Don't get the wrong idea; This is all my opinion and not based on anything I know for a fact. In the end it seems that the other interviews were just a front. Gene had to do his "due diligence" and interview these guys, but none of them was going to get the job. It was always going to be Mularkey.

While I am not necessarily anti-Mularkey, he is not who I wanted. Thus, my bias may be clouding my judgement. That being said, I think Gene did a disservice to the Jaguars organization by not considering all of the candidates. Why ask Chudzinski for a second interview that Khan would sit in, only to never have that interview? Why not wait for Mike McCoy to be available to interview? Was Schottenheimer ever actually interviewed (I don't actually know this so forgive me if he was and I am just ignorant.)?

My problem with Mularkey is not his offense's performance this past season; Mike McCarthy had a poor offense the year before he was hired in GB. My problem is his tenure in Buffalo. While you might say "It's Buffalo, no one can win there", what makes Buffalo any different than any other place in the long run? It is my opinion that a great coach will find ways to win with what he has, and Mularkey did not do that. A great coach is what Jax needs if they want achieve the ultimate goal of winning the superbowl, and in his only stint as one, Mularkey was mediocre. If that is what the front office was looking for in a coach they should have kept Del Rio.

All in all, I just think that Gene, having had a relationship with Mularkey previously, targeted him from the beginning. I understand that hiring someone who has never been a head coach could end poorly or fantastically or could end up being another Del Rio, but I would always choose someone with the potential for greatness, bust factor and all, over someone who has proven he is not great.

Just my opinion