the chance to become important parts of the nucleus of the team.

5. I have no idea about Pederson's skills at talent evaluation. Baalke's history at this has had it's ups and downs, but the major knock on him is how badly he relates to others.

6. I was hoping Spielman would be hired in some capacity. I stopped being a season ticket-holder after 26 years due to Khan's change of heart about hiring someone in place of or over Baalke.

7. This is a difficult question since much depends on whether particular players they are targeting are still on the board. However, based on your no-trade scenario, I'd say the 4 positions addressed by the end of round 3 are Edge rusher, wide receiver, linebacker and offensive line. They may wait until round 4 to take a tight end.

1-3...So 12 starters..Maybe another 2-3 contributors possible.  That seems the general consensus, though using your analysis, if you add in other key contributors, that number gets higher.

4 & 5.  Thinking about those guys from last year who could become starters now, I wonder how similar the schemes are, how flexible Pederson is etc., if transitioning them into starting roles is an indication of how much they've developed as players over the last year,  how much more Pederson and company can develop them, or if Baalke drafted with the suspiscion that UM may not last long.

6.  That's unfortunate.  If the team starts preforming better under Pederson, would you return?  If a return is possible how much improvement would they have to show?

7.  I could see TE in round 4, though I would hope TE is addressed no later than day 2.

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

For the purposes of these questions, assume the following conditions:

A.  A top slot WR and top nickel/slot CBs are considered starters, given the prevalence of 11 personnel and nickel defenses.

B.  There will be no trades up or down in any round, nor will there be any trades for or away of players existing on rosters, so there will be no trading away Shenault or trading for DK Metcalf.  What you now see as far as draft picks is what we will utilize in this draft.

With the above conditions in place:

1.  How many new starters do you expect to come out of our free agency haul?  Who are they?

2.  How many immediate starters do you expect to come out of this draft?

3.  Are there any guys drafted last year that did not start for whatever reason last year to be starters this year?  Name them and if applicable, name their positions.

4.  Given the number of new starters combined from the questions listed above, would you say that is a good or bad total?  Why?  Do you think the number of new starters is a reflection of a job well done in terms of player acquisition, a function of how bad the roster was in the first place, the need for newer players to fit the new schemes, or some combination? Will the players be clear upgrades or scheme fillers?

5.  Do your expectations rise or fall depending upon who has the most sway in the draft room between Baalke or Pederson?

6.  Would your expectations be any higher if Baalke had been fired or an EVP beeh placed above him as promised by Khan?

7.  Of all of the positions deemed to be needs on this team, what's the one position you somehow think will not be addressed by round 3?

I will give my answers a little later.  I want to hear your thoughts.

I'm not as worried about starts. I'm more concerned with performance. Guys taken earlier in the darft or signed to big contracts should be able to win out any competition for a starting spot, and also produce when the snaps starts counting. If they aren't starting or producing because we found someone later in the darft or as a cheaper FA pick, I ain't gonna complain if we're doing what it takes to be competitive. Period.

For 5, unless Doug2.0 says "I have the conn", or someone above him asserts the same, I don't see how any of us can even allege the level of sway he has. My only hope is that if he has a type, he makes that known to Baalke and the scouts, and they don't send him a bunch of mis-fit players that force him out of his comfort zone. Again, I don't care who is ultimately making the choices, so long as we're not compromising the foundation we've already begun building and the team shows promise.

6 is a good Q. Thusfar in 2022, I can't say Baalke has been the nightmare some clamor him to be. Coach and GM appear to be playing nicely together, the team is working to address need, and we're not mortgaging the future to build in the present. Would it be much different if we brought in Spielman? I don't think so. A lot of the spending we've done was likely at the direction of the owner, or with his approval to open the coffers, so all Spielman would have done was relay the message and oversee the strategy we deployed. I don't think an EVP changes that strategy or the targets, honestly.

Now if we rolled with Lefty and Wilson? First, would there have been an EVP in the mix too, or would that have been a further dealbreaker? I dunno. But just with the two of them working in conjuction, I think it would have taken a little more time to build the scouting and evaluation teams. Had we acted in early Jan, though, that's plenty of time for the coach and GM to review prior footage to evaluate the present roster, understand who does or does not fit in the future plans, and shape their plan. FA may have been different, and would Khan have been so open to release the checkbook with a new GM that was essentially foisted upon him by his HC hire? I suspect not, although the wiser move is to spend now and allow the team to begin setting aside future cap for the big hits that should come if our recent picks are deemed long-term fixtures.

7 will probably be Center. I don't see Linderbaum falling, and I think the remaining prospects fit better from 4 or later. WR might be the dark horse answer. If we're not moving around, I think a lot of the WR that will be available when we pick are similar to guys we already have on the roster and would be redundant. That, and I see a lot of the runs will likely leave a lot of value picks at other positions, so the patient or not desperate drafters will come away with steals this year, but maybe not at the flashiest position.

Apologies for the textwall

(emphasis added)

Thanks to you and everyone else for your replies.

As for #6, the portion in bold is interesting.  Considering how excited Khan was about the UM hire, why wouldn't he spend more last year like he did this year?  I guess it was a blessing in disguise he didn't given how big of a melt down UM had.

Certainly no need to apologize for any text wall.

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

I just think Little couldn’t beat out Taylor and Cisco couldn’t earn a starting spot at either safety spot from jump street, that’s not a good sign.

Don’t expect much out of Evan Engram either. Both RBs are coming off injuries so there’s a huge question mark at that spot. I have no idea what they will do with Shenault. He has no trade value. Maybe they go get the best available WR in the 2nd and 3rd. I gotta weird feeling Little will be a let down but I hope he wins a starting spot on the oline. I hope Cisco becomes a starter too.

---

I saw someone mention kicker.  I will say that I would predict that the Jaguars use a late round pick on a kicker and he wins the job.  I didn't include him in my number because I don't consider kickers or punters to be starters.  I'm not Gene Smith.

This year's draft class of kickers are uniformly rated as UDFA material and it's unlikely any are drafted.

I was also hopeful we might draft a kicker late (222 or 225) and solve that issue, but folks here pointed out this news to me and I think they are correct.

Dicker and the guy from LSU should be worth consideration. I think the punter class is pretty decent though.

---

I just think Little couldn’t beat out Taylor and Cisco couldn’t earn a starting spot at either safety spot from jump street, that’s not a good sign.

Don’t expect much out of Evan Engram either. Both RBs are coming off injuries so there’s a huge question mark at that spot. I have no idea what they will do with Shenault. He has no trade value. Maybe they go get the best available WR in the 2nd and 3rd. I gotta weird feeling Little will be a let down but I hope he wins a starting spot on the oline. I hope Cisco becomes a starter too.

You can't take what Urban did as "this player couldn't beat out this other player."

Cisco never even got the chance to start until after Urban was fired and he looked great.

Little actually did well when he played minus some normal rookie errors and he was coming off of not playing for two years. I could see Little winning the RT spot and us making Taylor move to LG. It would make the most sense imo.

---

I am hoping Pederson is a flexible coach that will mold his offense around his personnel and not try to shoehorn our personnel into his old Eagles' offenses.

Simply put, if Pederson forces this team to run a lot of 12 personnel it's going to be a bad time.

Do you think this because we don't have the number of TEs in quantity and quality to run it?

If so, how many more TEs does this team need?

If it's some other position(s), what positions are needed?

I think I have explained my worries enough that everyone is annoyed by it, so I'll do the quick version.

Both traditional and advanced stats show Kirk is bad outside and good in the slot. Everyone and their mother knows that Engram and Arnold have no business playing inline TE since they are awful blockers.

Pederson's 12 peronnel heavy offense dictates that the vast majority of the time there is going to be a TE inline and a TE in the slot.

That is 3 diametrically opposing facts, so if Pederson sticks to his normal Eagles offense I think there will be some serious oil/water action going on. Hopefully he amends his style to fit this team and we run a TON of 11 personnel.

---

I just think Little couldn’t beat out Taylor and Cisco couldn’t earn a starting spot at either safety spot from jump street, that’s not a good sign.

Don’t expect much out of Evan Engram either. Both RBs are coming off injuries so there’s a huge question mark at that spot. I have no idea what they will do with Shenault. He has no trade value. Maybe they go get the best available WR in the 2nd and 3rd. I gotta weird feeling Little will be a let down but I hope he wins a starting spot on the oline. I hope Cisco becomes a starter too.

I think all of these are legitimate concerns even though some may say you run the risk of being a negative nancy.

We all saw that Jawaan Taylor was horrible and most felt Cam Robinson wasn't that good.  The general consensus seemed to be that Cisco should easily supplant Wingard.  I theorized that Little may have some rust to shake off before being able to be a starter, but I was with most in thinking that these guys would be starters.  When they didn't start and the season circled down the toilet, in some level, many seemed to blame UM for mismanaging the roster.

But what if these guys really aren't starting material ON THIS TEAM?:!?  Under the heading of a broken clock being right twice a day, what if UM and company were actually right in keeping Little and Cisco on the bench?  What if the RBs don't recover from injuries to pre injury form?

Sobering thoughts to be sure.

But for what it's worth coming less than a month before the draft, the Jaguars brass and Etienne himself seem confident he will recover completely by training camp.  I also think Engram will be a pleasant surprise (though admittedly I've been wrong on these things before).   Engram has never had less than 44 catches in a seasonm and that was when he played in half the games.  He's made a Pro Bowl, and has played in his entire career with some bad QBing.  He has speed, and if healthy can be a matchup issue for defenses.  He is coming to play for Doug Pederson, in a scheme that places heavy emphasis on the TE with a potential franchise QB throwing him the ball.

I get the pessimism when it comes to this time.  But I think they got the Engram choice right, based on facts more than hope.

---

Do you think this because we don't have the number of TEs in quantity and quality to run it?

If so, how many more TEs does this team need?

If it's some other position(s), what positions are needed?

I think I have explained my worries enough that everyone is annoyed by it, so I'll do the quick version.

Both traditional and advanced stats show Kirk is bad outside and good in the slot. Everyone and their mother knows that Engram and Arnold have no business playing inline TE since they are awful blockers.

Pederson's 12 peronnel heavy offense dictates that the vast majority of the time there is going to be a TE inline and a TE in the slot.

That is 3 diametrically opposing facts, so if Pederson sticks to his normal Eagles offense I think there will be some serious oil/water action going on. Hopefully he amends his style to fit this team and we run a TON of 11 personnel.

So if they drafted a Trey McBride at the top of round 3 giving them the two TEs they need, and an outside WR somewhere appropriate (#33?) would that still be forcing the 12 personnel grouping or would that ve a natural transition?

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

So if they drafted a Trey McBride at the top of round 3 giving them the two TEs they need, and an outside WR somewhere appropriate (#33?) would that still be forcing the 12 personnel grouping or would that ve a natural transition?

I have serious concerns with McBride's ability to play inline also with his lack of size, so that would scare me even more lol. My main worry is that we have all of Kirk, Engram, and Arnold that are all mainly stuck playing not outside WR and not inline TE. It's going to be really hard to maximize Kirk and Engram (I don't really care about both Engram and Arnold getting theirs) since they basically win the same way. I think they are going to have Kirk playing outside a lot, and it's going to be a waste of his talent.

We need an outside WR extremely bad, but that's just a general team need not my specific concern with how Pederson's Eagles offense would struggle to work here.

---