Quote:Sure, it may be too early to judge the front office, but it isn't too early to be weary of its current direction considering the team was flirting with historical levels of bad last year, and two games into the season look very similar to two games into last season.
 
I have no idea whether completely gutting the roster was the right move rather than replacing pieces as we went. I think GMs would have a mixed opinion on that. What I do know is that last year was a sort of bad unseen by the NFL in ages and that two games in the Jaguars are picking up exactly where they left off after the bye week. That has to stop, and it has to stop this week. There's no excuse to not field a semi-competitive team after two offseasons.
 
For the record, you could cite the Seahawks as a 2-3 year rebuild. The Falcons, the Packers, the Panthers. "Rebuild" is a bit of a subjective term, but those would be textbook successful 2-3 year rebuilds in my book. The Panthers were especially barren in the talent department.

I agree...the term "rebuild" is very subjective. My preference, especially for a franchise like Jax, would be a "true" or "total" rebuild...essentially a gutting of the roster if you will. One of my favorite teams has always been the Packers, and even though they have one of the top QB's, they're always tinkering with what I would call a "targeted" rebuild. They need help badly on D, BTW. But, you're right, rebuild can have numerous methodologies, plans, terms, etc. I was excited to see the added defensive players Caldwell signed, but I honestly didn't think they would win more than 5 games...and that's entirely because of the offense. I know Jags fans hate to hear it, and understandably so, but this season was really all about the young offense learning the NFL, learning to play together, and gel. I am hoping that it can get fixed at least enough to allow Bortles a minimum of 8 starts, giving him time to run the offense and time to mesh with the offense.

---