Quote:Just real quick, good on you for making your point without being insulting.
To clarify, I would never advise the team to tell the coaches or players to intentionally lay down. You don't want them doing that, and I don't think they would even if you did.
If you're going to do it, you simply make a change or two to younger guys to "give them a look" in what is already a lost season. It's not like our QB play has warranted any loyalty to them, we could easily play somebody like Scott without it being 100% transparent that we were throwing a game.
In regards to the making points without being insulting; same to you. This has actually been a fairly enjoyable conversation, from my end at least.
As for the switching guys out, I wouldn't be opposed to that if its done correctly. If, let's say, after Henne's poor performance against Arizona Gus decided "screw it, we're starting Stanzi/Scott" I'd be a little worried. Stanzi's a guy so far down the depth chart, he hasn't even been active since Gabbert came back from injury, and Scott's on the practice squad. You can dress it up as "we're just getting a look at our guys" but in that situation, it comes off as nothing less than "we've given up. Let's see if we have
anything for next year." It just comes off as a defeatist mentality. And I think it would look the same way to the team.
(Though I might also be a bit biased on that last sentence because I have a loose connection to a WR on the team. I don't want to say too much and risk getting him, or our mutual friend, in trouble, but I know that when it came down to Henne or Gabbert, the WR's seemed to be in agreement that they preferred playing for Henne. Didn't get a straight answer as to why, but the "nudgenudge" answer seemed to be that they felt Gabbert left them out to dry too much on his passes. I don't know what they feel about Scott or Stanzi, so I may just be overestimating their faith in Henne because of their lack of faith in Gabbert. Just as a disclaimer in case anyone else feels like plugging Stanzi or Scott in to start the next game without any in-game reps beforehand wouldn't look like giving up. :confused: )
If, let's say, you start Henne and he has a poor game, and towards the end you toss Stanzi/Scott out there and he does anything even remotely close to positive, I'd have no issue with starting him the next week. There's been a lot of games where I've been ready to see Stanzi come in. If its a "he provided a spark" move, I have no issue with that.
Then again, I'm not really super opposed to tanking, so maybe someone else will take more offense to this type of maneuver than I. For me, it really just comes down to the fact that I can't root against the Jags. I've got enough garbage going on in my own life that football's my little escape for a couple hours a week, so, hoping to spend that time watching my team lose just seems counterproductive to me. If they start Henne, I'll hope for a win. If they start Stanzi, I'll hope for a win. If they start Scott, I'll hope for a win. If they win, I'll be happy. It doesn't really matter if they win by 3 or 50 to me. If they lose, I won't really care. (Note: The last couple of sentences apply specifically to this year. I'd obviously care if they lost in week 17 and missed the playoffs because of it or something.) Its not like I think getting a higher pick is a terrible thing, its just not something that I think the team needs to prioritize for. I'd just rather see the team win, get used to winning and develop that mentality and culture than sneakily try to lose or admit the season's over. Its like the quote from Coleman that Chiefjag posted;
Quote:Marco Coleman, ex-player, even said on the post game broadcast that it's way more important for a team to learn how to win, learn what it takes to win, learn how to pull out wins than it is to move up to get a player who may not produce anyway.
As for;
Quote:I fail to see why any of the above would not have been equally true had the Texans scored on that last drive.
We beat a 2 win team starting an undrafted QB, and they still were within range to win that game in the final minute. This is not some great achievement.
In the context of the NFL, its not a great achievement. In the context of the fact that this is the team currently sitting on the wrong side of the most lopsided Vegas odds in NFL history, any victory is a victory. There's some players on this team who we expect to be on the team for years to come, so a win like this is good for them. A hard fought victory is a hard fought victory, regardless of who its against. You don't want to start discrediting the tough games these guys play just because you think their opponent isn't worthwhile. If you do that, then you start breeding a culture where these guys will start overlooking opponents or not taking them as seriously. Every game counts, every opponent is a worthwhile opponent, and every win is a win. They had to dig down deep today to pull out a win because they're just flat out not that talented. And they did that. Now, for when the time comes in the future and the talent is there, and they're in a game against a more talented opponent than today's Texans, they know what needs to be done, and will hopefully do it. As opposed to collapsing down the stretch like the '09 and '10 teams, in which I remember one year when they played the Washington Redskins who played with a starting defensive line that had maybe 1 second stringer on it, and everyone else was a 3rd or 4th stringer. For the record, that makeshift defensive line completely shut down the Jag's running game, which magically re-found its groove the next week, after the team had already been eliminated from playoff contention. :confused:
.gif "Laughing")