A few months ago I was in Charlotte to see the Dolphins-Carolina game. My son wanted to get to the stadium early and see some of the players get off the bus and enter the stadium. We were there in plenty of time and were able to see all of the Dolphin players. As they were walking by us I couldn't help but notice how unimpressive they looked as a team. The phins players looked small and they looked frail. Our receiving core was noticeably tiny. Ginn, Camarillo, Hartline and Bess quickly made me realize why Miami is no threat in the passing game. Pat White looked like he was in junior high. Gabril Wilson? Merling? Weak.

To be honest, the only impressive looking athletes who really wowed me seeing them in person were Jake Long and Sean Smith. I knew Jake would be massive but Sean Smith is much more imposing in person than he appears on tv.

So what does all of this mean? I think it helps explain how poor of a team we were in the 4th quarter last season. I can easily see how other teams could wear down Miami and push them around at the end of games. Last fall I was in Atlanta for the VT-Bama game. Just so happened we were staying at the same hotel as the Crimson Tide. I saw alot of their players up close and it was a completely different experience from seeing the phins. Rolando McClain? Beast. Athlete. Julio Jones? Freak of nature athlete. Dante Hightower, Mark Ingraham, Roy Upchurch... goes on and on.

We were leading Bama in that game heading into the 4th quarter and then their size and strength took over. It was obvious to see. We had a game plan to beat them, we matched their speed, but their strength and conditioning allowed them to dominate the 4th quarter. Look at Alabama's entire season. Other teams were able to keep it close for the 3 quarters and then Bama's size and strength took over. Hopefully the Dolphins can move towards a roster that can wear teams down at the end of games, because as of now, it's not even close with the roster they have now.

As the saying goes, looks can be decieving... I would blame our lack luster season to an overwelming amount of key injuries, pennington, ronnie, fasano, decimated interior OL, Pat white, Patric kobbs, will allen, porter (gimpy playing on one wheel), crowder, and I am sure that I am missing atleast three more players. I would say that 85 percent of the people above were all starters. Cant win with that much loss... oh and I cant forget about pasqualoni- he SUCKSS!!! I drew up better defensive coverage playing on the beach playing with my buddies

I don't think Pasqualoni sucks. I think he suffered from Porter being washed up and refusing to come off the field, from Gabril Wilson being beyond horrible, from having to start 2 rookie corners, and from losing Jason Ferguson.

Someone had to take the hit, Pasqualoni did. Nolan is a bit of an upgrade anyway....so I don't mind the move. But I didn't pin a lot of our defensive problems on Pasqualoni. You either have the players or you don't. He didn't.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/09/2010 07:11AM by MikeO.

MikeO Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't think Pasqualoni sucks. I think he
> suffered from Porter being washed up and refusing
> to come off the field, from Gabril Wilson being
> beyond horrible, from having to start 2 rookie
> corners, and from losing Jason Ferguson.
>
> Someone had to take the hit, Pasqualoni did. Nolan
> is a bit of an upgrade anyway....so I don't mind
> the move. But I didn't pin a lot of our defensive
> problems on Pasqualoni. You either have the
> players or you don't. He didn't.

Isn't the substitution rotation the job of the DC? Pasqualoni chose to play Wilson and put him in situations he wasn't equiped to handle. I doubt Sparano was twisting Pasqualoni's arm on playing Porter. What about the change in gameplan from the 1st to 2nd half against the Saints? That wasn't Paasqualoni?

I believe if we would have taken Wilson and Porter out and/or played more agressive defense overall, we would have won more games.

I agree that he was stuck with some defective parts; but, we had several games in which our D was being effective with some changes and then they turtled and played it safe....and lost.

We had young rookie corners who were exposed with schemes that had them in man too often.

Porter refused to come off the field ...more than once....more than twice...why was he back on the field? DC makes that call.

YES!!!! you are correct sir!

if Porter is refusing to come off the field, its the head coaches call to suspend him. Not an assistant.

third and long and we consistently could not get off the field. I used to dred when we made teams one dimensional since we could not defend the pass... EVEN IN A PASS DEFENSE!!! soooo frustrating. 3-10, 3-15, 3-18 it didnt matter even if J.Russell were to drop back I knew that it was going for a first down. He had to go, not a scape goat just the right move.

MikeO Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> if Porter is refusing to come off the field, its
> the head coaches call to suspend him. Not an
> assistant.

What, the DC can't tell the HC to bench him? Is Sparano that much of a wimp? I don't think so. Pasqualoni thought he could "handle" the situation. WRONG.

We had the 15th ranked defense in 2008. We chose to resign two players to big contracts on defense that did nothing to help us in 09 but their was no way to avoid that.

We let our best CB get away and started a rookie in his place and our starting safety was let go in favor of a free agent flop.

We cut our starting SOLB only to watch him go to Cleveland and be a very successful WOLB's. We got nothing for him in return.

We lost our best NT, CB and ILB to injury.

While you can't do much about injuries, it seems to me most of our problems stemmed from personnel decisions.

Everyone knew Porter was a liability vs the run. Why is it that no one had the foresight to trade him and get a high pick after his 17 sack season and could not identify that Roth could be a very good WOLB?

There were things that went on that none of us knew about and Paul P. was fired for some reason... but it was not all his fault.

Hindsight is 20/20 but we would have been better of to trade Porter for a 2nd round pick and keep Roth. I still don't know what happened there.

We should have kept Renaldo Hill and steered clear of Wilson.

We should have drafted Connor Barwin and stayed away from Pat WHite.

Or how about the ignoring of the NT position b/c of Soliai. Sammie Lee Hill is turning into a promising player and we passed on him as well for the likes of Pat Turner.

These are the kind of decisions that make or break a team in a matter of a few years....(see N.E....They had some great drafts and turned in around and are now doing the opposite)

I am beginning to wonder about Ireland and his ability to evaluate players....who knows how many of the good decisions were made by Parcels?

The "trifecta" are said to work as a team and come to a consensus about personnel moves so there is enough blame to go around.

.....................................................................................
“I'm here" You're welcome!" - Kenny Powers

montequi Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> MikeO Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > if Porter is refusing to come off the field,
> its
> > the head coaches call to suspend him. Not an
> > assistant.
>
> What, the DC can't tell the HC to bench him? Is
> Sparano that much of a wimp? I don't think so.
> Pasqualoni thought he could "handle" the
> situation. WRONG.


1) Porter was suspended for a game. Why only a game? That call ain't Pasqualoni's/

2) NO ASSISTANT COACH in the league has the kind of power you think they do if you think they can have a guy benched.

3) When Porter is making that kind of money, you don't just bench him without a huge domino effect that will cripple the lockeroom.

and BTW...Matt Roth was given a second round tender.

.....................................................................................
“I'm here" You're welcome!" - Kenny Powers

MikeO Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> montequi Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > MikeO Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > if Porter is refusing to come off the field,
> > its
> > > the head coaches call to suspend him. Not an
> > > assistant.
> >
> > What, the DC can't tell the HC to bench him?
> Is
> > Sparano that much of a wimp? I don't think so.
>
> > Pasqualoni thought he could "handle" the
> > situation. WRONG.
>
>
> 1) Porter was suspended for a game. Why only a
> game? That call ain't Pasqualoni's/
>
> 2) NO ASSISTANT COACH in the league has the kind
> of power you think they do if you think they can
> have a guy benched.
>
> 3) When Porter is making that kind of money, you
> don't just bench him without a huge domino effect
> that will cripple the lockeroom.

If Sparano makes it a habit to overrule his D.C. and force him to play guys just because they have huge contracts, then so much for Nolan improving our defense. I, for one, don't believe Sparano would do that.

if you don't think BIG MONEY guys get special treatment in the NFL your naive!

MikeO Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> if you don't think BIG MONEY guys get special
> treatment in the NFL your naive!

Good coaches hold everyone accountable, regardless of the size of your contract. Just because there are coaches like Wanny doesn't mean all coaches do that.

all coaches do it.

Well Parcells is changing the look of our team. Its only been 2 offseasons.

---------------------

"When you suck long enough, you get a Hickey"

eesti Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Everyone knew Porter was a liability vs the run.
> Why is it that no one had the foresight to trade
> him and get a high pick after his 17 sack season
> and could not identify that Roth could be a very
> good WOLB?
>

Well, you answered the question of why we couldn't have got a high pick for Porter. Everyone knew he was a liability against the run. Porter's sack totals were impressive in 2008, but he was awful against the run. He posted the fewest tackles since his rookie year (before he broke that record again in 2009). And he also completely disappeared down the stretch. He was a complete non-factor in December of 2008. People around the league aren't stupid enough to trade a high pick for a one dimensional LB who talks more than he produces and creates more headaches than he's worth. And because of our salary cap situation, we couldn't cut Porter in 2009. So, we were stuck with him.

Are you sure Roth was playing WOLB in Cleveland? In the games I saw, and it was just a couple, he was playing primarily on the strongside with Wembley on the weakside. They move Wembley around a lot, but he's the guy usually rushing the passer. And to me, Roth looked as slow as ever.

MikeO Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> if you don't think BIG MONEY guys get special
> treatment in the NFL your naive!

You are right here. Just as a college recruits with the full ride has it over a walk on. Why, coaches, GMs, and college coaches need to prove they are right and save face.
Sorry, but that is the way it is. Not only in sports, but in every business. Top recruits and draft choises will get the first chance.

Leon In Denver Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> MikeO Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > if you don't think BIG MONEY guys get special
> > treatment in the NFL your naive!
>
> You are right here. Just as a college recruits
> with the full ride has it over a walk on. Why,
> coaches, GMs, and college coaches need to prove
> they are right and save face.
> Sorry, but that is the way it is. Not only in
> sports, but in every business. Top recruits and
> draft choises will get the first chance.


YEP!