Quote:I agree with this too. Bradley was essentially a prospect. He had zero head coaching experience. Reid, Kelly or even Arians would all have been better choices for what we needed, partly because of their head coaching experience, as well as success over the years with QB development/ QB evaluation/ getting production from the QB position.
Yet he was on your list of options for the Jags. You're a joke.
Quote:You're no Jags fan.
Funny how you're so demanding about an entity you have zero impact on, yet in your personal life there are clearly no lofty expectations beyond avoiding hot grease.
I am a Jags fan. I'd say a very passionate one as well. You are wrong. Again.
When are you trading that crapcycle in for a Jaguars steamrolller? It would be more of a fit for you.
Quote:Yet he was on your list of options for the Jags. You're a joke.
Yeah, 6th on that list...after the better options I had ranked higher were already gone.
Labeling Bradley as a prospect is accurate. He had zero head coaching experience. Sorry the truth hurts you.
Quote:Interesting that everyone around here always cries "patience" but when looking around the league it is more apparent than ever that quick turnarounds are capable.
Mark Trestman was within one win of making the playoffs despite losing his starting QB for a good part of the year at Chicago.
lol Trestman inherited a 10-6 team and promptly went 8-8. What a great turnaround huh.
Quote:lol Trestman inherited a 10-6 team and promptly went 8-8. What a great turnaround huh.
Under his watch the offense became more of a big play threat. The team also managed to get the most out of Josh McCown than anyone else had been able to previously. Its hard to keep up success when your established starting QB goes down with injury and yet the Bears did. He should get some credit.
Quote:Yeah, 6th on that list...after the better options I had ranked higher were already gone.
Labeling Bradley as a prospect is accurate. He had zero head coaching experience. Sorry the truth hurts you.
So under your rationale, in the 50s and 60's, the Packers could have done better than Lombardi because he was just a coordinator and not an established coach, and Dallas could have done better than Landry and Pittsburgh could have done better than Noll?
Continuing this line of thought, the Skins could have done better than Gibbs in 1980-81, the Giants could have done better than Parcells, the Bears better than Ditka?
The Packers could have done better than Holmgren-even though by hiring the same guy, Seattle made a better hire in him?
For that matter, Reid was not the best hire by Philly?
Quote:Under his watch the offense became more of a big play threat. The team also managed to get the most out of Josh McCown than anyone else had been able to previously. Its hard to keep up success when your established starting QB goes down with injury and yet the Bears did. He should get some credit.
Not really. He had two less wins than Lovie Smith. Aaron Rodgers was out for like half the year and he still couldn't win the division.
Their starting QB went down but the backup actually did better than the starter, so there's no reason for them to be 8-8.
And who cares that the offense became more a big play threat? They're watching Rodgers on the TV right now. Big play threat means NOTHING if it doesn't make W's more likely. It didn't.. He should get a lot of blame for that.
The Bears fired Lovie Smith because of an underperforming talented roster. The Eagles fired Andy Reid because of an underperforming talented roster. The Chargers fired Norv Turner because of an underperforming talented roster. The Chiefs fired Romeo Crennel because of an underperforming talented roster. Their respective coaches did a good job and there is no denying that but their respective situations are not akin to Jacksonville. I'm sure whoever inherits Jim Schwartz' team in Detroit will probably be in the playoff hunt next year; probably because they already were.
Quote:The Bears fired Lovie Smith because of an underperforming talented roster. The Eagles fired Andy Reid because of an underperforming talented roster. The Chargers fired Norv Turner because of an underperforming talented roster. The Chiefs fired Romeo Crennel because of an underperforming talented roster. Their respective coaches did a good job and there is no denying that but their respective situations are not akin to Jacksonville. I'm sure whoever inherits Jim Schwartz' team in Detroit will probably be in the playoff hunt next year; probably because they already were.
Truth. Comparing their situations to what we had in Jacksonville is idiotic.
Quote:So under your rationale, in the 50s and 60's, the Packers could have done better than Lombardi because he was just a coordinator and not an established coach, and Dallas could have done better than Landry and Pittsburgh could have done better than Noll?
Continuing this line of thought, the Skins could have done better than Gibbs in 1980-81, the Giants could have done better than Parcells, the Bears better than Ditka?
The Packers could have done better than Holmgren-even though by hiring the same guy, Seattle made a better hire in him?
For that matter, Reid was not the best hire by Philly?
I don't think that its always a bad spot to a take a chance on a guy with no head coaching experience. Its not an "all or nothing" proposition as you are seemingly trying to make it.
Obviously there are plenty of examples where it has worked.
However, in the Jaguars specific situation, the wiser choice seemed to be a guy like Reid, Kelly or even Arians. The Jaguars needed stability and at least some proven experience as a head coach. Plus, as mentioned all 3 of those guys were pretty good in track record with the QB position and getting production from it, which has been issue #1 for this team over the last what? - decade??
Just as an aside though.....lol.....I'd bet in almost ALL of the examples you provided, that teh Coordinators those coaches hired were better than the 2 weak ones Gus chose. The quality of assistant coaching is important - even MORE SO for a guy coming in with zero head coaching experience.
Quote:I don't think that its always a bad spot to a take a chance on a guy with no head coaching experience. Its not an "all or nothing" proposition as you are seemingly trying to make it.
Obviously there are plenty of examples where it has worked.
However, in the Jaguars specific situation, the wiser choice seemed to be a guy like Reid, Kelly or even Arians. The Jaguars needed stability and at least some proven experience as a head coach. Plus, as mentioned all 3 of those guys were pretty good in track record with the QB position and getting production from it, which has been issue #1 for this team over the last what? - decade??
Just as an aside though.....lol.....I'd bet in almost ALL of the examples you provided, that teh Coordinators those coaches hired were better than the 2 weak ones Gus chose. The quality of assistant coaching is important - even MORE SO for a guy coming in with zero head coaching experience.
I didn't make it an all-or-nothing proposition.
You did, by stating that Reid, etc. were better candidates than Bradley because of prior head coaching experience, not due to any other factors.
Your closing remark may well be true, but you are right in that it is an aside.
Quote:I didn't make it an all-or-nothing proposition.
You did, by stating that Reid, etc. were better candidates than Bradley because of prior head coaching experience, not due to any other factors.
Actually, thats a lie. (Hopefully not intentional - would be disappointing if so - you were one on here who used to be able to debate without lying) I also cited their (Reid/ Kelly/ Arians) track record with QB/ the QB position.
Quote:As long as we continue to set the bar low and make excuses for others success, we'll continue to flounder right where we are.
Sorry TMD but the talent difference between all of those teams and this one is significant. I was pleasantly surprised that this squad won 4 games. That alone speaks well of what this first year coaching staff accomplished.
Quote:I disagree. I think every coach I listed in the OP could have got at least 4 wins from this roster. The schedule in weeks 9 through 15 was very easy.
I think most of them would have gotten 6 wins as a season total, minimum.
And some of those coaches, probably most, wouldn't have sat on this QB situation, either. As Chiefjag agreed, this regime owns that decision.
I would agree with except that the squad was depleted from it's already weak state as the season wore on. Blackmon on the roster down the stretch would have led to 2 more victories but who were those guys playing last week?
Quote:Actually, thats a lie. (Hopefully not intentional - would be disappointing if so - you were one on here who used to be able to debate without lying) I also cited their (Reid/ Kelly/ Arians) track record with QB/ the QB position.
I responded to this group of posts on this experience topic, not to the entire thread. If I misrepresented your stance, it was unintentional. My apologies.
Edit...yeah I did misrepresent your stance. Had I read more closely I would have noticed your clarifying words.
Mea culpa.
Quote:I am a Jags fan. I'd say a very passionate one as well. You are wrong. Again.
When are you trading that crapcycle in for a Jaguars steamrolller? It would be more of a fit for you.
If you were truly a Jaguar fan, then your content (not your desperate pleas begging people to believe you) would prove otherwise.
The truth is your undoing. Every time. Your content proves opposite.
Quote:Sorry TMD but the talent difference between all of those teams and this one is significant. I was pleasantly surprised that this squad won 4 games. That alone speaks well of what this first year coaching staff accomplished.
Completely agree.
We weren't favored by the oddsmakers (oh, the memories of another of his ridiculous threads about betting lines) in a single game.
Not even when facing the worst team in the league, at home, on a three game winning streak.
Prior to the bye week, people were talking historically worst team ever, yadda, yadda. Once the lineup was somewhat stabilized after losing players to injury and suspension, the team seemed to settle into the system and they were able to string some wins together.
We also have to understand that TMD watches from a bar afar, and has zero connection to the city or access to those who report from inside the building. He's got zero clue about the impact this staff has had on the players and the locker room, which has been very positive. Even during the first half of the season, the players were "all in" and never succumbed to the negativity like so many did on these boards.
Quote:The Bears fired Lovie Smith because of an underperforming talented roster. The Eagles fired Andy Reid because of an underperforming talented roster. The Chargers fired Norv Turner because of an underperforming talented roster. The Chiefs fired Romeo Crennel because of an underperforming talented roster. Their respective coaches did a good job and there is no denying that but their respective situations are not akin to Jacksonville. I'm sure whoever inherits Jim Schwartz' team in Detroit will probably be in the playoff hunt next year; probably because they already were.
Nailed it. Very succinct.
Quote:This I can agree on. Next year will be telling in the way things are headed. Improvement has to happen next year. No excuses.
"No excuses". I love that kind of stuff. Hope you had a scowl on your face when you typed it.
Or what? You'll no longer attend the games?
Bill Gates... from college drop-out to multi-billionaire
The standard has been set.