(02-24-2023, 08:12 PM)SeldomRite Wrote:

(02-24-2023, 06:31 PM)The Real Marty Wrote: BUT- he's been in the system for a year, so we don't have to totally train a new guy.  

I'm going to trust the front office with these decisions.  They did pretty well last year.

Which games would the Jags have won last year with Beathard if Trevor had been unable to start a game?

Maybe the jets or second texans game. Those games the Jags may have been able to win with any guy that can manage to throw a pass. Other than those I can't think of any that Beathard could have won.

If I'm right about the above then the team shouldn't spend any amount of money on trying to maximize what would happen if Trevor gets hurt, and instead spend every cent they can on making sure he doesn't.

When the financials are released, please show me the level of guard/RT we could sign for the same amount of money.

Spoiler: the results will be dire.

---

(02-24-2023, 09:59 PM)copycat Wrote:

(02-24-2023, 09:30 PM)TheDuke007 Wrote: There's nothing odd.  Beathard was a free agent.  If we don't extend him, we lose him.  He's insurance against Rourke not working out or needing time to develop.  Beathard has the advantage over some other free agent qb in that he has a year of experience in the system.  The Jags can devote more practice snaps and preseason game time to Rourke to see if he can develop.  If Rourke looks good, the team can cut Beathard.  If Rourke looks terrible, at least we have a guy that knows the system.

I’m thinking of the financial side.  We are already over the cap and every dollar counts

If Rourke tanks it, and we let CJB go, we're either forced to stick with someone unfit for play or to overpay for a different backup to come in.

You're right. Every dollar counts.

---