(04-26-2020, 09:54 AM)Upper Wrote:

(04-26-2020, 09:41 AM)JackCity Wrote: What if I told you all of the first 3 picks were all on the top of their board as well as being needs? 

No offense but I don't think you know what you're are talking about here. Shenault certainly wasn't a reach

Lol, every single year Dave says we got the type guy on his board in addition to getting guys in the 2nd round that they had graded as first rounders. And then we pick top 10 again.

Maybe, just maybe, he's lying. Or he is really awful at putting a board together. Or both.

Shenault wasn't a reach per se, but it was a risky pick considering there was equal upside in a much safer package with Mims.

I'm not talking about what Dave said publicly

---

(04-26-2020, 09:52 AM)SeldomRite Wrote:

(04-26-2020, 09:41 AM)JackCity Wrote: What if I told you all of the first 3 picks were all on the top of their board as well as being needs? 

No offense but I don't think you know what you're are talking about here. Shenault certainly wasn't a reach

I wouldn't trust the Jaguars board, they rank guys taking "need" into account. Like I said, maybe it works out anyway, but I have a sinking feeling we'll continue to see what we've seen for years, guys taken a pick or two after our guys will be better players, and the Jaguars won't even have most of these guys on the team anymore in 4 years.

As for Shenault, maybe he succeeds or maybe he doesn't, it's the needs based drafting that bothers me more than who they took, who might work out anyway.

Every football team makes a horizontal and vertical board making need into account, the Jags are no different. 

Chaisson and Henderson were both needs, but also they viewed then as very appropriate talent at each spot. If Chaisson was gone they were going to go Justin Jefferson.

---