Quote:Keep in mind, Bradley is a guy he liked. He is a guy who TMD said was a "potential coaching superstar."
Just imagine if he hated him.
He loved Bradley when the Eagles were going to hire him. Once he came here, it turned a bit lukewarm. The total 180 was predictable. Just part of the schtick.
Quote:Keep in mind, Bradley is a guy he liked. He is a guy who TMD said was a "potential coaching superstar."
Just imagine if he hated him.
Indeed he did...right up to the point where the Jaguars started looking in his direction, at which point the dog whimperer shifted gears and put him at #6 on his coaching candidate list.
Keep in mind that this is the same bar stool diva who was demanding the team give Jack Del Rio a contract extension coming off the 2007 playoff run only to demand his head on a platter a few months later when the team faltered.
Whichever way the wind blows, that's the side of the fence our little dancing dog prefers to leave his puddles.
Quote:So then inexperience can suppress the performance of possibly innately talented players...right...even in the presence of good coaching?
Tell me again what Bradley and Fisch are supposed to do with at least 6 rookies starting or playing a key role in the offense?
Inexperience can, however, that doesn't excuse scraping the basement at 0-5, 31st/ 32nd in defense/ offense respectively in year 2.
If you want to give Bradley a pass for the team STILL getting blown out weekly and having those rankings now in year 2, go right ahead.
Those sort of records/ rankings were understandable last year. In year 2 there should be visible improvement and not be sitting at 0-5/ with several blowout losses and a defense thats still giving up 40-burgers routinely and losing in blowout fashion routinely.
Quote:Attack the GM(check).
await nick name given to head coach.
Is this for me? Where have I "attacked" Caldwell in this thread?
Quote:Sure. And that's why when some people were going "Hey, look how positive TMD is being!" I was predicting that very shortly you'd be back to your old self, in a cycle as old and predictable as time.
And bless my cotton socks, here you are right on time.
This is ridiculous, so I'm "going back to MY old self" because I'm making a negative post about the performance of a head coach that is now 4-17 and just as bad in year 2 as he was in year one, and appears to be little more than a head cheerleader in his job?
Quote:Keep in mind, Bradley is a guy he liked. He is a guy who TMD said was a "potential coaching superstar."
Just imagine if he hated him.
Dude, Its disappointing you resort to this sort of ad-hominem. First of all Bradley WAS my SIXTH choice. Thats FACT. There were FIVE head coaching candidates I wanted before Bradley. I won't deny that yes, I did make the statement you cite, but what does that really even matter at this point if I liked him or not?? The bottom line is he's clearly NOT going to be anything close to a good head coach, let alone superstar and he's getting blown out weekly, still in year 2.
I also said after Bradley's hiring that his assistant coaching choices, particularly the Coordinator choices were going to be crucial to his success or failure, and was spot on with that (not that what I said is any sort of revelation), but you seem to be cherry picking with bringing forth that "he liked Bradley" red herring you are running with. It has nothing to do with whats going on right now with Bradley.
Quote:He loved Bradley when the Eagles were going to hire him. Once he came here, it turned a bit lukewarm. The total 180 was predictable. Just part of the schtick.
See above......and nothing but more ad-hominem that doesn't all of a sudden sweep Bradley's current status under the rug.
Referring to points as burgers is not a good way to avoid fry cook jokes.
Quote:Indeed he did...right up to the point where the Jaguars started looking in his direction, at which point the dog whimperer shifted gears and put him at #6 on his coaching candidate list.
Keep in mind that this is the same bar stool diva who was demanding the team give Jack Del Rio a contract extension coming off the 2007 playoff run only to demand his head on a platter a few months later when the team faltered.
Whichever way the wind blows, that's the side of the fence our little dancing dog prefers to leave his puddles.
More ad-hominem and do we even dare dig up your takes? You ALSO were on board with the JDR contract extension when it happened. Then again, you're almost always "on-board" with every move the team makes. Gene Smith/ Leftwich/ Bradley/.....anything they do, you'll be there backing them up. In fact the ONLY time I ever remember you being anti-management was when they fired Leftwich and made Garrard the starter....and that move proved to be the correct move at the time, so you were wrong (again), anyway.
Quote:Referring to points as burgers is not a good way to avoid fry cook jokes.
I couldn't care less dude, any stuff like that they say like that is only their desperation to get the focus away from the lousy job Bradley is doing as head coach right now. And THATS the main topic of this thread.
Post 264 last two sentences.."Then again" is a change of stance about comparing him to your view of Bradley. It's ok though I know you will hang on to your but,but, I said Caldwell was decent earlier line as a disguise. That way if Caldwell pans out you will have two viewpoints on him.... Rinse and repeat
Quote:1. Inexperience can, however, that doesn't excuse scraping the basement at 0-5, 31st/ 32nd in defense/ offense respectively in year 2.
If you want to give Bradley a pass for the team STILL getting blown out weekly and having those rankings now in year 2, go right ahead.
Those sort of records/ rankings were understandable last year. In year 2 there should be visible improvement and not be sitting at 0-5/ with several blowout losses and a defense thats still giving up 40-burgers routinely and losing in blowout fashion routinely.
2. Dude, Its disappointing you resort to this sort of ad-hominem. First of all Bradley WAS my SIXTH choice. Thats FACT. There were FIVE head coaching candidates I wanted before Bradley. I won't deny that yes, I did make the statement you cite, but what does that really even matter at this point if I liked him or not?? The bottom line is he's clearly NOT going to be anything close to a good head coach, let alone superstar and he's getting blown out weekly, still in year 2.
I also said after Bradley's hiring that his assistant coaching choices, particularly the Coordinator choices were going to be crucial to his success or failure, and was spot on with that (not that what I said is any sort of revelation), but you seem to be cherry picking with bringing forth that "he liked Bradley" red herring you are running with. It has nothing to do with whats going on right now with Bradley.
1. The defense HAS been disappointing, but admit it. It hasn't gotten too much help from the offense. Constant 3 and outs like we saw in the 2nd half of the Philly game, all game long against Washington, and the first half against Indy did not help the defense at all and hurt the offensive and defensive rankings, as well as the overall W-L record, which is the basis of your saying Bradley is in over his head. Furthermore, the second year performance is perfectly understandable when you consider the rookie input has taken place in his second year, not the first.
2. I'm not attacking you. The fact Bradley was a 6th choice of yours is in no way inconsistent with the fact you nevertheless liked him as a candidate and called him a potential coaching superstar. It only matters in that it was a device to make a humorous observation about your impatience in these matters. I've critiqued you for being impatient in these matters numerous times over the years without being accused by you of engaging in ad-hominem attacks. What is different now? Even before the post you quoted, my point has repeatedly been anyone criticizing Bradley for the record at this point is being premature given the lack of experienced talent he has to work with. I reiterated these points in your thread. If I completely retract the post you cite as an ad hominem attack (and I'll do it if it will further the football discussion here), the underlying premise-you, once again, being reactionary and impatient in football matters-stands.
Quote:Post 264 last two sentences.."Then again" is a change of stance about comparing him to your view of Bradley. It's ok though I know you will hang on to your but,but, I said Caldwell was decent earlier line as a disguise. That way if Caldwell pans out you will have two viewpoints on him.... Rinse and repeat
Again, where is the "attack" on Caldwell by me, there?
You aren't citing an "attack". Unless to YOU,
thats an attack. :ermm:
Quote:More ad-hominem and do we even dare dig up your takes? You ALSO were on board with the JDR contract extension when it happened. Then again, you're almost always "on-board" with every move the team makes. Gene Smith/ Leftwich/ Bradley/.....anything they do, you'll be there backing them up. In fact the ONLY time I ever remember you being anti-management was when they fired Leftwich and made Garrard the starter....and that move proved to be the correct move at the time, so you were wrong (again), anyway.
Feel free to go back and find my take on giving JDR a new contract when you were howling for it years ago. I didn't see any sense of urgency at that point.
I know this is confusing for you because preaching patience to allow moves to pan out is something that's simply not part of your mental toolbox because that requires an IQ higher than that of a garden slug. I know you TELL us how high your IQ is, but normally when people are bragging about how smart they are, it's because they know they're not.
Preaching patience is not the same thing as being "on board" with moves. It's simply a recognition that knee jerk reactions tend to be a little ridiculous. But then again, you're the queen of ridiculous, so you live in the world of premature evaluation.
Quote:1. The defense HAS been disappointing, but admit it. It hasn't gotten too much help from the offense. Constant 3 and outs like we saw in the 2nd half of the Philly game, all game long against Washington, and the first half against Indy did not help the defense at all and hurt the offensive and defensive rankings, as well as the overall W-L record, which is the basis of your saying Bradley is in over his head. Furthermore, the second year performance is perfectly understandable when you consider the rookie input has taken place in his second year, not the first.
2. I'm not attacking you. The fact Bradley was a 6th choice of yours is in no way inconsistent with the fact you nevertheless liked him as a candidate and called him a potential coaching superstar. It only matters in that it was a device to make a humorous observation about your impatience in these matters. I've critiqued you for being impatient in these matters numerous times over the years without being accused by you of engaging in ad-hominem attacks. What is different now? Even before the post you quoted, my point has repeatedly been anyone criticizing Bradley for the record at this point is being premature given the lack of experienced talent he has to work with. I reiterated these points in your thread. If I completely retract the post you cite as an ad hominem attack (and I'll do it if it will further the football discussion here), the underlying premise-you, once again, being reactionary and impatient in football matters-stands.
Premature evaluation is fine as long as people forget all the times he's been wrong.
Anyone reading those last two lines can comprehend your comparison.. TMD I think you're smart. then again, you posted this thread. (see how that works).
For the record, I am not being critical on TMD's past threads just this one at this time.
Quote:Feel free to go back and find my take on giving JDR a new contract when you were howling for it years ago. I didn't see any sense of urgency at that point.
I know this is confusing for you because preaching patience to allow moves to pan out is something that's simply not part of your mental toolbox because that requires an IQ higher than that of a garden slug. I know you TELL us how high your IQ is, but normally when people are bragging about how smart they are, it's because they know they're not.
Preaching patience is not the same thing as being "on board" with moves. It's simply a recognition that knee jerk reactions tend to be a little ridiculous. But then again, you're the queen of ridiculous, so you live in the world of premature evaluation.
Exactly, per typical you didn't actually make a vocal stand on JDR's extension until the team GAVE it to him, then you were vocally on board. Thats par for the course with you and siding with Jags management. You still were for it, just like I was.
Its far from being "impatient" at this point to point out Bradley's performance as head coach. We're 21 games in now, and he looks just as much the rookie head coach as he did his very first game.
Impatience because you can't seem to put things into proper context. Look at what they've been doing with the roster the past 2 years in gutting it and rebuilding it with a focus on doing the bulk of the heavy lifting through the draft. To expect some magical turnaround to happen quickly using that approach is pointless. We've gutted the team and replaced the majority of the major components with young players. They're not going to instantly become the kind of players who are savvy veterans right out of the box. That includes a defense that's almost completely different from what we had on the field even a year or two ago.
Quote:Exactly, per typical you didn't actually make a vocal stand on JDR's extension until the team GAVE it to him, then you were vocally on board. Thats par for the course with you and siding with Jags management. You still were for it, just like I was.
Its far from being "impatient" at this point to point out Bradley's performance as head coach. We're 21 games in now, and he looks just as much the rookie head coach as he did his very first game.
Typical diva rant. You really aren't smart enough to grasp the point about allowing things to develop.
Having a roster that's chalked through of 5 rookie starters on the offense, and 7 rookies contributing, and a defense that continues to be retooled almost weekly certainly has nothing to do with the struggles, right? It's all about coaching. So, when a player makes a mental error, that's the coach's fault, right? That's what you're saying? So, when you overcook a hamburger, it's the managers fault, right?
Please do the world a favor. Don't have kids. They're bound to do nothing but disappoint their father with his high expectations (for others, not himself).
Quote:Impatience because you can't seem to put things into proper context. Look at what they've been doing with the roster the past 2 years in gutting it and rebuilding it with a focus on doing the bulk of the heavy lifting through the draft. To expect some magical turnaround to happen quickly using that approach is pointless. We've gutted the team and replaced the majority of the major components with young players. They're not going to instantly become the kind of players who are savvy veterans right out of the box. That includes a defense that's almost completely different from what we had on the field even a year or two ago.
Quote:Typical diva rant. You really aren't smart enough to grasp the point about allowing things to develop.
Having a roster that's chalked through of 5 rookie starters on the offense, and 7 rookies contributing, and a defense that continues to be retooled almost weekly certainly has nothing to do with the struggles, right? It's all about coaching. So, when a player makes a mental error, that's the coach's fault, right? That's what you're saying? So, when you overcook a hamburger, it's the managers fault, right?
Please do the world a favor. Don't have kids. They're bound to do nothing but disappoint their father with his high expectations (for others, not himself).
LOL, you act as if this Jaguars roster is historically young. Get over yourself. It isn't. Its not even the youngest in the league this season.
The 1989-90 Dallas Cowboys roster was just as young, if not younger. The difference was that Jimmy Johnson actually knew what the hell he was doing. Thats why you saw improvement.
There have been plenty of examples of very young teams that haven't continued to be THIS bad over the years.
21 games and Gus still looking every bit the rookie as he did his debut is cause and reason for concern. He's still awful on game management/ clock management, and their halftime adjustments appear to be bathroom breaks. Gus' Coordinator choices might have yielded the worst OC/ DC combo in the entire league.
Again, I can excuse a losing record in year 2.....however, theres no excuse for the point differential to continue to be as bad as its been. By now Bradley should be getting this team to at least be competitive on an almost weekly basis.
Quote:LOL, you act as if this Jaguars roster is historically young. Get over yourself. It isn't. Its not even the youngest in the league this season.
The 1989-90 Dallas Cowboys roster was just as young, if not younger. The difference was that Jimmy Johnson actually knew what the hell he was doing. Thats why you saw improvement.
There have been plenty of examples of very young teams that haven't continued to be THIS bad over the years.
21 games and Gus still looking every bit the rookie as he did his debut is cause and reason for concern. He's still awful on game management/ clock management, and their halftime adjustments appear to be bathroom breaks.
I agree that the halftime adjustments have killed us. We've scored 23 points in the 2nd half all year with 17 of those coming in the second half of the Colts game. Outside of the Colts game, we have been reasonably close (yes I'm considering being down 21-7 against the skins reasonably close). After half-time we've been absolutely destroyed. There haven't been any times where we've come out and looked like we made adjustments.