Miami QB records since #13

Jay Fiedler 36-23
Chad Henne 13-18
Chad Pennington 12-8
Gus Frerotte 9-6
Matt Moore 6-6
Damon Huard 6-6
Joey Harrington 5-6
Brian Griese 3-2
A.J. Feeley 3-5
Ray Lucas 2-4
Daunte Culpepper 1-3
Cleo Lemon 1-7
Tyler Thigpen 0-1
Sage Rosenfels 0-2
John Beck 0-4
Trent Green 0-5

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

WOW! That's a terrible thing to post this early in the morning lol! It surely brings back some bad memories.

KB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WOW! That's a terrible thing to post this early in
> the morning lol! It surely brings back some bad
> memories.


Makes us pull for tannehill even more.

Dan Marino 147-93

36 fourth quarter comebacks, 51 game-winning drives

That last stat is the one I like.

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

eesti Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Dan Marino 147-93



I thought he had less losses but that is still a great record.

That's what I remember fondly from the Dan Marino Era. If the phins were down in quarter 4 within striking distance, it was a win almost all the time.

I remember having heart attacks every Sunday because the defense kept giving up leads and leaving it all up to Marino.

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

> I remember having heart attacks every Sunday because the defense kept giving up leads and leaving it all up to Marino.

I still think Ollivadotti had pictures of Shula ... why else would they have kept the king of prevent defense on board

Imagine what W/L record Marino & the Fins could have had if he had a defense.

Phinjim Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > I remember having heart attacks every Sunday
> because the defense kept giving up leads and
> leaving it all up to Marino.
>
> I still think Ollivadotti had pictures of Shula
> ... why else would they have kept the king of
> prevent defense on board
>
> Imagine what W/L record Marino & the Fins could
> have had if he had a defense.


Or a decent running game.

TreasurecoastPhinsfan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Phinjim Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > > I remember having heart attacks every Sunday
> > because the defense kept giving up leads and
> > leaving it all up to Marino.
> >
> > I still think Ollivadotti had pictures of Shula
> > ... why else would they have kept the king of
> > prevent defense on board
> >
> > Imagine what W/L record Marino & the Fins could
> > have had if he had a defense.
>
>
> Or a decent running game.

I do NOT fault Shula for our lack of running game with Marino.

- First of all, Dan was the worst play-action QB I've ever seen. It was blatantly obvious that he preferred to pass than hand it off.
- Second, our RBs when we had Marino were all very good receivers...so they were still threats on offense
- Third, we lost Andre Franklin in Marino's rookie year
- Fourth, Sammy Smith would have been a decent RB if he could only hold on to the ball!!!

I think, with a decent defense, Dan could have won 1 or more Superbowls even without a decent running game.

montequi Wrote:

> I do NOT fault Shula for our lack of running game
> with Marino.
>

He sure as heck tried to find running backs. There was David Overstreet, who tragically died. There was Joe Carter, who flashed big time ability but couldn't hang on to the ball. There was Troy Stradford, who was quite good, but got injured. A first round pick on Lorenzo Hampton. Another on Sammie Smith. The trade for Bobby Humphrey.

To Montequi:

It was a high scoring offense that was predicated on "we'll simply outscore you."

Had we a good running game while Dan was in his hey-day, I'm not sure it would not have actually had the effect of slowing DOWN our scoring and maybe, in some respects, lowering the scoring total.

And what are the other positives of a running game BESIDES SCORING, resting the defense. But I'm not sure rest would have helped our defense.

In any event, a better defense would probably have helped but it was not a foregone conclusion.

The two most famous losses I remember from the Marino days was the lost to The San Diego Chargers and the lost to the 49ers in the SuperBowl. I remember us beating the mighty Bears in 1985, the only blemish on their SuperBowl Shuffle year.

However of those two famous losses, Dan Fouts of the Chargers simply outscored us, so I'm not sure that a good defense (HAD WE HAD ONE) would have been anymore effective at stopping Dan Fouts than the vaunted Chicago Bear offense was at stopping Dan Marino. I remember my ex-wife said, "You want to put up points Miami? That's Dan Fouts' middle name. He can outscore anyone. You wanna get into a scoring contest? The Chargers say "Fine. That's our game."

The 49ers were just as much an offensive power but I don't think that a better Miami Defense would have stopped Joe Montana and Jerry Rice anymore than, again, defenses were able to stop Dan Marino.

So, as a result, I'm not sure a better defense would have changed history either.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/23/2012 06:27PM by ChyrenB.

What is impressive to me is, after The Mark's (Duper and Clayton) left, Dan really had no Top Shelf receivers. Mcduffie was good but not great and some of the 'big names' they brought were WELL past their prime. Still, Dan used what he had and made us a contender year in and year out.

I've often thought that the Marino era defenses lack of pressure and just plain old nastiness was exacerbated by the fact that we DID have a big play, quick strike offense with no ground game. Even the successful drives didn't last very long so the defense was on the field A LOT. Being as porous as they were this only made them look worse.

KB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What is impressive to me is, after The Mark's
> (Duper and Clayton) left, Dan really had no Top
> Shelf receivers. Mcduffie was good but not great
> and some of the 'big names' they brought were WELL
> past their prime. Still, Dan used what he had and
> made us a contender year in and year out.
>
> I've often thought that the Marino era defenses
> lack of pressure and just plain old nastiness was
> exacerbated by the fact that we DID have a big
> play, quick strike offense with no ground game.
> Even the successful drives didn't last very long
> so the defense was on the field A LOT. Being as
> porous as they were this only made them look
> worse.

Irving Fryar was in his prime.

Still, the thing about Dan was that a receiver didn't have to be fast or big - they just had to be open. That is what a good QB does - he makes the receivers good.

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

Miami Dolphins. Always Perfect.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/24/2012 07:56AM by DolfanKing.

montequi Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------


Quote:
Had we a good running game while Dan was in his hey-day






> >
> Good running game? I don't consider no 1000-yard
> rusher and almost never having a rusher over 100
> yards in a game a good running game. Our running
> game was pathetic, for the most part, when Dan was
> at his best.

You misread the phrase you quoted. It does NOT say we HAD a good running game. It says quite the opposite. It concedes we did NOT have a good running game. It says "HAD we had a good running game then......



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 08/24/2012 08:30AM by ChyrenB.