You always prop up Haskins, you can insert any QB name in there.  He might not even be the top QB on our draft board or top 2.  I could easily see them having Murray and Lock rated higher

---

If Lock is the top QB on their board should they take him at 7 if he's there?

Yes... They should. He's not my top QB but if they feel he's a true franchise guy, please select him.

I ...


To me, Foles is a band aid. The Jags will be looking for another QB in 3 years. Not because Foles plays poorly (I hope) but it's because they didn't truly address the QB position until it was too late.

I think they may actually see Foles as a very expensive band-aid that buys them time to draft the next one. 
My hope is that they have every intention of drafting Foles' replacement in the 2020 or draft, but I'd be good with them doing it in a few weeks if they rate Haskins or another highly enough. 

It's just the timing of Foles contract dead money and cap savings would make releasing him a real possibility prior to the 2021 or 2022 seasons. Not so much prior to that. So drafting his replacement now would be jumping the gun a bit in terms of timing finance with QB development.

---

Yes... They should. He's not my top QB but if they feel he's a true franchise guy, please select him.

I only talk about Haskins because he's the only true franchise QB in this draft..... In my opinion. I wouldn't take Lock or Murray or Jones or Grier but that's just me. The really great teams are always thinking 2 steps ahead while the Jags almost always try to use a band aid to fix mistakes. Botch the Fowler pick? Hey let's go sign Campbell (that worked). Botched ARob leaving? Hey let's give Moncrief money! Botch Bortles? Hey let's give Foles some money! Fournette is sucking? Hey let's trade for Hyde!

Chiefs had a QB who led them to the playoffs but then drafted up to take Mahomes. Packers had Favre still playing at a high level but selected Rodgers. Eagles had just signed Bradford but traded up for Wentz. Seahawks gave a ton of money to Matt Flynn but took Wilson in the 3rd and let him compete.

To me, Foles is a band aid. The Jags will be looking for another QB in 3 years. Not because Foles plays poorly (I hope) but it's because they didn't truly address the QB position until it was too late.

I agree with most of this. Foles being a band aid Is the only part we do not eye to eye about. I know this makes me sound like a homer but I am of the impression that Foles could turn out to be something much more than a band aid or a stop gap. People seem to be more butt hurt about the amount we payed him rather than what he has or hasn't done on the field and that is not something that can be swayed, you think we did or you don't. I know there are quite a few who disagree but I think that he could turn out to be our guy for quite a while. I don't think this means you do not take a qb if he is the best player on your board at your pick. I am with you that we shouldn't draft out of desperation because of a need because, like you said, it pigeon holes our selections and results in us missing out on talent more often than not. So if Haskins falls and our boards say he is the BAP, take him if no one is willing to trade up. 

Every argument for and against the Foles acquisition has been brought up and discussed at length on this board so I'm not going to go into major detail as to why I am on board with this pick. I guess we are at the cross roads where people are either on board with the guy or not so I will just leave it at that.

Don't let my post fool you. I am all aboard the Foles train. I want him to lead this team to a SB.

I would have just taken a different path this off season.

---

I'm of the opinion that the QB position should be addressed until it's absolutely certain you have one. So yes, I do see Foles as an upgrade but wouldn't mind seeing the position addressed in the draft.

---