If he goes top 3 they will. 

if the jaguars draft mack at 3. 0% chance that anyone on epsn or nfl network says he is a reach. i guarantee that. 

---

Coughlin when asked if winning will be a focus: "What the hell else is there? This is nice and dandy, but winning is what all this is about."

If he goes top 3 they will. 

 

Right. Despite the fact that they have him ranked as such. Makes complete sense.

---

;

;

In what world would the Jags trade up to #2 to select Mack?  You just making stuff up now?

 

Those "trade up to #2" rumors were exclusively for Clowney or one of the QBs (when Bridgewater was considered a 1st overall pick by many)

 

If the Jags like Mack as much as some of you fans apparently do then, who knows?? Just substitute "Clowney" with "Mack". 

---

if the jaguars draft mack at 3. 0% chance that anyone on epsn or nfl network says he is a reach. i guarantee that. 

 

Saved. 

---

I see you're now not disputing the initial claim that if he was drafted at 2 by us that they would call it a reach.

 

The Jags jumping up to 2 might happen/ might not. Don't stray. 

 

even if the jaguars trade up to 2 to get mack. he has more value to the jaguars. he represents the perfect piece to the exact defense that bradley runs. versatile, can play the LEO to a T. maybe for st louis he wouldnt have as much value but for what he could offer the jaguars, moving up one spot to get him would be smart IF they felt like they had to. if staying at 3 he still falls and they draft him, no one is going to call that a reach. 

---

Coughlin when asked if winning will be a focus: "What the hell else is there? This is nice and dandy, but winning is what all this is about."

If the Jags like Mack as much as some of you fans apparently do then, who knows?? Just substitute "Clowney" with "Mack". 

Now you're just making stuff up.  Who put Clowney and Mack as equal? You could try to argue with yourself? 

---

You don't pass on a Tackle the level of Matthews (with the type of pass rushers the Texans would have after a Clowney selection)....because you have a player like Pazstor, at RT, lol. He really wasn't as good as some tried to spin it. He was absolutely horrible in run blocking and was serviceable at pass blocking. Lets stop acting like we found the next Leon Searcy there with Pazstor.

If the Jaguars spend their entire existence trying to respond to their competition, they wont get very far. We need pass rushers too.


We shouldn't get a lineman every time a rival gets a pass rusher.

---

Saved. 

screenshot it, print it, and hang it above the guide with the pictures of burgers on it hanging above the register so you know how to enter a happy meal. ill sign it for you after the dust settles. 

---

Coughlin when asked if winning will be a focus: "What the hell else is there? This is nice and dandy, but winning is what all this is about."

even if the jaguars trade up to 2 to get mack. he has more value to the jaguars. he represents the perfect piece to the exact defense that bradley runs. versatile, can play the LEO to a T. maybe for st louis he wouldnt have as much value but for what he could offer the jaguars, moving up one spot to get him would be smart IF they felt like they had to. if staying at 3 he still falls and they draft him, no one is going to call that a reach. 

 

Precisely the response I was expecting to read from you. 

---

If the Jags like Mack as much as some of you fans apparently do then, who knows?? Just substitute "Clowney" with "Mack". 

 

I don't like Mack enough to trade up for him.  

 

I would be OK with him at #3, but I would actually prefer Watkins at #3.

---

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

Really, slappy? ....Don' think so. 

 

I can almost guarantee if the Jags select him at 2 (after a trade up) the TV analysts would all be questioning "reach". 

 

RED HERRING!

---

I don't like Mack enough to trade up for him.  

 

I would be OK with him at #3, but I would actually prefer Watkins at #3.

 

And not one person has suggested trading up to 2 and take Mack.

 

TMD knows he is looking the fool and is trying to change the topic.

---

If the Jaguars spend their entire existence trying to respond to their competition, they wont get very far. We need pass rushers too.


We shouldn't get a lineman every time a rival gets a pass rusher.

 

The 90's Cowboys pretty much utilized this strategy to counter the Eagles top level D -line. They made sure they improved their OL to the top level of the sport - specifically to counter the Eagles D. Jimmy Johnson has said this before. It worked. Granted, they also added other pieces that helped too, but the OL point, stands. If the Jags can get the Matthews level (pro bowl level) OT in rounds 2 or later, then great, but if not, then I'd just take him at pick 3 if the Texans take Clowney. 

---

The 90's Cowboys pretty much utilized this strategy to counter the Eagles top level D -line. They made sure they improved their OL to the top level of the sport - specifically to counter the Eagles D. Jimmy Johnson has said this before. It worked. Granted, they also added other pieces that helped too, but the OL point, stands. If the Jags can get the Matthews level (pro bowl level) OT in rounds 2 or later, then great, but if not, then I'd just take him at pick 3 if the Texans take Clowney. 

 

ONE TEAM EVER IN THE HISTORY OF THE NFL DID THIS SO WE SHOULD DO IT TOO!!!

 

#brianboitano

---

Coughlin when asked if winning will be a focus: "What the hell else is there? This is nice and dandy, but winning is what all this is about."

I see you're now not disputing the initial claim that if he was drafted at 2 by us that they would call it a reach.

 

The Jags jumping up to 2 might happen/ might not. Don't stray. 

I never said that he'd be a reach at two, I just openly laughed at the notion that the Jaguars would jump up to two. This is a team that's made move after move indicating a desire to stockpile picks. Given that any team jumping to two would be doing so to beat the Jaguars to the punch, it seems wholly unrealistic to me that the Jags would be willing to offer a high enough bounty to beat another team out, especially one drafting in the 4-6 range.

---

And they did so without taking anyone in the 1st round, much less the top 5.

 

The 90's Cowboys pretty much utilized this strategy to counter the Eagles top level D -line. They made sure they improved their OL to the top level of the sport - specifically to counter the Eagles D. 

---

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

And not one person has suggested trading up to 2 and take Mack.

 

TMD knows he is looking the fool and is trying to change the topic.

 

No, they were using Clowney in that scenario. I brought up Mack as a possibility in same trade parameters if Jags brass is as high on Mack as some of you seem to be. The implied Mack love in this thread is strong. Deny it all you wish. 

---

ONE TEAM EVER IN THE HISTORY OF THE NFL DID THIS SO WE SHOULD DO IT TOO!!!

 

#brianboitano

 

Racking up on the clown responses, I see. 

 

Its not just one example, but pretty much a direct correlation example - a team with a great pass rushing defense that was neutralized by another division team that built specifically to combat that strength. 

 

Dallas wound up winning 3 SB's after the culmination of that strategy as well as their overall rebuild. 

 

Yes, lets brush that off as meaningless. 

---

And they did so without taking anyone in the 1st round, much less the top 5.

 

LOL, I see you snipped the other part of the post (233) where I talked about that.... haha, what a crock. 

---

No, they were using Clowney in that scenario. I brought up Mack as a possibility in same trade parameters if Jags brass is as high on Mack as some of you seem to be. The implied Mack love in this thread is strong. Deny it all you wish. 

 

The vast majority of the people aren't even posting any love about Mack really.  There's just an implied annoyance with you.

---

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