(12-24-2018, 11:38 AM)rfc17 Wrote:

(12-23-2018, 05:28 PM)Jags02 Wrote: I've been trying to point this out for weeks, but it keeps seeming to fall on deaf ears (or would that be blind eyes). The difference between keeping Blake and letting him go and paying for him anyways is merely the cost of a backup qb.  You actually can get a decent backup for around $4.5 mil, but if you want a decent backup who can potentially start for an extended time, it's going to cost you more. I actually love the idea of actually letting Blake start next year while drafting a rookie who can take over mid-season when he's ready.

I tend to agree but I think the team put themselves in a bind by essentially saying Blake isn't coming back. I don't think any of these rookies will be good enough to start day 1 and if I'm right that means you need a veteran to begin the season. The money we save by cutting Blake isn't that much and probably wouldn't land us a player better than Blake. So we could find ourselves in this tough spot where we are forced to start a rookie earlier than we want or a veteran on the level of Kessler which signals a wasted season before it even begins.  When our best bet may actually be to just keep Bortles, who we know we can win with when the team stays healthy, and groom the rookie until they are ready to start which would hopefully be sooner rather than later. We need to cut Blake after June right? So I guess we could draft our rookie and hopefully bring in a veteran without a guaranteed deal. And then see where we are come June.

Although who knows, maybe they surprise us by dropping big money on a guy like Foles or someone else.