No reports of anything, but given they were not officially let go and Khan's MO, it feels odd. Especially since the defense was worse the offense; Khan even said it in the presser.

So if a new HC wanted to keep Nielsen, Khan would be okay with that decision given he himself said he wants "unpredictability" and not the last defense in the league.

Why not just fire them right now instead creating another mess for a new HC to have to deal with.

I don't see anything out of the ordinary with letting your next coach decide if he wants to retain anyone from the prior staff that is still under contract.

I always thought that was standard protocol in most situations. 

It doesn't imply some belief in Nielsen that no announcement has been made about him or his position coaches.

I get that new HC's often do have the option to come and decide who from prior staffs are kept/fired. 

However, if in the press conference where you announce you are firing the HC, the main reasons are 
- because your defense became the worse after the coordinator change and is now last in the league 
- you believe both your offense and defense are too predictable, and you want people to come in to be more unpredictable.

Then why on earth give the new HC the options to keep the coordinators in charge of those situations. 

Is there any situation where a new incoming HC would be able to convince Khan that that "Nielsen was set up to fail by the roster construction, and the offense's inability to stay on the field. He is actually a good DC and he will be totally different this year with a less predictable scheme"? 

If Khan had fired Pederson for clock management issues, the team quitting on him, or way too many penalties. If Khan had said, "we failed way too much on 3rd down and the red zone and we couldn't score in first halves," as reasons we needed to make a change. Then keeping quiet on Nielsen makes sense.

Listing the above as key reasons to turn the page, and then keeping quiet on the 2nd in charge of those reasons is a waste of everyone's time. Including an incoming HC that shouldn't have more put on their plate.

---

I don't see anything out of the ordinary with letting your next coach decide if he wants to retain anyone from the prior staff that is still under contract.

I always thought that was standard protocol in most situations. 

It doesn't imply some belief in Nielsen that no announcement has been made about him or his position coaches.

I get that new HC's often do have the option to come and decide who from prior staffs are kept/fired. 

However, if in the press conference where you announce you are firing the HC, the main reasons are 
- because your defense became the worse after the coordinator change and is now last in the league 
- you believe both your offense and defense are too predictable, and you want people to come in to be more unpredictable.

Then why on earth give the new HC the options to keep the coordinators in charge of those situations. 

Is there any situation where a new incoming HC would be able to convince Khan that that "Nielsen was set up to fail by the roster construction, and the offense's inability to stay on the field. He is actually a good DC and he will be totally different this year with a less predictable scheme"? 

If Khan had fired Pederson for clock management issues, the team quitting on him, or way too many penalties. If Khan had said, "we failed way too much on 3rd down and the red zone and we couldn't score in first halves," as reasons we needed to make a change. Then keeping quiet on Nielsen makes sense.

Listing the above as key reasons to turn the page, and then keeping quiet on the 2nd in charge of those reasons is a waste of everyone's time. Including an incoming HC that shouldn't have more put on their plate.

Nah - it's not that dramatic. 

If the next HC sells Khan/Baalke on keeping the CB coach and making another of Nielsen's guy's the assistant DL coach - that's your reason for not summarily firing everyone in the bldg until the appropriate time. 

I think Nielsen is gonna be an assistant somewhere not within the confines of Duval county, but I also understand why they don't have to make some show out of firing the guy before it's time to do so.

---

I don't see anything out of the ordinary with letting your next coach decide if he wants to retain anyone from the prior staff that is still under contract.

I always thought that was standard protocol in most situations. 

It doesn't imply some belief in Nielsen that no announcement has been made about him or his position coaches.

I get that new HC's often do have the option to come and decide who from prior staffs are kept/fired. 

However, if in the press conference where you announce you are firing the HC, the main reasons are 
- because your defense became the worse after the coordinator change and is now last in the league 
- you believe both your offense and defense are too predictable, and you want people to come in to be more unpredictable.

Then why on earth give the new HC the options to keep the coordinators in charge of those situations. 

Is there any situation where a new incoming HC would be able to convince Khan that that "Nielsen was set up to fail by the roster construction, and the offense's inability to stay on the field. He is actually a good DC and he will be totally different this year with a less predictable scheme"? 

If Khan had fired Pederson for clock management issues, the team quitting on him, or way too many penalties. If Khan had said, "we failed way too much on 3rd down and the red zone and we couldn't score in first halves," as reasons we needed to make a change. Then keeping quiet on Nielsen makes sense.

Listing the above as key reasons to turn the page, and then keeping quiet on the 2nd in charge of those reasons is a waste of everyone's time. Including an incoming HC that shouldn't have more put on their plate.

Exactly.

The fact that some inept owner and his lackeys think that we should keep Neilsen is hilarious.  Can you imagine if the next HC looked at Neilsen and thought he'd be worth keeping?  LOL  That would be a disaster.

Naw, whoever is hired will bring in their own staff.  And thank goodness for that!

Players are important.  But Coaching has been proven to be the thing that this franchise will focus on.  And rightfully so.

---

I don't see anything out of the ordinary with letting your next coach decide if he wants to retain anyone from the prior staff that is still under contract.

I always thought that was standard protocol in most situations. 

It doesn't imply some belief in Nielsen that no announcement has been made about him or his position coaches.

I get that new HC's often do have the option to come and decide who from prior staffs are kept/fired. 

However, if in the press conference where you announce you are firing the HC, the main reasons are 
- because your defense became the worse after the coordinator change and is now last in the league 
- you believe both your offense and defense are too predictable, and you want people to come in to be more unpredictable.

Then why on earth give the new HC the options to keep the coordinators in charge of those situations. 

Is there any situation where a new incoming HC would be able to convince Khan that that "Nielsen was set up to fail by the roster construction, and the offense's inability to stay on the field. He is actually a good DC and he will be totally different this year with a less predictable scheme"? 

If Khan had fired Pederson for clock management issues, the team quitting on him, or way too many penalties. If Khan had said, "we failed way too much on 3rd down and the red zone and we couldn't score in first halves," as reasons we needed to make a change. Then keeping quiet on Nielsen makes sense.

Listing the above as key reasons to turn the page, and then keeping quiet on the 2nd in charge of those reasons is a waste of everyone's time. Including an incoming HC that shouldn't have more put on their plate.

I think all of that hashes out in an entrance interview with the new HC whenever they are hired. You sit down with the DC, talk about what worked, what didn't, why for both, and what they envision for the future. If you are on board with the plan and see this as a guy you can work with, yay us we keep the guy around on the existing deal. If not, they bid them adieu and either bring in their dude or start interviewing candidates to bring in (if they aren't planning to call the D themselves).

There's no gain in firing him today, other than catharsis. Teams can ask us to interview him while he's under contract, but to my knowledge there have been no requests thusfar.

---

I get that new HC's often do have the option to come and decide who from prior staffs are kept/fired. 

However, if in the press conference where you announce you are firing the HC, the main reasons are 
- because your defense became the worse after the coordinator change and is now last in the league 
- you believe both your offense and defense are too predictable, and you want people to come in to be more unpredictable.

Then why on earth give the new HC the options to keep the coordinators in charge of those situations. 

Is there any situation where a new incoming HC would be able to convince Khan that that "Nielsen was set up to fail by the roster construction, and the offense's inability to stay on the field. He is actually a good DC and he will be totally different this year with a less predictable scheme"? 

If Khan had fired Pederson for clock management issues, the team quitting on him, or way too many penalties. If Khan had said, "we failed way too much on 3rd down and the red zone and we couldn't score in first halves," as reasons we needed to make a change. Then keeping quiet on Nielsen makes sense.

Listing the above as key reasons to turn the page, and then keeping quiet on the 2nd in charge of those reasons is a waste of everyone's time. Including an incoming HC that shouldn't have more put on their plate.

Exactly.

The fact that some inept owner and his lackeys think that we should keep Neilsen is hilarious.  Can you imagine if the next HC looked at Neilsen and thought he'd be worth keeping?  LOL  That would be a disaster.

Naw, whoever is hired will bring in their own staff.  And thank goodness for that!

Players are important.  But Coaching has been proven to be the thing scapegoat that this hideous GM will focus on to save his sorry [BLEEP].  And rightfully so #becausejaguars, some folks eat it up.

FTFY.

---

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

I get that new HC's often do have the option to come and decide who from prior staffs are kept/fired. 

However, if in the press conference where you announce you are firing the HC, the main reasons are 
- because your defense became the worse after the coordinator change and is now last in the league 
- you believe both your offense and defense are too predictable, and you want people to come in to be more unpredictable.

Then why on earth give the new HC the options to keep the coordinators in charge of those situations. 

Is there any situation where a new incoming HC would be able to convince Khan that that "Nielsen was set up to fail by the roster construction, and the offense's inability to stay on the field. He is actually a good DC and he will be totally different this year with a less predictable scheme"? 

If Khan had fired Pederson for clock management issues, the team quitting on him, or way too many penalties. If Khan had said, "we failed way too much on 3rd down and the red zone and we couldn't score in first halves," as reasons we needed to make a change. Then keeping quiet on Nielsen makes sense.

Listing the above as key reasons to turn the page, and then keeping quiet on the 2nd in charge of those reasons is a waste of everyone's time. Including an incoming HC that shouldn't have more put on their plate.

I think all of that hashes out in an entrance interview with the new HC whenever they are hired. You sit down with the DC, talk about what worked, what didn't, why for both, and what they envision for the future. If you are on board with the plan and see this as a guy you can work with, yay us we keep the guy around on the existing deal. If not, they bid them adieu and either bring in their dude or start interviewing candidates to bring in (if they aren't planning to call the D themselves).

There's no gain in firing him today, other than catharsis. Teams can ask us to interview him while he's under contract, but to my knowledge there have been no requests thusfar.

Okay in theory that makes sense. 

But for the Jags specific situation. We are talking about a DC who had little DC experience before '24. A team that had one of the worst defenses in the league. There are some advanced metrics that have them as the worst by at least 2 standard deviations. A DC who took more than half a season to stop running the same system that is his MO, but who was still predictable in blitzing even when he was forced out of man coverage.

You think a incoming HC is going to spend their capital on convincing the fanbase, the media, and the owner to keep that guy as one of their first acts on the job?

Unless you are thinking well, they can keep Nielsen but demote him to DLine coach?

---

I think all of that hashes out in an entrance interview with the new HC whenever they are hired. You sit down with the DC, talk about what worked, what didn't, why for both, and what they envision for the future. If you are on board with the plan and see this as a guy you can work with, yay us we keep the guy around on the existing deal. If not, they bid them adieu and either bring in their dude or start interviewing candidates to bring in (if they aren't planning to call the D themselves).

There's no gain in firing him today, other than catharsis. Teams can ask us to interview him while he's under contract, but to my knowledge there have been no requests thusfar.

Okay in theory that makes sense. 

But for the Jags specific situation. We are talking about a DC who had little DC experience before '24. A team that had one of the worst defenses in the league. There are some advanced metrics that have them as the worst by at least 2 standard deviations. A DC who took more than half a season to stop running the same system that is his MO, but who was still predictable in blitzing even when he was forced out of man coverage.

You think a incoming HC is going to spend their capital on convincing the fanbase, the media, and the owner to keep that guy as one of their first acts on the job?

Unless you are thinking well, they can keep Nielsen but demote him to DLine coach?

I'll go back to my post. If Nielsen can say convincingly what went wrong, and why, and how he plans to fix it and everyone in the room is on board with his proposal, I have seen much stranger things happen than he remain under contract.

I give it a 91% chance that he's out of work within 24 hours of our HC hire, though. Until that happens, though, again, nothing to be lost or gained by keeping him around.

---

Gene Frenette: Jacksonville Jaguars missed the mark when they hired D-coordinator Ryan Nielsen

…A lot of people, myself included, felt bringing in Nielsen might be the best acquisition of the Jaguars’ last offseason. What fool’s gold that turned out to be.

Not only were the Jaguars dead last in passing yards allowed and 31st in total defense, but multiple NFL sources tell me there was a disconnect between Nielsen and his players almost from the start.

When they questioned his schemes or strategy, I’m told Nielsen’s arrogant demeanor turned the players off even more and made for a tense atmosphere within the unit…

---

I hope 2025 is a whole new regime, but Nielsen is fool's gold.

Not the real deal as advertised.

He kept taking Travon Walker off the field today and he refuses to put his best front four together for 60-70% of the snaps like most DCs tend to do.

I'm over it with this defense. Obviously we need another corner and another safety no matter what the scheme, but he should be getting more out of these players.

Gene Frenette: Jacksonville Jaguars missed the mark when they hired D-coordinator Ryan Nielsen

…A lot of people, myself included, felt bringing in Nielsen might be the best acquisition of the Jaguars’ last offseason. What fool’s gold that turned out to be.

Not only were the Jaguars dead last in passing yards allowed and 31st in total defense, but multiple NFL sources tell me there was a disconnect between Nielsen and his players almost from the start.

When they questioned his schemes or strategy, I’m told Nielsen’s arrogant demeanor turned the players off even more and made for a tense atmosphere within the unit…

I beat Gene to that punch line by 10 weeks, LOL.

---