Thats my new response from now on until a team makes it to the super bowl that i like,and can cheer for. Jags are still my favorite of course. I'm jsut saying if someone like green bay,detriot,vikeings made i could go for them unless jags were playing them. Until then my response to anything sports releated from now on will be. Puppy Bowl !!!!!!!!!!!

---

snowwolf titans owner in madden.

note titans owner means im undeafted againest them. 

That's called spamming and against the rules.

---

Really?

Marrone took this team from six (6) straight seasons of five (5) wins or less to the AFC South division crown and the AFC Championship game, and he's scared of his own shadow??!?!?

Unreal.

Right. So now our coach sucks. How bought we bring Gus back lol

IKR.

How many fake punts did Marrone call last season?

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

Right. So now our coach sucks. How bought we bring Gus back lol

IKR.

How many fake punts did Marrone call last season?

While I definitely don't think Marrone is "scared of his own shadow" as the poster suggested earlier, do you think it's fair to say he seems to endorse a conservative turn in strategy at some questionable moments in games?

---

IKR.

How many fake punts did Marrone call last season?

While I definitely don't think Marrone is "scared of his own shadow" as the poster suggested earlier, do you think it's fair to say he seems to endorse a conservative turn in strategy at some questionable moments in games?

Maybe, but is that based on personnel and trying to limit players mistakes?  If that's the case, Bortles isn't the guy, but that philosophy won the Jags games, including the opening round playoff game.  The defense was good enough to win as long as the offense didn't give up bad turnovers/points.

---

 

IKR.

How many fake punts did Marrone call last season?

While I definitely don't think Marrone is "scared of his own shadow" as the poster suggested earlier, do you think it's fair to say he seems to endorse a conservative turn in strategy at some questionable moments in games?

Not dodging your question, but it's difficult to say.

This team was built to be a run first team.  The approach is going to be conservative overall.

Considering the injuries and youth at WR, a more conservative approach was understandable at times.

Not only that, I have long maintained that ineffective offense is too often conflated with conservative offense.

Could you cite specific instances?

If you mention the AFCCG, I could see a run first approach to the 4th quarter, considering Atlanta lost the Super Bowl last year because they abandoned the run.  Should there have been more playcall variety in that 4th quarter?  Absolutely, but I don't abandon the run during that stretch.

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

While I definitely don't think Marrone is "scared of his own shadow" as the poster suggested earlier, do you think it's fair to say he seems to endorse a conservative turn in strategy at some questionable moments in games?

Not dodging your question, but it's difficult to say.

This team was built to be a run first team.  The approach is going to be conservative overall.

Considering the injuries and youth at WR, a more conservative approach was understandable at times.

Not only that, I have long maintained that ineffective offense is too often conflated with conservative offense.

Could you cite specific instances?

If you mention the AFCCG, I could see a run first approach to the 4th quarter, considering Atlanta lost the Super Bowl last year because they abandoned the run.  Should there have been more playcall variety in that 4th quarter?  Absolutely, but I don't abandon the run during that stretch.

It wasn't the run first approach that struck me as too conservative. It was scrapping the run from a two-back/3 WR set for a more conservative one back power formation that bothered me.  Much, much easier to defend. 

Marrone/Hackett steered this tack late in at least 4 games over the season. I recall it working in two of them when Fournette was able to break loose. It didn't work well in the others as Fournette was bottled up and limited on first and sometimes second down. 

Just seems like running from a more "multiple" set in those instances - with more wrinkles to defend - is a wiser course than just daring your opponent to stop the run.

---

Not dodging your question, but it's difficult to say.

This team was built to be a run first team.  The approach is going to be conservative overall.

Considering the injuries and youth at WR, a more conservative approach was understandable at times.

Not only that, I have long maintained that ineffective offense is too often conflated with conservative offense.

Could you cite specific instances?

If you mention the AFCCG, I could see a run first approach to the 4th quarter, considering Atlanta lost the Super Bowl last year because they abandoned the run.  Should there have been more playcall variety in that 4th quarter?  Absolutely, but I don't abandon the run during that stretch.

It wasn't the run first approach that struck me as too conservative. It was scrapping the run from a two-back/3 WR set for a more conservative one back power formation that bothered me.  Much, much easier to defend. 

Marrone/Hackett steered this tack late in at least 4 games over the season. I recall it working in two of the five when Fournette was able to break loose. It didn't work well in the others as Fournette was bottled up and limited on first and sometimes second down. 

Just seems like running from a more "multiple" set in those instances - with more wrinkles to defend - is a wiser course than just daring your opponent to stop the run.

Well I agree with your analysis here, generally.  I think there needed to be more formation/personnel variety.

I just don't know if I would label it a conservative approach.

I don't know that a one back set makes something conservative.  The Gibbs era skins were a one back set and they threw the ball all over the place.  The Greatest Show on Turf Rams ran a lot of one back with Faulk, and I wouldn't call them conservative for that, either.

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

It wasn't the run first approach that struck me as too conservative. It was scrapping the run from a two-back/3 WR set for a more conservative one back power formation that bothered me.  Much, much easier to defend. 

Marrone/Hackett steered this tack late in at least 4 games over the season. I recall it working in two of the five when Fournette was able to break loose. It didn't work well in the others as Fournette was bottled up and limited on first and sometimes second down. 

Just seems like running from a more "multiple" set in those instances - with more wrinkles to defend - is a wiser course than just daring your opponent to stop the run.

Well I agree with your analysis here, generally.  I think there needed to be more formation/personnel variety.

I just don't know if I would label it a conservative approach.

I don't know that a one back set makes something conservative.  The Gibbs era skins were a one back set and they threw the ball all over the place.  The Greatest Show on Turf Rams ran a lot of one back with Faulk, and I wouldn't call them conservative for that, either.

They not only switched from a more varied set with more options to a power set with fewer options, they generally only called the more obvious option from the more limited set.

It seems at the very least "stubborn" to me.  The pity is that multiple receivers and backs were getting open for relatively low risk throws from that "Shotgun Bunch" set and the pats really hadn't stopped it much. 

I don't get the strategy of abandoning that in favor of running 27 up the middle on 8 or 9 first downs against a loaded box. 

Don't get me wrong. I like Marrone and I really like it when Hackett opens up the book a little bit. I just hope they analyze those 4 or 5 games and see that they could have kept their foot on the gas to a better outcome.

---

Well I agree with your analysis here, generally.  I think there needed to be more formation/personnel variety.

I just don't know if I would label it a conservative approach.

I don't know that a one back set makes something conservative.  The Gibbs era skins were a one back set and they threw the ball all over the place.  The Greatest Show on Turf Rams ran a lot of one back with Faulk, and I wouldn't call them conservative for that, either.

They not only switched from a more varied set with more options to a power set with fewer options, they generally only called the more obvious option from the more limited set.

It seems at the very least "stubborn" to me.  The pity is that multiple receivers and backs were getting open for relatively low risk throws from that "Shotgun Bunch" set and the pats really hadn't stopped it much. 

I don't get the strategy of abandoning that in favor of running 27 up the middle on 8 or 9 first downs against a loaded box. 

Don't get me wrong. I like Marrone and I really like it when Hackett opens up the book a little bit. I just hope they analyze those 4 or 5 games and see that they could have kept their foot on the gas to a better outcome.

Foot on the gas sums up every loss. Where was London Doug vs New England?

---

I say we bitterly dwell on the past. That will make everything better.

Does this mean we should let go of the titan hate?

Blasphemy!  You go too far RJ!

---

Original Season Ticket Holder - Retired  1995 - 2020


At some point you just have to let go of what you thought should happen and live in what is happening.
 

Anybody catching the Post-Superbowl celebrations in Philly? I want that feeling.

---

Does this mean we should let go of the titan hate?

Blasphemy!  You go too far RJ!

Letting go of tack hate?!?

Isn't the mere suggestion grounds for some sort of board sanction?

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

Blasphemy!  You go too far RJ!

Letting go of tack hate?!?

Isn't the mere suggestion grounds for some sort of board sanction?

It's fine. Let him go along his own path of redemption. I have enough hate to make up for whatever he is giving up.

---

I'm trying to make myself more informed and less opinionated.

Stop saying whatever stupid thing you're talking about and pay attention to all the interesting things I have to say!

I haven't been able to watch the super bowl in serveal years,espaillsy with a team in it that i like. I mean like a team thats behind the jags as a favorite team. Last time i had that was when it was bucs vs raiders. Bucs are my number 2 team. then raiders. so I am really tired of not haveing a team in super bowl i like. getting really tired of nfl always haveing same team over,and over,and over,and over. thats why im doing Puppy Bowl !!!!!!!!!!! until i got a team in super i like again. oh wait it might of been green bay if they were after bus-oak one. Green bay is #4.

---

snowwolf titans owner in madden.

note titans owner means im undeafted againest them.