Every year, there is at least one constant in the NFL: the Jacksonville Jaguars are that one team that you can't quite put your finger on. One week, they will be blown out so badly that people start discussing the futures of QB David Garrard and head coach Jack Del Rio in Jacksonville. The next week, they will come up with a season-saving win in impressive fashion. The trend just seems to alternate like that, year after year, and I didn't even mention how you can count Jacksonville out whenever they have to make a trip across the country.
This season hasn't been any different for the Jaguars. They have a good record at 5-4 and are certainly in the playoff hunt again, but look at how their schedule has played out so far...
Jacksonville Jaguars' First Nine Games So Far
Is that not baffling? The Jaguars get blown out two weeks in a row, then come home to beat Indianapolis. After a win over Buffalo, they get blown out two more times in a row, before coming back to blow out a team on the road and win on a Hail Mary pass versus Houston last week. If you ever bet on Jacksonville straight up, you're kind of nuts. If you tally the nine games up, Jacksonville's distribution of "types" of games they've played have been like this:
That doesn't help much, doesn't? In only reinforces the point that there's no rhyme or reason as to when and who the Jaguars will bring their A-game against. Jacksonville clearly has the potential to be a solid team, but we've been saying that for years. Until they remove the inconsistency gaffe, it's impossible to take them seriously as contenders. If someone is looking for a stretch, one could argue that the Jaguars were blown out by teams with winning records, blew out teams with terrible records, and were competitive more times than not in division games. In which category would you put Cleveland, a team with a losing record but has been highly competitive? Certainly not in the group with Buffalo and Dallas, but the other two categories seem like a tossup.
While it didn't help Cleveland when they faced Kansas City earlier this year, maybe the Browns' Week 17 victory over the Jaguars last season will be of help to them. If you don't remember, Cleveland beat Jacksonville 23-17 at home behind minimal passing from Derek Anderson and a strong ground game. The final score was a little deceptive. Cleveland was up 23-10 before Jacksonville scored a touchdown with no time left in the game.
Offensively, David Garrard has had a couple of down games, but he's on pace to have a career year. He's thrown for 15 touchdowns to 7 interceptions and is completing a remarkable 69% of his passes. Maurice Jones-Drew's numbers are down a little bit this year, but he still ranks among one of the league's top backs and is consistent. Jacksonville has quietly had good numbers from receivers Mike Thomas, Mike Sims-Walker, and Marcedes Lewis, but I don't think Cleveland will treat them with the same "respect" as they did the Jets' receivers.
A big difference between the Jaguars this week and the Jets last week? The Jaguars aren't very good defensively. On average, they give up more points than any of the opponents Cleveland has faced this season -- 27.8 points per week. You can pretty much pick and choose how you want to attack them, as they don't particularly excel at defending the run or the pass. When it comes to making plays on defense, they don't come very often either -- they rank below average in sacks, forced fumbles, interceptions, and passes defended.
The bottom line is that Cleveland can't head into this game expecting to have an easier matchup than the ones they've had over the past three weeks. Based on the way Jacksonville's season has gone, this could end up being the toughest game since the one against Pittsburgh. Cleveland also has big holes to fill with the definite absence of Scott Fujita on defense and the probable absence of Joshua Cribbs.
If there's an X-factor to this game, it could be coaching. When Jacksonville plays inconsistent, I do blame that on Del Rio. If Cleveland, even with their setbacks on the injury front, continues to play motivated and physical football, I think they can wear Jacksonville down and come out on the winning side.
0 recs | 46 comments
Their record and the disparity in their approach to winning leads me to believe we will encounter a team that can play it two ways. One, toe to toe, winging it. Two, versus your play calling, on offense AND defense. The thing to do is also choose one or the other, only with much more gumption. Come in hard with either approach and don´t slow down, show you can follow a game plan.
mooncamping - November 18, 2010
We’ve blown out better teams this season. I honestly think we’ll take this one fairly easily.
38 – 13
Simmsinns - November 18, 2010
I voted a blowout in favor of the browns myself.
Kimble_79 - November 18, 2010
We’ve blown out a better team.
North Coast Flea - November 18, 2010
To be more clear I wouldn’t say we blew out NO.
North Coast Flea - November 18, 2010
Yes we did, they had garbage touchdowns which discourage the score but if you watched the game, it was a blowout.
SpecialBrownie - November 18, 2010
we didn’t dominate NO, they just made some really costly mistakes.
notthatnoise - November 18, 2010
Which we probably influenced, which goes back to us dominating them.
SpecialBrownie - November 18, 2010
Mistakes are part of the game. We were up 20 really late.
Roger Dorn - November 18, 2010
Ah, thank you.
SpecialBrownie - November 18, 2010
That’s called dominating. We turned the ball over, we made plays, we put the onus on them to make plays and they didn’t. Scoreboard.
rufio - November 18, 2010
Ah, thank you.
SpecialBrownie - November 18, 2010
By “turned the ball over” I mean “we were able to create turnovers versus their offense”
rufio - November 19, 2010
I guess I’m just factoring in other stuff besides the score. didn’t they have more total yardage than us? didn’t our offense play a pretty mediocre game? our defense dominated, our offense played decently, I just don’t consider that dominating.
New England on the other hand…
notthatnoise - November 19, 2010
This is where I was coming from, if No didn’t make a few costly mistakes they were still in the game. NE on the other hand, we took them to the woodshed pretty much the whole game.
North Coast Flea - November 19, 2010
I think schooling them on one side of the ball while playing league average on the other – especially when that gives you a large lead – is essentially dominating. But since there’s no official standards, it’s all just opinion.
JustBob - November 19, 2010
Our offense had a horrible game. But we didn’t even try to gain yardage or score when we had the ball, our #1 goal once we went up 20-3 early was to minimize risk on offense.
We had a crap-ton of “hidden” yardage, mostly on Bowens’ INTs for TDs. We dominated that game, we were essentially taking kneeldowns for a half.
rufio - November 21, 2010
we walked all over the pats, though.
GoBrowns - November 19, 2010
I did watch the game. We played well but they made a lot of key mistakes that help put away the game, we did not dominate them like we did the Pats.
North Coast Flea - November 18, 2010
…New England too
bross09 - November 19, 2010
My biggest concern is that our defense effectively played 2 games last week. They could get knocked around pretty good if they are playing on rubbery legs.
HenryDawg - November 18, 2010 via mobile
Agreed. I see this game as being tougher than we might think. I got the Browns 24-21.
Les Fleurs Du Mal - November 18, 2010
thats why the browns need to control the clock. this D has not been particularly good this year so we need to have long, sustained drives.
bross09 - November 19, 2010
Garrard and MJD are going to give them some issues, but I think they will prevail. The key will be getting up on them early. That takes MJD out of the equation.
CW78 - November 18, 2010
We’ve got to get back to ball possession. If Hillis carries for 100 yards and McCoy has 20-25 attempts, we’ll blow them out.
StuckInPa - November 18, 2010
The third quater fiasco from last week was much more the defense’s fault and the Jets’ superior ability to keep it than the offense. I mean, once the offense did come on the field and threw consistent 3 and outs, yes. But it was more the defense’s fault.
SpecialBrownie - November 18, 2010
I’m not sure if I would call it the defense’s “fault” per se. There were definitely some 3rd downs on that drive we needed/should have stopped, but they really ran a fantastic drive from my perspective.
But yes, I was truly pissed when we finally got the ball back after the missed FG and promptly went 3-and-out. Offense absolutely HAS to pick up a first down there, if only to give the D a rest.
DisplacedBuckeye - November 18, 2010
I like the Browns chances this week after an absolutely brutal schedule for the first half of the year. We have not yet played a team with a losing record at the time of the game. Opponents have a 26-9 (.742) record at the time they faced the browns. Currently those teams have a 52-29 (.642) record with only the bungles being a losing team. Also, in the current ESPN power rankings we have played these teams, #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #9, #11, #15, #28. The Jag’s at 5-4 are #18 in the power rankings.
kedda13 - November 18, 2010
I think this is a close game.
rufio - November 18, 2010
agreed. i feel like this is one of the games that a lot of people have chalked up as a victory that could come up and bite us in the arse … on the flip side, i’m still convinced that we’re going to win an “unexpected” one to make up for it.
DontCallMeJoey - November 19, 2010
wait…didn’t we have two “unexpected” wins?
bross09 - November 19, 2010
Yeah, but we’re taking an extra helping this year.
JustBob - November 19, 2010
While it’s an entirely obvious point, if Garrard has a good day I think they may just have enough. I just hope our key D injuries isn’t the difference here.
DisplacedBuckeye - November 19, 2010
I understand that thinking. However, I’ve been thinking that the Browns want to dominate after letting last week’s game slip away. If Matt Roth gets a sack on the opening drive, the Browns will win by at least 17. That guy needs to get his bloodlust on against the jags.
GoBrowns - November 19, 2010
Agreed. We are playing a team that has won 5 football games, and we are on the road.
Also, while I love how we have been playing, I think, inevitably, there are going to be games where this team comes back down to earth. I don’t know if it’ll be this week, but it’s likely to happen. We still have major issues in terms of talent and that fact hasn’t changed despite much improved play over the course of the last month.
Western Reserve - November 19, 2010
I don’t think we have anywhere to come back down to. We’re a team that’s 3-6 and a few key plays from being 8-1, now if we’d have made (or not made) those plays and were sitting at 8-1 I can see the coming back down to earth.
North Coast Flea - November 19, 2010
We’ve been riding pretty high the last three games. I don’t think it’s unrealistic to think, even if this team could continue playing on a similar level, to still end up a respectable 4-3 down the stretch, especially with four games on the road.
Western Reserve - November 19, 2010
We’re not even close to being an 8-1 team. Let’s be realistic.
Buckeye Brad - November 19, 2010
I am being realistic, we had a shot to win every game IMO except the Pittsburgh game. Each game was one or two plays we did or didn’t make away from winning. I think the last few games have proved that we can compete with the upper echelon teams. Let’s not be pessimistic.We have Rocland for that after all.
North Coast Flea - November 20, 2010
I think there’s a large, encompassing middle between your optimism and Rocland’s pessimism. The margins are small in the NFL — “any given Sunday” — virtually every team has a chance to win any given game; this year especially. If the Browns could be 8-1 right now, and could go 7-0 down the stretch, the Browns could have finished 15-1. And I just don’t think this team is the ‘85 Bears. But I’m not trying to rain on your parade. I, too, am very excited and encouraged by what we’ve seen the last three games.
Western Reserve - November 20, 2010
Except for us last year prior to week 10.
rufio - November 21, 2010
Yes, we has a chance to win every game. This is the NFL — as Bill Parcells (I think) once said, 80% of the games come down to 3 or 4 plays and the team that makes those plays win. Using your criteria, there are about 20 teams right now that are “a few plays away” from being 8-1 or 9-0. That doesn’t mean all those teams are really that good.
The Browns are playing well and we should be happy, but let’s not go crazy here. This team does not have the talent of an elite team and any objective observor can see that. That doesn’t take anything away from this team or the coaches, but it’s silly to say that we are close to being an 8-1 team. That’s not being pessimistic, that’s being realistic. We are all intelligent people and we can see the flaws and shortcomings of this team. I’m not trying to put down this team, because I’m very excited about how they’ve been playing the past month, but we can’t ignore the truth and pretend we’re an upper echelon team right now. We’re not.
Buckeye Brad - November 20, 2010
I never said we are an upper echelon team, but we’re a few players away. All I’m saying is that we’re close to turning the corner imo.
North Coast Flea - November 21, 2010
See, this is that “objectivity” that I have brought up previously: how am I supposed to be objective about something like “talent”? I mean every objective number we have for evaluating talent seems to not do a good job, right? 40 times, hand sizes, bench press reps…even at some point the best stats fail to measure talent.
I guess I get your point in that anyone being honest with themselves should judge the Browns to be not among the league’s best in terms of talent. But that’s a judgment, and subjective one.
rufio - November 21, 2010
You’re such a downer.
StuckInPa - November 21, 2010
I’d have actually thought that number would be higher than 80% of games.
Simmsinns - November 21, 2010
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Dawgs By Nature to post a comment.