My first thought was to have this be the last day of logo talk, but it remains strong – dominating the inbox at startling numbers, actually. So, we'll see what the day brings.
Let's get to it . . .
Sally from Jacksonville:
Why has the reaction to the new logo NOT been a surprise? Isn't the intent and purpose behind designing a new logo to generate a positive response? When you say the negative reaction to the new logo is not a huge surprise you imply you either had seen the logo prior to its reveal and had formed an opinion of your own that matches those that don't like it OR you expected the logo to look bad OR you think the collective Jag fan base is whiny and incapable of ever being happy with anything. So which is it?
John: Actually, Sally, in your notably confident effort to assume what I was implying, you omitted the most crucial category – that is, that people are often initially resistant to change of any kind. And I certainly do not think the Jaguars' fan base is any more whiny and any more incapable of ever being happy with anything than the rest of humankind, a group of which I am proud to call myself a member.
J.R. from Yulee, FL:
I took a deep breath and I have to admit the logo is growing on me. I like it.
Nick from Annapolis, MD:
As tough a decision as it will be, I would not play in 2013 if I were Laurent Robinson. Make that decision early. Commit to resting and trying to get well for 2014. Stress on the brain wondering whether or not he is going to be able to come back can't be good, and obviously getting a couple concussions early in the season might end his career. Let's be honest though: no one, quite literally no one, really knows what the best course of action is. I feel for him.
John: He indeed has reached a difficult point. There is so much unknown about concussions, and so much conflicting information, that it's difficult if not impossible right now to separate the noise from the facts. There is so much talk in the media about the seriousness of concussions that public opinion has gone completely over to the other side; whereas five years ago there was almost no awareness and little in place to protect players, we are now at a spot where one concussion spawns talk of shutting a player down for the season. Is this necessary? Is it smart? Is it too much? It very well could be. Or it very well may not be. We just don't know. Although there are reports suggesting that concussions cause long-term problems, there are also reports that indicate there just aren't enough facts to know. Where does that leave a player in Robinson's situation? A very frightening place, to be sure – and a place where no one but him can make the decision he ultimately must make.
Andy from St. John's, FL:
Time to fess up. Did you see the logo before the press conference, or was that really the first time you ever saw it – when Mr. Khan unveiled it Tuesday afternoon?
John: I could tell you, but then . . . well, you know.
Josh from Dayton, OH:
You pulled the entirely predictable accusation that we're all just afraid of change, that we need to "let it sink in" and we'll realize it's fine. I for one have no problem with change and was looking forward to a new logo. Our old logo was great but I was excited to see what we could come up with. I love that they kept the colors, because I love the Jags colors. But the logo is atrocious. It's not just us, NFL.com users are laughing at us, too. The logo is supposed to be something we can be proud of. It represents our team, it's what we wear to show we support them. I'm too embarrassed to wear this logo. For the first time, as an out-of-town fan, I'm wondering if it's worth everything I put up with to be a Jags fan now that I even have to be embarrassed about the team logo.
John: I never accused anyone of anything, and actually, I save most of my accusing these days for those times I suspect J.P. Shadrick of using the mattress in my office when I'm out of town. As for your concerns over the logo, no one can force you to like anything, but based on the limited about of time I've spent perusing comments on nfl.com – well, let's just say, "if nfl.com users don't like it . . ."
Mike from Section 238:
John - toughen up! Close the window behind Ryan and leave him out on the ledge with all the other "conditional" fans.
John: I thought of that. I didn't. Insurance reasons.
Gary from Broken Arrow, OK:
The Jags, since the purchase of the team by Mr. Khan, have undergone constant and nearly complete change. Why is it that something like a facelift of our beloved logo would not be expected? To me all of the changes appear to be upgrades, including the logo. Why do we love our team so much, but question the changes that will inevitably make the organization better?
John: I've said often since Tuesday's announcement, the first instinct of many people is to reject and fear change, but let me be clear: it's not that people don't want to like it. It's just that it's unfamiliar and in time, most will grow as comfortable with the new logo as they were the old one. People are uncomfortable with the unfamiliar, and some longtime fans have been uncomfortable and apprehensive about many of the changes under Khan. As you said, people have questioned many of the changes. That's OK. It's not unexpected. It is, in fact, normal. What many people tend to forget is that in 2010 and 2011, there were many things that in fact needed change. The organization as a whole was not as successful as would have been ideal, and there were improvements that needed to be made. When Khan bought the franchise, there was a surge of hope that he would improve those things. Since the purchase, he has made moves to improve and in light of that, it's necessary to remember what improvement is. It's not always just doing old things better. Sometimes, it's doing new things and trying new approaches to discover a better way.
Greg from Jaguarville, FL:
You said you can go crazy thinking about past draft picks, and I agree. Wouldn't they also have different experiences, teachers, and even chances for injury? What if we picked Aaron Rodgers and he got hurt in the first game because he wasn't ready?
John: You touch on something that's very true – and very hard to quantify. Without question the success or failure of many players depends at least somewhat on the circumstances under which they enter professional football. Would Rodgers' career have been different had he been in a situation to play as a rookie? Would he have been ready? Would it have been different had he been in a different offense, with a less stable organization? Of course. The NFL is the ultimate team game, and it's rare for any player to be elite enough to succeed in negative circumstances. The reverse also is true, that average players can perform very well in solid organizations. That's why judging drafts and second-guessing, while entertaining, doesn't do all that much good.
Chris from Jacksonville Beach, FL:
With the second pick of the 2013 NFL draft, the Jacksonville Jaguars select...Ezekiel Ansah, DE from BYU. You heard it here first!
John: Don't rule it out.
Jeff from Atlantic Beach, FL:
The impression I have from the press conference is that Mr. Khan and the Jaguars are committed to the city of Jacksonville, but in order to make it work, Jacksonville also must be committed to the Jaguars. Thoughts?
John: I think Shad Khan has said that more than once since purchasing the team, and I think Wayne Weaver said it more than once during his time as owner. That is, in fact, the implied contract of any professional sports franchise and its market. The team must commit to the city and the city must commit to the team. Anything else is a failed model.
Steven from Arlington, TX:
When I saw the logo, I wasn't happy about it, then I watched the video. I feel like the new logo will grow on me. Shad is doing what he can to keep this team in Jacksonville and i truly believe that now. It would be cool to have that huge TV!
John: People like things that are on television. They really like things that are on big televisions.