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.
If you didn't hear Sparano on WQAM the other night, then you missed him really praise Patrick Turner. While he liked him on tape, he was even more impressed at the rookie camp. He talked about how, unlike other tall guys, Turner can really sink his hips and stop on a dime to create separation from dbs. He talked about his good hands and how he can get to balls in the middle of the field. He ended by suggesting that he thinks they have a real find in this kid. Say good bye to Ernest.
Yes say goodbye to ernest once and for all. Now thats what you call a bust.
When a free agent rookie makes the team and is listed above you on the depth chart, you don't see the field the entire year...( you are making 10 mill and the rookie is making minimun wage )......there is something wrong with you.
All of this is true....BUT.....I still hold the Trifecta accountable on the Wilford thing.
The saying is "past behavior/performance is the best predictor of future behavior/performance."
It was widely known that Wilford was not a great practice player and that he was a 'gamer'. I've coached my share of them and they are frustrating in that you are trying to set a tone in practice and get everyone to accept a high pace and level of expectation...and then you have some guy who looks like he isn't buying in, or is bucking the system, but come game day he has a higher gear.
But I have been coaching teens for long enough to have learned that 'some of them' are actually trying to go hard in practice....but without the adrenaline from a game..they are flat.
Wilford has always been a chain mover, or a red zone guy, he was never a burner, or a crisp route runner. They signed him based on that. he was NOT a special teams guy. They signed him. Then they benched him because he wasn't going nuts in practice and didn't play special teams.
I can understand Bess winning out over the long haul, but some of those early games we lost throwing jump balls in the red zone to 5'10" WR's while our 6'4" experience vet was at home in jeans.
So, that one is a negative mark in the Sparano column in my book.
realist Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> All of this is true....BUT.....I still hold the
> Trifecta accountable on the Wilford thing.
Agreed....100%
> I can understand Bess winning out over the long
> haul, but some of those early games we lost
> throwing jump balls in the red zone to 5'10" WR's
> while our 6'4" experience vet was at home in
> jeans.
Very true....
> So, that one is a negative mark in the Sparano
> column in my book.
Everybody makes mistakes.....1 negative out of say 100 isnt that bad......they hit on the first pick in the draft.....big time....................hit on merling, lankford donald thomas.....................Were smart enough to sign bess...Or lucky enough shall i say.......desperate enough to come up with the wild cat when nothing else was working.......smart enough to bring in fasano and also ayodele for a low draft pick,, both became starters and did well. Turned matt roth into an OL and he had a solid year.....Drafted chad henne and he has looked pretty good from what ive seen. And last but not least signed our free agent savior penninton.
Realist Just imagine how jet fans felt last year about letting pennington go, signing brett then losing to us on that last game of the year..
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/12/2009 02:23PM by samsam3738.
does anyone know if we will save any money by cutting wilford, or if cutting him will be worse for our cap than keeping him (which I think I had heard somewhere)?
I have yet to see a coach draft somebody and say "hey you know what, he really was not that good but we had nobody better on the board." What do you expect them to say.
Hey, I can see sitting a guy for not being a practice warrior when he is a rookie or a guy on the roster you inherited; but, when that is the 'KNOWN HISTORY" of a guy YOU signed...it is on YOU! plain and simple.
And if he WAS a 'stiff' as you've said.....how can you not blame them for signing a stiff to such big contract? It can't be both ways.
Congrats to Sparano for signing a stiff with a history of playing better in games then in practice and then sitting him for not practicing hard enough???? That is a bit silly.
Wilford was not a stiff in Jacksonville. He had 40+ receptions in 2 seasons. He wasn't a #1 WR, barely a #2, but he certainly was good enough to suit up and play. Especially since he is a situational player.
In 2007 his 1st down percentage was higher than Randy Moss, Antonio Gates, Braylon Edwards, Plaxico Burress. THAT is what they signed him to do...convert 3rd downs into 1sts......they just figured they could change his practice spots.
sorry, they knew who he was when they signed him. SO either they signed a stiff and its on them, or they signed a guy for what he did in games, and benched for what he did in practice.
Agreed, don't get me wrong. I love Sparano and Parcells. they are doing great things for us. BUT...as a 'realist' I try to keep track of the good and the bad.
The Wilford thing so far is the only 'negative' thing I am attributing to Sparano.
It is unfair to pin it all on Wilford. The guy is who he is, and has value to someone. If the Trifecta want to pass on him...fine...but let's not pretend they handled things perfectly and he blew it. He barely got on the field.
If we cut him, he will get signed by someone and will catch 30-40 balls, 70% of which will be 1st downs, and he will have 2-5 TD's. Nothing sexy, but valuable none the less.
Phinsfan2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> realist Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Congrats to Sparano for signing a stiff with a
> > history of playing better in games then in
> > practice and then sitting him for not
> practicing
> > hard enough???? That is a bit silly.
>
>
> Once again, Ireland/Parcells signed him. Sporano
> benched him.
>
> Tell me again who made the wrong decision?
These are the kinds of moves that often cause friction between the coach and GM. Luckily, I don't think that happened here, but I recall other cases where a GM signed a player that the coach refused to play. Byron Scott did it in NJ with Dikembe Motumbo. Scott was fired the following season.
I guess I didn't catch you seperating Sparano from the Trifecta.
fair enough. Parcells and ireland get the blame then.
But I still say he was far from a stiff. He is a situational player. Chain movers typicall have high 1st down percentages but low over-all numbers. And that's who Wilford is.
Phinsfan2 ... lot of reps on the one point - It was FO not Sparano.
I think there is room for both positions here:
1. I'm all over, Sparano's - show it in practice.
2. These guys are however pros and know that there aregame time players. There were more than enough chances (no other receivers catching the ball ... last year to give Wilford a game time shot to prove himself.
- With the contract they paid him, they should have made him earn a bit and find out if he can deliver in the clutch moments too.
- Life is full of greys and not just black and white ... the whole tyeam knows it.
- They need to to sit Wilford down and let him know he needs to convince himself in practice that he is playing in the game if he wants to play in Miami.
If you can't motivate yourself to do what the coaches ask and practise hard then you need to sit. It's not that difficult. Just do it. don't whine that you never got a chance.