Create Account



The Jungle is self-supported by showing advertisements via Google Adsense.
Please consider disabling your advertisement-blocking plugin on the Jungle to help support the site and let us grow!
We also show significantly less advertisements to registered users, so create your account to benefit from this!
Questions or concerns about this ad? Take a screenshot and comment in the thread. We do value your feedback.
Based on FA the pick is clearly Fournette

#21

Quote:Even if we don't upgrade our oline, I bet the farm that he runs for more than 400 yards like Yeldon and Ivory.


Not to mention the whopping (2) 100 yard games we had.
 

 

I'm aiming a lot higher then that. With upgrades to the O-Line (RG and RT), I believe he could be a 1500+ yard RB.

Reply

We show less advertisements to registered users. Accounts are free; join today!


#22

Quote:I'm aiming a lot higher then that. With upgrades to the O-Line (RG and RT), I believe he could be a 1500+ yard RB.


I think he could run for 1500 with our oline like it is right now.
Reply

#23

Quote:I think he could run for 1500 with our oline like it is right now.
It would appear by your comments in many of these threads that you haven't really watched much of him. 

 

It is widely acknowledged that because of his lack of explosion he is one of the more oline dependent RBs, especially among the top ones. It is also widely acknowledged that because of his lack of explosion he is best suited for an under center offense (LSU was 85% under center, Jags were 73% shotgun). On the shotgun attempts he did make he was nearly a full half yard below the NCAA average, 4.4 to 4.8.  

 

Even if I believed he was the best RB in this class, which I don't, I would still believe he is not a good fit for this offense. Blake has never played in an under center offense in his career NFL or college. If we take Fournette we are trying to fit a round peg into a square hole one way or another. It would be awfully risky to not only expect Blake to take the leaps and bounds advancements he needs to make, but expect him to do it while transitioning to an offense he has never ran before. 

 

On the flip side, Mixon, McCaffrey, and Cook (among many other day 2 RBs) all have a lot more experience and much more production while in shotgun. 

Reply

#24

Quote:It would appear by your comments in many of these threads that you haven't really watched much of him. 

 

It is widely acknowledged that because of his lack of explosion he is one of the more oline dependent RBs, especially among the top ones. It is also widely acknowledged that because of his lack of explosion he is best suited for an under center offense (LSU was 85% under center, Jags were 73% shotgun). On the shotgun attempts he did make he was nearly a full half yard below the NCAA average, 4.4 to 4.8.  

 

Even if I believed he was the best RB in this class, which I don't, I would still believe he is not a good fit for this offense. Blake has never played in an under center offense in his career NFL or college. If we take Fournette we are trying to fit a round peg into a square hole one way or another. It would be awfully risky to not only expect Blake to take the leaps and bounds advancements he needs to make, but expect him to do it while transitioning to an offense he has never ran before. 

 

On the flip side, Mixon, McCaffrey, and Cook (among many other day 2 RBs) all have a lot more experience and much more production while in shotgun. 
 

 

I don't buy into every stat I see. I trust my eyes and I see a tough, strong, "run you over" type of RB that has breakaway speed. That's what I want and it isn't going to change. Period.

 

Mixon might very well be the best all around RB in the class, but he ruined any shot he had of being a Jaguar when he cold-cocked that girl. This is a team that takes character into consideration. He's not coming here and the sooner you accept that, the easier it will be for you to move on. Cook is almost as big a "scumbag." I doubt they will consider him either. As for McCaffrey, I simply don't get why some people are enamored with him. He's smallish, he's not a power runner, he is not an in between the tackles type of runner. On top of that, he needs to be in a two back system to succeed. We've already shown that we don't have another competent RB on our roster. Drafting McCaffrey would be an exercise in futility. 

Reply

#25

Quote:I don't buy into every stat I see. I trust my eyes and I see a tough, strong, "run you over" type of RB that has breakaway speed. That's what I want and it isn't going to change. Period.

 

Mixon might very well be the best all around RB in the class, but he ruined any shot he had of being a Jaguar when he cold-cocked that girl. This is a team that takes character into consideration. He's not coming here and the sooner you accept that, the easier it will be for you to move on. Cook is almost as big a "scumbag." I doubt they will consider him either. As for McCaffrey, I simply don't get why some people are enamored with him. He's smallish, he's not a power runner, he is not an in between the tackles type of runner. On top of that, he needs to be in a two back system to succeed. We've already shown that we don't have another competent RB on our roster. Drafting McCaffrey would be an exercise in futility. 
It's a good thing that the numbers agree with what the eyes say then. He is a tough, strong, "run you over" type of RB that has breakaway speed...once he gets to the 2nd level. If he doesn't get blocking he goes down for negative yards far too often and far too easily. 

 

Also, I don't know how someone who trusts your eyes like you say wouldn't like McCaffrey. He runs through the between the tackles impressively. You'll want a goal line/short yardage back with him, but he can be the early down and passing down back just fine. 

Reply

We show less advertisements to registered users. Accounts are free; join today!


#26

I like fournette but for where we could potentially land mixon, I'd prefer Adams to be the pick.
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."
Reply

#27

Not if we sign Murray it won't be.  Then ya have to lean for cook or another elusive back.   


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

  #Gojags
Reply

#28

Quote:Not if we sign Murray it won't be.  Then ya have to lean for cook or another elusive back.   
 

 

No, you don't. 

Reply

#29

LOL at Oesher...


 

<p style="margin-left:40px;">a whole lot of things seem to point to them drafting a running back at No. 4, and a whole lot seems to point to that running back being from Louisiana State, and a whole lot indicates that player could be named Leonard. But if that’s not the direction, then yeah …

<p style="margin-left:40px;"> 

I still think Solomon Thomas will be gone, and that Jonathan Allen will be the pick to replace Sen'Derrick. The new DT Stefan Charles is total camp fodder competing for a backup role. Todd Wash is almost about keeping his DLs fresh meaning he wants rotational DLs just as good as his starters, and Allen can rotate in for both Jackson and Campbell.



'02
Reply

We show less advertisements to registered users. Accounts are free; join today!


#30
(This post was last modified: 03-11-2017, 07:53 PM by Teal Time Radio.)

Quote:LOL at Oesher...


 

<p style="margin-left:40px;">a whole lot of things seem to point to them drafting a running back at No. 4, and a whole lot seems to point to that running back being from Louisiana State, and a whole lot indicates that player could be named Leonard. But if that’s not the direction, then yeah …

<p style="margin-left:40px;"> 

I still think Solomon Thomas will be gone, and that Jonathan Allen will be the pick to replace Sen'Derrick. The new DT Stefan Charles is total camp fodder competing for a backup role. Todd Wash is almost about keeping his DLs fresh meaning he wants rotational DLs just as good as his starters, and Allen can rotate in for both Jackson and Campbell.
What if we shocked the world and traded up and grabbed Garrett. 


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

  #Gojags
Reply

#31

I don't think Cook will be the pick at #4 regardless of what we do. He's terrible in pass protection and short yardage situations. Add on that he comes with baggage. It's well known that he travels with an entourage of thugs, and his past history with hitting women would not fly with the Jaguars. 

 

LSU has a pretty bad offensive line, I think ours will be a lot better next year. Fournette seems like a high character player, love his story, and love to watch him play. McCaffrey is great too but in a different way. At 6'0", 200 pounds, I can't see him as a bellcow 3 down back life Fournette. I think you have to pair McCaffrey up with someone to make it work. 


Calling Deshawn Watson a future bust since 3/19/17. If I eat crow, I will keep this in here and proclaim JackCity a genius. 
Reply

#32

Quote:LOL at Oesher...


 

<p style="margin-left:40px;">a whole lot of things seem to point to them drafting a running back at No. 4, and a whole lot seems to point to that running back being from Louisiana State, and a whole lot indicates that player could be named Leonard. But if that’s not the direction, then yeah …

<p style="margin-left:40px;"> 

I still think Solomon Thomas will be gone, and that Jonathan Allen will be the pick to replace Sen'Derrick. The new DT Stefan Charles is total camp fodder competing for a backup role. Todd Wash is almost about keeping his DLs fresh meaning he wants rotational DLs just as good as his starters, and Allen can rotate in for both Jackson and Campbell.
 

You don't draft a backup rotational player with the 4th overall pick. Especially not in this draft class and especially not with our roster.

Reply

#33

Quote:What if we shocked the world and traded up and grabbed Garrett. 
 

 

I like it.


'02
Reply

We show less advertisements to registered users. Accounts are free; join today!


#34
(This post was last modified: 03-11-2017, 08:50 PM by Caldrac.)

May not be the case if it's true we're bringing in Murray for a look from OAK next week after SEA gets a look at him. If they sign him we'd be overloaded in the backfield. 

 

Ivory - Yeldon - Murray - Grant 

 

There's no need to draft Fournette in this situation if that's the case. Especially when you dive into the numbers from last year and see that Hackett managed to call the offense into nearly a 1200 yard net rushing team through just nine or ten games.

 

At this point I am thinking they're either looking to trade down having filled all of these needs so they can address another need at RG or RT. And if they can't get the trade they want they may sit tight and go with Johnathan Allen or Solomon Thomas if he's there. 

 

Because it should go:

 

1. Cleveland - Myles Garrett

2. San Francisco - Mitch Trubisky 

3. Chicago - Johnathan Allen or Marshon Lattimore

4. Jacksonville - Johnathan Allen or Solomon Thomas 


[Image: 4SXW6gC.png]

"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."
Reply

#35

4 RBs aren't going to be active on gameday. I would think they'd like to see more of Grant, so that would mean one of them is probably gone.
Reply

#36

Yeah but if you take Fournette or sign Murray you now have a RB stable of:

 

Ivory: 6'0 - 222

Yeldon: 6'2 - 221

Fournette: 6'0 - 240

Or Murray: 6'3 - 230 

 

That's a beefy backfield. You'd think they'd want a player of Grant's size, speed and shiftiness to compliment the bigger backs. If they draft Fournette you'd have to think Ivory is probably the odd man out already due to his age and salary. Not sure if we'd eat a lot of cap penalty with him but it is what it is. 


[Image: 4SXW6gC.png]

"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."
Reply

#37

Hard to say if it's Ivory or Yeldon that's out I can see it going either way
Reply

We show less advertisements to registered users. Accounts are free; join today!


#38

I'd love to see us draft a QB at #4 just to see the fallout from it
Reply

#39

Quote:I think he could run for 1500 with our oline like it is right now.


No. Impossible.
Reply

#40

Quote:I'd love to see us draft a QB at #4 just to see the fallout from it
 

Same. This board would crash due to an epic level of draft night traffic of epic proportions. I'd be fine with it. If they feel like Trubisky (If he sneaks by San Francisco) or Kizer, Watson or Mahomes is a flat out upgrade over Bortles with more upside. So [BLEEP] be it. 

 

[Image: 113981-personagens-que-poderiam-se-junta...20x0-1.gif]

[Image: 4SXW6gC.png]

"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."
Reply




Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)

The Jungle is self-supported by showing advertisements via Google Adsense.
Please consider disabling your advertisement-blocking plugin on the Jungle to help support the site and let us grow!
We also show less advertisements to registered users, so create your account to benefit from this!
Questions or concerns about this ad? Take a screenshot and comment in the thread. We do value your feedback.


ABOUT US
The Jungle Forums is the Jaguars' biggest fan message board. Talking about the Jags since 2006, the Jungle was the team-endorsed home of all things Jaguars.

Since 2017, the Jungle is now independent of the team but still run by the same crew. We are here to support and discuss all things Jaguars and all things Duval!