Did anyone read where Griese commented, thinking he was off the air, that he had never seen a QB unable to read defenses and audible? I read it but now I can't find any reference

jlyell13 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Did anyone read where Griese commented, thinking
> he was off the air, that he had never seen a QB
> unable to read defenses and audible? I read it
> but now I can't find any reference


I guess he didn't watch his son much...........

GO DOLPHINS!!!!

Treasure, there is a difference between not being able to successfully audible and not even being permitted to audible.

Tannehill was as good as his son.


Good for nothing.

That was a good zinger, SamSam.

This whole audible thing is ridiculous.

First, you have to make a distinction between what players and what journalists and fans refer to as audibles. The true definition of the audible is the ability to change to any play in the playbook.

The reality is that very few QB's have the option to change from the play called into them that they are intended to run to any random play in the playbook that they see fit in today's NFL. There is a called play and the QB has the option to change the play at the line of scrimmage to one of a pre-determined set of different plays based upon what the defense is showing them.

Now, some QB's, based upon the system, don't even have that option. But all at least have a run/pass option, so if the defense is obviously giving up the pass to play the run or vice versa, the QB can change to the other play.

But most passing offenses today are designed to attack a defense - regardless of the coverage. If they play zone, this is your read. If they play man, this is your read. If they blitz, this is your hot route. They are either designed that way when it's drawn up, or it might be a bit more complicated and rely upon the receiver to run option routes depending on the coverage they are facing.

The play that is called doesn't need to change because the QB's read progression changes or the WR's routes change.

These are things that weren't as prevalent back in the 1980s when Marino played and he needed to be able to pull from the entire playbook in order to get a play to create offensive opportunities.

Mike Martz ran the most successful offense of all time with Greatest Show on Turf and when he went to Chicago as O/C, he was blasted for Jay Cutler's bad play because Cutler didn't have the ability to audible. His response was that his system doesn't allow QB's to audible because his system provides for every eventuality that the defense can show and it's up to the QB to make the right reads to throw to the right receiver, or to change the play to a run.

Until somebody can show me some proof that Brees or Rodgers can change any given play to any other play in the playbook, I have a very hard time believing that Sean Payton and Mike McCarthy spend so much time and effort deciding which plays to call only to have their QB's have the freedom to completely change to something else.

Otherwise, I tend to believe that Payton and McCarthy call plays that give the QB multiple ways to attack defenses based upon what they show and that they give Brees and Rodgers the ability to change out of those plays into another select group of plays if the defensive personnel and formation dictates. But to any play in the playbook? Plays that might not have even been practiced all week?

As far as Gannon's comments go, I hated listening to him. He spent half the game telling us that Tannehill can't throw deep and can only throw a limited number routes, can't recognize the blitz and make the quick decision and then says we need to give Tannehill the ability to change the play to any play in the playbook?

Hell, Campbell said it himself. He said Tannehill is a "tough" QB, he said he wants Tannehill to "run the ball more". These aren't exactly things you say about franchise QB's. He said that Tannehill's decisions are more limited now in Lazor's offense than Sherman's and that everybody saw that as a benefit because it speed up Tannehill's decision making ability. Uhhh.. whaaa...??



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/25/2015 05:48PM by Phins5.0.

I think we do know the truth. We do know that Tannehill can change from a run to a pass and from a pass to a run. We do know that Tannehill can change the protection. We do know that Tannehill can change the routes the receivers are running by making hand signals.

All these things are stated by Tannehill, Lazor and Campbell and none are in conflict.

What we also know is that Tannehill has less decision making ability under Lazor than he did under Sherman, because Campbell said it speeds up his decision making process.

So whereas maybe before he was able to select from a "menu" of plays to audible from, now he cannot.

We also know that many offensive systems do not allow QB's to audible completely out of the play, such as Martz's system and Kelly's system. We know that these systems don't allow that because they are designed to be successful regardless of the defensive play call - as long as the QB makes the proper run/pass read and the proper WR route adjustment calls.

So again, this whole thing is a non-issue. I'm not giving Lazor a free pass here, I think he sucks. But I don't think the problem is that Tannehill can't audible. Tannehill can't even handle his current responsibilities that are more limited, and they've actually reduced his responsibilities in order to see the improvement that they have (such as pass completion %, etc).

It also shows volumes of why players leave here and are way more successful.
I would bet my house that if Tanny wasn't signed and went elsewhere he would be much more successful.

GO DOLPHINS!!!!

What players have left here and are way more successful?

For the most part, what I see are mediocre Dolphins players that have lots of homer support here and then completely vanish off the face of the earth when leaving.

What is this myth that players go elsewhere and become stars based upon? Welker? It's no surprise he left and played better, he went from our hot mess at the QB position to playing for one of the best QB's of all time. But who else?

How many ex Dolphins are on the Bills? Jets? 5.0 you seem bewildered by that question.

GO DOLPHINS!!!!

I'm bewildered by the notion that there's a history of players leaving the Dolphins going elsewhere and being "way more successful", yes.

And you didn't provide any support to back up that claim, so I'm still waiting for it. The number of ex-dolphins on the Bills and Jets is irrelevant to your claim. You need to show that those players are "way more successful" on the Bills and Jets than they were with the Dolphins.

So, who are these players? You made it seem as if this was something that happens repeatedly and often, so it shouldn't be difficult for you to quickly provide a list.

Phins5.0 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm bewildered by the notion that there's a
> history of players leaving the Dolphins going
> elsewhere and being "way more successful", yes.
>

Brandon Marshall, Wes Welker, Vontae Davis and soon to be Chris Hogan.

Brandon Marshall was a Pro Bowler before coming to Miami, was a stud while in Miami, was a stud in Chicago and is still pretty good with NY. He didn't leave the Dolphins and become "way more successful".

Wes Welker, I already talked about.

Vontae Davis was a great corner for us and is a great corner for the Colts. Has he gotten better while with the Colts? Eh, maybe by a bit but again, he was a great player for us.

Chris Hogan? Really? 7-11 because he's always open? He's hardly setting the world on fire. If that is who you're going to hang your hat on to represent the notion that players frequently leave the dolphins and are way more successful elsewhere, I guess I'll just concede the point because I don't know what you are trying to demonstrate or where you are trying to go with that idea.

Griese not saying anything that many of us have not seen

Phins5.0 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Brandon Marshall was a Pro Bowler before coming to
> Miami, was a stud while in Miami, was a stud in
> Chicago and is still pretty good with NY. He
> didn't leave the Dolphins and become "way more
> successful".
>
> Wes Welker, I already talked about.
>
> Vontae Davis was a great corner for us and is a
> great corner for the Colts. Has he gotten better
> while with the Colts? Eh, maybe by a bit but
> again, he was a great player for us.
>
> Chris Hogan? Really? 7-11 because he's always
> open? He's hardly setting the world on fire. If
> that is who you're going to hang your hat on to
> represent the notion that players frequently leave
> the dolphins and are way more successful
> elsewhere, I guess I'll just concede the point
> because I don't know what you are trying to
> demonstrate or where you are trying to go with
> that idea.

5.0 I like your posts and you seem like a bright fella, but relax on assuming your the know it all, be all.

Here's the point, those players above mentioned, and many others may not have been probowlers, but they filled gaps that could have opened draft picks for other well needed spots such as Corner, O linemen, snx Linebacker.

When we let players go consistently we have holes consistantly.when we have holes , we have no depth, when we have no depth we can't make it through a season because injuries are part of the game.

GO DOLPHINS!!!!

I wonder what happened to Football God and JoeFootball?

ChyrenB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I wonder what happened to Football God and
> JoeFootball?


Lol.......this guy just likes to change his name everyonce and a While because we can smell the soup he's cookin......

GO DOLPHINS!!!!

Jumped ship

ChyrenB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I wonder what happened to Football God and
> JoeFootball?


Now i know they are definetely not DUK AKA Howard.......


They sounded very smart and used to talk football.