|
| | | | |
| |  Posted Sunday, August 31, 2008 5:29 PM | |
| 
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Saturday, November 08, 2008 1:11 PM
|
| Gimli:-englandjag (8/31/2008)
Unless he is a top WR who puts us over the top, no. What would be the point?
Yes, but your not getting Larry Fitgeralds & Braylon Edwards' off of waivers.
Chad Jackson would be a player that you bring in with a hope for this season, as well as an eye on the future.
Like I said, getting rid of one of 2 Safeties that don't really fit into the long term plans anyway, or moving Thomas Williams to the PS, seems like a small price to pay when you can acquire a player who has the upside that Jackson has.
I'm not suggesting the Jags get rid of any critical part of the roster to potentially make this move.
Look, the way I see it, the Jags WR position, until proven otherwise, is still a question mark. So, given that, I'd think they should always be seeking out potential improvements for the area.
Low risk/ potential high reward. Possible long term reward as well, given his age.
Don't overplay the being cut by Belichick thing....Belichck is a surly character....this release might have more to do with getting on the bad side of Belichick more than actual talent/ potential of the player. Maybe not....but I surely wouldn't put it past Belichick.
Congratulations to the 2008 WORLD Champions, your Philadelphia Phillies!
|
|
| |
| | | Posted Sunday, August 31, 2008 5:29 PM | |
|
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Sunday, September 21, 2008 12:14 PM
|
| Even if we did have interest in Chad, why would Prioleau or Fudge be the obvious casualty?
Makes no sense having 7 WR, 6 is arguably a bit high and probably only carrying 6 right now to cover Porter. |
| |
| | | Posted Sunday, August 31, 2008 5:30 PM | |
|
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 8:38 AM
|
| The Mad Dog (8/31/2008)Aren't the Florida Gators the Jaguars farm club?  Just thought it would be of interest to the many Gator fans on this board, as well as the people who will undoubtably be calling for the Jags to take a look. I wouldn't be one of those that would be recommending the Jags bother with Chad Jackson, tho.
Go Jaguars! Official Reggie Williams Supporter! |
|
| |
| | | Posted Sunday, August 31, 2008 5:34 PM | |
|
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Saturday, November 08, 2008 1:11 PM
|
| zachthejag (8/31/2008)
Chad Jackson is not good...why would we want him?......we have wide outs....if we wanted to keep a project either Hoag or Woods would still be on the team!
You're comparing a 29 year old journeyman & an undrafted guy who looked decent but has limitations with a player who was the 36th overall player in the draft 2 years ago & runs a 4.32 while being a solid 6' 1", 215.
Jackson may not have panned out, yet, & maybe he never does.....but he certainly would be a player that is MUCH more highly regarded than those 2....and I am a fan of Woods....
Congratulations to the 2008 WORLD Champions, your Philadelphia Phillies!
|
|
| |
| | | Posted Sunday, August 31, 2008 5:38 PM | |
| 
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Saturday, November 01, 2008 11:38 PM
|
| The Mad Dog (8/31/2008)
Gimli:-englandjag (8/31/2008)
Unless he is a top WR who puts us over the top, no. What would be the point?Yes, but your not getting Larry Fitgeralds & Braylon Edwards' off of waivers. Chad Jackson would be a player that you bring in with a hope for this season, as well as an eye on the future. Like I said, getting rid of one of 2 Safeties that don't really fit into the long term plans anyway, or moving Thomas Williams to the PS, seems like a small price to pay when you can acquire a player who has the upside that Jackson has. I'm not suggesting the Jags get rid of any critical part of the roster to potentially make this move. Look, the way I see it, the Jags WR position, until proven otherwise, is still a question mark. So, given that, I'd think they should always be seeking out potential improvements for the area. Low risk/ potential high reward. Possible long term reward as well, given his age. Don't overplay the being cut by Belichick thing....Belichck is a surly character....this release might have more to do with getting on the bad side of Belichick more than actual talent/ potential of the player. Maybe not....but I surely wouldn't put it past Belichick. I see what you are saying, I'm not adversed to picking players off the street, but is he any better than what we have? Is he significantly younger? Not really. That coupled with the fact that secondary depth was a real issue last year, I'd rather leave the balence of the team as it is. Also 7 WR!!!! Have you seen this team play? 7 WR on this team would be like having 3 punters.
David Garrard? Ive always liked him.  The Essex Blades. The heart and soul of British Football! http://essexblades.com/ |
|
| |
| | | Posted Sunday, August 31, 2008 5:39 PM | |
| 
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 12:34 AM
|
| | i would have liked to bring him into camp back in july. but now its probably too late. besides, i dont think youd wanna carry 7 WRs on the 53 man roster. youd have to get rid of one of the current guys. who would that be?
JACKSONVILLE JAGUARS
Joined: 10/1/2000 12:00:00AM |
|
| |
| | | Posted Sunday, August 31, 2008 5:40 PM | |
| 
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 9:34 PM
|
| | I wonder who the lone 'yes' is.. Hmph..
11-04-08 I can see the brewery from my house.
|
|
| |
| | | Posted Sunday, August 31, 2008 5:41 PM | |
|
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Saturday, November 08, 2008 1:11 PM
|
| The Gaffer (8/31/2008)
Even if we did have interest in Chad, why would Prioleau or Fudge be the obvious casualty?
I listed them because first off, I don't think we need BOTH of them, and IMO neither of those 2 fit into Jax' long term plans. Thus making at least one of them disposable (for lack of a better term).
I also listed the possibility of releasing Thomas Williams with the idea of placing him on the PS, as we already have a ton of LB's with limited PT, given the ability of Peterson, Smith, Ingram & Durant, to begin with.
The Gaffer (8/31/2008)
Makes no sense having 7 WR, 6 is arguably a bit high and probably only carrying 6 right now to cover Porter.
Again, I know its a high number. But its not like we have 6 Jimmy Smiths on the roster....it is 6 WR's of which many are still questionmarks. Until we start getting answers in the form of impact WR's to those questionmarks, I see no problem with continuing to explore WR options, especially with the kind of potential a player like Chad Jackson has.
Congratulations to the 2008 WORLD Champions, your Philadelphia Phillies!
|
|
| |
| | | Posted Sunday, August 31, 2008 5:41 PM | |
|
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 8:38 AM
|
| 91 Off The Edge 93 (8/31/2008)
I wonder who the lone 'yes' is.. Hmph.. Probably the same guy who just about four hours ago said, I wouldn't be one of those recommending we bother with Chad Jackson though. At least this way he can say he was right no matter what happens.
Go Jaguars! Official Reggie Williams Supporter! |
|
| |
| | | Posted Sunday, August 31, 2008 5:43 PM | |
| 
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Monday, November 03, 2008 10:27 AM
|
| The Mad Dog (8/31/2008)
Buckethead....
how about this?
Add Jackson from waivers to 53 man roster, then,
Cut Thomas Williams from the 53, as he is PS eligible, and add Th Williams to the PS, and remove one of the current PS guys, like say Chris Brown.
We'dstill have 6 LB's on the active 53 in the above scenario. Thats plenty. That is a good way to make room for a free agent, but again, I don't know enogh about Chad Jackson to make the call.
IIRC he was drafted fairly high... no?
You don’t win the title by assembling the best. You win the title by playing the best. JDR |
|
| |
|
|