The Shula way.

WCO is a calling system based on spread formation (3WR, 1 TE, 1 RB base), as opposed to power formation football. Our passing game is that system. But with Lazor, we run it out of pistol (zone-read) to set up both the running and passing attack.


The benefit are that we spread the defense out and there are wide open spaces in the field. Very much what you see in college every Saturday.

The drawback over power formation football is that we protect with 5 very often--the Oline and the QB take the beating for the benefit of the offense.

I am eternally thankful to Joe Philbin for bringing this offense to Miami. I've wanted it since the early 90S. We ran pistol under SHerman as well, a little bit, just not to the extent that Lazor has done it. That has ,made a huge difference in the run game.

I think we are set. We just need to get better.

THE Truth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ken Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > We should restructure Wallace's contract
>
>
> Why would he restructure his contract?

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

Wallace won't restructure his contract.

First, I don't see him as the type of player that would do that, and second, he won't do it because he, like the rest of us, doesn't see Miami battling for any championship rings in the near future.

The front office (and coaches) are basically inept, so he isn't going to give up any money for that nonsense.

IMO you need to get off this crap and realize the problem with last season was not Mike Wallace. The problem starts at the TOP with Ross and includes the structure he has in place from Phlimflam on down.

Dumping (or keeping) Mike Wallace is going to make ZERO difference unless and until there are more fundamental and essential changes made.

BNF.

I never said the problem with the entire team was Mike Wallace BUT since you brought it up....

He did not earn the 17 mil he got paid this year AND is not worth the 12 mil he will make next year.

The point IS...we need too many other players to spend that much on Mike Wallace. We need to rid ourselves of these inflated Ireland contracts.

Dumping wallace will mean we have no speedster at the wr position with his kind of talent.

When we dump wallace prepare for 8 and 9 man fronts..

The running game will suffer and tannehill will have less time in the pocket with all the blitzes.

The Dolphins cannot afford to dump Mike Wallace for a variety of reasons. The guilty parties here are Joe Philbin and Bill Lazor for misusing his ability, and Ryan Tannehill for being inept with his deep throws. My message to those three are to own the problem and fix it. Trading Wallace doesnt solve the team's inability to threaten the deep third of the field...which is WHY they signed Wallace in the first place!

No one could possibly dispute the fact that Wallace is being paid psychopathically insane money -- so you are right on that front.

I assumed you believe Wallace (as a player and forgetting about the $$ for a second) was a problem. Perhaps you don't? But simply have issue with his contract?

That said, I do not think he is a "Waste" as your thread title declares. He may be a POOR VALUE for the team in financial terms, but he in NOT a waste IMO.

Was he a "good signing?" No. Not at the price. But we bought the farm and you can seriously make the case the kid has seemingly put in the effort to be a team leader and work hard -- but has NOT been used effectively by the coaching staff.

I for one cannot figure out why it seems impossible game after game to at least attempt to take the top off the defense with him. Is it Thill? Plimflam? I don't get it...

But, bottom line -- the lack of deep balls is NOT Wallace's fault. So whatever potential "value return" we're missing from that dimension -- the blame lies elsewhere.

My .02

BNF.

That's why you have to attempt to replace him (and no one is putting up 9 man fronts).

If I am spending 12-17 mil per year on a receiver. It's for a TRUE # 1. Not a guy who's "almost" a 1k receiver. That money is for a guy who puts up yards, moves the sticks AND scores 12-15 TD's.

He is best when in a vertical offense playing opposite a top receiver. He's just not a great fit in this offense at that price.

I love Hartline but he is not a great fit either.

For the price we are paying both (19.5 mil), we could have much more talent on the team. Demaryius Thomas, Jeremy Maclin, Randall Cobb, etc.

Or do it the right way and actually draft a WR.

and when I made the thread is when the story came out about him "quitting".

cshashaty Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Dolphins cannot afford to dump Mike Wallace
> for a variety of reasons. The guilty parties here
> are Joe Philbin and Bill Lazor for misusing his
> ability, and Ryan Tannehill for being inept with
> his deep throws. My message to those three are to
> own the problem and fix it. Trading Wallace doesnt
> solve the team's inability to threaten the deep
> third of the field...which is WHY they signed
> Wallace in the first place!

Some of that may be true but there is more to playing WR than running down the field as fast as you can and expecting a perfect pass to drop into your hands. I've seen him give up on passes as much as I've seen Tannehill miss the throws.

Wallace has done well to adapt somewhat but he is still as limited at WR as Tannehill is at QB.

Tannehill is not Aaron Rodgers or Ben Roethlisberger. Never will be. You have to build the offense around the QB, IMO. They are little more hard to find than WR's.

First it was Todd Haley who "misused" MW's abilities. Then it was Mike Sherman and now Bill Lazor?

The problem is he is just not a #1 WR on any team but got paid like the #1 WR in the NFL.

The problem are the owners who continue to raise the player salaries every year.

Imagine what a player is going to get paid 20 years from now.

but Joe, we gotta be fair. It's an overstatement to say that between Wallace and Tanny on deep balls there is an even split on who is at fault.

There are far more missed throws than dropped balls although there certainly were a couple of dropped balls.

That would be pretty pretty hard to judge unless your the coach and can break down the tape to see if ....

A. The WR ran a good route
B. The ball placement was off.

I do know I saw him hit a couple at the end of the year. RT just didn't throw many at all this year.

Well, sitting back and looking at it, that is true about having to know which was the proper route that was designed to be run.

But since the balls were mainly overthrown or underthrown (those that were not dropped that is) as opposed to going wide, would not you agree that the odds would be pretty long against this being a problem of the defect being that the route was not properly run and thus the miscues being on the receiver since we are not talking about the failure to connect east as opposed to west but the failure to connect north as opposed to South (vertically that is)?

All of this is why it's in everyones best interest to attempt a restructure...not saying it will happen mind you. We are stuck between a rock and a hard place as far as Wallace and his contract goes. We either pay him and sacrifice other areas, we cut him and sacrifice other areas due to the cap hit, or we attempt a restructure whereby MW still gets paid but we lower his cap number so we can address improvements to the team and still keep him.

We benefit more from keeping him on the field and replacing Hartline...provided the guy we bring in is fast and plays at a level befitting a #1 guy right away.

Tough situation that the Hickey may not be able to resolve properly...we may have to get lucky.

ChyrenB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well, sitting back and looking at it, that is true
> about having to know which was the proper route
> that was designed to be run.
>
> But since the balls were mainly overthrown or
> underthrown (those that were not dropped that is)
> as opposed to going wide, would not you agree that
> the odds would be pretty long against this being a
> problem of the defect being that the route was not
> properly run and thus the miscues being on the
> receiver since we are not talking about the
> failure to connect east as opposed to west but the
> failure to connect north as opposed to South
> (vertically that is)?

No. Not at all. It's timing based and if Wallace didn't get to the spot because he didn't get off quick enough that's on him.

Now the under throws are a different story. It would be hard to NOT put that on RT...unless of course, if it was a back shoulder throw.

I think the lack of deep balls is on all parties equally, Tannehill for not taking advantage of the chances he had, Wallace for a host reasons, the o-line for not doing their job most of the time and Lazor for abandoning going deep for most of the season. It's such a coordinated effort that you can't really put it on any one thing more then the other. Anyone that blames just Tannehill is foolish IMO.

Ken Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> All of this is why it's in everyones best interest
> to attempt a restructure...not saying it will
> happen mind you. We are stuck between a rock and a
> hard place as far as Wallace and his contract
> goes. We either pay him and sacrifice other areas,
> we cut him and sacrifice other areas due to the
> cap hit, or we attempt a restructure whereby MW
> still gets paid but we lower his cap number so we
> can address improvements to the team and still
> keep him.

All restructuring does is convert salary to bonus and make it guaranteed and harder to get rid of in the future.

That is why they often use the phrase “Robbing Peter to pay Paul.” Teams are saving themselves space now but hurting their cap situations in the future.

It is a tool to free up cap space but it just screws up the cap in future years.

> We benefit more from keeping him on the field and
> replacing Hartline...provided the guy we bring in
> is fast and plays at a level befitting a #1 guy
> right away.

I guess that all depends on how much the coaches are willing to change. It doesn't seem like they are at all.

> Tough situation that the Hickey may not be able to
> resolve properly...we may have to get lucky.

What we have seen in the past is that when Philbin dislikes you or you give him grief, you are gone even if you are a good player. Vontae, Karlos, etc.

It does create quite the dilemma as you can only designate two players as post June 1st cuts. One HAS to be Ellerbe. Then you have to choose between Wallace and Hartline for the other. Wallace saves 1 mil more on the cap but Wallace is more productive in this offense. Hartline has NEVER scored TD's.

As much as I hate to say it, It will probably be Hartline that gets the axe (unless we can trade him). Hickey needs to find another gem WR in the draft. Only it has to be one who plays outside (and in the end zone) this time.

I would say a deep ball throw is not a timing throw.

An out or a curl is a timing throw.

a deep ball throw is a touch throw.

And this is also true...

Omar Kelly ? @OmarKelly

At some point Joe Philbin needs to realize the problem isn't Marshall, Wallace, Bush, Dansby, Vontae, Burnett, Smith etc and that it's HIM.

Omar Kelly ? @OmarKelly

I'm pretty sure Ross isn't oblivious to the ridiculous exodus of talented players the Dolphins have dumped because Philbin can't coach them


Omar Kelly ? @OmarKelly

If I'm Steve Ross I tell Philbin "you asked for Mike Wallace, said you'd use him properly. Be a leader & make it work cause I paid for it."

dolphaholic Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think the lack of deep balls is on all parties
> equally, Tannehill for not taking advantage of the
> chances he had, Wallace for a host reasons, the
> o-line for not doing their job most of the time
> and Lazor for abandoning going deep for most of
> the season. It's such a coordinated effort that
> you can't really put it on any one thing more then
> the other. Anyone that blames just Tannehill is
> foolish IMO.


I'm not sure holic. I'd have to look at the coaches game films to be sure, but I think there are plenty of deep opportunities in this offense.

I think part of the problem is RT in that he's more apt to take the first open receiver in his progression rather than realize what deep pattern will have single coverage and wait for it to uncover.

Part of that is experience. Part of that is coaching (get rid of the ball, keep the chains moving, etc). But the biggest part of that is the oline.

It took a month or more for everyone to get on the same page with this new offense. Then by midseason our oline started to slowly disintegrate with injuries. Once that happened, RT rarely had a well formed pocket to sit in for 3+ seconds to take that shot down field.

I think that if we fix the oline we'll see more deep opportunities. Whether or not RT can hit on them remains to be seen, but they are there in Lazor's offense.

As Joe has been saying for weeks. Priority #1 is finish the Oline overhaul we started this season.

Tannehill struggled mid year or so throwing the long ball. At the end he improved a bit. Some long passes were thrown for strikes and were dropped too.

THE Truth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> dolphaholic Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I think the lack of deep balls is on all
> parties
> > equally, Tannehill for not taking advantage of
> the
> > chances he had, Wallace for a host reasons, the
> > o-line for not doing their job most of the time
> > and Lazor for abandoning going deep for most of
> > the season. It's such a coordinated effort that
> > you can't really put it on any one thing more
> then
> > the other. Anyone that blames just Tannehill is
> > foolish IMO.
>
>
> I'm not sure holic. I'd have to look at the
> coaches game films to be sure, but I think there
> are plenty of deep opportunities in this offense.
>
>
> I think part of the problem is RT in that he's
> more apt to take the first open receiver in his
> progression rather than realize what deep pattern
> will have single coverage and wait for it to
> uncover.
>
> Part of that is experience. Part of that is
> coaching (get rid of the ball, keep the chains
> moving, etc). But the biggest part of that is
> the oline.
>
> It took a month or more for everyone to get on the
> same page with this new offense. Then by midseason
> our oline started to slowly disintegrate with
> injuries. Once that happened, RT rarely had a well
> formed pocket to sit in for 3+ seconds to take
> that shot down field.
>
> I think that if we fix the oline we'll see more
> deep opportunities. Whether or not RT can hit on
> them remains to be seen, but they are there in
> Lazor's offense.
>
> As Joe has been saying for weeks. Priority #1 is
> finish the Oline overhaul we started this season.


True that we're not privy to see coaches tape or hear if the long ball was called, but i'd have to think if there was plenty of openings for the long pass and Tannehill just wouldn't pull the trigger that the coaches would be harping on him to take some shots (maybe they were, who really knows?)

I think we both agree that a huge part of the problem has been the O-line not giving enough time for the deeper paterns to develop. Either way, it can be blamed on just RT17, although he has to shoulder his share of the blame also.

Andrew Luck's line is horrible. He has no problem with the deep pass.

At some point your QB has to instill some fear in an opposing D. He has to beat the rush once in a while and hit a big play.

So tired of hearing we need a big wr, we need a deep threat, we need a new oline.

What we need is our QB to put his big boy pants on and start making plays when they're there. Until then he's going to face constant pressure no matter who we put on the line.

And if he can't do that you change your offensive philosophy and run the ball 30-40x a game and build a solid D.

I think he has the ability. He just needs to do it.

Overthrows and underthrows to wallace in 2013



<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/dNLTdNxhFvw" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>