(01-19-2018, 11:42 AM)jagsfan1983 Wrote: I'm not saying don't draft a QB, but we won't be drafting high enough to get one of the top 3. There is a chance to hit a home run by drafting a QB later but Bortles would be a better option for next year and it would be better to have the rookie sit a year rather than throw them in the fire with Super Bowl aspirations and watch them struggle as a young QB with no NFL experience which is what happens in the majority of the situations where a rookie QB starts.

I should clarify again as I have in many other threads but maybe not this one. I am ok with Bortles on the 5th year option and drafting a QB as high as possible, hopefully in a trade up if a good prospect starts slipping like Mahomes/Watson did last year. I don't think it's as good as signing Cousins or trading for Smith (while also drafting QB early), but it's an ok option. I am not ok with giving Bortles an extension and drafting a mid round long shot QB to develop as has been suggested by many in this thread.

---

(01-19-2018, 11:59 AM)Rico Wrote:

(01-19-2018, 11:55 AM)Upper Wrote: That's the goal, yes. It's really darn hard to sustain winning without a true franchise QB. Players get old, players get expensive, players get hurt. If we want this perfect storm of weak division, easy schedule, and fortunate health luck to translate into long term sustainability we should stay diligent on the path of upgrading QB.

What a joke.  So how long have those players been around?  And in that timespan you, yourself, said that one other quarterback has snuck in there.  And allll of the quarterbacks drafted in that same timespan and only one has won the AFC.  What a joke.  Using three first ballot HOF quarterbacks as a measuring stick...as if that's the norm.  Come back to reality for a while.

I didn't say that's the norm, I said that's the goal. It's a far more noble goal than settling on average. And it's even more attainable now that that group of Brady/Ben/Brees is close to their way out.

---