So...uh...how bout that Clowney?

---

;

;

So...uh...how bout that Clowney?

 

Great player, doesn't fill a need. Peter King is clearly lying, we don't want pass rushers.

---

Just to be different, Bortles.

I dont like the whole strength of schedule argument in this case because it can work both ways.  Since he lays on a weak team i'm sure he was double teamed a ton and still was productive.

---

Forced fumbles do count. ...wonder how many less he might have had had he played in the SEC. 

 

I wonder if you would have asked the same question about Demarcus Ware.

---

;

;

I wonder if you would have asked the same question about Demarcus Ware.

Demarcus is a good pass rusher name so doubtful.


And c'mon everyone. We know what's going on. TMD tends to dislike the players/coaches (Gus when it looked like he would be hired even though TMD started a thread saying we should look at him) when it seems like the jags are likely to land them.

---

Demarcus is a good pass rusher name so doubtful.


And c'mon everyone. We know what's going on. TMD tends to dislike the players/coaches (Gus when it looked like he would be hired even though TMD started a thread saying we should look at him) when it seems like the jags are likely to land them.

 

all players on the jaguars radar get blasted, all players that philly or new england look at turn into the new poster above his bed near his 98 degrees one... 

---

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."

Demarcus is a good pass rusher name so doubtful.


And c'mon everyone. We know what's going on. TMD tends to dislike the players/coaches (Gus when it looked like he would be hired even though TMD started a thread saying we should look at him) when it seems like the jags are likely to land them.

 

He's an odd dude.

 

It's like as soon as a guy is on the team's radar, he goes into blast mode. I wonder what the point is for him.

---

;

;

One of the Consensus Top 5 players will be a Jaguar. I predict this, therefore I am right. 

---

And c'mon everyone. We know what's going on. TMD tends to dislike the players/coaches (Gus when it looked like he would be hired even though TMD started a thread saying we should look at him) when it seems like the jags are likely to land them.

 

Eh, this seems true sometimes.  But personally I have concerns about Mack as well. I think he could be good -- but I'm not sure he's worth a Top 5 pick.  Others have expressed the same sentiment.  I don't think this is a case of "Jags about to get him."  Especially considering that it's not a sure thing that the Jags are going to pick him. 

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

I wonder if you would have asked the same question about Demarcus Ware.

 

DeMarcus Ware is more physically impressive than Mack's average sized frame/ average physical ability, and was arguably more impressive production-wise as well. 

 

....and where was Ware selected?? :whistling: 

 

 

hint: later than 3.

 

 

(which is the main point I'm trying to say about Mack). I won't mind a selection of Mack where its decent value - around 10 or so) 

---

He's an odd dude.

 

It's like as soon as a guy is on the team's radar, he goes into blast mode. I wonder what the point is for him.

 

Mack's on a lot of team's radar. 

 

Bridgewater is allegedy on the Jags radar too....we've brought him in twice for interviews (or plan to bring him in again) - wheres my "blast mode" there?? Oops, there isn't one, you're just being a butt-hurt fanboy of Mack because you want the Jags to draft him regardless of pick selection/ value. 

---

DeMarcus Ware is more physically impressive than Mack's average sized frame/ average physical ability, and was arguably more impressive production-wise as well. 

 

....and where was Ware selected?? :whistling:

 

 

hint: later than 3.

 

 

(which is the main point I'm trying to say about Mack). I won't mind a selection of Mack where its decent value - around 10 or so) 

 

So because 10 teams whiffed on Ware, we should whiff on Mack? Good call.

---

;

;

Eh, this seems true sometimes. But personally I have concerns about Mack as well. I think he could be good -- but I'm not sure he's worth a Top 5 pick. Others have expressed the same sentiment. I don't think this is a case of "Jags about to get him." Especially considering that it's not a sure thing that the Jags are going to pick him.

I honestly haven't seen enough of Mack to comment but I'm just going with what I've seen TMD do time and time again. He may have legit concerns about the skillset of Mack but it's tough for me to believe which reason he dislikes him.


Hopefully we just get Clowney and everyone will be happy.

---

So because 10 teams whiffed on Ware, we should whiff on Mack? Good call.

Well we're whiffing on a top QB prospect because because they're only the 5th, 6th, and 8th best players on Mel's board. 

---

So because 10 teams whiffed on Ware, we should whiff on Mack? Good call.

 

Mack isn't as good as Ware. 

---

DeMarcus Ware is more physically impressive than Mack's average sized frame/ average physical ability, and was arguably more impressive production-wise as well.


....and where was Ware selected?? :whistling:



hint: later than 3.



(which is the main point I'm trying to say about Mack). I won't mind a selection of Mack where its decent value - around 10 or so)

6'3 250 Lb man that runs a 40 in the 4.5's with a 40 inch vert is "average" physical ability? Lol come on TMD, you're better than that. I tend to agree with a lot of things you've said in the past, but this is over the top. Mack is freak athlete that dominated against lower competition, when he got his chance against an elite program in Ohio State he dominated that game as well. His versatility and explosiveness will be welcomed by any defensive scheme, 100 tackles 10 sacks with 19 tackles for loss is a mind blowing stat line at any level of football , he's a more athletic version of Navarro Bowman.

---

6'3 250 Lb man that runs a 40 in the 4.5's with a 40 inch vert is "average" physical ability? Lol come on TMD, you're better than that. I tend to agree with a lot of things you've said in the past, but this is over the top. Mack is freak athlete that dominated against lower competition, when he got his chance against an elite program in Ohio State he dominated that game as well. His versatility and explosiveness will be welcomed by any defensive scheme, 100 tackles 10 sacks with 19 tackles for loss is a mind blowing stat line at any level of football , he's a more athletic version of Navarro Bowman.

 

Jevon Kearse ran in the 4.4's and was bigger/ just as athletic. THAT's a physical freak of nature. Hell, Ware was more physically impressive and was drafted outside the top 10. Mack's is not all that impressive for his size. Plus, theres the small school thing. One game vs Ohio state don't prove anything but one game. We don't know that he'll be able to be dominant at the NFL level on a consistent basis. As said, if we trade down and then select Mack, at least we'd be getting some value. Selecting Mack at 3 would be dumb. 

---

Mack isn't as good as Ware. 

 

For someone who admits he doesn't watch college football, I doubt you have any clue what type on player Ware was coming out of Troy almost a decade ago.

---

;

;

For someone who admits he doesn't watch college football, I doubt you have any clue what type on player Ware was coming out of Troy almost a decade ago.

lol great point.

---

For someone who admits he doesn't watch college football, I doubt you have any clue what type on player Ware was coming out of Troy almost a decade ago.

 

Ware was a better physical specimen than Mack, and more productive and still was drafted after 10 overall. Mack at 3 overall would be beyond stupid. 

 

And, that quote is ten years old. I've watched a lot of college football yearly since that comment was made. I needed to, just to see how clueless some of you are that pimp your favorite players. (Dysert as an example, lol) 

---