Quote:Be disappointed in me all you like.

 

It seems that's how you work.  I thought you were a legitimate critical voice, until you started trashing Bradley within HOURS of him being named coach.

 

Has nothing to do with attacking you personally, like some others who get into it with you.

 

I'm tired of going over this. Yes I was critical of Bradley hours after the hire, partly because I did not want the hire to come so soon after one interview. I wanted Roman and the Falcons guy to be interviewed first, and I wanted second interviews before a final decision was made. It was the way we hired Caldwell and I wanted the same method to be utilized on any head coach we hired that did not possess head coach experience prior. I'll admit some of it was fear of "everything we seem to do is wrong", so I had a little of that, but too bad, thats what over a decade straight of bad decisions will do.  When we start developing a reputation of making solid moves, guess what - then my automatic thinking the worst for us will also fade, and turn into the opposite. 

 

Quote:No matter who they hire, fire, draft, sign, release, start, bench, demote, promote or shake hands with at the combine....

 

...our resident troll will invent 100 things wrong with it.   Or prognosticate how the Jags will likely screw up an upcoming decision - which is what we have to endure for the next few months.  It's sad. 

 

Oh really? Like Joeckel? Oops. Like Blackmon? Oops. Like picks 5-7? OOps. 

 

Theres things I like that we've done and there have been things I have not liked. Its not my fault the majority have been moves I have not liked. 

 

Quote:But why trade down if the player you want is on the board?

 

I'm not talking the Alualu type reach that ridiculous Gene Smith was known for.

 

I'm talking if we are at three and Clowney is on the board, why trade down when we have the chance to get a star caliber player YOU acknowledged we need?

 

The Patriots were able to do that for years thanks to the Jets, who traded them all of those picks for Curtis Martin, added to an already loaded roster.  Since they had few if any immediate needs over the years and a lot of picks with which to operate, it made it a lot easier to trade down for a future first round pick.

 

That's a lot different than the Jaguars situation, where the Jaguars have a lot of immediate needs.

 

I am not saying I am categorically opposed to trading down irrespective of circumstances.  What I am saying is that there may be circumstances where trading down is unwise.  There may be times where trading down is not feasible.  There may be times where the team does not trade down and still maximized the value in their draft picks.  Under those circumstances, it's silly to criticize the team for not trading down.

 

If Clowney is on the board, and someone offers us a package of picks that include multiple good picks for 2014 and also a first rounder or more for 2015, I say you have to consider it and most likely take it. Weigh the potential benefits as well as concerns with Clowney. I'll be fine with Clowney at 3. But I'd also be fine with a trade down from 3 that nets us a lot of value. 

 

Quote:Anyone know if that TE Gillmore from Colorado St. was invited to the combine?  

 

I think he'd be a nice pick with one of our fourth rounders. 

 

http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings/dsp...&genpos=TE

 

 

Isn't that the guy that dropped Garropolo's pass that was right in his eggos?

 

Quote:Sadly, that seems like a safe bet.

 

Yes, we know. Mob. 

---