You are currently viewing the old forums. We have upgraded to a new NFL Forum.
This old forum is being left as a read-only archive.
Please update your bookmarks to our new forum at forums.footballsfuture.com.


 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Marrone's staff
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 13, 14, 15  Next
 
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Jacksonville Jaguars
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
RaidersAreOne


Joined: 28 Jun 2008
Posts: 16832
Location: Canada, but don't worry... i'm not one of those damn dirty french.
PostPosted: Fri Jan 27, 2017 9:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Trentwannabe wrote:
Your new QB Scott Milanovich is a QB guru. He played the position and fun fact, was the first overall pick in the XFL Laughing

He's coached a variety style of QB's in the CFL and his offense was always near the top of the league. He revived the career of two dwindiling veterans and created two franchise guys from scratch.

He should be nothing but good for Bortles and I could see him as an OC in a few years.


You're pumping Milanovich wayyyyy too much my man. Laughing
_________________

#JihadWard
First jersey purchased: Jamarcus Russell.
Second jersey purchased: Rolando McClain.
Next purchases: Every Chiefs, Chargers and Broncos player.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Trentwannabe


Joined: 28 Dec 2007
Posts: 6782
Location: Igloo, Canada
PostPosted: Fri Jan 27, 2017 9:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

RaidersAreOne wrote:
Trentwannabe wrote:
Your new QB Scott Milanovich is a QB guru. He played the position and fun fact, was the first overall pick in the XFL Laughing

He's coached a variety style of QB's in the CFL and his offense was always near the top of the league. He revived the career of two dwindiling veterans and created two franchise guys from scratch.

He should be nothing but good for Bortles and I could see him as an OC in a few years.


You're pumping Milanovich wayyyyy too much my man. Laughing


How?
His first season as a HC he won the Grey Cup.

His team went 8-10 while playing 5 home games in Hamilton, Ottawa and Edmonton as opposed to Toronto.

Calvillo was done in the CFL before Trestman and Milanovich got there hands on him.

Ricky Rays 2nd best TD season came when he was 37 years old and the following year in 10 games Ray had 21 TD to just 2 ints.

Trevor Harris and Zach Collaros went from being 3rd and 4th strings with the Argos in 2012 to both being franchise QB by 2014.

He had some issues as a HC but denying his ability to mold QB's is naive.
_________________

Thank you NickChowaniec!

Trust the Process.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Jlash


Joined: 17 Oct 2016
Posts: 2133
Location: NJ
PostPosted: Fri Jan 27, 2017 9:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Interesting to say the least, at least you guys will have something to talk about.


As an outsider who follows certain players on the Jags, I think what Bortles showed in 2015 wasn't a fluke, I think he's got a ton of ability and potential. Hopefully the new staff can help it, because that offense was fun to watch when it was clicking.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
.Buzz


Joined: 16 Jul 2013
Posts: 3760
Location: Iowa
PostPosted: Fri Jan 27, 2017 10:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Trentwannabe wrote:
Your new QB Scott Milanovich is a QB guru. He played the position and fun fact, was the first overall pick in the XFL Laughing

He's coached a variety style of QB's in the CFL and his offense was always near the top of the league. He revived the career of two dwindiling veterans and created two franchise guys from scratch.

He should be nothing but good for Bortles and I could see him as an OC in a few years.


Thanks for the info. Didnt know much about the guy obviously. Definitely seems like someone that wont hurt Bortles at least... Laughing

Pretty good working with QBs on mechanics? Thats Bortles main problem.
_________________

El Ramster on the sig
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
FreeDaJags


Joined: 05 Jan 2017
Posts: 57
Location: UF
PostPosted: Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

iPwn wrote:
And I mean the defense is only worth keeping the Under if you think it's better to have
- Skuta playing on the LOS instead of having Jack in space
- Telvin not covering TEs
- Malik not moving around
- No pressure generated from LE
- Day/Abry predominantly playing backup to Malik instead of starting next to him.

Once you're okay with breaking away from those, you really have no pieces that aren't translatable to varied fronts or different schemes at all. Under, Over, Over Stem, one gap, 2 gap. Most everyone fits all of that. The only one who doesn't really fit outside of a Under is Marks (and who knows if he's ever going to be good anyway) and the space heater 5Ts.

There's nothing wrong with keeping the Under as a part of the package. The Under should be a part of any base 4-3 playbook. The issue is that the way Kaye said it, it looks like there won't be much schematic variance from what we did before.
He didn't imply that whatsoever. All he said was, the expectation at mobile was for them to "keep the 43U". That tells you absolutely nothing since half the time we WEREN'T in a 43U. It barely tells you anything about the front 7, and tells you absolutely nothing about the secondary. We still know jack squat other than that we are going to stay a 4-3 defense, which was obvious when we kept Wash. For all we know they're get rid of the big end and go with a traditional 2 "small" DE's (barring the drafting of Jonathan Allen) and have Jack play off of the LOS more. All the 43U means is that the pass rushing 3T is on the weakside of the defense rather than the strongside.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
.Buzz


Joined: 16 Jul 2013
Posts: 3760
Location: Iowa
PostPosted: Sat Jan 28, 2017 2:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

FreeDaJags wrote:
iPwn wrote:
And I mean the defense is only worth keeping the Under if you think it's better to have
- Skuta playing on the LOS instead of having Jack in space
- Telvin not covering TEs
- Malik not moving around
- No pressure generated from LE
- Day/Abry predominantly playing backup to Malik instead of starting next to him.

Once you're okay with breaking away from those, you really have no pieces that aren't translatable to varied fronts or different schemes at all. Under, Over, Over Stem, one gap, 2 gap. Most everyone fits all of that. The only one who doesn't really fit outside of a Under is Marks (and who knows if he's ever going to be good anyway) and the space heater 5Ts.

There's nothing wrong with keeping the Under as a part of the package. The Under should be a part of any base 4-3 playbook. The issue is that the way Kaye said it, it looks like there won't be much schematic variance from what we did before.
He didn't imply that whatsoever. All he said was, the expectation at mobile was for them to "keep the 43U". That tells you absolutely nothing since half the time we WEREN'T in a 43U. It barely tells you anything about the front 7, and tells you absolutely nothing about the secondary. We still know jack squat other than that we are going to stay a 4-3 defense, which was obvious when we kept Wash. For all we know they're get rid of the big end and go with a traditional 2 "small" DE's (barring the drafting of Jonathan Allen) and have Jack play off of the LOS more. All the 43U means is that the pass rushing 3T is on the weakside of the defense rather than the strongside.


4-3 under usually has an OLB that lines up right on the line of scrimmage for the most part too along with the 3T lining up on weakside.

I agree for the most part though, we have ZERO idea how Wash will actually line people up/how he'll play players until we actually hear it from him or see it in game/practice.
_________________

El Ramster on the sig
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
iPwn


Global Moderator
Joined: 10 Oct 2009
Posts: 55990
Location: Sweet Home Chicago
PostPosted: Sun Jan 29, 2017 6:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

FreeDaJags wrote:
He didn't imply that whatsoever. All he said was, the expectation at mobile was for them to "keep the 43U". That tells you absolutely nothing since half the time we WEREN'T in a 43U. It barely tells you anything about the front 7, and tells you absolutely nothing about the secondary. We still know jack squat other than that we are going to stay a 4-3 defense, which was obvious when we kept Wash. For all we know they're get rid of the big end and go with a traditional 2 "small" DE's (barring the drafting of Jonathan Allen) and have Jack play off of the LOS more. All the 43U means is that the pass rushing 3T is on the weakside of the defense rather than the strongside.
It was already stated that we were staying a 4-3. There was no need to speculate that he would be keeping the Under unless it meant the front 7 was staying largely the same.
_________________

Live like you're down 3-1
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
FreeDaJags


Joined: 05 Jan 2017
Posts: 57
Location: UF
PostPosted: Sun Jan 29, 2017 5:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

iPwn wrote:
FreeDaJags wrote:
He didn't imply that whatsoever. All he said was, the expectation at mobile was for them to "keep the 43U". That tells you absolutely nothing since half the time we WEREN'T in a 43U. It barely tells you anything about the front 7, and tells you absolutely nothing about the secondary. We still know jack squat other than that we are going to stay a 4-3 defense, which was obvious when we kept Wash. For all we know they're get rid of the big end and go with a traditional 2 "small" DE's (barring the drafting of Jonathan Allen) and have Jack play off of the LOS more. All the 43U means is that the pass rushing 3T is on the weakside of the defense rather than the strongside.
It was already stated that we were staying a 4-3. There was no need to speculate that he would be keeping the Under unless it meant the front 7 was staying largely the same.
Or maybe you're reading too much into a 6 word tweet.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
iPwn


Global Moderator
Joined: 10 Oct 2009
Posts: 55990
Location: Sweet Home Chicago
PostPosted: Sun Jan 29, 2017 7:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

FreeDaJags wrote:
iPwn wrote:
FreeDaJags wrote:
He didn't imply that whatsoever. All he said was, the expectation at mobile was for them to "keep the 43U". That tells you absolutely nothing since half the time we WEREN'T in a 43U. It barely tells you anything about the front 7, and tells you absolutely nothing about the secondary. We still know jack squat other than that we are going to stay a 4-3 defense, which was obvious when we kept Wash. For all we know they're get rid of the big end and go with a traditional 2 "small" DE's (barring the drafting of Jonathan Allen) and have Jack play off of the LOS more. All the 43U means is that the pass rushing 3T is on the weakside of the defense rather than the strongside.
It was already stated that we were staying a 4-3. There was no need to speculate that he would be keeping the Under unless it meant the front 7 was staying largely the same.
Or maybe you're reading too much into a 6 word tweet.
K
_________________

Live like you're down 3-1
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
VLoo


Joined: 05 Feb 2014
Posts: 401
PostPosted: Sun Jan 29, 2017 10:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yeah, but at least John Lynch isn't our GM.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tugboat


Joined: 30 Mar 2011
Posts: 5206
PostPosted: Thu Feb 09, 2017 12:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It seems kind of messed up and counterintuitive that the Atlanta Falcons coming off a Super Bowl appearance now basically have more coaching turnover than us. Confused
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
iPwn


Global Moderator
Joined: 10 Oct 2009
Posts: 55990
Location: Sweet Home Chicago
PostPosted: Thu Feb 09, 2017 5:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tugboat wrote:
It seems kind of messed up and counterintuitive that the Atlanta Falcons coming off a Super Bowl appearance now basically have more coaching turnover than us. Confused
Gus Bradley was the only problem, man. He was so incompetent that he had a great GM, a great Head Coach as OL coach, a great DC, and a great OC as QB coach/OC and still put together the worst coaching performance in NFL history. Every problem was him and small random impact guys. No other big names or guys in big spots contributed to one of the worst 4 year stretches in NFL history.
_________________

Live like you're down 3-1
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DuvalsKing


Joined: 15 Nov 2011
Posts: 1017
PostPosted: Thu Feb 09, 2017 10:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

iPwn wrote:
Tugboat wrote:
It seems kind of messed up and counterintuitive that the Atlanta Falcons coming off a Super Bowl appearance now basically have more coaching turnover than us. Confused
Gus Bradley was the only problem, man. He was so incompetent that he had a great GM, a great Head Coach as OL coach, a great DC, and a great OC as QB coach/OC and still put together the worst coaching performance in NFL history. Every problem was him and small random impact guys. No other big names or guys in big spots contributed to one of the worst 4 year stretches in NFL history.


To piggy back off of that, a lot of people asked why take Marrone and he was the reason that Gus was as bad as he was. My opinion is when your in a leadership role your either an individual who takes advice and uses it or you believe your way is the highway. Its been widely reported that Gus was a bit of a micro manager contrary to popular belief. Meaning if Marrone tried to help it would be tough to think he would take his advice. Therefore Gus probably had his notion of how he viewed his team to work hence the fact they looked the same way every game. There was not 1 instants where you saw a game plan they looked the same way in 2013 that they looked like in 2016.
_________________
Who I wanted drafted vs Jags over the last 4 drafts
2014:Khalil Mack - Blake Bortles
2015:Amari Cooper - Dante Fowler
2016:Jalen Ramsey - Jalen Ramsey
2017:Solomon Thomas - Leonard Fournette
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
.Buzz


Joined: 16 Jul 2013
Posts: 3760
Location: Iowa
PostPosted: Fri Feb 10, 2017 2:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

iPwn wrote:
Tugboat wrote:
It seems kind of messed up and counterintuitive that the Atlanta Falcons coming off a Super Bowl appearance now basically have more coaching turnover than us. Confused
Gus Bradley was the only problem, man. He was so incompetent that he had a great GM, a great Head Coach as OL coach, a great DC, and a great OC as QB coach/OC and still put together the worst coaching performance in NFL history. Every problem was him and small random impact guys. No other big names or guys in big spots contributed to one of the worst 4 year stretches in NFL history.


Considering how much different it was watching this team the final two games (regardless of win/loss, it was clearly a differently coached team) when he couldn't change anything drastically due to it being week 16 I'd say Gus Bradley had a very large hand in the failures. I really don't think that can be understated. We fired the HC, brought in a new head of football operations/to oversee all the day to day football operations, etc. You're acting like we didn't have any turnover because we kept the OC and DC.

He changed the entire staffs in all three facets except for the OC (who had to run a different guys offense and improved Bortles mechanics once Olsen was gone and he was allowed to) and Wash is a guy that we'll just have to wait and see on. None of us know how much pull Gus had on him and the team. You'd have to imagine he was pretty much a "yes man" considering we passed up guys like Jim Schwartz and other possibilites at DC for an in-house candidate in a win or get fired season for him.

Brand new ST, brand new position coaches across the board (which are the guys that work with these players on the daily and are pretty much the most important aspect of the development aspect, some of which are highly respected.

Just gotta wait and see what happens, but I think a more demanding/serious coach that doesn't preach "just get better" and allows the players to get away with anything and everything will do wonders. Sure showed up in the final two games, but who the hell knows if it translates until next season is here.

Only reason ATL had such a high turnover is because a coordinator got poached, he took/is trying to take a couple coaches, and the DC (who got his playcalling taken away midseason) is gone. If the guy isn't doing his job, he's going to get fired. I'd say Wash was competent this past year and although I surely wanted Pettine or a new face, it's not like it was a must to get rid of him. Our defense was pretty damn solid with two rookie edges/youth across the board while forcing the BS positions in the scheme with Skuta starting over Jack til Gus was fired.
_________________

El Ramster on the sig
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Adrenaline_Flux


Moderator
Joined: 19 Dec 2008
Posts: 22895
Location: The Iowa
PostPosted: Fri Feb 10, 2017 10:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

We're going to win the division because everyone is really pessimistic right now and this team operates on spiteful trolling.
_________________


Winner of Football's Future Big Brother II
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Jacksonville Jaguars All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 13, 14, 15  Next
Page 14 of 15

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group