What blast are you talking about?

A&O and others... After he posted that Hartline was made a star because of how good Tannehill was not Hartline. And Tannehill proved to everybody what a star he was... Obviously after such a bold post, I asked if Tannehill was such a star and made other stars, how come he didnt finish the game, and had to have the defense finsish it for him...
That is when A&O responded to my post by calling me an idiot, I need to shut my pie hole, and people like me and my idiotic views are why people dont visit the site.... I thought A&O retired from the site, now he just comes backs to insult people personally when he graces us plebes with his superior points of view...... Yet Mike SHerman was questioning the same points I was at about the same time...

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



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/09/2012 01:58PM by Crowder52.

Go listen to it I posted the link, it was a direct response to the question asked by a reporter... it wasnt Clay related.... the words I typed above was exactly what he said...

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



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 10/09/2012 02:50PM by Crowder52.

Yeah, went back and listened to it myself. It was kinda hard because the QUESTIONS by the reporters were so soft you could barely hear them. I kept toggling the sound up and down between the questioners' and him.

That being said, those were two separate questions. The one about Clay came earlier and the one about the "finishing" came later.

But, to take exception again, I don't think he was talking about Tannehill when he talked about us not closing. I think he was talking about the whole team. He was saying that whenever you are in that situation, you should end up with the ball when the clock runs out. However, he said in that earlier clip about Clay that Tannehill had permission to fall down and take the loss. So I don't know how one could say that when he made the criticism of the whole team that they had to punt the ball and give the Jets one more crack at it that he was criticizing Tannehill.

I think he was saying that in those situations, we as a team need to not give the opposition a final chance to win or tie the game but if he integrate that philosophy with his acknowledgement that Tannehill was told to take a sack rather than risk a turnover, the only conclusion you can draw is that he was criticizing the team as a whole and not Tannehill as the team leader for failing to make that additional first down which would have avoided having to punt.

His Clay comments define exactly what he was trying to do at the end of the game.

Ideally, he wanted Clay to be open, catch the ball, stay in bounds...and get the first down.

Only half of that happened. Hense the disappointment for not closing out the game.

He was clearly talking about the offense not the whole team, otherwise why would he reference the defense seperately, and the offense specifically as not finishing...

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

Nobody's saying he was criticizing the defense, Crowder. If you thought I meant that then I apologize but I don't think any one who thought about it would say that he was blaming the DEFENSE for the offense not ending up with the ball when the clock ran out when it was the offense that had to punt the ball at the end of the game.

Jim B Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> His Clay comments define exactly what he was
> trying to do at the end of the game.
>
> Ideally, he wanted Clay to be open, catch the
> ball, stay in bounds...and get the first down.
>
> Only half of that happened. Hense the
> disappointment for not closing out the game.


Actually, if you go back and listen, when he addressed Clay he said something like "We left 1:54 on the clock instead of 1:24 seconds" paraphrasing of course.

But his overall comment was that we, the offense, should end up with the ball until the clock runs out and that means we've got to keep getting first downs.

He criticized Clay for

1) not turning upfield immediately and perhaps costing a first down but also

2) not staying inbounds and allowing us to run more time off the clock.

I remember screaming to the TV when it happened, "Great, that was just like giving them a time out!"

The difference between the prior 2 weeks losses and this weeks win was that somebody stepped up and won the game and it surely was not our offense.. In the prior weeks nobody on our team from the kicker to both sides of the football in a dolphins uniform went out and won the game. The defense isnt going to be able to do it every week, we need an offense that can score, when we need them to... All of the Dan Carpenter missed kicks are a non issue if the offense can drive down the field... Right now our offense isnt getting the job done when we need them to at the end of ballgames.. The whole offense not just Tannehill...

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

Again, Tannehill had zero help. If he had help, the offense would
Have closed out the game.

But again, because he did not close out the game he is not a star, and neither did Peyton Manning, Andy Dalton, Cam Newton, Aaron Rodgers on Sunday, and they must not be stars either.

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

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

I'm not following this real close but Crowder if you're NOT really excited about Thill then I have no idea why you're Miami Dolphin fan.

The kid is growing leaps and bounds week to week and has an upside that's nothing less than "super star." No, I'm not saying that's a lock, but based on what the kid has shown so far (pocket awareness, accuracy, command, leadership, uncanny composure, outstanding on the move, ball handling, and maybe most of all - DEDICATION and superb professionalism) we should all feel really optamistic about his future. And ya know what - the whole team sees it, and you better believe they know he's LEGIT and that means our team is Legit!

That's my take.

BNF.

eesti Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> After he posted that Hartline was made a star
> because of how good Tannehill was not Hartline
>
> Not to take anything away from Hartline but with 6
> more catches he will equal his total for last
> year.
>
> 101 more yards and he ties his career high.
>
> I don't see him performing like that with Moore at
> QB.

Definetely agree with this. Moore is nothing but a journey man.

I thought, before the season started, that Moore was our QB this year. No doubt in my mind.

When RT got the start, I thought...

1. This is crazy! The guy doesn't have the experience to be a starting QB his first year in the NFL.

2. This is coming from Ireland who's hitched his wagon to Thill and has to do something so he's pressuring Philbin to play a rookie that's not ready.

3. This is going to end up bad...Thill is going to struggle and possibly get hurt trying to acclimate to the speed of the NFL after only one season at the NCAA level.


Glad I was WRONG!!!!!

GBOFinFan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
>
> Glad I was WRONG!!!!!


A true fan who doesnt mind a bit to be wrong. We see eye to eye.

And I don't buy this idea that we had no other choice than to take Tannehill. This is another ruse to discredit Ireland for the things he has done right. Not saying he is a master, just trying to be fair.

No way is Ireland going to stake his career and reputation on a player he didn't believe in. He was ecstatic when he landed Tannehill as if he had no reservations whatsoever.

He's not going to just prolong the inevitable and take a lesser QB just because he wants to buy a year because when that player fails, JI still has to find another job...and I'm sure he wants to remain a GM no metter where he goes.

Taking just anyone at that spot would make him look like an idiot and probably land him a demotion as a pro scout at another franchise.

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

eesti, you are badly misinterpreting the point about Ireland and RT.

No one is saying he HAD to do pick Tannehill....just that you cannot praise it as if he made a brilliant move by finding an unknown diamond in the weeds. It was not like picking Gronk or signing Wake.

Now, he deserves ORDINARY praise for making the pick at no. 8 when folks warned that might be too high but there is no question that Tanny was the 3rd rank QB and nos 1 & 2 were gone and lastly that QB was a position of NEED for Miami.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/12/2012 08:36AM by ChyrenB.

samsam3738 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> A true fan who doesnt mind a bit to be wrong. We
> see eye to eye.

Actually someone did say (another thread) Ireland had no other choice than to pick RT so I don't think I am missing the point. Because of fan pressure. lol

If RT turns out to be a franchise QB then ABSOLUTELY he deserves high praise. Plenty of GM's have whiffed on QB's in the first round and even higher than #8. Ireland also passed on SEVERAL to his credit & did not give up the farm to trade up (Jets, Was, Jags, Den) for one that still may turn out to be a flop. I mean....according to many on this site and around the NFL, Ireland reached for RT. Obviously he saw the talent.

Gronk was a second round pick that 31 other teams passed on. Including Belichick. It's not like he discoverd him in the 6th round. He and Gresham were the top rated TE's in 2010.

Same goes for Hernandez. If BB knew he would be so good he would have taken them 1 & 2. Not taking Cunningham, Spikes & Price (who are flops and average players) all ahead of Hernandez.

I understand when you use that theory for the number one overall pick but we didn't have to mortgage our future like some teams just to get a QB.

The amount of praise Ireland gets may be debatable but some refuse to give him ANY WHATSOEVER. Would you rather give up three years of 1 & 2nd round pick to move up for Luck or stay and at 8 for RT? Those teams (was) still have to find talent to surround RGIII and now they have no ammunition.

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

Gronkowski was not nationally known? Nobody knew about Russell Wilson? Are you kidding? We are not talking about the average football fan. We are talking about NFL scouting departments. I can pretty much guarantee that EVERY NFL team knew of Gronk since I knew of him just from reading scouting web sites. Like I said he was the number 1 or 2 rated TE by most sites.

And again...like previous years when Parcels was still here. We had other options if you want to rely on ego and think you can pluck a starting QB out of the second or later rounds (Chad Henne).

He went with the player he thought was the best at 8.

Every NFL team has different grades on the same players. Doesn't mean RT was the consensus #3 QB by all 32 teams.

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

eesti Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> He went with the player he thought was the best at
> 8.

RESPONSE: Who are you arguing with? What are you arguing? Who is criticizing Ireland for picking Tannehill at no. 8? All I said was essentially that Tannehill is turning out to be a great pick, but given that Ireland wanted at QB at no. 8, that was the only sensible choice for him.


> Every NFL team has different grades on the same
> players. Doesn't mean RT was the consensus #3 QB
> by all 32 teams.

RESPONSE: LOL. Well for the life of me, I'd like to know WHO rated either Weeden or Wilson ahead of him. I'd bet it should be easy for you to provide a link from prior to April's draft where Tannehill was rated behind those quarterbacks. Before you come back, I'm not talking about drafts (mock) that had Tannehill going lower than no. 8 or even going in the 2nd round but only link to THOSE drafts IF THEY ALSO had Weeden or Russell Wilson going BEFORE Tannehill in those mock drafts.

I know of NO mock drafts that had Tannehill going anywhere but as the 3rd QB behind Luck and RGIII.



Edited to say I forgot about your point about the "32 teams." What is the relevance about what ranking was put on QBs OTHER THAN BY THOSE TEAMS IN THE MARKET FOR A QUARTERBACK?????????????



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/12/2012 06:01PM by ChyrenB.

how easily we forget that Tannehill was ridiculed as a 2nd round project QB by many. Miami was mocked nationally for reaching on a QB that would be a "2nd rounder in any other draft". It was in no way an obviously great pick. Pundits either loved or hated Tannehill and many had Wheedon rated higher.

Ireland orchestrated the whole thing perfectly from hiring Philbin/Sherman to tagging along in the Manning & RGIII chase to not overpaying Flynn to not being played into trading up for Tannehill. Whether you love or hate Ireland, you must give him credit for that specific sequence of events.

Chyren, you hated the idea of taking Tannehill and posted for months about what a bad idea it was. So how can you say now that it was an obvious, slam dunk pick?

You are right 1423. I did hate the pick. But go back and look what I am saying above over and over but I guess it is too subtle a point. I acknowledged that one can challenge and indeed many including me DID challenge whether we should have picked a QB, particularly Tannehill at no. 8.

Many people saw him, as you say, as a 2nd round pick. But nobody saw him as going after Weeden.


But the point I was making is IF YOU WERE DETERMINED TO PICK A QB WITH THE NUMBER 8 PICK, WHAT CHOICE DID YOU HAVE EXCEPT TANNEHILL?

Luck and RGIII were gone and you would have hardly picked Weeden at 8. I wanted Weeden but kept advocating that we trade down and pick up value and then draft him in the 2nd round.

So if you are saying ya gotta give props to Ireland for deciding to take a quarterback like Tannehill with the questions surrounding him at the time as number 8 instead of trading down, like I wanted, or going to another position at no. 8 with that pick, I say yeah give him props for that.

But if you start with the premise that he WAS GOING FOR QUARTERBACK AT NO. 8, what other choice did he have.

The subject started with designating those picks that were brilliant picks that no one but Ireland could have seen. Like snatching Cameron Wake from the CFL.

Ireland's good decision was to go for Quarterback at no. 8, not that he selected Tannehill once he decided to do that. That last thing ws the no-brainer.

Crowder52 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> And Tannehill proved to everybody what a star he was...


Two issue with Tannehill right now:
1. With or without a lead, he can't close out games.
2. He isn't very good in the red zone.

The stats back this up. And Mike Sherman is as much as acknowledging it.

For some reason, when you speak the truth about Tannehill, people around here get up in arms and call you a hater and question you as a fan.



> That is when A&O responded to my post by calling
> me an idiot, I need to shut my pie hole, and
> people like me and my idiotic views are why people
> dont visit the site....

Do you really expect that guy to be respectful? He's proven time and time again that he has zero respect for anyone that doesn't think just like him.

And he thinks we are why people don't visit the site... I've seen a lot more people here since he has left.

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

Miami Dolphins. Always Perfect.

DK give him a break he is only played 5 games in the NFL.

With time he will get better closing out games and in the redzone.

Next years draft gives him the amunnition he needs to get to the next level.

The most important thing is hes shown a lot of upside and talent. Hes shown things that you cannot teach.

for me, i really cannot ask more of tannehill. He is doing really good with what he has to work with.