I'm already suffering withdrawls from the lack of football, and as such I've been thinking a lot about how the Jags should manage this offseason. I know this idea will catch a lot of heat from people but hear me out.

I think we should invest the vast majority of our significant resources this offseason (FA money and draft picks) on the offense, at the expense of probably having a terrible defense next year.

To start, here are 2 things that we need to accept about next season:
1. I don't think we have enough resources to make this team competitive (as in challenging to win a superbowl) in one offseason. We already have a whole bunch of holes on the roster, plus underperforming incumbent starters. The cap situation is basically a catch-22 - restructure and retain our existing players and we have no money to spend in FA, OR release a bunch of veterans and we have FA money, but the number of massive holes on our roster basically doubles. 
2. The one thing we do have is good draft capital, but relying on rookies to immediately improve a team is a fool's game. Even last year's draft haul, which appears to be very good and generally performed well, was not enough to make a significant difference in the W/L column. It's foolish to think we can make a competitive team with rookies filling multiple holes.

So, ultimately, IMO it's impossible for us to be truly competitive next year.

Once we accept that, the question becomes: What is the quickest way to get this team to a state where it is truly competitive?

My answer to that may seem counter-intuitive (because it was clear to see that the defense was more of a problem for this team last year): WE SHOULD INVEST AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE TO BUILD AN EXCELLENT SUPPORTING CLASS AROUND THE QB. 

Why?

1. I think it takes longer to get an offense operating at a consistently high standard in this league, than it does for a defense. A defense can be fixed relatively quickly, an offense takes time for players to be on the same page, to really get the timing down and learn the intricacies. As such, it makes sense to start the development of the offense first or you risk putting together a good defense (which is hard to keep together) but waste it on a bad offense (ring any bells?). Start building the offense first.
2. Like I said, the offense is at least a bit more functional than the defense right now. With an offseason of additions we could actually take it up to a pretty good level, with obviously the potential to improve greatly on top of that.
3. We have some of the pieces in place that are often most dificult to find. A young and talented QB (hopefully), a very good WR1, a strong RT, and a workhouse RB, and other players who could be part of a good offense. A few big additions could really go a long way.
4. Possibly most importantly, you would be building a foundation on which a young QB could have success. Whether that is Minshew, or a rookie next year, or whoever. Significantly investing in the offense will help us to evaluate whoever is playing under center, and will give them a platform for success.

So, I think we should approach the offseason with a plan of focussing on the offense. We should cut as many vets as possible on defense, and only allocate small parts of the FA money to replace them. The truth is it is easier to find adequate players at many positions on def such as run stuffing d-tackle, off the ball linebacker, free safety. The majority of the remaining FA money should go to young offensive players who could add another dimension to this team, such as Hooper or Henry at TE, or O-line. Then the draft should again be skewed to the offense: O-line, WR, TE, RB.... look to add big boys and playmakers. Let's give our QB protection and weapons.

TLDR: Focus all offseason resources on building an offensive cast that will provide a QB a stable platform to have success. This means defense will suck next year, and we won't be close to being a complete team, but at least we will be half-way there. Trying to improve everything in one offseason will only leave us with mediocrity (at best) all over.

---

Well, with nine draft picks and limited cap space (until moves are made in the oncoming months) you have a fair point and case.

We have plenty of holes across the board on this team. If they feel Minshew is the answer. They should consider investing around him. The problem is that when you look at the first round projections in April? Most of that talent is leaning more and more towards the defensive side of the football.

Now, they could like one of the offensive lineman after the combine, team workouts and interviews that could be there at No. 9. Maybe it will be Wills from Alabama or Wirfs from Iowa? Maybe they end up deciding a receiver like Higgins or Shenault Jr. are worth the 20th overall selection to compliment Chark?

I like your idea though. If you're going to invest with one solid class of draft picks why not emphasize one side of the football? Especially offensively? Still major concerns with Wash at DC with this defense though. Unless we're to believe the injuries at LB were the difference in them losing the way they did most of the time.

---

"What do I know of cultured ways, the gilt, the craft and the lie? I, who was born in a naked land and bred in the open sky. The subtle tongue, the sophist guile, they fail when the broadswords sing; Rush in and die, dogs - I was a man before I was a king."

There's a case to be made here and it's meshes nicely with the only current strength of the defense. 

But if they don't stop the run to at least a respectable degree, it won't matter. Especially considering the top division rival.

---

I do t hate the idea. But what if they go 8-8? Defense struggles at times. Offense keeps them in games. Does that mean another year of Wash and Marrone to fix the D? How would you feel about that? I see both sides but also don’t want to stick with something we shouldn’t or set someone up to fail. Even if he has been failing.

---

I do t hate the idea.  But what if they go 8-8?  Defense struggles at times.  Offense keeps them in games.  Does that mean another year of Wash and Marrone to fix the D?  How would you feel about that?  I see both sides but also don’t want to stick with something we shouldn’t or set someone up to fail.  Even if he has been failing.

I think that's one of the reasons that the FO and coaching staff might consider the strategy. If it does work out it does give them the chance to say 'we are building something here, keep us around to see it through'.

Obviously the thought of them sticking around is pretty horrific for most fans right now, but let's be honest, they aren't exactly gonna plan an off-season strategy that increases the chances of their own departures, are they?

---

I do t hate the idea.  But what if they go 8-8?  Defense struggles at times.  Offense keeps them in games.  Does that mean another year of Wash and Marrone to fix the D?  How would you feel about that?  I see both sides but also don’t want to stick with something we shouldn’t or set someone up to fail.  Even if he has been failing.

I think that's one of the reasons that the FO and coaching staff might consider the strategy. If it does work out it does give them the chance to say 'we are building something here, keep us around to see it through'.

Obviously the thought of them sticking around is pretty horrific for most fans right now, but let's be honest, they aren't exactly gonna plan an off-season strategy that increases the chances of their own departures, are they?

To your last sentence, of course not.  Which makes me question this approach.  What do you do? With so many holes...do you go all in like this idea? Or go half and half and still get the same results.  I really believe Marrone and Co. have only a year left.  I’d love to be proved wrong.   But with most fans upset with Wash, I don’t know how you can go that route, stink it up on D then keep a job.  That stadium with be speaking for itself.  Not sure how that can get ignored 2 years in a row.

---

The only way i would do this if the offensive player is always BAP. I doubt that happens though. You dont just reach for a player because he plays on offense

---

There's a case to be made here and it's meshes nicely with the only current strength of the defense. 

But if they don't stop the run to at least a respectable degree, it won't matter. Especially considering the top division rival.

Yeah, playing with a lead would certainly help the pass rush.

You're right, the run defense is the biggest problem right now. But you can make a pretty argument that run defense is actually one of the more simple things to fix on a football team, even with limited resources.

---

I think that's one of the reasons that the FO and coaching staff might consider the strategy. If it does work out it does give them the chance to say 'we are building something here, keep us around to see it through'.

Obviously the thought of them sticking around is pretty horrific for most fans right now, but let's be honest, they aren't exactly gonna plan an off-season strategy that increases the chances of their own departures, are they?

To your last sentence, of course not.  Which makes me question this approach.  What do you do? With so many holes...do you go all in like this idea? Or go half and half and still get the same results.  I really believe Marrone and Co. have only a year left.  I’d love to be proved wrong.   But with most fans upset with Wash, I don’t know how you can go that route, stink it up on D then keep a job.  That stadium with be speaking for itself.  Not sure how that can get ignored 2 years in a row.

I hear what you're saying. I'm not suggesting that I want to save their jobs in any way shape or form... But in terms of attendance, don't you think a good high-scoring offense led by Minshew would get the fair-weather fans to the games?

I also think it has to be their last year in charge. Still doesn't change that this would be a good way to handle it, both from their chances of ongoing employment and what's best for the team...

---

There's a case to be made here and it's meshes nicely with the only current strength of the defense. 

But if they don't stop the run to at least a respectable degree, it won't matter. Especially considering the top division rival.

Yeah, playing with a lead would certainly help the pass rush.

You're right, the run defense is the biggest problem right now. But you can make a pretty argument that run defense is actually one of the more simple things to fix on a football team, even with limited resources.

Very simple: fire Wash.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

To your last sentence, of course not.  Which makes me question this approach.  What do you do? With so many holes...do you go all in like this idea? Or go half and half and still get the same results.  I really believe Marrone and Co. have only a year left.  I’d love to be proved wrong.   But with most fans upset with Wash, I don’t know how you can go that route, stink it up on D then keep a job.  That stadium with be speaking for itself.  Not sure how that can get ignored 2 years in a row.

I hear what you're saying. I'm not suggesting that I want to save their jobs in any way shape or form... But in terms of attendance, don't you think a good high-scoring offense led by Minshew would get the fair-weather fans to the games?

I also think it has to be their last year in charge. Still doesn't change that this would be a good way to handle it, both from their chances of ongoing employment and what's best for the team...

A high performance offense with Minshew at charge would do a lot.  Minshew mania is real.  But you’d have to hit on most picks plus FA.  I just don’t see that happening.  If Wash wants to earn his job, well, more power to him plus happy fans.  I just think the cards are stacked against that.  Will happily be wrong, though.   In a perfect world, maybe that scenario works.

---

I get why people like the concept.

And if you share the opinion it's not gonna all get fixed in one year, then it makes even more sense.

Still gotta land a proper nose tackle and at least a decent ILB though, even if that's all you do on defense besides late round picks and UDFA for secondary and depth.

Personally, I still want a NT and CB prior to the 4th round in this draft and the best ILB you can muster in free agency.

---

I don't hate the idea, even though I'd love to go back to having a top D.

Drafting a WR/O-line with our 2 first round pics would be a nice start. I'd love to see Minshew with an improved o-line and a new toy at WR to play with.

---

I get why people like the concept.

And if you share the opinion it's not gonna all get fixed in one year, then it makes even more sense.

Still gotta land a proper nose tackle and at least a decent ILB though, even if that's all you do on defense besides late round picks and UDFA for secondary and depth.

Personally, I still want a NT and CB prior to the 4th round in this draft and the best ILB you can muster in free agency.

I agree.  You can focus on the O but there are big needs on the D.  A high power offense is fun to watch.  But if the D sucks, you’re not going to be watching in January.   I just don’t see how this FO can do it in one year.  But with Rhule getting his massive contract and the precedent being set for Hc’s, I can’t see Khan paying Marrone and a new coach a [BLEEP] ton for more years with the “new” precedent when he can wait it out, clean house and hire what we hope to be the best man.

---

As long as marrone, wash and caldwell are still here.....the odds of anything being fixed are ...long, very long.
I'm afraid we must endure another less than .500 season .

---

"Stay tight, stay close. Great things are going to continue to happen for this football team."  - Doug Peterson

As long as marrone, wash and caldwell are still here.....the odds of anything being fixed are ...long, very long.
I'm afraid we must endure another less than .500 season .

As of right now, I’m thinking 7-9 or 8-8 at best.  Which, is sadly better than we’re used to.  Unless Khan is the freaking man and pulled out the only chink in our armor in Coughlin.  If so, he da man. But with so much losing, prove it.

---

I get why people like the concept.

And if you share the opinion it's not gonna all get fixed in one year, then it makes even more sense.

Still gotta land a proper nose tackle and at least a decent ILB though, even if that's all you do on defense besides late round picks and UDFA for secondary and depth.

Personally, I still want a NT and CB prior to the 4th round in this draft and the best ILB you can muster in free agency.

Nose tackles can be found readily in the not first round of the draft. Same with ILB. Those are two of the least in demand positions, between FA, trade, and later round picks we can fill it.

If we were to somehow pay Hunter Henry and then draft Wills Jr (or Thomas/Wirfs if Wills is gone) and Ruggs...whew that could be the start of a very dangerous offense.

---

I get why people like the concept.

And if you share the opinion it's not gonna all get fixed in one year, then it makes even more sense.

Still gotta land a proper nose tackle and at least a decent ILB though, even if that's all you do on defense besides late round picks and UDFA for secondary and depth.

Personally, I still want a NT and CB prior to the 4th round in this draft and the best ILB you can muster in free agency.

Nose tackles can be found readily in the not first round of the draft. Same with ILB. Those are two of the least in demand positions, between FA, trade, and later round picks we can fill it.

If we were to somehow pay Hunter Henry and then draft Wills Jr (or Thomas/Wirfs if Wills is gone) and Ruggs...whew that could be the start of a very dangerous offense.

So can every other position. 
But the quality diminishes.  

I'd be OK with an OT/WR combo early if they quickly find value at CB and NT immediately following. 


I'm going to be a hard sell on waiting till middle or late rounds to address NT and CB. I'd like to get good prospects  early at those spots. 
ILB is different because I think free agency may yield better results than this draft class.

---

I get why people like the concept.

And if you share the opinion it's not gonna all get fixed in one year, then it makes even more sense.

Still gotta land a proper nose tackle and at least a decent ILB though, even if that's all you do on defense besides late round picks and UDFA for secondary and depth.

Personally, I still want a NT and CB prior to the 4th round in this draft and the best ILB you can muster in free agency.

Nose tackles can be found readily in the not first round of the draft. Same with ILB. Those are two of the least in demand positions, between FA, trade, and later round picks we can fill it.

If we were to somehow pay Hunter Henry and then draft Wills Jr (or Thomas/Wirfs if Wills is gone) and Ruggs...whew that could be the start of a very dangerous offense.

That's pretty much exactly the route I'm thinking... One of the top OTs at 9 and WR at 20... Or the other way around, paired with a top FA TE... Suddenly you're looking at a potent offense.

I know many people see WR as a low priority, but most of Minshew's struggles came when opponents schemed to take Chark away, coupled with the lack of a threat over the middle... Add those options and suddenly it's a different ballgame.

Ruggs is a personal draft crush of mine, the speed alone, with Minshew's great deep ball, would completely change how defenses would play us.

---

This is the kind of draft I'm thinking of:

9: R1P9
 
WR JERRY JEUDY
ALABAMA
20: R1P20
 
OT MEKHI BECTON
LOUISVILLE
42: R2P10
 
C TYLER BIADASZ
WISCONSIN
73: R3P9
 
TE HUNTER BRYANT
WASHINGTON
113: R4P10
 
LB EVAN WEAVER
CALIFORNIA
165: R5P19
 
WR TYLER JOHNSON
MINNESOTA
189: R6P10
 
CB JAMES PIERRE
FLORIDA ATLANTIC
206: R6P27
 
DL BENITO JONES
OLE MISS
223: R7P9
 
DL LARRELL MURCHISON
NC STATE

---