Seldom...

 

so why does the Jaguars passing game match up better against more opponents than the Jaguars running game?

 

What's the point you're trying to make, Bullseye?

---

Man you are slow.

 

Let me break it down to your simpleton level. I did not learn football by playing Madden. I learned it by actually playing the game. That is the answer to your question if I am a "Maddenist" (your stupid made up term).

 

Jeez you are dumb.

 

No one asked how you learned football, you were asked why you thought running the ball four times with Gerhart was the right play for the Jaguars at that point. Your answer belied an incredible simplicity in your view of the world, such as one might get from thinking of players like characters in a video game. Whether you got that view from playing video games or because you once played football your reasoning as to why it was the right play to call is still completely non sequitur.

 

It would be as if you had been asked if fighting the Vietnam war the way it was fought was correct and you said that it was because the generals made all of the right calls and you know this because you were once a soldier.

---

The point is talent makes the difference.

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

No one asked how you learned football, you were asked why you thought running the ball four times with Gerhart was the right play for the Jaguars at that point. Your answer belied an incredible simplicity in your view of the world, such as one might get from thinking of players like characters in a video game. Whether you got that view from playing video games or because you once played football your reasoning as to why it was the right play to call is still completely non sequitur.

 

It would be as if you had been asked if fighting the Vietnam war the way it was fought was correct and you said that it was because the generals made all of the right calls and you know this because you were once a soldier.

You asked if I were a Maddenist, if I thought players were blips on a screen.

 

I actually played football which means I know first hand that there is more to it than characters on a video game and yes in real life we run the ball on goal line situations.

 

Are you really this stupid?

---

The point is talent makes the difference.

 

Talent makes the difference in whether certain plays are more likely to work, coaching makes the difference in whether the more likely to work play is called in the first place.

---

You asked if I were a Maddenist, if I thought players were blips on a screen.

 

I actually played football which means I know first hand that there is more to it than characters on a video game and yes in real life we run the ball on goal line situations.

 

Are you really this stupid?

 

Well this little dance has gone on long enough.

---

Talent makes the difference in whether certain plays are more likely to work, coaching makes the difference in whether the more likely to work play is called in the first place.

So then why not just play exclusively to your strengths?

 

If the Jaguars unquestioned strength is passing the ball, why bother to run the ball at all?  For that matter, why kick FGs or even punt?  Certainly Bortles is more reliable than Myers, right?  Just have Bortles drop back and chunk it every play, wholly irrespective of the circumstances in the game.

 

If the Jaguars unquestioned strength is defense, then why run offense at all?  If the defense turns the ball over or forces a punt, why not just punt it back immediately so that the team's strength is always in a position to affect the game?

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

He was the power back and it was a goal line situation. You have to also remember that this was a team still trying to find it's pieces. You sometimes have to force these situations just to find out the capabilities of the players on your roster.


These failures assured that some of these players are no longer on the roster.


You have to remember that the coaches didn't have the luxury of hindsight the way we can look at it now.

Idk. I feel like they ran Denard Robinson just as much as Yeldon around the goal line. Very weird to me. Yeldon was ballin that game. He should have finished the drive. He's just as powerful as Gerhart anyway.

---

Shock the world

"GERHART GOES FOR ZERO ON FIRST DOWN! ZERO ON SECOND DOWN! ZERO ON THIRD DOWN!"


"Maybe they'll try a pass here, Frank?"


"GERHART GETS STUFFED! The Jaguars turn it over on downs."

Ah the run run pass days. It hurts to even think about it

---

The heat and humidity is an advantage, period. That said it's not enough of an advantage to allow the Jaguars to beat a better more motivated team. If the Jaguars are going to win they're going to have to be good enough to make the heat an issue. If the Jaguars do their typical act under Bradley and come out and try to run the ball into ten man fronts to "establish the run" and such then they're likely to get their [BLEEP] handed to them.

 

It's not an advantage over a team who's been training in the same level of heat and humidity.

---

If something can corrupt you, you're corrupted already.
- Bob Marley


 

Well this little dance has gone on long enough.

To be quite honest, you're being a little obtuse but I think you're being that way on purpose. Running the ball at the goalline 4 times is the highest percentage play and the safest. There was already a reply by bullseye citing the Seahawks/Patriots superbowl. If you can't see why they ran the ball four times in that situation, you probably don't understand football the way you think you do. Ending the conversation between you and predator had nothing to do with digging in on your opinion but more to do with your inability to prove going away from the run was a more viable solution. At least own up to it. Just because you are severely wrong today doesn't mean you will be wrong tomorrow.

---

To be quite honest, you're being a little obtuse but I think you're being that way on purpose. Running the ball at the goalline 4 times is the highest percentage play and the safest. There was already a reply by bullseye citing the Seahawks/Patriots superbowl. If you can't see why they ran the ball four times in that situation, you probably don't understand football the way you think you do. Ending the conversation between you and predator had nothing to do with digging in on your opinion but more to do with your inability to prove going away from the run was a more viable solution. At least own up to it. Just because you are severely wrong today doesn't mean you will be wrong tomorrow.

Minor point of correction:

 

I pointed out the two AFC Championship games where Brunell threw an INT in the end zone from inside the 5 yard line.

 

Predator made reference to the Pats-Seahawks Super Bowl.

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

Minor point of correction:


I pointed out the two AFC Championship games where Brunell threw an INT in the end zone from inside the 5 yard line.


Predator made reference to the Pats-Seahawks Super Bowl.

My mistake.

---

To be quite honest, you're being a little obtuse but I think you're being that way on purpose. Running the ball at the goalline 4 times is the highest percentage play and the safest. There was already a reply by bullseye citing the Seahawks/Patriots superbowl. If you can't see why they ran the ball four times in that situation, you probably don't understand football the way you think you do. Ending the conversation between you and predator had nothing to do with digging in on your opinion but more to do with your inability to prove going away from the run was a more viable solution. At least own up to it. Just because you are severely wrong today doesn't mean you will be wrong tomorrow.

---

IT WAS ALWAYS THE JAGS

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="1981" data-cid="759182" data-time="1465152839">
To be quite honest, you're being a little obtuse but I think you're being that way on purpose. Running the ball at the goalline 4 times is the highest percentage play and the safest. There was already a reply by bullseye citing the Seahawks/Patriots superbowl. If you can't see why they ran the ball four times in that situation, you probably don't understand football the way you think you do. Ending the conversation between you and predator had nothing to do with digging in on your opinion but more to do with your inability to prove going away from the run was a more viable solution. At least own up to it. Just because you are severely wrong today doesn't mean you will be wrong tomorrow.

</blockquote>


Nice

---

Since when did Bradley start calling offensive plays?

The series in question, although it should have been an easy punch in, was probably the worst four plays of the year, and it wasn't bad coaching or bad execution it was freakin both. First two plays bad execution, after that then you can pile bad coaching in there

---

A good loser is a good loser

The few cut scenes you see from the 7 on 7 and 11 on 11, he looks really quick off the edge

---

To be quite honest, you're being a little obtuse but I think you're being that way on purpose. Running the ball at the goalline 4 times is the highest percentage play and the safest. There was already a reply by bullseye citing the Seahawks/Patriots superbowl. If you can't see why they ran the ball four times in that situation, you probably don't understand football the way you think you do. Ending the conversation between you and predator had nothing to do with digging in on your opinion but more to do with your inability to prove going away from the run was a more viable solution. At least own up to it. Just because you are severely wrong today doesn't mean you will be wrong tomorrow.

So after failing to gain 1 yard after 3 tries with Toby, the correct call was to try it a 4th time?

Based on the ol football adage of "you should be able to get one yard"?

 

I think at that point, your pass/fail % is the same.

Why not throw the ball, which could be the best choice considering the other choice had already failed, 3 times, and Bortles>Jags run game

---

So after failing to gain 1 yard after 3 tries with Toby, the correct call was to try it a 4th time?

Based on the ol football adage of "you should be able to get one yard"?


I think at that point, your pass/fail % is the same.

Why not throw the ball, which could be the best choice considering the other choice had already failed, 3 times, and Bortles>Jags run game

I'm not saying it was right or wrong, but it sure isn't the first time I've seen a coach do it using the same sort of logic.

---

So after failing to gain 1 yard after 3 tries with Toby, the correct call was to try it a 4th time?

Based on the ol football adage of "you should be able to get one yard"?


I think at that point, your pass/fail % is the same.

Why not throw the ball, which could be the best choice considering the other choice had already failed, 3 times, and Bortles>Jags run game

The biggest reason you run it a fourth time is there is a chance your prized, second year qb just might throw another pick 6, which would be worse than turning the ball over on downs at the goalline.

---