I hope they take two QBs, with one being a later round, developmental guy. Maybe someone with one of the extra 5th or 6th rounders. I would like to see someone that they can just sit and train for some time like they did with Garrard. I think every team needs one of those guys.

---

What lies behind us, and what lies before us are tiny matters compared to what lies within us.







 

I hope they take two QBs, with one being a later round, developmental guy. Maybe someone with one of the extra 5th or 6th rounders. I would like to see someone that they can just sit and train for some time like they did with Garrard. I think every team needs one of those guys.

 

Tajh Boyd could be that guy.

 

He could scramble like Garrard, thick-ly built like Garrard, and has accuracy issues - like Garrard.  Still a player I would be quite happy with in the 5th round.

---

<FONT face="Comic Sans MS" size=3><B><FONT face=Verdana color=#ff6600 size=4></FONT></B></FONT>

...but as a developmental guy, I think you can clearly do worse. 

I hate when people say stuff like grab Murray or McCarron 'as a developmental guy'. Those types that have years and years of starting experience and are both limited and maxed out physically are the antithesis of developmental. If you want to just say draft them to be a solid backup guy that's fine, but they aren't going to be the long term answer to anyone's QB needs and they sure as heck aren't going to suddenly develop into having some extra gear that we haven't seen over the 4 years of college play. 

---

The Jags wind up executing either one or multiple trade downs, and wind up taking Mack or Barr, and then with later picks in the draft selecting both QB Jimmy Garoppolo + Aaron Murray? 

 

I think one of those 2, if not both will turn out to be a very good QB in this league and the other would be a solid backup/ developmental QB. 

 

I'd rather the Jags draft a star player (Clowney) if he's there at 3 rather than settle for a lesser DE. I'm beginning to believe that Manziel will be a star in the NFL, if so I wouldn't trade the pick if he were there.


 

If the top two players go 1,2 then a trade down seems reasonable if the offer is good.

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

I hate when people say stuff like grab Murray or McCarron 'as a developmental guy'. Those types that have years and years of starting experience and are both limited and maxed out physically are the antithesis of developmental. If you want to just say draft them to be a solid backup guy that's fine, but they aren't going to be the long term answer to anyone's QB needs and they sure as heck aren't going to suddenly develop into having some extra gear that we haven't seen over the 4 years of college play. 

 

Kind of like everyone else hates when you act like you know more than the average person on this forum about the draft?  

---

<FONT face="Comic Sans MS" size=3><B><FONT face=Verdana color=#ff6600 size=4></FONT></B></FONT>

I don't get the man-crush on Garoppolo. Yes, he was productive in college, but it was at a low level of competition. People keep comparing him to Romo, well guess what? Romo spent three years on the bench. I'm all for taking a developmental guy like Boyd, Murray or Brett Smith late, but if you're going to draft a QB as high as you'll probably have to go for Garoppolo, make it someone like Carr who'll be up to NFL speed sooner than 2017.

---

I hate when people say stuff like grab Murray or McCarron 'as a developmental guy'. Those types that have years and years of starting experience and are both limited and maxed out physically are the antithesis of developmental. If you want to just say draft them to be a solid backup guy that's fine, but they aren't going to be the long term answer to anyone's QB needs and they sure as heck aren't going to suddenly develop into having some extra gear that we haven't seen over the 4 years of college play. 

 

Was Rob Johnson a developmental guy? Call him what you want, drafting him when we already had Brunell and Beuerlein wound up netting us an extra first and an extra 4th rounder in later years. 

 

With that same premise, I'd want to draft someone like Murray in addition to whatever QB we also draft, just to try and do it again, even if we don't ever get -as- much in return again. 

---

What do people like about Aaron Murray?


I do feel QBs that are currently injured tend to not get scrutinized as much. Everyone thinks they will get a "steal" when they draft Murray because they think they are getting them much lower than they would have been if they were fully healthy.


But my question is honestly - what are his positive traits? Does he have an NFL arm?

I've liked the guy since his freshman year. He has a good arm on him and has played 4 years of football in the SEC. Sounds solid to me. This last year all his starting skill players got hurt and still had his team in contention. That says the most to me about him

---

I hate when people say stuff like grab Murray or McCarron 'as a developmental guy'. Those types that have years and years of starting experience and are both limited and maxed out physically are the antithesis of developmental. If you want to just say draft them to be a solid backup guy that's fine, but they aren't going to be the long term answer to anyone's QB needs and they sure as heck aren't going to suddenly develop into having some extra gear that we haven't seen over the 4 years of college play. 

Speaking of pro scouts! You come on here with your "Im the greatest talent scout on these boards" attitude every freakin day with no substance to back your claims other than the random link! "I dont want to work for so and so's blog because it pays peanuts"? My money says its more like , youre not working for a blog, because you were banned.

---

I don't get the man-crush on Garoppolo. Yes, he was productive in college, but it was at a low level of competition. People keep comparing him to Romo, well guess what? Romo spent three years on the bench. I'm all for taking a developmental guy like Boyd, Murray or Brett Smith late, but if you're going to draft a QB as high as you'll probably have to go for Garoppolo, make it someone like Carr who'll be up to NFL speed sooner than 2017.

My issue is his delivery (Unlike a certain train touting poster, I really do spend time breaking down multiple players at multiple spots ), Maybe it could be fixed? Almost a tweaked sidearm delivery (worried about blocked throws at the line). But Mettenberger I feel would deliver more value in the 2nd/3rd round, maybe a Boyd or a Thomas, or even a Tom Savage from Pitt in the 4th/5th/6th (I like those 3, as 2-3 year projects to sit and learn). Murray, Mccarron, Garoppolo, Smith, Shaw should all be in that late 2-early 4 group, all have flaws (as does every qb in this class) coming out of the gate but pontential starters. 

---

I've liked the guy since his freshman year. He has a good arm on him and has played 4 years of football in the SEC. Sounds solid to me. This last year all his starting skill players got hurt and still had his team in contention. That says the most to me about him

 

He doesn't have a good arm.

---

He doesn't have a good arm.

Murray has a decent arm. Far from the strongest in this class, but above average.

---

Murray has a decent arm. Far from the strongest in this class, but above average.

 

It's not even above average. He's undersized with a mediocre arm. How does that translate into the NFL?

---

It's not even above average. He's undersized with a mediocre arm. How does that translate into the NFL?

Far from mediocre, again not great (which was never said by the op) but decent (and it is a clean deep ball). Not sure why youre using the undersized quote to support your claim. That was never argued (however hes only an inch shorter than 4 others projected in the first 4 rounds, and taller than 1).

---

Was Rob Johnson a developmental guy? Call him what you want, drafting him when we already had Brunell and Beuerlein wound up netting us an extra first and an extra 4th rounder in later years. 

 

With that same premise, I'd want to draft someone like Murray in addition to whatever QB we also draft, just to try and do it again, even if we don't ever get -as- much in return again. 

 

Beuerlein was only a one year guy and Brunell was far from a sure thing. They took Johnson because he was projected to go much higher. It would be like Derek Carr slipping to the fourth round, not Aaron Murray.

---

I agree.  I wouldn't mind a trade down, but I dislike both of the two quarterbacks.  Garoppolo is Matt Scott 2.0.  The only positive trait Aaron Murray has as a quarterback is his personality.

---

Garoppolo is Matt Scott 2.0.

 

Not a dig at you but I find it funny when something like this is said. If you don't like a player just say he is (insert mediocre player) 2.0.

 

This guy is Blaine Gabbert 2.0 or Derrick Harvey 2.0.

 

It's hilarious.

---

;

;

Not a Murray fan at all. Average size, average arm, average athlete. I could see him maybe being a solid backup but never a starter in the league.

---

;

;

Murray has a mediocre "arm"? Then "mediocre arm" is an overrated aspect of QB. As said I've seen lots of examples of Murray completing intermediate to longer passes all over the yard. When people said that about Lefeavor, while I may not have agreed at first, I was able to go back and reluctantly see that they had a point. But to say similar with Murray, I don't get it. He's much more of a gunslinger, and he plays in the SEC so its not about facing weaker D's. 

 

A guy like David Fales is an example of a rag arm. You can see it immediately when watching. Murray is no Fales in that respect. 

---

Murray has a mediocre "arm"? Then "mediocre arm" is an overrated aspect of QB. As said I've seen lots of examples of Murray completing intermediate to longer passes all over the yard. When people said that about Lefeavor, while I may not have agreed at first, I was able to go back and reluctantly see that they had a point. But to say similar with Murray, I don't get it. He's much more of a gunslinger, and he plays in the SEC so its not about facing weaker D's. 

 

A guy like David Fales is an example of a rag arm. You can see it immediately when watching. Murray is no Fales in that respect. 

Watching Fales, I agree! I liked him a little when I first started looking at the qb class, but not even in my top 10 now

---