Jacksonville Jaguars Fan Forums

I wanted McCoy but I see he's taken the job in Denver. Who else it out there?

Quote:I wanted McCoy but I see he's taken the job in Denver. Who else it out there?

I would be happy with Hackett, to be honest.

 

Hackett and Marrone go back a ways. 

 

Hackett knows what Marrone wants, knows his philosophy, playbook, etc.

It would be interesting to see what Marrone and Hackett get done with the run game (and mitigating Bortles' miscues) when they are doing it with their own design and not Greg Olson's. 

 

I feel pretty confident it would be a striking improvement. 

 

However -  I like that they appear to be exploring other possibilities.

I haven't really pinpointed any favorites, personally. 

Not really sure.


Been thinking about how a Rick Dennison/Kubiak style scheme like they had with the Texans a few years would look like with Blake running it. Emphasis on the run with lots of play action deep shots and bootlegs mixed in.


Don't really like that scheme or Dennison as an OC but it would be interesting to see how plays Blake in it.

Don't care, just give me a FB and a power run game/offensive line. Tired of watching this team run the ball so poorly. I thought the offensive line was built enough to be successful running the ball, but I want to blame the failure on the scheme.

Someone who will move people around and play to peoples strengths. Hackett I do think is a bright mind and could do some things here, so would be fine with him.


I expect Dennison, Norv Turner, and a few others to get calls from us though.

Quote:Someone who will move people around and play to peoples strengths. Hackett I do think is a bright mind and could do some things here, so would be fine with him.

I expect Dennison, Norv Turner, and a few others to get calls from us though.

Norv you know for sure wants to run a down field offense. If that's going to be the plan with bortles, he'll be the best fit as a guy with experience

Anybody but Hackett.

Quote:Anybody but Hackett.

Why?!?

 

He and Marrone have been good together.

Quote:Why?!?

 

He and Marrone have been good together.

 

 

As I have said before, I want as many signs of Gus Bradley gone as possible. It doesn't matter though. The team never does what I wish them to. 

Quote:Someone who will move people around and play to peoples strengths. Hackett I do think is a bright mind and could do some things here, so would be fine with him.

I expect Dennison, Norv Turner, and a few others to get calls from us though.

I don't want Turner here, no offensive line in the league is good enough to run his scheme.  The leagues DCs have had him figured out for the last decade.

Quote:As I have said before, I want as many signs of Gus Bradley gone as possible. It doesn't matter though. The team never does what I wish them to. 

 

Hackett has very little tie to Bradley. There's not much association there.  Hackett is much more a Marrone guy than a "Bradley guy." 

 

Wash on the other hand....

I would imagine it'll be Hackett.

Quote:Hackett has very little tie to Bradley. There's not much association there.  Hackett is much more a Marrone guy than a "Bradley guy." 

 

Wash on the other hand....

 

Agreed completely.

Quote:Hackett has very little tie to Bradley. There's not much association there.  Hackett is much more a Marrone guy than a "Bradley guy." 

 

Wash on the other hand....

Wash gets a bad rap, they guys a good coach I'm reserving judgement on him until a year under a proper HC

Anybody who schemes guys open. I hated watching Olsen's offense that seemed so heavily reliant on individual WR's beating the DB 1v1. Once Hackett too over it seemed like there were more WR's open in space due to scheme and attacking the empty zones in the defense.


Not to say an offense shouldn't rely on their WR's to win 1v1 occasionally, but it seemed like the Jags offense was to reliant on fade routes or back shoulder fades and hoping the WR's win each battle. That's just not a realistic expectation IMO. A teams scheme has to get guys open often as well.

Quote:Wash gets a bad rap, they guys a good coach I'm reserving judgement on him until a year under a proper HC

I was only pointing out the "association" thing. 

 

I like Wash.  I'm excited to see what he does with the defense when he's presumably got more flexibility scheme-wise.  My only disappointments with Wash seem to be related more to Bradley's scheme than Wash's play-calling.  The one caveat may be the tendency to go conservative when up on the scoreboard. I hope Wash is more aggressive with his coverages in those situations moving forward. 

Quote:Wash gets a bad rap, the guys a good coach I'm reserving judgement on him until a year under a proper HC

I pretty much feel the same way. I actually like a lot of what Wash did up front with blitzes and getting pressure. I feel like he was at times stuck between trying to pacify Gus and his scheme and trying to add his (Wash) own wrinkles to the defense.


I actually feel Wash will be fine running his own defense with multiple looks.

Quote:I was only pointing out the "association" thing. 

 

I like Wash.  I'm excited to see what he does with the defense when he's presumably got more flexibility scheme-wise.  My only disappointments with Wash seem to be related more to Bradley's scheme than Wash's play-calling.  The one caveat may be the tendency to go conservative when up on the scoreboard. I hope Wash is more aggressive with his coverages in those situations moving forward. 

 

 

Quote:I pretty much feel the same way. I actually like a lot of what Wash did up front with blitzes and getting pressure. I feel like he was at times stuck between trying to pacify Gus and his scheme and trying to add his (Wash) own wrinkles to the defense.


I actually feel Wash will be fine running his own defense with multiple looks.

Agree with both of you only real change I would like to see is a more flexible scheme thats a bit more aggressive

Darryl Drake or bust.