First Impressions - Jagodzinski

[The Leaper]

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.

I don't know how you can automatically equate his comments to this. Personally, I think his comments on specific weights are more directed at several of the fat asses on this team who need to lose weight and gain mobility. By telling them what he wants, he is making it clear where they need to be by August.

Until he pulls a Sherman and actually plays someone inferior (Whitticker) rather than adjust his scheme, I wouldn't be too quick to judge.

[Patler]

I'm beginning to wonder if some of you have actually read or heard his comments, or are reacting to what you hope he said, or what you wanted him to say.

That is why I hesitated to bring up this topic. Jagodzinski has not taken a "tough guy" or "tell it like it is" approach. I only wish that that were true. For example, its not that he told Whittiker he was overweight, he has as much as said it didn't matter, the guy is useless. Maybe he is, but at least let him show that he is rather than pre-judge him based on a stupid minicamp.

You can't ever make me believe that 5 pounds make a huge performance difference on players that weigh 300+ pounds. Yet Jagodzinski has made it sound like the difference between success and failure.

As I said, I am not making a judgment about whether he will or will not succeed. But I have usually been over tolerant of GMs, coaches and players, giving them plenty of time to prove themselves (see, for example, my comments on Ahmad Carroll!). It is unusual for me to react negatively to a coach this early, and I don't understand why I have with Jagodzinski, especially when I first gave him a "plus" simply for having been fired by Sherman!.

[Deputy Nutz]

Here is a quote from JS about Jags opinion on Whitticker,

"Asked about Whitticker Friday night, offensive coordinator Jeff Jagodzinski's initial reply was, "Let's move on." When pressed, Jagodzinski said, "He needs to fit in with what we're doing. And he is. He's giving good effort."

But is Whitticker a tackle?

"That's where he's playing right now. We're short some guys," Jagodzinski said. "He's a smart kid. We're just trying to get different combinations in there and see who the best fit is where. What you're seeing out there isn't what you're going to see in the fall."


So to me he is trying to find the best place for each player, and right now he is trying to fill some holes.

[Patler]

Here is a quote from JS about Jags opinion on Whitticker,

"Asked about Whitticker Friday night, offensive coordinator Jeff Jagodzinski's initial reply was, "Let's move on." When pressed, Jagodzinski said, "He needs to fit in with what we're doing. And he is. He's giving good effort."

But is Whitticker a tackle?

"That's where he's playing right now. We're short some guys," Jagodzinski said. "He's a smart kid. We're just trying to get different combinations in there and see who the best fit is where. What you're seeing out there isn't what you're going to see in the fall."

So to me he is trying to find the best place for each player, and right now he is trying to fill some holes.

You might be right, and of course one of the problems is we all mostly see and hear brief snipits of comments. I just struggle with why I have been growing increasingly uncomfortable with him over the last month or so. I was NOT that way initially when he was hired.

Restore my faith and optimism, PLEASE!!!

[pbmax]

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.

This is a question I still have about the 2005 season, did the running game pick up because of the change in lineup (Wells/Reug vs. Klemm/Whittaker), or healthy Gado versus bad wheel Green or did they change their play selection?

McGinn claims Green wasn't the same back after the leg inury he sustained against New Orleans in 2003. If a hobbled Green is even paritally the answer, I am worried about him for this season as well, no matter how the thigh heals, unless it was the end result of the original injury.

[Patler]

McGinn claims Green wasn't the same back after the leg inury he sustained against New Orleans in 2003. If a hobbled Green is even paritally the answer, I am worried about him for this season as well, no matter how the thigh heals, unless it was the end result of the original injury.

Green's injury last year was the climax of an injury he first sustained in college. It had grown progressively worse since 2003, and especially since mid 2004. There was an article last year that summarized all the different incidents of it recurring since the initial injury in college, and mentioned both the team and Green knew that a complete tear might result. Thay had been advised that the corrective surgery had the same risks as the surgery to fix a complete tear, and agreed that as long as he could continue to play reasonably well the surgery was too risky.

[RashanGary]

I would rather have a coach that says "If you don't fit in to what we're doing and don't make an effort to be in the physical condition you need to be in to be most successful then we will move forward without you"

As opposed to "We'll just let you become a fat ass and keep playing you."

[pbmax]

Here is a quote from JS about Jags opinion on Whitticker,

"Asked about Whitticker Friday night, offensive coordinator Jeff Jagodzinski's initial reply was, "Let's move on." When pressed, Jagodzinski said, "He needs to fit in with what we're doing. And he is. He's giving good effort."

But is Whitticker a tackle?

"That's where he's playing right now. We're short some guys," Jagodzinski said. "He's a smart kid. We're just trying to get different combinations in there and see who the best fit is where. What you're seeing out there isn't what you're going to see in the fall."


So to me he is trying to find the best place for each player, and right now he is trying to fill some holes.

Actually Nutz, when I read that quote, that he is out at tackle because they are short of people, I took it to mean Witticker doesn't have a home yet at guard and right now his best use is to fill in until the guys we want come back. Colledge, Coston, Spitz, White etc. haven't been asked to switch around. If you had asked me prior to this thread, I would have said Jags sees him being cut, unless injuries or development don't allow them to proceed normally.

As for Jags seeing these guys in minicamp, he has Philbin there who has run the zone scheme at Iowa, between the two I think they have a decent idea of who will be able to handle the assignments, and if the requirments are agility, speed and conditioning, they might be able to tell more from a minicamp than we might think.

I know a former D1 O-lineman who said the zone concept (meaning zone blocking assignments and zone running plays, the stretch etc.) requires people who can move and get to an edge on their guys rather than great technique or brute strength, which are diminished requirments. It might be easier to judge the former than the latter in a minicamp.

As he dismissively puts it, its all angles, edges and pushing, no one needs to beat anyone physically. And as you might surmise, he played in a power running game. He also said the defense hated facing these teams.

[Patler]

I would rather have a coach that says "If you don't fit in to what we're doing and don't make an effort to be in the physical condition you need to be in to be most successful then we will move forward without you"

As opposed to "We'll just let you become a fat ass and keep playing you."

He never said the first, and it has not been suggested by me or anyone else that he should say anything even remotely close to the second.

[RashanGary]

I would rather have a coach that says "If you don't fit in to what we're doing and don't make an effort to be in the physical condition you need to be in to be most successful then we will move forward without you"

As opposed to "We'll just let you become a fat ass and keep playing you."

He never said the first, and it has not been suggested by me or anyone else that he should say anything even remotely close to the second.

He never said anything you where paraphrasing either so whats your point sir know it all?

[pbmax]

Green's injury last year was the climax of an injury he first sustained in college. It had grown progressively worse since 2003, and especially since mid 2004. There was an article last year that summarized all the different incidents of it recurring since the initial injury in college, and mentioned both the team and Green knew that a complete tear might result. Thay had been advised that the corrective surgery had the same risks as the surgery to fix a complete tear, and agreed that as long as he could continue to play reasonably well the surgery was too risky.

Do you remember the article? I remember McGinn surmising that it had affected his play since the, apparent, re-injury against N.O., but I don't recall reading it first occuring in college.

This is something of a relief, as I thought Green was becoming far less effective with time, even in 2004 with the O-Line intact. I could never decide whether U-71 and the Power-O game had been out schemed/scouted, or if the RB ws just not plowing through smaller holes and arm tackles.

[Patler]

If you had asked me prior to this thread, I would have said Jags sees him being cut, unless injuries or development don't allow them to proceed normally.

That is the impression I have gotten. I can understand that Jagodzinski might feel that way, but to let us know it already is wrong.

I want players to have to compete for their positions. I want coaches to be open-minded enough to allow the players to compete for their positions and pick the best one, regardless of whether or not the player fits in a nice, neat little picture the coaches have of what a player should look like.

[RashanGary]

I get your point that he should concentrate on what they are able to do as opposed to their body fat percentage and weight. Has it ever occured to you though that maybe they think that moving an extra 20 LBS hinders the linemans ability to get where they need to be?

Has it ever occured to you that maybe they think that those extra 20 LBS are useless becuase lineman aren't being asked to push and power holes open. So he's asking his lineman to get rid of what is now useless weight which also allows them to be quicker and more agile which is the quality required to play OG in this scheme.

What is your point. I can see how you feel body fat isn't as relevant as the acctual ability to play but have you ever considered that he is demanding the best the players have and in this case body fat is useless so he's demanding them to lose it or risk being cut.

[Patler]

Green's injury last year was the climax of an injury he first sustained in college. It had grown progressively worse since 2003, and especially since mid 2004. There was an article last year that summarized all the different incidents of it recurring since the initial injury in college, and mentioned both the team and Green knew that a complete tear might result. Thay had been advised that the corrective surgery had the same risks as the surgery to fix a complete tear, and agreed that as long as he could continue to play reasonably well the surgery was too risky.

Do you remember the article? I remember McGinn surmising that it had affected his play since the, apparent, re-injury against N.O., but I don't recall reading it first occuring in college.

This is something of a relief, as I thought Green was becoming far less effective with time, even in 2004 with the O-Line intact. I could never decide whether U-71 and the Power-O game had been out schemed/scouted, or if the RB ws just not plowing through smaller holes and arm tackles.

It was a JSO article, probably right after the injury that put him out for the year. It might actually have been in two different articels, one chronicaling the history, and the other discussing what the team and Green knew the possibilities to be.

[Noodle]

I'm jumping in with Shamler on this one.

Jags bugs me. I thought his trashing of Sherman was increbily bush league. I can understand returning fire, but I've never read anything where Shermy was derogatory about Jags, and Shermy certainly didn't do anything to trip up Jags' opportunity with Atlanta. So it's not like Shermy laid a label on the guy

And no, Jags wasn't fired over Shermy's play calling, as Shermy didn't call the plays that year, Rossley did. But cpk, you're right that Shermy did can Jags because, at least according to the reports, they had a philosophical difference. My sense was that Jags was one of those guys who wouldn't STFU. But again, Shermy never trashed the guy.

In addition to my being ticked about his classless trashing of Shermy, my impression, early as it is, is that Jags likes to hear himself talk. A lot. His man crush for M3 is nothing short of disturbing, and I think he's going to wear thin quickly if his vaunted zone scheme doesn't work. And I'll bet this too -- I've posted before that zone is fine, but I don't want us to get a rep for being punk ass knee diving cut blockers like those mopes in Denver. Jags strikes me as the kind of guy who'll encourage his guys to blast knees.

Maybe I'm wrong. But I don't like the cut of this guy's jib, skippy.