JACKSONVILLE – Let's get to it …

Leonard from Jacksonville

Mr. O. A big thank you for all the insight and wisdom that you have provided via this forum all these years. I believe that I have read every O-Zone written since inception. I appreciate you and the Jaguars' organization for this free service. I want to pose a question that some may think is idiotic. Here goes: T-Law has signed a contract that substantially uses up an inordinate amount of the salary cap. I do not intend to question whether he deserves same. In order to keep our team together, would our quarterback consider reworking his contract to a more cap-friendly position in order to allow for more cap space to retain running back Travis Etienne Jr. and linebacker Devin Lloyd. I understand that quarterback Tom Brady did such things to help retain the New England Patriots' core players. I am tired of typing. I am very interested to hear your thoughts on this. Thank you for all you do.

Jaguars quarterback Trevor Lawrence signed a big contract that will take up a lot of salary-cap space moving forward. Every NFL quarterback perceived to be a franchise quarterback after his rookie contract plays under a big contract that will take up a lot of his team's salary-cap space moving forward. I expect Lawrence will restructure his contract from time to time to help the Jaguars maneuver within the cap in a given year – just as many players with cap-eating contracts have done and will continue to do. Very, very, very few players truly rework contracts in the sense of giving back money or agreeing to earn less money – and I do not expect Lawrence will "take less money" so that the Jaguars can re-sign Etienne or Lloyd. I would not do this. Very few people who are honest with themselves would do this. To whatever extent Brady did this while with the Patriots, it was an outlier and no one – not Lawrence, not anyone – should be expected to do it. It's professional football. You play for the money.

Yeti Daddy from Somewhere and Yet Nowhere

So, here we are! I have been watching Jag highlights and games. Head Coach Liam Coen did a great job last year on games days. Since every team learns, adapts, responds to an ever-changing landscape, how much did it matter that it was his first year and teams didn't have a large body of work from which to prepare for his style of game calls? And how do you think it will impact next year's record?

Jaguars Head Coach Liam Coen was the Tampa Bay Buccaneers' offensive coordinator in 2024, and he runs an offense similar to that run by the Los Angeles Rams and multiple other NFL teams. I mention these things to make the point that teams weren't completely unfamiliar what Coen and the Jaguars were trying to do offensively this season. Teams undoubtedly will scout the Jaguars this offseason and scheme ways to stop the offense. But if you're asking if the Jaguars' success offensively this season was a function of Coen and the Jaguars having some newfangled scheme that the league didn't understand – and if that means they will be ineffective next season … no, I don't think that will be the case.

J.Hooks from Mandarin

Liam Coen alluded to the fact that he hasn't even opened up the whole playbook for Trevor yet and they were going to focus on a lot more packages and plays. That gives me a ton of belief that the offense next season will be even more dangerous. That's getting me fired up!

As it should.

Travis from High Springs

I know this is impossible to predict, but what does your gut say about Travis Hunter's role next season? Do you think he plays a lot both ways? Or do you believe it'll be a situation where he plays full-time defense and just has certain packages on offense, maybe between 10 to 15 plays per game?

I expect there's a good chance Hunter will play a full-time role as a cornerback with a role as a receiver. The extent of that role on offense remains to be seem.

Nick from Palm Coast, FL

Did we not have a run-game coordinator or a defensive pass-game coordinator last year? Does every team have these coaches?

The Jaguars this week hired Mathieu Araujo as defensive pass-game coordinator and Brian Picucci as offensive run-game coordinator. They did not have these positions last season. Not every team has such specific coordinators under the offensive and defensive coordinators. Whether teams do or don't have such positions depends on how the head coach wants the staff structured and whether the head coach has coaches he believes will excel in those positions.

Jami from Claxton, GA

What will a run game or passing coordinator do? I've always assumed that's what the coordinators do. Thanks.

A defensive pass-game coordinator coordinates run defense more specifically than a defensive coordinator. An offensive run-game coordinator coordinates run offense more specifically than an offensive coordinator. Are the positions necessary? Yes, if the head coach believes so.

Paul from St. Augustine, FL

I never thought we'd manage to retain our coordinators. It honestly still feels a little strange to have coordinators we want to retain, honestly. I'm finally coming around to agreeing with Andy Dufrense on this whole "hope" thing.

Hope is a good thing. Winning is a cool thing. Fans like it. They also like coordinators when things are going well. Fans fan. It's what they do.

David from Jacksonville

My Mom used to tell me there is no such thing as a dumb question, so I hope this isn't dumb. I kept reading you say recently that the Hall of Fame voting system is imperfect. Who are the people that made it imperfect and who are the people that can fix it?

The Pro Football Hall of Fame's Board of Directors and Board of Trustees set the voting rules, bylaws and committee composition for the Hall of Fame. The group revised bylaws to the current system two years ago. Remember: The previous system was imperfect and the current system is imperfect. A new system will be imperfect because there's no perfect voting system for this sort of entity. But the current system appears to be reducing the number of people enshrined each season. If there's going to be imperfection, I would rather see that imperfection err toward more enshrinees.

Bradford from Orange Park, FL

I don't know if you remember you and I, a couple years ago, kicking Fred Taylor's Pro Football Hall of Fame merits back and forth on this column. You said he should be in, and gave insight as to why he wasn't yet. I said he should be in, and that he was getting a hard time because he played for Jacksonville, a smaller market. Some things change in this life. Some things do not. #FreeFreddyT

OK.

Howard from Homestead, FL

Is it safe to say that the diminished seating capacity in 2026 will mean no home primetime games? The NFL wouldn't want to highlight a game with only 30,000 fans, would it?

I don't think it's at all safe to say that reduced capacity in EverBank Stadium in 2026 will mean the Jaguars not having a prime-time home game. I will surprised if the Jaguars don't have multiple prime-time games in 2026 and I expect at least one to be in Jacksonville. We'll see.

Pedal Bin from Farnborough, Hampshire, UK

Oh Mighty 'O' / King of all Funk, with regards to a recent suggestion that field goals are worth four points, the now defunct NFL Europe used to award four points for a field goal of 50 yards or longer. Admittedly that was when 50-yard field goals were rarer than now. Like you, I cannot see the NFL changing the rules, but maybe a team could propose a field goal of 55 (or 60?) yards or more to be worth four points. It would certainly make for interesting decisions at the end of close games as to whether to try for two points after a touchdown, to go for it on fourth down or even deliberately losing a yard or two to enter "four-point range."

I would hate, hate, hate – did I say "hate?" – this because I would hate to see the game bent, twisted and further wrung out of shape than is already the case. Example: The new kickoff rules, which have made the play nearly unrecognizable and far less entertaining than the old rules. I think most fans, observers and league officials agree that the current kickoff rule is less than "ideal" – but that there is a legitimate safety reason for the rule and it therefore is at least acceptable. I doubt there would be any real momentum for changing the rule on field-goal points just to add a point to a play that has been fine essentially since the league began. I hope this is the case, anyway. This old sportswriter can only handle so much.