Build the D.

Sign Grimes and Alteran Verner to start, Soliai, and take some solid defensive players in the draft

dude if we don't majorly fix the OL we have no shot at even 6 wins

________________________________________________________
The beatings will continue until morale improves.

Obviously we need to shore up the OL, sign Monroe, Mack, or Albert and draft a few OL

but Grimes and Verner give us the best corners in AFC. It took Seattle 4 years of great talent evaluation and player selection. Hopefully with the new GM the changes are the start

Seattle has a guy name Benson Mayowa we need to sign . A sleeper DE

berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> dude if we don't majorly fix the OL we have no
> shot at even 6 wins


But look what we did AFTER BULLYGATE with a patchwork oline

Mon Nov 11 at Tampa Bay Buccaneers L 19-22
Sun Nov 17 SAN DIEGO CHARGERS W 24-20
Sun Nov 24 CAROLINA PANTHERS L 16-20
Sun Dec 01 at New York Jets W 23-3
Sun Dec 08 at Pittsburgh Steelers W 34-28
Sun Dec 15 NEW ENGLAND PATRIOTS W 24-20

We lost to the bucs by 3 points and to the Panthers by only 4 and beat the Steelers and the Patriots.

Bottom line is that it might be flip a coin as to whether we should get the best linebacker we can in the first round or the best offensive lineman we can.

Man......that Seattle defense was sick. those hits were dead on. no broken Tackles. Peyton had no chance. Welker was covered. We need to resign Grimes and find another shutdown corner.

GO DOLPHINS!!!!

just heard dan quinn on mike and mike. the preach fundamentals...tackling and work on it all season.

they're goal is to win with fundamentals and turnovers.

as much as i dislike pete carrol he does build some quality defenses.

Complete teams with no glaring weaknesses win championships.

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

Beware flavor of the month thinking, it's been a problem for many fields and organizations. While they all swarm to catch up and copy what worked before, the game changes on them and they only have the blueprint of what worked in the past and not in the present. Seahawks looked great this season, but we need to remember our recent past while we tried to copy other systems and strategies and failed. West Coast offense, JJ's Dallas Defense, Project BIG and so on.

A true innovator and revolutionary thinker never follows the steps of what came before. I don't think we currently have those kind of guys in place on the Dolphins management team, but I could be wrong.

And to think I only heard and read about 836,297 times this season that this is a QUARTERBACK DRIVEN LEAGUE!

JC Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> And to think I only heard and read about 836,297
> times this season that this is a QUARTERBACK
> DRIVEN LEAGUE!


It may be a QB driven league, but Defense wins championships. I'll go to my grave believing that.

cshashaty Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> JC Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > And to think I only heard and read about
> 836,297
> > times this season that this is a QUARTERBACK
> > DRIVEN LEAGUE!
>
>
> It may be a QB driven league, but Defense wins
> championships. I'll go to my grave believing that.


I agree Chris! That was kind of my point.

jlyell13 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Build the D.
>
> Sign Grimes and Alteran Verner to start, Soliai,
> and take some solid defensive players in the draft


*************************************************

Hell, just grab a couple of Seattle's defenders and the Dolphins are on their way.

ChyrenB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> berkeley223 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > dude if we don't majorly fix the OL we have no
> > shot at even 6 wins
>
>
> But look what we did AFTER BULLYGATE with a
> patchwork oline
>
> Mon Nov 11 at Tampa Bay Buccaneers L 19-22
> Sun Nov 17 SAN DIEGO CHARGERS W 24-20
> Sun Nov 24 CAROLINA PANTHERS L 16-20
> Sun Dec 01 at New York Jets W 23-3
> Sun Dec 08 at Pittsburgh Steelers W 34-28
> Sun Dec 15 NEW ENGLAND PATRIOTS W 24-20
>
> We lost to the bucs by 3 points and to the
> Panthers by only 4 and beat the Steelers and the
> Patriots.
>
> Bottom line is that it might be flip a coin as to
> whether we should get the best linebacker we can
> in the first round or the best offensive lineman
> we can.

*********************************************

To me, Chryen, it's pretty simple. If there is an OL sitting at the top of the Dolphins' draft board when their pick comes up, that's where you go. But, as I and many others have said on this board, "Best Player Available" and hope that guy is at one of the Dolphins' need positions.

Oh, don't get me wrong, Cap. I'm just saying that ya can't blame EVERYTHING on the o line. It is a position of need. But those wins demonstrate that (and this is my point) it is NOT THE ONLY position of need.

Those stats don't tell the whole story though. When you look at Super Bowl history when a team with a top offense and mediocre defense plays a team with a top defense and mediocre (or worse) offense, it is almost always the team that has the top defense that wins. The Ravens in 2000, The Patsies in 2001 (#6 D vs. #1 O, although they did cheat), the Bucs 2002 (#1 D vs. #1 O), the Giants in 2007 (#7 D vs. #1 O), Steelers in 2008 (#1 D vs. #3 O), and now 2013 with Seattle (#1 D vs. #1 O). In other SBs since 2000, the Ds and/or Os were similarly rated.

It's possible to get to and even win a SB with a dominating D and a lousy O (see the Ravens and Bucs), but it's almost impossible to get to a SB with a lousy D and a great O (see the Phins of the late 80s and 90s, the Colts before Dungy got there, and all those years of Air Coryelle).

Anemone1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Those stats don't tell the whole story though.
> When you look at Super Bowl history when a team
> with a top offense and mediocre defense plays a
> team with a top defense and mediocre (or worse)
> offense, it is almost always the team that has the
> top defense that wins. The Ravens in 2000, The
> Patsies in 2001 (#6 D vs. #1 O, although they did
> cheat), the Bucs 2002 (#1 D vs. #1 O), the Giants
> in 2007 (#7 D vs. #1 O), Steelers in 2008 (#1 D
> vs. #3 O), and now 2013 with Seattle (#1 D vs. #1
> O). In other SBs since 2000, the Ds and/or Os
> were similarly rated.
>
> It's possible to get to and even win a SB with a
> dominating D and a lousy O (see the Ravens and
> Bucs), but it's almost impossible to get to a SB
> with a lousy D and a great O (see the Phins of the
> late 80s and 90s, the Colts before Dungy got
> there, and all those years of Air Coryelle).

good points

________________________________________________________
The beatings will continue until morale improves.

They play a press coverage. We do not. In fact we line up about 10 yards off the receivers.

If the Dolphins had those exact players on defense it would not be as good as we play a soft defense.

Peope forget Seattle's offense equally kicked Denver's D in the ***

Seattle's O spotted their D a 15 point lead. Yeah I know 2 were a gimme
Seattle's O gave up 0 sacks.
Seattle's O committed 0 turnovers

You can have the best D in the world but its no good if your O stinks.

People are too reactive... defense wins championships is an old cliché and don't know if it still applies. Below is the superbowl winners over the past decade.

2013 Champs: Seahawks 17th offense/ 1th Defense
2012 Champs: Ravens 16th offense/ 17th Defense
2011 Champs: Giants 8th Offense/ 27st Defense
2010 Champs: Packers 9th offense/ 5th Defense
2009 Champs: Saints 1th offense/ 25th Defense
2008 Champs: Steelers 22th offense/ 1th Defense
2007 Champs: Giants 16th offense/ 7th Defense
2006 Champs: Colts 3th offense/ 21th Defense
2005 Champs: Steelers 15th offense/ 4th Defense
2004 Champs: Patsies 6th offense/ 24th Defense
2003 Champs: Patsies 17th offense/ 7th Defense


Looking at the numbers however it does look to slightly favor the defense. There are many ways you can analyze this data, two years #1 defense won, once the #1 offense won... 5 times a top 10 offense won, 6 times a top 10 defense won... However the reality is football is the ultimate team sport and one hand washes the other... to think that a top defense alone will win you the championship in my opinion is pretty foolish

mizzou15 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Peope forget Seattle's offense equally kicked
> Denver's D in the ***
>
> Seattle's O spotted their D a 15 point lead. Yeah
> I know 2 were a gimme
> Seattle's O gave up 0 sacks.
> Seattle's O committed 0 turnovers
>
> You can have the best D in the world but its no
> good if your O stinks.

Preach it, Brother. But they do not listen.

Reppa is right. It is very possible to overstate the case.

Denver got whupped on BOTH sides of the ball.

And it is impossible to say that this side or the other side of the team wins Championships.

It can shift depending on how much the imbalance is.....NOT FOR THE TEAM UNDER CONSIDERATION, but for the opposing team.

You may have the Greatest Offense in the world but if the team you are playing has the SECOND greatest and your team has a piss poor defense and they have a great defense, they'll be you.

If you both have piss poor defenses, the odds are your team will win.

Denver's defense did NOT fall apart.

Peyton's offense was even shaky against the Patriots.

It just caught up with them against a better defense.

But IF THE PATRIOTS DEFENSE HAD BEEN PLAYING IN SEAHAWKS UNIFORMS LAST SUNDAY, THEY STILL WOULD HAVE BEATEN DENVER WITH SEATTLE'S OFFENSE.

So I don't buy this...It was ALL the Seattle defense line.

As I pointed out earlier, you have to look at who each team is playing. Yes, New Orleans had the #1 O and only #25 D, but they were playing Indy, who had the #9 O but only #18 D. Neither defense was dominant (both in the bottom half of the league), so in this case the better offense one.

The only real outlier here seems to be 2004, when the Patsies beat the Eagles, who had the #9 O and #10 D, but the Patsies cheated so that doesn't really count. To some extent the Ravens beating SF also doesn't follow the trend, but that was a bit of a shocker to everyone I think.

Miami Reppa Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> People are too reactive... defense wins
> championships is an old cliché and don't know if
> it still applies. Below is the superbowl winners
> over the past decade.
>
> 2013 Champs: Seahawks 17th offense/ 1th Defense
> 2012 Champs: Ravens 16th offense/ 17th Defense
> 2011 Champs: Giants 8th Offense/ 27st Defense
> 2010 Champs: Packers 9th offense/ 5th Defense
> 2009 Champs: Saints 1th offense/ 25th Defense
> 2008 Champs: Steelers 22th offense/ 1th Defense
> 2007 Champs: Giants 16th offense/ 7th Defense
> 2006 Champs: Colts 3th offense/ 21th Defense
> 2005 Champs: Steelers 15th offense/ 4th Defense
> 2004 Champs: Patsies 6th offense/ 24th Defense
> 2003 Champs: Patsies 17th offense/ 7th Defense
>
>
> Looking at the numbers however it does look to
> slightly favor the defense. There are many ways
> you can analyze this data, two years #1 defense
> won, once the #1 offense won... 5 times a top 10
> offense won, 6 times a top 10 defense won...
> However the reality is football is the ultimate
> team sport and one hand washes the other... to
> think that a top defense alone will win you the
> championship in my opinion is pretty foolish



There are two things that every team on that list have in common. And they are the keys (along with good fortune) to winning a Super Bowl under today's rules:

They all had defenses that could rush the passer and turn the ball over.

And most importantly they ALL have elite QB's.

Brady, Roethlisberger, Peyton Manning, Eli Manning, Brees, Rogers, Flacco, Wilson.

There's your blueprint for success in this league. Its not that complicated. Its just hard to find that QB.

ChyrenB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Oh, don't get me wrong, Cap. I'm just saying that
> ya can't blame EVERYTHING on the o line. It is a
> position of need. But those wins demonstrate that
> (and this is my point) it is NOT THE ONLY position
> of need.


I agree its not the only position of need. But its where we have to concentrate the most because it was the worst position on this team.

I we had a great Oline this year we would had won a couple more games and made the playoffs.

You're right, SamSam but the problem is that if the top guy at O line falls to you, you're right, grab him because it's the worse position.

That's easy.


The problem is that if the best two o line guys are GONE and the top LB is there, do you take the third best O line guy or the best LB guy?


I say take the best LB guy and that you can't cry over spilled milk.

If you can solve ONE of your needs, don't go for second best at your top need when you can go for FIRST BEST at your second need.

fair enough chren..........We have a very weak LBs Corp as well.


as for me..........


I would trade up to get the best available Oline player. But thats just me.

I mean we traded up this year for an injured know type player.

If we had a QB that could complete a deep pass we would have won more games too.

I would go best player available.