Especially after this comment. Marrone to Bortles: "If you continue to turn the ball over, you won't be our QB. Everything else we can work on but that's non-negotiable."
This is something Gus Bradley would have never said and fits more of the mold of Tom Coughlin. I'm excited about this season but I won't fall for the trap again........ Keeping my expectations low.
Marrone is a tough nut....I like it (and believe it's needed).
I was meh at first as well. My whole philosophy(or at least how i justified to myself) on us keeping gus as long as we did was to not only give him a solid chance, but to make this job more attractive to higher caliber coaches who may be deterred by a team who constantly hires and fires coached(Cleveland). So when i heard we just promoted Doug my immediate reaction was; why the hell didn't you pull the trigger sooner if the next coach was in house the whole time. Not to mention the way we finally did let bradley go was a little bit crude to say the least.
But after watching Marrone the last two games and seeing his war room discussion with draft picks, i couldn't be happier with hire. He my not be the sexy pick or be good in front of cameras, but i have a feeling that him coupled with TC could be a hell of a combo that this team needs.
Some people were hard on dave after reviewing some of his early drafts, but honestly, this guy is pretty on point with bringing on talent. It may be a little awkward to put someone like TC in the position he is over his head but if he can work around it and keep giving Doug decent picks to develop, he may be in a sweet spot to become one of the next top GMs.
(06-15-2017, 12:55 PM)BklynJag Wrote: [ -> ]Especially after this comment. Marrone to Bortles: "If you continue to turn the ball over, you won't be our QB. Everything else we can work on but that's non-negotiable."
This is something Gus Bradley would have never said and fits more of the mold of Tom Coughlin. I'm excited about this season but I won't fall for the trap again........ Keeping my expectations low.
so you like marrone because he's negative towards blake? I hope your hate for blake isn't so bad that a comment like that brings you joy? I like marrone because he brings structure and discipline to the team not because he's willing to take a shot to blake to satisfy the non-blake fans out there.
(06-15-2017, 06:14 PM)leopold332002 Wrote: [ -> ] (06-15-2017, 12:55 PM)BklynJag Wrote: [ -> ]Especially after this comment. Marrone to Bortles: "If you continue to turn the ball over, you won't be our QB. Everything else we can work on but that's non-negotiable."
This is something Gus Bradley would have never said and fits more of the mold of Tom Coughlin. I'm excited about this season but I won't fall for the trap again........ Keeping my expectations low.
so you like marrone because he's negative towards blake? I hope your hate for blake isn't so bad that a comment like that brings you joy? I like marrone because he brings structure and discipline to the team not because he's willing to take a shot to blake to satisfy the non-blake fans out there.
I don't take that as a shot at Blake or being negative toward Blake. I take it as a matter of fact statement that Blake needed to hear.
(06-15-2017, 06:14 PM)leopold332002 Wrote: [ -> ] (06-15-2017, 12:55 PM)BklynJag Wrote: [ -> ]Especially after this comment. Marrone to Bortles: "If you continue to turn the ball over, you won't be our QB. Everything else we can work on but that's non-negotiable."
This is something Gus Bradley would have never said and fits more of the mold of Tom Coughlin. I'm excited about this season but I won't fall for the trap again........ Keeping my expectations low.
so you like marrone because he's negative towards blake? I hope your hate for blake isn't so bad that a comment like that brings you joy? I like marrone because he brings structure and discipline to the team not because he's willing to take a shot to blake to satisfy the non-blake fans out there.
Being negative? Hate for Blake? What??
You like the structure and discipline that Marrone brings to the team. So, if someone chronically turns the ball over he tells them they won't get to play. That sounds like structure and discipline to me.
(06-15-2017, 06:26 PM)Jags02 Wrote: [ -> ] (06-15-2017, 06:14 PM)leopold332002 Wrote: [ -> ]so you like marrone because he's negative towards blake? I hope your hate for blake isn't so bad that a comment like that brings you joy? I like marrone because he brings structure and discipline to the team not because he's willing to take a shot to blake to satisfy the non-blake fans out there.
I don't take that as a shot at Blake or being negative toward Blake. I take it as a matter of fact statement that Blake needed to hear.
I completely agree with you my good man but i just feel like any press that can be considered critical towards blake they run with it as if they want to see the man fail. I want to see this team succeed and i truly hope he's leading the way.
I have been a staunch Marrone supporter predating the Bradley firing, because I happened to see a Bills game when he was coach, and, despite the loss, was one of the best coached games I had seen in quite some time.
The team's performance when he became interim coach reinforced my belief in him. The snippets I've seen in the off season program has bolstered my confidence in him further.
Had I not seen that game, I could quite possibly have been/still be meh about it.
I like what I still see, but at the end of the day, the team has to produce far better results on the field under his coaching.
If Marrone's philosophy ended at being overtly structured and disciplined that would be great. The comments about the passing attempts going down, hopefully to zero even, are scary even if said tongue in cheek.
I think we are embarking on a mission to become an MJD/Garrard or more recently Texans/Bengalsesque team where we hope to run/defend our way into enough wins to squeak into the playoffs and then get walloped by a legitimate Super Bowl contender with a franchise QB.
I'll take that over 3 wins.
I knew instantly he was a huge upgrade over ice cream Bradley. I am not ready to praise Marrone yet but I like the tough attitude.
(06-15-2017, 06:43 PM)KYjaggy Wrote: [ -> ]If Marrone's philosophy ended at being overtly structured and disciplined that would be great. The comments about the passing attempts going down, hopefully to zero even, are scary even if said tongue in cheek.
I think we are embarking on a mission to become an MJD/Garrard or more recently Texans/Bengalsesque team where we hope to run/defend our way into enough wins to squeak into the playoffs and then get walloped by a legitimate Super Bowl contender with a franchise QB.
(06-15-2017, 07:00 PM)Hard_Eight Wrote: [ -> ]I'll take that over 3 wins.
Yes. That would be light years better than what we've seen since 2011.
The Bills didn't have a winning season for a decade before Marrone and haven't since he left.
(06-15-2017, 06:43 PM)KYjaggy Wrote: [ -> ]If Marrone's philosophy ended at being overtly structured and disciplined that would be great. The comments about the passing attempts going down, hopefully to zero even, are scary even if said tongue in cheek.
I think we are embarking on a mission to become an MJD/Garrard or more recently Texans/Bengalsesque team where we hope to run/defend our way into enough wins to squeak into the playoffs and then get walloped by a legitimate Super Bowl contender with a franchise QB.
How awful to make the playoffs. O noes. Evrbody has a sad.
The Patriots are an anomaly and riding an elite QB. The Pittsburgh model is to field a team that can get in the playoffs and then catch breaks and win super bowls from time to time. We have been perennial losers.
Couglin is obsessed with balance and with the drafting of Fournette I'm not surprised that they joked about 0 pass attempts.
(06-15-2017, 09:03 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]How awful to make the playoffs. O noes. Evrbody has a sad.
Sorry but if the Caldwell era, which has had the most elite draft capital ever and by a huge amount the most FA $ spent in history, peaks out with one or two quick exit playoff appearances it will be a disappointment to me. Everyone in the fanbase deserves more than that with what we've been through.
(06-15-2017, 10:15 PM)MoJagFan Wrote: [ -> ]The Patriots are an anomaly and riding an elite QB. The Pittsburgh model is to field a team that can get in the playoffs and then catch breaks and win super bowls from time to time. We have been perennial losers.
Couglin is obsessed with balance and with the drafting of Fournette I'm not surprised that they joked about 0 pass attempts.
Big Ben is a top ~10 all time QB also, so I'm not sure using either team with an elite QB is fair. The Texans/Bengals/Garrard era Jags is still the right comp for what we are trying to do IMO.
I'm also not dissing people who are/would be content with short playoff runs, that's completely understandable considering how hard the last half decade has been. It's just not how I feel personally.
(06-15-2017, 10:56 PM)KYjaggy Wrote: [ -> ] (06-15-2017, 09:03 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]How awful to make the playoffs. O noes. Evrbody has a sad.
Sorry but if the Caldwell era, which has had the most elite draft capital ever and by a huge amount the most FA $ spent in history, peaks out with one or two quick exit playoff appearances it will be a disappointment to me. Everyone in the fanbase deserves more than that with what we've been through.
(06-15-2017, 10:15 PM)MoJagFan Wrote: [ -> ]The Patriots are an anomaly and riding an elite QB. The Pittsburgh model is to field a team that can get in the playoffs and then catch breaks and win super bowls from time to time. We have been perennial losers.
Couglin is obsessed with balance and with the drafting of Fournette I'm not surprised that they joked about 0 pass attempts.
Big Ben is a top ~10 all time QB also, so I'm not sure using either team with an elite QB is fair. The Texans/Bengals/Garrard era Jags is still the right comp for what we are trying to do IMO.
I'm also not dissing people who are/would be content with short playoff runs, that's completely understandable considering how hard the last half decade has been. It's just not how I feel personally.
Define "short playoff run."
(06-16-2017, 03:20 AM)Bullseye Wrote: [ -> ] (06-15-2017, 10:56 PM)KYjaggy Wrote: [ -> ]Sorry but if the Caldwell era, which has had the most elite draft capital ever and by a huge amount the most FA $ spent in history, peaks out with one or two quick exit playoff appearances it will be a disappointment to me. Everyone in the fanbase deserves more than that with what we've been through.
Big Ben is a top ~10 all time QB also, so I'm not sure using either team with an elite QB is fair. The Texans/Bengals/Garrard era Jags is still the right comp for what we are trying to do IMO.
I'm also not dissing people who are/would be content with short playoff runs, that's completely understandable considering how hard the last half decade has been. It's just not how I feel personally.
Define "short playoff run."
1 and done. That's short, usually a wildcard one off. That is a short playoff run. A "long" or "deep" playoff run is winning a couple games, getting to the conference title game or a super bowl appearance. I know we haven't been to the playoffs in a while, so these things can be confusing. Some of us older fans were there when we were good, So I am glad I could clear this up for you.
(06-15-2017, 10:56 PM)KYjaggy Wrote: [ -> ] (06-15-2017, 09:03 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]How awful to make the playoffs. O noes. Evrbody has a sad.
Sorry but if the Caldwell era, which has had the most elite draft capital ever and by a huge amount the most FA $ spent in history, peaks out with one or two quick exit playoff appearances it will be a disappointment to me. Everyone in the fanbase deserves more than that with what we've been through.
(06-15-2017, 10:15 PM)MoJagFan Wrote: [ -> ]The Patriots are an anomaly and riding an elite QB. The Pittsburgh model is to field a team that can get in the playoffs and then catch breaks and win super bowls from time to time. We have been perennial losers.
Couglin is obsessed with balance and with the drafting of Fournette I'm not surprised that they joked about 0 pass attempts.
Big Ben is a top ~10 all time QB also, so I'm not sure using either team with an elite QB is fair. The Texans/Bengals/Garrard era Jags is still the right comp for what we are trying to do IMO.
I'm also not dissing people who are/would be content with short playoff runs, that's completely understandable considering how hard the last half decade has been. It's just not how I feel personally.
I don't mean to completely derail this conversation, but....
Ben Roethlisberger, a top ten all-time QB? Don't get me wrong, he's better than a lot of them, but top-10?
In no particular order...
Montana
Kelley
Marino
Elway
Unitas
Manning
Brady
Bradshaw
Tarkenton
Young
Graham
Favre
Brees
Staubach
Aikman
Namath
Starr
So.... Which EIGHT of those guys are worse than Big Ben?
Again, sorry for the derailment, but sometimes some things need to be addressed quickly.
(06-16-2017, 04:20 AM)JagsFanSince95 Wrote: [ -> ] (06-16-2017, 03:20 AM)Bullseye Wrote: [ -> ]Define "short playoff run."
1 and done. That's short, usually a wildcard one off. That is a short playoff run. A "long" or "deep" playoff run is winning a couple games, getting to the conference title game or a super bowl appearance. I know we haven't been to the playoffs in a while, so these things can be confusing. Some of us older fans were there when we were good, So I am glad I could clear this up for you.
Let's provide some additional clarification.
1. I am a STH since 1995, and a pro football fan since 1977. I have games on DVD dating back to Super Bowl III. If you endeavor to condescend, at least endeavor to have a clue about your audience.
2. The term "short playoff run" was vague, as it could have meant within the context of one season, or over the course of several seasons. If a team made the playoffs seven straight years but was bounced from the playoffs early each time, does that constitute a "short playoff run" or something other than a short playoff run? If a team goes to the conference championship game or Super Bowl one year and is not heard from again in subsequent postseasons, does that constitute a short playoff run or a long playoff run? The distinction has an impact on the analysis.
Thee have been plenty of run dominant teams that have been to the playoffs over a sustained period, who may or may not have had great QBs (See Baltimore Ravens 2001 through 2011 who made the playoffs seven out of eleven seasons, making the conference title game only twice during that span) Meanwhile the Manning era Colts had a run over seven years between 1999-2005, making the playoffs six of them, and reaching the conference championship only once. Did they not have sustained success?
Assume for argument's sake Marrone leads the Jaguars to the AFC championship game this year, then the team reverts to Bradley-esque performances the next four seasons. When it came to renewing his contract, would many Jaguars fans be happy with that? Would you be in favor of renewing his contract under those circumstances? Why or why not?