Quote:That upside will mean nothing if it doesnt lead to results. I liked him as a longer term prospect. But you dont draft a project at #3 if you dont have a qb established who he can sit behind. Dave was right, blake probably should have sat all year. But you couldnt justify doing that with henne as your top option.

 

Gosh!  That's some revelation there!  If his upsdide doesn't lead to results, it means nothing!  Who knew?!?!

 

Any other statements of the obvious you'd like to toss out there?  Water is wet?  The sky is blue?  Teach us all, oh wise one!

 

If you think a QB will become a franchise level QB, and you grade him as such, whether he requires development or not, you draft him.  It's not rocket science.  This front office believed he was the best QB in the draft.  They had the opportunity to draft him, Bridgewater, or Manziel, and they went with the guy they felt was the only true potential franchise QB.  Time will tell if they were right or wrong in that assessment.  But, they clearly didn't see Bridgewater as being anything more than a decent QB with limitations. Otherwise, he'd be the Jags QB. 

 

You're welcome to go back and look at all of Teddy's highlights if it gives you the warm fuzzies.  Ultimately, he is what he is.  He's not going to grow into a more sturdy version of himself. 

 

Quote:question is, will the next gm keep him around if it takes 2 more years? Because we could be looking at a whole new regime by then. I just didnt think blake was the right pick for this team at that moment. Needed a guy who could come in and lead by example right away. Blake needed a year or two to sit. Should have never gone #3.

 

All indications are that Bortles IS leading by example, but feel free to keep your head buried in the orifice of your choosing to avoid that fact.

 

Quote:The "bandwagon" was pretty light on draft day last year.

 

I'm pretty sure the only disappointed folks were the diva and the OP. 

---