Jump to content

Jaguars release Allen Hurns


.Buzz

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, Speedyg said:

I wouldn't be oppose to adding a bigger receiver in the later rounds, but it wouldn't surprise me if they felt Moncrief and Jenkins gives us enough in that department.

Not sure we're a big fade team now anyway as it seems our goal line plays are heavily predicated on run and play action off it

It's not just for fades, but developing someone to move the chains consistently, win 50/50, and goaline. A possession WR to balance against all this speed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, .Buzz said:

I just feel like it's more on Blake than getting him a WR for our offense to be able to pick up that slack.

I don’t disagree with this. But I think it’s a thing where it’s the team as a whole.

Adversity from injuries is a given. Some years it hits harder than others, and it’s largely random. But teams that get through, do so by having the pieces that can overcome that. Some of that is depth behind those players, but a whole lot of it is just having a lot of high level talent everywhere, where you can adjust to things.

 

What if Fournette gets hurt? Do we have a backup RB and the passing game weapons to overcome that and play well? What if a CB goes down the week we play the Patriots? Do we have the offensive firepower to win that matchup? What if if defense gets hit with some major injuries for a long period of time?

 

To me, it feels like last season we got asked “what if we lose a bunch of receivers, can we win games?” and when we found out the answer was yes, we just decided to get rid of all the good receivers as if they’re not needed. So now they won’t be available to help us when next season asks us “can you win when you lose _______”. If they’re not going to spend resources to rectify that, I’d be pretty concerned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, iPwn said:

I don’t disagree with this. But I think it’s a thing where it’s the team as a whole.

Adversity from injuries is a given. Some years it hits harder than others, and it’s largely random. But teams that get through, do so by having the pieces that can overcome that. Some of that is depth behind those players, but a whole lot of it is just having a lot of high level talent everywhere, where you can adjust to things.

 

What if Fournette gets hurt? Do we have a backup RB and the passing game weapons to overcome that and play well? What if a CB goes down the week we play the Patriots? Do we have the offensive firepower to win that matchup? What if if defense gets hit with some major injuries for a long period of time?

 

To me, it feels like last season we got asked “what if we lose a bunch of receivers, can we win games?” and when we found out the answer was yes, we just decided to get rid of all the good receivers as if they’re not needed. So now they won’t be available to help us when next season asks us “can you win when you lose _______”. If they’re not going to spend resources to rectify that, I’d be pretty concerned.

I just feel like you can do that with most teams. No one can replace there key studs. Other guys have to pick up the slack. I don't think you can really find a guy to replace those types of guys.You just have to hope guys step up to the plate/other positions pick up the slack around them.

We were 7-6 in games last year with Fournette. Which is obviously better than not, but I think we can carry the load for a certain amount of time/if we're not playing a guy like Ivory who did literally nothing/fumbled more than he scored while here.

Again, not many/if any teams are 5 deep on talent at WR. If we drafted a guy in round 1 or two, that would be exactly where we're at. What's your plan if we did that? Just sit Cole or Dede?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, .Buzz said:

I just feel like you can do that with most teams. No one can replace there key studs. Other guys have to pick up the slack. I don't think you can really find a guy to replace those types of guys.You just have to hope guys step up to the plate/other positions pick up the slack around them.

Teams like the Patriots, Seahawks, Steelers, Chiefs, Packers all deal with injuries and they all find ways to keep winning year after year after year. This is what separates the truly great teams from the one year wonders.

4 minutes ago, .Buzz said:

Again, not many/if any teams are 5 deep on talent at WR. If we drafted a guy in round 1 or two, that would be exactly where we're at. What's your plan if we did that? Just sit Cole or Dede?

We’re not exactly close to being 5 deep either. Moncrief has one season where he had more than 450 yards. Lee’s best season is 850 yards. Combined, Dede and Cole have played a whole one season and they have like 1k yards combined.

Look back at that 2008 receiving group. Dennis Northcutt, Matt Jones, Reggie Williams, Jerry Porter, Mike Sims Walker. It’s considered a trash unit, and for good reason. But what honestly makes this current group of four better than that group of 5, other than hoping some guys progress? And I mean we had good Marcedes catching the ball then too, so TE was better then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, .Buzz said:

Yeah, and I can't say I blame them with that approach. With how we want to play there's no reason to pay 16M per on a WR. It's nice to have "that guy" in certain situations but we have a lot of guys we have to pay on defense/OL. Can't pay everyone, so may as well be someone at a position that we don't put a particularly huge value on.

If Moncrief can stay healthy I think he could be a pretty big pickup for us. Just such a big if though. 

But I'm all in on a WR in the middle rounds as you said. Unless they think really highly of Wynn and/or Mickens I'd be surprised if they didn't take on in that range.

That seems to be roughly their thinking as well.  "We don't throw it as much, so we can't afford to pay any single WR that much".

I tend to look at it the other way around though.  Because we're typically not going to come out and line up in elaborate spread sets, and we're generally only going to have 2 or 3 WRs out there on the field and with limited targets to dole out...i think that actually makes it easier, and maybe even more important to have that stud "go to guy".  The guy you can count on to convert those crucial downs when it matters.  Where quality > quantity, because even healthy...you're only going to get 2 or 3 of those guys on the field...and drops/failure to separate are absolute drive killers.  Our scheme elevates the significance of those little 3-5 yard pickups in how critical they become to keeping the offense on schedule.

This philosophy of quantity > quality seems far more appropriate to something like the Rams under McVay.  Where they can afford to cut a guy like Watkins loose because he's not even the clear cut top target, being as there are so many different targets on the field all the time, and the ball gets spread around so prolifically that no one particular receiving target is "most valuable" or "most relied upon".  And where there are enough explosive plays in the repertoire to confidently bail them out of any one drop or missed play putting them a bit behind schedule.  Basically...the complete philosophical opposite of what we do here.

 

It just seems like in their fervor to build the ultimate ground 'n pound offense (which is awesome, and the perfect way to complement an elite defense)...they managed to forget that it's 2018 and we do still pass the ball ~50% of the time.  It still matters.  Quite a bit actually.

Long-term, absolutely paying a top dollar WR would have to to end up one of the first things on the chopping block for spending, when the "hard choices" start having to be made.  But in the meantime...they're spending quite a bit on the spot anyway, paying some middling guys top dollar...while showing an unwillingness to pay top dollar on top quality guys, or other different middling guys.  It's all just a bit...confusing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Tugboat said:

That seems to be roughly their thinking as well.  "We don't throw it as much, so we can't afford to pay any single WR that much".

I tend to look at it the other way around though.  Because we're typically not going to come out and line up in elaborate spread sets, and we're generally only going to have 2 or 3 WRs out there on the field and with limited targets to dole out...i think that actually makes it easier, and maybe even more important to have that stud "go to guy".  The guy you can count on to convert those crucial downs when it matters.  Where quality > quantity, because even healthy...you're only going to get 2 or 3 of those guys on the field...and drops/failure to separate are absolute drive killers.  Our scheme elevates the significance of those little 3-5 yard pickups in how critical they become to keeping the offense on schedule.

This philosophy of quantity > quality seems far more appropriate to something like the Rams under McVay.  Where they can afford to cut a guy like Watkins loose because he's not even the clear cut top target, being as there are so many different targets on the field all the time, and the ball gets spread around so prolifically that no one particular receiving target is "most valuable" or "most relied upon".  And where there are enough explosive plays in the repertoire to confidently bail them out of any one drop or missed play putting them a bit behind schedule.  Basically...the complete philosophical opposite of what we do here.

 

It just seems like in their fervor to build the ultimate ground 'n pound offense (which is awesome, and the perfect way to complement an elite defense)...they managed to forget that it's 2018 and we do still pass the ball ~50% of the time.  It still matters.  Quite a bit actually.

Long-term, absolutely paying a top dollar WR would have to to end up one of the first things on the chopping block for spending, when the "hard choices" start having to be made.  But in the meantime...they're spending quite a bit on the spot anyway, paying some middling guys top dollar...while showing an unwillingness to pay top dollar on top quality guys, or other different middling guys.  It's all just a bit...confusing.

I love ARob but I feel like 2015 is putting him in a higher light than he deserves.

He'd be our best receiver, but he had his problems in 2016 and is coming off a torn ACL. Think if the last two years weren't poor for him there'd be a good chance we may have gave him that tag/gave him 14M per.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, .Buzz said:

Gotcha, but I don't think drafting a receiver early really changes those dynamics. Signing A-Rob/Watkins doesn't likely even drastically change that. This team is built to play great D and run the heck out of the ball (as you obviously know), it seems as if our plan is to sure up some weak spots (Norwell, ASJ signed), build up the ST (McCray back, Cody Davis, Niles Paul, etc.), and be deep at the WR position while not having to pay a guy long-term a big allotment of money because that's not the type of offense we are.

Our DL is pretty solid as far as depth goes atm and Smoot when given a chances flashed considerably year one. We'll have to draft more guys to hopefully make the defense deeper so if a big piece does go out we can put someone in there that doesn't kill us. Safety especially, probably another corner at some point.

We can win games with a big guy or two going out as long as our offense can do something. It'd be nice to add another big time WR, but if we can nab a TE ala Hurst/someone else that's decent whether that be in round 1 or round 3, with ASJ, and Moncrief/Lee (maybe one of these guys is out at some point)/Dede/Cole with a rookie/Wynn/Mickens I think that's a supporting cast that can get it done. It all hinges on Blake not having those games like TEN x2/ARZ/BUF where the only way to win is if our defense is insane and forces multiple turnovers. His weapons weren't great at times, but there was some games where he just didn't have it and couldn't hit anything. Would have been a struggle even with a better supporting cast.

Our OL just added an all-pro and in all reality 4/5 of our OL is pretty damn solid. Yeldon showed some serious improvement last year when he was given a chance and was hitting the hole harder. We gave Grant a 2nd round tender so I'd be surprised if he wasn't used more. Fournette is Fournette, when he's out there he's a machine. This was done with some seriously suspect interior OL (minus Linder) and an OT who was all out of whack due to a nagging leg injury in Cam Robinson. Our running game was pretty pedestrian after week 7/8 of last year. All while having a hit or miss passing game and we still got to 10-6 and the AFC Championship game.

It's going to be interesting, I just don't think spending a high pick on a WR makes sense with our current setup but then again, it's not like I'm opposed to loading up on weapons for Blake to throw too. I just would rather see another interior OL/developmental OT ala McGlinchey/TE to pair with ASJ than a WR where we have four legit receivers (some inexperience and there is risk, but still) that all should/need to get playing time in the early rounds.

Reality is our defense won't be that healthy this year, that's a given. I just feel like it's more on Blake than getting him a WR for our offense to be able to pick up that slack. The weapons he has/should have after the draft will be pretty solid with an OL that is pretty darn good compared to most of the NFL. It's on him to utilize it and take a step in the consistency department. We know he can do it.

The thing is, when you start looking at the depth chart by position like this...one thing that obviously sticks out is that on defense especially, we have very good to elite starters pretty much across the board (aside from SAM LBer, and NB with Colvin gone).  The top rung of the depth chart across the defense isn't something they can realistically upgrade.  On offense now, especially with Norwell added...we have 4/5 spots on the OLine that are going to be tough to upgrade.  We have a top RB that's going to be tough to upgrade.

The QB could certainly use an upgrade, but that is obviously the single most difficult position in the league to upgrade, and there realistically wasn't a clear path to that on the market this offseason, like there was with WR.  So we're sorta left with hoping for internal improvement from Blake, and maybe a rookie with some upside behind him if he falters.

One area where we did have significant room to "upgrade" our best guy compared to last year...was at WR.  And we had a clear opportunity to do so as well.

Which is i think what @iPwn is generally getting at.  You can improve a team's resilience against injuries by improving depth in terms of linear "next man up at x position".  But often just as important, is upgrading the top end of other positions, so that you have more headroom to shift emphasis if/when injuries inhibit your ability to do some other specific thing at an elite level.  That's what the perennial contenders do.  They're built to be flexible enough when key injuries hit, to adapt and find other ways to compensate.

 

I mean...just think back to how our defense suffered on the field, when we had our only significant defensive injury with Telvin missing time.  Or think back to our run defense problems before we had Dareus causing havoc in the middle.  We're one or two defensive injuries from not fielding an "elite" defense overall.  Which...the natural balance against that, is to have an offense that can at least keeps its head above water if asked to pick up that slack.  Where maybe some weeks, our defense isn't fully healthy and thus doesn't just immediately put them ahead on the scoreboard and shut the other team down completely.  So the offense has to find a way to play a bit differently and actually come from behind.  Which is where an upgrade to the very top of the WR depth chart could provide some insurance.  Or heck, even just maintaining what was above average depth before cutting Hurns loose...even if it was "too much $$$ to justify" when everyone is fully healthy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, .Buzz said:

I love ARob but I feel like 2015 is putting him in a higher light than he deserves.

He'd be our best receiver, but he had his problems in 2016 and is coming off a torn ACL. Think if the last two years weren't poor for him there'd be a good chance we may have gave him that tag/gave him 14M per.

I feel like the bolded is the key though.  While there are obviously some differing perspectives on exactly how good ARob really is, and some questions about how he'll come back from the injury...i think there's also pretty much unanimous agreement that he'd have slotted in as our clear best WR.  That's where the value is.  In upgrading the top of the depth chart at a position.

He may not be a Tag/$14M per year receiver.  In fact, i'd argue he probably isn't.  But then...i wouldn't necessarily call Lee a solid $8M+ per year receiver, nor has Moncrief really proven he's clearly a $10M per year receiver.  The whole WR market this offseason has had some weird inflation to it.  And the Jags front office showed a willingness to pay that somewhat inflated market price on those guys who are really more #2/3 types.  But less willingness to pay a pretty much unanimously viewed, "top of depth chart" guy.  And an unwillingness to pay a specific other #2/3ish guy who has shown better than any of the others when healthy, has a clear rapport with our QB, and literally crawled wounded from the field for the team.  It's just...weird.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tugboat said:

Which is i think what @iPwn is generally getting at.  You can improve a team's resilience against injuries by improving depth in terms of linear "next man up at x position".  But often just as important, is upgrading the top end of other positions, so that you have more headroom to shift emphasis if/when injuries inhibit your ability to do some other specific thing at an elite level.  That's what the perennial contenders do.  They're built to be flexible enough when key injuries hit, to adapt and find other ways to compensate.

 

I mean...just think back to how our defense suffered on the field, when we had our only significant defensive injury with Telvin missing time.  Or think back to our run defense problems before we had Dareus causing havoc in the middle.  We're one or two defensive injuries from not fielding an "elite" defense overall.  Which...the natural balance against that, is to have an offense that can at least keeps its head above water if asked to pick up that slack.  Where maybe some weeks, our defense isn't fully healthy and thus doesn't just immediately put them ahead on the scoreboard and shut the other team down completely.  So the offense has to find a way to play a bit differently and actually come from behind.  Which is where an upgrade to the very top of the WR depth chart could provide some insurance.  Or heck, even just maintaining what was above average depth before cutting Hurns loose...even if it was "too much $$$ to justify" when everyone is fully healthy.

This is exactly what I’m getting at.

The Patriots can lose the best (non-QB) player on their team in the middle of the AFC Championship, and they can adjust and still put up 24 points against the best defense in football because they have receivers and backs and stuff that can still do things.

The Steelers can lose the best receiver in football in the middle of a game and were a single play away from beating the Patriots.

The Eagles lost their top two RBs, a Pro Bowl OL, and they still had the top offense in football. And then they lost one of the top 3 MVP candidates and they still won the Super Bowl.

 

 

And it’s not just injuries. Sometimes things don’t go to plan. We want to run the ball and play ball control. But what happens when we’re down by 14 with 5 minutes to go? What if we’re playing the best run defense in football? Can we make the changes necessary to beat those teams?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think what is being overlooked (perhaps at least, have only slightly skimmed) is that even if you are not putting high dollar value on a #1 WR and because you have some depth of #2s and #3s, that should not prevent you from taking a WR high. In this CBA, you cannot even negotiate with a player until after three seasons; you have them at least for four and have a fifth year option (albeit the fifth year option is where the high money begins to show). 

It makes sense given the current roster make-up for the team to take a WR high if they really like one. It gives them a potential #1 WR (or at least more high-invested insurance at the position) without really having to pay for it. It makes sense to take a Calvin Ridley (if you trade up) or a Christian Kirk if you think they give you that dynamic because you don't have to make a dollar decision on them until at least three years into their career. And who knows? The NFL changes drastically and the team may value a #1 WR as a high dollar guy by that point.

I don't think a WR at #29 or even a potential trade up (for Ridley, perhaps) is out of the question at all. I don't know if it happens, but I wouldn't be surprised.

While I am thinking about it, I also think we should target a DT relatively early on considering we likely will need to make one if not multiple decisions at the position after 2018.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Adrenaline_Flux said:

I think what is being overlooked (perhaps at least, have only slightly skimmed) is that even if you are not putting high dollar value on a #1 WR and because you have some depth of #2s and #3s, that should not prevent you from taking a WR high. In this CBA, you cannot even negotiate with a player until after three seasons; you have them at least for four and have a fifth year option (albeit the fifth year option is where the high money begins to show). 

It makes sense given the current roster make-up for the team to take a WR high if they really like one. It gives them a potential #1 WR (or at least more high-invested insurance at the position) without really having to pay for it. It makes sense to take a Calvin Ridley (if you trade up) or a Christian Kirk if you think they give you that dynamic because you don't have to make a dollar decision on them until at least three years into their career. And who knows? The NFL changes drastically and the team may value a #1 WR as a high dollar guy by that point.

I don't think a WR at #29 or even a potential trade up (for Ridley, perhaps) is out of the question at all. I don't know if it happens, but I wouldn't be surprised.

While I am thinking about it, I also think we should target a DT relatively early on considering we likely will need to make one if not multiple decisions at the position after 2018.

I'm not dismissing it, I just would rather go elsewhere with our situation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Tugboat said:

I feel like the bolded is the key though.  While there are obviously some differing perspectives on exactly how good ARob really is, and some questions about how he'll come back from the injury...i think there's also pretty much unanimous agreement that he'd have slotted in as our clear best WR.  That's where the value is.  In upgrading the top of the depth chart at a position.

He may not be a Tag/$14M per year receiver.  In fact, i'd argue he probably isn't.  But then...i wouldn't necessarily call Lee a solid $8M+ per year receiver, nor has Moncrief really proven he's clearly a $10M per year receiver.  The whole WR market this offseason has had some weird inflation to it.  And the Jags front office showed a willingness to pay that somewhat inflated market price on those guys who are really more #2/3 types.  But less willingness to pay a pretty much unanimously viewed, "top of depth chart" guy.  And an unwillingness to pay a specific other #2/3ish guy who has shown better than any of the others when healthy, has a clear rapport with our QB, and literally crawled wounded from the field for the team.  It's just...weird.

This all boils down to money do you want to continue to pay guys for half the production.. you're paying Hurns 7 mil a year he's missed 11 games in 2 seasons.. you can say that he was massively over paid by production to salary ratio. Where in that is good business sense to continue to pay a guy who is possibly your 3rd best receiver some may even argue your 4th best receiver 7 million dollars when you're getting more production from lesser guys in front of him. I understand what Hurns gave you in the past he crawled off the field blah blah blah.. thats what he got paid to do.  If he was still giving you 2015 production Hurns would still be on this team.. this is a production league guess what if Dareus, Jackson, or Campbell falls off the earth rest assured they won't be on this team either next season. They'll shed the cap space and go another direction.. I don't think people understand the business side of how Pittsburg remains Pittsburg and the Pats remain the Pats. Outside of the Pats because of 12 you can use Pittsburg they have a strong front office and they know when you're declining and they send you on your way Bill is good at smelling when the player is declining as well. I got into an argument when a friend, he was saying how when MJD was holding out on how we should open up the vault and give him what he wants for what he did for the city. I told him you don't play players for what they did in the past. For instance if you look at it in totality MJD was paid like a starter when Fred was still the starter you can do right by players and they still feel slighted.. needless to say Jags were right not to give MJD more money. Why? Because he fell off the damn map.. How does Mercedes feel slighted? Should he? He was paid like a top flight TE and the Jags fans were not receiving the production that equalled out to the value of his contract. But Mercedes feels disrespected.. spare me. Stop living in the past thinking that you the Jags fan owe a guy who is getting paid to produce but hasn't been on the field to produce.. its just not business savvy. Now if you want to be the Texans and pay JJ Watt 15 million a year because of what he use to be or because what he gave you 2 yrs ago.. or because of his humanitarian efforts than so be it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DuvalsKing said:

This all boils down to money do you want to continue to pay guys for half the production.. you're paying Hurns 7 mil a year he's missed 11 games in 2 seasons.. you can say that he was massively over paid by production to salary ratio. Where in that is good business sense to continue to pay a guy who is possibly your 3rd best receiver some may even argue your 4th best receiver 7 million dollars when you're getting more production from lesser guys in front of him. I understand what Hurns gave you in the past he crawled off the field blah blah blah.. thats what he got paid to do.  If he was still giving you 2015 production Hurns would still be on this team.. this is a production league guess what if Dareus, Jackson, or Campbell falls off the earth rest assured they won't be on this team either next season. They'll shed the cap space and go another direction.. I don't think people understand the business side of how Pittsburg remains Pittsburg and the Pats remain the Pats. Outside of the Pats because of 12 you can use Pittsburg they have a strong front office and they know when you're declining and they send you on your way Bill is good at smelling when the player is declining as well. I got into an argument when a friend, he was saying how when MJD was holding out on how we should open up the vault and give him what he wants for what he did for the city. I told him you don't play players for what they did in the past. For instance if you look at it in totality MJD was paid like a starter when Fred was still the starter you can do right by players and they still feel slighted.. needless to say Jags were right not to give MJD more money. Why? Because he fell off the damn map.. How does Mercedes feel slighted? Should he? He was paid like a top flight TE and the Jags fans were not receiving the production that equalled out to the value of his contract. But Mercedes feels disrespected.. spare me. Stop living in the past thinking that you the Jags fan owe a guy who is getting paid to produce but hasn't been on the field to produce.. its just not business savvy. Now if you want to be the Texans and pay JJ Watt 15 million a year because of what he use to be or because what he gave you 2 yrs ago.. or because of his humanitarian efforts than so be it. 

I get that it's a "what have you done for my lately" league, and sometimes tough calls have to be made, with emotional detachment.

But if Hurns is massively overpaid and we can't afford to keep him at that price because we've made a cold hard logical decision based on his production...then what the heck is Moncrief?  Being paid more than Hurns.  Yet has he had a year since they came into the league where he outproduced him?

Different situations and all that, but there's a lack of consistency to it all too.

It's not like Hurns has just fallen off a cliff either.  He's been pretty consistently around the same Yds/Game ballpark through his career, aside from a clearly anomalous 2015.  And he's mostly been in a similar range to Lee (who also has trouble staying on the field).  Who is making more than Hurns now as well.

Just seems like they're holding one particularly lengthy injury against Hurns more, same for ARob...compared to guys like Lee and Moncrief who have shown a propensity of their own for attracting injuries and missing games (or parts of games).  I mean, we're basically talking about a cluster of WRs who all have injury problems of some manner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Tugboat said:

I get that it's a "what have you done for my lately" league, and sometimes tough calls have to be made, with emotional detachment.

But if Hurns is massively overpaid and we can't afford to keep him at that price because we've made a cold hard logical decision based on his production...then what the heck is Moncrief?  Being paid more than Hurns.  Yet has he had a year since they came into the league where he outproduced him?

Different situations and all that, but there's a lack of consistency to it all too.

It's not like Hurns has just fallen off a cliff either.  He's been pretty consistently around the same Yds/Game ballpark through his career, aside from a clearly anomalous 2015.  And he's mostly been in a similar range to Lee (who also has trouble staying on the field).  Who is making more than Hurns now as well.

Just seems like they're holding one particularly lengthy injury against Hurns more, same for ARob...compared to guys like Lee and Moncrief who have shown a propensity of their own for attracting injuries and missing games (or parts of games).  I mean, we're basically talking about a cluster of WRs who all have injury problems of some manner.

You can say that but people are not looking at how the situation played out.. they negotiated with ARob during the tampering period it was clear he was going to hit the market due to no franchise tag.. the receiver market was terrible past ARob and Watkins. Did you want to pay Paul Richardson what he made? The receivers are who were available they had no choice but to pay Lee what he made he is essentially Paul Richardson stat wise plus Lee has already been here he knows the system the guys already are familiar with him. Donte Moncrief is Hurns bigger and faster version even down to the injuries (Jags know what they want to do on offense Hurns isn't what they are looking for) and you're not locked into him past this year they needed some type of depth.. but I think his 1 yr prove it deal is more beneficial than Hurns walking threw a season knowing he's going to get 7 mill in game checks this year. If the Jags would have went into camp with just Lee, Westbrook, and Cole, people would still be flipping out. Like why didn't we sign any help?.. Then when the market is trash and no great prospects but they sign a prospect for depth on a flier deal its still not good enough good grief folks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...