Quote:Norv Turner makes Teddy look good and has helped Teddy to a 5-4 record.
Blake is better than Teddy so a really good OC can help you improve a lot.
So Blake is only bad because of Fisch and Teddy is only good because of Norv. Got it.
I dont know why defensive coordinator is even an option. The defense has played good football in the majority of the games this season.
No offensive coordinator can turn the team around without more talent. If you want to know how long it will take to make this a top 16 offense I say 2 more years.
Quote:Agreed with the first part. The talent being brought in is pretty good with a couple of misses, but everyone makes those. The statement about development is hard to justify...don't you have to give him more than a dozen games? The common rule of thumb is that a QB reaches his potential after his 50th start. We're a long way from that yet.
I said it because even though yes, its only 12 games, it appears to be going in reverse/ regressing. Its one thing to show slow "progress" and then cite "its only 12 games". But regression is a whole 'nother issue. When the player starts out like Bortles did, and playing loose and confident, and very well, and 12 games later you look at him and the player is now a shell of what that initial player looked like, I think you have a major issue with the people developing this kid.
Quote:I dont know why defensive coordinator is even an option. The defense has played good football in the majority of the games this season.
No offensive coordinator can turn the team around without more talent. If you want to know how long it will take to make this a top 16 offense I say 2 more years.
The defense got better once Bradley took it over, if those rumors are to be believed.
I tend to believe them based on how the defense looked prior as well as Babich's track record as a defensive coordinator in Chicago. Not good.
Quote:I said it because even though yes, its only 12 games, it appears to be going in reverse/ regressing. Its one thing to show slow "progress" and then cite "its only 12 games". But regression is a whole 'nother issue. When the player starts out like Bortles did, and playing loose and confident, and very well, and 12 games later you look at him and the player is now a shell of what that initial player looked like, I think you have a major issue with the people developing this kid.
The reason that he seems to be regressing is that in his first few starts, opposing defensive coordinators didn't have much game tape on him but as he played, that changed. Coaches in the NFL are pretty smart and they can figure out what a player likes to do and what they're not so good at pretty quickly and so they started to compensate for that. Naturally, Bortles' performances started to suffer. This is 100% natural and happens to all rookies regardless of their positions (see Allen Hurns). It will take him a while but eventually he will overcome it. Don't get me wrong, I don't consider Fisch a great coordinator and would prefer to have someone a little more proven, but ultimately Blake has to gain some experience before the Jag's offense will improve regardless of who's coaching.
You see some small signs in the last couple of games. The turnovers have slowed considerably (as I predicted, see an earlier post) and he will start to become a bit of a game manager before he eventually starts to realize his potential. I see this probably happening somewhere mid-3rd season for him.
Quote:I said it because even though yes, its only 12 games, it appears to be going in reverse/ regressing. Its one thing to show slow "progress" and then cite "its only 12 games". But regression is a whole 'nother issue. When the player starts out like Bortles did, and playing loose and confident, and very well, and 12 games later you look at him and the player is now a shell of what that initial player looked like, I think you have a major issue with the people developing this kid.
Good points.
While there are multiple issues that are the cause of our lack of success, to deny that coaching / player development are a factor in this.
Look at the offense versus the defense in terms of progress. The D has looked much improved from week 1 till now. Yes, we have some holes, but all in all, what we are seeing on the d side is progress.
I'm hard pressed to cite any progress at all on the offensive side besides how well the rookie WRs are doing.
Quote:The reason that he seems to be regressing is that in his first few starts, opposing defensive coordinators didn't have much game tape on him but as he played, that changed. Coaches in the NFL are pretty smart and they can figure out what a player likes to do and what they're not so good at pretty quickly and so they started to compensate for that. Naturally, Bortles' performances started to suffer. This is 100% natural and happens to all rookies regardless of their positions. It will take him a while but eventually he will overcome it. Don't get me wrong, I don't consider Fisch a great coordinator and would prefer to have someone a little more proven, but ultimately Blake has to gain some experience before the Jag's offense will improve.
You see some small signs in the last couple of games. The turnovers have slowed considerably (as I predicted, see an earlier post) and he will start to become a bit of a game manager before he eventually starts to realize his potential. I see this probably happening somewhere mid-3rd season for him.
Hmmm... So coaches in the NFL can figure things out... interesting... I guess opposing coaches can analyze stuff, but our coaches get a pass for not analyzing stuff? LOL, you realize the logic fail here, yes?
I know you want to, for whatever reason, defend the coaches and lay it all on the players. But in order to do so, you begin to look... short-sighted & biased.
Most critics of the OC can see (and clearly admit) issues with players and their experience. We see that it's both players
and plays... The Ketchman-itis of sticking with "Players NOT plays" creates a blind spot in some of you guys that aren't able to keep an open mind... Just my 2 sheckles...
Quote:Hmmm... So coaches in the NFL can figure things out... interesting... I guess opposing coaches can analyze stuff, but our coaches get a pass for not analyzing stuff? LOL, you realize the logic fail here, yes?
I know you want to, for whatever reason, defend the coaches and lay it all on the players. But in order to do so, you begin to look... short-sighted & biased.
Most critics of the OC can see (and clearly admit) issues with players and their experience. We see that it's both players and plays... The Ketchman-itis of sticking with "Players NOT plays" creates a blind spot in some of you guys that aren't able to keep an open mind... Just my 2 sheckles...
Nope sorry, that doesn't wash. The coaches can coach but they can't change a player's experience level. That only comes with time. Hey, if Bortles was playing against all rookie defenses all the time he would look like a world beater *regardless* of who the defensive coordinators were, but he's not. He's playing against experienced, veteran defenses in most cases. Jags are the youngest offense in the league and may be the youngest starting offense in history although I'd have to research that. I know they have more starting rookies than anyone's had in a long time.
It's Jimmy's and Joe's, not X's and O's.
Quote:Nope sorry, that doesn't wash. The coaches can coach but they can't change a player's experience level. That only comes with time. Hey, if Bortles was playing against all rookie defenses all the time he would look like a world beater *regardless* of who the defensive coordinators were, but he's not. He's playing against experienced, veteran defenses in most cases. Jags are the youngest offense in the league and may be the youngest starting offense in history although I'd have to research that. I know they have more starting rookies than anyone's had in a long time.
It's Jimmy's and Joe's, not X's and O's.
OK, friend...
Let me re-quote what you said, "coaches in the NFL are pretty smart and they can figure out what a player likes to do and what they're not so good at pretty quickly and so they started to compensate for that."
You say Player's not Plays, yet you just conceded that coaches are doing a better job against us after they have more tape on our player's tendancies. Again, this is a logic fail and is contradictory to your Ketchman-like dogma that you hold so dearly.
Look, if you want to maintian your philosophy and hold it as gospel, that's fine. But realize that most of us can recognize that you've closed yourself off from objective analysis. You yourself have stated that coaching has allowed other teams to adapt thier game plans, yet you cannot bring yourself to admit it.
Just like in life, nothing is so absolute as you wish it to be. Fighting against it only shows your lack of intellectual honesty and self awareness.
But to each their own I guess. Trust me on this one, it's the players, and it's the plays. It's Jimmy's and Joes AND X's and O's
Quote:Nope sorry, that doesn't wash. The coaches can coach but they can't change a player's experience level. That only comes with time. H
In regards to the above:
It's not ONLY time... It's time
with coaching. You can't put a player in a vacuum and think "over-time" he's gonna get better. You need a coach that understands football to train the player. To teach the player what he's doing wrong and how to do it better.
These things don't happen in a vacuum. You can't just assume that game experience alone will develop a player. It's game experience along with the coaching staff teaching them what they messed up on and then training them on how to do it better.
Otherwise, why the heck would they waste all that time watching game film and going to a whole bunch of meetings?
Again, you have a blind spot in terms of coaching... I don't quite understand why, but it's becoming apparent.
Quote:OK, friend...
Let me re-quote what you said, "coaches in the NFL are pretty smart and they can figure out what a player likes to do and what they're not so good at pretty quickly and so they started to compensate for that."
You say Player's not Plays, yet you just conceded that coaches are doing a better job against us after they have more tape on our player's tendancies. Again, this is a logic fail and is contradictory to your Ketchman-like dogma that you hold so dearly.
Look, if you want to maintian your philosophy and hold it as gospel, that's fine. But realize that most of us can recognize that you've closed yourself off from objective analysis. You yourself have stated that coaching has allowed other teams to adapt thier game plans, yet you cannot bring yourself to admit it.
Just like in life, nothing is so absolute as you wish it to be. Fighting against it only shows your lack of intellectual honesty and self awareness.
But to each their own I guess. Trust me on this one, it's the players, and it's the plays. It's Jimmy's and Joes AND X's and O's
A coach with a good group of veteran players can make adjustments that the players can understand and implement. A coach with a good group of rookies has to simplify things and doesn't have as much latitude to compensate. I can't make it any simpler than that. If you can't grasp the difference between rookies and veterans, then I dunno how I'm going to help you. Best you go back to Madden for now, we'll welcome you back onto the bandwagon in a year or two.
Quote:In regards to the above:
It's not ONLY time... It's time with coaching. You can't put a player in a vacuum and think "over-time" he's gonna get better. You need a coach that understands football to train the player. To teach the player what he's doing wrong and how to do it better.
These things don't happen in a vacuum. You can't just assume that game experience alone will develop a player. It's game experience along with the coaching staff teaching them what they messed up on and then training them on how to do it better.
Otherwise, why the heck would they waste all that time watching game film and going to a whole bunch of meetings?
Again, you have a blind spot in terms of coaching... I don't quite understand why, but it's becoming apparent.
Agreed, you're almost there. Time and coaching. Say it again, *time* AND coaching.
Quote:Nope sorry, that doesn't wash. The coaches can coach but they can't change a player's experience level. That only comes with time. Hey, if Bortles was playing against all rookie defenses all the time he would look like a world beater *regardless* of who the defensive coordinators were, but he's not. He's playing against experienced, veteran defenses in most cases. Jags are the youngest offense in the league and may be the youngest starting offense in history although I'd have to research that. I know they have more starting rookies than anyone's had in a long time.
It's Jimmy's and Joe's, not X's and O's.
Well, theres plenty of examples in the annals of NFL history to discredit that last sentence. If it was all players then guys like Chip Kelly wouldn't be paid 7 MIL per year before he even won 1 NFL game, and teams like Miami wouldn't be offering Jim Harbaugh 7 MIL per (4 years ago). I'd never say that coaching can win superbowls without the top talent, but you could also cite the same thing in reverse as there has been many very good, talented teams that have underachieved because coaching was lacking.
You cite that opposing coaches caught up to what Blake was doing, yet give our coaching a pass for not countering at that point or failure in their counter at that point.
When Blake Bortles resembles Chad Henne the more time that passes. You have a problem with the development. Thats not on the opposing coaches - that on our own. Chad Henne even regressed the more he was under Fisch's watch. When Henne first started he had that breakout game with Blackmon. It more or less steadily regressed all the way to what you saw in Washington this year. Now, I'm not saying Henne is anything great to begin with, but when both QB trend to pretty much arrive at the same type of QB, you don't have a QB problem you have a development problem. 2 different QB, one OC, same result.
Quote:A coach with a good group of veteran players can make adjustments that the players can understand and implement. A coach with a good group of rookies has to simplify things and doesn't have as much latitude to compensate. I can't make it any simpler than that. If you can't grasp the difference between rookies and veterans, then I dunno how I'm going to help you. Best you go back to Madden for now, we'll welcome you back onto the bandwagon in a year or two.
Ok, bruh...
Quote:Agreed, you're almost there. Time and coaching. Say it again, *time* AND coaching.
LOL! Nice job dancing over to my position. I'm gonna head out to play some madden. Why don't you get back to ballet practice, spinderella... I'm actually beginning to feel bad for you.
Let's just agree to disagree here...
Quote:If they keep Fisch and Babich:
I think this defense could be ranked between 15-20th in the league just by upgrading the FS and OTTO. (George and/or Poz at MLB)
I think this offense could be/will be ranked 18-23rd in the league just by letting Bortles, Lee, the Robinsons, and a young line mature over another offseason together.
It's literally the youngest starting unit in the NFL.
(I looked at the 5 youngest rosters and analyzed their offensive depth charts)
A coordinator change might help.
Or it might not. Better players in the back 7 on D and a year to mature on offense definitely will improve these units.
Players not plays. If you go in and start tinkering at this point with the offensive scheme, that's a new system these guys will have to adjust to. In Bortles case, I'd be concerned about that. I would prefer to see him focusing on fixing his mechanics, and not having to digest an entirely new offensive scheme this off season. I don't think Fisch is as big a disaster as some here do. I think the talent he's been working with has been more of a problem. He's not perfect, but with better talent, he could show improvement as well. I don't think the offensive woes we're seeing now are the result of play calling.
Quote:Well, theres plenty of examples in the annals of NFL history to discredit that last sentence. If it was all players then guys like Chip Kelly wouldn't be paid 7 MIL per year before he even won 1 NFL game, and teams like Miami wouldn't be offering Jim Harbaugh 7 MIL per (4 years ago). I'd never say that coaching can win superbowls without the top talent, but you could also cite the same thing in reverse as there has been many very good, talented teams that have underachieved because coaching was lacking.
You cite that opposing coaches caught up to what Blake was doing, yet give our coaching a pass for not countering at that point or failure in their counter at that point.
When Blake Bortles resembles Chad Henne the more time that passes. You have a problem with the development. Thats not on the opposing coaches - that on our own. Chad Henne even regressed the more he was under Fisch's watch. When Henne first started he had that breakout game with Blackmon. It more or less steadily regressed all the way to what you saw in Washington this year. Now, I'm not saying Henne is anything great to begin with, but when both QB trend to pretty much arrive at the same type of QB, you don't have a QB problem you have a development problem. 2 different QB, one OC, same result.
There are differences in coaches to be sure, but you're missing the point. Players make the difference, this is an adage that is proven over and over again, year after year. Do you think Jimmy Johnson would have done what he did without the Herschel Walker trade? The defensive coordinators made adjustments with Bortles and they had the advantage of having veteran players that could implement those schemes. If they had rookies, they would not have been able to do that. You work with the tools you have.
Furthermore, do you really honestly think Bortles resembles Chad Henne? All I can say to that is, WOW! Well, everyone has their opinion. I think 95% of observers would disagree with you. Interestingly, he's progressing *exactly* as I predicted. From the early "wow" moments, to the high interception ratio, to the regression as he becomes more cautious. I have little doubt that I'll be any less accurate in predicting his future path to becoming a very productive QB (regardless of who's coaching him). You kind of remind me of the guys that were so in favor of Bortles starting and then when he did got all warped out because he didn't immediately play like Joe Montana. Same thing will go for Fisch, I'm sure.
Quote:Ok, bruh...
LOL! Nice job dancing over to my position. I'm gonna head out to play some madden. Why don't you get back to ballet practice, spinderella... I'm actually beginning to feel bad for you.
Let's just agree to disagree here...
Ha ha, pot meet kettle. You're simply too proud or too sensitive to admit your wrong. No matter, as I said when you're ready to come back on the bandwagon, there'll be room for ya!
Quote:Players not plays. If you go in and start tinkering at this point with the offensive scheme, that's a new system these guys will have to adjust to. In Bortles case, I'd be concerned about that. I would prefer to see him focusing on fixing his mechanics, and not having to digest an entirely new offensive scheme this off season. I don't think Fisch is as big a disaster as some here do. I think the talent he's been working with has been more of a problem. He's not perfect, but with better talent, he could show improvement as well. I don't think the offensive woes we're seeing now are the result of play calling.
Obviously at this point, we cannot prove a negative. Meaning that we won't know how the coaching of this current staff is effecting the development and success of the team if / when a change occurs.
On top of that, none of us are in any of the meetings or practices, so we're not privy to the actual facts of how the coaches are approaching each player, each game, etc...
To me, it's clear that the defense has improved from September untill now. That's a positive, and it should be a credit to both Babich and Bradley.
On the flip side, there is very little improvement to see on the offensive side of the ball. Someone mentioned that BB5 has begun throwing less interceptions, citing that as improvement. That's all well and good. But rookies are expected to throw INTs. What I'm more concerned about with BB5 is his footwork, his accuracy, his pre-snap reads, and his ability to go through progressions during the play. That type of progress is not occurring...
Well, I tried to past BB5's season stats, but it didn't work the way I wanted...
Let's just say this... BB5's QB rating was higher the first 4 games then they were the last 4... That's not the direction one wants to go...Same with his yards per attempt average... Same with his yards per game... Same with TDs...
http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/gamelog/_/...ke-bortles
Besides INTs, almost every other statistical category has dropped off his last 4 games compared to his first 4. Again, these are things that concern me. And these are also things that are the players fault as well as the responsibility of the coaches...
Quote:
Furthermore, do you really honestly think Bortles resembles Chad Henne? All I can say to that is, WOW! .
Lately? Sure do. In the beginning? No, not at all. Thats the point. The more time the QB get under Fisch's influence, they all seem to end up looking the same. Bad. Hesitant. Unwilling to take chances. Fisch sucks the life out of all the QB with his scheme/ playcalling.
He even had like 3 passes batted down at the LOS in one of the recent games. Very Henne-like.
Quote:Lately? Sure do. In the beginning? No, not at all. Thats the point. The more time the QB get under Fisch's influence, they all seem to end up looking the same. Bad. Hesitant. Unwilling to take chances. Fisch sucks the life out of all the QB with his scheme/ playcalling.
He even had like 3 passes batted down at the LOS in one of the recent games. Very Henne-like.
BB5's production has been on the decline the last 4 games when compared to his first 4 games... That's just a fact...
Yes, he's a rookie. Yes he's playing with a bad O-Line. Yes, his WR's are rookies.
But wouldn't one expect our QB's progress to at least be steady and not regressing from the start of the season to the end?
Still 3 games to go, so things can change. Let's hope they do. But again, you can't blame the entire thing on the fact that rookies are playing. The coaches are getting paid good money to teach these guys and to put them in the best position to be successfull.
To this point, I would say the defensive coaches seem to be earning their money. I'm not so sure about the offensive coaches.