All I am saying is if they take one I won't mind it.  No need to start crying about it.  I mean good grief. 

So you want us to flat out waste the 3rd overall pick on a position we don't need? Not to mention it wouldn't even be BAP?

 

Come on

---

Nope not kidding. I enjoy watching a team with a good o line. With how much this message board complains about the Jag's oline I am a little surprised by the hypocrisy.

Complaining about Rackley, Bradfield, Meester and Uche's poor play last year has zero to do with not wanting tackle in the first round.

---

So you want us to flat out waste the 3rd overall pick on a position we don't need? Not to mention it wouldn't even be BAP?

 

Come on

 

For the tenth time I WOULDN"T MIND IT.  I didn't say I want them to take one.  I want them to take Teddy or Clowney or Mack or whoever.  But if they take Matthews or Robinson I am not going to go crying to mommy about it.  I like good o lines.  This team's o line has been terrible.  Paztor can play guard, can he not?  Maybe Matthews or Robinson can play guard.  Maybe Luke's ankle won't be 100%.  You never know. 

 

And don't act like you wouldn't be in full support if they took a tackle in the first round.

---

For the tenth time I WOULDN"T MIND IT.  I didn't say I want them to take one.  I want them to take Teddy or Clowney or Mack or whoever.  But if they take Matthews or Robinson I am not going to go crying to mommy about it.  I like good o lines.  This team's o line has been terrible.  Paztor can play guard, can he not?  Maybe Matthews or Robinson can play guard.  Maybe Luke's ankle won't be 100%.  You never know. 

I would be upset.. last year it was okay because that draft class was weak and Joeckel/Fisher/Johnson were clearly the best players in the draft.. 

 

 

At this point any of these players should be taken before we even considered a Tackle:

 

1. Clowney

2. Bridgewater

3. Watkins

4. Mack

5. Barr

 

 

 

If we trade back I'd still take some of these over the best tackle:

 

Eric Ebron, Mike Evans, Darquez Denard (may be spelt wrong) 

 

 

 

Point is, tackle at 3 is a waste

---

I would be upset.. last year it was okay because that draft class was weak and Joeckel/Fisher/Johnson were clearly the best players in the draft.. 

 

 

At this point any of these players should be taken before we even considered a Tackle:

 

1. Clowney

2. Bridgewater

3. Watkins

4. Mack

5. Barr

 

 

 

If we trade back I'd still take some of these over the best tackle:

 

Eric Ebron, Mike Evans, Darquez Denard (may be spelt wrong) 

 

 

 

Point is, tackle at 3 is a waste

 

Yeah I like all those players too.  I also really like Matthews and Robinson.  A lot.  I think they are both going to be very good.  But yeah, I would love it if we took Watkins, Clowney, Bridge.  I especially like Mike Evans, but I don't think we are going to take him. 

 

I think Paztor is good.  I think he is good enough that IF we were to take a tackle at 3, he could kick inside to guard and be equally effective, erasing our need at Guard. 

---

Yeah I like all those players too.  I also really like Matthews and Robinson.  A lot.  I think they are both going to be very good.  But yeah, I would love it if we took Watkins, Clowney, Bridge.  I especially like Mike Evans, but I don't think we are going to take him. 

 

I think Paztor is good.  I think he is good enough that IF we were to take a tackle at 3, he could kick inside to guard and be equally effective, erasing our need at Guard. 

 

 

Or we can keep him at RT where he's been extremely effective and take a Guard who will be solid in the 3rd/4th and get an actual playmaker at 3 like Watkins/Bridgewater. 

 

 

I honestly do not think Dave Caldwell is even considering a tackle at 3. 

---

Or we can keep him at RT where he's been extremely effective and take a Guard who will be solid in the 3rd/4th and get an actual playmaker at 3 like Watkins/Bridgewater. 

 

 

I honestly do not think Dave Caldwell is even considering a tackle at 3. 

 

He might not be.  I am just saying I wouldn't mind it.  Good football players are good football players.  You can never have too many good o line men. 

---

For the tenth time I WOULDN"T MIND IT. I didn't say I want them to take one. I want them to take Teddy or Clowney or Mack or whoever. But if they take Matthews or Robinson I am not going to go crying to mommy about it. I like good o lines. This team's o line has been terrible. Paztor can play guard, can he not? .

Caldwell, Bradley and Pasztor all said back in December that he was better at tackle than guard.

---

Caldwell, Bradley and Pasztor all said back in December that he was better at tackle than guard.

 

That's wonderful. 

---

That's wonderful.

It kinda is actually.

We scored a starting right tackle out of a gene smith waiver wire guard pickup.

---

It kinda is actually.

We scored a starting right tackle out of a gene smith waiver wire guard pickup.

I am all for Pasztor.  I thought he played really good last year.  But I am all for having a dominant oline. 

 

Also, is Pasztor a free agent after this year?

---

I am all for Pasztor. I thought he played really good last year. But I am all for having a dominant oline.


Also, is Pasztor a free agent after this year?

He was just re-signed. Was an ERFA

He'll make $570k in 2014

Will be a RFA in 2015

---

He was just re-signed. Was an ERFA

He'll make $570k in 2014

Will be a RFA in 2015

 

That is cheap for a guy who is pretty darn good.  I just hope he isn't a one hit NFL wonder. 

---

Paszstor is not "pretty good"...

 

He was an average starter on one of the worst offensive lines in football.

 

Let's not make him into something he's not.

 

He's serviceable, solid.... young with upside to get better.  But he's not a good tackle yet.

---

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

Paszstor is not "pretty good"...

 

He was an average starter on one of the worst offensive lines in football.

 

Let's not make him into something he's not.

 

He's serviceable, solid.... young with upside to get better.  But he's not a good tackle yet.

 

He played pretty good last season.  You can't deny that. 

---

He played pretty good last season. You can't deny that.

He was serviceable. Bradford at LT played better than Pasztor at RT IMO.

---

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

He was serviceable. Bradford at LT played better than Pasztor at RT IMO.

This was simply not the case.

The team had more success running to Pasztor's side and Bradfield easily allowed more sacks and pressures.


(For the record- I labeled frenchie as a 'solid' tackle that might be really good one day. )

---

This was simply not the case.

The team had more success running to Pasztor's side and Bradfield easily allowed more sacks and pressures.


(For the record- I labeled frenchie as a 'solid' tackle that might be really good one day. )

 

Do you have anything to quantify how much more success we had running behind Pasztor?

 

For the casual observer like myself, I remember we didn't have any success running the football pretty much all year.  So nobody get's to say they're better run blocking than someone else, IMO.

 

I just quickly looked up sacks allowed - Bradfield had 7 and Pasztor 5.  Being that Bradfield played LT and probably faced more pure pass rushers from that side, you could pretty much call that even.

 

I just don't see Pasztor as this "building block" like some people.  I think he and Bradfield are about the same.  Luckily he's young and he has the mean attitude, so he could definitely get better.

---

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

Do you have anything to quantify how much more success we had running behind Pasztor?


For the casual observer like myself, I remember we didn't have any success running the football pretty much all year. So nobody get's to say they're better run blocking than someone else, IMO.


I just quickly looked up sacks allowed - Bradfield had 7 and Pasztor 5. Being that Bradfield played LT and probably faced more pure pass rushers from that side, you could pretty much call that even.


I just don't see Pasztor as this "building block" like some people. I think he and Bradfield are about the same. Luckily he's young and he has the mean attitude, so he could definitely get better.

There was a thread about it back in November or December. Stats from pff were posted by a subscriber.

I actually thought it was plainly obvious that they had more success running behind uche/pasztor than rackley/ Bradfield.

I never called him a building block

I think he played well enough to earn another crack at if and it frees up Dave to focus elsewhere early in this paticular draft.

---

The problem is the problem. We've got offensive line problems. No ringing endorsement is going to make a problem better. Drafting talented offensive linemen will.

 

You are exaggerating about the offensive line only being able to block for a different quarterback. I did not know until today that offensive linemen tend to not want to block for just any quarterback. I guess they'll make the decision on how well to do their jobs predicated on who we get in the draft.

 

Quarterbacks are good for two things. They hand the ball off and throw for first downs once in a while. If they can't do their job and look good, nine times out of ten you've got a talent problem on your offensive line.

 

Six consecutive non-winning seasons and we pretend that our quarterbacks aren't good enough at throwing the ball away fast enough. 

 

Yeah, that's it.

 

The problem is the problem. We've got offensive line problems. No ringing endorsement is going to make a problem better. Drafting talented offensive linemen will.

 

You are exaggerating about the offensive line only being able to block for a different quarterback. I did not know until today that offensive linemen tend to not want to block for just any quarterback. I guess they'll make the decision on how well to do their jobs predicated on who we get in the draft.

 

Quarterbacks are good for two things. They hand the ball off and throw for first downs once in a while. If they can't do their job and look good, nine times out of ten you've got a talent problem on your offensive line.

 

Six consecutive non-winning seasons and we pretend that our quarterbacks aren't good enough at throwing the ball away fast enough. 

 

Yeah, that's it.

 

Yup, I wasted my breath. So much fail.

---

Just to be different, Bortles.