That was either a big play, or the game winning TD if our bum [BLEEP] OL could block for even a second. BTJ was WIDE open.

Have to consider the consequences of calling a long developing play backed up in your endzone.
The reward is great but the risk is too high for that moment.

On first down in your endzone, the play call should be some thing quick to make some room. Get 4-6 yards.
Then run that play on 2nd down. Get sacked at the goal line and you still have 3rd down.

I'm not as worried about the call as I am worried about 2 guys not being able to block 1 guy for even half a second.

---

Those four were in pure pass rush mode.  Not worrying about gaps. Not worried about containing.

Our Center and LG let one man get by between the two of them.

You seriously want to sit here and blame that on the DT "having his ears pinned back" or "pass rush mode?" 

Seriously?? 

C'mon...

I do blame it on that.  A DT who has a gap assignment will have more to look at and process than just "get the QB".  

Also, Stroud and Henderson would beat double teams multiple times a game.  It happens.

Sherff and Harrison also got manhandled on the play.  The only guy who remotely did his job was 74. 

I grant it was a great call for the score, the down, the distance, the QB, and the receivers, but it was a terrible call given how the o-line looked in pass blocking most of the game.  

Not only does the formation put more stress on the pass blocking, but the shallow pocket, back in the end zone, also puts more stress on the pass blocking.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Our Center and LG let one man get by between the two of them.

You seriously want to sit here and blame that on the DT "having his ears pinned back" or "pass rush mode?" 

Seriously?? 

C'mon...

I do blame it on that.  A DT who has a gap assignment will have more to look at and process than just "get the QB".  

Also, Stroud and Henderson would beat double teams multiple times a game.  It happens.

Sherff and Harrison also got manhandled on the play.  The only guy who remotely did his job was 74. 

I grant it was a great call for the score, the down, the distance, the QB, and the receivers, but it was a terrible call given how the o-line looked in pass blocking most of the game.  

Not only does the formation put more stress on the pass blocking, but the shallow pocket, back in the end zone, also puts more stress on the pass blocking.

We are in double trouble at 0-2


This offensive line needs to hit the weight room

---

Our Center and LG let one man get by between the two of them.

You seriously want to sit here and blame that on the DT "having his ears pinned back" or "pass rush mode?" 

Seriously?? 

C'mon...

I do blame it on that.  A DT who has a gap assignment will have more to look at and process than just "get the QB".  

Also, Stroud and Henderson would beat double teams multiple times a game.  It happens.

Sherff and Harrison also got manhandled on the play.  The only guy who remotely did his job was 74. 

I grant it was a great call for the score, the down, the distance, the QB, and the receivers, but it was a terrible call given how the o-line looked in pass blocking most of the game.  

Not only does the formation put more stress on the pass blocking, but the shallow pocket, back in the end zone, also puts more stress on the pass blocking.

So two guys got beat by one guy because the one guy was is "pass rush mode" 
Got it. 

That's [BLEEP] stupid, but OK. 

And then you want them to not call any plays that give them a chance of coming from behind with very limited time on the clock, because the OL looked bad. 

Great. They should have just conceded the game at halftime with that philosophy.

---

Yeah there is a little bit of truth to both arguments. It sucks to have a bad o-line though.

---

I do blame it on that.  A DT who has a gap assignment will have more to look at and process than just "get the QB".  

Also, Stroud and Henderson would beat double teams multiple times a game.  It happens.

Sherff and Harrison also got manhandled on the play.  The only guy who remotely did his job was 74. 

I grant it was a great call for the score, the down, the distance, the QB, and the receivers, but it was a terrible call given how the o-line looked in pass blocking most of the game.  

Not only does the formation put more stress on the pass blocking, but the shallow pocket, back in the end zone, also puts more stress on the pass blocking.

So two guys got beat by one guy because the one guy was is "pass rush mode" 
Got it. 

That's [BLEEP] stupid, but OK. 

And then you want them to not call any plays that give them a chance of coming from behind with very limited time on the clock, because the OL looked bad. 

Great. They should have just conceded the game at halftime with that philosophy.

Here we go again. How is it [BLEEP] stupid to suggest a better concept, formation or play call there that could have altered the outcome of that play?

If you can cry about the lack of execution from the players then the same can be said about the [BLEEP] play caller putting said [BLEEP] players in a highly unfavorable play call.

The only thing [BLEEP] stupid here is your dog [BLEEP] attitude and dog [BLEEP] take and defense of a bad call that had a very predictable outcome based on how the day had unfolded in pass protection prior to that play.

Lighten the [BLEEP] up. He has a valid point. If I am playing defense there and I can see the QB 5 yards deep in his own endzone in shotgun? And I have MYLES [BLEEP] GARRETT lined up next to me? My job and assignment just got a whole hell of a lot easier there.

Just like when that whole Darnold to Jefferson play was referenced in this thread to use as justification to call out execution. They weren't even the same formations, concepts nor situations.

It was in the 1st half, under center with a play action element baked into the play. What did that concept allow smart [BLEEP] that our situation and concept didn't?

The element of guess work. QB's back is turned briefly. RB could get it. He's selling it to him either way. None of that happens in shotgun. I can already see your stupid [BLEEP] hands in front of me so there is no element of surprise or ability to freeze anybody to make a play develop a .5 second or two longer.

Get off your [BLEEP] high horse. God forbid a mod take a [BLEEP] L around here.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

---

"What do I know of cultured ways, the gilt, the craft and the lie? I, who was born in a naked land and bred in the open sky. The subtle tongue, the sophist guile, they fail when the broadswords sing; Rush in and die, dogs - I was a man before I was a king."

So two guys got beat by one guy because the one guy was is "pass rush mode" 
Got it. 

That's [BLEEP] stupid, but OK. 

And then you want them to not call any plays that give them a chance of coming from behind with very limited time on the clock, because the OL looked bad. 

Great. They should have just conceded the game at halftime with that philosophy.

Here we go again. How is it [BLEEP] stupid to suggest a better concept, formation or play call there that could have altered the outcome of that play?

If you can cry about the lack of execution from the players then the same can be said about the [BLEEP] play caller putting said [BLEEP] players in a highly unfavorable play call.

The only thing [BLEEP] stupid here is your dog [BLEEP] attitude and dog [BLEEP] take and defense of a bad call that had a very predictable outcome based on how the day had unfolded in pass protection prior to that play.

Lighten the [BLEEP] up. He has a valid point. If I am playing defense there and I can see the QB 5 yards deep in his own endzone in shotgun? And I have MYLES [BLEEP] GARRETT lined up next to me? My job and assignment just got a whole hell of a lot easier there.

Just like when that whole Darnold to Jefferson play was referenced in this thread to use as justification to call out execution. They weren't even the same formations, concepts nor situations.

It was in the 1st half, under center with a play action element baked into the play. What did that concept allow smart [BLEEP] that our situation and concept didn't?

The element of guess work. QB's back is turned briefly. RB could get it. He's selling it to him either way. None of that happens in shotgun. I can already see your stupid [BLEEP] hands in front of me so there is no element of surprise or ability to freeze anybody to make a play develop a .5 second or two longer.

Get off your [BLEEP] high horse. God forbid a mod take a [BLEEP] L around here.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

Thanks for the backup champ

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

So two guys got beat by one guy because the one guy was is "pass rush mode" 
Got it. 

That's [BLEEP] stupid, but OK. 

And then you want them to not call any plays that give them a chance of coming from behind with very limited time on the clock, because the OL looked bad. 

Great. They should have just conceded the game at halftime with that philosophy.

Here we go again. How is it [BLEEP] stupid to suggest a better concept, formation or play call there that could have altered the outcome of that play?

If you can cry about the lack of execution from the players then the same can be said about the [BLEEP] play caller putting said [BLEEP] players in a highly unfavorable play call.

The only thing [BLEEP] stupid here is your dog [BLEEP] attitude and dog [BLEEP] take and defense of a bad call that had a very predictable outcome based on how the day had unfolded in pass protection prior to that play.

Lighten the [BLEEP] up. He has a valid point. If I am playing defense there and I can see the QB 5 yards deep in his own endzone in shotgun? And I have MYLES [BLEEP] GARRETT lined up next to me? My job and assignment just got a whole hell of a lot easier there.

Just like when that whole Darnold to Jefferson play was referenced in this thread to use as justification to call out execution. They weren't even the same formations, concepts nor situations.

It was in the 1st half, under center with a play action element baked into the play. What did that concept allow smart [BLEEP] that our situation and concept didn't?

The element of guess work. QB's back is turned briefly. RB could get it. He's selling it to him either way. None of that happens in shotgun. I can already see your stupid [BLEEP] hands in front of me so there is no element of surprise or ability to freeze anybody to make a play develop a .5 second or two longer.

Get off your [BLEEP] high horse. God forbid a mod take a [BLEEP] L around here.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

Wow, think this is a record for [BLEEP]'s.  Actually, the way we were run blocking it doesn't surprise me.  If it had hit he would have been a genius since it didn't it gave us something to talk about. I would maybe have added a short crosser. As it was despite the 2 point safety we still had a chance to win the game.  (best silver lining I could come up with guys/gals)

---

A new broom always sweeps clean.

So two guys got beat by one guy because the one guy was is "pass rush mode" 
Got it. 

That's [BLEEP] stupid, but OK. 

And then you want them to not call any plays that give them a chance of coming from behind with very limited time on the clock, because the OL looked bad. 

Great. They should have just conceded the game at halftime with that philosophy.

Here we go again. How is it [BLEEP] stupid to suggest a better concept, formation or play call there that could have altered the outcome of that play?

If you can cry about the lack of execution from the players then the same can be said about the [BLEEP] play caller putting said [BLEEP] players in a highly unfavorable play call.

The only thing [BLEEP] stupid here is your dog [BLEEP] attitude and dog [BLEEP] take and defense of a bad call that had a very predictable outcome based on how the day had unfolded in pass protection prior to that play.

Lighten the [BLEEP] up. He has a valid point. If I am playing defense there and I can see the QB 5 yards deep in his own endzone in shotgun? And I have MYLES [BLEEP] GARRETT lined up next to me? My job and assignment just got a whole hell of a lot easier there.

Just like when that whole Darnold to Jefferson play was referenced in this thread to use as justification to call out execution. They weren't even the same formations, concepts nor situations.

It was in the 1st half, under center with a play action element baked into the play. What did that concept allow smart [BLEEP] that our situation and concept didn't?

The element of guess work. QB's back is turned briefly. RB could get it. He's selling it to him either way. None of that happens in shotgun. I can already see your stupid [BLEEP] hands in front of me so there is no element of surprise or ability to freeze anybody to make a play develop a .5 second or two longer.

Get off your [BLEEP] high horse. God forbid a mod take a [BLEEP] L around here.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

It was a good call. Damn near worked to perfection. 

If the LG/C could combine to block one guy it's either a TD or a first down in FG range. 
They bungled that blocking assignment - so here we are raging about it. 

I don't mind aggressive play-calling. I hope to see more of it. 

Crazy how much whining there was here last year with fans BEGGING for more downfield passing, play action, less dink and dunk etc. 

Now it's the devil because we had the audacity to try it backed up to our end zone. 

It was an unconventional call but I like it. You don't. Great.

---

Pederson saw the same thing I did:

https://twitter.com/JustonLewis_/status/...3859366082

(of course - half of our fanbase wants him fired, so, that doesn't do anything to support my opinion about the play call, LOL)

---

Pederson saw the same thing I did:

https://twitter.com/JustonLewis_/status/...3859366082

(of course - half of our fanbase wants him fired, so, that doesn't do anything to support my opinion about the play call, LOL)

Too bad Scherff didn't.

---

Here we go again. How is it [BLEEP] stupid to suggest a better concept, formation or play call there that could have altered the outcome of that play?

If you can cry about the lack of execution from the players then the same can be said about the [BLEEP] play caller putting said [BLEEP] players in a highly unfavorable play call.

The only thing [BLEEP] stupid here is your dog [BLEEP] attitude and dog [BLEEP] take and defense of a bad call that had a very predictable outcome based on how the day had unfolded in pass protection prior to that play.

Lighten the [BLEEP] up. He has a valid point. If I am playing defense there and I can see the QB 5 yards deep in his own endzone in shotgun? And I have MYLES [BLEEP] GARRETT lined up next to me? My job and assignment just got a whole hell of a lot easier there.

Just like when that whole Darnold to Jefferson play was referenced in this thread to use as justification to call out execution. They weren't even the same formations, concepts nor situations.

It was in the 1st half, under center with a play action element baked into the play. What did that concept allow smart [BLEEP] that our situation and concept didn't?

The element of guess work. QB's back is turned briefly. RB could get it. He's selling it to him either way. None of that happens in shotgun. I can already see your stupid [BLEEP] hands in front of me so there is no element of surprise or ability to freeze anybody to make a play develop a .5 second or two longer.

Get off your [BLEEP] high horse. God forbid a mod take a [BLEEP] L around here.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

Wow, think this is a record for [BLEEP]'s.  Actually, the way we were run blocking it doesn't surprise me.  If it had hit he would have been a genius since it didn't it gave us something to talk about. I would maybe have added a short crosser. As it was despite the 2 point safety we still had a chance to win the game.  (best silver lining I could come up with guys/gals)

I am tired of the holier than thou mentality from both camps on here. It's old and stale. Both arguments can be made, however, on that play? Leading up to that exact moment? We simply didn't do enough from top, down.

The call, like you said, could have had better elements to it. The execution could have been better. But, again, surely, if us armchair GM's and armchair HC's can see that our pass protection had been dog [BLEEP] 3x prior to that drive?

Surely, the actual HC and his staff and GM from his pressbox can see it. So, why tempt fate there that early? Knowing you got an All Pro DE, a quality defensive coordinator there in Jim Schwartz and a line that has more shakiness to it than Shakira's hips?

I try to be fair. I do. But. You have to look at each situation, look at how the game unfolded, look at how the protection did or didn't hold up. You have to know your personnel. You have to know when and where to take those risks.

That wasn't the time. And if the execution could have been better in that circumstance? So could have been the play call.

No creativity there. No element of surprise. No element of play action. No attempt to run Lawrence away from that pocket. Just an amateur hour call that you would expect to see from maybe the 50 yard line at best after you chained a few plays together and greased the gears a little bit.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

---

Pederson saw the same thing I did:

https://twitter.com/JustonLewis_/status/...3859366082

(of course - half of our fanbase wants him fired, so, that doesn't do anything to support my opinion about the play call, LOL)

Breaking news! Offensive guru likes his calls and puts the blame on everybody else but his play design and concept.

Shocking.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

---

"What do I know of cultured ways, the gilt, the craft and the lie? I, who was born in a naked land and bred in the open sky. The subtle tongue, the sophist guile, they fail when the broadswords sing; Rush in and die, dogs - I was a man before I was a king."

Pederson saw the same thing I did:

https://twitter.com/JustonLewis_/status/...3859366082

(of course - half of our fanbase wants him fired, so, that doesn't do anything to support my opinion about the play call, LOL)

Too bad Scherff didn't.

Twas Ezra Cleveland on this one methinks, but yes, it's too bad. 
Scherff may have let his guy through too actually! 

It also looked like Ezra and Morse totally didn't understand their assignment there either as their technique immediately after the snap seemed counter productive to the play design. I think they were not on the same page with the plays that was called.

---

Pederson saw the same thing I did:

https://twitter.com/JustonLewis_/status/...3859366082

(of course - half of our fanbase wants him fired, so, that doesn't do anything to support my opinion about the play call, LOL)

I don't. I like Doug. I would rather see Baalke, Rauscher and Taylor canned in that order first before Pederson.

What I don't like is the inconsistencies and streakiness. Forget that call in particular.

Where was the 4th down Doug at on Sunday? At home? Did he leave that part of himself down in Miami to gamble elsewhere?

Nobody is bringing that up on here. Do you know how aggravated I was to see Stefanski go 3/3 for 4th down? On our [BLEEP] turf? And he didn't even try to steal one of those back from him. Not even once.

When Johnson [BLEEP] Kirk over from that TD call? Why did he settle for the FG there? That felt like the time to actually push your chips into the center of the table and gamble there.

That's what I don't like about him. Now, I know. Our win streak is coming. He's been good for it for the last two years in a row. But, he barely got in during 2022 and he barely missed out in 2023.

It's his gambling and jekyll and hyde aggressiveness that drives the wheel here. This chaos engine. It's a love/hate thing with this guy.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

---

"What do I know of cultured ways, the gilt, the craft and the lie? I, who was born in a naked land and bred in the open sky. The subtle tongue, the sophist guile, they fail when the broadswords sing; Rush in and die, dogs - I was a man before I was a king."

Too bad Scherff didn't.

Twas Ezra Cleveland on this one methinks, but yes, it's too bad. 
Scherff may have let his guy through too actually! 

It also looked like Ezra and Morse totally didn't understand their assignment there either as their technique immediately after the snap seemed counter productive to the play design. I think they were not on the same page with the plays that was called.

Yea it was Ezra, from my memory it appeared he was expecting help inside and did not get it so your same page theory sounds about right.  Sad thing is that was the only time that game. I looked at PFF and it appears they credited Morse with that sack.

---

A new broom always sweeps clean.

Pederson saw the same thing I did:

https://twitter.com/JustonLewis_/status/...3859366082

(of course - half of our fanbase wants him fired, so, that doesn't do anything to support my opinion about the play call, LOL)

I don't. I like Doug. I would rather see Baalke, Rauscher and Taylor canned in that order first before Pederson.

What I don't like is the inconsistencies and streakiness. Forget that call in particular.

Where was the 4th down Doug at on Sunday? At home? Did he leave that part of himself down in Miami to gamble elsewhere?

Nobody is bringing that up on here. Do you know how aggravated I was to see Stefanski go 3/3 for 4th down? On our [BLEEP] turf? And he didn't even try to steal one of those back from him. Not even once.

When Johnson [BLEEP] Kirk over from that TD call? Why did he settle for the FG there? That felt like the time to actually push your chips into the center of the table and gamble there.

That's what I don't like about him. Now, I know. Our win streak is coming. He's been good for it for the last two years in a row. But, he barely got in during 2022 and he barely missed out in 2023.

It's his gambling and jekyll and hyde aggressiveness that drives the wheel here. This chaos engine. It's a love/hate thing with this guy.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

It's true he is oddly inconsistent with the aggressive approach. 

Doesn't seem to come when we expect it sometimes.

---

Here we go again. How is it [BLEEP] stupid to suggest a better concept, formation or play call there that could have altered the outcome of that play?

If you can cry about the lack of execution from the players then the same can be said about the [BLEEP] play caller putting said [BLEEP] players in a highly unfavorable play call.

The only thing [BLEEP] stupid here is your dog [BLEEP] attitude and dog [BLEEP] take and defense of a bad call that had a very predictable outcome based on how the day had unfolded in pass protection prior to that play.

Lighten the [BLEEP] up. He has a valid point. If I am playing defense there and I can see the QB 5 yards deep in his own endzone in shotgun? And I have MYLES [BLEEP] GARRETT lined up next to me? My job and assignment just got a whole hell of a lot easier there.

Just like when that whole Darnold to Jefferson play was referenced in this thread to use as justification to call out execution. They weren't even the same formations, concepts nor situations.

It was in the 1st half, under center with a play action element baked into the play. What did that concept allow smart [BLEEP] that our situation and concept didn't?

The element of guess work. QB's back is turned briefly. RB could get it. He's selling it to him either way. None of that happens in shotgun. I can already see your stupid [BLEEP] hands in front of me so there is no element of surprise or ability to freeze anybody to make a play develop a .5 second or two longer.

Get off your [BLEEP] high horse. God forbid a mod take a [BLEEP] L around here.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

It was a good call. Damn near worked to perfection. 

If the LG/C could combine to block one guy it's either a TD or a first down in FG range. 
They bungled that blocking assignment - so here we are raging about it. 

I don't mind aggressive play-calling. I hope to see more of it. 

Crazy how much whining there was here last year with fans BEGGING for more downfield passing, play action, less dink and dunk etc. 

Now it's the devil because we had the audacity to try it backed up to our end zone. 

It was an unconventional call but I like it. You don't. Great.

But the NFL is all about situational calls, plays, recognition, and execution. That was one of Bill Bellicheck's mantras along with do your job. Putting all the player through every situation mentally so they were prepared to face them in game. 

If anything that is what this team has repeatedly failed at over the past 2 seasons, from multiple different players, coaches, and FO staff. And the play call at that moment seems reflective of that disconnect. You can definitely be aggressive, but some of us feel that was the situationally a wrong moment for to go balls to the wall.

On top of that, they were aggressive on that play but the play designs/scheme didn't have enough fudge factor to work unless every does their jobs perfectly there. The other team gets paid too, so cannot just expect all the things to fall in your favor. You cannot just say block Miles Garret when he is on the short list for best player in the NFL. You have to expect for "when Garret gets pressure how can the blocking be set up so we still have time for the play to work"? So to run that play but have no chip help on Garrett when you know T-Law needs time and won't have space, or not design it so the pocket moves a bit to buy some time makes it feel even more frustrating. Or recognize that at the 2 yard line, you cannot block him or others well enough to have that time because of the limited pocket space.

---

It was a good call. Damn near worked to perfection. 

If the LG/C could combine to block one guy it's either a TD or a first down in FG range. 
They bungled that blocking assignment - so here we are raging about it. 

I don't mind aggressive play-calling. I hope to see more of it. 

Crazy how much whining there was here last year with fans BEGGING for more downfield passing, play action, less dink and dunk etc. 

Now it's the devil because we had the audacity to try it backed up to our end zone. 

It was an unconventional call but I like it. You don't. Great.

But the NFL is all about situational calls, plays, recognition, and execution. That was one of Bill Bellicheck's mantras along with do your job. Putting all the player through every situation mentally so they were prepared to face them in game. 

If anything that is what this team has repeatedly failed at over the past 2 seasons, from multiple different players, coaches, and FO staff. And the play call at that moment seems reflective of that disconnect. You can definitely be aggressive, but some of us feel that was the situationally a wrong moment for to go balls to the wall.

On top of that, they were aggressive on that play but the play designs/scheme didn't have enough fudge factor to work unless every does their jobs perfectly there. The other team gets paid too, so cannot just expect all the things to fall in your favor. You cannot just say block Miles Garret when he is on the short list for best player in the NFL. You have to expect for "when Garret gets pressure how can the blocking be set up so we still have time for the play to work"? So to run that play but have no chip help on Garrett when you know T-Law needs time and won't have space, or not design it so the pocket moves a bit to buy some time makes it feel even more frustrating. Or recognize that at the 2 yard line, you cannot block him or others well enough to have that time because of the limited pocket space.

Again, the failure was at C/G failing to keep a single DT from collapsing the pocket collectively. Blocking Garrett a bit better would have been nice, but he was pushed wide enough if TL had a pocket to step into. 

I fail to see how they (C/G) were put in a bad situation there. Should have been a cakewalk if they understood their role.

Yes, they could have done something more conventional (that Clevland had been defending well all day) and hope to take a shot later, but I just don't mind pulling the trigger when they did.

Saying the NFL is all about situational calls is also a gross overstatement and a concept that is in flux as offenses evolve.

---

Playcalling isnt going to fix any of this; only a sled, the realization of loss of income and vomiting. Lots of vomiting. [BLEEP] nerds.

---

It was glorious listening to Mike DiRocco talk on the radio tonight about the Jags woes and this play in particular. To sum, he said that this play was a beautiful call and a heartbeat from a Tuddie but one guy screwed it up,, and that "Not to defend Press Taylor, but no play call is going to make a difference when the line is that bad." It's nice to see he reads my posts on here and helps so many folks gain a better understanding of NFL football by sharing my thoughts on his platform.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato