It would be one thing if Mallet had even ONE start where he played the entire game and showed he can play.  He hasn't.  Why anyone would trade a 3rd rounder for him, especially knowing he'll be a free agent next year, is beyond me.

 

Pretty sure I said if he is a free agent after the 2014 season wait till he hits the open market and sign him as a free agent.  I wasn't sure when he was becoming a free agent. 

---

Well it kind of doesn't matter what you think.  Most scouts said he had a great arm, and NFL GMs also did.  Heck, just today and yesterday Bradley talked about how Gabbert has everything would need in an elite QB, he just hasn't put any of it together.

 

If your argument is that Mallet has elite QB talent, I will grant you that point.  But you can't say that Gabbert DIDN'T or doesn't have elite QB talent.  If heard it described as extremely rare to be so athletic, big, smart, and have a great arm like Blaine.  Too bad he sucks.

Maybe sitting the rest of the year Dave and Gus figured studing how the games progress and is played by henne and another year of maturity might help BG put it together. and that is why he is being kept on.

---

Maybe so, I am just saying it wouldn't bother me if they traded a 3rd for Mallet. 

 

Fair enough.

---

Of course it doesn't.  What matter is what the scouts and GMs thought about Blaine's talent.  They obviously thought he was talented enough to be a 1st round QB.  The fact that you don't think so really is besides the point.

 

Ok.  What's your point?

---

An understandable philosophy.


However, given your stance regarding how undesirable our current first round draft position is, how tenable is trading down this year?


According to you, the two true superstar caliber players-Clowney and Bridgewater- will be off the board by three.


If this is true, what real incentive would any team below us have in trading up with us? Why would any team below us trade above Cleveland?


It seems you would fault the team for not trading down when there seems little to no incentive for any team to trade up. For that matter, if we stick solely to the words you used in this message I quoted above, then if Clowney somehow makes it to three and the team takes him, they are still somehow at fault for not trading down.


Am I misinterpreting you?

You're not misinterpreting him.


You're calling him out on one of his many, MANY inconsistencies.


When you fabricate as many "dissenting opinions" as he does, you are bound to frequently contradict yourself.

---

Ok.  What's your point?

 

You saying he doesn't have a good arm when there's countless examples of GMs and scouts saying otherwise is a silly position to hold. 

 

If you've seen our games, which I'm sure you have, you can remember some really amazing throws from Blaine.  They were very few, but he has showcased that talent. 

I would agree that he isn't accurate and that he has no pocket presence.  Those 2 things have destroyed him as a QB.

---

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

An understandable philosophy.

 

However, given your stance regarding how undesirable our current first round draft position is, how tenable is trading down this year?

 

According to you, the two true superstar caliber players-Clowney and Bridgewater- will be off the board by three.

 

If this is true, what real incentive would any team below us have in trading up with us?  Why would any team below us trade above Cleveland?

 

It seems you would fault the team for not trading down when there seems little to no incentive for any team to trade up.  For that matter, if we stick solely to the words you used in this message I quoted above, then if Clowney somehow makes it to three and the team takes him, they are still somehow at fault for not trading down.

 

Am I misinterpreting you?

 

This is where TMD replies with:

 

"If the Lions were stupid enough to trade for Mike Thomas, there will be a GM out there stupid enough to trade up to the 3rd pick. If it doesn't happen, Caldwell isn't doing his job."

 

We've been here before.

---

You saying he doesn't have a good arm when there's countless examples of GMs and scouts saying otherwise is a silly position to hold. 

 

If you've seen our games, which I'm sure you have, you can remember some really amazing throws from Blaine.  They were very few, but he has showcased that talent. 

I would agree that he isn't accurate and that he has no pocket presence.  Those 2 things have destroyed him as a QB.

I am not saying he has a water pistol.  He has a good arm, but I don't think it is great.  I can think of probably 15, maybe a few less, QBs that have better arms than him. 

 

The best throws I have seen Blaine make was his rookie year against the Bengals, and his second year against the Packers when Blackmon couldn't get his footdown. 

---

I am not saying he has a water pistol.  He has a good arm, but I don't think it is great.  I can think of probably 15 QBs that have better arms than him. 

 

The best throws I have seen Blaine make was his rookie year against the Bengals, and his second year against the Packers when Blackmon couldn't get his footdown. 

 

Fair enough.

It kind of proves one thing to me... it's not just about the talent.  If you're going to draft someone strictly because they have talent, so be it.  You have time to develop him etc.


To trade for a QB who has showcased great talent 4 years ago, while not displaying any of that in the NFL because he's stuck behind a hall of fame QB, may be risky.  I wouldn't be completely opposed to adding Mallet.  I would be completely against trading our 3rd round pick for him though.  If you like him that much, use that 3rd round pick for a guard or something and just sign him next year when you can.  I doubt Mallet would come right in here, learn an offense on the fly, and make a huge difference compared to say Chad Henne.

---

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

Name a backup QBs that were traded who became elite or at least considered a franchise QB? From what I remember favre wanted out so he doesnt count lol though I maybe be wrong. It's basically QB purgatory.

 

Steve Young leaps to mind.  You could argue Brunell and Hasselbeck (IIRC he was traded) too.

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

Fair enough.

It kind of proves one thing to me... it's not just about the talent.  If you're going to draft someone strictly because they have talent, so be it.  You have time to develop him etc.

To trade for a QB who has showcased great talent 4 years ago, while not displaying any of that in the NFL because he's stuck behind a hall of fame QB, may be risky.  I wouldn't be completely opposed to adding Mallet.  I would be completely against trading our 3rd round pick for him though.  If you like him that much, use that 3rd round pick for a guard or something and just sign him next year when you can.  I doubt Mallet would come right in here, learn an offense on the fly, and make a huge difference compared to say Chad Henne.

 

True.  If Mallet had two years left in New England I would trade a third for him.  Since he is becoming a free agent after next season I would wait and try to sign him.  I just think this team obviously and desperately has to get a QB who they think can string together some wins and maybe a playoff berth.  Maybe Mallet can, maybe he can't.  Your right, we have no clue what Mallet can or can't do. 

---

Personally, I'd rather see the Jaguars draft two QBs and hopefully one of them becomes our guy. 

---

Steve Young leaps to mind.  You could argue Brunell and Hasselbeck (IIRC he was traded) too.

was young a backup when he was traded? yeah i mentioned brunell earlier but the track record for traded back up QBs isnt great unless you want decent QB play. I'd rather draft one in the hopes of finding a franchise QB rather than trading for the matt schaubs/brunell/hassellbeck of the worlds.

---

was young a backup when he was traded? yeah i mentioned brunell earlier but the track record for traded back up QBs isnt great unless you want decent QB play. I'd rather draft one in the hopes of finding a franchise QB rather than trading for the matt schaubs/brunell/hassellbeck of the worlds.

 

And you are being generous. Brunell/Hasselbeck are the upper tier of QB trades. I'd rather draft a QB than trade for the Matt Flynns, Kevin Kolbs, Trent Greens, Rob Johnsons, and Matt Cassels of the world.

---

was young a backup when he was traded? yeah i mentioned brunell earlier but the track record for traded back up QBs isnt great unless you want decent QB play. I'd rather draft one in the hopes of finding a franchise QB rather than trading for the matt schaubs/brunell/hassellbeck of the worlds.

 

Yes he was.  The Bucs moved on to Vinny Testaverde.  However, I agree with your general proposition that it is better to draft a QB than trade for one.

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

All this bickering doesnt change the fact that we need more good players

---

If you think Mallet has the same level of talent as Kolb, Cassel, and Cousins, then nothing will help you my friend. 

 

Agreed. Mallett >>>>>>> all of them combined 

 

An understandable philosophy.

 

However, given your stance regarding how undesirable our current first round draft position is, how tenable is trading down this year?

 

According to you, the two true superstar caliber players-Clowney and Bridgewater- will be off the board by three.

 

If this is true, what real incentive would any team below us have in trading up with us?  Why would any team below us trade above Cleveland?

 

It seems you would fault the team for not trading down when there seems little to no incentive for any team to trade up.  For that matter, if we stick solely to the words you used in this message I quoted above, then if Clowney somehow makes it to three and the team takes him, they are still somehow at fault for not trading down.

 

Am I misinterpreting you?

 

As said before, there have indeed been examples of trams trading down for some nice packages of draft choices even when they are not sitting on an RG3 type player at their pick. 

 

A few years ago (I think it was the ALualu draft) the Eagles traded down twice, when sitting at 14 initially. Just as one recent example. 

 

I also remember Belichick making many trade downs on almost a yearly basis to acquire a better quantity of picks, as well as winding up with multiple #1's for a period of years. 

 

 

There are much better ways to use that 3rd round pick that trading it for Mallet. I'd like to see the Jaguars get great value one a WR in the 3rd round with a guy like Paul Richardson.

 

lol, so Paul Richardson > potential franchise QB. 

 

okay. 

---

Yes he was.  The Bucs moved on to Vinny Testaverde.  However, I agree with your general proposition that it is better to draft a QB than trade for one.

oh alright. just reading through wiki, he posted a 3-16 record as a starter with 11tds and 21 ints lol so gabbertesque, then he got traded and became montana's backup. then the rest is history.  looks like gabbert seem to be in a similar path stats wise lol that would suck if we traded gabbert and he ends up like steve young but i doubt it.

---

I would be happy to bring Mallet in to compete for a starting job, but im not a fan of handing it to him without having to earn it

---

lol, so Paul Richardson > potential franchise QB. 

 

okay. 

damn if anyone can trade a potential franchise qb for a 3rd rounder shouldnt all the qb needy teams jump on it? the hype train is rolling again lolol

---