2019 NFL draft where the jags pick at 32;) (Update: pick at 7)

[Tugboat]

12 hours ago, .Buzz said:

I mean, Coughlin apparently coveted Watson back in his first draft he was in our organization and likely would have taken him had he not trusted or went with Caldwell's plan. He deserves just as much blame, BUT when we had a clear need for a QB he was fine reaching on a QB prospect top 5. I doubt it is changed here.

 

9 hours ago, .Buzz said:

I guess, but if a guy clearly isn't it you have to cut your losses. Coughlin was hired to oversee operations and wasn't a part of the past regime. He should have come and saw this as a blank canvas with help needed everywhere. Blake was coming off an absolutely awful year and hadn't shown much hope prior.

Either way, point was more so that he was high on a QB prospect and would have likely taken one that wasn't seen as worthy of a top 5 consideration...so I like the chances of it happening with a definite QB need barring FA moves.

This is where i just kinda call bullcrap on the whole "Coughling wanted Watson" narrative.  If he was that convinced on Watson and wanted him that badly, and has as much power as it appears he does within the organization...it would've happened.

I can buy the "Coughlin wasn't married to Bortles as QB" coming in angle of the whole thing.  But the proof is in the pudding.  He came in, he became football czar, and he drafted a RB to help take pressure off that QB he probably didn't fully believe in.  But that's a far cry from actually stepping up and putting yourself on the line by taking Watson there because you like him enough to actually take him there.

In the end, Tom ends up with plenty of leash to have that kind of Dave scapeBoating rumour out there.  Plenty of leash to walk into this draft with a blank slate for QB picks here.  But he had a blank slate last year too.  Yeah, it would've been a bit of a stretch taking a QB in the 1st after Bortles just took us to within half a game of the Super Bowl...but if Coughlin was so unconvinced by Bortles as it's made to sound...he could have pulled the trigger.  It wouldn't have been that outrageous.  But he didn't.

[.Buzz]

13 minutes ago, Tugboat said:

Fair enough i guess.

As a fan, i still really hate this idea that this regime can take one last "free shot" at a QB and worst case...they're gone, and we as fans are potentially just stuck watching a team spinning it's wheels, wasting extremely valuable 1st round picks on desperation hail mary attemps if they stuff it.  That may well be the mentality of Coughlin and whoever he's working with come draft day...but it kinda sucks as a fan, knowing that they might just be chucking one up and hoping it pans out.  I think if you're Coughlin, you also probably have some ego creeping in when it comes to your "legacy".  You're Tom...on your last gig before retirement...do you really want to be the guy who goes out drafting a bust, pulverizing any good will you have in Jacksonville into dust, and riding out in shame?

 

I do generally agree that "the grass is always greener" thing can play into QB discussions too much at times.  I'm not really sold on Tua tbh, that i think he's going to be a surefire franchise saver either.  But it ultimately always just comes down to the prospects this year, and right now...it looks dicey to me.  And that's if Haskins and Herbert are both in the conversation, which doesn't look like any kind of certainty.  Sometimes, a bad looking QB class is just bad.  Doesn't require a grass is greener looking over to the next draft...it's just about the guys this year being suspect.  Right now...Haskins is the only one i kinda like, and he's a really scary 1-year-wonder himself.

In any case, i think it's really interesting the way this year's draft is kinda setting up at QB.  Unlike a lot of years...it almost seems a bit upside-down in that the "top tier" guys in Haskins, Herbert, and even Lock if we're gonna throw him in there...they're all real "projects".  Some of them with alarmingly little experience.  Whereas if we're talking about going into next year and having a guy walk in and start to "save their job" or whatever and keep things afloat next year...it's potentially kinda the "second wave" of QBs who carry the experience to maybe step right in as Seniors.  Guys like Thorson, Rypien, and Grier to an extent...though he's obviously heavier in the practice reps and less weighty on the game reps with all the transfer stuff.  They all carry a bit of "low ceiling" stigma, but some of these guys have thrown like 3 times as many high level collegiate passes as a guy like Haskins and run arguably more sophisticated offenses for multiple years.

If it's one last gasp from this regime trying to find a QB to fill in next year and save them...there might be options in that sort of group that are attractive too.  More so than a project who might not even really play next year until the season is lost (if we land a decent vet stopgap).  Especially if you can also land a serious gamebreaker at another position (preferably on the offense somewhere) to make things easier.

We had years where we took elite/highly viewed guys like Fournette, Joeckel, Fowler, etc. and that didn't work either. As I said, if we're top 5 and there's an obvious stud than pull the trigger there if you don't see a QB. But all of these guys are going to have drawbacks and risks, but you gotta take a shot. I wouldn't say taking a guy like Lock, Herbert, or Haskins would be as disastrous/throwing up a random shot blindly and hoping for the best. I mean, most see that these guys have ceilings that are substantial, they also carry heavy risk (more so Lock, and to a certain extent Herbert), but there's reason to take a guy with tools like them high.

We aren't going anywhere until we find a guy. Personally, I'd rather take a shot on a guy who has upside of a possible franchise guy and see if it works out rather than taking a risk at a less important position. Teams (not just us) bomb on "safe" or top tier skill players/lineman all the time at the top too. Your chances are better to hit obviously as the QB position is tough, and I don't want to just draft a QB to draft a guy, but there are guys worthy of being taken round one in this draft, 3-4 of them most likely when all is said and done. I would rather take a shot on one of them than get a guy that is outside of the elite tier of Bosa/Allen etc. that seems to have got their own elite tier at the very top looking at things now...although things may changr as we get closer/where we end up slotting in at.

[.Buzz]

1 minute ago, Tugboat said:

 

This is where i just kinda call bullcrap on the whole "Coughling wanted Watson" narrative.  If he was that convinced on Watson and wanted him that badly, and has as much power as it appears he does within the organization...it would've happened.

I can buy the "Coughlin wasn't married to Bortles as QB" coming in angle of the whole thing.  But the proof is in the pudding.  He came in, he became football czar, and he drafted a RB to help take pressure off that QB he probably didn't fully believe in.  But that's a far cry from actually stepping up and putting yourself on the line by taking Watson there because you like him enough to actually take him there.

In the end, Tom ends up with plenty of leash to have that kind of Dave scapeBoating rumour out there.  Plenty of leash to walk into this draft with a blank slate for QB picks here.  But he had a blank slate last year too.  Yeah, it would've been a bit of a stretch taking a QB in the 1st after Bortles just took us to within half a game of the Super Bowl...but if Coughlin was so unconvinced by Bortles as it's made to sound...he could have pulled the trigger.  It wouldn't have been that outrageous.  But he didn't.

That's still beside the whole point I'm making. He loved a QB and likely would have been good taking said QB who not many viewed as an upper echelon prospect high in the draft. Which is a position we're about to be in, with literally nothing at said position.

[Tugboat]

On 20/12/2018 at 3:58 PM, .Buzz said:

I would be shocked if Hockenson fell that far. I've seen him go in round 1 in mocks.

That does seem a bit of a stretch at the back end of R3.  But 1st round seems way rich for Hockenson to me on the other end too.  I think Fant is the guy teams are really gonna go gaga over there.  Hockenson probably doesn't make it to end top of R3, but if he did...he'd be a great get.  Might even be a better fit for this sort of offense if they don't go in a very different direction tbh.  Just hard to see a R1/R2 TE pick for us given that at least one of those picks pretty much has to be penciled in as a QB, and we've got plenty of other needs...on offense especially.

 

On 20/12/2018 at 3:54 PM, .Buzz said:

 

He's so tiny.  I mean, it's great fun jitterbug jive stuff.  In the right scheme, in the right role utilized to his strengths, i could see him really thriving in today's NFL as a weapon.  But here...just seems like he'd be a Corey Grant replacement.  At a premium price.  You can find overlooked little guys who got moves.  Like Grant, or Lindsay et al that get picked up off the scrap heap after the draft.

 

13 hours ago, .Buzz said:

There are some very intriguing RB's.

Henderson i like more.  But it is still a bit of a question how he'd integrate here, coming out of that Memphis system.

 

Really, i wouldn't mind if they just went shopping back at their fav SEC shop and grabbed Damien Harris, provided the pricetag isn't stupid.  He doesn't have any of the flash and dazzle of those two, but i think he'd probably be a more effective RB2 behind Fournette with what we're likely to be running the next while with either a stopgap Vet or a rookie QB under center.

[Tugboat]

11 minutes ago, .Buzz said:

We had years where we took elite/highly viewed guys like Fournette, Joeckel, Fowler, etc. and that didn't work either. As I said, if we're top 5 and there's an obvious stud than pull the trigger there if you don't see a QB. But all of these guys are going to have drawbacks and risks, but you gotta take a shot. I wouldn't say taking a guy like Lock, Herbert, or Haskins would be as disastrous/throwing up a random shot blindly and hoping for the best. I mean, most see that these guys have ceilings that are substantial, they also carry heavy risk (more so Lock, and to a certain extent Herbert), but there's reason to take a guy with tools like them high.

We aren't going anywhere until we find a guy. Personally, I'd rather take a shot on a guy who has upside of a possible franchise guy and see if it works out rather than taking a risk at a less important position. Teams (not just us) bomb on "safe" or top tier skill players/lineman all the time at the top too. Your chances are better to hit obviously as the QB position is tough, and I don't want to just draft a QB to draft a guy, but there are guys worthy of being taken round one in this draft, 3-4 of them most likely when all is said and done. I would rather take a shot on one of them than get a guy that is outside of the elite tier of Bosa/Allen etc. that seems to have got their own elite tier at the very top looking at things now...although things may changr as we get closer/where we end up slotting in at.

The thing is still that with QB, it's more complicated than just "missing" on a pick.

Not only is QB a pretty black/white position.  There's no such thing as a "rotational QB".  Where even a "bust" like Dante Fowler was still a pretty darn useful player for us in last year's run.  A "miss" like Fournette can still be your RB1 when they're healthy at least.  But QB is also one of those positions where inevitably...if the guy shows any flashes of potential, you end up tied to your dart throw in limbo for at least 3+ years.  I mean, Gabbert did about as much as humanly possible to prove he wasn't going to be the guy...but he survived a few years, and into the next regime even...before finally being replaced.  By the guy who tied us up for another bunch of years and left us on the hook for a stupid amount of dead money next year even.  That's just kinda the nature of the position...because of how much of a commitment a top pick QB is.

When you pick a QB Top-10, the stakes go up immensely, not just in the pick itself if they bust...but in all the accouterments and symbolic tethers that applies to your franchise for at least the next few years.

That's where i think it's gotta be the right guy, not just the guy who happens to be most highly touted the year you've decided you want to find a franchise QB again.  I'd rather wait a year, maybe venture a lesser commitment in the meantime and see what happens...if the available options don't have me banging the table excited.  Yeah...probably gonna miss on some guys that way, but also gonna skip some disasters too.  Especially given the low success rate on QBs in general.

[Tugboat]

20 minutes ago, .Buzz said:

That's still beside the whole point I'm making. He loved a QB and likely would have been good taking said QB who not many viewed as an upper echelon prospect high in the draft. Which is a position we're about to be in, with literally nothing at said position.

There's literally zero evidence to support this rumour though, is the point i'm making.  Which makes it seem like utter retroactively tinted bull**** designed to make Tom look less like a fool than Dave.

If Tom really loved the guy that much, that he was willing to go up and get him wherever it took in the draft as a QB, while simultaneously apparently being not a fan of Bortles...how did we not end up with DeShaun Watson in a Jaguars uniform?  When we had a pick far higher than necessary to actually land the guy?  I just don't buy it.

[DuvalsKing]

7 hours ago, Tugboat said:

That does seem a bit of a stretch at the back end of R3.  But 1st round seems way rich for Hockenson to me on the other end too.  I think Fant is the guy teams are really gonna go gaga over there.  Hockenson probably doesn't make it to end top of R3, but if he did...he'd be a great get.  

You have to think that this is a pretty deep draft it’s not top heavy draft because a lot of the players at the top Oliver for example he’s top notch talent and has potential to develop but If people are expecting Oliver to be Aaron they are going to be disappointed.. Aaron is small for his size as an interior lineman and Oliver is even smaller and he’s still not as skilled pass rush wise as Aaron. Players who you think are not going to slide end up sliding Fant is the sure lock first round TE on that Iowa team. I can see Hockerson potentially sliding due to others teams needs and due to other players being more talented than Hockerson based on potential. Personally I don’t see Hockerson becoming much better than what he is already. To me Fant has Kelce potential and Hockerson to me ceiling would be more of Charles Clay type solid fringe pro bowler. Plus this TE class is going to be sneaky good and deep like last years class it’s few TEs this year that have potential to be sneaky good for example Caleb Wilson of UCLA..  I’m not worried about finding a quality one this year but I’m guessing the Jags weren’t worried about grabbing one last year  either because of the forecast of this year.

[.Buzz]

8 hours ago, Tugboat said:

There's literally zero evidence to support this rumour though, is the point i'm making.  Which makes it seem like utter retroactively tinted bull**** designed to make Tom look less like a fool than Dave.

If Tom really loved the guy that much, that he was willing to go up and get him wherever it took in the draft as a QB, while simultaneously apparently being not a fan of Bortles...how did we not end up with DeShaun Watson in a Jaguars uniform?  When we had a pick far higher than necessary to actually land the guy?  I just don't buy it.

Prisco has a ton of ties to the Jaguars organization tying back to the 90's and although crazy over social media talking to fans, is a very reliable source I'd say.

If you choose not to believe it that's fine, but "no evidence" when a reporter said prior to the draft and doubled down after the draft saying he liked him as well as Trubisky I tend to believe when it comes from a guy I deem much more than "zero evidence, bull****"

As I said, Dave was still in the organization and had to meet with Tom and Shad when Tom came on. He obviously pitched why he should stay on and likely they had a meeting about Blake. Had Blake been replaced on the spot, as we've discussed before, Caldwell should have been canned. When you're a relatively new at the GM position and every draft since you got here you had bad drafts and than busted on your QB, you don't usually get a 2nd shot. There's very few GMs who have been given that opportunity. 

We don't have a QB going into next year. We are desperate for one. We continuously have this conversation every couple days. You clearly are on the other side of the fence which is fine. But I'm not going to keep going back and forth on this. 

We'll see where we go in April.

[Tugboat]

2 hours ago, .Buzz said:

Prisco has a ton of ties to the Jaguars organization tying back to the 90's and although crazy over social media talking to fans, is a very reliable source I'd say.

If you choose not to believe it that's fine, but "no evidence" when a reporter said prior to the draft and doubled down after the draft saying he liked him as well as Trubisky I tend to believe when it comes from a guy I deem much more than "zero evidence, bull****"

As I said, Dave was still in the organization and had to meet with Tom and Shad when Tom came on. He obviously pitched why he should stay on and likely they had a meeting about Blake. Had Blake been replaced on the spot, as we've discussed before, Caldwell should have been canned. When you're a relatively new at the GM position and every draft since you got here you had bad drafts and than busted on your QB, you don't usually get a 2nd shot. There's very few GMs who have been given that opportunity. 

We don't have a QB going into next year. We are desperate for one. We continuously have this conversation every couple days. You clearly are on the other side of the fence which is fine. But I'm not going to keep going back and forth on this. 

We'll see where we go in April.

I'm not saying Prisco doesn't have sources and ties within the Jaguars organization.  But that snippet about liking Watson could've come directly from Coughlin to Prisco, straight to press on twitter or whatever...it's still bull****.  It's a win-win, no-lose scenario for Coughlin to float something like that.  If Watson does well, he gets the "i told you so" card via Prisco or whatever.  If he doesn't, he's got total deniability.

That's where i value the ultimate litmus test, of whether they truly love the guy enough to ante up and actually select them when they have the opportunity, or not.  The commitment is in a totally different realm, between floating a rumor, and actually investing your top pick to get the deal done.

Same thing with the Chargers, where we have it on pretty good authority that they were seriously looking at Mahomes themselves.  That's great and all, but at the end of the day, they clearly weren't quite sold enough on him to actually spend the pick.  So they can thump their chest and say they were right about the QB, but it's still bull****, because at the end of the day they still have to watch that kid tear their division apart for years and years to come now.

I don't think anybody is denying that there's a very high likelihood that Tom and whoever is working with him could invest that top pick in a QB this year, in this particularly situation.  But the Watson thing is still bull****, and not even really relevant to anything other than making Tom look better, and Dave look even more inept.  It's spin, priming the fans for Dave fired and Tom continuing on.

 

I mean, yeah...this sort of topic probably is going to pop up and circle around every few days from now until the draft, or the start of next year even.  There's really nothing worth talking about in this pathetic team and their sad sack performance game-to-game these days.  So obviously conversation is going to shift to the future...and with that, obviously the most important position and how they're going to address it is going to become a major focal point of discussion.  Until it's resolved (and probably afterward too tbh), it's going to keep swirling around that same general discussion.  Everything else is kinda gonna have to flow out of that decision.  There are multiple avenues seemingly on the table right now...and they each have different things likely to accompany them.  So until we know...it's going to be a central focus of discussion as an absolutely glaring hole in the roster.

[LinderFournette]

8 hours ago, DuvalsKing said:

You have to think that this is a pretty deep draft it’s not top heavy draft because a lot of the players at the top Oliver for example he’s top notch talent and has potential to develop but If people are expecting Oliver to be Aaron they are going to be disappointed.. Aaron is small for his size as an interior lineman and Oliver is even smaller and he’s still not as skilled pass rush wise as Aaron. Players who you think are not going to slide end up sliding Fant is the sure lock first round TE on that Iowa team. I can see Hockerson potentially sliding due to others teams needs and due to other players being more talented than Hockerson based on potential. Personally I don’t see Hockerson becoming much better than what he is already. To me Fant has Kelce potential and Hockerson to me ceiling would be more of Charles Clay type solid fringe pro bowler. Plus this TE class is going to be sneaky good and deep like last years class it’s few TEs this year that have potential to be sneaky good for example Caleb Wilson of UCLA..  I’m not worried about finding a quality one this year but I’m guessing the Jags weren’t worried about grabbing one last year  either because of the forecast of this year.

lol wilson isnt gonna be that good at TE.  hes gonna be a solid pass catcher but hes not a highly athletic guy and he lacks the size to be a good blocker.  id say hes close to a travis beckum or a Garrett graham. 

[DuvalsKing]

8 hours ago, LinderFournette said:

lol wilson isnt gonna be that good at TE.  hes gonna be a solid pass catcher but hes not a highly athletic guy and he lacks the size to be a good blocker.  id say hes close to a travis beckum or a Garrett graham. 

http://walterfootball.com/draft2019TE.php

https://www.google.com/amp/s/draftwire.usatoday.com/2018/11/27/2019-nfl-draft-top-10-rankings-for-every-position/amp/

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.milehighreport.com/platform/amp/2018/9/28/17885320/future-broncos-outlining-the-2019-nfl-drafts-tight-end-prospects

I mean that’s your opinion when I used Caleb as an example.. I used him as a bottom of the spectrum of the talent in this class. Currently with this organization he isn’t a fit but to say he just won’t be any good period is a reach he is regarded by many as a sleeper 2-4th round talent.

[LinderFournette]

6 hours ago, DuvalsKing said:

http://walterfootball.com/draft2019TE.php

https://www.google.com/amp/s/draftwire.usatoday.com/2018/11/27/2019-nfl-draft-top-10-rankings-for-every-position/amp/

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.milehighreport.com/platform/amp/2018/9/28/17885320/future-broncos-outlining-the-2019-nfl-drafts-tight-end-prospects

I mean that’s your opinion when I used Caleb as an example.. I used him as a bottom of the spectrum of the talent in this class. Currently with this organization he isn’t a fit but to say he just won’t be any good period is a reach he is regarded by many as a sleeper 2-4th round talent.

if we are picking a TE we should be looking for guys who can atleast block or has a frame to block. we havent used the TE well since we had gus. i mean weve had 1 game in that span where the TE had a great game and that game has shown to be an outlier. i dont think Marrone values the position much in the offense outside of blocking and some redzone looks. 

[Tugboat]

3 hours ago, LinderFournette said:

if we are picking a TE we should be looking for guys who can atleast block or has a frame to block. we havent used the TE well since we had gus. i mean weve had 1 game in that span where the TE had a great game and that game has shown to be an outlier. i dont think Marrone values the position much in the offense outside of blocking and some redzone looks. 

There's a bit of "chicken or the egg?" component to that discussion with TE utilization here.  We really haven't had anyone that resembles a bigtime seam threat/move TE type to see how they'd be used.  But as a whole, yeah...i just don't see this team really using that type of player to maximum effect, unless we have a completely different staff in place, and move away from the type of football Coughlin has shown he really wants to install here.

Same sort of thing that made a guy like Gesicki a really improbable fit for us last year.  Those types of jumbo WR types who don't block, don't run a lot of traditional TE type routes, etc. just don't seem like a fit here.  Which is fine.

They did show that TE is a position they wanted to at least upgrade a bit...going out and getting ASJ.  And there were rumours that they were really after a TE in the mid-rounds of the last draft but kinda struck out.  Still seem to be looking at more well-rounded types though.  I haven't really dived into all of the TEs that much yet, but what i have seen, and a casual glance around at the rest, there looks to be a decent supply of those types, or at least guys who show the ability to develop into good, well-rounded TEs in this draft.  So that's good. 

I'd expect them to use at least one pick on someone there.  Though when you look at TEs as essentially, "supplemental blocker" first, "receiver" second...that kinda inherently makes it a bit less of a premium position i think.  Less like the sort of thing i'd expect them to spend a 1st round pick on.  But who knows.

[.Buzz]

 

[.Buzz]