Don't be so stupid. Of course they can justify it.

To think otherwise requires us to believe that the entire coaching/front office staff are somehow deluded and can't see what you think you see (and remember, they have access to a whole load more information than you on every play and every practice session) and that the owner is a credulous fool who also can't see what you think you see.
 
The fact of the matter is that they've made the choice based on the information they have to hand, and they will have had to justify it to their employer.

I may be wrong but I recall the decision being made right after they drafted him. The every play every practice session is out the window.

---

Great analysis, Bullseye.  While I don't agree with all of it, I will say that you bring up some points that should be considered.

 

I've been one that has been harping on the fact that the 2nd half playcalling went into prevent.  It's interesting to see that the number of throwing plays was 8-1.  All I can say is that from my perspective, it seems to me that the throws became more for short yardage, almost like we went into a west coast offense.

 

I believe it was you, or maybe NYCJags, and some others that mentioned the lack of a running game was a big factor.  I agree with that as well.  But what allowed us to move the ball in the first half was that the D was not sure exactly what was coming.  It seemed to me that the start of the second half, the plays we ran were pretty predictable.

 

If the D knows the type of play you're going to run they can tee up on it.  We really weren't challenging the iggles the way we did in the first half, at least that's my perspective.  Yes we threw the ball quite a bit, but that doesn't necessarily mean that we were being aggressive and challenging their D.  

Thanks for the kudos.

 

I am among those who assert the lack of a running game hurt the Jaguars in a big way.

 

Yes, in the first half, the play calling seemed unpredictable.  This is for a couple of reasons.  First, it wasn't established in the game that the Jaguars could not run the ball.  Those first few series, the Eagles had to play the run honestly.  After a few series where the run game proved to be wholly ineffective, then the Eagles could focus their adjustments on limiting the damage the passing game made.

 

Secondly, as NYCJags (?) pointed out above, the Jaguars were the beneficiaries of turnover created great field position.  The team could afford to be aggressive then.  They were playing with "house money" so to speak.

 

Combined, that's why it seemed the play calling changed.  I think it DID change-maybe for both the Jaguars offense and the Eagles' defense-out of the realization the Jaguars could not run the ball and as the circumstances changed.

 

But I don't think they went "conservative."

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

On that play, McClendon snapped it high and Henne didn't recover well on the quick timing route and threw it too far outside and high for Lee to make a play on it. A lower and closer pass was an easy first down. 

 

Henne made a bad throw but he was trying to recover from a bad snap.  It's on Henne and McClendon more than Lee in my book. 

I forgot about the high snap on that play.

 

Indeed that snap was a factor in the timing of such a quick hitting play.

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

Nice points/breakdown, OP.

 

Its pretty clear we threw the ball more due to the deficiency of our running game. The problem then became who was throwing the ball. I root for the guy starting, but if we are having to rely on Henne to throw 40 something passes, it likely means we're playing to catch up/from behind and that will never be Henne's game. I'll admit had the running game came together for at least 3 or 4 yards a carry Henne wouldn't have cost us the game.

Basically, string some 3rd downs together or some points in response to their big plays, and its a different ball game. We couldn't score in the second half and that's why we lost.

---

No one is safe.

 

Its pretty clear we threw the ball more due to the deficiency of our running game. The problem then became who was throwing the ball. I root for the guy starting, but if we are having to rely on Henne to throw 40 something passes, it likely means we're playing to catch up/from behind and that will never be Henne's game. I'll admit had the running game came together for at least 3 or 4 yards a carry Henne wouldn't have cost us the game.

Basically, string some 3rd downs together or some points in response to their big plays, and its a different ball game. We couldn't score in the second half and that's why we lost.

The run game was not good because Philadelphia loaded the box and dared Henne to beat them.

---

Don't be so stupid. Of course they can justify it.


To think otherwise requires us to believe that the entire coaching/front office staff are somehow deluded and can't see what you think you see (and remember, they have access to a whole load more information than you on every play and every practice session) and that the owner is a credulous fool who also can't see what you think you see.


The fact of the matter is that they've made the choice based on the information they have to hand, and they will have had to justify it to their employer.

None of that means they're making the right decision. I have confidence in a majority of the decisions the team has made but they all haven't been good. Not every choice they make will be the right one. Many, including myself, praised Gene and the decisions he made early on. I was wrong to defend a lot of those situations like I did. Even the best front offices make bad or wrong decisions no matter how much information they have.

---

The run game was not good because Philadelphia loaded the box and dared Henne to beat them.

It worked, too.

---

Many of these points are well thought out and valid. But, the bottom line is one game does NOT make a season. If we all are having this same conversation after week 4, then we may have a serious problem. And, if it turns out to be true and it's mostly on Henne, this years go round might be fixable. Nobody thought the Jags were going 16-0 anyways but this first one does hurt simply because it was a game we lost just as much as it was a game that Philly won. We should have (not could have) won that first game. It's fantastic to see our expectations have soared to new levels............ let's just wait and see how this team develops and matures.

---

---

Good analysis in this thread. It's pretty rare these days to read an agenda free football discussion on this board.

---

+1 I went to type this exact sentiment when I read your reply. Maybe the best thread I've ever read on here. Terrific analysis from so many directions.

---