jaguars.com Message Board / Football / Free Agency & NFL Draft / Jags Vs. Seahawks / Latest Posts

RE: Jags Vs. Seahawks

MalabarJag — Wed, 07 May 2008 22:06:14 GMT

[quote][b]The Mad Dog (5/7/2008)[/b][hr]
It is pretty sad seeing some of the ego's on this board like Alfie & BJORN KRAP or KARL TORP or whatever he goes by...

Looking over that injury rap sheet of Wrighster, provided in this thread, any reasonable, objective NFL fan would consider __that__ a player which has hardly been a beacon of health. But here, you have people like those 2, who simply refuse to admit the slightest semblance of their almighty "takes" being wrong.

How pathetic.[/quote]

Who really knows whether those 2006 injuries listed for Wrighster were a concern? Wrighster played every game that year. Here is another injury list from some guy last year who set the NFL record for TD passes.

EDIT: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/nfl/players/5228/injuries.html

Feb 01, 2008		Right shoulder
Jan 18, 2008		Right shoulder
Jan 11, 2008		Right shoulder
Dec 28, 2007		Right shoulder
Dec 21, 2007		Right shoulder
Dec 14, 2007		Right shoulder
Dec 07, 2007		Right shoulder
Nov 30, 2007		Right shoulder
Nov 23, 2007		Right shoulder
Nov 16, 2007		Right shoulder
Nov 02, 2007		Right shoulder
Oct 26, 2007		Right shoulder
Oct 19, 2007		Right shoulder
Oct 12, 2007		Right shoulder
Oct 05, 2007		Right shoulder
Sep 28, 2007		Right shoulder
Sep 21, 2007		Right shoulder
Sep 14, 2007		Right shoulder
Sep 07, 2007		Right shoulder

RE: Jags Vs. Seahawks

Alfie — Wed, 07 May 2008 21:03:29 GMT

I think I have one, now two, posts in this thread.

I'd consider Wrighster injury prone, and have said so myself.

I admit I'm wrong all the time TMD, when I actually am.

You of all people should probably not be talking about others ego's and not admitting when they're wrong.

RE: Jags Vs. Seahawks

The Mad Dog — Wed, 07 May 2008 20:38:28 GMT

It is pretty sad seeing some of the ego's on this board like Alfie & BJORN KRAP or KARL TORP or whatever he goes by...

Looking over that injury rap sheet of Wrighster, provided in this thread, any reasonable, objective NFL fan would consider __that__ a player which has hardly been a beacon of health. But here, you have people like those 2, who simply refuse to admit the slightest semblance of their almighty "takes" being wrong.

How pathetic.

RE: Jags Vs. Seahawks

Alfie — Wed, 07 May 2008 20:27:09 GMT

The "back" is the herniated disk Bjorn was referring to...

RE: Jags Vs. Seahawks

jagabc6893 — Wed, 07 May 2008 15:55:25 GMT

[quote][b]BJORN TOURAQUE (5/7/2008)[/b][hr][quote][b]PAJagfan27 (5/5/2008)[/b][hr]Okay, I don't want to get involved in the huge Wrighster argument. But here is a link I found that shows all the times he has been on the injury report since 2003. The "days out" column is pretty useless but it atleast shows the number of times he was listed.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/nfl/players/6440/injuries.html [/quote]

Look what we have here. Someone who useful information instead of BS lies.

From that link:

INJURIES
Date	Days Out	Injury
Nov 26, 2007	0	Knee
Nov 25, 2007	0	Knee
Oct 26, 2007		Head
Oct 12, 2007		Knee
Oct 05, 2007		Knee
Dec 13, 2006		Shoulder
Dec 06, 2006		Shoulder
Nov 29, 2006		Head
Nov 22, 2006		Shoulder
Nov 15, 2006		Back
Nov 10, 2006		Back
Dec 21, 2004	0
Dec 21, 2004	64
Dec 15, 2004		Back
Dec 08, 2004		Back
Dec 01, 2004		Back
Nov 24, 2004		Back
Nov 17, 2004		Back
Nov 10, 2004		Back
Oct 27, 2004		Back
Oct 20, 2004		Back
Oct 13, 2004		Back
Oct 06, 2004		Back
Sep 08, 2004		Foot
Dec 17, 2003		Hamstring

Where is this "nagging injury" that has been keeping Wrighster down? We have last years knee, 2004's back and some midweek rest during the stretch of 2 season.

Sure looks "injury prone" to me!

You guys are all as right as can be.

So, anyone care to answer my, polite as I could be, question:

[quote][b]BJORN TOURAQUE (5/4/2008)[/b][hr]Again, based on what? That he's not Tony Gonzalez? Based on something proven and better that we have?

What am I missing here? In this thread he's been called "aging" at 27 and a "medical reject" with two career injures and it's been said that there are others with equal production on this team.

Isee no basis for any of these claims. And he got a 5 year extension in 2006.[/quote]

Oh wait. People here see the future. Nevermind.[/quote]

Do you see all those entries that say "Back"? That would be that other major problem he had besides his knee. The shoulder was the 3rd less serious one I referred to. I give up. Trying to explain something to you is liking talking to a brick wall. I guess I shouldn't insult a brick wall like that.

RE: Jags Vs. Seahawks

Jags2DaDeath — Wed, 07 May 2008 08:31:17 GMT

[quote][b]Larry (5/5/2008)[/b][hr]I like Lawrence Jackson and Red Bryant, but neither fit in to what the front office wanted to do.

Jackson is more of a LDE without much pass rush upside, but would be a solid every down end. Bryant is a solid clogger in the middle as a nose tackle in the 43 that Seattle runs.

I don't think either would have really fit into what the Jaguars are trying to do here in address the pass rush.[/quote]

Exactly. I think Seattle knows what they are getting in Jackson. They already have speed rushers.

RE: Jags Vs. Seahawks

BJORN TOURAQUE — Wed, 07 May 2008 00:44:25 GMT

[quote][b]PAJagfan27 (5/5/2008)[/b][hr]Okay, I don't want to get involved in the huge Wrighster argument. But here is a link I found that shows all the times he has been on the injury report since 2003. The "days out" column is pretty useless but it atleast shows the number of times he was listed.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/nfl/players/6440/injuries.html [/quote]

Look what we have here. Someone who useful information instead of BS lies.

From that link:

INJURIES
Date	Days Out	Injury
Nov 26, 2007	0	Knee
Nov 25, 2007	0	Knee
Oct 26, 2007		Head
Oct 12, 2007		Knee
Oct 05, 2007		Knee
Dec 13, 2006		Shoulder
Dec 06, 2006		Shoulder
Nov 29, 2006		Head
Nov 22, 2006		Shoulder
Nov 15, 2006		Back
Nov 10, 2006		Back
Dec 21, 2004	0
Dec 21, 2004	64
Dec 15, 2004		Back
Dec 08, 2004		Back
Dec 01, 2004		Back
Nov 24, 2004		Back
Nov 17, 2004		Back
Nov 10, 2004		Back
Oct 27, 2004		Back
Oct 20, 2004		Back
Oct 13, 2004		Back
Oct 06, 2004		Back
Sep 08, 2004		Foot
Dec 17, 2003		Hamstring

Where is this "nagging injury" that has been keeping Wrighster down? We have last years knee, 2004's back and some midweek rest during the stretch of 2 season.

Sure looks "injury prone" to me!

You guys are all as right as can be.

So, anyone care to answer my, polite as I could be, question:

[quote][b]BJORN TOURAQUE (5/4/2008)[/b][hr]Again, based on what? That he's not Tony Gonzalez? Based on something proven and better that we have?

What am I missing here? In this thread he's been called "aging" at 27 and a "medical reject" with two career injures and it's been said that there are others with equal production on this team.

I see no basis for any of these claims. And he got a 5 year extension in 2006.[/quote]

Oh wait. People here see the future. Nevermind.

RE: Jags Vs. Seahawks

BJORN TOURAQUE — Wed, 07 May 2008 00:34:35 GMT

[quote][b]BJORN TOURAQUE (5/7/2008)[/b][hr] In fact, this conversation was with your boyfriend the new Texans fan before you came to defend his honor. At least he was smart enough to shut his trap after he got served his.[/quote]

[quote][b]The Mad Dog (5/5/2008)[/b][hr]
BJORN LOSER got beat down here.

Good stuff.[/quote]

I stand corrected.

RE: Jags Vs. Seahawks

BJORN TOURAQUE — Wed, 07 May 2008 00:32:21 GMT

[quote][b]jagabc6893 (5/5/2008)[/b][hr][quote][b]BJORN TOURAQUE (5/4/2008)[/b][hr][quote][b]jagabc6893 (5/4/2008)[/b][hr][quote][b]BJORN TOURAQUE (5/4/2008)[/b][hr]Again, based on what? That he's not Tony Gonzalez? Based on something proven and better that we have?

What am I missing here? In this thread he's been called "aging" at 27 and a "medical reject" with two career injures and it's been said that there are others with equal production on this team.

I see no basis for any of these claims. And he got a 5 year extension in 2006.[/quote]

His chronic injuries and lack of production remind me of Byron, Stroud and Naeole (though older) to a certain extent. All of those mentioned have been released or traded. That is why I think he and Mike P both will be gone soon. Maybe not this year, but by next year. How many years with serious injuries qualifies a guy as "injury prone" in your book? 2 out of the last 3 would do it for me. And I believe he had a less serious "nagging" injury the other year. Wrighster is pretty good when he is on the field, but he has not done much the last 3 years and now has a bad knee injury. IMO, If you can see why some people think he may be replaced, then you don't pay enough attention to the team.[/quote]

OK, mini-mad dog, I was trying to be polite. Seeing as you're such the expert on the team I haven't been paying attention to, it's your turn to put up or shut up.

What is this mystery injury that you are referring to? What exactly is this "chronic" "nagging" injury? Name it or shut it up.

And lack of production. You're a funny one. Last year Marcedes Lewis was ranked 14th for TEs with his 37 catches for 391 yards and 2 TD's in 18 games in the almighty fantasy football rankings.

http://www.sportsline.com/nfl/playerrankings/regularseason/TE

In 2006 Wrighster had 39 catches for 353 yards and 3 TD's in 16 games. Should we cut Lewis for his lack of production too? Lewis had an injury his rookie year. He must be "injury prone" too, huh? That's one "serious" "nagging" injury every 2 years by your math.

2 of the last three years he's had "serious injures" has he? OK, smart man, how does starting in 16 games in 2005 and 16 games in 2006 equal "serious injury" in 2 of the last three years? Does a "serious injury" cause you to start all 16 games in 2 consecutive seasons. Is making up things what does it for you?

IMO, if you can't do simple math to back up your BS opinions you shouldn't be posting your opinions on a messageboard.

Again. You've called him "aging" at one month removed from 27 and "injury prone" with "2 serious injures" in the past 3 years that he somehow managed to play through and said he has no production. All crap. All lies.

Who's not paying attention to this team, you tool?[/quote]

Ok, Toolsack. You want to go elementary school and start calling each other names, I can stoop to your level. So, Joe Dirt Boy, show me in the stats below where Wrighster has "started all 16 games". Here is your quote by the way: "OK, smart man, how does starting in 16 games in 2005 and 16 games in 2006 equal "serious injury" in 2 of the last three years? Does a "serious injury" cause you to start all 16 games in 2 consecutive seasons. Is making up things what does it for you?"

2007 G 11 GS 6
2006 G 16 GS 10
2005 G 16 GS 6
2004 G 4 GS 3
2003 G 15 GS 1

Hmmmm? I don't see 16 games started any place on that list. Wrong again, retardo. You don't think a torn ACL is serious? Priceless. So, now I'd like you to answer my question about how many seasons it takes in your mind for a guy to be injured before he is considered "injury prone"? Your brilliant analysis has compared Lewis being injured ONE season to Wrighster being injured for at least 3 out of 5 seasons. Yeah, that is the same thing. Not. Wrong again. Finally, I like how you cherry pick and show Wrighster's one decent season out of 5 when showing his stats. The bottom line is that Wrighster is on the decline, and he will be gone this year or next. You magically left out the most important part of all this in your retarded attempt to argue with me. Wrighster has a serious KNEE injury. Oh wait, am I wrong about that? I already predicted Stroud and Naeole would be gone before the season started. What have you done except chime in with attempts to make other posters look bad?
Why don't you lay off the weed for a while? Maybe you will see how wrong you are, and your mullet might even grow out. [/quote]

OK, numb nuts. Yeah, "started", wrong word. You got me with that. How about active on the field for the game, does that work for you? Did that change the stats? Did that qualify as an injury?

I'll slow this down for you as you don't seem to want to read.

YOU: [quote]How many years with serious injuries qualifies a guy as "injury prone" in your book? 2 out of the last 3 would do it for me. And I believe he had a less serious "nagging" injury the other year. [/quote]

He hurt his knee last year. That's one. Yes? 2007, yes?

So, I'm typing slow here for you. That's one out of one year.

Me: [quote]In 2006 Wrighster had 39 catches for 353 yards and 3 TD's in 16 games.[/quote]

That's 16 games in 2006. Played a full year, 16 games. That's a total of ONE injury out of TWO YEARS. Yes?

Now, read very carefully here:

[quote]
2007 G 11 GS 6
2006 G 16 GS 10
2005 G 16 GS 6[/quote]

You posted that. Do you see that part there where you wrote "2005 G 16"? Do you see it? That means, as you said, he played 16 games in 2005.

So, if he was injured in 2007, played 16 games in 2006 and 16 games 2005. That means he HAD ONE INJURY IN 3 YEARS. Not this lie that you keep writing "2 of the last 3".

Did you follow that? Do you need pictures? Can I tutor you in math some more?

Notice I didn't quote your whole block of numbers? Let me do that for you now:

[quote]
2007 G 11 GS 6
2006 G 16 GS 10
2005 G 16 GS 6
2004 G 4 GS 3
2003 G 15 GS 1[/quote]

I see 2 complete 16 game seasons and one 15 game rookie season. Mind you, this is your quote.

Please point to me where you get this nonsense:
[quote]Your brilliant analysis has compared Lewis being injured ONE season to Wrighster being injured for at least 3 out of 5 seasons.[/quote]

So, captain. Where is this magical 3rd injured season come from? Why won't you tell me what this mystical injury is that you mention here:

[quote]His chronic injuries and lack of production remind me of Byron, Stroud and Naeole (though older) to a certain extent.[/quote]

And, here:

[quote]And I believe he had a less serious "nagging" injury the other year.[/quote]

Again, put up or shut up. I'm guessing you're going to do neither.

[quote]Finally, I like how you cherry pick and show Wrighster's one decent season out of 5 when showing his stats. [/quote]

So, you have comprehension issues with what you write as well as reading?

[quote]Wrighster is pretty good when he is on the field, but he has not done much the last 3 years[/quote]

You wrote, I answered. The stats I quoted were from 2006. Season before last, his last full season, the season when Lewis was injured. A better season than Lewis had last year. The same last season where Lewis "started" all 16 games. If that's "cherry picking" to you, I can't help you.

[quote]I already predicted Stroud and Naeole would be gone before the season started. [/quote]

A. I don't care. It doesn't make you clairvoyant or, apparently smarter.

B. Prove it. Find me a quote.

[quote][b]jagabc6893 (5/5/2008)[/b][hr]Ok, Toolsack. You want to go elementary school and start calling each other names, I can stoop to your level. [/quote]

You already did. Why cop out by calling it your "opinion":

[quote][b]jagabc6893 (5/4/2008)[/b][hr]IMO, If you can see why some people think he may be replaced, then you don't pay enough attention to the team.[/quote]

[quote] What have you done except chime in with attempts to make other posters look bad?[/quote]

You don't really need my help. I would have this same conversation with a Colt or a Titan fan posting his worthless opinion. In fact, this conversation was with your boyfriend the new Texans fan before you came to defend his honor. At least he was smart enough to shut his trap after he got served his.

RE: Jags Vs. Seahawks

Larry — Mon, 05 May 2008 17:49:04 GMT

I like Lawrence Jackson and Red Bryant, but neither fit in to what the front office wanted to do.

Jackson is more of a LDE without much pass rush upside, but would be a solid every down end. Bryant is a solid clogger in the middle as a nose tackle in the 43 that Seattle runs.

I don't think either would have really fit into what the Jaguars are trying to do here in address the pass rush.

RE: Jags Vs. Seahawks

The Mad Dog — Mon, 05 May 2008 15:30:17 GMT

2007 G 11 GS 6
2006 G 16 GS 10
2005 G 16 GS 6
2004 G 4 GS 3
2003 G 15 GS 1

RE: Jags Vs. Seahawks

PAJagfan27 — Mon, 05 May 2008 15:27:23 GMT

Okay, I don't want to get involved in the huge Wrighster argument. But here is a link I found that shows all the times he has been on the injury report since 2003. The "days out" column is pretty useless but it atleast shows the number of times he was listed.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/nfl/players/6440/injuries.html

RE: Jags Vs. Seahawks

jj82284 — Mon, 05 May 2008 13:10:15 GMT

[quote][b]rfc17 (5/3/2008)[/b][hr]I dont really think all that much of Jackson.[/quote]

The jaguars couldn't have thouhgt all that much of him either because all counts were that he would have ben there at 26 or a lot closer than 8. If they really wanted Jackson they would have stayed put. I think that harvey offers more upside than Jackson.

RE: Jags Vs. Seahawks

user name — Mon, 05 May 2008 12:16:31 GMT

Kyle Brady was the starting TE for most of those years prior to his departure in 2007 (may have been 2006)

RE: Jags Vs. Seahawks

jagabc6893 — Mon, 05 May 2008 01:45:22 GMT

[quote][b]BJORN TOURAQUE (5/4/2008)[/b][hr][quote][b]jagabc6893 (5/4/2008)[/b][hr][quote][b]BJORN TOURAQUE (5/4/2008)[/b][hr]Again, based on what? That he's not Tony Gonzalez? Based on something proven and better that we have?

What am I missing here? In this thread he's been called "aging" at 27 and a "medical reject" with two career injures and it's been said that there are others with equal production on this team.

I see no basis for any of these claims. And he got a 5 year extension in 2006.[/quote]

2007 G 11 GS 6
2006 G 16 GS 10
2005 G 16 GS 6
2004 G 4 GS 3
2003 G 15 GS 1

RE: Jags Vs. Seahawks

BJORN TOURAQUE — Sun, 04 May 2008 21:50:43 GMT

[quote][b]jagabc6893 (5/4/2008)[/b][hr][quote][b]BJORN TOURAQUE (5/4/2008)[/b][hr]Again, based on what? That he's not Tony Gonzalez? Based on something proven and better that we have?

What am I missing here? In this thread he's been called "aging" at 27 and a "medical reject" with two career injures and it's been said that there are others with equal production on this team.

I see no basis for any of these claims. And he got a 5 year extension in 2006.[/quote]

RE: Jags Vs. Seahawks

jagabc6893 — Sun, 04 May 2008 19:07:28 GMT

[quote][b]BJORN TOURAQUE (5/4/2008)[/b][hr]Again, based on what? That he's not Tony Gonzalez? Based on something proven and better that we have?

What am I missing here? In this thread he's been called "aging" at 27 and a "medical reject" with two career injures and it's been said that there are others with equal production on this team.

I see no basis for any of these claims. And he got a 5 year extension in 2006.[/quote]

RE: Jags Vs. Seahawks

BJORN TOURAQUE — Sun, 04 May 2008 18:20:00 GMT

Again, based on what? That he's not Tony Gonzalez? Based on something proven and better that we have?

What am I missing here? In this thread he's been called "aging" at 27 and a "medical reject" with two career injures and it's been said that there are others with equal production on this team.

I see no basis for any of these claims. And he got a 5 year extension in 2006.

RE: Jags Vs. Seahawks

jagabc6893 — Sun, 04 May 2008 16:23:42 GMT

The bottom line is that Wrighster needs to be upgraded, and he will be. If he does some how make the final roster this year, he will be limited. I doubt he is around by next year.

RE: Jags Vs. Seahawks

BJORN TOURAQUE — Sun, 04 May 2008 12:37:02 GMT

[quote][b]The Mad Dog (5/4/2008)[/b][hr][quote][b]BJORN TOURAQUE (5/4/2008)[/b][hr]

Per Rotoworld:

George Wrighster 2008: $825,000

Compared to

Joe Zelenka 2008: $670,000

Big money, eh?

[/quote]

Why would you use Zelenka as comparison & not the players we were talking about, i.e. Angulo, Smolko, Estandia?

Zelenka's salary is that much because of his years of service. Which also makes him an increasing chance to be replaced as time goes by. The Jags most certainly would like to get a cheaper option at LS, if they could. Ideally, it would be nice if Adam Bishop panned out and made the roster as a TE3, as the Jags could then use one roster spot for essentially 2 positions. (LS/ TE3)

If they can get = production for less pay as well as potentially having a player who is more durable, then why wouldn't the Jaguars entertain the option of replacing Wrighster?[/quote]

I used him because he's a TE. I'll do the leg work to help you prove your point:

Richard Angulo 2008: $520,000

Greg Estandia 2008: $370,000

Issac Smolko 2008: $370,000

Also:

Smolko: Career - 1 Reception.
Estandia: Career - 9 receptions.
Angulo: Career - 8 Receptions.

Wrighster: 2007 - 17 receptions.

So, which way do you want to go with this?

Where is the equal production? 17 last year vs 18 for all other 3?

Where is the big money problem? $825,000 for 17 receptions vs $1,260,000 for 18 receptions?

Where is the injury problem? 2005 & 2006 16 games played each.

2006 - 39 receptions, more than double the total careers of the other 3 combined.

I just don't see the argument of replacing him, and I don't buy the "medical reject" label.

RE: Jags Vs. Seahawks

WVsNumeber1WR — Sun, 04 May 2008 12:20:11 GMT

Reb Bryant and Owen from WVU would be the only ones from that list that I would've been happy with the Jaguars taking.

But, with the picks we had this year and the players we got with them I think our draft class was definitely a B. I'm overall pleased and excited to see how these players develop.

RE: Jags Vs. Seahawks

The Mad Dog — Sun, 04 May 2008 12:20:06 GMT

[quote][b]BJORN TOURAQUE (5/4/2008)[/b][hr]

Per Rotoworld:

George Wrighster 2008: $825,000

Compared to

Joe Zelenka 2008: $670,000

Big money, eh?

RE: Jags Vs. Seahawks

BJORN TOURAQUE — Sun, 04 May 2008 12:06:31 GMT

Per Rotoworld:

George Wrighster 2008: $825,000

Compared to

Joe Zelenka 2008: $670,000

Big money, eh?

RE: Jags Vs. Seahawks

The Mad Dog — Sun, 04 May 2008 11:49:52 GMT

[quote][b]BJORN TOURAQUE (5/4/2008)[/b][hr][quote][b]The Mad Dog (5/4/2008)[/b][hr][quote][b]BJORN TOURAQUE (5/4/2008)[/b][hr]A herniated disk in 2004 and a torn ACL last year makes a "medical reject" now?[/quote]

He's had other nagging injuries as well. Don't sit there and act as if Wrighster hasn't been injury prone. I could have sworn Wrighster had a shoulder issue at some point during his Jags career as well, along with ankle issues at some point too.

It's not like Wrighster is all that great that looking for a better option who can remain healthy should be out of the question.

I don't think we missed him much at all even with Angulo & Smolko in there.

Wrighster's not worth the $$$ or the nuiscence of having to endure all the injuries he seems to sustain.[/quote]

Put up or shut up.

2003 GP 15

2004 GP 4 (Hernated Disk)

2005 GP 16

2006 GP 16

2007 GP 11 (ACL)

Where do all of these injurys come in?

I never said he was Tony Gonzalez. But, hey, it's the TMD Happy Fun Slander Game.[/quote]

No slander. I said he was injury prone. It would appear over his brief career that it would be a fair label.

The above you list just tabs games played.

It does not account for times when Wrighster had injuries that limited his game, but he still shows up on a stat sheet as "played".

As said before, given Wrighster's contract, we're better off going with players like Angulo, Smolko, Estandia to round out the TE position as there was little/ if any drop off without Wrighster and those players all make the minimum salary, and may prove to be more durable than GW.

RE: Jags Vs. Seahawks

The Lord of Orange — Sun, 04 May 2008 11:42:34 GMT

Lawrence Jackson was my selection for the Jags first pick for a while. My reason being that trading up for Harvey will put him in the spotlight. If it works out, Ok, but me being the ultra conservative I am I think Jackson would have been an adequate pick at pick 26. If he went bust at pick 26 it wouldn't have been as bad as if Harvey goes bust after trading up to pick 8 for him. I'd also assume they could have gotten Jackson cheaper than Harvey.

McCray was like the only Jag who's been in double digit sacks for how long? I think Jackson would maybe have been adequate to replace McCray, who really didn't play much last season and the Jags were still 11-5. And I believe Jackson had more sacks than Harvey last season and throughout his entire NCAA career.

Harvey AND Groves sounds like overkill OR a major revamping of the defensive line has begun.

I'd agree that Jackson first round and maybe Bryant second round would have been good picks after they signed Florence to cover most of the DB weak spots. I don't think the Jags were necessarily looking to be conservative or cheap in that draft and that's the reason they went all out for Harvey. That and maybe because he was a Gator. I know he was ranked higher than some other guys (incl. Jackson) but they could have gotten good value out of 3 or 4 DE's still in the draft without having to trade up for Harvey.

RE: Jags Vs. Seahawks

BJORN TOURAQUE — Sun, 04 May 2008 11:41:36 GMT

[quote][b]The Mad Dog (5/4/2008)[/b][hr][quote][b]BJORN TOURAQUE (5/4/2008)[/b][hr]A herniated disk in 2004 and a torn ACL last year makes a "medical reject" now?[/quote]

He's had other nagging injuries as well. Don't sit there and act as if Wrighster hasn't been injury prone. I could have sworn Wrighster had a shoulder issue at some point during his Jags career as well, along with ankle issues at some point too.

It's not like Wrighster is all that great that looking for a better option who can remain healthy should be out of the question.

I don't think we missed him much at all even with Angulo & Smolko in there.

Wrighster's not worth the $$$ or the nuiscence of having to endure all the injuries he seems to sustain.[/quote]

Put up or shut up.

2003 GP 15

2004 GP 4 (Hernated Disk)

2005 GP 16

2006 GP 16

2007 GP 11 (ACL)

Where do all of these injurys come in?

I never said he was Tony Gonzalez. But, hey, it's the TMD Happy Fun Slander Game.

RE: Jags Vs. Seahawks

The Mad Dog — Sun, 04 May 2008 11:36:48 GMT

[quote][b]BJORN TOURAQUE (5/4/2008)[/b][hr]A herniated disk in 2004 and a torn ACL last year makes a "medical reject" now?[/quote]

He's had other nagging injuries as well. Don't sit there and act as if Wrighster hasn't been injury prone. I could have sworn Wrighster had a shoulder issue at some point during his Jags career as well, along with ankle issues at some point too.

It's not like Wrighster is all that great that looking for a better option who can remain healthy should be out of the question.

I don't think we missed him much at all even with Angulo & Smolko in there.

Wrighster's not worth the $$$ or the nuiscence of having to endure all the injuries he seems to sustain.

RE: Jags Vs. Seahawks

BJORN TOURAQUE — Sun, 04 May 2008 11:29:30 GMT

A herniated disk in 2004 and a torn ACL last year makes a "medical reject" now?

RE: Jags Vs. Seahawks

The Mad Dog — Sun, 04 May 2008 11:16:07 GMT

[quote][b]BJORN TOURAQUE (5/4/2008)[/b][hr]Long snapper and kicker, what a draft class.

And is Wighster really "aging" at 27 this past month?[/quote]

Wrighster is a medical reject who cannot be depended on to contribute the course of a full season. He's always getting hurt.

I'd rather just go with Angulo, Smolko or Adam Bishop in addition to Marcedes/ Estandia at this point. Even Estandia is a "?" at this point, due to his shoulder.

Next year's draft needs to find another TE prospect (preferably one who is known for his blocking ability) as well as SS, and probably DT, OT.

RE: Jags Vs. Seahawks

BJORN TOURAQUE — Sun, 04 May 2008 10:58:46 GMT

Long snapper and kicker, what a draft class.

And is Wighster really "aging" at 27 this past month?

RE: Jags Vs. Seahawks

Omg Its Leftwich — Sat, 03 May 2008 21:26:32 GMT

The only guy I wouldve really wanted out of their draft would be Red Bryant.

RE: Jags Vs. Seahawks

rfc17 — Sat, 03 May 2008 21:09:11 GMT

I dont really think all that much of Jackson.

RE: Jags Vs. Seahawks

RnRoutlaw — Sat, 03 May 2008 20:56:02 GMT

I think our first two picks outweigh theirs by a large margin. The rest is possibles with potential upside. I don't think we needed very many projects (maybe a DT or OL) This was a draft where we addressed a need and got a couple fillers. Hopefully this will be the year.

Jags Vs. Seahawks

jagabc6893 — Sat, 03 May 2008 20:29:59 GMT

I was bored and looking at the draft tracker. I noticed the Seahawks picks. They stood out because they drafted a few players that were mentioned often as possible picks for the Jags. I would almost rather have their draft. Almost. Check it out:

1. Lawrence Jackson, DE, USC- Big, fast, highly productive, every down DE. Had 30.5 career sacks. Could have filled pass rush need well.

2. John Carlson, TE, Notre Dame- big TE with good hands and good blocking skills. Would have been an upgrade over aging, injured Wrighster.

4. Red Bryant, DT, Texas A & M- big, run-stuffing DE who would have added nicely to the DT rotation with the Jags. He is similar in size to the departed Stroud and was mentioned often as a possible draft pick for the Jags.

5. Owen Schmitt, FB, West Virginia- 6'2", 250 with a nasty streak. Could have been a special teams demon and a more than capable replacement for Greg Jones in the event of injury. If Fred or MJD were hurt, this would allow Greg Jones to move to RB and the FB position would not miss a beat.

6. Tyler Schmitt, LS, San Diego St- yeah we don't really need a long-snapper, but they say this guy is really good at it and he could have been a more athletic, cheaper replacement for Zelenka.

7. Justin Forsett, RB, California- many people took notice of this guy during the Senior Bowl. He is undersized, but could have been a capable 3rd RB.

7. Brandon Coutu, K, Georgia- this guy is good. Maybe better than Scobee. We would not have drafted a kicker of course. This pick would have been a CB or Safety.

I guess Harvey and Groves will be better than Jackson, but who knows. Anybody else think these players would have fit in nicely for the Jags?