lol, why do you want to get rid of Shorts so bad. 

 

because shorts got drafted instead of a guy that TMD was clamoring for.

---

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."

lol, why do you want to get rid of Shorts so bad. 

 

New expensive contract coming up + less of a need given with what we have at WR + Shorts actually carries some trade value to be utilized to get help in other area of team need (O-line??) In a nutshell....the need for keeping Shorts is lessened greatly. He's not a Blackmon type talent, either. I think that level of ability WR (Blackmon)  is the only ones worth giving 2nd contracts to. 

 

Sometimes you gotta trade something to get something. 

 

The opportunity is presenting itself now and won't be there forever. Strike while the iron is hot. 

---

New expensive contract coming up + less of a need given with what we have at WR + Shorts actually carries some trade value to be utilized to get help in other area of team need (O-line??) In a nutshell....the need for keeping Shorts is lessened greatly. He's not a Blackmon type talent, either. I think that level of WR is the only ones worth giving 2nd contracts to. 

 

Sometimes you gotta trade something to get something. 

 

The opportunity is presenting itself now and won't be there forever. Strike while the iron is hot. 

 

 

and if a rob, lee, or hurns go down, or more than one.... tandon doss is a capable backup? hahahahahahahahahaha tandon doss is barely a capable 5th wide receiver, much less a second string guy. he is around for his special teams ability. nothing else keeps him on the roster.

---

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."

New expensive contract coming up + less of a need given with what we have at WR + Shorts actually carries some trade value to be utilized to get help in other area of team need (O-line??) In a nutshell....the need for keeping Shorts is lessened greatly. He's not a Blackmon type talent, either. I think that level of ability WR (Blackmon)  is the only ones worth giving 2nd contracts to. 

 

Sometimes you gotta trade something to get something. 

 

The opportunity is presenting itself now and won't be there forever. Strike while the iron is hot. 

---

How does Shorts represent trade value if he's such a bum according to TMD?

---

Your beliefs become your thoughts,
Your thoughts become your words,
Your words become your actions,
Your actions become your habits,
Your habits become your values,
Your values become your destiny.

and if a rob, lee, or hurns go down, or more than one.... tandon doss is a capable backup? hahahahahahahahahaha tandon doss is barely a capable 5th wide receiver, much less a second string guy. he is around for his special teams ability. nothing else keeps him on the roster.

 

You're thinking ultraconservatively on the issue." If this, if that.".....

 

Look at how efficiently Blake is operating with the WR all preseason.....and thats throwing to the same guys that you're apparently worried about him having to throw to in case of some Robinson / Lee injury. 

 

hint: Blake hasn't had Lee or Robinson on the field much anyway. 

---

You're thinking ultraconservatively on the issue." If this, if that.".....

 

Look at how efficiently Blake is operating with the WR all preseason.....and thats throwing to the same guys that you're apparently worried about him having to throw to in case of some Robinson / Lee injury. 

 

hint: Blake hasn't had Lee or Robinson on the field much anyway. 

 

youre thinking short sighted. lets give away our talent because injuries in the nfl never happen.

 

lets get rid of our depth. the teams that win are the ones that have the most depth, the most overall talent. you cant just have your starters be your only good players and dump everyone else.

 

youre a terrible talent evaluator and you would make a terrible GM because you lack foresight and logic.

---

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."

How does Shorts represent trade value if he's such a bum according to TMD?

 

I'm not saying CS3 is a "bum". He's just not worthy of a 2nd/ expensive contract on THIS team right now. We have a competent enough WR corps without him, and could better spend that money in other area of team need. 

---

I'm not saying CS3 is a "bum". He's just not worthy of a 2nd/ expensive contract on THIS team right now. We have a competent enough WR corps without him, and could better spend that money in other area of team need. 

Shorts wont get an "expensive contract"

---

youre thinking short sighted. lets give away our talent because injuries in the nfl never happen.

 

lets get rid of our depth. the teams that win are the ones that have the most depth, the most overall talent. you cant just have your starters be your only good players and dump everyone else.

 

youre a terrible talent evaluator and you would make a terrible GM because you lack foresight and logic.

 

I lack foresight....lol, I already listed 6 WR for the corps...we have plenty of depth. 

 

My whole trading SHorts idea stems from PROACTIVE thinking not the old sit on what we got shortsighted crap. Your type of thinking is what made the Jags keep Leftwich/ Garrard and Gray that year and not cash in on one of them when the trade opportunity was there. In the end they all washed out and we got nothing for any of them. 

 

Opportunity only knocks once. 

 

The Jags can get by fine without Shorts and would be foolish to spend big bucks and long term to keep him here. It would be an unnecessary waste of money that could be used better elsewhere for team need. 

---

Shorts wont get an "expensive contract"

 

In what fairy tale world do you live in that you see the above coming true? He absolutely will get big money his next deal. 

 

Let me ask you then - what do you envision Shorts getting for his next deal? 

---

He reminds me so much of Stevie Johnson in his prime.

---

If you believe in Hurns.....and he's given you no reason not to.....then you will be more open to trading Shorts, 

 

If you are paranoid about trading Shorts then you probably don't really have the faith in Hurns/ Bortles/ Sullivan/ Lee/ Robinson/ et al.....that your lip service claims you have. 

---

In what fairy tale world do you live in that you see the above coming true? He absolutely will get big money his next deal.


Let me ask you then - what do you envision Shorts getting for his next deal?

I'd say about 16-20 mil 4 yr deal

---

He reminds me so much of Stevie Johnson in his prime.

 

Hurns? I had thought Stevie Johnson was a thicker framed athlete. Johnson dropped a lot of passes too. I don't think Hurns has that issue. 

---

@ flgatorsjags....

 

I think you are way underestimating what Shorts will get in this new CBA era. 

 

Hell, Riley Cooper only had one half of a good year got more coin than that.....

---

I'd say about 16-20 mil 4 yr deal

I agree.  Not a bank-breaker. 

---

Hurns? I had thought Stevie Johnson was a thicker framed athlete. Johnson dropped a lot of passes too. I don't think Hurns has that issue.

I think their builds are similar. The other thing is that neither is particularly physically dominant, size strength or speed wise, but have just enough of all three and a knack for getting open.

---

I agree.  Not a bank-breaker. 

 

dude....Riley Cooper got more than that  and only had one half of one good season in 3 or 4 years. Shorts will get a lot more. 

---

What makes Hurons so good? Is it now his route running after a couple of months with Sullivan?

---

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