Do you like Gus as a Head Coach or do you like him as a person (personallity)?  I mean 0-8 its hard to rate any HC with a C maybe if he was 3-4 at least...

 

The other thing is both Dave (GM) and Gus are new so its hard to tell if they are working together (like who thought it would be a good idea to get rid of Eugene)?

Actually, it's hard to grade him at all with what he was supplied with. Look at the flipping roster.

 

Who thought it would be a good idea to get rid of Monroe? The one who realized that he wouldn't be here next year so he decided to get draft picks instead of nothing. This is a rebuild. Picks are everything.

---

I think Bridgewater at 3 is better value than Mack at 3, yes.

 

<div> 
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL. Clown.
</div>
 
 
 

How exactly can you not wrap your head around this, HOW CAN THEY BUILD A COMPETENT TEAM WITH WHAT THEY WERE SUPPLIED WITH IN 1 OFFSEASON? LOL. Blows my mind entirely that some people are so football stupid.

 

How do you not understand that many teams have been just as devoid of talent as this team and haven't been this bad.  Teams are now routinely resting starters for large portions of games against us.  We have no touchdowns at Everbank.  We haven't been within single digits.  That's not all just on the coaching, but its not all just a roster issue either.  

---

Gene's Myth

How do you not understand that many teams have been just as devoid of talent as this team and haven't been this bad.  Teams are now routinely resting starters for large portions of games against us.  We have no touchdowns at Everbank.  We haven't been within single digits.  That's not all just on the coaching, but its not all just a roster issue either.  

No, actually. This has been said it's one of the worst rosters in NFL history. This team is made up of rookies and players who wouldn't even sniff the 53 man roster of other teams. 

 

Go look at the second worst team in the league at the moment, whether you want to call it the Bucs, Giants, Browns, Vikes, or Steelers. Compare their roster to ours. Go ahead, do it. The be amazed at how much talent we have compared to the second worst team in the NFL. NEXT TO NONE.

---

I think Bridgewater at 3 is better value than Mack at 3, yes.

 

<div> 
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL. Clown.
</div>
 
 
 

No, actually. This has been said it's one of the worst rosters in NFL history. This team is made up of rookies and players who wouldn't even sniff the 53 man roster of other teams. 

 

Go look at the second worst team in the league at the moment, whether you want to call it the Bucs, Giants, Browns, Vikes, or Steelers. Compare their roster to ours. Go ahead, do it. The be amazed at how much talent we have compared to the second worst team in the NFL. NEXT TO NONE.

 

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/te...roster.htm

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

That's a far different stance then you took before the season.

Not at all. 

 

Their approach was pretty clear before the season started.  My main point prior to the start of the season based on how young the roster was then was to say that it would be ugly early, and we'd hopefully see improvement later in the season.  We're not later in the season yet, and my "stance" remains the same. 

 

I'm not sure how my stance has changed.  I didn't have high expectations for the team this year going in, and so far they've validated that position.  I also don't see how my stance has changed with regard to what I expect to see happen this coming off season.  I've been saying all along that A.) this year was about blowing the roster up and getting rid of players who were not part of the long-term plan, and B.) we will have  much better sense for where this team is headed next off season based on the personnel moves they make in the draft and free agency. 

 

Not terribly difficult to follow.  I'm not sure you understand what "changing a stance means" because I've been pretty consistent here. 

---

Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

Not at all. 

 

Their approach was pretty clear before the season started.  My main point prior to the start of the season based on how young the roster was then was to say that it would be ugly early, and we'd hopefully see improvement later in the season.  We're not later in the season yet, and my "stance" remains the same. 

 

I'm not sure how my stance has changed.  I didn't have high expectations for the team this year going in, and so far they've validated that position.  I also don't see how my stance has changed with regard to what I expect to see happen this coming off season.  I've been saying all along that A.) this year was about blowing the roster up and getting rid of players who were not part of the long-term plan, and B.) we will have  much better sense for where this team is headed next off season based on the personnel moves they make in the draft and free agency. 

 

Not terribly difficult to follow.  I'm not sure you understand what "changing a stance means" because I've been pretty consistent here. 

 

Before the season had already started you'd deemed everything this front office did in regards to releasing or not re-signing players as the right direction, a necessary move to rebuild this franchise the right way, before we saw the first game. I've been insistent this is just a different direction, we've got no clue if it's right or wrong yet. And base upon what we've seen I'm leaning more towards its the wrong direction again.

 

If your on board with the wait and see approach again then fine, but waiting doesn't mean accepting every move the front office takes. They've made some bad choices in a short period of time.

---

Just because the roster is bad doesn't mean the coach gets an automatic pass. We shouldn't have hired a staff then and just ran this bag of garbage out there with no direction because that's how they look now with a coaching staff. Halfway thru the season on a progress report they recieve a F from me because it's no improvement from no department of the team.

 

I really wish Caldwell would've waited and hired his boy Roman. Caldwell gets a F too by the way at this halfway point. You have to be at least competitive in some games to get a passing grade. Can't believe how folks defend the coach when he says himself he's not doing a good enough job having the team be prepared to win and compete in games.

---

Right now, I'm thinking that Caldwell is in the "Oh [BAD WORD REMOVED]" mode as he sees Bradley and his coaching staff getting blown out by the score of 155-36 in the 1st half of our 8 games.

 

That's an average score of 19-4 by halftime.

 

We average getting beat by 2 TDs in the 1st half of games -- that's pathetic to think that (on average) we're down by 14 points by halftime in every game.

 

Not only does our talent stink but our gameplanning is worse.

---

Just because the roster is bad doesn't mean the coach gets an automatic pass. We shouldn't have hired a staff then and just ran this bag of garbage out there with no direction because that's how they look now with a coaching staff. Halfway thru the season on a progress report they recieve a F from me because it's no improvement from no department of the team.


I really wish Caldwell would've waited and hired his boy Roman. Caldwell gets a F too by the way at this halfway point. You have to be at least competitive in some games to get a passing grade. Can't believe how folks defend the coach when he says himself he's not doing a good enough job having the team be prepared to win and compete in games.

You can't get blood from a stone. If you have a squad full of subpar talent, the end result usually is gonna be subpar.. It is what it is.. He's only working with what he currently has, which isn't much at all.. Now after this season, game on and that's when he truly should be graded.

---

How exactly can you not wrap your head around this, HOW CAN THEY BUILD A COMPETENT TEAM WITH WHAT THEY WERE SUPPLIED WITH IN 1 OFFSEASON? LOL. Blows my mind entirely that some people are so football stupid.

 

I think I've watered things smarter than you. The team we have was not dumped on Gus and Dave. They assembled it in the offseason and jettisoned the players from a 2 and 14 team they didn't want WHO ARE NOW ON OTHER TEAM'S ROSTER!

 

If you think this roster is better than the one from last year then you must agree the team should be more competititve than last year. If you believe the roster is better and we're not as competitive then the only conclusion you can draw is the coaching is worse.

---

Right now, I'm thinking that Caldwell is in the "Oh [BAD WORD REMOVED]" mode as he sees Bradley and his coaching staff getting blown out by the score of 155-36 in the 1st half of our 8 games.

 

That's an average score of 19-4 by halftime.

 

We average getting beat by 2 TDs in the 1st half of games -- that's pathetic to think that (on average) we're down by 14 points by halftime in every game.

 

Not only does our talent stink but our gameplanning is worse.

 

Ah, the old "gameplanning" canard. You need to fax your plans to Everbank post haste.

 

I'm sure there is this super-secret plan out there that would have won at least three or four games, but Bradley refuses to use it because he like where the Jaguars are now.

 

I'm surprised you didn't throw in the good old "halftime adjustments" complaint you Junior Head Coaches love to make.

 

Looking forward to the vast improvement we'll see once you and TMD get together with Caldwell and Bradley.

---

The sun's not yellow, it's chicken.

I think I've watered things smarter than you. The team we have was not dumped on Gus and Dave. They assembled it in the offseason and jettisoned the players from a 2 and 14 team they didn't want WHO ARE NOW ON OTHER TEAM'S ROSTER!

 

If you think this roster is better than the one from last year then you must agree the team should be more competititve than last year. If you believe the roster is better and we're not as competitive then the only conclusion you can draw is the coaching is worse.

   

 

First of all, with what they were supplied with was a horrible team. It HAD to be broken down to have any success for the future. That said, how exactly do you think they could have built a quality roster without sacrificing the future? Go ahead. I'll wait. 

---

I think Bridgewater at 3 is better value than Mack at 3, yes.

 

<div> 
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL. Clown.
</div>
 
 
 

   

 

First of all, with what they were supplied with was a horrible team. It HAD to be broken down to have any success for the future. That said, how exactly do you think they could have built a quality roster without sacrificing the future? Go ahead. I'll wait. 

 

They have replaced 35 players with their own. Tommy, are we a better team? Yes, or NO!

 

If you answer Yes, why are we 0-8 and less competitive? The only reasonable answer would be coaching since the roster is better if you answer YES.

 

If you answer No, then we have regressed under Bradley and Caldwell.

 

It's pretty dang simple Tommy. If we're better then they've done well, if we're worse then they have not. Are we better or not? Yes or No?

 

Regards...............the Chiefjag

---

Tommy, why exactly would we have to get worse before we get better? That's like saying we have to get dumber before we get smarter.

---

"We believe in victory!"   - Gus Bradley
"I don't want to believe.  I want to know."   - Carl Sagan

Tommy, you realize this is Chief youre arguing with right.

---

Tommy, why exactly would we have to get worse before we get better? That's like saying we have to get dumber before we get smarter.

 

That explains the plan behind the guys Khan has been hiring to run the Jags.

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

   

 

First of all, with what they were supplied with was a horrible team. It HAD to be broken down to have any success for the future. That said, how exactly do you think they could have built a quality roster without sacrificing the future? Go ahead. I'll wait. 

 

Well lets start with the simple and obvious, letting players like Daryl Smith go to evaluate a journeyman like Geno Hayes was a mistake.

 

It doesn't really matter what anyone says about what moves "could've" or "should've" been made to prevent this backward motion of a rebuild, you'll just come back with either "that's not possible", "they where apart of a 2-14 team they wouldn't make that big of a difference" or my personal favorite "____ player didn't want to be here so it's not an option".

 

No one expected the Front office to field a "winning" team this year, but damn is it to much to ask for a team that at the very least mirrors an NFL team? For all the hate Gene Smith gets never once did we have a squad this bad under him, not even in his first year taking over for Harris.

 

You want to shield Caldwell from this roster and yet as it's been pointed out 35 members of the 53 man roster where brought in this year alone by Caldwell.

 

Just an observers idea of what I wish we would've done in hindsight

 

1. Resign Daryl Smith, Terrence Knighton, Derek Cox, Laron Landry, CJ Mosley to similar contracts they signed else where not a single one signed an outrageous contract.

 

2. Instead of drafting Joeckel take a premium pass rusher at 2 there was PLENTY of options. Even if the rest of the draft is the same taking a player like Ziggy or Jordan would've filled a HUGE need and allowed us to part ways with useless players like Babin.

 

3. I like the signings of Marks and Blackmon, imagine how much better of a line rotation we'd have with Marks playing with Knighton and Mosley instead of the blob like Roy Miller. Imagine a backfield with Cox, Blackmon and a young Gratz allowed to develop instead of being thrown to the wolves. Imagine allowing Cyprien to develop with Landry and Lowery.

 

Just those 3 simple things would put us in a much better position heading into the next offseason. I'm not saying it's a perfect flawless plan I'm point out again how retaining some of the players that where serviceable would've put us in a better position down the road and even today.

---

I think I've watered things smarter than you. The team we have was not dumped on Gus and Dave. They assembled it in the offseason and jettisoned the players from a 2 and 14 team they didn't want WHO ARE NOW ON OTHER TEAM'S ROSTER!

 

If you think this roster is better than the one from last year then you must agree the team should be more competititve than last year. If you believe the roster is better and we're not as competitive then the only conclusion you can draw is the coaching is worse.

 

 

I don't believe this roster is any better than last year's. I believe it's an even younger roster jettisoned of what little talent was left in order to truly start over and build from scratch. As tough as this is, it may simply be what's necessary to truly build a team into a rock solid contender. The other approach may have achieved quicker competitiveness while at the same team leaving the team with holes by the time they're ready to contend. Just look at the Texans now.

---

'02

I'm surprised you didn't throw in the good old "halftime adjustments" complaint you Junior Head Coaches love to make.

 

 

I'm not sure who you're calling a Junior Head Coach, but let me clarify my feelings regarding halftime adjustments. Quite frankly, this team isn't so bad at it. In fact, I'd say in most games the Jaguars do show some second half improvements as if they've figured some things out at halftime. There are exceptions like the Broncos game where the other team made the better adjustments, in their case to protect Manning from getting hit so much. But this team at least does some adjusting. You were never able to say that about last year's teams. It wan't just a case of bad halftime adjustments...rather, it was a case of absolutely no halftime adjustments. Mularkey could be up by three TDs at halftime and would still lose the game. When it comes to halftime adjustments, it flat out can't possibly get any worse than Mularkey.

---

'02

Tommy, why exactly would we have to get worse before we get better? That's like saying we have to get dumber before we get smarter.

 

 

Have you never heard of the phrase, "one step backward...two steps forward"?

---

'02