Home
THIS SITE
  About Phins.com
  Contact Us
  Staff
TEAM NEWS
  Team Info
  Twitter Feeds
  News Wire
  XML News
  Subscribe using any news reader
  News Articles
  Mobile News
  On Porpoise
GAMES
  Schedule
PERSONNEL
  Roster
  Depth Chart
  Training Camp
  Draft
FOR THE FANS
  Forums
  Places To Watch
  Dolphins Links
  Game Tickets
HISTORY
  Team History
  1972 Tribute
  News Archive
  Past Games
  Transactions
  Past Rosters
SUPPORT PHINS.COM
  Dolphins Fan Shop
  Phins.com Apparel
 
-- Advertisement --
Privacy Policy at Phins.com
 
  Phins.com Phorums
    News Wire | Roster | Depth Chart | Last/Next Game | Schedule | Links  
          Amazing
Miami Dolphins Civilized Discussion :  Phins.com Phorums The fastest message board... ever.
This is a moderated phorum for the CIVILIZED discussion of the Miami Dolphins. In this phorum, there are rules and moderators to make sure you abide by the rules. The moderators for this phorum are JC and Colonel
Pages: 12Next
Current Page: 1 of 2
Amazing
Posted by: ChyrenB ()
Date: November 22, 2015 05:49PM

I just brought up our 2011 roster.

Look how many players are STILL in the league.

How many of them did we, and a lot of you I remember, haughtily laugh and claim that these were people we could do without????? (although I admit to criticizing the Lebanese).

Quarterbacks
9 Pat Devlin
6 J. P. Losman
8 Matt Moore
Running backs
22 Reggie Bush
31 Charles Clay FB/TE
26 Lex Hilliard RB/FB
38 Richard Medlin
23 Steve Slaton
33 Daniel Thomas
Wide receivers
15 Davone Bess PR
10 Clyde Gates KR
82 Brian Hartline
19 Brandon Marshall
11 Julius Pruitt
Tight ends
80 Anthony Fasano
88 Jeron Mastrud
89 Will Yeatman
Offensive linemen
61 Will Barker T
72 Vernon Carey G
71 Marc Colombo T
62 Ryan Cook C/G
69 Ray Feinga G
75 Nate Garner G/T
68 Richie Incognito G
74 John Jerry G
51 Mike Pouncey C
Defensive linemen
90 Ryan Baker DE/NT
70 Kendall Langford DE
78 Tony McDaniel DE
97 Phillip Merling DE
98 Jared Odrick DE
94 Randy Starks DE
96 Paul Soliai NT
Linebackers
59 Ikaika Alama-Francis OLB
56 Kevin Burnett ILB
58 Karlos Dansby ILB
50 Marvin Mitchell ILB
53 Austin Spitler ILB
99 Jason Taylor OLB
93 Jason Trusnik OLB
91 Cameron Wake OLB
Defensive backs
25 Will Allen CB
37 Yeremiah Bell SS
28 Nolan Carroll CB
30 Chris Clemons FS
29 Tyrone Culver SS
21 Vontae Davis CB
20 Reshad Jones FS
24 Sean Smith CB
27 Jimmy Wilson CB
Special teams
5 Dan Carpenter K
92 John Denney LS
2 Brandon Fields P
Reserve lists
7 Chad Henne QB (IR) Injury icon 2.svg
77 Jake Long OT (IR) Injury icon 2.svg
55 Koa Misi OLB (IR) Injury icon 2.svg
14 Marlon Moore WR (IR) Injury icon 2.svg
76 Lydon Murtha OT (IR) Injury icon 2.svg
18 Roberto Wallace WR (IR) Injury icon 2.svg

Practice squad
95 Isaako Aaitui NT
43 Vince Agnew CB
4 McLeod Bethel-Thompson QB
32 Marcus Brown CB
49 Jonathan Freeny OLB
-- Chris Hogan WR
-- Ian Johnson RB
40 Anderson Russell SS

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Amazing
Posted by: samsam3738 ()
Date: November 23, 2015 03:43AM

So we have had talent.....


Its mostly schemes and coaching that hurt us most.



Maybe we would be in first place with the pats coaching staff.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Amazing
Posted by: davdoldew4 ()
Date: November 23, 2015 09:37AM

Not with this QB. !!!

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Amazing
Posted by: ChyrenB ()
Date: November 23, 2015 10:20AM

But just goes to show that if you get rid of a guy, unless it is a monster type historical trade, then the guy you get rid of should be out of the league in three years. If a bunch of your guys you got rid of are in the league and still starring almost five years later, then you are a sucker who got fleeced for your most valuable merchandise.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Amazing
Posted by: KB ()
Date: November 23, 2015 11:03AM

Ok, so WHO should we have kept?

At skill positions offensively, I see some role players - Bush, Clay, Hartline, Fasano...but no one who could give our sputtering Offense an identity. I see a head case who would be sulking, complaining and poisoning a losing locker room - Marshall. And I see a whole lot of....ABSOLUTELY NOTHING at QB.

The categories that stand out to me are the areas we have 'worked on' the most. O Line and DB. We have let go some guys, there that are playing decent in other places...

That tells me a couple of things:
1.)Player evaluation may not be as bad as assumed, and YES there is poor scheming and coaching.
2.)Maybe our line isn't as HORRIBLE as some think, maybe we just don't have players who can run, pass, get open or catch at an NFL level!

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Amazing
Posted by: captkoi ()
Date: November 23, 2015 12:03PM

KB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ok, so WHO should we have kept?
>
> At skill positions offensively, I see some role
> players - Bush, Clay, Hartline, Fasano...but no
> one who could give our sputtering Offense an
> identity. I see a head case who would be sulking,
> complaining and poisoning a losing locker room -
> Marshall. And I see a whole lot of....ABSOLUTELY
> NOTHING at QB.
>
> The categories that stand out to me are the areas
> we have 'worked on' the most. O Line and DB. We
> have let go some guys, there that are playing
> decent in other places...
>
> That tells me a couple of things:
> 1.)Player evaluation may not be as bad as assumed,
> and YES there is poor scheming and coaching.
> 2.)Maybe our line isn't as HORRIBLE as some think,
> maybe we just don't have players who can run,
> pass, get open or catch at an NFL level!

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

Geez, KB, your last sentence puts the whole offense in the crap hole, so why point out RT in the majority of your posts?

I would figure that, by what your last statement said, that if our guys could run, get open or catch, that RT would do just fine.

I still don't give that OL a pass; no way. As a group, they suck!

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Amazing
Posted by: KB ()
Date: November 23, 2015 12:39PM

captkoi Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> KB Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Ok, so WHO should we have kept?
> >
> > At skill positions offensively, I see some role
> > players - Bush, Clay, Hartline, Fasano...but no
> > one who could give our sputtering Offense an
> > identity. I see a head case who would be
> sulking,
> > complaining and poisoning a losing locker room
> -
> > Marshall. And I see a whole lot
> of....ABSOLUTELY
> > NOTHING at QB.
> >
> > The categories that stand out to me are the
> areas
> > we have 'worked on' the most. O Line and DB.
> We
> > have let go some guys, there that are playing
> > decent in other places...
> >
> > That tells me a couple of things:
> > 1.)Player evaluation may not be as bad as
> assumed,
> > and YES there is poor scheming and coaching.
> > 2.)Maybe our line isn't as HORRIBLE as some
> think,
> > maybe we just don't have players who can run,
> > pass, get open or catch at an NFL level!
>
> **************************************************
> ***
>
> Geez, KB, your last sentence puts the whole
> offense in the crap hole, so why point out RT in
> the majority of your posts?

Because he 'runs and passes' and does neither very well lol. HE'S THE QB...that's why I talk about him a lot. But that doesn't mean I don't think we have other problems. I just think they are magnified by not having a leader, field general and playmaker at the most important position on the field.
>
> I would figure that, by what your last statement
> said, that if our guys could run, get open or
> catch, that RT would do just fine.

Sure, sure, get the '85 Bears defense, the '93 Cowboys OLine, Rice, Clayton Irving and Dwight Clark at receiver, Jim Brown, Barry Sanders and Csonka in the backfield and then get AJ Feeley out of retirement...he'll do just fine...NOT reality CAP.

>
> I still don't give that OL a pass; no way. As a
> group, they suck!

Well they certainly aren't top of the league, but neither is Greenbay's (4 of the 5 starters injured) yet they are putting together a decent season...because they have a QB who can play (and who could have been a Dolphin BTW). The guy up in NE is doing pretty well with a bunch of undrafted guys off the street too.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Amazing
Posted by: jsm08 ()
Date: November 23, 2015 01:54PM

Our line and skill positions weren't any better when Ragarmington was the qb. He could read a D and made the players around him better.

Ricky was better than any RB we have now. Ronnie is comparable to what we have now.

Camarillo, Ginn, Bess, Fasano < what we have now.

Long and Carey = Albert & James.

Smiley, Satele, Nduwke =< Thomas, Pouncy, Turner

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Amazing
Posted by: JC ()
Date: November 23, 2015 05:27PM


Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Amazing
Posted by: KB ()
Date: November 24, 2015 03:59AM

I think he means Chad 'Glass Shoulder' Pennington.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Amazing
Posted by: JC ()
Date: November 24, 2015 04:29AM

KB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think he means Chad 'Glass Shoulder' Pennington.


Thanks. That was either a nickname I was unfamiliar with or one heck of a spell-check thing.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Amazing
Posted by: samsam3738 ()
Date: November 24, 2015 05:15AM

LOL.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Amazing
Posted by: jsm08 ()
Date: November 24, 2015 05:22AM

KB is correct.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Amazing
Posted by: Phins5.0 ()
Date: November 24, 2015 07:03PM

Either you think you need a franchise QB to win consistently, or you don't. Either you believe a franchise QB makes up for deficiencies at other positions, or you don't.

It's no different than Ronnie Brown VS Ricky Williams. Both were big, powerful, relatively fast running backs. Ronnie Brown was nothing more than average and Ricky Williams could have been in the HOF if he had liked playing football. The difference was vision, balance, patience, the instinct that comes with actually be a running back. Ronnie Brown had all of the physical talent, but was just an athlete playing RB.

Tannehill is just an athlete playing QB. He doesn't read defenses quickly, he doesn't recognize blitzes, he doesn't have pocket awareness to "feel" pressure, he doesn't make quick decisions, he isn't aggressive trying to attack defenses and push the ball down the field, he doesn't "throw open" receivers, he doesn't have good ball placement when he does deliver the ball.

Hell, it was widely discussed that the reason we brought in receivers Still and Parker was because they were good at contested catches!

To the earlier poster's point, Chad Pennington didn't have half the physical gifts that Tannehill does. Yet he excelled everywhere else, reading coverages, reading blitzes, pocket awareness, quick decision making, ball placement.

We need to keep trying to find that franchise QB to make up for deficiencies elsewhere because we're never going to build a strong enough team around the Jay Fiedler's or Ryan Tannehills to win a championship.

I'd say I can't believe that posters still hold out Brad Johnson and Trent Dilfer as examples of how you can win a SB with a subpar QB, but Rex Ryan actually made that exact comment before the season began so I guess you guys aren't in bad company. After all, an NFL head coach agrees with you.

I tend to disagree, I think using an example that was the exception to the rule when it happened, and even then, happened a decade and a half ago is folly.

In 2003, 4000 yards was an amazing QB performance, achieved by only the greatest in the league. In 2015, that measurement is 5,000 yards and 4,000 yards is what 3,000 yards used to be in the days of Jay Fiedler. In 2003, only Peyton and the Colts had over 4,000 yards passing but the Chiefs, Rams, Vikings, Titans, and Bucs were close. In 2014, TWELVE teams had over 4,000 yards passing, at least four were within 5,000 yards passing and another 6 with were within 4,000.

See what I'm saying here? 4,000 yards passing is now the league average. Or maybe it's the mean, or the mode. But whatever the correct statistical term is, it means it's mediocre.

1000 yards receiving used to be a Pro Bowl season for a WR. Now, we get multiple receivers over 1000 in the first HALF of the season. This season it was Julio Jones and Antonio Brown.

Point being the league is different than it was in 2001 when the Ravens won and its different than it was in 2003 when the Bucs won. Even if we could, somehow, build one of the best defenses in history the odds are still stacked against us.

And, have you actually taken a look at what happened to these two teams after that "1 and done" season that you aspire the Dolphins will achieve with Tannehill?

The Ravens cut Dilfer, and immediately crashed into a Miami Dolphins-like quagmire. .500 season after .500 season, not sucking but not really contending. Then they drafted Joe Flacco in 2008 and went from a .500 team to a 10 win team, perennial playoff contenders, won a SB and have pretty much stayed in the mix until this year.

Tampa Bay won with Brad Johnson. He threw for over 4,000 yards and made the Pro Bowl in 1998. He's #2 in the Redskins history book for passing yards.When he led the Bucs to a SB he led the NFC in passer rating. Then he got hurt, couldn't throw the deep pass anymore and the Bucs have been pretty much a .500 team for most of the time since.

The point being is that both these teams were .500 clubs until they found their QB, and both teams while being .500 clubs tried multiple QB's. We are a .500 club with Tannehill or without him and that says everything you need to know about Tannehill.

We need to find our QB. I'd prefer we draft one so we don't suffer the same 1 year rental fate that the Ravens in 2001 and the Bucs in 2003 did. Oh, and of course, we could even only suffer the same fate as the Ravens and Bucs if we managed to put together all time great defenses.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Amazing
Posted by: chatafkup ()
Date: November 24, 2015 07:36PM

I think it just goes to show how boring this season is with the same soup of the day performance from this team. Lots of postings normally found in the offseason already starting to show up on the board. drinking smiley

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Amazing
Posted by: montequi ()
Date: November 25, 2015 02:34AM

We're much more talented NOW than we were under Saban, but we were more competitive with NS. That points to one thing: COACHING.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Amazing
Posted by: KB ()
Date: November 25, 2015 03:05AM

Phins5.0 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Either you think you need a franchise QB to win
> consistently, or you don't. Either you believe a
> franchise QB makes up for deficiencies at other
> positions, or you don't.
>
> It's no different than Ronnie Brown VS Ricky
> Williams. Both were big, powerful, relatively
> fast running backs. Ronnie Brown was nothing more
> than average and Ricky Williams could have been in
> the HOF if he had liked playing football. The
> difference was vision, balance, patience, the
> instinct that comes with actually be a running
> back. Ronnie Brown had all of the physical
> talent, but was just an athlete playing RB.
>
> Tannehill is just an athlete playing QB. He
> doesn't read defenses quickly, he doesn't
> recognize blitzes, he doesn't have pocket
> awareness to "feel" pressure, he doesn't make
> quick decisions, he isn't aggressive trying to
> attack defenses and push the ball down the field,
> he doesn't "throw open" receivers, he doesn't have
> good ball placement when he does deliver the
> ball.
>
> Hell, it was widely discussed that the reason we
> brought in receivers Still and Parker was because
> they were good at contested catches!
>
> To the earlier poster's point, Chad Pennington
> didn't have half the physical gifts that Tannehill
> does. Yet he excelled everywhere else, reading
> coverages, reading blitzes, pocket awareness,
> quick decision making, ball placement.
>
> We need to keep trying to find that franchise QB
> to make up for deficiencies elsewhere because
> we're never going to build a strong enough team
> around the Jay Fiedler's or Ryan Tannehills to win
> a championship.
>
> I'd say I can't believe that posters still hold
> out Brad Johnson and Trent Dilfer as examples of
> how you can win a SB with a subpar QB, but Rex
> Ryan actually made that exact comment before the
> season began so I guess you guys aren't in bad
> company. After all, an NFL head coach agrees with
> you.
>
> I tend to disagree, I think using an example that
> was the exception to the rule when it happened,
> and even then, happened a decade and a half ago is
> folly.
>
> In 2003, 4000 yards was an amazing QB performance,
> achieved by only the greatest in the league. In
> 2015, that measurement is 5,000 yards and 4,000
> yards is what 3,000 yards used to be in the days
> of Jay Fiedler. In 2003, only Peyton and the Colts
> had over 4,000 yards passing but the Chiefs, Rams,
> Vikings, Titans, and Bucs were close. In 2014,
> TWELVE teams had over 4,000 yards passing, at
> least four were within 5,000 yards passing and
> another 6 with were within 4,000.
>
> See what I'm saying here? 4,000 yards passing is
> now the league average. Or maybe it's the mean,
> or the mode. But whatever the correct statistical
> term is, it means it's mediocre.
>
> 1000 yards receiving used to be a Pro Bowl season
> for a WR. Now, we get multiple receivers over
> 1000 in the first HALF of the season. This season
> it was Julio Jones and Antonio Brown.
>
> Point being the league is different than it was in
> 2001 when the Ravens won and its different than it
> was in 2003 when the Bucs won. Even if we could,
> somehow, build one of the best defenses in history
> the odds are still stacked against us.
>
> And, have you actually taken a look at what
> happened to these two teams after that "1 and
> done" season that you aspire the Dolphins will
> achieve with Tannehill?
>
> The Ravens cut Dilfer, and immediately crashed
> into a Miami Dolphins-like quagmire. .500 season
> after .500 season, not sucking but not really
> contending. Then they drafted Joe Flacco in 2008
> and went from a .500 team to a 10 win team,
> perennial playoff contenders, won a SB and have
> pretty much stayed in the mix until this year.
>
> Tampa Bay won with Brad Johnson. He threw for
> over 4,000 yards and made the Pro Bowl in 1998.
> He's #2 in the Redskins history book for passing
> yards.When he led the Bucs to a SB he led the NFC
> in passer rating. Then he got hurt, couldn't throw
> the deep pass anymore and the Bucs have been
> pretty much a .500 team for most of the time
> since.
>
> The point being is that both these teams were .500
> clubs until they found their QB, and both teams
> while being .500 clubs tried multiple QB's. We
> are a .500 club with Tannehill or without him and
> that says everything you need to know about
> Tannehill.
>
> We need to find our QB. I'd prefer we draft one
> so we don't suffer the same 1 year rental fate
> that the Ravens in 2001 and the Bucs in 2003 did.
> Oh, and of course, we could even only suffer the
> same fate as the Ravens and Bucs if we managed to
> put together all time great defenses.


Well put 5.0. Conclusions backed by relevant data. Prepare to be flamed by the Tannehill fanboys lol...

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Amazing
Posted by: jsm08 ()
Date: November 25, 2015 03:11AM

That was a quality post 5.0. I couldn't have said it any better.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Amazing
Posted by: Hooligan2 ()
Date: November 25, 2015 06:39AM

More and more are seeing it. Tannehill is smart, maybe very smart but, that doesn't necessarily show up at "game speed". I'll give him some slack for having the misfortune of being "developed" under Philbin and the rest of the Keystone Kops behind a bad line but, I wonder if the game will ever slow down enough for him to be anything more than average.
Here we are in year 4 of his development and only recently have we seen him use a hard snap count. Three full years of getting sacked and only now does he realize how easy it is to draw an overly eager defense offside with his voice alone.
The next coach will give him a year to $hit or get off the pot.
I hope he shines.

........................................

It is HEALTH that is the true wealth, not pieces of gold and silver.
-Mahatma Gandhi-



-

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Amazing
Posted by: jsm08 ()
Date: November 25, 2015 06:53AM

Not if we get Payton. He'll be a package deal with Brees.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Amazing
Posted by: sickofit ()
Date: November 25, 2015 09:10AM

Dear Phins5.0:

I want to marry your post.

Sincerely,
Sickofit

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Amazing
Date: November 25, 2015 09:29AM

While I like a lot of 5.0s post and agree with the decision making, I don't feel we can judge Ryan fairly. He has had to learn 2 offenses, 2 head coaches, and a new panel of recivers every year.that said......look at some of the other QBS in the league that are literally failing out. While Ryan is not Aarron Rodgers, he's consistently decent , he's not injury prone , and very poised as far as not getting over emotional after a bad decision. With some stability in the coaching dept, and his recievers would go a long way with Oline help.

With all the money in this defense I can't believe you all are hanging Ryan out to dry. 3rd and 26, and the Cowboys got a first down!!!! 1 play later it's a touchdown and you want to hang Ryan?

He's far from perfect, but he's no Geno that's for sure.geez.......

GO MIAMI!!!

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Amazing
Posted by: Phins5.0 ()
Date: November 25, 2015 04:01PM

Well, Treasure, that's the reason I started my post the way that I did. If you don't believe you need a franchise QB to win consistently or if you don't believe a franchise QB covers up other deficiencies then you must believe that having an average QB is okay and will move on and focus your attention on other areas of need.

There are plenty of other areas of need on this team, there's no question. This team needs three new linebackers and it needs at least one of them to be an impact difference maker. This team needs that even if it had a Top 5 QB. But if you believe the team can win championships with an average QB, then we need not one but two of those new linebackers to be impact difference makers. It goes on like that for each position group, be it the secondary, the backs and receivers or the OL.

Finding a franchise QB is difficult, but if you don't keep looking you'll never find one. And I'm not sure that it's easier to find Hall of Fame candidates and NFL record setters at multiple positions than it is to find a franchise QB.

Again, looking at the last time that mediocre QB's won the SB, they were surrounded by great talent. Jonathan Ogden, Jamal Lewis, Shannon Sharpe, Rob Burnett, Peter Boulware, Michael McCrary, Sam Adams, Chris McCallister, Rod Woodson, Mike Alstott, Keyshawn Johnson, Keenan McCardell, Ken Dilger, Jeff Christy, Warren Sapp, Simeon Rice, Shelton Quarles, Derrick Brooks, Ronde Barber, and John Lynch. All at least Pro Bowlers, many multiple time Pro Bowlers, and more than a handful of HOF'ers.

It's one thing to say 'yeah, I know those teams were loaded', it's another to actually list them out. When you do, you see just how far this team is from becoming the type of team that can carry a mediocre QB - even if it were still possible to do so today, which it most likely is not as my passing stats in the previous message demonstrated.

I also disagree with two of your other premises:
1) Tannehill has had to suffer through 2 offensive coordinators. I see it differently, I see it as Tannehill had probably the easiest transition of any QB from College to Pro by benefiting from going into the exact same system run by the exact same person. He's only had to "learn" one new system, something most NFL QB's have to do as rookies when they are also adjusting to the speed and complexity of the NFL game. Tannehill had the luxury of already knowing the offense while making that adjustment.

2) The notion that somehow the money is being spent disproportionately on the defense. We're paying for Suh, Jones, Wake and Grimes. Interestingly enough, just about the only players worth a damn. On offense, we're paying for Albert, Pouncey, Tannehill and Cameron.

By my math, which could be off by a bit, but feel free to correct me - we are spending $48M on offense and $49M on defense, both of which equate to approximately 50% of our cap room. We are essentially spending exactly evenly across our offense and defensive units.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/25/2015 04:22PM by Phins5.0.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Amazing
Posted by: ChyrenB ()
Date: November 25, 2015 04:17PM


Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Amazing
Posted by: Phins5.0 ()
Date: November 25, 2015 04:52PM

Chryen - Not sure I follow what you are saying, so I'm not sure if I agree or disagree. I'm not sure what you are trying to accomplish? Are you trying to win a championship? If you want to win a championship, then no.. I don't see how a combination of "good" and "mediocre" makes for a Championship team.

I'm not sure how you are defining "good" differently than "mediocre". If you wanted to quantify those terms, I'll be willing to look into it and see how it fits with my statements and propositions. If "great" is Top 5 and "good" is Top 10 or something like that?

I'm hoping that I'm taking the bait you threw out and you are going to come back with a couple examples of how "good" and "mediocre" can combine to win Championships? But as I said, I'm not sure I'm following your message.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Amazing
Posted by: ChyrenB ()
Date: November 25, 2015 05:52PM

Well, if you're talking about winning Super Bowls, probably not although I suspect there were some combinations of good (meaning above average though not great) and mediocre (meaning a C average) that got into the championship game.

But in order to get into the playoffs, all we had to do is win ONE GAME in that year Pennington finished off which we lost PRIOR to Pennington taking over and we would have been in the playoffs.

What I'm saying is that you don't need an overall great team to win the SuperBowl. You don't even need an overall great team to get into the playoffs.

We almost won a SuperBowl against Washington at the Rose Bowl as I saw David Woodley fail to complete a single pass in the second half.

And had not Joe Theisman pulled Kim Bokamper's arms apart as Bokamper was about to come down with a "pick six" in the endzone, we would have won that Super Bowl.

I'm trying to say that I'm tired of kicking the can down the road and saying "Let's upgrade part A of our team because part B can't really be blamed as long as parts A and C are not that good."

In other words, it's time to pass Harsh judgements on All defective parts of the team and to tell them "Either shape up or be replaced."

That goes for Tannehill too.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Amazing
Posted by: Phins5.0 ()
Date: November 25, 2015 06:10PM

I agree on both your key points. You don't need an overall great team to make the playoffs and you don't need an overall great team to win a Championship.

Were there combinations of "good" and "mediocre" that got into a Championship game? Probably. I'll bet there were probably more than a few. I guess I just don't see the point?

Like I did with the Ravens and Bucs in terms of their records after winning a championship with a mediocre QB, I'd like to know what teams you are referring to so I can see what happened before and after they made the championship game.

Teams that are .500 squads make the playoffs all the time. Sure, we could have gone to the playoffs with Pennington, we went with Fiedler, and we could have gone last year. And if our defense wasn't completely awful, we could have gone this year.

It doesn't change the fact that we are a 7-9 to 9-7 team and that in any given year we might go 6-10 or maybe 10-6 and make the playoffs.

Until you start putting together at least 10 win seasons where your margin for error knocks you back down to .500, rather than under .500, you aren't a consistent playoff contender.

I'm not saying we might not get lucky and get a 10 win season and make the playoffs with Tannehill as this team is currently configured (mediocre), I'm saying there's no point.

The Tampa Bay Bucs have been largely a .500 team since they won the SB in 2003, yet they last made the playoffs in 2007 at 9-7.

All those teams hovering around .500 will get into the playoffs eventually. You could say that we are long over due for a bounce or call to go our way that puts us back into the playoffs.

But again, I don't see the point. If you're a .500 team, that's what you are. Sometimes you'll win a game or two less, sometimes, you might win a game or two more. But will that game or two more lead to an improbable Superbowl run? No. It just leads to even worse draft position and a continuation of the .500 death spiral.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Amazing
Posted by: ChyrenB ()
Date: November 25, 2015 06:19PM


Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Amazing
Posted by: Phins5.0 ()
Date: November 25, 2015 06:55PM

I think we're on the same page, here. It's been 3.5 years, he's had every opportunity to succeed including the unheard of chance to transition to the NFL into the same exact offense with the same exact play caller.

He is what he is.

I'll also agree that Tannehill's best throws come on the run, when he's rolling out of the pocket and on the move.

I'm not sure we're going to agree on the next point though, which is that limited but athletic QB's always do better on the run because it limits their decision making by 50% or more. Those designed rollouts determine the targets, it's a completely different set of circumstances than standing in the pocket, reading the entire field, making a presnap read and then altering your read based upon what the defense does after the snap and changing your progression accordingly.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: Amazing
Posted by: ChyrenB ()
Date: November 25, 2015 08:27PM


Options: ReplyQuote
Pages: 12Next
Current Page: 1 of 2


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
This forum powered by Phorum.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
     
   
Home Curt Fennell
Contact Us
DOLFAN in New England
TOP
   
© Phins.com. No portion of this site may be reproduced without
the express permission of the author, Curt Fennell. All rights reserved.