https://twitter.com/Jaguars/status/987358432670838784

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

Interesting comment from TC on Ryan O's question about scouting O-Linemen form today's NCAA systems.

---

Interesting comment from TC on Ryan O's question about scouting O-Linemen form today's NCAA systems.

Yes it was interesting.

Maybe that partially accounts for the lack of OT prospects.

I also found his response to the first questions about overall draft philosophy interesting.

He says they've always been a BAP team, but later seems to capitulate to need when he says if they are all rated exactly the same, or if there's a slight difference they might go for need, but he says they won't reach.

So if true, a player that doesn't meet a need can be rated a 7.0, and a guy that does meet a need can be rated a 6.9, they could take the 6.9 player and not reach.

Interesting.

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

Interesting comment from TC on Ryan O's question about scouting O-Linemen form today's NCAA systems.

Yes it was interesting.

Maybe that partially accounts for the lack of OT prospects.

I also found his response to the first questions about overall draft philosophy interesting.

He says they've always been a BAP team, but later seems to capitulate to need when he says if they are all rated exactly the same, or if there's a slight difference they might go for need, but he says they won't reach.

So if true, a player that doesn't meet a need can be rated a 7.0, and a guy that does meet a need can be rated a 6.9, they could take the 6.9 player and not reach.

Interesting.

Personally -  I think every single GM/FO guy in the league has a similar system.
  For some of them the gap between those similar ratings or grades can be wider and still be deemed acceptable - or not considered a reach. 
For Coughlin it is likely a fairly narrow gap in comparison to others' adopted methods.

---

RE: the o-linemen thing - 

I really liked the "hunt for the type of tape that can provide you information you need" comment a lot.

---

Yes it was interesting.

Maybe that partially accounts for the lack of OT prospects.

I also found his response to the first questions about overall draft philosophy interesting.

He says they've always been a BAP team, but later seems to capitulate to need when he says if they are all rated exactly the same, or if there's a slight difference they might go for need, but he says they won't reach.

So if true, a player that doesn't meet a need can be rated a 7.0, and a guy that does meet a need can be rated a 6.9, they could take the 6.9 player and not reach.

Interesting.

Personally -  I think every single GM/FO guy in the league has a similar system.
  For some of them the gap between those similar ratings or grades can be wider and still be deemed acceptable - or not considered a reach. 
For Coughlin it is likely a fairly narrow gap in comparison to others' adopted methods.

Agreed completely which is why I have long maintained teams don't truly draft BAP.

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

Yes it was interesting.

Maybe that partially accounts for the lack of OT prospects.

I also found his response to the first questions about overall draft philosophy interesting.

He says they've always been a BAP team, but later seems to capitulate to need when he says if they are all rated exactly the same, or if there's a slight difference they might go for need, but he says they won't reach.

So if true, a player that doesn't meet a need can be rated a 7.0, and a guy that does meet a need can be rated a 6.9, they could take the 6.9 player and not reach.

Interesting.

Personally -  I think every single GM/FO guy in the league has a similar system.
  For some of them the gap between those similar ratings or grades can be wider and still be deemed acceptable - or not considered a reach. 
For Coughlin it is likely a fairly narrow gap in comparison to others' adopted methods.

---

RE: the o-linemen thing - 

I really liked the "hunt for the type of tape that can provide you information you need" comment a lot.

I’ve long said this. The idea is to draft the best available player at a given need. If player 1 is rated 8 at DT and player 2 is rated 7.9 at TE ideally you’d take the TE. If player one is rated 8 at DT and player 2 is rated 6.2 at TE you take the DT. I also believe most teams subscribe to this theory. Rarely will you find a truly strict BAP GM.

---

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

Personally -  I think every single GM/FO guy in the league has a similar system.
  For some of them the gap between those similar ratings or grades can be wider and still be deemed acceptable - or not considered a reach. 
For Coughlin it is likely a fairly narrow gap in comparison to others' adopted methods.

Agreed completely which is why I have long maintained teams don't truly draft BAP.

Personally -  I think every single GM/FO guy in the league has a similar system...

I’ve long said this. The idea is to draft the best available player at a given need. If player 1 is rated 8 at DT and player 2 is rated 7.9 at TE ideally you’d take the TE. If player one is rated 8 at DT and player 2 is rated 6.2 at TE you take the DT. I also believe most teams subscribe to this theory. Rarely will you find a truly strict BAP GM.

Yes and yes. 
 
Drafting "pure BAP" in early rounds is an albino tiger.  Incredibly rare.  A GM has to have a complete roster and a healthy cap situation to make it a wise move. And even then a choice is often made between a handful of players based on depth or impending need in subsequent offseasons.

---

For example.

Joeckel - need or BAP: both
Bortles - need or BAP : both
Fowler- need or BAP: Both
Ramsey- Need or BAP: Both
Fournette- Need or BAP: Both.

---

For example.

Joeckel - need or BAP: both
Bortles - need or BAP : both
Fowler- need or BAP: Both
Ramsey- Need or BAP: Both
Fournette- Need or BAP: Both.

Agreed. It's more like BAP at a position of need.

---

For example.

Joeckel - need or BAP: both
Bortles - need or BAP : both
Fowler- need or BAP: Both
Ramsey- Need or BAP: Both
Fournette- Need or BAP: Both.

Yeah...I'm calling major questionability with BAP on all of those except Ramsey. Both at the time and especially now.

Also Monroe was still a very serviceable LT at the time so Joeckel wasn't even a need then. That's a big part of why many of us were so against that pick.

---

For example.

Joeckel - need or BAP: both
Bortles - need or BAP : both
Fowler- need or BAP: Both
Ramsey- Need or BAP: Both
Fournette- Need or BAP: Both.

Yeah...I'm calling major questionability with BAP on all of those except Ramsey. Both at the time and especially now.

Also Monroe was still a very serviceable LT at the time so Joeckel wasn't even a need then. That's a big part of why many of us were so against that pick.

Joeckel - An elite tackle prospect in every sense of the word. The "safest" pick in the draft. They needed a tackle and took the best one.  

Bortles- Huge need at QB. They took the Bortles under the impression he'd be the most valuable player from the entire draft.   

Fowler- Huge need. Their top ranked pass rusher.  

Ramsey - Huge need. Their top ranked CB.  

Fournette- Huge need. Their top ranked RB and a guy considered a top 10 pick around the league. Would have gone at #8 to the Panthers if not sooner.  

All of these picks were a combination of need and being a top player on their board. As are most picks..

---

I agree they took need. I do not agree it was both need and BAP as you said for all of them. Joeckel and Ramsey were BAPs IMO, but Joeckel wasn't a need. Bortles, Fowler, and LF were not BAP. Ramsey fit both though for sure.

---

I agree they took need. I do not agree it was both need and BAP as you said for all of them. Joeckel and Ramsey were BAPs IMO, but Joeckel wasn't a need. Bortles, Fowler, and LF were not BAP. Ramsey fit both though for sure.

Every single snap Monroe played after leaving Jacksonville says you are wrong about Joeckel being a need. He was average at best and largely unavailable thereafter.

---

I agree they took need. I do not agree it was both need and BAP as you said for all of them. Joeckel and Ramsey were BAPs IMO, but Joeckel wasn't a need. Bortles, Fowler, and LF were not BAP. Ramsey fit both though for sure.

Question: how do we determine who was the Jags BAP at each draft pick? 

Who was going to be our RT in 2013?

Team use horizontal and vertical boards to make selections. They might have 5 players on a similar tier and then take the one at a position they need the most. Would that be BAP or need?

---

Nuggets and takeaways:

 Well, you have to evaluate the talent, the traits first," Caldwell said.

"Once you look at the traits, then you try to implant those traits into your system. What we look for is big guys with strength and power and athleticism. If they have that, then we feel like we have a really good coaching staff that can train them, regardless of what scheme they played in college. Everyone is going to have an adjustment factor coming into the NFL anyway, but as long as they have the traits and they're smart and competitive and tough and they can adapt, then we feel like the scheme they played in college shouldn't make a huge difference."

Definitely sounds like Hernandez to me. 

Marrone also talks about guys moving from tackle to play guard in our scheme.

[font=serif]"I think you kind of go [into that] but each player is their own a lot of times. I think people get nervous - if you're 6-6, 6-7 - going in there, playing guard. I think it's something that just depends on how you're built. I tend to like to like people with shorter legs, 32-34 inseam. Things like that but overall, if you talk to any line coach or anyone that's done that position for a long time, they'll be different things you look for or critical areas."[/font]

[font=serif]Wynn and Crosby should fit this easily.[/font]

 Caldwell said the team would "ideally" like to have a backup running back who has similar traits to Leonard Fournette. He also said T.J. Yeldon is a good fit for the group and acknowledged Corey Grant as a change-of-pace back. Caldwell said "we'll see" regarding a potential expansion of Grant's role this season.

I think it’s safe to say we do not currently have a guy who has similar traits to Fournette on the roster. Look for us to draft a running back this year who fits that mold. Guice and Chubb fit that mold in the earlier rounds and guys like Ballage, Freeman, and Scarbrough in the middle to later rounds. 

 [font=serif]"When you're looking at the position, you have to say 'hey, this what we're looking for, this is the priority of this position,'" Marrone said.

"'We need this guy to block for us and this.' And then all of a sudden, 'hey, if we change this personnel, we need this guy to be a receiver that we can put into the slot. I always say the number one question is if you put that guy in the slot, he's got to be better than your third receiver if you're going to do that. If he's not, then people are going to look at you and say 'How come your best player is not on the field?'"[/font]

[font=serif]Slightly interesting quote as we haven’t ran very much TE playing from the slot. The “G” brothers and potentially Hurst could prove to be the player to do this. Ian Thomas as well in due time. [/font]

[font=serif]https://www.firstcoastnews.com/article/s...-543512286[/font]

---

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

Nuggets and takeaways:

...

[font=serif]https://www.firstcoastnews.com/article/s...-543512286[/font]

Good quotes.  All stuff I like to hear.

---