Originally Posted by sweater-vest_mafia
It's not wrong and I see the author's point, however, I don't agree with it; even though I hate Gabbert as well.
You can argue that improving the roster is the GM's job and that improving the QB position might be his most important. However, sunken costs isn't the only argument against it.
A. a greater net gain for the team can probably be found elsewhere, adding to another position such as receiver.
B. Drafting even a good QB into this situation and starting him is a terrible idea.
I wouldn't be absolutely opposed to the idea of drafting a QB I just think that the Jags might be one of the biggest stages set up for a young QB to fail as is out there right now.
I don't think you could possibly have a greater net gain than replacing Gabbert. There's absolutely no question that quarterback is the most important position on the football team. You win and lose more games from that single position than any other and it's not even close.
That's fact #1, and it's indisputable. The second question that needs to be asked is if Gabbert is the worst starter on the Jaguars. In my opinion he is. Even if he's not, I think you win more games by replacing him than anyone else.
This situation parallels the Carolina Panthers situation last year, and the Panthers absolutely made the right choice.
Let's not dilute the fact that Gabbert was awful simply by blaming his supporting cast. If you watched even one Jaguars game this year you'd see someone who is absolutely terrible in every conceivable way.