I hate this kind of obvious defense of the pick....

 

You could say the same thing for many failed picks of the past as well. 

 

Ooooh, so Caldwell & the scouts were in agreement....well no [BAD WORD REMOVED] sherlock. 

 

 

To me, its a weak and obvious defense of the selection. 

 

Similar to how the previous regime defended the Alualu pick. 

 

Difference is, Gene didn't wait for the scouts.  He decided he liked Alualu.  Didn't matter what the scouts wanted.  Also Alualu was a Defensive Tackle.  And I don't think anybody mocked him anywhere near the Top 10.

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

I hate this kind of obvious defense of the pick....

 

You could say the same thing for many failed picks of the past as well. 

 

Ooooh, so Caldwell & the scouts were in agreement....well no [BAD WORD REMOVED] sherlock. 

 

 

To me, its a weak and obvious defense of the selection. 

 

Similar to how the previous regime defended the Alualu pick. 

 

 

maybe that defense of the pick is a little bit of a stretch, but the real defense of the pick is the TMD defense. even if it seems like it might have been a little bit of a reach, if you are getting a franchise qb, then its ok. thats how you justified that taking teddy at 3 would have been ok. and i said this in another thread, but we dont know that the browns wouldnt have taken bortles if he was there at 4? there could have been numerous teams that would have wanted him. we just dont know. 

---

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."

But when they cite measurables as one of the first reasoning for why he likes him....

 

While I agree that Gabbert and Bortles were different styles in college, I got the same underwhelming feeling when watching his play in college. 

 

Potential? Sure. But Gabbert also had the same sort of "potential" and a lot of it was based off of the measurables and chalk talk. 

 

Sorry but I honestly don't see similar players by watching their college tape.

 

Bortles actually had very good years in college, and WON the big-time games.  He lead his team on many comeback wins, he's clutch.

 

If Bortles plays in the NFL like he played in college, we have a pro-bowl QB.

 

Gabbert played in the NFL just like he played in college.  Scared and ineffectively.  

 

Take the chalk talk and interviews and measurables out of the picture.  You have 2 entirely different QBs.

---

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

Another thing is if you watch his 2012

Tape vs 2013 you can see a lot

Of

Improvement. I

Think

That's a good sign.

---

But when they cite measurables as one of the first reasoning for why he likes him....

 

While I agree that Gabbert and Bortles were different styles in college, I got the same underwhelming feeling when watching his play in college. 

 

Potential? Sure. But Gabbert also had the same sort of "potential" and a lot of it was based off of the measurables and chalk talk. 

 

 

I dunno, I would feel less apprehensive if measureables weren't one of the first thing Caldwell used there to trump the pick up. 

 

Measurables is just one of those power words that people use.  There have been plenty of QB's who succeeded that had the measurables, and it was probably the first thing talked about then too.

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

TMD, you can't be mad at this pic.

 

Your mock draft had the Jags taking Teddy #3 overall.  You also would have been OK with Manziel #3 overall.

 

Every single NFL team has decided that your evaluation is far off in this case.

 

in the end, your mock is correct in terms of the positon that we picked.  We picked QB, you got that right.

Now, you have to ask yourself this question:  Was I right (and every NFL team wrong) about evaluating this QB class?  

 

Or did Caldwell, the scouts, the coaches all make a huge mistake and picked the wrong guy?  We got what we believe is the best QB not just this year, but the following year as well.

 

Caldwell has made it clear that he drafts in the 1st round also based on who is available next year.  That's why we didn't draft a QB last year.  He waited for Bortles.  He said looking ahead, Bortles is the best prospect, ahead of guys like Mariota and Jameis.  He got his guy.

 

Not it's time to develop him.  

---

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

Measurables is just one of those power words that people use. There have been plenty of QB's who succeeded that had the measurables, and it was probably the first thing talked about then too.

probably why Manziel

Fell.

---

Is your opinion on this QB literally changing after every article you read about someone else's OPINION?  Gotcha.

 

Bortles is the anti-Blaine gabbert under pressure.

 

Steps up into the pocket, moves very well, doesn't get scared, and can deliver the ball from the pocket or on the run.

 

Also, he has the clutch trait.  He has taken UCF with much less talent around him to a BCS bowl win.  He did a lot with less talent around him. 

 

I will agree with that last point. It gives me hope despite the other apprehension. 

---

I will agree with that last point. It gives me hope despite the other apprehension.

he played some big games in college and showed up

Every time. In fact he beat Bridge head to head.

---

Bortles has good touch on the ball too. Gabbert only knew how to throw flat fastballs into the dirt. Seriously any comparison of any of these QBs coming out to Gabbert is baseless and laughable

---

I will agree with that last point. It gives me hope despite the other apprehension. 

 

When I heard Blake Bortles from Goodell, I was in disbelief.  I didn't like it.  My guy reaction was "nooo".... but now that I took emotion out of it, and I spent more time evaluating him and others, I'm OK with it.  It will come down to how he develops, which is true with every pick.  I didn't like it because I was expecting (or hoping) for the sexy pick.  The Johnny football type of pick.  The Sammy Watkins type of pick..... but luckily I don't make the decisions because those are feelings I have when I have a few beers in me.  Our initial gut reaction is "we want the sexy pick!".... Bortles was not the sexy pick, but it can prove to be the BEST pick.

 

What I LOVE about the pick is that I had no clue we'd get him.  Caldwell played this draft perfectly.  Nobody, absolutely nobody thought Bortles was his guy.  He manipulated the media like a pro.  Maybe that's one of the reasons I had the initial "noo" reaction.  I just didn't envision him coming.  I thought their plan was to build the other players first and find a QB later.

 

It speaks volumes that Caldwell has a plan and that he's not as transparent as some of us feared.  He kept the media and the fans completely clueless.  

---

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

I hate using walterfootball as a source, but I think this is interesting:

Bortles could be the first quarterback selected in the 2014 NFL Draft. Sources from around the league acknowledge that Bortles requires some development, but he has the most upside of any quarterback in the 2014 NFL Draft. Bortles stands a good chance of being a top-10 pick. 

We wrote in mid-February, "Two of the quarterback-needy teams picking in the top five have told WalterFootball.com that they have Bortles as their No. 1-rated quarterback. If the Houston Texans take a quarterback with the No. 1-overall pick, WalterFootball.com believes it will be Bortles based on conversations with league contacts." Nothing has changed that stance. 

That contention has become the mainstream opinion as Bortles had a quality pro day to help his draft stock. He is the top quarterback prospect and the only one who could go with the first-overall pick. 

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

TMD, you can't be mad at this pic.

 

Your mock draft had the Jags taking Teddy #3 overall.  You also would have been OK with Manziel #3 overall.

 

Every single NFL team has decided that your evaluation is far off in this case.

 

in the end, your mock is correct in terms of the positon that we picked.  We picked QB, you got that right.

Now, you have to ask yourself this question:  Was I right (and every NFL team wrong) about evaluating this QB class?  

 

Or did Caldwell, the scouts, the coaches all make a huge mistake and picked the wrong guy?  We got what we believe is the best QB not just this year, but the following year as well.

 

Caldwell has made it clear that he drafts in the 1st round also based on who is available next year.  That's why we didn't draft a QB last year.  He waited for Bortles.  He said looking ahead, Bortles is the best prospect, ahead of guys like Mariota and Jameis.  He got his guy.

 

Not it's time to develop him.  

 

I'm not "mad" at the pick. I'm not. 

 

Still in shock? Perhaps....a little jealous of what Cleveland was able to do, and think that would have been great for us? (and believe if that trade was there for Cleveland it probably was for us too) Yep. Still concerned that  Bortles isn't all that great of a QB prospect? Yep. Did I think that Bortles would have fell in the draft at least somewhat? Yep. I don't see Cleveland taking him at 4. Cleveland was trading down regardless, IMO. Cleveland wanted the player they took after the trade down first. 

 

I'll give Bortles a chance. But I am allowed to have an opinion where as of right now, I'm not sold on the guy. Sure, that can change when I start to see him developing for us. We all want this guy to pan out. Its pretty much the only hope we got. Right? 

---

This explains it perfectly.  Caldwell made up his mind and waited for the scouts reaction.  When they realized they all said Bortles was in agreement, they went with it.

 

Can't argue with that.

 

 

Caldwell said he thinks Bortles will be the Jaguars’ starting quarterback for a decade or more, and Caldwell views Bortles as the kind of elite prospect who doesn’t come along very often.

 

“It was very easy,” Caldwell said. “There’s not a lot of 6-foot-5, 245-pound pro-style quarterbacks with the athleticism Blake has.”

 

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/201...-it-quiet/

Go ahead and wrap your head around perception-building tactics.

 

There's no way Caldwell wasn't the victim of the inappropriate influence of the Gator-infested media. They still spew passive aggressive attitude about "even if he's released". The TU hacks never get mad, they get complete annihilation ugly.

 

Caldwell is a lame duck GM.

 

What you suggest is the magical draft fairy was a busy, busy girl dusting Caldwell and the Gene Smith scouts with UCF pixie dust.

 

It just doesn't happen that way.

---

First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win. - Mahatma Gandhi

 

http://s6.postimg.org/vyr2ycdfz/Teddy_Br...cked_4.gif

The worst tape I found on Bortles was 2012 vs Missouri but you can see a great deal of improvement from there on.

---

Bortles has good touch on the ball too. Gabbert only knew how to throw flat fastballs into the dirt. Seriously any comparison of any of these QBs coming out to Gabbert is baseless and laughable

 

I think the comparison to Gabbert was brought on a little by Dave himself when one of the first reasoning given for his choice is listing Bortles measurables. People remember that was also one of the first things mentioned by our people when we drafted Gabbert. 

---

I'm not "mad" at the pick. I'm not. 

 

Still in shock? Perhaps....a little jealous of what Cleveland was able to do, and think that would have been great for us? Yep. Still concerned that  Bortles isn't all that great of a QB prospect? Yep. Did I think that Bortles would have fell in the draft at least somewhat? Yep. I don't see Cleveland taking him at 4. Cleveland was trading down regardless, IMO. 

 

I'll give Bortles a chance. But I am allowed to have an opinion where as of right now, I'm not sold on the guy. Sure, that can change when I start to see him developing for us. We all want this guy to pan out. Its pretty much the only hope we got. Right? 

 

Of course, that's very reasonable.

 

No beef with that stance at all.

 

Another thing to consider... taking the QB skills out of it (which I also think Bortles is best at).. he was a very safe pick.  They talked about him not having any distractions. He's ALLLL about football.  NO concerns with the law, drugs, etc.  No concerns with size or durability.  No concerns with intelligence and work ethic.  No concerns at all.

 

You can't say that about Bridgewater and Manziel.  Can't say that about Sammy either now that I think about it.

---

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

I think the comparison to Gabbert was brought on a little by Dave himself when one of the first reasoning given for his choice is listing Bortles measurables. People remember that was also one of the first things mentioned by our people when we drafted Gabbert. 

 

Caldwell didn't cite his measurables as his first reason he liked Bortles.

---

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

I think the comparison to Gabbert was brought on a little by Dave himself when one of the first reasoning given for his choice is listing Bortles measurables. People remember that was also one of the first things mentioned by our people when we drafted Gabbert. 

 

So that makes having those measurables a bad thing?

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

I think the comparison to Gabbert was brought on a little by Dave himself when one of the first reasoning given for his choice is listing Bortles measurables. People remember that was also one of the first things mentioned by our people when we drafted Gabbert.

Pretty sure that was the only thing said about Gabbert. Please don't make me picture Gabbert's footwork again. One of the worst dropback motions I've ever seen. Makes me sick

---