(09-15-2020, 06:18 AM)homebiscuit Wrote:

(09-15-2020, 12:16 AM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: You need to figure out what common sense means. What you are using as evidence, is complete speculation. Are you in the building everyday to see how much interaction Caldwell has with the players? Neither of us know for sure if he never sees them or if he has long discussions with the guys about their families, their hopes and their dreams. For you to simply speculate that he never sees them is just conjecture. 

All I know is that it's part of a GM's job to make players feel wanted by the organization and convince them that Jacksonville is the team they need to be playing for. He has failed on this level. 

Also, once Coughlin was fired, the dissent continued. If the "tumor" was completely removed, why did we still have players who were critical of the organization? If it was all Coughlin's fault, wouldn't the problem be solved, once he was fired? There's more to the story than the blame being 100% on Coughlin. He was definitely a HUGE problem, but it can't be completely his fault.

It is? How so? How much contact do players have with the GM beyond contract signings? Why don't we hear anymore grumblings of dissent now that the Tom Coughlin Victims Group is gone from the locker room? 

I get it, you don't like Dave Caldwell, but you're laying too much blame for the Coughlin regime at his feet.

I have no idea how much contact the GM has with players. None of us do. That was my point. Why don't we hear any more dissenters? Because they are hopefully all gone. I totally disagree with calling them the "Tom Coughlin Victims Group" though. They were still complaining after he was gone, so that means he must not have been 100% of the problem. 

Too much blame? I already said that the majority of the blame was Coughlin's fault (probably a good 75-80%.) I'm just not convinced Caldwell was completely blameless as others seem to profess.

---