- Joined
- Oct 20, 2007
- Messages
- 29,794
- Reaction score
- 20,459
I think Jax taking Bortles was the right move. If they can draft well and he develops they could become a quality team in a weak div. (besides Indy). Their coach Bradley was the architect of the Seahawks defense. I could see them being a .500 team next year if Bortles makes the kind of strides you would expect for a 2nd year franchise QB. I think Houston made a mistake passing on him and taking Clowney.
I'm conflicted. Bortles may or may not be a good QB, and I have to assume that Houston didn't take him because they didn't view him as an above-average starter, long term. Can't fault that, IMO- if you're not sold on him, you don't take him. And he has been bad this year, FWIW.
But regardless, I don't think the Jags should have taken him. Even if he is good, you were going to get something like this year. He's been sacked 3 times tonight, was sacked 9 times last week, and was sacked 6 times last time they played the Titans. The team is so far from being good, and their OL is so bad, that even if he is a good prospect they're probably just going to ruin him, David Carr style. If I was the Jags, at #3, I would normally go OL, but since there was nothing close to BPA at #3, I probably would've taken one of Evans, Watkins, or maybe Mack if my goal was to just build a stacked D.
Basically, I would be drafting with the understanding that even a home run won't keep me from picking in the top 5 next year, cause that's how bad this team is. So instead of picking the best QB available (unless he's an andrew luck-type prospect), I would just build up the team around him so that when I do pick my QB he won't be stuck on a team so bad that he gets ruined.
Having said all of that, though, I think you're right that Houston wishes they'd taken him. Although that maybe says more about Clowney need microfracture surgery than it says about Bortles.