The Jaguars and Khan

Jacksonville got waxed again today. 44-17 by the Colts.
Just thinking out loud here, but is anybody else concerned about Khan's track record as their owner?
They're now 6-29 since he bought the club. Best I can tell, they show no signs whatsoever of threatening for a playoff spot.
I know this is a small sample size, that it takes time to turn around a pro sports franchise. But I wonder just how successful he'll turn out to be as an owner. The fact that he's owned them longer than he's owned us and they don't seem to be improving at all concerns me.
Should we be worried that he's our owner at this point in history? I'm starting to wonder....

 

As far as I know (and I'm no expert), being affiliated in any way with the NFL is a license to print money. I'd have to imagine, regardless of success on the field, the Jags' share of the league's television revenue is enough to line his pockets.

So it's not a perfect apples-to-apples comparison. FFC's financial success is more closely tied to its success on the pitch.

That said, I do think it's concerning. Regardless of financial circumstances, you want an owner who's proud to put a winning team out there.

 

And they just named a rookie as the starting quarterback...historically not a recipe for success in the NFL. I'm beginning to see a lot of parallels between the two, regardless of the differences. It can be summed up in two words:
losing football.

 

Not to mention, he seems to like one foot on either side of an issue. He COULD have played Maverick and brought in Tim Tebow which would have given him press and probably more revenue.
Point is he must have found a tax dodge that makes it best to lose?

 

Just another one of a rich man's shiny, new playthings, I think we may have become.

 

The Jags were a dumpster fire before Khan had gotten there. They made strides at the end of last year, and had another good draft. I like Gus Bradley the HC, but as a Pete Carroll disciple who's mantra is 'competition at every spot on the field from day 1' it was stupidity to NOT start the rookie right away (like the Seahawks did when Bradley was there and Russell Wilson outplayed the highly paid Matt Flynn in the preseason). Blake Bortles clearly outperformed Chad Henne, and it was a mistake not to throw him in. He's going to take his lumps, but he has all the attributes to be a franchise QB.

All sports teams are playthings for rich men, but I guarantee you losing is takings its toll a lot more on Khan than any fan of either team.

Tim Tebow? Come on Fog, there is only 1 problem with him (besides the media obsession/distraction he creates)...HE CAN"T THROW THE BALL. Only a total buffoon of an owner would of hitched their wagon to him.

 

I've been a Jaguars fan since the beginning and they've had a hard time putting together a really solid core team for years. They've been pretty poor since 2008 and when Khan took over in 2012 they were just about to hit rock bottom. His first decision, choosing Mike Mularkey as head coach did not turn out to be a good one, but he was also working with the previous GM (sounds familiar). Since Mularkey was replaced with Bradley and Caldwell became the GM I've felt better about the direction of the team.

The second half of last season wasn't too shabby (finished 4-4 after an 0-8 start), so I started this season pretty hopeful. I was at the opening game in Philly and with a 17-0 lead at halftime my son and I were entertaining thoughts of a division championship! They looked awesome on defense and the offense was good enough. I don't know where that defense went in the next 10 quarters.

If I could draw a lesson from Jacksonville to Fulham, I'd say that Khan sincerely wants to help the team win - and put more butts in the seats - but he has to figure out how first. That is partly why I figured Mackintosh would be canned this season since that was what happened with the Jaguars. Khan has also invested a lot in Everbank Field so I would expect some improvements at Craven Cottage too.

I was also a little puzzled by why they didn't pick up Tebow. You can't tell me he'd be any worse than Blaine Gabbert and Tebow would have sold out home games - even if they had a losing record. I went to FSU, so I'm not even a big Tebow fan, but that one didn't make sense to me. Put him in, sell some tickets while losing, and find a better alternative in the meantime.

 

I think you'd be hard pressed to prove all pro sports teams are a rich man's toy. The group that bought the Cardinals from Anheuser-Busch in '96 seem to be good stewards of the club and generally do right by the fans. The ultimate fan/supporter goal is, of course, winning. Bill DeWitt grew up in St. Louis. His father was an MLB executive. He was always around the game, was even a batboy for the Browns. Stayed around the game when they moved and become involved with the Reds.
He hasn't done it alone, but you can't ignore what he's achieved for a small market franchise as the chairman and managing partner. I think he and other successful owners have one thing in common. They truly understand the details of the game. They don't consider it just another one of their "holdings." DeWitt's had his moments (Ballpark Village fiasco), but, for the most part, he's pushed all the right buttons. Certainly can't argue with the results.
I just wonder how savvy our owner is about sports business. It's different, that's for sure.

 

Does it? Andrew Luck has started every single game from day one and had 22 wins in his first two seasons. Russell Wilson won the Super Bowl last year at the end of his second season. He also started every game his first two seasons. There are a lot of other facets involved.

 

That's why I included the qualifying word "historically." If you look back at the history of the league, they are the exceptions, albeit recent exceptions.