(05-01-2021, 11:43 AM)Sibelius Wrote:

(05-01-2021, 11:32 AM)Bullseye Wrote: To clarify, do you not think he represented value because you believe RBs should not be taken in the first, or do you not think Etienne was not worth a first round pick?  If you are saying it has nothing to do with Etienne, then I surmise it isn't the latter.

Or was Etienne less valuable to the Jaguars because he was not as much of a need as someone at another position?

That's a really smart question.

For me, I gave the Etienne pick a C because there were great players available at other positions that met our needs far more than a RB. Also, because we all knew RBs were going to drop to later in the draft - only 4 RBs were picked in the first three rounds. So we could still get an excellent RB in Round 4 if we really wanted one. 

Basically, by indulging a want in round 1 we set every subsequent back by one choice.

Thank you.

So basically in your mind, it's seemingly a combination of questions 1 and 3.

I have no problems with taking a RB in the first.

I have no problems with Etienne as a player worthy of a first round pick as far as his ability.  If utilized properly

Any reservation I have about that pick is in relation to needs elsewhere, and uncertainty about the ability of the team to properly utilize him.

Ultimately, this was not the pick that set every pick back by one, because every guy we discussed at 25 were still there for us at 33.  I would argue the Campbell pick did that, though again as a player, I had little problem with Campbell.

---