One thing it shows is that DolfanKing is "imagining things" when he says that on that last unsuccessful 2nd down and 8 play when we should have been running the ball and Tannehill threw a long incomplete bomb to the 3 yard line, there was no one open short like DK says.

ChyrenB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> One thing it shows is that DolfanKing is
> "imagining things" when he says that on that last
> unsuccessful 2nd down and 8 play when we should
> have been running the ball and Tannehill threw a
> long incomplete bomb to the 3 yard line, there was
> no one open short like DK says.


There were 3 plays in that series, and there wasn't a 2nd and 8 situation...

1st and 10 at the 25: In the video, at 8:10. Hartline is wide open at the 17 on 1st and 10. Instead, Tannehill tries to force a pass to Fasano on 15 yard out - incomplete.

Next play 2nd and 10: In the video at 8:21 Thomas is wide open at the 21 with a ton of room in front of him. Instead Tannehill tries to force a throw to Hartline into double coverage and is way off target in the corner of the end zone.

Next play 2nd and 10: In the video at 8:26. Bess is wide open at the 20 with a ton of room in front of him. Instead Tannehill tries to force the same exact throw to Hartline with the same exact result. The definition of insanity.

I'd like to say you are imagining things, but I suspect you motives here are a bit more malicious. You pick a random play out of the game then try to tell me I'm making crap up. Yes, you are a lawyer.

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

Miami Dolphins. Always Perfect.

ChyrenB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> RESPONSE: YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE WRONG SERIES

I know what series I was talking about. Evident you made some wrong assumptions about what I was talking about.


> NUMB-NUTS!!!!!

That was rude. All I did was call you a layer.


> And you are an outright liar because everyone
> knows I was talking about the overtime FAILED KICK
> NOT THE SUCCESSFUL KICK IN REGULATION!


No, I'm not a liar. You would be obtuse for thinking so.

You never said what series you were talking about. You just mentioned a second down. If you noticed, I put down times in the video, so there is no ambiguity. The game was full of second downs, so I really had no idea what you were talking about. But since you were responding to me with such confidence, I figured you knew what I was talking about. Obviously not.

As far as everyone... this discussion looks like just you and I, and since I had no clue which second down you were talking about, then you are wrong by saying "everyone knew". It looks like the only person that knew what you were blabbing on about was you.

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

Miami Dolphins. Always Perfect.

DolfanKing Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> No, I'm not a liar. You would be obtuse for
> thinking so.
>
> You never said what series you were talking about.

RESPONSE: ONLY ALL OVER THE BOARD AND EVERYTIME I MENTIONED IT I ALSO SAID OVERTIME AND A CHANCE TO WIN THE GAME. What other field goal would have won the game for us with the Jets having no chance to respond?

But YOU KNEW that was what I was talking about all along. You're a liar and you wanted to blame the loss on Tannehill.


> You just mentioned a second down.


RESPONSE: No I didn't "just" mention a second down. I talked about overtime and winning the game with a sure thing.



If you noticed,
> I put down times in the video, so there is no
> ambiguity.

RESPONSE: You only brought out the video at the END OF THE DISCUSSION when you were looking for a place to hide because you knew you had no other argument. When you realize you had lost the argument, you went looking for a place to save face and dreamed up this whole "misunderstanding."


The game was full of second downs, so
> I really had no idea what you were talking about.

RESPONSE: A lie.

> But since you were responding to me with such
> confidence, I figured you knew what I was talking
> about. Obviously not.


RESPONSE: You're lying. You only dreamed up this late argument when the video was posted during our argument which showed that NOBODY WAS OPEN WHEN TANNEHILL THREW THAT BOMB IN OVERTIME. I'm now going to go back through your posts and repost one of yours that CLEARLY SHOWS YOU KNEW WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THAT PASS ON 2ND AND 8 IN OVERTIME.

>
> As far as everyone... this discussion looks like
> just you and I, and since I had no clue which
> second down you were talking about,

RESPONSE: You're lying.

then you are
> wrong by saying "everyone knew". It looks like
> the only person that knew what you were blabbing
> on about was you.

RESPONSE: DK, you said that the coaches don't consult this board when deciding which plays to call. That's true. Like Crowder said, we are just guys on a chatboard talking about our favorite team.

We don't affect anything. There is probably nothing more insignificant in the world than what we do on this chatboard.

BUT MARK THIS DOWN IN YOUR BOOK, we who post on this board may not have much but we do have our integrity.

We take a position and sometimes we argue it to the death even when wrong.

But you are the only person on this board who I have seen actually lie about a position you took and who has PRETENDED TO HAVE misinterpreted someone else's position.

Oh that happens BY ACCIDENT. Many times. But in this instance, I posted TOO MANY TIMES how I was talking about that kick in overtime to have someone not realize what I was talking about.

And like I said, your comment about Tannehill's passes on the last drive in REGULATION doesn't make sense that I was talking about that because that was a MADE FIELD GOAL and I was clearly talking about a MISSED field goal.

You have given up perhaps the only thing you had left on this board, DK, and that was your integrity.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/29/2012 09:15PM by ChyrenB.

I am not sure, you guys got me lost in the argument and which play you guys are talking about... either way,
I thought the video was good work by the guy who did it, labeling the WR who the ball was going to presnap and identifying the blitzing players. He said he will be doing it each week for Tannehill and posting on friday following the games. supercool, I am stoked! I will try and post them each week, if I can find the links....If you go to the page he has the Houston and Radiers games are available as well...

-----------------------------------------------------------------
All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Nietzsche

Crowder52 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I am not sure, you guys got me lost in the
> argument and which play you guys are talking
> about... either way,

I don't blame anyone for not wanting to get involved, Crowder, but the bottom line is either DolfanKing is not telling the truth or he is admitting something much worse..........that he runs his mouth without even reading and understanding and thus knowing what he is talking about.

No one who was not just blindly attacking Tannehill and defending every other element of the team would have thought I was talking about any kick besides the one in overtime.......unless they were just running their mouth without reading what they were responding to.

I understand your position on icing the kicker, it was clear in the topic...
IMO, I think it is fine as long as you communicate with your defense that you are going to do it, maybe the players can use the fake play to set up another play, but I think Philbin failed when he didnt communicate the play to Starks and the rest of the defense..

-----------------------------------------------------------------
All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Nietzsche

NFL.com now says Reggie is starting today..

-----------------------------------------------------------------
All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Nietzsche

The argument really was not so much icing the kicker but which field goal I was blaming the coaching staff for blowing. I could give him a pass for lumping me in with those who said that we should never have iced the kicker and I understand your point about communicating to the defense.

Again, I heard that whistle loudly. Maybe that's just TV. But I can't help but think players on the field heard it and held up just a little bit and if that happened to the guy blocking Starks then the whistle made all the difference.

I think its something that can never be known. I saw your replay but as I said before, we're talking about what 22 players heard and saw and whether they went full out so that you can say that "but for" the timeout, we would have blocked the winning field goal. I don't think it is possible to say that. I guess which makes your point about communicating to the defense even more valid.

ChyrenB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> I don't blame anyone for not wanting to get
> involved, Crowder, but the bottom line is either
> DolfanKing is not telling the truth or he is
> admitting something much worse..........that he
> runs his mouth without even reading and
> understanding and thus knowing what he is talking
> about.

Hardly either. You admitted that you did criticized the TO call.

As for the rest, you are flipping out, calling people liars for no reason, claiming I'm upsetting "everyone".... that is hysterical. But, you are a lawyer, so none of this is unexpected.

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

Miami Dolphins. Always Perfect.

I said that calling timeouts no longer works.

That's a world of difference from people criticizing THIS timeout because they thought we had blocked the field goal ON THIS OCCASION!!!!.

I have to keep it simple with you because the more someone argues with you, the more you get to hide behind misunderstanding the conversation!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/30/2012 11:30AM by ChyrenB.

While you call me a liar for saying you criticized the call, you continually admit that you criticized the call.

You are true to your profession.


ChyrenB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I said that calling timeouts no longer works.
>
> That's a world of difference from people
> criticizing THIS timeout because they thought we
> had blocked the field goal ON THIS OCCASION!!!!.
>
> I have to keep it simple with you because the more
> someone argues with you, the more you get to hide
> behind misunderstanding the conversation!

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

Miami Dolphins. Always Perfect.

Big call Javorskie Lane on 4th and goal on the 1 with 2 minutes to go in half!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

-----------------------------------------------------------------
All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Nietzsche

DolfanKing Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> While you call me a liar for saying you criticized
> the call, you continually admit that you
> criticized the call.
>
> You are true to your profession.

And you are true to being a liar. Saying that that technique is old and never works is NOT the same as criticizing the call PARTICULARLY when there was a blocked kicked by our side on THAT PARTICULAR PLAY.

I admitted nothing. My point about it doesn't ice the kicker had nothing to do with the points of those who said we blew a block OR the point of others that we should have alerted our players to the timeout.

The more you argue the more people are either questioning your intelligence or your integrity. At this point, very few on this board think you have either.

ChyrenB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> DolfanKing Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > While you call me a liar for saying you
> criticized
> > the call, you continually admit that you
> > criticized the call.
> >
> > You are true to your profession.
>
> And you are true to being a liar. Saying that
> that technique is old and never works is NOT the
> same as criticizing the call PARTICULARLY when
> there was a blocked kicked by our side on THAT
> PARTICULAR PLAY.
>
> I admitted nothing. My point about it doesn't ice
> the kicker had nothing to do with the points of
> those who said we blew a block OR the point of
> others that we should have alerted our players to
> the timeout.
>
> The more you argue the more people are either
> questioning your intelligence or your integrity.
> At this point, very few on this board think you
> have either.


Is your real name Bob Loblaw?

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

Miami Dolphins. Always Perfect.

Is your real name DolfanQueen?

ChyrenB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Is your real name DolfanQueen?


Now comes the name calling.

Can't we all just get along....

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

Miami Dolphins. Always Perfect.

Only you would call someone a name and then turn around and complain when someone calls you a name back.