ICYMI...FWIW...here's Shannon Sharpe's take on Cousins...

https://youtu.be/l7yGVG08SFs

I am honestly torn.  Though I am leaning Bortles, I am intrigued by what Cousins potentially represents here-both good and bad.

If I could be convinced that signing Cousins

A.  Would actually upgrade the QB position, giving us the best chance to go to the Super Bowl and
B.  Not wreck our salary cap and force a premature purge of our talent and
C. not destroy the locker room

then I'd be for it.

Likewise, I could be content with Bortles if





A.  His play down the stretch of the season, in games against Seattle, Pittsburgh and New England represents what he can do for us more consistently such that
B. He's better equipped to get that 8th guy out of the box
C and with the current coaching he can continue to develop and make better decisions with another year in the offense.

I want the guy who will win us a Super Bowl or two.  I'm not sure which of these two is that guy, if either are.

One thing that should be considered is that Blake played most of the season with a wrist injury.  I think because he played every game with the injury most of us did not consider it an issue.  Then as soon as the season ended he had wrist surgery! One article felt that this injure is often the result of the thumb being bent back to the point where it injures the wrist.  The question is how much did the wrist affect his game.  We know he had a stretch where he was the most efficient QB for three games, So was his wrist re injuredi during the last game and that is the reason for the poor play the next few games?  We know how important the thumb is for passing a football.  We know he was inconsistent during the year  with flashes of elite QB play.  I would keep Blake and bring in competition to replace Henne.  If Blake is not resigned and goes to a team healthy and playing the  way we all hoped he would, could you imagine the uproar on this message board  blaming management for not keeping Blake even though so many want him gone. As they say be careful what you wish for It just might come back and bite you where the sun don't shine.

---

Other than the fact that it's asinine to compare the importance of a guard to a quarterback...nice comparison.

Sweet, another one converted to the QB is our #1 need camp (unless you already were in which case carry on).

You like putting words in people's mouths and misconstruing their posts. 

It's really lame.

---

Sweet, another one converted to the QB is our #1 need camp (unless you already were in which case carry on).

You like putting words in people's mouths and misconstruing their posts. 

It's really lame.

That's OK.  I have no idea what lame inference he was making, nor do I care.  Maybe if he posted a spider-chart or some other 'advanced analytic' it might help.

---

No, what you were trying to do was twist my post in your typical sarcastic manner. Perhaps it is time to change Big cat country , to Big Cousins country and go on your merry way ?

Nope just pointing out how silly playing the "we went to the title game" line of logic can get. Perhaps it is time you start using arguments that don't have glaring logical fallacies in them.

I've only said it 50 times on here, draft someone to push him or replace him.

I find it funny, you have been using the same logic in your Cousins or bust argument.

---

I watched all the games the Jags won this season (I deleted the losing games) and I have to say, Blake did very well. He had some really good moments. If we let him go, 10 teams would scramble to pick him up. I say draft a QB and let him develop.

---

"If you always do what you've always done, You'll always get what you always got"

I watched all the games the Jags won this season (I deleted the losing games) and I have to say, Blake did very well. He had some really good moments. If we let him go, 10 teams would scramble to pick him up.  I say draft a QB and let him develop.

I believe that is the best option.

---

I watched all the games the Jags won this season (I deleted the losing games) and I have to say, Blake did very well. He had some really good moments. If we let him go, 10 teams would scramble to pick him up.  I say draft a QB and let him develop.

So he played well in the games the Jags won?

You don’t say.

---

I watched all the games the Jags won this season (I deleted the losing games) and I have to say, Blake did very well. He had some really good moments. If we let him go, 10 teams would scramble to pick him up.  I say draft a QB and let him develop.

^^^ this guy knows how to be happy and steer away from being a complete keyboard GM. Thank you sir. You are a dying bread on these boards. And you also bring up a valid point.

---

I watched all the games the Jags won this season (I deleted the losing games) and I have to say, Blake did very well. He had some really good moments. If we let him go, 10 teams would scramble to pick him up.  I say draft a QB and let him develop.

^^^ this guy knows how to be happy and steer away from being a complete keyboard GM. Thank you sir. You are a dying bread on these boards. And you also bring up a valid point.

Brown or white?

---

^^^ this guy knows how to be happy and steer away from being a complete keyboard GM. Thank you sir. You are a dying bread on these boards. And you also bring up a valid point.

Brown or white?

I figured sourdough

---

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."

Sweet, another one converted to the QB is our #1 need camp (unless you already were in which case carry on).

You like putting words in people's mouths and misconstruing their posts. 

It's really lame.

That's funny that it's frame it that way when I have been the one far more on the receiving end of putting words in mouths or misconstruing. As evidenced by his very next post saying I am in the Cousins or bust crowd when I have provided evidence of my support for trading for Foles or Alex Smith. Yet he keeps doing it. Or the other guy continually calling me Ryan Day (I don't even know who that is) because trying to attack the person is a lot easier than attacking a solid argument.

All I am doing is comparing the simple juxtaposition of QB being so much more important than OG that saying Blake "took us to the title game" is fair while insert other wink link is not fair, with the reference to the team needs threads where virtually everyone said OG is a bigger need than QB. The only way that makes logical sense is if you believe the QB is already playing at a franchise caliber level, which I believe we pretty much all agree he has not yet.

---

This. Smart teams do things like this, not get rid of a starting QB who had a solid year and is still growing just because some people hate him (which doesn’t make sense - 3 other 3rd year QBs have regressed, but nobody is trying to tear them down...)

We went to the title game with Blake, in 2018 it should be Blake. He has at least earned that.

I understand why people would use the "we went to the title game with Blake" as the main support for their opinion of him.

I would really add in that there might not be any upgrades (none, affordable, or draftable) out there for BB. 

Yes, Bortles looked very good in a few games this season. He did not look good at all vs Buffalo, but then looked really good against Pitt and NE (Patriots Defense stunk though,,, Foles looked like the GOAT).

Here's something interesting:
In 2009 AND 2010,
the NY JETS went to two AFC Title games (back to back) with freaking Mark Sanchez as their QB. 

The Jets then were sporting a super strong defense with an elite "lock-down" secondary and back-end play,  and good pass rushing.
They also had a superb running game and screen game on the other side.
Sanchez looked really good when they needed him to during those playoff runs.

Do those Jets teams sound like anything familiar?

Were the Jets set at QB because they made it to not 1, but 2 AFCC games with Sanchez? Mark Sanchez??

Think about that. 

-- Anyway, yes Bortles will be back, and he earned that with his play. But, he's not "The Guy" only on the fact that he went to a title game, in my eyes. 

There are definitely other factors to consider.

---

We went to the title game with Blake, in 2018 it should be Blake. He has at least earned that.

I understand why people would use the "we went to the title game with Blake" as the main support for their opinion of him.

I would really add in that there might not be any upgrades (none, affordable, or draftable) out there for BB. 

Yes, Bortles looked very good in a few games this season. He did not look good at all vs Buffalo, but then looked really good against Pitt and NE (Patriots Defense stunk though,,, Foles looked like the GOAT).

Here's something interesting:
In 2009 AND 2010,
the NY JETS went to two AFC Title games (back to back) with freaking Mark Sanchez as their QB. 

The Jets then were sporting a super strong defense with an elite "lock-down" secondary and back-end play,  and good pass rushing.
They also had a superb running game and screen game on the other side.
Sanchez looked really good when they needed him to during those playoff runs.

Do those Jets teams sound like anything familiar?

Were the Jets set at QB because they made it to not 1, but 2 AFCC games with Sanchez? Mark Sanchez??

Think about that. 

-- Anyway, yes Bortles will be back, and he earned that with his play. But, he's not "The Guy" only on the fact that he went to a title game, in my eyes. 

There are definitely other factors to consider.

And then NYJ moved on from him and where are they now? I am not saying that they could not have gotten better at the position, but you better be certain that the guy you are bringing in is better than what you already have on hand.

---

I'm trying to make myself more informed and less opinionated.

Stop saying whatever stupid thing you're talking about and pay attention to all the interesting things I have to say!

You like putting words in people's mouths and misconstruing their posts. 

It's really lame.

That's funny that it's frame it that way when I have been the one far more on the receiving end of putting words in mouths or misconstruing. As evidenced by his very next post saying I am in the Cousins or bust crowd when I have provided evidence of my support for trading for Foles or Alex Smith. Yet he keeps doing it. Or the other guy continually calling me Ryan Day (I don't even know who that is) because trying to attack the person is a lot easier than attacking a solid argument.

All I am doing is comparing the simple juxtaposition of QB being so much more important than OG that saying Blake "took us to the title game" is fair while insert other wink link is not fair, with the reference to the team needs threads where virtually everyone said OG is a bigger need than QB. The only way that makes logical sense is if you believe the QB is already playing at a franchise caliber level, which I believe we pretty much all agree he has not yet.

It's a strawman comparison because upgrading a guard is far easier than upgrading a QB. 

Bortles isn't a franchise QB? True, but Aaron Rodgers is not available.

Cousins may be an upgrade over Bortles but it's not a certainty. They played in different systems. Bortles did well when he was allowed to come out throwing in the first quarter. 

Based on what's coming from the Jets Cousins is going to cost over $30M per year in a fully-guaranteed contract. if Cousins is injured, or just starts playing poorly, the team that signs him is still going to be stuck with a $30M cap hit every year of his contract.

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

We went to the title game with Blake, in 2018 it should be Blake. He has at least earned that.

I understand why people would use the "we went to the title game with Blake" as the main support for their opinion of him.

I would really add in that there might not be any upgrades (none, affordable, or draftable) out there for BB. 

Yes, Bortles looked very good in a few games this season. He did not look good at all vs Buffalo, but then looked really good against Pitt and NE (Patriots Defense stunk though,,, Foles looked like the GOAT).

Here's something interesting:
In 2009 AND 2010,
the NY JETS went to two AFC Title games (back to back) with freaking Mark Sanchez as their QB. 

The Jets then were sporting a super strong defense with an elite "lock-down" secondary and back-end play,  and good pass rushing.
They also had a superb running game and screen game on the other side.
Sanchez looked really good when they needed him to during those playoff runs.

Do those Jets teams sound like anything familiar?

Were the Jets set at QB because they made it to not 1, but 2 AFCC games with Sanchez? Mark Sanchez??

Think about that. 

-- Anyway, yes Bortles will be back, and he earned that with his play. But, he's not "The Guy" only on the fact that he went to a title game, in my eyes. 

There are definitely other factors to consider.

Yeah, I made my comment way too generic. I am on the draft and compete wagon, as opposed to "change, just to make a change".

---

I understand why people would use the "we went to the title game with Blake" as the main support for their opinion of him.

I would really add in that there might not be any upgrades (none, affordable, or draftable) out there for BB. 

Yes, Bortles looked very good in a few games this season. He did not look good at all vs Buffalo, but then looked really good against Pitt and NE (Patriots Defense stunk though,,, Foles looked like the GOAT).

Here's something interesting:
In 2009 AND 2010,
the NY JETS went to two AFC Title games (back to back) with freaking Mark Sanchez as their QB. 

The Jets then were sporting a super strong defense with an elite "lock-down" secondary and back-end play,  and good pass rushing.
They also had a superb running game and screen game on the other side.
Sanchez looked really good when they needed him to during those playoff runs.

Do those Jets teams sound like anything familiar?

Were the Jets set at QB because they made it to not 1, but 2 AFCC games with Sanchez? Mark Sanchez??

Think about that. 

-- Anyway, yes Bortles will be back, and he earned that with his play. But, he's not "The Guy" only on the fact that he went to a title game, in my eyes. 

There are definitely other factors to consider.

And then NYJ moved on from him and where are they now? I am not saying that they could not have gotten better at the position, but you better be certain that the guy you are bringing in is better than what you already have on hand.

Completely Agree. 

That's why I  said "that there might not be any upgrades (none, affordable, or draftable ) out there for BB."

Bortles played well at times, really well at times, and pretty "meh" at times this season. 

No reason to move on from him unless there is a surefire upgrade out there (I don't think there is). 
However, just because the Jags made it to the title game should not be the only reason to say that Bortles is the guy.
Plenty of underwhelming QBs have made it to title games and Superbowls over the decades. 

** IIRC, the downfall of the NYJ after those "championship years" was due to FA in the defense and O-Line,, and the defense started getting "long in the tooth at key positions.

---

I understand why people would use the "we went to the title game with Blake" as the main support for their opinion of him.

I would really add in that there might not be any upgrades (none, affordable, or draftable) out there for BB. 

Yes, Bortles looked very good in a few games this season. He did not look good at all vs Buffalo, but then looked really good against Pitt and NE (Patriots Defense stunk though,,, Foles looked like the GOAT).

Here's something interesting:
In 2009 AND 2010,
the NY JETS went to two AFC Title games (back to back) with freaking Mark Sanchez as their QB. 

The Jets then were sporting a super strong defense with an elite "lock-down" secondary and back-end play,  and good pass rushing.
They also had a superb running game and screen game on the other side.
Sanchez looked really good when they needed him to during those playoff runs.

Do those Jets teams sound like anything familiar?

Were the Jets set at QB because they made it to not 1, but 2 AFCC games with Sanchez? Mark Sanchez??

Think about that. 

-- Anyway, yes Bortles will be back, and he earned that with his play. But, he's not "The Guy" only on the fact that he went to a title game, in my eyes. 

There are definitely other factors to consider.

Yeah, I made my comment way too generic. I am on the draft and compete wagon, as opposed to "change, just to make a change".

^ I'm on board with that too. 
I think that's the best option. Let Bortles continue to play and keep his job by playing well. 

Draft a guy to develop and then compete for the position of he shows enough ability.

---

And then NYJ moved on from him and where are they now? I am not saying that they could not have gotten better at the position, but you better be certain that the guy you are bringing in is better than what you already have on hand.

Completely Agree. 

That's why I  said "that there might not be any upgrades (none, affordable, or draftable ) out there for BB."

Bortles played well at times, really well at times, and pretty "meh" at times this season. 

No reason to move on from him unless there is a surefire upgrade out there (I don't think there is). 
However, just because the Jags made it to the title game should not be the only reason to say that Bortles is the guy.
Plenty of underwhelming QBs have made it to title games and Superbowls over the decades. 

** IIRC, the downfall of the NYJ after those "championship years" was due to FA in the defense and O-Line,, and the defense started getting "long in the tooth at key positions.

---

Yeah, I made my comment way too generic. I am on the draft and compete wagon, as opposed to "change, just to make a change".

^ I'm on board with that too. 
I think that's the best option. Let Bortles continue to play and keep his job by playing well. 

Draft a guy to develop and then compete for the position of he shows enough ability.

My friend, you and I are in heated agreement.

---

I'm trying to make myself more informed and less opinionated.

Stop saying whatever stupid thing you're talking about and pay attention to all the interesting things I have to say!

I understand why people would use the "we went to the title game with Blake" as the main support for their opinion of him.

I would really add in that there might not be any upgrades (none, affordable, or draftable) out there for BB. 

Yes, Bortles looked very good in a few games this season. He did not look good at all vs Buffalo, but then looked really good against Pitt and NE (Patriots Defense stunk though,,, Foles looked like the GOAT).

Here's something interesting:
In 2009 AND 2010,
the NY JETS went to two AFC Title games (back to back) with freaking Mark Sanchez as their QB. 

The Jets then were sporting a super strong defense with an elite "lock-down" secondary and back-end play,  and good pass rushing.
They also had a superb running game and screen game on the other side.
Sanchez looked really good when they needed him to during those playoff runs.

Do those Jets teams sound like anything familiar?

Were the Jets set at QB because they made it to not 1, but 2 AFCC games with Sanchez? Mark Sanchez??

Think about that. 

-- Anyway, yes Bortles will be back, and he earned that with his play. But, he's not "The Guy" only on the fact that he went to a title game, in my eyes. 

There are definitely other factors to consider.

And then NYJ moved on from him and where are they now? I am not saying that they could not have gotten better at the position, but you better be certain that the guy you are bringing in is better than what you already have on hand.

The downfall began when they actually asked their QB to be a focal point instead of a side piece.

---

Other than the fact that it's asinine to compare the importance of a guard to a quarterback...nice comparison.

Sweet, another one converted to the QB is our #1 need camp (unless you already were in which case carry on).

You like putting words in people's mouths and misconstruing their posts. 

It's really lame.

That's funny that it's frame it that way when I have been the one far more on the receiving end of putting words in mouths or misconstruing. As evidenced by his very next post saying I am in the Cousins or bust crowd when I have provided evidence of my support for trading for Foles or Alex Smith. Yet he keeps doing it. Or the other guy continually calling me Ryan Day (I don't even know who that is) because trying to attack the person is a lot easier than attacking a solid argument.

All I am doing is comparing the simple juxtaposition of QB being so much more important than OG that saying Blake "took us to the title game" is fair while insert other wink link is not fair, with the reference to the team needs threads where virtually everyone said OG is a bigger need than QB. The only way that makes logical sense is if you believe the QB is already playing at a franchise caliber level, which I believe we pretty much all agree he has not yet.

I'll try to break this down piece by piece. 

Bolded bit: You went from a poster comparing "the overall import of guard to QB" to "quoted poster thinks QB is our #1 need."  This is laughably inaccurate and clearly putting words in the guys mouth that he wasn't expressing. Those aren't the same things and you know it.
 You did something similar to two of my posts while we debated Cousins vs a rookie to start in 2019.  That's three times you've blatantly twisted someone's post to suit your argument - so I called you on it. No big deal. We all do it to some degree occasionally - even if in jest. 

---

Underlined red bit:
This is a very closed-minded stance. There is more than one way to skin this particular cat. 
Listing OG as a greater need than QB makes sense if you believe any of a number of things that folks were expressing here and there in that thread.

• A run blocking guard upgrade can open up the run game - which will help any QB no matter your preference
  
• One may simply be listing positions in the order of which performed more poorly - not the order in which they affect a team
  
• Plenty of people think the team can go to a super bowl with Blake Bortles and an improved run game and a #1 WR (I don't think that's ideal - but it may indeed be true - we know you don't agree)
  

---

I'll try to break this down piece by piece. 

Bolded bit: You went from a poster comparing "the overall import of guard to QB" to "quoted poster thinks QB is our #1 need."  This is laughably inaccurate and clearly putting words in the guys mouth that he wasn't expressing. Those aren't the same things and you know it.
 You did something similar to two of my posts while we debated Cousins vs a rookie to start in 2019.  That's three times you've blatantly twisted someone's post to suit your argument - so I called you on it. No big deal. We all do it to some degree occasionally - even if in jest. 

---

Underlined red bit:
This is a very closed-minded stance. There is more than one way to skin this particular cat. 
Listing OG as a greater need than QB makes sense if you believe any of a number of things that folks were expressing here and there in that thread.

• A run blocking guard upgrade can open up the run game - which will help any QB no matter your preference
  
• One may simply be listing positions in the order of which performed more poorly - not the order in which they affect a team
  
• Plenty of people think the team can go to a super bowl with Blake Bortles and an improved run game and a #1 WR (I don't think that's ideal - but it may indeed be true - we know you don't agree)
  

I see what you're saying, but I can't help but feel as if this is all Rico's fault...

---

I'm trying to make myself more informed and less opinionated.

Stop saying whatever stupid thing you're talking about and pay attention to all the interesting things I have to say!