Jacksonville Jaguars Fan Forums

Quote:The mentality of building a team around not being able to score has to go.  

 

I don't think there is a GM or coach in the league that think s that way.  Certainly not this regime in Jax.  They drafted a quarterback and two receivers before the third round. 

 

The big run stopping defense thing only goes as far as the front four. Gus' scheme calls for speed at LB (which we haven't acquired yet outside of Smith who isn't disciplined yet) and while the safeties and corners must be physical - speed is still a requirement. 

Quote:Build around the QB it's what the good teams do

Lol don't tell that to the Patriots

Quote: 

<span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family:Arial, 'sans-serif';font-size:10.5pt;">I think the Jaguars offense is being built in Atlanta's likeness, Blake Bortles is Matt Ryan (albeit with a much higher upside), Marqise Lee is Roddy White and Allen Robinson is Julio Jones. You can also reference Indianapolis (when David Caldwell was there), they had a franchise QB with two dynamic receivers as well (Marvin Harrison & Reggie Wayne), once the offense is fully built I expect it to look nothing like Seattle's.</span>

 

 

Oh my lord please put down the teal colored kool aid.  No, no and no.

Quote:I didn't suggest anything.  I'm just explaining to you how and why SF and SEA got so good.  You don't suck as a strategy, but if you "build through the draft" that is basically how your team gets really good.  If your are bad for long enough, eventually you get more talented.

 

You build your offense to score points.  You build your defense to be good at more than one thing.  You don't want to get in a situation where you have a glaring weakness. The goal should be to be balanced on both sides of the ball.

 

 

Obviously the goal is to be good at everything.  All teams want to run the ball well and pass the ball well.  All teams want to stop the run and stop the pass.  But how many teams can maintain being good at everything for an extended period of time?  It's not sustainable. You have to compromise something. You have to have some identity.  Otherwise the danger of trying to be good at everything is that you end up not being great at anything. 

Quote:Obviously the goal is to be good at everything. All teams want to run the ball well and pass the ball well. All teams want to stop the run and stop the pass. But how many teams can maintain being good at everything for an extended period of time? It's not sustainable. You have to compromise something. You have to have some identity. Otherwise the danger of trying to be good at everything is that you end up not being great at anything.

Something we've lacked for a while I might add.

Oh No, DOES THIS MEAN GERHART ISN'T BEASTMODE ?

Quote:I don't think there is a GM or coach in the league that think s that way. 

 

I do.  But to me, building a team around defense/run the ball is the same thing as building it around not being able to score.  In other words it's like saying "we can still win if we're not scoring" as opposed to "we have to score to win".  

Quote:I do.  But to me, building a team around defense/run the ball is the same thing as building it around not being able to score.  In other words it's like saying "we can still win if we're not scoring" as opposed to "we have to score to win".  

And you think that's what Caldwell was up to after seeing this past draft??

 

And - often commitment to the run is primarily intended to open up the passing game, not to replace or circumvent it.

Quote:Obviously the goal is to be good at everything. All teams want to run the ball well and pass the ball well. All teams want to stop the run and stop the pass. But how many teams can maintain being good at everything for an extended period of time? It's not sustainable. You have to compromise something. You have to have some identity. Otherwise the danger of trying to be good at everything is that you end up not being great at anything.

Prisco is suggesting we get smaller and faster. Its a bad idea. Im fine with getting faster. We just need to find elite talent. Going out and finding guys to "play with the lead" wont help us.


Our identity as a team will shape itself. I dont think its going to be a team that throws it all over the yard. We are going to be a balanced team on both sides of the ball.

Quote:This is the NFL.  You will rarely have a situation where Bortles is blowing teams out.  Especially in the playoffs where everybody is good.  What good will a defense "built to play with the lead" do when its a 3 point ball game or its tied in the 4th qtr?

 

Maybe they give up a score.  Who knows?  But that just means you have to score when you get the ball back.  This is where a franchise QB comes in handy, and a team that's practically built to play in the 4th quarter and in 2 minute drill situations.  It's all about the 4th quarter.

 

I'll take your scenario + a franchise QB over the garbage 4th quarters we've had here over the past forever years.

Quote:And you think that's what Caldwell was up to after seeing this past draft??

 

Definitely not.  And I'm happy about that.  

Funny that we're even mentioning playing with a lead on this board.

I totally agree with Prisco with regard to building around Bortles. He has the ability to be one of the best in the league. Give him weapons, bolster the o-line, and spend our ridiculous amount of cap space to help the defense.

Quote:I just listened to Jaguars Monday , and Prisco mentioned something interesting.  A lot of us assumed the Jaguars are being built in the mold of the Seahawks.  But are they?  And should they?  

 

Prisco sees Bortles' upside as being higher than Russel Wilson and that the Jaguars should be building around him and not around a defense/running game.  What I think he means is basically draft offense based around the passing game, and draft defense based on having a lead and defending the pass, and retain players with those same principals.  

 

Which leads me to Caldwell.  His history is generally of offensive teams built around franchise quarterbacks.  He has no ties to Seattle and the way their team was built, so why would that be his model in the first place?  I don't think Caldwell is trying to build another Seattle Seahawks.  I think he's building the team based on Colts/Hawks model. 

 

So why hire a defensive-minded coach?  My theory is that he expects to have more talent on the offensive side, and expects his quarterback to almost be the coach of the offense, and expects to retain players based moreso on the passing game.  Having a defensive minded coach (if that's even a thing) makes sense when your team is built so that that side of the ball will need the most coaching.  In other words someone who can keep developing cheap talent (which is what he's done in Seattle).

 

Defensively. People thought this team was being built like the Seahawks. Which is partly true (that's why Bryant, Blackmon, and Clemons came here). Bradley didn't change his scheme nor how the LEO position works on defense. Caldwell has also targeted rather tall secondary players as well for his scheme when you look at guys like Cyprien, Gratz, and McCray. Offensively. I am not sure. I didn't mistake the fact that Caldwell came from ATL. If he was truly molded after the General Manager in SEA this team would be better already. LOL. Just kidding. It is what it is man. Ultimately. If Bradley was brought here to coach up the defense and coach up "cheap" talent, then that was NOT a very good decision by Caldwell or Khan or both.

 

You hire a man you think is capable of leading a team, not an offense, not just the defense, but the team in it's entirety. It's really odd how this usually plays out though when you look at the history of headcoaches that basically got the job off their abilities they displayed on one side of the football.

 

Billick was known for coaching outstanding offenses in the NFL (See the 98' Vikings) - He goes to BAL and is forever remembered for coaching arguably one of the greatest defenses ever for over a pretty solid period of time.

 

Dungy leaves TB for IND - His defense was "okay" but it was ultimately the offense that got him there, an offense he never had in TB.

 

Gruden did virutally the same thing in TB when OAK traded him there - Again, an offensive guru - who, when you look back at the 02' season will be known for it's defense - not the offense (thought it was good that year).

 

Mike Smith comes to mind as well. Mike made a good living here when we had a solid defense. He goes to ATL. And it's honestly the defense there that's held that team back. Not Matt Ryan and that offense.

 

At the end of the day though. It comes down to your Jimmy's and Joe's and not your X's and O's. And I really believe that. With that said. If the coach sees that Jimmy and Joe ain't compatible with his X's and O's. He needs to change something up schemactially in my book. If Gearhart is a North/South runner... stop running pitch plays and sweeps with him. If Robinson is a quick guy that's shifty.... stop lining him up in the I-Formation and expecting him to be Jim Brown. Same goes for any other player on the team.

Quote:Defensively. People thought this team was being built like the Seahawks. Which is partly true (that's why Bryant, Blackmon, and Clemons came here). Bradley didn't change his scheme nor how the LEO position works on defense. Caldwell has also targeted rather tall secondary players as well for his scheme when you look at guys like Cyprien, Gratz, and McCray. Offensively. I am not sure. I didn't mistake the fact that Caldwell came from ATL. If he was truly molded after the General Manager in SEA this team would be better already. LOL. Just kidding. It is what it is man. Ultimately. If Bradley was brought here to coach up the defense and coach up "cheap" talent, then that was NOT a very good decision by Caldwell or Khan or both.

 

You hire a man you think is capable of leading a team, not an offense, not just the defense, but the team in it's entirety. It's really odd how this usually plays out though when you look at the history of headcoaches that basically got the job off their abilities they displayed on one side of the football.

 

Billick was known for coaching outstanding offenses in the NFL (See the 98' Vikings) - He goes to BAL and is forever remembered for coaching arguably one of the greatest defenses ever for over a pretty solid period of time.

 

Dungy leaves TB for IND - His defense was "okay" but it was ultimately the offense that got him there, an offense he never had in TB.

 

Gruden did virutally the same thing in TB when OAK traded him there - Again, an offensive guru - who, when you look back at the 02' season will be known for it's defense - not the offense (thought it was good that year).

 

Mike Smith comes to mind as well. Mike made a good living here when we had a solid defense. He goes to ATL. And it's honestly the defense there that's held that team back. Not Matt Ryan and that offense.

 

At the end of the day though. It comes down to your Jimmy's and Joe's and not your X's and O's. And I really believe that. With that said. If the coach sees that Jimmy and Joe ain't compatible with his X's and O's. He needs to change something up schemactially in my book. If Gearhart is a North/South runner... stop running pitch plays and sweeps with him. If Robinson is a quick guy that's shifty.... stop lining him up in the I-Formation and expecting him to be Jim Brown. Same goes for any other player on the team.

 

I just don't expect the identity of the team to be the same as the Seahawks if we do become good.  I don't think that's how we'll be perceived.  I'm no longer expecting that kind of defense.   I think Caldwell believes Gus will get creative and scheme around specific talents ("what they do well") which was the basis for his defense in Seattle.  So it's possible that in the end, the defense ends up being nothing like Seattle just because the difference in the personnel.  As far as my theory about developing cheap talent, that was more trying to come up with the advantage of a pass heavy team in hiring a defensive coach, not really an explanation of why they hired him.  

The plain and simple truth to the matter is, with a competent defense, 3 of these game were very winnable.. 

 

Quote:


<span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-size:10px;">I think the Jaguars offense is being built in Atlanta's likeness, Blake Bortles is Matt Ryan (albeit with a much higher upside), Marqise Lee is Roddy White and Allen Robinson is Julio Jones. You can also reference Indianapolis (when David Caldwell was there), they had a franchise QB with two dynamic receivers as well (Marvin Harrison & Reggie Wayne), once the offense is fully built I expect it to look nothing like Seattle's.

</span></span>

I agree. Based on Caldwell's experience. We will be the Colts of 2003-2007.

Is it possible for this team to create it's own identity? '07 we were compared to the "steelers of the south" now it's the seahawks. How about the Jags? Much easier.

Quote:Is it possible for this team to create it's own identity? '07 we were compared to the "steelers of the south" now it's the seahawks. How about the Jags? Much easier.

 It'll happen.  As soon as we can string together some wins.  Might be a while yet. 

Here is how I see it personally.

 

I believe we 'Finally' have our franchise QB.  We drafted 2 young WR's, and picked up Hurns to grow with Bortles.  But I don't see CSIII being here much longer with all his hamstring issues.  We have a young inexperienced O-line that with a few more draft picks/FA signings can be good enough to give Bortles the protection the previous 5 QB's never had, and actually have depth.  With stability on the O-line we might be able to open up some running lanes for once.

 

The D-line seems to be getting better(Although we do need more depth here as well), and the secondary is complete trash.

 

That being said, I see our off season being mainly focused on our secondary.

 

This league is a passing league right now, and that's how the Jags seem to be moving toward.  They want to throw the ball and score quickly.  Something we really haven't had since the days of Mark Brunell.

 

In short I agree with the OP, we are building our offense for quick strikes.  While bringing in a defensive coach to fix what's been broken for a LONG time.

But keep in mind, the previous regime had completely screwed us on both sides of the ball.  While we seem to not have seen much improvement on the Defense, we are finally seeing some sparks on offense.

 

I see us next year having a much better year.