|ESPN.com: AFC South||[Print without images]|
David in Jacksonville writes: The Jags should trade down if they can. This team has needs on both sides of the ball and lacks playmakers on the roster. It is going to take a few good drafts to fix this roster. What are the chances the Jags can trade down? Will it take a QB (Stafford or Sanchez) to fall and someone behind the Jags wanted to trade up into the top ten?
Paul Kuharsky: More picks would be better, sure, but if they don't hit better than it won't matter.
From the outside, I would suspect they are willing to sink or swim with David Garrard at least a year more -- with better protection and better targets -- before judging if they made a mistake there or not with the big contract. In conversations I've had with people inside their headquarters, they still believe in him. I've not heard from the inside how they feel about Sanchez or how they feel about the idea of taking a quarterback at No. 8.
With the holes they have, a trade down scenario or using the pick to address defensive tackle or receiver or offensive tackle seems most sensible to me. If they take a quarterback, then they cast doubt on Garrard and create a whole other storyline. That doesn't mean they won't, though.
Paul Kuharsky: I'm not sure the Titans want to go so old with the depth at corner. If they judge one of those guys to still be able to play effectively, are those guys going to come in and be content to rank as the fourth corner from the start? The Titans are not in the market for a nickel - Vincent Fuller has been quite good in that role and was re-signed.
LenDale White is in the final year of his initial contract, and doesn't have great trade value because of that and because his numbers were largely a product of the Titans' system. Tennessee need to think about who can replace him in 2010. I don't think they are looking to replace him this season.
Chris Kirk from parts unknown writes: I was wondering if you thought there was any chance the Colts would look at James Laurinaitis with their first round pick. I'm not sure d-tackle is as pressing of a need as many since I liked what I saw out of Antonio Johnson last year and on paper Daniel Muir adds even more bulk to the middle. It seems like the easiest way to bring toughness and physicality to the front seven is with a tough linebacker and Laurinaitis makes our defense tougher by just walking in the door. This is a guy who would've been a top ten pick if he'd come out last year and I'm surprised more teams aren't talking about him. Given the Colts recent history with drafting OSU guys(Gonzo, Pitcock, and Roy Hall) can you see the Colts going that direction again with Laurinaitis?
Paul Kuharsky: Not impossible, but if he's strictly an inside guy to them, that's not where they need the most help. I don't think it's a sure think they are looking defensive tackle in the first -- the top three are likely to be gone. They could have better options at receiver. But if the highest-rated player on their board isn't a DT or a receiver or a backer, they're not going to be afraid to take him wherever he plays. It's how they want to operate in the first couple rounds.
|The best moments from Jay Cutler in 2008.|
Rob in Chattanooga writes: Paul, I was just wondering if you had given any more thought to the idea of the Titans possibly trading for Jay Cutler. I know they just locked up Collins for two more years. But with the ever-dwindling confidence in VY and Collins' age, isn't it worth taking a shot at Cutler? It seems like they could afford to offer a couple of draft picks, cash and maybe a player or two to get him. Your thoughts? Thanks!
Paul Kuharsky: I just don't see the Titans being a good trade partner for Denver. They don't have a quarterback the Broncos want.
Cap considerations and the Broncos actually wanting what the Titans could offer player-wise would make it difficult to put together the sort of deal you propose. And the Titans would create an awkward environment with two starters.
They are going to need another quarterback soon, but I don't think it lines up to be this one.
Brian Fullford in Jacksonville writes: Considering he went to Vanderbilt and with the aging Collins and bust in Young, why is Tennessee not more of a choice for the Cutler? I imagine Fisher would love his fire and wouldn't have a Cutler in the backfield be a bigger draw for FA wide receivers? On another note, I'm a bit shocked at some of my Jaguar brethren. The uproar at the Jones release has them clamoring for Gene's head. It is a sad affair when such mediocrity is missed. I don't believe for one second this pushes WR up the charts at the #8 pick but does it put more of an impetus on trading out? I like Oher but if he is hot\cold like some are saying then the Jags may have Raji, Monroe and Smith kids they would be willing to pay #8 money. What does your gut (or sources) tell you, Paul?
Paul Kuharsky: I certainly think the Titans would like to have Cutler as their quarterback for the long haul. You ask why Tennessee isn't more of a choice for him. He's not doing the choosing here. He's under contract to Denver, and Denver can choose to trade him wherever it likes or not to move him and deal with the consequences of the impasse.
Free agent wide receivers are not wary of Tennessee as so many people seem to suspect, at least not because they don't like the offense. When the Titans offer a big contract, people jump. Nate Washington got a pretty good deal considering his resume and he had plenty of interest from other teams. There was no headliner in this free agent class. David Givens, who had horrible luck suffering a horrible injury, had other good options and didn't hesitate to sign in Te
As for Matt Jones, I thought he turned into a nice possession guy last year. It's a lot easier to find one of those than a deep threat, which the Jaguars always seem to need.
I think B.J. Raji and Eugene Monroe will be gone by No. 8. If Michael Crabtree or Jeremy Maclin fall there, I think they'd be hard to resist no matter the track record. Perhaps best-case is a quarterback there and the Jets or someone in love with him wanting to trade up. But Jacksonville's got to end up with an impact guy at the top of this draft.
William Guice from Spring Hill, TN writes: I was hoping for the NFL to at least discuss a new overtime method, but oh well. I have an idea for a new overtime model & would love your thoughts... How about field goal attempts/free kicks...like penalty kicks in soccer. The only people on the field are a kicker & his holder. Each team gets 3 attempts from the 40, then the 45 (if needed), then the 50 (if needed), then the -45 (if needed). Alternating turns. Flip a coin to pick end or who goes first. The one who has the best round of kicks at a yard line wins! Go no further back than the -45. It makes teams have kickers that can kick the long ball. Can you imagine the pressure of just a kicker & a holder on the field with a rocking or a silent stadium...waiting to see if that guy can make the kick. Anyway...just a crazy idea. Peace ~
Paul Kuharsky: My strong feeling is that a football game needs to be decided by football, not a gimmick. The college construct is gimmicky enough -- teams don't even naturally take possession of the ball at the opponents' 20. They certainly don't naturally ever have only a kicker and holder on the field with a game on the line.
I've got no problem with NFL overtime as it is. I'd have no major issue with a rule that the team that loses the toss gets to field a punt or a kickoff before the game becomes sudden. Anything more than that I am against.