Well, they are favored this week. Why would they not be favored against Houston at home?

Yes I meant after this week I thought I typed that. That said, the line has moved from +1.5 to +1 so by game time who knows.

---

I think the Jags are a team that will be hard to guess how they are going to do the rest of the season.  They are young and at least the D is getting better every week.  Of their 3 losses only game did they not have a chance to win, Chargers week 2.  So I am just going to go week to week with this team.

 

This is what I have been telling everybody since the Ravens game and got blasted big time for. We absolutely should be 4-1, not 2-3.

---

This is what I have been telling everybody since the Ravens game and got blasted big time for. We absolutely should be 4-1, not 2-3.

We could be 0-5 too with easily losing to Indy and Chicago.


We won 2 close games and lost 2 close games, it tends to balance out over the course of a season when you're consistently playing in 1 possession games.

---

We could be 0-5 too with easily losing to Indy and Chicago.


We won 2 close games and lost 2 close games, it tends to balance out over the course of a season when you're consistently playing in 1 possession games.

 

The Colts game was better than the score.

---

The Colts game was better than the score.

No? They were down 3 in our territory with a minute and 30 to go. We could have easily lost that game.

---

No? They were down 3 in our territory with a minute and 30 to go. We could have easily lost that game.

 

Watch the ENTIRE GAME.

---

Feel free to disagree but this is how I think it will go down.


Jaguars schedule

Raiders-W

@Titans-W

@Chiefs-W

Texans-W

@Lions-W

@Bills-W

Broncos-W

Vikings-W

@Texans-W

Titans-W

Colts-W


 

ftfy

:yes:  :thumbsup:

---

Jaguars schedule

Raiders- W

@Titans-W

@Chiefs-L

Texans-W

@Lions-L

@Bills-L

Broncos-W

Vikings-L

@Texans-L

Titans-W

Colts-W


Final record 8-8

---

Watch the ENTIRE GAME.

You're missing the point. Yes we were in control but at the end of the game (when it matters most) it was a close game in which we could have easily lost.

---

13-3. I don't want to hear about anything else!

---

"Before you criticize a man, walk a mile in his shoes. That way, if he gets angry, he's a mile away and barefoot."

You can't recall it because it's never happened.

Didn't the Browns have a winning record when we beat them in 2014? Not that it matters because The browns ended up hot garbage as usual.

---

No commercial messages in sigs

You're missing the point. Yes we were in control but at the end of the game (when it matters most) it was a close game in which we could have easily lost.

 

I am not missing the point at all. Saying the game was better than the score obviously means most of the time we were in control. It is not accurate to suggest the game was worse than the score just because we nearly choked at the end.

---

You can't recall it because it's never happened.

Tacks were 4-4 in 2013 when we beat them, so we've beaten a .500 team, but not one with a winning record that I can remember.

---

Didn't the Browns have a winning record when we beat them in 2014? Not that it matters because the Browns ended up hot garbage as usual.

 

LOL It was one of those "Lose to Gus, you're on the bus" games. I would be surprised if they had a winning record at the time.

 

It is sad that we have to think about this before playing against a winning team.

---

Tacks were 4-4 in 2013 when we beat them, so we've beaten a .500 team, but not one with a winning record that I can remember.

Teams that end the season with a winning record. Beating a 1-0 team is different than beating a 10-6 team.

---

I am not missing the point at all. Saying the game was better than the score obviously means most of the time we were in control. It is not accurate to suggest the game was worse than the score just because we nearly choked at the end.

It doesn't matter if we were in control if at the end of the game we had a chance to lose. The statement you made is we could be 4-1 due to playing in close games. I said we could be 0-5 based on the same logic.

---

I am not missing the point at all. Saying the game was better than the score obviously means most of the time we were in control. It is not accurate to suggest the game was worse than the score just because we nearly choked at the end.

 

 

  Like so many other things,  this discussion has a large amount of subjectivity involved.

 

  My take is if a team is within one or two plays of having a very good chance to win the game,  what transpired up until that point doesn't change the fact that this game could have gone either way.   IMO,  you don't get style points for holding a sizable lead if the outcome in the game becomes in doubt.     The bottom line for the Jaguars is 4 of their 5 games could have gone either way.    

---

It doesn't matter if we were in control if at the end of the game we had a chance to lose. The statement you made is we could be 4-1 due to playing in close games. I said we could be 0-5 based on the same logic.

 

If we are in control most of the game, it is better than the score indicates. FACT.

---

Didn't the Browns have a winning record when we beat them in 2014? Not that it matters because The browns ended up hot garbage as usual.

 

Yep, you are correct. The Browns were 3-2 when the came into Jax and got beaten by the Jags 24-6.

 

Also, the Dolphins had a 1-0 record in 2015 when the came into Jax and the Jags beat them 23-20.

 

I just looked up both games.

 

1-0 is a winning record, so I guess that does technically count as beating a team with a winning record, although the Dolphins finished the year with a record of 6-10.

 

Same goes for the 3-2 Browns, although they finished the season 7-9.

---

I survived the Gus Bradley Error.

I still don't know what to make of this team.  Did last week wake up a sleeping Lion who is ready to roar or the same old Jaguars.  This Raiders game is a measuring stick game.  I got to see what Sunday shows.

---