You'd get more than just a #1 pick for Luck, even if he was behind Manning.

 

The Jaguars got a first and fourth rounder for Rob Johnson based on one regular season game, and he wasn't a heralded guy coming out.

 

If the Colts had kept Manning and traded Luck this offseason they'd get an RG3 style haul for him.

 

I remember reading something that said the Browns offered their entire draft for the first pick to select Luck and the Colts still declined.

---

Shock the world

Whhhhhhaat? Who are these guys who knew Leftwich would never make it after 13 starts? I'll tell you who, they are either rainman style savants or flat out liars. Going into 2005 this was Byron's team.

 

You what else QBs are, the most expensive thing in football. With the salary cap and the old CBA, nobody is taking QBs in the top 10 twice, it would be madness.

 

I hate to keep revisiting history because it really doesn't agree with what you say. Roethlisberger was not this cast iron absolutely must be BAP on every board player. Nobody traded up for Roethlisberger, you dont think if someone had offered a big trade to pick him someone would have taken it wouldn't they, but no.

 

No one traded up for him because they knew shack harris didn't have the stones to take him.

 

I still recall the radio broadcast during the draft, Vic was yelling into the microphone that if the Jaguars can't trade the pick they have to take Roethlisberger. I can recall how deflated he sounded when the Reggie Williams pick was announced.

 

I can also recall Gene Smith on the radio telling the JTW gang of Brian Vic and Lags that he and Del Rio both wanted Roethlisberger during the draft when the team was on the clock and that Harris was the guy that insisted in taking Williams.

---

Never just pass on an elite QB prospect to select a much worse talent..

Raw genius. I hate when GMs pass on an obvious elite talent to select a much worse talent..........

---

Raw genius. I hate when GMs pass on an obvious elite talent to select a much worse talent..........

And yet we still see it happen quite often.

---

You'd get more than just a #1 pick for Luck, even if he was behind Manning.

 

The Jaguars got a first and fourth rounder for Rob Johnson based on one regular season game, and he wasn't a heralded guy coming out.

 

If the Colts had kept Manning and traded Luck this offseason they'd get an RG3 style haul for him.

Again, you are saying this based on Luck playing. We have no idea what kind of haul you would get from a bench riding Luck.

---

Raw genius. I hate when GMs pass on an obvious elite talent to select a much worse talent..........

Who said you have to select much worse talent?

---

I remember reading something that said the Browns offered their entire draft for the first pick to select Luck and the Colts still declined.

And this is when his value was the highest. It was going to get higher sitting behind Manning and not playing.

---

No one traded up for him because they knew shack harris didn't have the stones to take him.

 

I still recall the radio broadcast during the draft, Vic was yelling into the microphone that if the Jaguars can't trade the pick they have to take Roethlisberger. I can recall how deflated he sounded when the Reggie Williams pick was announced.

 

 

"Shack Harris isn't going to take Big Ben!  So no way will I trade up ahead of the Steelers, who will take Big Ben in order to get such a great talent.  Nope.  I won't trade up with the Jaguars, because Big Ben will fall a little further.  And I won't trade with the Texans either, because I bet they don't have the stones to take him either!  Not with David Carr as their QB!  My best bet will be to try and trade with the Steelers!  The best way to trade is to trade with GM's who want the guy, instead of GM's who don't!"

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

No one traded up for him because they knew shack harris didn't have the stones to take him.

 

I still recall the radio broadcast during the draft, Vic was yelling into the microphone that if the Jaguars can't trade the pick they have to take Roethlisberger. I can recall how deflated he sounded when the Reggie Williams pick was announced.

 

I can also recall Gene Smith on the radio telling the JTW gang of Brian Vic and Lags that he and Del Rio both wanted Roethlisberger during the draft when the team was on the clock and that Harris was the guy that insisted in taking Williams.

 

What about the other 10 teams before Pitt. Did they lack stones?

 

When did Gene Smith say this, right after the draft? He would have been fired on the spot and having seen his drafting, I don't trust a word he says about the past if he is trying to claim he had spotted an elite talent. Anyway, I thought he was the BAP anti-christ.

---

Just to be different, Bortles.

"Shack Harris isn't going to take Big Ben!  So no way will I trade up ahead of the Steelers, who will take Big Ben in order to get such a great talent.  Nope.  I won't trade up with the Jaguars, because Big Ben will fall a little further.  And I won't trade with the Texans either, because I bet they don't have the stones to take him either!  Not with David Carr as their QB!  My best bet will be to try and trade with the Steelers!  The best way to trade is to trade with GM's who want the guy, instead of GM's who don't!"

Have to consider the source. Oklahomie was defending Gabbert till the bitter end. Still remember all of those threads and posts defending him over and over again no matter how bad he played.

---

What about the other 10 teams before Pitt. Did they lack stones?

 

When did Gene Smith say this, right after the draft? He would have been fired on the spot and having seen his drafting, I don't trust a word he says about the past if he is trying to claim he had spotted an elite talent. Anyway, I thought he was the BAP anti-christ.

 

A couple of QBs went before Roethlisberger and turned out to be good, so apparently the teams before the Steelers that felt a great pull to take a QB took one.

---

A couple of QBs went before Roethlisberger and turned out to be good, so apparently the teams before the Steelers that felt a great pull to take a QB took one.

 

 

Yeah, a couple. That means 8 teams didn't draft QBs and didn't take a trade offer that should have been so easy to come by.

 

Here is a crazy thought. What if Roethlisberger wasn't top of the Steelers board and they took him to fill a need? Its not like they had much at QB. Or is that not possible, because using 20/20 hindsight, we now know he was the best player in the draft.

---

Just to be different, Bortles.

Yeah, a couple. That means 8 teams didn't draft QBs and didn't take a trade offer that should have been so easy to come by.

 

Here is a crazy thought. What if Roethlisberger wasn't top of the Steelers board and they took him to fill a need? Its not like they had much at QB. Or is that not possible, because using 20/20 hindsight, we now know he was the best player in the draft.

 

So the Steelers wanted him but didn't trade up because he wasn't at the top of their board but then they went ahead and took him ahead of whatever player was ranked over him? Okay.

---

So the Steelers wanted him but didn't trade up because he wasn't at the top of their board but then they went ahead and took him ahead of whatever player was ranked over him? Okay.

 

 

Are the Steelers the only team that might have traded up?

 

We took a guy who was lower on our board according to you are we the only team to have followed this folly?

---

Just to be different, Bortles.

Yeah, a couple. That means 8 teams didn't draft QBs and didn't take a trade offer that should have been so easy to come by.

 

Here is a crazy thought. What if Roethlisberger wasn't top of the Steelers board and they took him to fill a need? Its not like they had much at QB. Or is that not possible, because using 20/20 hindsight, we now know he was the best player in the draft.

 

Steelers draft philosophy has been BAP for decades so it is a crazy thought.

---

Are the Steelers the only team that might have traded up?

 

We took a guy who was lower on our board according to you are we the only team to have followed this folly?

 

No, bad teams draft poorly all the time. Look at Gene Smith, every time we thought the team couldn't be worse he made a move.

 

As for the Steelers, they're pretty well known for being disciplined toward always drafting the better player, it's why they're in the middle of a 20 year run of relative excellence.

---

We as the fans didn't know what Leftwich would be, but when the Jaguars radio guys talk about the 2004 draft they say a lot of guys already knew at that point that Leftwich would never make it in the league and that taking Roethlisberger should have been done.

 

QB is the most important position in all of sports, and if a truly elite prospect is there you either have to take him or make someone else pay to come and get him. Anything else is wasting value, and the draft is all about value.

 

Free agency is for positional need.

First off, I call shenanigans on your "everyone knew Leftwich would tank" assertion. I don't recall the media here saying a single bad thing about him for a couple of years after he arrived, and as many leaks as there were in the Jags organization during the Shack/Gene era (anyone else remember when the Jags website infamously posted a page the night before the 2007 draft saying that Reggie Nelson was the pick?), there's no way information that big could've stayed under wraps.

 

Second, no one wanted to trade up for Roethlisberger, at least not at a price that would have returned consummate value for the caliber of player being passed. We get back into my previous argument that spending two top-ten picks in a row and tens of millions of dollars on two guys at a position that only plays one gets you into a situation where you get hosed trading one during the draft, or you end up giving one away for a second-round pick afterwards. I'll give you this much: at any other position on offense or defense, I would agree with you probably 90% of the time. If the highest rated player on your board is a stud DE, take the man, even if you have two established starters. Ditto that for wideouts, offensive linemen, QBs, pass-rushing LBs, the list goes on. Quarterback is the only non-specialist position where it just doesn't make sense to stockpile young players with multiple first-round picks in a row.

 

Consider this as well: teams had had eight previous opportunities to trade up for Roethlisberger, and no one did. If the Jags were drafting fifth after Manning and Rivers had come off the board, they might have had more leverage, as they would have been sitting on the last of the big three QBs with a few teams that would have been candidates to draft Roethlisberger directly behind them, but not at nine where teams had already passed on the man eight times and knew that the Jags and Texans would almost certainly not be taking him.

 

I said always take the highest rated guy if you can't trade back.

 

I consider it a reach any time you take a guy that you already evaluated as worse than a guy you're passing up. That includes if you rated one guy an 87 and the other an 86.

I admire your principles and agree with your general concept, but it's my opinion that the grade given includes consideration for position and team need, and an 8.6 can, should and will be drafted ahead of an 8.7 if he can fill an immediate need at an acceptable level for his draft slot. If we're talking 8.0 over an 8.7, then I begin to agree with you that the team is reaching too far--something that I believe happened with Reggie Williams.

 

Still, I'd rather have Joe Montana AND Steve Young and keep winning Superbowls instead of having to play against him all the time.

Interestingly enough, there was not a single first-round pick used in bringing those two to SF.

 

If you assume Shack was a needs drafter (as so many have), recall in 2007, he traded down when Brady Quinn was on the board and wound up with Reggie Nelson.

Main counter-point there, Shack did not see QB as a need, even though Del Rio was supposedly pushing for a Quinn selection. He was bound at the hip to Leftwich, even as it became more apparent that Leftwich wasn't working out. Safety was considered a bigger need by Shack (and, admittedly, plenty of fans and media as well).

 

Yes, you are getting that much only watching him in the preseason. Have you not paid attention to anything?

 

The Jaguars even got a pick for Gabbert. Gabbert

Please don't even try to compare the Gabbert trade with the Roethlisberger scenario. I don't dispute that the Jags could have gotten a pick for Roethlisberger or Leftwich if they'd drafted to stack the two. I do dispute the notion that the Jaguars would have gotten anything close to the value of the ninth overall pick back in that scenario.

---

First off, I call shenanigans on your "everyone knew Leftwich would tank" assertion. I don't recall the media here saying a single bad thing about him for a couple of years after he arrived, and as many leaks as there were in the Jags organization during the Shack/Gene era (anyone else remember when the Jags website infamously posted a page the night before the 2007 draft saying that Reggie Nelson was the pick?), there's no way information that big could've stayed under wraps.

 

Second, no one wanted to trade up for Roethlisberger, at least not at a price that would have returned consummate value for the caliber of player being passed. We get back into my previous argument that spending two top-ten picks in a row and tens of millions of dollars on two guys at a position that only plays one gets you into a situation where you get hosed trading one during the draft, or you end up giving one away for a second-round pick afterwards. I'll give you this much: at any other position on offense or defense, I would agree with you probably 90% of the time. If the highest rated player on your board is a stud DE, take the man, even if you have two established starters. Ditto that for wideouts, offensive linemen, QBs, pass-rushing LBs, the list goes on. Quarterback is the only non-specialist position where it just doesn't make sense to stockpile young players with multiple first-round picks in a row.

 

Consider this as well: teams had had eight previous opportunities to trade up for Roethlisberger, and no one did. If the Jags were drafting fifth after Manning and Rivers had come off the board, they might have had more leverage, as they would have been sitting on the last of the big three QBs with a few teams that would have been candidates to draft Roethlisberger directly behind them, but not at nine where teams had already passed on the man eight times and knew that the Jags and Texans would almost certainly not be taking him.

 


I admire your principles and agree with your general concept, but it's my opinion that the grade given includes consideration for position and team need, and an 8.6 can, should and will be drafted ahead of an 8.7 if he can fill an immediate need at an acceptable level for his draft slot. If we're talking 8.0 over an 8.7, then I begin to agree with you that the team is reaching too far--something that I believe happened with Reggie Williams.

 


Interestingly enough, there was not a single first-round pick used in bringing those two to SF.

 


Main counter-point there, Shack did not see QB as a need, even though Del Rio was supposedly pushing for a Quinn selection. He was bound at the hip to Leftwich, even as it became more apparent that Leftwich wasn't working out. Safety was considered a bigger need by Shack (and, admittedly, plenty of fans and media as well).

 


Please don't even try to compare the Gabbert trade with the Roethlisberger scenario. I don't dispute that the Jags could have gotten a pick for Roethlisberger or Leftwich if they'd drafted to stack the two. I do dispute the notion that the Jaguars would have gotten anything close to the value of the ninth overall pick back in that scenario.

 

Not comparing the Gabbert deal with Roethlisberger. That was in response to someone stating that no one would trade for Andrew Luck right now if he were warming the bench for Manning.

---

Whhhhhhaat? Who are these guys who knew Leftwich would never make it after 13 starts? I'll tell you who, they are either rainman style savants or flat out liars. Going into 2005 this was Byron's team.

 

I disagree, by 2005 it became obvious that Byron wasn't going to be able to cut it, (the last straw for me was the 2005 Patriots playoff game), but there most certainly were enough signs pointing to that conclusion well before that game. Byron wasn't doing all that great in 2005, (good yes, great? no) - IMO it was an EXTREMELY easy schedule that year if you don't remember....think 2013 weeks 9 through 16 but longer. The Jags won 12 games that year largely because of that. Byron only looked like a decent NFL starter that year because of that. 

 

A HUGE red flag for me about Leftwich was in 2004 when we were GOOSE-EGGED at home by a BAD Texans team when we had a playoff berth on the line. I don't fault Leftwich for losing that game, but I do fault him for presiding over such an anemicly ineffective offense. It was something that plagued him all too much over his Jags career, and with Freddy T and Jimmy Smith there, there was zero excuse for that. 

---

I disagree, by 2005 it became obvious that Byron wasn't going to be able to cut it, (the last straw for me was the 2005 Patriots playoff game), but there most certainly were enough signs pointing to that conclusion well before that game. Byron wasn't doing all that great in 2005, (good yes, great? no) - IMO it was an EXTREMELY easy schedule that year if you don't remember....think 2013 weeks 9 through 16 but longer. The Jags won 12 games that year largely because of that. Byron only looked like a decent NFL starter that year because of that.


A HUGE red flag for me about Leftwich was in 2004 when we were GOOSE-EGGED at home by a BAD Texans team when we had a playoff berth on the line. I don't fault Leftwich for losing that game, but I do fault him for presiding over such an anemicly ineffective offense. It was something that plagued him all too much over his Jags career, and with Freddy T and Jimmy Smith there, there was zero excuse for that.

The entire offense was bad. Besides Fred and Jimmy what other weapons did we have?

---

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