TMD,


Would you at least admit you severely overvalued Mallet in terms of market value?

They got their QB!

---

TMD,

 

Would you at least admit you severely overvalued Mallet in terms of market value?

This is where TMD makes a reference to HOUs brass and how superior they are.

---

I feel like you will regret this answer.

 

 

Wow

 

 

Anyone would think franchise qbs grow on trees. After 2 top ten busts and a decade of mediocre to awful qb play, he wants to trade away our potential superstar qb...

 

Want to trade away our franchise QB? Uh, no. 

 

I was asked a question and answered it honestly, unlike some of you when posed with questions. 

 

In that trade scenario question one side is getting a DE prospect that is thought of as a once in a decade or 2 prospect. The same side is also getting 2 QB, one I think very highly of as a potential franchise QB and a developmental QB prospect. 

 

The other side is getting a single player in Bortles, who yes, I think very highly of after watching his play this pre-season, but we also have to remember he hasn't played a single regular season snap yet. We can't just act like a John Elway-like career for Bortles is imminent. We don't know. Lots of variables need to be played out. He could get hurt. My accepting that trade is more about the odds of success for the one side of the trade over the other. More players = more chance for success. Will all 3 become top AFC talent? Maybe not. but 2 of the 3 would be a reasonable estimate. 

 

I think its funny that people are trying to make this out as if I'm spearheading some sort of effort to deal Bortles here because thats not true. I simply answered a question. But some of you are like a lynch mob. 

 

 

TMD,

 

Would you at least admit you severely overvalued Mallet in terms of market value?

 

Yes, but at least in recent weeks/ month I have not been stating that it would still take the 2nd rounder to fetch Mallett. I figiured by this point once Garoppolo started to shine that it was going to lower what the Pats could get in a trade for Mallett since everyone knew that they'd now be more apt to want to move him. They didn't want to have to keep 3 QB on the active roster for long. 

 

My sarcasm meter just broke. Is trolling to this degree allowed?

 

Answering a question is now "trolling"? :wacko:

 

You people are nuts. 

---

TMD,


Would you at least admit you severely overvalued Mallet in terms of market value?

You mad ryan mallet got traded for a very late round pick and stephen didn't?

---

Want to trade away our franchise QB? Uh, no.


I was asked a question and answered it honestly, unlike some of you when posed with questions.


In that trade scenario question one side is getting a DE prospect that is thought of as a once in a decade or 2 prospect. The same side is also getting 2 QB, one I think very highly of as a potential franchise QB and a developmental QB prospect.


The other side is getting a single player in Bortles, who yes, I think very highly of after watching his play this pre-season, but we also have to remember he hasn't played a single regular season snap yet. We can't just act like a John Elway-like career for Bortles is imminent. We don't know. Lots of variables need to be played out. He could get hurt. My accepting that trade is more about the odds of success for the one side of the trade over the other. More players = more chance for success. Will all 3 become top AFC talent? Maybe not. but 2 of the 3 would be a reasonable estimate.


I think its funny that people are trying to make this out as if I'm spearheading some sort of effort to deal Bortles here because thats not true. I simply answered a question. But some of you are like a lynch mob.




Yes, but at least in recent weeks/ month I have not been stating that it would still take the 2nd rounder to fetch Mallett. I figiured by this point once Garoppolo started to shine that it was going to lower what the Pats could get in a trade for Mallett since everyone knew that they'd now be more apt to want to move him. They didn't want to have to keep 3 QB on the active roster for long.



Answering a question is now "trolling"? :wacko:


You people are nuts.

Its been painfully evident for a long time that the clowney hype is way overblown.

---

Coughlin when asked if winning will be a focus: "What the hell else is there? This is nice and dandy, but winning is what all this is about."

We can't act like Blake Bortles is going to be a franchise caliber QB, but you can go and assume that Ryan Mallett will be?  Despite the fact that Bortles has shown far more than Mallett and Savage combined?


You've basically fallen for a guy because you like what he did in college.  Suddenly the Texans sign him, and they're #Texanswinning.  (Despite him having shown ZERO in the NFL, and having ample opportunities.)


I don't care how much you liked him in college.  Mallett has had 3 years in the NFL, and has less to show for it than Bortles.  And Tom Savage had a terrible college career. 


I know I'd much rather have a guy who looks like a franchise QB than a once in a lifetime prospect DE and two 'huge maybe' Quarterbacks that have shown absolutely zero in the NFL.  

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

We can't act like Blake Bortles is going to be a franchise caliber QB, but you can go and assume that Ryan Mallett will be?  Despite the fact that Bortles has shown far more than Mallett and Savage combined?


You've basically fallen for a guy because you like what he did in college.  Suddenly the Texans sign him, and they're #Texanswinning.  (Despite him having shown ZERO in the NFL, and having ample opportunities.)


I don't care how much you liked him in college.  Mallett has had 3 years in the NFL, and has less to show for it than Bortles.  And Tom Savage had a terrible college career. 

I know I'd much rather have a guy who looks like a franchise QB than a once in a lifetime prospect DE and two 'huge maybe' Quarterbacks that have shown absolutely zero in the NFL.  

 

Tom Savage has not had a "terrible" college career...he's had a limited college career. 

 

Anyway, as typical you guys are always trying to force a side vs side here. 

 

I like Bortles and think highly of him, so you aren't going to trick me into bashing him. Also I said #texanswinning in that post and that meant I like what they are doing here. But the typical ubersensitive jags fan interprets that comment as #jagslosing even though no one is saying that. 

 

Again, I was asked the question of if I would take a hypothetical trade and I answered it honestly. If you don't want to hear the answer, don't ask the question. 

---

What I don't get is you usually say arm strength is overrated, but bizarrely you love Mallet and that seems to be his only attribute apart from size.


Also you hate the workout warriors and there you are pimping for Hill and that's all he is.


You can't even stick to what you believe in.

---

What I don't get is you usually say arm strength is overrated, but bizarrely you love Mallet and that seems to be his only attribute apart from size.


Also you hate the workout warriors and there you are pimping for Hill and that's all he is.


You can't even stick to what you believe in.

 

Arm strength without the accuracy is overrated. I've seen Mallett very accurate in college and put the ball in tight windows and beating solid coverage. 

 

As for the workout warrior thing, lol, you people have no concept of perspective. Yes, I wouldn't likely ever champion bringing in Stephen Hill if the cost was exhorbitant and I wouldn;t have advocated spending/ trading  a second rounder (or 3rd, or 4th or 5th or 6th) on him.....but this is an example (and its been said like 1000 times already in this thread by both me and hailtoyourvoctor) of a LOW RISK signing. It costs the Jags very little. No draft pick compensation. Nothing. These are precisely the opportunities that you take chances on these physical/ workout freaks - NOT with high picks. The Jags have the best position coach in the league at his position. Its absolutely worth the small gamble. 

---

One bad game was enough? Are you that consistent across the board with judging players or only certain ones?

Funny, I remember when you were jumping up and down declaring that Derek Carr was a terrible player because of one bad game. Oh, and the whole "related to David Carr" thing, so I guess that sets the two apart and minimizes your hypocrisy somewhat.

---

You mad ryan mallet got traded for a very late round pick and stephen didn't?

 

Before cuts ever happened I said that it wasn't likely Stephen Hill would get traded for. I made the mistake of assuming most people knew how to read on this forum. Next time I'll draw you a picture, ok?

---

Before cuts ever happened I said that it wasn't likely Stephen Hill would get traded for. I made the mistake of assuming most people knew how to read on this forum. Next time I'll draw you a picture, ok?

You swore he wouldn't pass the waiver wire though.

 

I called that one lol

---

Those 3 vs just Bortles? 

 

Yep, I'd take those three. 

 

And I really like Bortles. 

 

lol

 

clown.

---

lol

 

clown.

 

dude, you're a clown

 

3 players (one of which I also see as a potential franchise QB) vs just Blake Bortles? Yeah, gimme the 3 player side. 

---

Before cuts ever happened I said that it wasn't likely Stephen Hill would get traded for. I made the mistake of assuming most people knew how to read on this forum. Next time I'll draw you a picture, ok?

 

lol, you'll need to do so in crayon for some of these ppl. 

---

Funny, I remember when you were jumping up and down declaring that Derek Carr was a terrible player because of one bad game. Oh, and the whole "related to David Carr" thing, so I guess that sets the two apart and minimizes your hypocrisy somewhat.

 

Except, it really wasn't just one bad game for Carr. 

 

The QB metrics for last years QB prospects bears that out. Carr was by far the worst QB when facing pressure amongst all of them. I don't see Carr being a very successful NFL QB. You don't just fix that issue overnight. 

---

dude, you're a clown

 

3 players (one of which I also see as a franchise QB) vs just Blake Bortles? Yeah, gimme the 3 player side. 

 

So you think you're smarter than all 32 GM's in the league?

 

I mean surely if Mallett were a franchise QB, someone would have traded more than a conditional 7th for him.  I imagine a franchise QB would warrant at least a 5th.

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

So you think you're smarter than all 32 GM's in the league?

 

I mean surely if Mallett were a franchise QB, someone would have traded more than a conditional 7th for him.  I imagine a franchise QB would warrant at least a 5th.

 

I think Mallett in the situation he is in right now (Texans) with that head coach and not much talent at QB blocking him from the starting spot (Fitzpatrick) has a really good chance to finally develop into the franchise QB that I've been propping him to have the potential for. 

 

You (and others) also realize that theres also this kid named Clowney in the other side of the proposed deal, right? Right??...  He's supposed to be pretty good, so they say.... 

---

dude, you're a clown


3 players (one of which I also see as a potential franchise QB) vs just Blake Bortles? Yeah, gimme the 3 player side.

The third pick of the draft who looks like a stud this preseason vs. A journeyman, a fourth round pick and a guy they gave up a seventh round pick to acquire.


Yes, I like my chances with Bortles.


I dont actually think you believe this.


Just another example of your obvious trolling. Your act. Trying to be a Bayless like shock jock.

---

;

;

I could see Mallett having a Derek Anderson kind of career. 

---