First Impressions - Jagodzinski

[Patler]

I really hesitate to start this thread, because I have continually argued against pre-judging anyone. GMs, coaches, players all have to be given sufficient time to show what they are or are not capable of. But, the more I hear from him, the less excited I am about Jagodzinski as the OC. My reasons:

1. Yes, the U71 may have been overused at times, but his comments about it have been condescending at best. Like it or not, the formation was responsible for a large perentage of long plays and TDs, both running and passing. For a while it was extremely effective, game in and game out, even when opponents knew it was coming. Some of Jagodzinski's comments come off sounding like it was an ineffective gimmick formation.

2. His comments about certain players have been less than diplomatic for so early in the year and in view of the fact that he hasn't even had more than a few minicamp days experience with them. Whittiker for example. Several comments have sounded like he has already written the guy off. It's a little early for that.

3. His remarks about "the scheme" sound as if he thinks it doesn't matter who the lineman are, as long as the aren't over about 310 lbs and have body fat within his prescribed limits. He does not seem receptive to the idea that there can be very nimble and quick bigger men too, even if not as common. I would like to hear him emphasize the desirable qualities of his linemen more than their desirable size.

4. Does he have an offensive philosophy? I've heard MM's comments about the offense as a whole, but not much from Jagodzinski. He sounds more like the line coach, not the OC.

I know it is MUCH, MUCH, MUCH too soon to reach any conclusion about Jagodzinski as the OC, but so far he has given me nothing to be excited about, or even interested in.

Does anyone else feel the same? The exact opposite? Even care at this point?

[Rastak]

Re: First Impressions - Jagodzinski

I really hesitate to start this thread, because I have continually argued against pre-judging anyone. GMs, coaches, players all have to be given sufficient time to show what they are or are not capable of. But, the more I hear from him, the less excited I am about Jagodzinski as the OC. My reasons:

1. Yes, the U71 may have been overused at times, but his comments about it have been condescending at best. Like it or not, the formation was responsible for a large perentage of long plays and TDs, both running and passing. For a while it was extremely effective, game in and game out, even when opponents knew it was coming. Some of Jagodzinski's comments come off sounding like it was an ineffective gimmick formation.

2. His comments about certain players have been less than diplomatic for so early in the year and in view of the fact that he hasn't even had more than a few minicamp days experience with them. Whittiker for example. Several comments have sounded like he has already written the guy off. It's a little early for that.

3. His remarks about "the scheme" sound as if he thinks it doesn't matter who the lineman are, as long as the aren't over about 310 lbs and have body fat within his prescribed limits. He does not seem receptive to the idea that there can be very nimble and quick bigger men too, even if not as common. I would like to hear him emphasize the desirable qualities of his linemen more than their desirable size.

4. Does he have an offensive philosophy? I've heard MM's comments about the offense as a whole, but not much from Jagodzinski. He sounds more like the line coach, not the OC.

I know it is MUCH, MUCH, MUCH too soon to reach any conclusion about Jagodzinski as the OC, but so far he has given me nothing to be excited about, or even interested in.

Does anyone else feel the same? The exact opposite? Even care at this point?

He does seem like an outspoken fellow. I agree with #3, as for #4..isn't McCarthy calling the plays? I think it's similar in Minnesota with Childress running the offense more or less and McCarthy doing the same. The OC is more of a game planner with HC actually implementing it. I don't like that approach much but that what both teams seem to have at this point.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Re: First Impressions - Jagodzinski

1. Yes, the U71 may have been overused at times, but his comments about it have been condescending at best. Like it or not, the formation was responsible for a large perentage of long plays and TDs, both running and passing. For a while it was extremely effective, game in and game out, even when opponents knew it was coming. Some of Jagodzinski's comments come off sounding like it was an ineffective gimmick formation.

U-71 was a gimmick play. Gimmick plays rarely sustain in the NFL. It had lost it's effectiveness. Mostly due to the deterioration in the OL. You could throw out almost any running play with the OL we had, and it would have worked. Look at Lombardi and the Packers Sweep. That wouldn't work without guys like Forrest Gregg running it.

2. His comments about certain players have been less than diplomatic for so early in the year and in view of the fact that he hasn't even had more than a few minicamp days experience with them. Whittiker for example. Several comments have sounded like he has already written the guy off. It's a little early for that.

I don't get this sense. Maybe he's trying to light a fire under the big guy's ass.

3. His remarks about "the scheme" sound as if he thinks it doesn't matter who the lineman are, as long as the aren't over about 310 lbs and have body fat within his prescribed limits. He does not seem receptive to the idea that there can be very nimble and quick bigger men too, even if not as common. I would like to hear him emphasize the desirable qualities of his linemen more than their desirable size.

All coaches have a tendency to show this face in public. What is he supposed to say "the GM has left me with horrible personnel, but I'll try my best to make it work?"

4. Does he have an offensive philosophy? I've heard MM's comments about the offense as a whole, but not much from Jagodzinski. He sounds more like the line coach, not the OC.

That tends to happen when you have an offensive minded coach. I doubt Holmgren had much of a philosophy when he first become offensive coordinator under Bill Walsh. Mostly, he's going to do what that offensive minded coach wants him to do. I'm excited about the zone blocking scheme though, and not just because of the success in Atlanta and Denver. Mainly because it seems that not many teams will be looking for the same type of OL, and it seems that it's been easier for those teams to find OL without having to sign big name FAs or draft guys high.

[cpk1994]

Remember, Jags is the one guy who had the guts to stand up and tell Mike Sherman he was getting too predictable in his playcalling. Of course, Mike fired him for it.

[Patler]

Harvey, my point on the U-71 is that for several years it was much more effective than other formations. In 2004, while being used less than 20% of the time, it accounted for a much higher percentage of both TDs and long plays (over 20 yds). The average per play, both running and passing was higher than in non-U71 formations. Yes, their offense was good regardless, but it was even better in the U71.

The U-71 is no more of a gimmick than a 4 WR formation or any other non-standard formation. A gimmick is based on trickery or confusion. The U71 was exactly the opposite. Teams knew what was coming when Barry came on to the field, they just couldn't stop it.

[Patler]

Remember, Jags is the one guy who had the guts to stand up and tell Mike Sherman he was getting too predictable in his playcalling. Of course, Mike fired him for it.

If the story is true, I give him credit for it. But he is also starting to come across like a bit of a "know it all". I know, I know, you don't have to tell me. ALL coaches are to some extent. ButJagodzinski is starting to rub me the wrong way, and I am very unaccustomed to that because I normally give people too much time before holding them accountable.

[HarveyWallbangers]

The U-71 is no more of a gimmick than a 4 WR formation or any other non-standard formation. A gimmick is based on trickery or confusion. The U71 was exactly the opposite. Teams knew what was coming when Barry came on to the field, they just couldn't stop it.

And it wasn't effective any more. Mostly due to the fact Wahle was in Carolina and Rivera was in Dallas. Yet, we still used it.

[Patler]

Re: First Impressions - Jagodzinski

2. His comments about certain players have been less than diplomatic for so early in the year and in view of the fact that he hasn't even had more than a few minicamp days experience with them. Whittiker for example. Several comments have sounded like he has already written the guy off. It's a little early for that.

I don't get this sense. Maybe he's trying to light a fire under the big guy's ass.

I see his comments as anything and everything except the "light his fire" type. Most have not been challenging, have not been encouraging, have not even been confrontational. When asked about Whittiker's performance, position or opportunities, Jagodzinski's comments have come across to me like "who cares, I sure don't".

[Patler]

The U-71 is no more of a gimmick than a 4 WR formation or any other non-standard formation. A gimmick is based on trickery or confusion. The U71 was exactly the opposite. Teams knew what was coming when Barry came on to the field, they just couldn't stop it.

And it wasn't effective any more. Mostly due to the fact Wahle was in Carolina and Rivera was in Dallas. Yet, we still used it.

Actually, I don't think it was any less effective than other formation in 2005, basically for a long time they all sucked. But when the running game started to come around at the end of the season, many of Gado's better runs were in the U71 formation.

I'm not saying he has to use it, but belittling it as he has done several times is unprofessional.

[Rastak]

Re: First Impressions - Jagodzinski

I'm excited about the zone blocking scheme though, and not just because of the success in Atlanta and Denver. Mainly because it seems that not many teams will be looking for the same type of OL, and it seems that it's been easier for those teams to find OL without having to sign big name FAs or draft guys high.

That's a very good point. Well see if it all works but that's a definate plus I hadn't thought of.

[Sparkey]

Remember, Jags is the one guy who had the guts to stand up and tell Mike Sherman he was getting too predictable in his playcalling. Of course, Mike fired him for it.

If the story is true, I give him credit for it. But he is also starting to come across like a bit of a "know it all". I know, I know, you don't have to tell me. ALL coaches are to some extent. ButJagodzinski is starting to rub me the wrong way, and I am very unaccustomed to that because I normally give people too much time before holding them accountable.

So far, all I have noticed is a Line/OC Coach getting on his lineman that are fat and out of shape. I don't see anything wrong with that.

As far as the scheme..I sure hope to hell that he is confident that the scheme will work. Otherwise what is the point in running it. I mean, why should the players believe in a scheme if the coach doesn't.

What would you want too hear:

A. Give me 5 quick, nimble and athletic linemen and I'll make the blocking scheme work

or

B. Unless we get some more nimble, quick linemen in camp, we'll never run this scheme successfully ? ?

I'd rather hear A every time.....

[MJZiggy]

Remember, Jags is the one guy who had the guts to stand up and tell Mike Sherman he was getting too predictable in his playcalling. Of course, Mike fired him for it.

If the story is true, I give him credit for it. But he is also starting to come across like a bit of a "know it all". I know, I know, you don't have to tell me. ALL coaches are to some extent. ButJagodzinski is starting to rub me the wrong way, and I am very unaccustomed to that because I normally give people too much time before holding them accountable.

First off, welcome CPK. Secondly, Shamler, it's ok that he rubs you the wrong way right now. First impressions are first impressions and sometimes they're negative. You didn't like him disregarding a formation that you knew to be effective. It's continued effectiveness is debatable as teams eventually figured out a way to counter it, but we couldn't run it right now if we wanted to anyway with Barry out. You can have a negative first impression and have reasons for it and still be open to the idea that the guy might turn out alright. Or he might not. You were quite right when you said it's too early to make judgments. I'm sure you see more of his comments than I do, but he did have a palpable enthusiasm for what he was doing when he was hired for this job. It will be interesting to see how the offense reacts to him.

[The Leaper]

Jags needs to be strongly in favor of HIS SCHEME...and that is mostly what I get from his comments. Ultimately, the approach of the zone blocking system is a 180 degree turn from the power edge run attack employed by Green Bay for most of the last 4 years. The old scheme was clearly successful...but to make the transition, you have to eliminate the old mentality and approach in the heads of the players. I'd be far more worried if Jags sat around waxing poetic about Sherman's scheme.

[Patler]

What would you want too hear:

A. Give me 5 quick, nimble and athletic linemen and I'll make the blocking scheme work
or

B. Unless we get some more nimble, quick linemen in camp, we'll never run this scheme successfully ? ?

I'd rather hear A every time.....

You missed my point, "A" is exactly what I want to hear him say. Instead he has said, "Give me 5 linemen less than 310 pounds with body fat under x% and the scheme will work."

I have nothing against confidence in a scheme, but we saw the results last year when Sherman tried to run his "scheme" when he no longer had the right players for it. Ideally you want the right players for the scheme the coach prefers, but absent that ideal combination, the coach has to find the parts of his scheme or variations of it that the players he has can be most effective with.

I almost feel like Jagodzinski would prefer a small lineman with no ability over a heavier lineman even if the heavier one is a better player. I know that is probaly extreme, but in the end you have keep and play with the better players even if they don't fit your "ideal" of what you want.

[packerpete]

Re: First Impressions - Jagodzinski

I really hesitate to start this thread, because I have continually argued against pre-judging anyone. GMs, coaches, players all have to be given sufficient time to show what they are or are not capable of. But, the more I hear from him, the less excited I am about Jagodzinski as the OC. My reasons:

1. Yes, the U71 may have been overused at times, but his comments about it have been condescending at best. Like it or not, the formation was responsible for a large perentage of long plays and TDs, both running and passing. For a while it was extremely effective, game in and game out, even when opponents knew it was coming. Some of Jagodzinski's comments come off sounding like it was an ineffective gimmick formation.

OK Mike Sherman, quit being so defensive, personnel changes. That formation was schemed for a certain personnel grouping, NOT only Barry. Barry needed the group as a whole for him to be seen as a difference maker in that formation, and an awful lot of guys that were around making that work are now gonzo.

2. His comments about certain players have been less than diplomatic for so early in the year and in view of the fact that he hasn't even had more than a few minicamp days experience with them. Whittiker for example. Several comments have sounded like he has already written the guy off. It's a little early for that.

There is absolutely nothing I dislike more than a mealy mouthed, PC, sneaky, say-one-thing-with-soft-centrist-words and another behind your back, moraly bankrupt, liberal... Ok, Im getting on a rant. You get the picture, I LOVE it when people simply say a fat guy is FAT. There is nothing wrong with that. We all need more of that. I am tired of the fat, lazy guys faults being covered by not hurting his self-esteem. This is football, these are professionals, thier physical performance determines thier success or failure, as a coach, you better point it out.

3. His remarks about "the scheme" sound as if he thinks it doesn't matter who the lineman are, as long as the aren't over about 310 lbs and have body fat within his prescribed limits. He does not seem receptive to the idea that there can be very nimble and quick bigger men too, even if not as common. I would like to hear him emphasize the desirable qualities of his linemen more than their desirable size.

Again, your comment is not about what he says, but rather about HOW he says it. I am beginning to truly bellieve you are really MIKE SHERMAN posting under Shamrock name.

4. Does he have an offensive philosophy? I've heard MM's comments about the offense as a whole, but not much from Jagodzinski. He sounds more like the line coach, not the OC.

Does TT have an organizational philosophy? Of course. Do you know it? NO! Why should JJ lay out his philosophy to you or me or do it at all publicly? So defenses can more easily prepare? That would be stupid. He was hired to work exactly as he is, concentrating on the line within an offensive philosophy. McCarthy is the one with the offensive vision, he hired his staff to enable him (McCarthy) to fulfill that vision. Harp on McCarthy about philosophy, not JJ.

I know it is MUCH, MUCH, MUCH too soon to reach any conclusion about Jagodzinski as the OC, but so far he has given me nothing to be excited about, or even interested in.

Im sorry, but are you NUTZ? After seemingly 3 decades of Tom Rossley, JJ seems like the second coming to me. I appreciate his candor, and I like his enthusiasm. That is a football attitude.

Does anyone else feel the same? The exact opposite? Even care at this point?


I guess it looks like I certainly feel the exact opposite.

Well, it is way too early to assess performance, but I cannot help but feel some anticipation about our changes. I certainly hope they are for the better.

It is never too early to care, just too early too judge new coaches performances.