The Jaguars Again (closing, clubs, suites)

[lrfox]

Originally Posted by Florida2014

The Jags actually did do enough to win; however, bad calls prevented that win.

They didn't though, that's the thing. That's why the score is what it was. Whether you believe some of the calls were "questionable" or not, they still didn't do enough to win. Even if you want to argue that there were some debatable calls, there was nothing egregious enough to have "blown the game." Some big ones went their way too but it doesn't matter if they lost anyway. The calls did not prevent them from winning.

• They took a knee at the end of the half with 55 seconds and 2 timeouts remaining. Literally no team has done that all year. Why would you do that if you've moved the ball well to that point? Easy opportunity to extend your lead an incredibly stupid decision by the coaching staff. Clearly they don't trust the quarterback which doesn't help win games
• They got a turnover (a call that went their way- could have been down by contact) that could have been momentum changing and were unable to capitalize on it going 3 and out.
• They couldn't run or throw for the most part in the 4th quarter
• They couldn't stop Amendola or Brady, even on 3rd and 18- you have to stop 3rd and 18
• They couldn't make big plays in the clutch.

That's why they lost, not the officiating.

[projectmaximus]

Originally Posted by lrfox

Even if you want to argue that there were some debatable calls, there was nothing egregious enough to have "blown the game."

Max Kellerman and Nick Wright totally disagree. Other analysts as well, just picking the two whose comments were trending. Based on Twitter, many other 3rd party fans and players also thought so. I am a Jags fan so I am obviously biased...but these guys aren't.

Originally Posted by lrfox

• They took a knee at the end of the half with 55 seconds and 2 timeouts remaining. Literally no team has done that all year. Why would you do that if you've moved the ball well to that point? Easy opportunity to extend your lead an incredibly stupid decision by the coaching staff. Clearly they don't trust the quarterback which doesn't help win games
• They got a turnover (a call that went their way- could have been down by contact) that could have been momentum changing and were unable to capitalize on it going 3 and out.
• They couldn't run or throw for the most part in the 4th quarter
• They couldn't stop Amendola or Brady, even on 3rd and 18- you have to stop 3rd and 18
• They couldn't make big plays in the clutch.

That's why they lost, not the officiating.

Hey you are totally right. Jags left a lot of plays out there, and you didnt even mention the delay of game AFTER A TIMEOUT that took away a first down conversion.

But that said...it can ALSO be the officiating. Several of those 3rd down Pats conversions were made possible by fairly obvious holding that was not called. It's not egregious but it could easily have been the difference in the game. No ref wants to call holding on such a disciplined, well-coached team, right??

[Florida2014]

Nothing like another team's fan coming onto a local message board to argue how much better his team is, lol. I believe that's the very definition of "troll."

[lrfox]

Originally Posted by projectmaximus

Max Kellerman and Nick Wright totally disagree. Other analysts as well, just picking the two whose comments were trending. Based on Twitter, many other 3rd party fans and players also thought so. I am a Jags fan so I am obviously biased...but these guys aren't.

But they are also entertainers, and Max Kellerman is always coming in strong with the hot takes. His entire argument for the call is essentially that the officials were "making it up" to the Patriots for a missed call earlier in the season. That's the definition of a hot take. No supporting evidence, just a take. He doesn't offer any evidence or reason WHY it's a bad call. He just says it is. I didn't see the Nick Wright take, so I can't really comment on it. But the Kellerman take didn't offer any explanation as to why the calls were wrong.

I'm a Pats fan, so I'm biased too. But I keep going back to that fumble call. Jags fans hang on the early whistle (which the NFL came out and said was called correctly), but it EASILY could have been argued that it wasn't, in fact, a fumble. The ball came loose, but it was secured against his body as he hit the ground. It was only after he hit the ground that the ball was taken from him. As with any review, it needs to be irrefutable that the call on the field was incorrect to overturn it and in this case, it wasn't. If the ruling on the field was down by contact, it wouldn't have been overturned either. Tony Romo questioned it during the broadcast and Peter King hit on this in MMQB this week. If the Patriots lose, you can bet that that would have been a call that people brought up afterwards as a blown call on a huge play when they were just gaining momentum. It's not a big deal because they were still able to come back and win.

Hey you are totally right. Jags left a lot of plays out there, and you didnt even mention the delay of game AFTER A TIMEOUT that took away a first down conversion.

But that said...it can ALSO be the officiating. Several of those 3rd down Pats conversions were made possible by fairly obvious holding that was not called. It's not egregious but it could easily have been the difference in the game. No ref wants to call holding on such a disciplined, well-coached team, right??

I still have a hard time blaming officiating. I think the laundry list of things the Jags did wrong in this game was more than enough to dig their own grave. "Questionable calls" didn't make or break them. As strong as they played the first half, they made too many mistakes to survive (both coaching and on the field) to win. And to be fair, the Pats have benefited from tough calls in the past. The touchdown at the end of the Steelers game should have stood. I get what the rule is ("surviving the ground."), but it's an instance where the rule just sucks. Not on Sunday though. They just made more plays.

Originally Posted by Florida2014

Nothing like another team's fan coming onto a local message board to argue how much better his team is, lol. I believe that's the very definition of "troll."

Eh, and whining about the officials is the very definition of "sour grapes." Also, where did I once say my team is much better? I said they made more plays at the end of the day and won the game. They were outplayed by the Jags for nearly 3 quarters. My whole argument here is that the officiating didn't cost the Jags the game. Their own mistakes, including dumb penalties, bad execution, and coaching mistakes did. They're one of the most penalized teams in the league for a reason. The Pats aren't infallible or flawless. They're not an invincible team. But they're not being helped by the officials either. It's just that when you win consistently, the calls that don't go your way aren't as big of a deal. The league doesn't have it out to support the Pats - remember, Tom Brady sat the first four games last year because of slightly under-inflated footballs. Domestic violence doesn't often warrant as big of a suspension. "Deflategate" was by most accounts a witchhunt against the Patriots. There's no conspiracy to keep them winning. Not by a long shot.

[Florida2014]

Literally not reading any of that. Good luck in the Super Bowl.

[Ivan Putski]

Originally Posted by Florida2014

Nothing like another team's fan coming onto a local message board to argue how much better his team is, lol. I believe that's the very definition of "troll."

Was wondering who this guy was that suddenly started posting here lol. Haven’t had the time to go back and read any of it but figured it was a Boston guy.

Can we have our thead back now Boston guy? Thanks.

[lrfox]

Originally Posted by Ivan Putski

Was wondering who this guy was that suddenly started posting here lol. Haven’t had the time to go back and read any of it but figured it was a Boston guy.

Can we have our thead back now Boston guy? Thanks.

It's a public forum for anyone to post on. It's not "yours." And fresh posts turn up on the main page, so it shouldn't come as a shock to anyone that people from outside of the Jax bubble might stumble upon a thread like this. Lots of it was pretty reasonable debate actually.

[kyle19125]

Bortles was signed to a contract extension last night for 3 years/54 million dollars. Thoughts?

Jacksonville Jaguars reach 3-year extension with QB Blake Bortles

[Ivan Putski]

My first impression when I heard about the extension was that this is a very cap friendly deal. It gives the Jaguars an opportunty to see if he can progress with better talent around him without having to franchise him in coming years. They haven’t released the nuts and bolts of the contract but I suspect the cap hit in 2018 will be much lower than the $19m+ he was owed on his 5th yr option.

If he falters this year, they can easily cut him leaving the Jags with minmal dead cap $ spread out over 2019 and 2020. If he does well, we have a QB in place who won’t hamstring the team and tie up $30m+ per yr in cap space. That defense needs to get paid in the coming years (Ngakoue/Ramsey).

With the front office now locked in through 2021, my hope is that they draft a QB with the 29th pick or try and move up in the 2nd (if they have to) to do so. They need another QB not named Henne to light a fire under Bortles.

[kyle19125]

Originally Posted by Ivan Putski

With the front office now locked in through 2021, my hope is that they draft a QB with the 29th pick or try and move up in the 2nd (if they have to) to do so. They need another QB not named Henne to light a fire under Bortles.

I hope so too. The Patriots are supposedly licking their chops for Richmond's Kyle Lauletta and it would be awesome if the Jags got him first. He's projected to go in the second round so unless the Pats trade up...