If he wasn't a first round pick then he would be cut already.

And if me Aunt had balls she'd be Bruce Jenner.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Looking more likely all the time.

---

And if me Aunt had balls she'd be Bruce Jenner.

 

I'm going to go ahead and call this as Post of the Preseason.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

 

Fordham, DeMarco, and Whimper were all RTs. I'm only considering Joeckel at LT, but he was as bad as any of those three in his short time at RT.

 

Fordham indeed was RT.  He was also forced to start at LT for a season, where he earned his Turnstile Todd title.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

LOL... obviously you don't remember the talk about Monroe at the same point in his career.

 

It was the same.

 

 

It wasn't the same. The talk about Monroe was that he wasn't quite living up to his status as the surefire best LT in the draft. The thought was we should have an elite LT but only had an average one. With Joekel it's like the dude's a total joke.

---

'02

Joeckel had that one bad play but was solid otherwise. It's an improvement. One sack in a half vs. Pitt starters (= 32 per season) is half of the 71 we suffered last year. The Jags offense can live with that.

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

It wasn't the same. The talk about Monroe was that he wasn't quite living up to his status as the surefire best LT in the draft. The thought was we should have an elite LT but only had an average one. With Joekel it's like the dude's a total joke.

Pun intended!

---

You made some very good points until here ^^.

 

He's been very close to both Monroe and Barnes.  Maybe even closer to Salaam.  But Pearson?  Sheesh... As questionable as he's been, he's been better than that.  The only worse than Pearson we had was "Turnstile Todd" Fordham.

 

Pearson had chicken legs and no drive.  As soon as he remotely started to resemble a LT, he got injured.

 

 

Pearson was easily a better pass protector than Joekel even early on. It's just that he absolutely stunk as a run blocker. Joekel is far and away a better run blocker than Mike.


 

As for Fordham, are you sure he played LT???? I don't recall him playing on that side especially for a full season.


 

Salaam...aka the man who loved to hold...was the opposite. He was worse than Joekel in pass protection but even better than him as a run blocker. Salaam was a run blocking beast who simply blew chunks in pass protection.


 

Barnes was decent.... as in about the same as Joekel as a run blocker and about the same as Pearson as a pass blocker.


 

Monroe was flat out better in pass protection and as a run blocker than all of the above. The only guy to compare to Monroe was Ben Coleman when he replaced Boselli due to injury, but he had far too many penalties.

---

'02

Joeckel had that one bad play but was solid otherwise. It's an improvement. One sack in a half vs. Pitt starters (= 32 per season) is half of the 71 we suffered last year. The Jags offense can live with that.

 

You're mathematic formulas are horrific.  So there is no other player that will give up sacks?  Just Luke?  Come on...

 

It's pre-season, so it's not live bullets yet.  But let's not go and start creating false math to make ourselves feel better.  

 

If Luke stunk it up, so be it.  But let's not go rationalizing non-sense after the 1st preseason game.  Let's just continue to watch and then freak out or proclaim greatness after Week 1.  

---

He was hot garbage tonight. Got man handled too many times and just had no confidence to bully the defender. He seems so weak and top heavy and I'm not sure if that's fixable. I really fear for Bortles this season, especially because that's his blind-side and we play against A TON of superstar pass rushers this year.

---

How's the LT group look in next year's draft? I'm thinking we'll be dipping into that well again next year. Joeckel just doesn't pass the eye test when you watch him out there. He's sub-par at best and Bortles needs a cornerstone LT out there watching his back if he's ever going to become an elite QB. As it stands now, he'll be running for his life or taking multiple blind-side shots.

---

<FONT size=3>The secret to surfing is don't do anything.</FONT>

How's the LT group look in next year's draft? I'm thinking we'll be dipping into that well again next year. Joeckel just doesn't pass the eye test when you watch him out there. He's sub-par at best and Bortles needs a cornerstone LT out there watching his back if he's ever going to become an elite QB. As it stands now, he'll be running for his life or taking multiple blind-side shots.

If Joeckel doesn't pan out I doubt the Jags will turn to the draft for his replacement, ideally they'd sign a veteran FA that has proven he can play in this league. This is the route I wanted them to go when the Raiders inexplicably allowed Jared Veldheer to walk in 2013, he's one of the better LT's in the league playing for the Arizona Cardinals. If I guy like Trent Williams (unlikely) makes it to FA in 2016 the Jaguars would be wise to pounce.

---

Not a good start by Luke. We will be taking a LT in the first 3 rounds next year IMO.

---

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

Not a good start by Luke. We will be taking a LT in the first 3 rounds next year IMO.

I doubt it man, they'll look to free agency. No more taking LT's high in the draft.

---

I doubt it man, they'll look to free agency. No more taking LT's high in the draft.

 

I would  be happy with drafting a tackle in round 2-3... get some serious competition going for him.

---

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

I'm with jagforlife85 on this one.  If Joeckel doesn't pan out  I'd rather we bring in a proven commodity that can be an instant plug and play.  BB5 is our franchise QB, I don't want anyone developing while on the job.  

 

I think the prudent thing to do would be to get a free agent and draft a LT to develop over 2 years...  (So I guess I want the best of both worlds)

 

I haven't seen the game yet, but man, from the way you guys are all talking, he must have laid one seriously stinky dookie in his bed.

---

I think there's a good chance we go hard at Russell Okung this offseason if Joeckel doesn't improve, his position is too damn important for the young QB'S health. Screw him being the 2nd overall pick, if after 3 years he doesn't show much improvement, it's time to look elsewhere.

---

Well, I think it was the first series and he gets beaten for a sack/fumble.


Everyone else did alright though.


He next few series it was better? But it still concerns me that the sack was given up by Luke in less than 1 half of football.

---

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

You're mathematic formulas are horrific.  So there is no other player that will give up sacks?  Just Luke?  Come on...

 

It's pre-season, so it's not live bullets yet.  But let's not go and start creating false math to make ourselves feel better.  

 

If Luke stunk it up, so be it.  But let's not go rationalizing non-sense after the 1st preseason game.  Let's just continue to watch and then freak out or proclaim greatness after Week 1.  

 

I realize that this is just one preseason game. There was not a lot of blitzing and stunts. I don't expect this to extend to the entire season. Ideally we'd have better play at LT, but we're stuck with what we have. Help is not on the way. My point was that it's not the end of the world. We can live with what we've got, since we'll have to.


 

And my math was fine. I counted one sack by the entire OL in the first half. In this case it was Joeckel. I'd expect others to give up sacks too, at a lesser rate. I'd also expect Joeckel could go for a half without giving up a sack. It all balances out.

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

Well, I think it was the first series and he gets beaten for a sack/fumble.


Everyone else did alright though.


He next few series it was better? But it still concerns me that the sack was given up by Luke in less than 1 half of football.

 

Joeckel played more than a half. I'm not sure if Pitt had starters that long, or how good their backups are. But Joeckel did not give up 32 sacks last year. I doubt he'll be on pace for two per game this year. It's too soon to panic.

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"