guy has 100 yards receiving this week and likely similar numbers every week. yet our coaches couldn't figure out how to use him in the passing game? wtf is with that?

________________________________________________________
The beatings will continue until morale improves.

Yeah could have been our slot reveiver

Yeah he did well, but is already nursing a minor injury. He always had durability concerns when he was with the Saints...looks like history is repeating itself.

Resigning him would have been expensive. I would have liked to see it though if he could stay healthy. Big IF. Great player though.

GO DOLPHINS!!!!

But the point berk makes is right. When he first started playing for us, he was most devastating catching the ball out of the backfield in open space where his shiftiness worked an advantage. But even seeing those few occasions where that happened our coaching staff insisted on using him as another Ricky Williams like whom he had similar or better moves than but unfortunately unlike whom did not have the same power as.

As I posted on another thread. Now they are trying to do the same thing with Miller who has the same attributes and, however, the same small size, as Bush, maybe not as much talent at this point but no way is he being used effectively trying to ram him up the middle as they did Bush.

If Bush's numbers are NOW going up, now that he has left us, it is because he is now resting with RATIONAL coaching instead of the irrational coaching here.

Letting Bush go was foolish IMO, if you cant find a guy like Reggie Bush useful on your team, I have to question your coaching or Gm..,. Reggie was only around 4-5 a year...
The reason to let Bush go, would only be if Lamar Miller's progress was being stopped from Bush getting all the starting reps... Last week, Lamar Miller didnt look to be the next coming of Reggie Bush... But lets wait and see.... If Miller doesnt shine, letting Bush go was a horrible miscalculation by Ireland... If Miller outperforms Bush this year, then no harm no foul...

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

100% AGREE with Crowder above.

Totally foolish. And unnecessary. BAD decision by Philbin & Co.

Fully agree that Reggie Bush was not a HB like Ricky Williams and should have been used catching short passes out of back field where he could maneuver and make some real gains. He will do well now--Bad utilization here, mostly misused.

As for Miller, I'm not convinced he can't run through holes made by our Oline. The problem is "what holes." Miller has to use more vision and look for places to run, rather than run where the play is designated to have a hole--where just isn't any right now. It's mostly on our run blocking and pulling; boy does is need improvement. I'm also puzzled as to why FB Clutts was used so sparingly against Cleveland.

Miller will be fine.

Crowder52 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Letting Bush go was foolish IMO, if you cant find
> a guy like Reggie Bush useful on your team, I have
> to question your coaching or Gm..,. Reggie was
> only around 4-5 a year...
> The reason to let Bush go, would only be if Lamar
> Miller's progress was being stopped from Bush
> getting all the starting reps... Last week, Lamar
> Miller didnt look to be the next coming of Reggie
> Bush... But lets wait and see.... If Miller doesnt
> shine, letting Bush go was a horrible
> miscalculation by Ireland... If Miller outperforms
> Bush this year, then no harm no foul...


Agreed.

LOL.

colonel Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Fully agree that Reggie Bush was not a HB like
> Ricky Williams and should have been used catching
> short passes out of back field where he could
> maneuver and make some real gains. He will do
> well now--Bad utilization here, mostly misused.
>
> As for Miller, I'm not convinced he can't run
> through holes made by our Oline. The problem is
> "what holes." Miller has to use more vision and
> look for places to run, rather than run where the
> play is designated to have a hole--where just
> isn't any right now. It's mostly on our run
> blocking and pulling; boy does is need
> improvement. I'm also puzzled as to why FB Clutts
> was used so sparingly against Cleveland.


I here what you are saying Colonel, it is kind of a catch 22... The coaching staff didn't like that Bush, didn't play as a one cut and go Rb.. They didn't like all of his dancing... They liked Miller because he did play as a one cut and go back when given the chance last year... But verse the Brown, Bush's style of reversing direction and changing the plan of attack when the hole wasn't there, would have worked better as it did on many plays last year... The fact Miller didn't improvise and reverse directions when the hole wasn't there led to a .9 yard avg per carry... Bush's style would have been more effective in the Browns game IMO... I am guessing long term, getting Miller into the secondary quicker is more effective, but only if we can execute properly.. If we can't execute then Bush's elusive style was much more effective...

And as Berk said initially, we failed to use Bush properly catching passes last year... Bush was beyond impressive catching passes last week for the Lions...

-----------------------------------------------------------------
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 09/10/2013 11:47AM by Crowder52.

Crowder52 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> And as Berk said initially, we failed to use Bush
> properly catching passes last year... Bush was
> beyond impressive catching passes last week for
> the Lions...


Bush was the focal point of our offense the last two years. Teams game planned to stop HIM.

In Detroit, he's the 3rd or 4th option behind (among others) the best WR on the planet.

We weren't in a position to use him the way, or get the mileage out of him, that Detroit did.

He should do well in that offense.

He'd do well in our offense this year also.

THE Truth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Bush was the focal point of our offense the last
> two years. Teams game planned to stop HIM.

I agree, that teams game planned to stop him last year.. I also agree teams game plan to stop Megatron first and foremost, which benefits Bush..
I also agree Megatron going deep, forces the opposing teams to not stack the box but bracket or role over the extra guy... Which opens up the field for Bush, something he rarely got last year...

>
> He'd do well in our offense this year also.

I just dont think you improve your football team by getting rid of guys like Reggie Bush... Especially at 4-5 million a year... Ireland/Philbin had zero interest in signing him, didnt even make him a real offer.... Bush wanted to stay, it doesnt make a lot of sense to me...

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

Crowder52 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> THE Truth Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > Bush was the focal point of our offense the
> last
> > two years. Teams game planned to stop HIM.
>
> I agree, that teams game planned to stop him last
> year.. I also agree teams game plan to stop
> Megatron first and foremost, which benefits
> Bush..
> I also agree Megatron going deep, forces the
> opposing teams to not stack the box but bracket or
> role over the extra guy... Which opens up the
> field for Bush, something he rarely got last
> year...
>
> >
> > He'd do well in our offense this year also.
>
> I just dont think you improve your football team
> by getting rid of guys like Reggie Bush...
> Especially at 4-5 million a year...
> Ireland/Philbin had zero interest in signing him,
> didnt even make him a real offer.... Bush wanted
> to stay, it doesnt make a lot of sense to me...


Players get cut for younger cheaper guys all the time. Its part of the business. A big part.

That's how we got Bush in the first place.

I'd like to have him here but I understand the desire to move on to another younger, cheaper guy who you believe is a better fit for your scheme.

I wanted Bush to stay, so count me in that camp.

But I'll bet that as Truth mentioned earlier, his being prone to injury was a factor in this. Dolphins brass probably thought: Whew we got lucky he made it through the season, now let's get rid of him because we'd be pressing our luck to expect him to remain healthy one more year.

you guys are missing the point---we misused Reggie while he was here by running him up the gut and not using him in the passing game. Det is using him "correctly," and he is on pace for a monster season. As for the injury concerns, he wasn't hurt when he was with us, and splitting him wide is less of a physical toll than running him up the gut, so that rationale doen't hold water. whether we should have kept him or not is another debate--but how we used him for 2 years, and the inability to get a 100 catch RB involved in the passing game, speaks poorly of our offensive coaches

________________________________________________________
The beatings will continue until morale improves.

I see your point Berk and yes I agree we misused him.

I'm just adding that they were concerned for his being injury prone (not saying they were right). They probably believed he was still injury prone even as a receiver. The guy was the most exciting player on our roster in years, I miss him.

berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> you guys are missing the point---we misused
> Reggie while he was here by running him up the gut
> and not using him in the passing game. Det is
> using him "correctly," and he is on pace for a
> monster season. As for the injury concerns, he
> wasn't hurt when he was with us, and splitting him
> wide is less of a physical toll than running him
> up the gut, so that rationale doen't hold water.
> whether we should have kept him or not is another
> debate--but how we used him for 2 years, and the
> inability to get a 100 catch RB involved in the
> passing game, speaks poorly of our offensive
> coaches


Berk,

We aren't missing the point. What we are saying is that because we lacked any real threats at WR last year, Bush most defenses keyed on stopping Bush which is WHY were couldn't have used him the way Detroit is.

You rarely see 8 in the box versus Detroit because of Calvin Johnson, Brandon Pettigrew, Nate Burleson, et al...


You almost ALWAYS saw 8 in the box the last two years versus our offense. And Bush STILL had excellent years with us.

just look at the game their back up RB had catching the ball.
Joique Bell was their third leading receiver that game with 5-67...or 13.4 yards per catch.

There's a LOT more room for their backs to run after catching dumpoffs and screens than there ever was in our offense because of their talent at the other skill positions.

I guess I don't see how stacking the box is evidence that bush should have been run up the middle as opposed to split wide or used more in screens. to me, if they are geared to stop the run that's when you try to get the RB in space.

I am not going to say I was banging the drum to keep bush b/c I was fairly indifferent given how we used him (and still think Lamar Miller will be a good player despite last Sunday), but our O would look pretty good right now with wallace and hartline and gibson and reggie bush split wide.

________________________________________________________
The beatings will continue until morale improves.

berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I guess I don't see how stacking the box is
> evidence that bush should have been run up the
> middle as opposed to split wide or used more in
> screens. to me, if they are geared to stop the run
> that's when you try to get the RB in space.
>
> I am not going to say I was banging the drum to
> keep bush b/c I was fairly indifferent given how
> we used him (and still think Lamar Miller will be
> a good player despite last Sunday), but our O
> would look pretty good right now with wallace and
> hartline and gibson and reggie bush split wide.


I'm not saying we would have used him the same way, just that it wasn't really an option.

We had a rookie QB, a rookie RT and a new quasi-RG in John Jerry. We had two WR, no TE's and zero speed in our receiving corps.

We had 1 RB who could pass protect in Reggie Bush so he was in the backfield most of the time. Even so, he still caught 2-3 passes a game. btw...He got 4 yesterday.

Last year we ran an offense that was limited by experience and a lack of talent and as a result was ultra conservative.

Comparing that to what is going on in Detroit with an All-world WR, a proven speed guy in Burleson, multiple threats at RB, and a big time TE threat in Pettigrew, not too mention a top 10 QB is not exactly comparing similar situations.

We did not put forth a sincere effort to keep Bush -- who 100% wanted to stay in Miami. In fact we gave him the proverbial cold shoulder -- don’t let the door kick you in the ass on the way out treatment IMO.

Beyond that -- this regime OWNS the decisions they've made -- and as much upside as LaMarvelous has (I hope) Reggie's "game" still could work in this O -- if indeed the staff has sufficient creativity to implement his skill-set correctly.

But how about that amazing first half? Totally dumbfounded by a base D?

I can see a series or 2, but an entire half??? We can only hope our ability to make adjustments in the heat of battle ramps up significantly like right NOW!

Last, with so much $$$$$$$$$ invested in Wallace and so little in terms of legit solutions on the OL -- I have reason to be "concerned" about the way this regime is using its resources. That kind of cash gets noticed by all the other players -- and the D knows they will be the deciding factor in terms of winning games -- and yet we can't get contracts done for the top D players like Starks et cetera.

Perhaps the middle finger was a sign? Perhaps not. But this team is lopsided talent-wise on the D -- so we better find a way to keep the resources we have or we'll be sunk. Real fast.

But of course I reserve the right to be wrong. And you obviously reserve the right to be cheerleader in chief for Ross and Ireland and Philbin.

Have a nice day.

BNF.

Our game plan was utterly awful. And our inability to solve the perplexing riddle of a base D is beyond concerning.

Like I said before -- I think there's too much old-Yankee cronyism on this staff dating all the way back to high school (or maybe even kindergarten).

It would be refreshing to have a young bright mind running the O and interjecting some "NEW" ideas and creative thinking into the mix.

Philbin is so anal it really concerns me. And you have to wonder how the team is reacting to his quasi OCD tendencies?

Whatever. Winning cures all ills. Or so they say.

BNF.

BigNastyFish Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> We did not put forth a sincere effort to keep Bush
> -- who 100% wanted to stay in Miami. In fact we
> gave him the proverbial cold shoulder -- don’t
> let the door kick you in the ass on the way out
> treatment IMO.


I don't disagree with that. I don't think Bush was in the plans and while they could clearly have had a roll for him this year, they were after other players and weren't going to pay him starting money to back up Miller.


>
> Beyond that -- this regime OWNS the decisions
> they've made -- and as much upside as LaMarvelous
> has (I hope) Reggie's "game" still could work in
> this O -- if indeed the staff has sufficient
> creativity to implement his skill-set correctly.


Really? Who knew? Interesting concept of having to live with results of your decisions. Of course, it wouldn't be a bad thing to wait more than 30 minutes to judge the results of those decisions...IMHO.

And you are smart enough to know that not every personnel decision is about whether a guy can find a roll in your offense. Clearly Bush could do that. Most decisions are financially related.

When you are chasing 2 WR's, pricey TE's, a staring LT, a starting CB and two starting LB's you have to save money somewhere to give yourself the flexibility to get them.



>
> But how about that amazing first half? Totally
> dumbfounded by a base D?


You are right...first 30 minutes on the road weren't epic. Season is a total failure. Pack up the equipment and put the balls away. Lets hire a new staff and get ready for next years draft...

Oh wait...second half was much better. Crisis averted. Nevermind...

>
> I can see a series or 2, but an entire half??? We
> can only hope our ability to make adjustments in
> the heat of battle ramps up significantly like
> right NOW!



Yeah, 'cuse whatever they did at halftime failed miserably...


>
> Last, with so much $$$$$$$$$ invested in Wallace
> and so little in terms of legit solutions on the
> OL -- I have reason to be "concerned" about the
> way this regime is using its resources. That kind
> of cash gets noticed by all the other players --
> and the D knows they will be the deciding factor
> in terms of winning games -- and yet we can't get
> contracts done for the top D players like Starks
> et cetera.



Starks is one of the highest paid DT's in the league this year at $8.5m. They spent $5M on Grimes. $5more (per year) on Wheeler and $7M a year on Ellerbe.

They just locked up one of the best young SS in the league for another $7m a year.

They gave Wake $49M/4 year extension last year.

Traded up for the best speed rusher in the draft this year.

See a pattern?

They are bringing in guys who fit their scheme and they aren't overpaying aging players who don't.

Just how much money do you think they have to spend?



Look, you all have every right to disagree with their talent assessments and player choices. You have every right to disagree with their schemes and strategies.

But you are blowing smoke out your collective ass if you are going to complain that they aren't spending on defense just because they haven't signed an older player or two from a previous regime who you happen to like.

And as long as you all are going to do THAT, then I am going to defend their RIGHT to bring in the pieces they think best fit what they are trying to do on both sides of the ball.





>
> Perhaps the middle finger was a sign? Perhaps not.
> But this team is lopsided talent-wise on the D --
> so we better find a way to keep the resources we
> have or we'll be sunk. Real fast.


Perhaps you'd like it to be a sign.

Starks is a pro's pro. If you think he flipped off the staff on national TV, the year he's playing for the last big contract of his life, then you aren't nearly as smart as I gave you credit for being and you are probably a Fins beat writer.


>
> But of course I reserve the right to be wrong. And
> you obviously reserve the right to be cheerleader
> in chief for Ross and Ireland and Philbin.


Yes. You should reserve that. Its the prudent thing to do. If you gameplan is to bitch about things like 'we aren't paying our defense enough money' when we just handed out big contracts to 8 or our 11 starters in the past 18 months then you are probably going to have to exercise that right more than the rest of us.

As for Ross, Ireland and Philbin...they have a long way to go to prove to me they are the answer, but lets just say I'll continue to defend them against unfounded bullshit...like claims that:

'they aren't spending enough on the defense.'

'We should have kept Bess despite the fact he limits their offense.'

'Ross is a terrible owner because he went after an elite coaching prospect the wrong way, changed the fight song, changed the carpets at the stadium, changed the logo and won't pay for a new stadium by his rich-ass self.'



>
> Have a nice day.


You too.

(or is that "to"?)

You're obviously attempting to make dollars and cents sense out of the entire project -- and perhaps that is the "correct" way to look at things if you're part of the regimes FO and specifically involved in bean counting. Is that your role in the Org?

I ask that somewhat sarcastically because you seemingly default to that position time and time again as if that's the universal answer to all questions and decisions this regime makes.

Beyond that -- do you mean to give the staff "credit" for figuring out how to deal with that exotic base D after 40 min of football?

That's really laughable. And I'm sure you're being sarcastic as well. Good one!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/11/2013 10:26AM by BigNastyFish.

BigNastyFish Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Beyond that -- do you mean to give the staff
> "credit" for figuring out how to deal with that
> exotic base D after 40 min of football?


Well lets see:

1st half: 98 yards passing, 7 yards rushing...6 points.

2nd half: 174 yards passing, 13 yards rushing...17 points.


Its not like Bill Walsh walked into the locker room at halftime but clearly they made adjustments that WORKED well enough to win. And those stats include sitting on the ball the last two drives with a double digit lead.


I'm not a big Mike Sherman fan. He should have spread that team out the whole second half and gone no huddle for a few drives. He ran the ball too much for my taste when it clearly wasn't happening. When he did go 4 wide in the 2nd half it worked very well and kept Cleveland off balance.

You might not have noticed, or perhaps they weren't spectacular enough for you, but they did make adjustments. And they did have positive results.

In addition, on defense, they got the ball shoved down their throat on the first drive. A couple of tweaks on the bench after that and Richardson was a non-factor the rest of the day.

We'll see how it plays out from here. Either they will post a wining record or they won't.

The rest of it is all BS.

if nothing else, the exchanges between BNF and Truth are among the most eloquent on here

________________________________________________________
The beatings will continue until morale improves.