I have no problem with it at 4. Even if he sits for a year.

I legitimately agree.

---

Montana and Favre were both in their 30s though so the dynamic was a little different.


I'm all for it but it would be strange to have Bortles play for his job this year while at the same time telling him he isn't the future.

Because he has not proved anything as far as wins.  Ya put everyone on notice.  And if he plays lights out ya have great trade bait in the future.  If he doesn't ya have another guy in waiting. 

---

Bleeding Teal since 1995. The Icon Teal Time Radio aka ctjags

  #Gojags

I've thought about it. Now what?

 

I would point out something. As bad as the Jaguars have been the past two years, they have managed to go 3-2 against Mariota and Luck.

 

one of the biggest annoyances on this board is the hyperbole people use about free agents or draft picks going to a division rival. 

.....

"if the titans get him they will be terrorizing us for the next decade"

 

quotes like this. who cares? our division rivals will always be adding players and always losing players, just like the jags do. 

 

some posters need to put on their big boy pants and stop letting ideas scare them. 

---

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."

Because he has not proved anything as far as wins.  Ya put everyone on notice.  And if he plays lights out ya have great trade bait in the future.  If he doesn't ya have another guy in waiting. 

Personally ya can believe and like ya team leader.  But business wise.  If havent produced.  Ya have to have another option in waiting.  Or on speed dial. 

---

Bleeding Teal since 1995. The Icon Teal Time Radio aka ctjags

  #Gojags

one of the biggest annoyances on this board is the hyperbole people use about free agents or draft picks going to a division rival. 

.....

"if the titans get him they will be terrorizing us for the next decade"

 

quotes like this. who cares? our division rivals will always be adding players and always losing players, just like the jags do. 

 

some posters need to put on their big boy pants and stop letting ideas scare them. 

No I am all for competition.  But the reality is.  Who is there qb?  Savage.  They are defiantly drafting a qb. 

---

Bleeding Teal since 1995. The Icon Teal Time Radio aka ctjags

  #Gojags

No I am all for competition.  But the reality is.  Who is there qb?  Savage.  They are defiantly drafting a qb. 

 

ok? who cares? 

---

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."

Because he has not proved anything as far as wins. Ya put everyone on notice. And if he plays lights out ya have great trade bait in the future. If he doesn't ya have another guy in waiting.

I'm all for it just don't think its likely and would be a strange way to go about it.

---

I'd say Watson should sit a year regardless of where he goes or when he's drafted.

 

That's not what you want in a #4 pick.

 

Watson hasn't proven he's a knockout pick, because if he was there would be no question he'd be the first overall.

 

Tim Couch, David Carr, JaMarcus Russell, Sam Bradford, and Jared Goff were all able to convince teams of that.

 

Not Watson.

 

That tells you all you need to know.

---

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

I'm all for it just don't think its likely and would be a strange way to go about it.

I don't think it would be.  At the end of the day it is still just a business.  But we can agree to disagree and that's cool.

---

Bleeding Teal since 1995. The Icon Teal Time Radio aka ctjags

  #Gojags

I'd say Watson should sit a year regardless of where he goes or when he's drafted.

 

That's not what you want in a #4 pick.

 

Watson hasn't proven he's a knockout pick, because if he was there would be no question he'd be the first overall.

 

Tim Couch, David Carr, JaMarcus Russell, Sam Bradford, and Jared Goff were all able to convince teams of that.

 

Not Watson.

 

That tells you all you need to know.

4 out of them 5 were bust.  I believe Watson is not going the sales pitch way. And letting his great combine, and, pro day numbers and, game tape tell the story.  Sorry I mean 3 out of 5 and Goff jury is out on him. Not looking good. 

---

Bleeding Teal since 1995. The Icon Teal Time Radio aka ctjags

  #Gojags

Your thinking is not evolving.

 

QBs ALWAYS get overdrafted and overvalued.

 

If Watson was all that and a bag of chips, he'd easily go higher than he's being projected.  It's what happened with the list of guys I mentioned... guys who weren't worth #1 overall but went there anyway because of need and position.

 

Very few have him rated the highest rated QB in what is a poor QB crop at the top.

 

That's telling.

---

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

I'd say Watson should sit a year regardless of where he goes or when he's drafted.


That's not what you want in a #4 pick.


Watson hasn't proven he's a knockout pick, because if he was there would be no question he'd be the first overall.


Tim Couch, David Carr, JaMarcus Russell, Sam Bradford, and Jared Goff were all able to convince teams of that.


Not Watson.


That tells you all you need to know.

Nah he doesn't need to sit for a year.


Watson likely not being the #1 pick doesn't mean he isn't a good QB or prospect though. All it really means is those teams made terrible evaluations.

---

I'd say Watson should sit a year regardless of where he goes or when he's drafted.


That's not what you want in a #4 pick.


Watson hasn't proven he's a knockout pick, because if he was there would be no question he'd be the first overall.


Tim Couch, David Carr, JaMarcus Russell, Sam Bradford, and Jared Goff were all able to convince teams of that.


Not Watson.


That tells you all you need to know.

.

---

Yeah there is a lot of uncertainty about this crop at the top, you could make the case for any of them to be the best guy and all of them have wildly different flaws and strengths.


When there's no clear cut #1 guy I think it tends to bring the whole class down a bit.

---

I get that line of thinking, but mine is this: if you think he's gonna be a good one, meaning potentially better than Bortles, draft Watson and then focus on the oline.


Let him sit behind Blake until Blake either establishes himself or continues to show hes not the guy. Then, you'll finally have a rookie QB in Jax with offensive weapons and time to learn the game before being thrown in the fire.


If Bortles shows up and plays well, he becomes great trade bait.


2 caveats here: The FO thinks Watson will be a franchise QB and better than Bortles in 2018, and the FO doesn't have 100% faith in Bortles.


I don't think it's a stretch to say Watson would be better, and I don't think there's reason for the FO to have 100% faith in Bortles. He's a hard worker and a good guy, leader and team mate, but I think he might be too far behind the curve to catch up, considering the Blaine Gabbert level of treatment he's received here in terms of lack of offensive line, weapons, and coaching, along with being tossed to the wolves early. Basically, I think Bortles is damaged goods as far as the Jaguars are concerned.

---

They likely have interest in Watson, but 2nd round or trad up into first.  Quarterbacks "fall" all the time.  That's my read.  

---

Meh, a team interviewing a player means almost nothing.  For all we know, they could have a 4th round grade on the guy but just wanted to meet him in case he did fall that far.

---

We already have receivers on the roster.

---

Shock the world

I'd say Watson should sit a year regardless of where he goes or when he's drafted.

 

That's not what you want in a #4 pick.

 

Watson hasn't proven he's a knockout pick, because if he was there would be no question he'd be the first overall.

 

Tim Couch, David Carr, JaMarcus Russell, Sam Bradford, and Jared Goff were all able to convince teams of that.

 

Not Watson.

 

That tells you all you need to know.

I get this line of thought, but I would offer the caveat that the ultimate gauge of a player isn't where he is the day he is drafted.  Steve McNair (3rd overall, 1995), Carson Palmer (1st overall, 2003), Aaron Rodgers (24th overall, 2005) and Tom Brady all sat their rookie seasons, and of that group, only Brady was not highly drafted.

 

All of those guys turned out pretty good and worth their draft selection, and certainly proved to be better than Couch, David Carr, Russell, Bradford and Goff.

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

I get this line of thought, but I would offer the caveat that the ultimate gauge of a player isn't where he is the day he is drafted.  Steve McNair (3rd overall, 1995), Carson Palmer (1st overall, 2003), Aaron Rodgers (24th overall, 2005) and Tom Brady all sat their rookie seasons, and of that group, only Brady was not highly drafted.

 

All of those guys turned out pretty good and worth their draft selection, and certainly proved to be better than Couch, David Carr, Russell, Bradford and Goff.

 

I think it's right to give some QBs time to develop, and Watson certainly needs it.

 

Needing time to develop does and should factor in to the draft status.  It's not an indictment of the player's future.  Like with investments, it's a way to factor in risk.

 

If a player pans out (like Brady, especially Brady since there's a very good argument for him as the greatest of our time, if not all time) but when they do that doesn't erase the fact the risk was higher than others.

 

There's value in Watson later where the risk matches the pick.

 

I don't see him as nearly as good a candidate coming out of college of any of the guys you mentioned aside from Brady.  Brady's situation was particularly a muddled one, given for whatever reason everyone was swooning for Henson and was playing in his false shadow.

---

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