per rotowold: 

 

(also of interest/ note is look at the phrase they use to describe the Monroe compensation. So many on here pounded their fists trying to make that deal sound good...well....)

 

 

 

Jake Matthews - T - Player
 
A source tells the Florida Times Union the Jaguars are considering Texas A&M OT Jake Matthews with the No. 3 overall pick.
 
This would qualify as a major surprise after the Jags not only selected Matthews' former linemate Luke Joeckel with the No. 2 overall selection last year, but then traded OLT Eugene Monroe away for pennies on the dollar. The Jags do have a hole opposite Joeckel, however, and as their rumored offer sheet to transition-tagged C Alex Mack indicates, they are serious about improving their line. We still expect them to go in a different direction at No. 3.

---

WE DONT NEED A TACKLE HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO POST THIS.

 

We need a G. 

---

 

per rotowold: 

 

(also of interest/ note is look at the phrase they use to describe the Monroe compensation. So many on here pounded their fists trying to make that deal sound good...well....)

 

 

 

<div>Jake Matthews - T - Player
 
A source tells the Florida Times Union the Jaguars are considering Texas A&M OT Jake Matthews with the No. 3 overall pick.
 
This would qualify as a major surprise after the Jags not only selected Matthews' former linemate Luke Joeckel with the No. 2 overall selection last year, but then traded OLT Eugene Monroe away for pennies on the dollar. The Jags do have a hole opposite Joeckel, however, and as their rumored offer sheet to transition-tagged C Alex Mack indicates, they are serious about improving their line. We still expect them to go in a different direction at No. 3.
 

</div>

 

trollol

---

I'd be a little confused.  Joeckel struggled at RT, so we would be putting Matthews there, who is a better prospect.  I don't see that happening.

---

They aren't drafting Matthews.

---

Ive not yet heard one person state the oh so blatant obvious.

 

Smokescreen. I think Caldwell is trying his absolute best to trade down from 3. We've heard way too many "sources" say we are taking this player or that player. Jags are essentially becoming a wildcard and that'll increase their prospects for a trade down scenario.

 

Tin foil hat bonus: I think he wants to trade down a few spots and still land Khalil Mack because he isn't worth the #3 spot but maybe #7 or #8

---

Its a smokescreen why do you think we brought in Greg Robinson, you have to make teams think you are gonna draft all the top players or you lose trade value 

---

<B><FONT color=cyan>Jags this is your year</FONT></B>

Would be 100% fine with taking a tackle at 3. 

---

It wouldn't shock me.


I would prefer a Clowney/Mack/Watkins/Bridge/Manziel with the 1st rd pick.

But, its obvious they mean business about rebuilding an O-Line that has been a joke (one of the worst, if not the worst, in the league the past few seasons).


Joeckel

Beadles

Mack ??? finger's crossed

Paztor

Matthews


Not preferred, but I could live with it. On paper,,, that could be beastly

---

I can't remember the video but around last years draft Dave said that having 2 really good tackles is very important and worth the money because teams have really good defensive ends that are able to line up on either side.

 

Personally it wouldn't shock me one bit to see a OT taken at #3 assuming they feel he is miles better than anything they can get later in the draft. If the Texans take Clowney they may really consider getting another OT..our line could be one of the best in football if that happens, if you have a good line your qb has more time...which means you could score more points. 

 

I don't think Dave thinks like most other gms. I think Dave isn't afraid to select a QB at 3 and let him sit for awhile, who says they have to start? I think Dave would select another OT at 3....who says you can't?

---

"Don't argue with an idiot, people watching may not be able to tell the difference."

I'd be a little confused.  Joeckel struggled at RT, so we would be putting Matthews there, who is a better prospect.  I don't see that happening.

 

Matthews played very well at ORT, Joeckel never did. Thats kinda the point. 

---

 

 

I don't think Dave thinks like most other gms. I think Dave isn't afraid to select a QB at 3 and let him sit for awhile, who says they have to start? I think Dave would select another OT at 3....who says you can't?

We're talking about displacing Chad Henne, not Manning or Brady.  If he's not worth starting on day 1, he's not worth the 3rd overall pick!

---

When you get into the endzone, act like you've been there before.

WE DONT NEED A TACKLE HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO POST THIS.

 

We need a G. 

 

I don't care how many times you post it, you take the best player.  If he's deemed that guy, then so be it.

 

Paztor can play RG, and has.

 

You're not going to find a G in this draft that matches Matthews' caliber.  You might not even find a G in this draft that could play RG as well as Paztor.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

Would he play RT? This concerns me. Some guys dont play as good on the other side.


Joekel was better on the left. Remember the "im a left tackle" quote? Right tackle is just not a premium position and even good teams dont spend too much money or high picks on getting that guy. We really need better interior play, not so necessarily the edge.

---

Would he play RT? This concerns me. Some guys dont play as good on the other side.


Joekel was better on the left. Remember the "im a left tackle" quote? Right tackle is just not a premium position and even good teams dont spend too much money or high picks on getting that guy. We really need better interior play, not so necessarily the edge.

 

Think of it this way, his rookie contract would be scaled.

 

When he gets his next contract, it will be at RT (not LT) scale.

 

I'd be all in if they think he's he best player on the board.  At the same time, we could also find an RT in the second or third that's more than capable of starting.  With so few to choose from, I'm not getting my hopes up that we'll find a C or G until 4th round or later.  So if that's the case they may consider the RT route instead.

 

Matthews played his first three seasons at RT before going to LT his senior season (after Joeckel was drafted.)

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

oh yeah, that makes sense.  Must be why they brought in Greg Robinson

---

You Gotta Be Able To Run Da' Rock~

This would be absolutely terrible. He wouldn't even be the best player available. Clowney or Mack would be there and both are high impact defensive stars. To draft a tackle for the 2nd year in a row, when you let a very good one go for a 4th rounder and offered a bigger contract than he would have commanded to a Center....that would be baffling. Some thing Gene Smith would do.

---

I wouldn't mind Matthews and even mocked him to us in quite a few of my mocks.


I could definitely see a scenario where we draft him and if Teddy or Manziel fall out of the top ten then us trading back into the first to take a QB.


Joeckel, Matthews, and Manziel has a nice ring to it IMO

---

I don't care how many times you post it, you take the best player.  If he's deemed that guy, then so be it.

 

Paztor can play RG, and has.

 

You're not going to find a G in this draft that matches Matthews' caliber.  You might not even find a G in this draft that could play RG as well as Paztor.

He's not the best player tho tha'ts the thing.

 

Clowney, Mack, Barr just to name a few are better players.. at more important positions. 

---

He's not the best player tho tha'ts the thing.

 

Clowney, Mack, Barr just to name a few are better players.. at more important positions. 

 

Barr? Good lord. 

---