Jump to content


Jaguarmeister2017

Member Since 15 Apr 2017
Offline Last Active Yesterday, 06:30 PM
-----

Posts I've Made

In Topic: 2017 Jaguars Yardstick For Success

15 May 2017 - 03:54 PM

I'm going by the strictest definition of your chosen wording and voting 9 wins. I'm not sure you can call a season a "success" without a winning record unless you somehow win the division at .500 or below which is a rare occurrence for a team to do. I could see using the word "content" to describe a season at 7-9 or 8-8, but to be considered successful let's win more games than we lose and then build from there.

In Topic: 1st Jags game.

12 May 2017 - 10:26 PM

I'm pretty sure you can bring sunscreen in to the stadium.


In Topic: Jags Will Win 10-12 Games This Year

12 May 2017 - 01:48 PM

Yep.

 

Firing Shack fixed it.

 

No, firing JDR fixed it.

 

No, firing Gene fixed it.

 

No, firing Mularkey fixed it.

 

No, firing Gabbert fixed it.

 

No, firing Gus fixed it.

 

<pause for breath>

 

Firing Bortles must certainly fix it this time.  We're running out of silver bullets.

 

(But we'll never, EVER run out of scapegoats...)

 

I didn't say that and never have.  I would have preferred for him to have the added pressure of facing free agency after this season, but that decision has been made and we're moving forward.  He's here, starting and likely will be into next season if not longer if he improves.  I'll be cheering him on and hoping for that improvement.  I won't be participating in the rewriting of history, however.  It's like some didn't watch the games last year or their memory of them faded and they looked at the raw season stats to draw shaky conclusions.

 

You can realize that the largest share of the blame for what happened last year was his and still cheer him on this year.  It isn't and doesn't have to be mutually exclusive.  No one needs to come up with an excuse to cheer him and the team on which is what the constant apologizing for him by some appears to be.  And no one needs to take personal offense at any deserved criticism lobbed at Bortles game last year, yet there's a few here that apparently do. 

 


In Topic: QB Hurries - Not as Sexy as Sacks but a Prime Indicator Nonetheless

12 May 2017 - 11:50 AM

Hopefully one of our guys can hurry the QB into the waiting arms of another one of our guys with more regularity next season.

In Topic: Jags Will Win 10-12 Games This Year

11 May 2017 - 05:11 PM

I've seen it and it was badly misguided. All defenses face short fields or turnovers/special teams plays that go for TDs. Most defenses also hand some of those back to the offense. The Jaguars defense didn't do that. They were terrible at creating turnovers, and they weren't good enough at making critical stops late in games.

 

You can try to equivocate it by coming up with stats like trying to reassign points to other phases of the team instead of the defense, but the defense was not some strength of the team getting a raw deal from the rest of the team, the defense wasn't good enough, either.

 

Like I said, there's a clear emotional attachment to the guy for some based on what he did in 2015.  It's the only explanation.  Had you actually read the thread, you probably wouldn't have made the implication that all teams deal with short fields at about the same rate because it simply isn't true.

 

Although I didn't compare the entire league in that thread, the most important comparisons are within the division which I did do.  Here's the cliffs notes:  The Jaguars had 23 combined instances (Offense/ST plays that resulted in field position inside the 45 for the other team) of turning the ball over deep in their own territory or ST gaffes.  Four of those resulted in defensive TDs for the other team and 3 more were game ending interceptions (a whole other issue) where the game was still in question and within one score at the time. So 16 short fields plus 7 of what I will call back-breakingly negative Offense/ST plays.

 

The tinhorns had 13 total instances with 3 resulting in defensive scores for the other team.  That's 10 short fields plus 3 back breaking plays.

 

The clots had 11 total instances with 2 resulting in defensive scores for the other team.  That's 9 short fields and 2 back breaking plays.

 

The tacks had 11 total instances with 6 resulting in defensive scores for the other team.   That's 5 short fields and 6 back breaking plays

 

The Jags defense clearly dealt with significantly more bad hands dealt to them by their own offense and special teams than any other team in the division by a wide margin and I'd venture a guess they were probably dealt one of the worst hands in the league last year.  If you feel these are made up stats or that 23 is about the same as 13 or 11 or that 16 is about the same as 10, 9 or 5, I don't know what to tell you.  This isn't earth shattering stuff.  Scoring for the other team and handing them short fields loses games.  

The defense needs to get more turnovers for sure, no one is saying otherwise.  However, they were clearly carrying more water last year than the offense or special teams, especially as the season wore on and they might have gotten more turnovers had some of those short fields been longer.  To shift blame toward them and away from the QB, who was responsible for most of those negative plays, is ridiculous.