The opening play against Miami I would love to playaction and go straight for the endzone with hurns, lee, Robinson. It doesn't matter. Just take that shot or they will sit on us all game. If it's incomplete, then you can try the run on 2nd down to make third down more manageable.

---

You either die as a good poster, or live long enough to become the troll.

Yes, because peyton manning, tom brady, aaron rodgers, and drew brees NEEEEEEEEVER use the hurry up outside of 2 minutes. Never ever.

Let us know when we sign one of the above mentioned. Maybe then, we can try it

---

Blakes Life Matters

And they shouldn't have. We weren't being blown out. That was a mistake. We looked tight on offense. I don't mind running the ball, etc..., but we need to be more aggressive on offense and less predictable.

 

I wish I could link to the NexGen Replay on WIndows 10 Microsoft NFL App but no go.  When you look at the pick 6 it encapsulates the problems we had Sunday.  Yeldon ran a poor route, only the TE released downfield and with the empty backfield there were 9 in the box.

 

Better option would have been to check to better protection and spread out the defense maybe?  I don't know with a 2 and 3 TE set at least check to run.

---

The Khan Years

Patience, Persistence, and Piss Poor General Managers.

Nobody is sayinf run no huddle all the time, but there's really no excuse not to incorporate it a bit more, especially when you have unreliable receivers who are mistake prone. When you're moving slow without a sense of urgency, those drops feel way more deflating

I agree with mixing it up. Makes us less predictable. We've been way to predictable for far too long.

---

I wish I could link to the NexGen Replay on WIndows 10 Microsoft NFL App but no go. When you look at the pick 6 it encapsulates the problems we had Sunday. Yeldon ran a poor route, only the TE released downfield and with the empty backfield there were 9 in the box.


Better option would have been to check to better protection and spread out the defense maybe? I don't know with a 2 and 3 TE set at least check to run.

Pick 6 is squarely on Bortles IMO.

---

Pick 6 is squarely on Bortles IMO

From the look on his face the second after he threw it he knew he screwed it up.

---

Looking to troll? Don't bother, we supply our own.

 

 

I agree with mixing it up. Makes us less predictable. We've been way to predictable for far too long.

I feel you. There is a difference in mixing it up and doing what works though. We did mix it up but Hurns, Robinson and Green couldn't catch a cold. Yeldon had a 4.2 avg and we didn't give him the ball. Sometimes you can overthink the situation when you are trying to "mix it up". Why draft the guy high if you won't use him when he's getting the job done? I just want the team to focus on winning. What ever is working ride that and use the other faucet of your game to flourish because of it.  

 

We can use the run to set up the pass. It appeared that we wanted to make the pass work and completely ignored that the run was being effective. 

---

From the look on his face the second after he threw it he knew he screwed it up.

 

He missed a read.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

So don't take the time to discuss the play in the huddle to make your receivers more reliable?


Ready, Fire, Aim!

Again, drops are more deflating when you're in a slow paced offensive approach that utilizes more run than pass. In no huddle you're quickly moving on to the next play, so there's no time to dwell on mistakes. On the other hand, if you only throw every third play and you drop a pass, that's when confidence goes out the window

---

Let us know when we sign one of the above mentioned. Maybe then, we can try it

The hope is you have a franchise guy capable of doing it, and clearly he's at his best in no huddle, so i'm not sure how anyone could argue against seeing a bit more of it.

---

If you wanna see us score in the 20s and 30s on occasion you should be all for no huddle. I, for one, am tired of averaging 15 pts

---

The hope is you have a franchise guy capable of doing it, and clearly he's at his best in no huddle, so i'm not sure how anyone could argue against seeing a bit more of it.

I'm not sure we have the wideouts to run no huddle. We aren't talking about which of our better units to rely on because neither are that good. The wideouts had ample opportunities to catch passes and just could not capitalize. It's hard to run a no huddle if the wideouts can't catch. The run game is about power and we have a ton of that on the right side of the line. 

 

This team has to learn to sustain drives and score points before they can focus on a no huddle. Their best defender went out and we never challenged that spot with the run or pass. The one guy who could single-handedly beat us went out. I'll say that this was simply not knowing how to manage the skill sets on the team,

---

But if we're doing ball control why not have a fullback? Running out of single back sets isn't going to get it done.

The Ace offense worked pretty well for Washington back in the day. The logic is that the second tight end reduces the need for a fullback.

 

The team does have a couple of "fullbacks" on the roster in Alualu and Gerhart.

---

I'm not sure we have the wideouts to run no huddle. We aren't talking about which of our better units to rely on because neither are that good. The wideouts had ample opportunities to catch passes and just could not capitalize. It's hard to run a no huddle if the wideouts can't catch. The run game is about power and we have a ton of that on the right side of the line. 

 

This team has to learn to sustain drives and score points before they can focus on a no huddle. Their best defender went out and we never challenged that spot with the run or pass. The one guy who could single-handedly beat us went out. I'll say that this was simply not knowing how to manage the skill sets on the team,

WE CLEARLY DO BECAUSE IT WORKED ON SUNDAY, AND IT WORKED WELL WHEN WE USED IT LAST YEAR. The biggest advantage is that the defense doesn't have time to regroup and plan against you. It doesn't take all world wide receivers. New Orleans and New England have had far from stellar receiving corps over the years.

---

I'm not sure we have the wideouts to run no huddle. We aren't talking about which of our better units to rely on because neither are that good. The wideouts had ample opportunities to catch passes and just could not capitalize. It's hard to run a no huddle if the wideouts can't catch. The run game is about power and we have a ton of that on the right side of the line. 

 

This team has to learn to sustain drives and score points before they can focus on a no huddle. Their best defender went out and we never challenged that spot with the run or pass. The one guy who could single-handedly beat us went out. I'll say that this was simply not knowing how to manage the skill sets on the team,

I think that that's true to an extent, but it's letting Blake off the hook a little bit. 

 

He absolutely needs to play better in the coming weeks of the season. If we continue to see more picks (esp pick 6s) than touchdowns, that's a bad, bad sign that he isn't learning from his mistakes. If that's the case, this team should be looking to at least draft a signal caller next year for competition sake. 

---

Which brings me to Caldwell. I firmly believed that Caldwell would get a 4th year regardless of how year 3 went, but that Gus wouldn't be so lucky. I'm not sure that's the case. Caldwell will likely get to stick around, but if there's a clear lack of progress, or even regression on Blake's part, I think that may be it for him. That's the guy he drafted to lead the franchise. That's the guy he took at 3 overall, before turning around and saying "he's not ready yet, Chad's our guy." That's the guy Dave said would have been the top quarterback prospect had he stayed another year in school. That's absolutely not true.

---

Ask yourself: Had the Jaguars drafted Mariota, would they have adapted their offense to his strengths like the titans did (more shotgun), or would they have tried to make him run this exact same offense?

 

My point is, I don't get the feeling that THIS coaching staff would have modified the playbook to give their quarterback a better chance at success in his rookie season.... That's concerning.

---

I believe there will be no more staffing changes at the coordinator and up spots until Blake has played at least two full seasons in system. Khan must realize that constant churn will not lead to success. Not saying this regime will achieve success but at some point the process must be given time. No matter the length of time the Jags have under achieved this is still a first year system once again. Sucks for us but it is what it is.

 

edit: Offensive system I meant to clarify. Also I will add that it only sucks for us if they don't get better. I believe the young. core will improve.

---

Looking to troll? Don't bother, we supply our own.

 

 

I believe there will be no more staffing changes at the coordinator and up spots until Blake has played at least two full seasons in system. Khan must realize that constant churn will not lead to success. Not saying this regime will achieve success but at some point the process must be given time. No matter the length of time the Jags have under achieved this is still a first year system once again. Sucks for us but it is what it is.

This. Unless the team completely falls flat on its face, Bradley will likely be back in 2016, along with most of his coaching staff. Olson and Hackett, in particular, are safe, because I do think that Caldwell and Khan recognize that shuffling Bortles in and out of different offenses and different coaches in each of his first three years is a good way to make sure he ends up like Gabbert.

---

This. Unless the team completely falls flat on its face, Bradley will likely be back in 2016, along with most of his coaching staff. Olson and Hackett, in particular, are safe, because I do think that Caldwell and Khan recognize that shuffling Bortles in and out of different offenses and different coaches in each of his first three years is a good way to make sure he ends up like Gabbert.

Like I said, the only way that there are changes beyond Bradley is if Blake completely implodes. I don't know that anyone would be back in that case.

If it's just a matter of the team being [BAD WORD REMOVED] poor again, then Bradley goes, but my guess is that they would still give the job to Marrone, because he's not gonna fire an offensive coaching staff he is completely comfortable working with.

 

The real question you have to ask yourself is this: If this year turns into a complete disaster, do you want Marrone to take over next year, or clean house so we can get a guy like Todd Haley?

 

*****AS A SIDE NOTE: Gabbert wasn't bad because of coaching changes, he just flat out wasn't good

---