My question is this. What do we do to counter the Titans and Colts if they don't draft pass rushers? They have 1st round picks as well. What if one drafts Ebron? Would Mack be considered a good counter or do we only need to counter the worst team in the league?

FYI...the Colts currently do NOT have a first round pick, having traded it to Cleveland for RB Trent Richardson.


That said, they DO have two good TEs in Fleener and Allen.

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

My question is this. What do we do to counter the Titans and Colts if they don't draft pass rushers? They have 1st round picks as well. What if one drafts Ebron? Would Mack be considered a good counter or do we only need to counter the worst team in the league?

 

Personally, I would not build my team to counter another team.   I would just build the best team possible.   In the NFL, things change so much from year to year, if you make decisions based on what other teams are doing, by the time you have implemented your own changes, the other teams may be completely different from what you expected. 

 

For example, if Houston drafts Clowney and now they have Watt and Clowney, so we say, OMG, we need a right tackle, so we draft Robinson, and then in a year, Clowney is a bust and Watt is injured, but Houston has come up with a great QB out of nowhere (they drafted him in the 3rd round), now what do you do?   OMG, instead of a RT, we should have drafted a pass rusher!!! 

 

You can't make decisions in reaction to the year to year moves of your opponents.   It just doesn't work, and in effect, your opponent is driving your decisions.   Why let them dictate how you build your team?  

---

Personally, I would not build my team to counter another team. I would just build the best team possible. In the NFL, things change so much from year to year, if you make decisions based on what other teams are doing, by the time you have implemented your own changes, the other teams may be completely different from what you expected.


For example, if Houston drafts Clowney and now they have Watt and Clowney, so we say, OMG, we need a right tackle, so we draft Robinson, and then in a year, Clowney is a bust and Watt is injured, but Houston has come up with a great QB out of nowhere (they drafted him in the 3rd round), now what do you do? OMG, instead of a RT, we should have drafted a pass rusher!!!


You can't make decisions in reaction to the year to year moves of your opponents. It just doesn't work, and in effect, your opponent is driving your decisions. Why let them dictate how you build your team?

My post was rhetorical towards TMD's pov. I 100% agree with you.

---

won't happen. Tmd is clairvoyant.

---

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."

Not a fan of Mack at 3. He has talent, but go watch his tape against Baylor and Stony Brook.. It's like he wasn't even out there

---

Shock the world

Hilarious and disturbing

 

To mine own self... and all of that.

---

I'm trying to make myself more informed and less opinionated.

Stop saying whatever stupid thing you're talking about and pay attention to all the interesting things I have to say!

Not a fan of Mack at 3. He has talent, but go watch his tape against Baylor and Stony Brook.. It's like he wasn't even out there

So prospects are not allowed to have bad games? Who would you rather the Jags select at 3?

---

So prospects are not allowed to have bad games? Who would you rather the Jags select at 3?

Not if they want to be drafted high by armchair GMs.

---

Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

Not if they want to be drafted high by armchair GMs.

I'm just shocked by all this hate towards Mack. Haven't really heard any bad news about him from anyone I've talked to or analysts I've listened to.

 

Clowney Mack or Watkins will be a Jag. 2nd round or a trade back into the 1st will be our QB and then 3-7 will be Oline help and offensive playmakers . Thats the way I see it playing out.

---

I'm just shocked by all this hate towards Mack. Haven't really heard any bad news about him from anyone I've talked to or analysts I've listened to.

 

Clowney Mack or Watkins will be a Jag. 2nd round or a trade back into the 1st will be our QB and then 3-7 will be Oline help and offensive playmakers . Thats the way I see it playing out.

You shouldn't be shocked by anything coming out of that trolls mouth.  He's an attention whore and uses this board to get it.  Pretty sad really.

---

I'm just shocked by all this hate towards Mack. Haven't really heard any bad news about him from anyone I've talked to or analysts I've listened to.

 

Clowney Mack or Watkins will be a Jag. 2nd round or a trade back into the 1st will be our QB and then 3-7 will be Oline help and offensive playmakers . Thats the way I see it playing out.

 

With Twitter, we now have hundreds of people pretending to be scouts and draft experts. Most are sensationalists that say outrageous things just to get attention/followers. Look at Nolan Nawrocki. A year and a half ago, not many people knew who he was. Now he works for NFL.com. It's the ESPN/Embrace Debate world we live in. 

---

I'm just shocked by all this hate towards Mack. Haven't really heard any bad news about him from anyone I've talked to or analysts I've listened to.

 

Clowney Mack or Watkins will be a Jag. 2nd round or a trade back into the 1st will be our QB and then 3-7 will be Oline help and offensive playmakers . Thats the way I see it playing out.

 

I don't hate Mack. I think he'll be a good, but not great player in the league. 

 

What I hate is not getting max value out of your drafts, especially with high picks. This opportunity only comes around once a year. Gene Smith already showed you what happens when you take players you simply fall in love with and leave value on the table. I think this draft is too talented to put all the chips in on Mack, rather than doing what the team should  be doing and trading down and stockpiling picks. IMO, theres going to be an equally talented player as far down as pick 9 or 10 as there is with selecting Mack at 3. This team needs volume picks, and trading down (to no further than 10) would be the way to go to get a very talented 1st rounder, combined with adding picks, i.e. getting the most value out of the situation. 

---

Not a fan of Mack at 3. He has talent, but go watch his tape against Baylor and Stony Brook.. It's like he wasn't even out there

 

Exactly......but all everyone focuses on is OMGZ - look at his game vs OHIGHOSTAYTE!!!!

 

Mack will likely be a good player in this league, but the Jags can get better value than that at 3 and/ or get an equally good player after trading down and stockpiling picks. 

---

I don't hate Mack. I think he'll be a good, but not great player in the league. 

 

What I hate is not getting max value out of your drafts, especially with high picks. This opportunity only comes around once a year. Gene Smith already showed you what happens when you take players you simply fall in love with and leave value on the table. I think this draft is too talented to put all the chips in on Mack, rather than doing what the team should  be doing and trading down and stockpiling picks. IMO, theres going to be an equally talented player as far down as pick 9 or 10 as there is with selecting Mack at 3. This team needs volume picks, and trading down (to no further than 10) would be the way to go to get a very talented 1st rounder, combined with adding picks, i.e. getting the most value out of the situation. 

You seem to be on an island when it comes to Mack. This is nothing at all like Gene Smith because Mack is not Alualu. Mack is widely considered a top 5 pick. Alualu was not. I understand your idea of getting the most value for your pick but most people feel that Mack is hitting the value at 3 perfectly where you feel like he should be taken somewhere between 6-10. Its just a difference of a players rating here.

 

We are running in circles because you tend to think Mack is not top 5 material where as 85% or more of the sports world feels he is. If we can trade down, great. But if we can't? And Clowney and Watkins are gone, we should take Mack.

---

Exactly......but all everyone focuses on is OMGZ - look at his game vs OHIGHOSTAYTE!!!!

 

Mack will likely be a good player in this league, but the Jags can get better value than that at 3 and/ or get an equally good player after trading down and stockpiling picks. 

And if we can't trade the pick you want us to take Teddy? Teddy never had a bad game???

---

You seem to be on an island when it comes to Mack. This is nothing at all like Gene Smith because Mack is not Alualu. Mack is widely considered a top 5 pick. Alualu was not. I understand your idea of getting the most value for your pick but most people feel that Mack is hitting the value at 3 perfectly where you feel like he should be taken somewhere between 6-10. Its just a difference of a players rating here.

 

We are running in circles because you tend to think Mack is not top 5 material where as 85% or more of the sports world feels he is. If we can trade down, great. But if we can't? And Clowney and Watkins are gone, we should take Mack.

 

Is it the exact same scope as Alualu? No. But it is still the same concept IMO. The Jags can still trade down, accumulate picks and get a player just as good in the 5-10 range, maybe still even get Mack there, but even if its not Mack, an equally talented player will be there, but you would be gaining value with the extra picks obtained in the trade down, rather than just taking Mack at 3 because you fell in love with the player. 

---

Is it the exact same scope as Alualu? No. But it is still the same concept IMO. The Jags can still trade down, accumulate picks and get a player just as good in the 5-10 range, maybe still even get Mack there, but even if its not Mack, an equally talented player will be there, but you would be gaining value with the extra picks obtained in the trade down, rather than just taking Mack at 3 because you fell in love with the player. 

I think a lot of people agree in trying to trade down if Clowney isn't there. I definitely would like to do that. But thats contingent on someone wanting to trade up. If no one wants to, the fact remains that you would want to take Bridgewater and IMO, thats getting worse value at #3 than if we take Mack.

---

And if we can't trade the pick you want us to take Teddy? Teddy never had a bad game???

 

But heres the difference - even though I am a Teddy fan, I've also prepared myself for a scenario where we don't get him, and get another QB like Manziel or Garoppolo. I can see there are other ways to get value and still be good picks. The Gene Smith method - that I hate, btw, is to fall in love with that one player and take him at your pick, ignoring other variables and opportunities. You can't be so rigid on draft day that you leave points on the field, so to speak. 

 

The only player you absolutely have to take at 3 should they fall to you is Clowney. Bridgewater I really like, and certainly won't complain if they select him at 3, but since he's projected to fall a bit I also won't mind passing on him for a trade down because there would still be the chance to get him after that trade down. 

---

But heres the difference - even though I am a Teddy fan, I've also prepared myself for a scenario where we don't get him, and get another QB like Manziel or Garoppolo. I can see there are other ways to get value and still be good picks. The Gene Smith method - that I hate, btw, is to fall in love with that one player and take him at your pick, ignoring other variables and opportunities. You can't be so rigid on draft day that you leave points on the field, so to speak. 

 

The only player you absolutely have to take at 3 should they fall to you is Clowney. Bridgewater I really like, and certainly won't complain if they select him at 3, but since he's projected to fall a bit I also won't mind passing on him for a trade down. 

I've prepared myself if we take like 10 different players at #3. I agree that falling in love with one player is the worst way to go. It's how you end up with Derrick Harvey, Matt Jones and Reggie Williams. I think we both have the same philosophy but the only thing we differ on is Mack. If Clowney and Watkins are both gone at #3 and we can't trade down, I would take Mack over Teddy and you would take Teddy. I think Mack has perfect value at #3 and you don't. Totally fine.

 

Let's just hope Bortles and Matthews go #1 and #2 and we can get Clowney.

---

I think a lot of people agree in trying to trade down if Clowney isn't there. I definitely would like to do that. But thats contingent on someone wanting to trade up. If no one wants to, the fact remains that you would want to take Bridgewater and IMO, thats getting worse value at #3 than if we take Mack.

 

I don't see it as worse value than Mack at all. 

 

At worst. Bridgewater is a similarly skilled player at his position as Mack is at his. So then to break that tie, you consider that Bridgewater plays the most important position on the field, and the above premise is proven incorrect. Bridgewater gives you more value than Mack. 

 

Clowney is the only player that at 3, you can really make the argument that he could give more value than Bridgewater and thats because some project him as one of the better players at his position maybe ever, with his raw talent/ physical ability. 

---