Because their offense is garbage. They are a one dimensional Del Rio like team. They can run the ball and play defense. 

 

sounds like Harbaugh's team

---

 Please elaborate. How does Bradley equate to Mularkey in any way, aside from both being the Jaguars' head coach for one ear to this point and failing to develop Gabbert into anything remotely resembling a competent QB?

 

For that matter, name a coach that carried an elite level QB to greatness instead of the other way around.

 

Belicheck and Brady have dominated together for over a decade, but Belicheck's Cleveland tenure was considerably less successful.

 

Cowher won a title with Roethlisberger and coached two Steelers teams to Super Bowls, winning one, but then so did Tomlin.  Roethlisberger is a common QB to both.

 

Mike Shanahan won two Super Bowls with Denver as John Elway as his QB, but has not only not won anything since Elway retired after the 1998 season, he's been fired twice.

 

Bill Parcells arguably never had any elite QBs when he won the Super Bowl with the Giants in 1986 (Phil Simms) and in 1990 (Simms/Hostetler).

 

Gibbs never had elite QBs to elevate either with the Skins.

 

Landry won his Super Bowls with a Hall of Fame QB in Staubach, and did not win it all with a less than HOF passer in Craig Morton.

 

Noll won all 4 of his Super Bowls with Bradshaw-a Hall of Famer, and Walsh won all three of his with Montana.  Who elevated who?

 

He equates to Mularkey in that their performances were intellectually identical. The texans tanking the season doesn't make Bradley more successful than Mularkey. In fact Bradley fared even worse. At least Mularkey had competitive games against decent teams. The Jaguars were out of every game against opponents with winning records by halftime this year.

 

As for coaches that carry QBs, Cowher is a good example. He won consistently with no one decent under center before Big Ben came along.

 

The Harbaughs are the same. Jim made Alex Smith look like a good QB and Alex Smith was the equivalent of Gabbert before Harbaugh came along. John Harbaugh just won a Superbowl with Flacco who is not an elite QB.

---

As I recall, and I am honestly hot attempting hyperbole or exaggeration here, you once said Bradley had the potential to be a "superstar" coach-most notably when the Eagles were considering him.  If I am distorting your views beyond recognition, please correct me.

 

Carroll is the one remaining constant because Bradley became our coach.

 

Had Bradley not taken the Jaguars job and not gotten any other job, he'd still likely be the defensive coordinator there. 

 

Tell me, what are his positive attributes you mentioned above?  What caused you to advocate for him?  What makes him better than some other coaching candidates/coaches?

 

I'm probably the one that used hyperbole if I used those terms describing Bradley. 

 

Bradley's positive attributes are how he seems to handle people, and he tries to create a positive environment. I advocated him, probably out of desperation since we at that point were not getting any of my top 5 candidates, as it appeared Kelly was going back to college, Reid was hired by KC, the other Kelly and O Brien were staying in college, and McCoy was hired by SD. I had read good things about Bradley from prior DC Monte Kiffin, and I think I went a little overboard on the praise, and drank the Kool aid too quickly based off of Kiffin's praise for Bradley. I wanted us to at least get someone half decent, and time was running out - so I probably jumped too quickly on the Bradley bandwagon initially. It would have been better for me to pause and temper that a bit and come back to reality that after all was said & done - this was choice #6. 

 

Bradley's weaknesses are/ were lack of head coach experience, which probably led to his weak Coordinator hires. Also not sure if Bradley is a good enough x's and o's coach compared to his qualities as a motivator/ people guy. I also wonder how quickly Bradleys rah rah style will get old, should they hit a wall on their perceived progress in year 2 and beyond. Since I don't see Bradley as a great x's and o's guy, to fall back on, the bottom could fall out quickly. 

---

 I also wonder how quickly Bradleys rah rah style will get old, should they hit a wall on their perceived progress in year 2 and beyond.

if it didn't happen at 0-8, when will it ever happen?

---

if it didn't happen at 0-8, when will it ever happen?

 

It was year 1. Everything was still fresh and new, so even at 0-8 what I am talking about wouldn't have happened yet. As years go by thats when a coach's message starts to get stale....and when winning is not happening at that point, the bottom can fall out quickly. If Bradley was a more dynamic coach and a X's & o's master like Belichick, he'd have that to fall back on, but it doesn't appear like Bradley is anything beyond a good people person. Combine this with the fact that Bradley's assistant staff - particularly the Coordinators, are weak hires, and this could get ugly in years 2 or 3. 

---

if it didn't happen at 0-8, when will it ever happen?

 

Guys in year one of a rebuild know they're playing for their future jobs.

 

When it becomes clear the house will soon be cleared suddenly everyone will stop drinking the coolaid.

 

Happened last year with Gene Smith and Mularkey. Everything was great until the end of the season when it was apparent the place was about to get flushed.

---

It was year 1. Everything was still fresh and new, so even at 0-8 what I am talking about wouldn't have happened yet.

being talked about maybe the worst teams of all times, but still kept a positive vibe on the team and played much better out of the bye, but lets not give any credit to him

---

He equates to Mularkey in that their performances were intellectually identical. The texans tanking the season doesn't make Bradley more successful than Mularkey. In fact Bradley fared even worse. At least Mularkey had competitive games against decent teams. The Jaguars were out of every game against opponents with winning records by halftime this year.

 

As for coaches that carry QBs, Cowher is a good example. He won consistently with no one decent under center before Big Ben came along.

 

The Harbaughs are the same. Jim made Alex Smith look like a good QB and Alex Smith was the equivalent of Gabbert before Harbaugh came along. John Harbaugh just won a Superbowl with Flacco who is not an elite QB.

 

 

"Intellectually identical?!?"  What, do they have the same SAT scores?

 

I don't understand your rationale here.

 

In the same breath you dismiss two of the Jaguars wins for being against a Texans team that tanked, you argue that Mularkey was at least competitive against decent teams, including the same Texans team with virtually identical personnel and scheme.  Also if you can definitively argue the Texans tanked and therefore Bradley's wins against them should be dismissed, then you can certainly argue that while not tanking, the Packers certainly didn't play their best football against us, either.  There is no way anyone can argue that the Jaguars under mularkey, from a talent and coaching perspective, belonged anywhere near on the same field as the Packers.  Competitive and losing is still losing, and at the end of the day, playing against a team not playing up to its capabilities still counts either as a win or loss.

 

As to the coaches, winning with a less than elite QB is a vastly different proposition than a coach "carrying" an elite QB to win a Super Bowl.

 

You argued Bradley and Mularkey need elite QBs to win instead of them being able to carry elite QBs to win.

 

I don't think anyone has proven any coach has "carried" an elite QB to win.

 

Now if you amend your statement to being a coach that can win without an elite QB is preferable to a coach not winning without an elite QB, then I would still question your paradigm.

 

Am I to believe Shula, Landry, Noll, and Walsh are not elite coaches while Brian Billick and Mike Ditka were elite coaches?

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

Happened last year with Gene Smith and Mularkey. Everything was great until the end of the season when it was apparent the place was about to get flushed.

everything was great?

---

being talked about maybe the worst teams of all times, but still kept a positive vibe on the team and played much better out of the bye, but lets not give any credit to him

 

Stop this garbage.

 

The team did not play better out of the bye, they played a string of chumps.

 

When they came up against another good team at the end of the season (the colts) it looked like one of the games from the first eight. The Jaguars got their butts kicked.

 

Any improvement you think you saw was illusion.

---

I think Bradley is the right man at HC. I could be wrong, it woupdn't be the first time.


What I'm not confident about are his coordinators/assistants. I think better ones are needed for this team to really take the next step in success. I'm not sold on Fisch and not at all sold in Babich. Time will tell but I truly think those hires may be Bradley's downfall.


I hope not because I really like Gus and the vision he appears to have. He has the leader of men quality a lot of non-successful coaches lack.

---

Stop this garbage.

 

The team did not play better out of the bye, they played a string of chumps.

 

When they came up against another good team at the end of the season (the colts) it looked like one of the games from the first eight. The Jaguars got their butts kicked.

 

Any improvement you think you saw was illusion.

even the Raiders and Rams smoked us in the first half of the season, there was much improvement especially on defense after the bye regardless of the opponent

---

Stop this garbage.

 

The team did not play better out of the bye, they played a string of chumps.

 

When they came up against another good team at the end of the season (the colts) it looked like one of the games from the first eight. The Jaguars got their butts kicked.

 

Any improvement you think you saw was illusion.

 

Not only that but the "worst roster of all time" thing was overblown too. It was a bottom 5 NFL roster this season, no doubt. But it was never "all time" bad. Thats just something latched on quickly by people around here to make the current coaching not seem like it was doing a bad job. This offense had decent players. And the defense not only had some decent talent like Poz, and Babin....but if the rookies chosen by Caldwell actually were bonafide "hits" rather than "maybes" then the defensive roster would have been better. Theres no "pass" here. 

---

I think Bradley is the right man at HC. I could be wrong, it woupdn't be the first time.


What I'm not confident about are his coordinators/assistants. I think better ones are needed for this team to really take the next step in success. I'm not sold on Fisch and not at all sold in Babich. Time will tell but I truly think those hires may be Bradley's downfall.


I hope not because I really like Gus and the vision he appears to have. He has the leader of men quality a lot of non-successful coaches lack.

 

If Bradley would have hired a great assistant coaching staff, he'd have a much better chance to succeed. He is a likeable guy but you can't win in this league on that alone. I wish he'd succeed too, but keeping both eyes open. 

---

even the Raiders and Rams smoked us in the first half of the season, there was much improvement especially on defense after the bye regardless of the opponent

 

The Raiders and Rams were the only teams that the Jaguars played in the first half of the season that they were competitive with going into halftime.

 

Also the Rams weren't great, but 7-9 in the toughest division in the NFL isn't as bad as you seem to think.

---

It was year 1. Everything was still fresh and new, so even at 0-8 what I am talking about wouldn't have happened yet. As years go by thats when a coach's message starts to get stale....and when winning is not happening at that point, the bottom can fall out quickly. If Bradley was a more dynamic coach and a X's & o's master like Belichick, he'd have that to fall back on, but it doesn't appear like Bradley is anything beyond a good people person. Combine this with the fact that Bradley's assistant staff - particularly the Coordinators, are weak hires, and this could get ugly in years 2 or 3. 

 

Would you say the bottom fell out quicker under Mularkey than it did with Bradley?

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

Not only that but the "worst roster of all time" thing was overblown too.

wasn't the point spread for the Broncos game largest ever?

---

He equates to Mularkey in that their performances were intellectually identical. The texans tanking the season doesn't make Bradley more successful than Mularkey. In fact Bradley fared even worse. At least Mularkey had competitive games against decent teams. The Jaguars were out of every game against opponents with winning records by halftime this year.

 

As for coaches that carry QBs, Cowher is a good example. He won consistently with no one decent under center before Big Ben came along.

 

The Harbaughs are the same. Jim made Alex Smith look like a good QB and Alex Smith was the equivalent of Gabbert before Harbaugh came along. John Harbaugh just won a Superbowl with Flacco who is not an elite QB.

 

"Intellectually identical"! Good one - I'll have to remember to use that when I have no answer and no idea what I'm talking about.

 

We're talking about the NFL - you better have a good QB if you want to be considered a good coach.

 

And your "Alex Smith was the equivalent of Gabbert" shows you have little knowledge of the NFL or you've switched your agenda from anti-Henne (after being pro-Gabbert) to anti-Bradley.

 

But at least you have a friend in TMD, who never saw a negative Jaguar view he didn't like. The actual truth is - you don't have a clue, after one year, what kind of coach Bradley is or will be.

---

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

"Intellectually identical"! Good one - I'll have to remember to use that when I have no answer and no idea what I'm talking about.

 

We're talking about the NFL - you better have a good QB if you want to be considered a good coach.

 

And your "Alex Smith was the equivalent of Gabbert" shows you have little knowledge of the NFL or you've switched your agenda from anti-Henne (after being pro-Gabbert) to anti-Bradley.

 

But at least you have a friend in TMD, who never saw a negative Jaguar view he didn't like. The actual truth is - you don't have a clue, after one year, what kind of coach Bradley is or will be.

 

Great job! You attacked everything I said and myself personally without actually offering anything except for empty refutation.

 

I applaud your trolling prowess and look forward to the next!

---

Would you say the bottom fell out quicker under Mularkey than it did with Bradley?

 

Yes, and thats because Mularkey didn't even have the "people skills". At least Bradley has that going for him. 

---