(01-01-2025, 03:39 PM)Jaguarmeister Wrote: If you agree with the reports that the Jags GM/HC spots are more attractive than any other potential or existing openings, then you have to ask why are they more attractive and who or what is responsible for making them the most attractive.  Obviously there are factors like weather, no state income tax and a non-meddling owner, but those factors are always present and when the Jags HC and/or GM spots have been open in the past, it hasn't necessarily been the most attractive spot in prior instances by comparison.  I think when your opening is attractive, that generally and usually means the roster is in good shape, contracts are manageable and you have a QB.  Those also happen to be reasons to keep whoever is responsible for that which is generally your GM.  Trevor is a big part of it here, but I also think the roster is generally in good shape.  I think most coaches would prefer not to go through the growing pains of developing a rookie QB (or 2nd year guy coming off an up and down rookie year in Caleb's case), and Trevor provides that still ascending veteran presence that I think most coaching candidates would covet.

I think Trent brought in an awful free agent class last offseason that significantly contributed to our inability to close out close games with dropped passes in key moments, lack of interior pass rush and abysmal coverage in the secondary all by our 2024 free agent class,  but I think he's done better than average in the draft with hitting on his early round picks and hitting adequately enough in the later rounds.  We've certainly seen a lot worse here in that regard.  Was the free agent class of 2024 across the league just awful in general?  If so, our crop is somewhat forgivable as you are forced to spend to some extent and you have to factor opportunity cost in a true evaluation of performance from the GM.  You could certainly hang not properly preparing for the free agent class, whether it be good or bad, around his neck, but you also can't look at it in a vacuum because what you do in free agency affects what you do in the draft for some picks.

The problem for Shad in not firing one or both of Doug and Trent is that if we start off next year at 0-6, 1-5 or maybe even 2-4 through the first 6 games, the negativity is going to get real public and real loud real quick, so, fair or unfair, they may just be out of time.  Ultimately, I think even a non-meddling Shad has an idea of what the problems on the roster are and an informed opinion (more informed than anyone here or in the media) of what went wrong in 2024.  I think he'll have or has already had a meeting with Trent and Doug separately to discuss what the roster issues or other issues were in 2024 and see if he gets the answer out of both of them that aligns with his.  If he gets that, then he'll ask what the plan is to remedy it (i.e. specific targets in the draft and/or free agency) and if he likes the answer he hears he will retain one or both.  This presumes Doug is actually continuing to visibly work hard inside the building and isn't just coasting as some have speculated.  If that is the case, Shad almost certainly is aware and the writing may indeed already be on the wall. 

I still think Doug and Trent  are attached at the hip, so I think retaining or firing both is more likely than firing just 1 or the other.  I'm now leaning toward 2 winning seasons out of 3 along with key injuries throughout the 2024 season potentially buying them this mulligan year, but I wouldn't necessarily put a ton of confidence in that being the outcome.  We'll find out in 5 or 6 days though.

This offense has talent in my opinion, so I would point the finger at Doug Pearson and press Taylor there. The defense is lacking, secondary talent and some draft mistakes at line backer and all through the defense. Blame is pointing right at balkie. A lot of the key injuries came after ALL the poor performance was already well happening. All this = you all are fired in a (trump voice)

---