I'm against taking one at 3 because I don't think there is a QB in this draft worth taking that high. You don't draft a QB just to draft one, obviously.

 

I also think that some people do not want a QB at 3 because if he turns out to be another Leftwich or Gabbert, that will set us back another  three, four, or five years.

 

The problem is if you don't pick a quarterback at #3, you will miss out on all of the best prospects and get a guy who sucks at #39.

---

Serious question. If we draft Clowney, do you really think he will be put on the bench? What elite players do we ave that will ride the bench if Clowney comes?

 

We have ZERO elite players on this team and if Clowney is as good as advertised he will make this team better.

 

He wouild make the defense better, sure, but no quarterback worth the #39 pick is good enough to help our offense.

---

He wouild make the defense better, sure, but no quarterback worth the #39 pick is good enough to help our offense.

And you know this for a fact? So if Manziel and Teddy are both gone, what would you like the team to do?

---

And you know this for a fact? So if Manziel and Teddy are both gone, what would you like the team to do?

 

I know for a fact the quarterbacks who were mentioned on this board as being possibly decent (but not great) candidates for the #39 pick have torn ACLs.

 

The good news for us is the Rams don't need a quarterback, so the only way we can miss out on Johnny Manziel is a leapfrog trade by the Browns or Raiders.

---

I know for a fact the quarterbacks who were mentioned on this board as being possibly decent (but not great) candidates for the #39 pick have torn ACLs.

 

The good news for us is the Rams don't need a quarterback, so the only way we can miss out on Johnny Manziel is a leapfrog trade by the Browns or Raiders.

Does Boyd have a torn ACL? Does Garropolo? Also you didn't answer me question. If Manziel and Teddy are both gone when we pick, what would you like the Jags to do?

---

I know for a fact the quarterbacks who were mentioned on this board as being possibly decent (but not great) candidates for the #39 pick have torn ACLs.

 

The good news for us is the Rams don't need a quarterback, so the only way we can miss out on Johnny Manziel is a leapfrog trade by the Browns or Raiders.

 

I'd take Bortles over Manziel easily. I think Bridgewater is better -- but Bortles would not be a bad pick at all.  I'd prefer it not to be at #3, but if there was no other way, and Caldwell thought Bortles could be the answer at QB, I'd be for taking him there.  His completion% under pressure is impressive.  

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

He wouild make the defense better, sure, but no quarterback worth the #39 pick is good enough to help our offense.

You know this how?

---

"Before you criticize a man, walk a mile in his shoes. That way, if he gets angry, he's a mile away and barefoot."

Does Boyd have a torn ACL? Does Garropolo? Also you didn't answer me question. If Manziel and Teddy are both gone when we pick, what would you like the Jags to do?

 

I was referring to Murray and Mettenberger.

 

Try to pry Josh McCown away from the Bears.

---

Try to pry Josh McCown away from the Bears.

 

No.  Dear god, no.  Josh McCown?  He may be the best of the McCown brothers.  But that's like being the best of the worst.

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

I was referring to Murray and Mettenberger.

 

Try to pry Josh McCown away from the Bears.

Again, you didn't answer the question. What should the Jags do if Manziel and Teddy are both gone? Who should they draft?

 

And there will be more QB's available with plenty of upside available at 39 other than Murray and Mettenbeger so stop acting like those are the only 2 who will be available.

 

And you really want to get McCown?! Seriously? Thats your answer?

---

He wouild make the defense better, sure, but no quarterback worth the #39 pick is good enough to help our offense.

You've said a lot of wild things since I started reading these boards, but I don't see how you can believe that none of the top QB prospects will be available to us at 39 or that they are all worse than Henne/Gabbert. 

 

I was referring to Murray and Mettenberger.

 

Try to pry Josh McCown away from the Bears.

 

Murray and Mettenberger have done nothing to give themselves a second round grade.

 

Say no to McCown. McCown would be good for how long? One year? Two years tops?

---

I think Bortles will be better than Manziel.


If Bridgewater and Clowney are out by the third pick, I'd take Bortles over Manziel. If Clowney is there at 3, and Bridgewater is gone, I'd consider trading down to a spot where I could still get Bortles.

Trade with who? Several teams below us need QBs.

---

Again, you didn't answer the question. What should the Jags do if Manziel and Teddy are both gone? Who should they draft?

 

And you really want to get McCown? Seriously? Thats your answer?

 

If Teddy and Johnny are both gone, I would pick the best available tight end, wide receiver, or outside linebacker, depending on who the most talented player is of those three.

---

Trade with who? Several teams below us need QBs.

 

Exactly my point - no matter who you trade with, you can miss out on your favorite quarterback.

---

The problem is if you don't pick a quarterback at #3, you will miss out on all of the best prospects and get a guy who sucks at #39.

 

Is there some rule somewhere that states we HAVE to pick a QB this year?

 

You just want them to draft a QB to say they drafted one.

---

Trade with who? Several teams below us need QBs.

 

Interesting question. How many teams are looking for a QB?

 

HOU, stl, JAX, CLE, oak, tb, MIN, TEN

 

Those are the teams that will likely select a QB early in the draft, with caps for emphasis. Eight teams tops. I see a situation where we have a choice between Manziel/Bridge, Bortles, and Clowney at 3, and then a number of possible defensive starters and Carr/Garoppolo/Fales at 39.

 

Which is better to you? Number 1 prospect + second tier QB or Top 3 QB + Value defensive player?

---

against the number 3 draft pick? I don't get it especially with today's NFL where the success and failures of a franchise is depended on the quarterback position. It's the one position on the team that I don't fix with a Band-Aid and for people who are waiting for the Andrew luck type prospect will be waiting forever because they are once in a generation talent. So why people shouting out Jimmy G, David Fales, or AJ "pistol pete" McCarron with our later draft picks so we can get a pass rusher in the first round just please give me Teddy B, Blake Brotles, or Johnny Football with the number 3 pick because I think they can upgrade this team in a heartbeat.  

 

None of the quarterbacks in this draft are going to grade out as elite, franchise quarterbacks. Yet, some team is going to ignore prudence in favor of the perception of need.

 

Any quarterback taken in the top five of a draft is going to be thrown in right away on teams impetuously seeking one in the top five.

 

It will be a real test of patience to resist the temptation to get the hook and yank out the starter once the fan meltdown begins thirty minutes after the veteran throws his first interception of the year in the first game of the year.

 

Drafting a non-elite quarterback in the top five has been discussed at length. Included was a comprehensive review of the results of taking a non-elite quarterback at the top of the draft. It does not make sense to over-draft quarterback.

---

First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win. - Mahatma Gandhi

 

http://s6.postimg.org/vyr2ycdfz/Teddy_Br...cked_4.gif

In an interview the other day I heard Caldwell said something along the lines that you look at a player and assume he has reached his floor.  You have to draft on the assumption everyone is peaked out.  If you think someone is still growing, you can draft based on potential, but that at the end of the day you only REALLY know the player can compete at the level he is currently competing.  Anything more can be seen as a bonus.  

 

This of course is more important in the early rounds when you are looking for immediate starters.  This seems to suggest, to me at least, that Jags are more likely to take someone with the highest floor at #3, not the highest ceiling.  So outside of Teddy, I have to say Clowney or Mack are most likely.  The other QBs are too uncertain.

---

“It is the job of thinking people not to be on the side of the executioners.”
― Albert Camus

Wow, just looked at Garrard's draft as well as the 2007 draft.  Not a single good QB outside of our decent Garrard.  Makes you wonder about forcing a pick.

 

That's the problem/question facing the teams drafting high this year.

 

We saw a similar situation last year, too.

---

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

None of the quarterbacks in this draft are going to grade out as elite, franchise quarterbacks. Yet, some team is going to ignore prudence in favor of the perception of need.

 

Any quarterback taken in the top five of a draft is going to be thrown in right away on teams impetuously seeking one in the top five.

 

It will be a real test of patience to resist the temptation to get the hook and yank out the starter once the fan meltdown begins thirty minutes after the veteran throws his first interception of the year in the first game of the year.

 

Drafting a non-elite quarterback in the top five has been discussed at length. Included was a comprehensive review of the results of taking a non-elite quarterback at the top of the draft. It does not make sense to over-draft quarterback.

 

Especially since their bust rate is higher than linemen (OL, DT, DE.)  Could Caldwell be considering this when he talks about assume the player's at his floor?  Guess we'll see in May.

---

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