First Impressions - Jagodzinski

[RashanGary]

I think it's more of Jags trying to get each player to understand what they need to do to be most successfull. He's stressing the importance of quickness and agility and explaining that high body fat hinders that. He's setting a black and white line so the players know what to focus on and where they need to be. I'm sure 19% or 21% don't make a big difference but it's probably a tactic to give players a direct border or guidline to shoot for and maintain.

I can see how you feel it isn't the most accurate number when gauging performance but to say his words or motivation tactic has no place or is not usefull for what he is trying to do is kind of under-thought IMO. How do you even know what he's trying to say or do? Do you?

Or maybe you're just giving premature judgements.

[RashanGary]

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.

Maybe the D-lineman should be aware of the blocking scheme and not come so hard if they don't want to get cut. Ever think of that.

Maybe a WR should value his body when a saftey is comeing over the middle. Have you considered that?

How about when those dirty DE's rip a defensless QB to the ground. Those devils. Everyone has a personal responsibility to protect their bodies and if sliding or curling up and going down protects a QB or WR from shortening his career he should do it. Like-wise, when a DT or DE is playing against a zone team, they should probably be aware that when a OG cut-blocks they should go down as opposed to trying to run through it.

P.S. I hope they cut block becuase it's effective and it slows the D-lineman down from going 120% forward. It gives them soemthing to think about

[Patler]

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.

You and I are not communicating well. 20 pounds, sure. But many coaches are overly fascinated with physical measurements. They tell a 330 pounder to lose 5 pouinds, like its going to make a huge difference. A guy 6'2" is considered ideal, a guy 6'1" is labeled "too short"and a guy 6'3" is "maybe too tall"

I want to hear what their qualities should be, not their size. For example, both Tauscher and Clifton are probably bigger than what the arbitrary "ideal" is for the infamous zone blocking. However, both are quick-footed, relatively nimble athletes who should do OK. That is what is important, not whether they fit someones ideal..

[RashanGary]

I was wathcing a Carolina game last year. Steve Smith was about the round the edge and he got tackled from behind very similar to the way Barnett tackled him. He immediately fell to the side instead of trying to power through it like he did in GB.

The point is, that players are put in positions to get hurt. It is not golf or hop scotch. Smith knew the danger when being tackled from behind and took steps necessary to protect his body. Should the LB's just stop tackling from behind? Or should the WR value his body?

Cut blocking is effective to slow down penetration and IMO it is a very valuable tool for an undersized lineman to use when being bull rushed or mismatched against a powerfull DL. It's like asking a Boxer to go out and get in a match of only uppercuts with Mike Tyson. One shot for you, and one shot for me. Why do that when you can mix it up and counter his power by making him pay when he uses it.

I don't know if you noticed or not, but our lineman are all about 300 LBS. That is pretty small. Do you really think they are going ot beable to stop 340 freaks from penetrating without using thier own power and aggressiveness against them. It's a battle of wits out there and hopefully the opposition has enough wit and self preservation to do what it takes to not get injured. It's their choice. They odn't need ot come 110 mph. They can slow down or they will get cut. Easy as that.

[Patler]

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.

Well, at least I am not totally alone in my thinking! I was getting pretty lonely here Noodle until you came along!

[RashanGary]

You and I are not communicating well. 20 pounds, sure. But many coaches are overly fascinated with physical measurements. They tell a 330 pounder to lose 5 pouinds, like its going to make a huge difference. A guy 6'2" is considered ideal, a guy 6'1" is labeled "too short"and a guy 6'3" is "maybe too tall"

I want to hear what their qualities should be, not their size. For example, both Tauscher and Clifton are probably bigger than what the arbitrary "ideal" is for the infamous zone blocking. However, both are quick-footed, relatively nimble athletes who should do OK. That is what is important, not whether they fit someones ideal..

Read my next post. I explained on reason he may be giving set numbers as a goal or an expectation for players. I explained how he may believe it is not a set number but a pretty good one for players to meet. I think McCarthy and Jags are trying to let players know what they expect and holding guys accountable when it's not met.

I'm sure they would rather have 10% but it might be a good thing that they give a set expectation so all the players strive to meet it. Again, I don't think you know everything that is running through Jags mind when you make these accusations. I'm just throwing out one possible reason for the #.

I don't really like his personality either. I think he's cocky and wrong for critisizing U-71. That was a great formation IMO before Rivera/Wahle/Walker left. I think Walker made it better by streching the field. I don't think your critisizm is either accurate or warrented at this point because I don't think your taking into consideration the motivational tactic he may be using by giving a goal to all lineman. Maybe I'm wrong, but what I'm saying is maybe you're wrong too.

[Noodle]

Nick, I'll mark you down in the "I want to be a punk ass knee diver" camp.

I'm just funking with you, and I wasn't clear enough. You can cut block by rolling in to the thighs, as ND has explained, or you can cut by going for the knees. I've got no problem with the former, but knee diving is punk ass.

Football's a brutal game, to be sure. But I wasn't a big fan of Sapp's hit on Cliffton, were you? It was legal, but it was punk ass. And I'm not going to be a fan of GB linemen diving at knees like a bunch of Denver pieces of crap.

Oh, and Shamler, you were right, I remember the story about Green first sustaining the quad strain while at Nebraska, and the decision being made to keep playing because an operation was too risky.

[wist43]

I have concerns about the whole staff... especially on offense.

OL and RB are very unsettled, and we have absolutely no idea what to expect from Jags and M3. What kind of game are they going to call??? Situational substitution???

As for his comments on Whitticker... I don't like Whitticker either - at all. Regardless of what type of blocking scheme they're running - I don't like Whitticker.

Even in a best case scenario, I think the offense is going to struggle mightily for at least half of the season... Hopefully they can start to gel by midseason, but even that is being pretty optimistic I fear.

[Patler]

Read my next post. I explained on reason he may be giving set numbers as a goal or an expectation for players. I explained how he may believe it is not a set number but a pretty good one for players to meet. I think McCarthy and Jags are trying to let players know what they expect and holding guys accountable when it's not met.

I'm sure they would rather have 10% but it might be a good thing that they give a set expectation so all the players strive to meet it. Again, I don't think you know everything that is running through Jags mind when you make these accusations. I'm just throwing out one possible reason for the #.

I don't really like his personality either. I think he's cocky and wrong for critisizing U-71. That was a great formation IMO before Rivera/Wahle/Walker left. I think Walker made it better by streching the field. I don't think your critisizm is either accurate or warrented at this point because I don't think your taking into consideration the motivational tactic he may be using by giving a goal to all lineman. Maybe I'm wrong, but what I'm saying is maybe you're wrong too.

I really don't care what is running through his mind, what his intentions are or anything of that sort. All I have stated is the impression that he has made on me. His motives are irrelevent to that, just like my feelings about him are irrelevent to the Packers.

I have said over an over, I'm not judging him, therefore I am not really criticizing, just stating how he comes across to me. Obviously you have a different impression of him.

Your "reasons" why he might be doing what he is doing are just as speculative as anything I have said. He might also have said some of the things he has said because he just flat out dislikes the guy. Neither you nor I know for sure.

My intention behind this thread was not so much to debate what he is doing, since as I have said it is way too early to judge him. I wanted to determine how others felt about him, if anyone had growing reservations as I have. That was the reason for my questions at the end of my first post, to determine how other felt about him. .

[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.

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.

I ain't gonna disagree that Whitticker's use on this team is most likely going to be as a back up tackle. He was a mistake last year at guard. His mobility is closer to a brick wall than a volkswagon. Bottom line is Whitticker is slow footed and most likely doesn't fit this scheme all that well, hell I knew that in Febuary. If Whitticker could even be a road grader, or a mauler in the run game I would see a spot for him on this roster, he doesn't even do that. He plays patty cake and has very little attitude while playing. Maybe that will change, but not while he is whinning about not playing guard, and complaining about his future in Green Bay.

[pbmax]

I was wathcing a Carolina game last year. Steve Smith was about the round the edge and he got tackled from behind very similar to the way Barnett tackled him. He immediately fell to the side instead of trying to power through it like he did in GB.

The point is, that players are put in positions to get hurt. It is not golf or hop scotch. Smith knew the danger when being tackled from behind and took steps necessary to protect his body. Should the LB's just stop tackling from behind? Or should the WR value his body?

Cut blocking is effective to slow down penetration and IMO it is a very valuable tool for an undersized lineman to use when being bull rushed or mismatched against a powerfull DL. It's like asking a Boxer to go out and get in a match of only uppercuts with Mike Tyson. One shot for you, and one shot for me. Why do that when you can mix it up and counter his power by making him pay when he uses it.

I don't know if you noticed or not, but our lineman are all about 300 LBS. That is pretty small. Do you really think they are going ot beable to stop 340 freaks from penetrating without using thier own power and aggressiveness against them. It's a battle of wits out there and hopefully the opposition has enough wit and self preservation to do what it takes to not get injured. It's their choice. They odn't need ot come 110 mph. They can slow down or they will get cut. Easy as that.

Nick, you are barking up the wrong tree on this one. I have not read complaints about cut-blocking in line, especially in pass defense, tackles do it all the time for a screen pass. This isn't the source of contention about this scheme.

The lousy rep for cut blocking comes from mostly guards who are not engaged with a defender. During run blocking, they dive at legs/knees of defenders in motion in pursuit of the ball away from line play but along the line of scrimmage. So the defender is not bull rushing anyone and isn't engaged with a defender at all.

This block is illegal everywhere on the football field except for 3 yards on either side of the line of scrimmage. In fact, its the penalty the refs called on Hasselback in the Super Bowl for his tackle of the interception. That was a bogus call because it was a tackle not a block, but that was the rule enforced.

Paul Zimmerman has encouraged the NFL to further tighten tighten the rule to make it illegal unless you are engaged with the defender.

[The Leaper]

Way too many people have become grandpas after the Sherman era...where a player was first asked whether or not he wanted to do something because the last thing we ever wanted to do was impose the will of the coaching staff on the players.

I love the fire and venom Jags brings to the table. I've grown tired of the patsy approach to coddle these players. I firmly believe much of the injury and penalty issues that have cropped up in recent years is due to the "country club" mentality of Sherman and friends. It is about time we have a coach who tells a player he isn't cutting the mustard, and better shape up or fear being shipped out. Sherman just left guys sitting on the roster for 3 years, hoping they might magically find their potential someday. The Lucky Charms approach isn't a good way to build a football team.

As far as being a "knee-diver"...I didn't hear a whole lot of that kind of talk regarding his OL in Atlanta, despite TWO SEASONS of leading the league in rushing yardage. I don't know why you would possibly assume that would suddenly appear in Green Bay. Legal cut blocks are a necessary part any good OL scheme, especially the zone blocking system that relies on smaller, more mobile linemen. Unless someone has credible evidence to suggest Jags teaches illegal blocks, I'd drop the "knee-diver" comments.

[Sparkey]

I don't remember Jags ever outright dissing Sherman. What I remember is calling the U71 package a gimmick. Which it was by proof that other teams did not emulate the formation or package. The NFL is a copycat league and anything that works and works well is emulated by other teams.

The fact that the U71 package was only used by GB and never ran by other teams, reinforces that it was a short term gimmick formation.

[Deputy Nutz]

I love the Cut block!!! At the same time, I think the area which a cut block is allowed should be narrowed, and in that area cut blocks from behind should be deemed illegal. I don't have a problem with cut blocks coming from straight on, or even from the side, but when a guy catches one in the back of the knees and doesn't see it coming, that just isn't right.

[Noodle]

Let's see, first, on the cut blocking hunch -- how about this from a Falcon's site:

"Blocking scheme under fire again
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

The cut-blocking techniques used by the Falcons have come under fire again. Tennessee Titans coach Jeff Fisher said some of the Falcons’ blocking in the Titan’s 24-21 victory Friday crossed the line in regards to player safety and that he would alert the NFL about it."

I also found this snippet from on Pro Football Weekly from when Jags was at Atlanta:

"Don’t think for a second that the Falcons’ offensive line is bothered by all the talk that it has become a dirty unit."

At bottom, Jags just strikes me as a guy who'd encourage his guys to do this. Look, I hope I'm wrong. I like what I've seen from M3, but this thread asked for impressions about Jags, and my impression is that Jags is a rock-headed blowhard who is big time kissing M3's arse.