Dave Hyde and Omar Kelly question Philbin's leadership and tactics

Very apt, though opinions seem to vary

 

HUH?? - Starks was a Pro-Bowler in 2010.

 

I think Starks has a pretty legit gripe at losing his starting job to Odrick. JMO, but I think Starks is a slightly better player right now. At worst, they're equal.

 

if they are equal, then he doesn't have a legit gripe.

 

Sure he does. He has seniority. The logical answer for Odrick being ahead, if they are equal, is that Starks skipped OTAs or because of his contract negotiations.

 

I'm a fan of punishing somebody for skipping a portion of the pre-season for prima-donna reasons. If week 1 was punishment, he got off fairly light. We'll see what happens moving forward.

 

The problem is that these are optional team activities. The NFLPA and owners negotiated this. The team isn't allowed to punish anyone for missing them.

 

Optional or not...not being a team-player is a negative in my book. Unofficial or official punishment...I agree with it.

 

He didn't show up to OTAs and Starks did. Nowhere should seniority mean less than on the football field.

 

And the team isn't allowed to punish anyone for missing OTAs.

 

not as a nose tackle he wasn't, Mr Strawman. Regardless, his production dipped from 56 tkls & 7 sacks in 2009 to 30 tkls & 3 sacks in 2010 after spending that offseason trying to build up as a nose tackle. And so what if the fans voted him to the Pro Bowl in 2010. That means jack shlit compared to the play on the field, and anyone with a decent pair of eyes saw that Starks' play wasn't the same that year. Go peruse some old threads and read for yourself rather than superficially spouting off "he was a Pro Bowler in 2010" in circular logic fashion.

The point was- Starks did have a chance to compete for starting nose tackle job in 2010, which means Soliai DID face competition contrary to Starks' agent's comments. Soliai earned his job. Wake earned his job. It's unfortunate for Starks that Miami has another quality 3-tech DT on the roster, but that's nothing more than life in the NFL. Competition is life in the NFL.

 

Why? If Miami is prioritizing interior pressure from their 3-tech DT then Odrick might be the better starting option, plus it's plausible he's still ascending as a player. Over the past 2 years Odrick has 11 sacks & 24 QB hits compared to Starks' 9 & 21. I don't feel Starks has any legitimate gripe b/c this isn't an indisputable situation. Odrick has just as solid of an argument, if not more.

 

They aren't punishing Starks. They are rewarding Odrick.

 

http://www.miamidolphins.com/news/a...eadaches/2736d9af-c3d8-4a13-9e00-8fa3e6b074c2

Coyle talks about this in this PC. basically they have 3 starters, so one might start one week and another start another week. wow what a horrible situation to be in..

 

So maybe they aren't punishing Starks for skipping OTAs but rather rewarding Odrick for attending them.

 

Same thing in practice. And I have no problem with it necessarily, but certainly one can't be surprised that Starks is upset for losing his job because he failed to attend something he negotiated to be optional.

 

HUH?!? The fans don't get a majority vote in the NFL - A 1/3rd of the vote to be exact. Starks grabbed 2/3rds from the Players and Coaches. Fans/Players/Coaches account for 1/3rd of the voting each. Mr. HUH-man.

Your production cannot help but dip in going from a 4-3 DT to a 3-4 NT. Please stop. It is two completely different roles.

SMH - Really.

 

This is an indisputable situation. Once again Starks was a Pro-Bowler in 2012. I know the opinions of the leagues players and coaches means little to you but value to the Dolphins : Starks wins.

They franchised the guy why exactly?? Answer: Because he a beast ! I'm damn happy to have him.

 

Starks is clearly a better player than Odrick. It's not close.

 

No one is surprised.

All anyone has said is:
- The "Bird" incident had nothing to do with anger at the team for his contract or demotion.
- Its not a legit gripe, if the gripe is based on seniority.
- And anything Todd has said.

 

Odrick's contract wasn't up, so why would the franchising of Starks and not Odrick prove anything?

 

Connect the Dots. If you are so comfortable with Sols and Ogs, why franchise Starks for 8 and half million?? Why not franchise Jake Long instead??

Look, Odrick is a solid player for us, I'm not in denial of that, but Starks should be the starter. Thats all.

 

Starks is an excellent player. I'm glad he's on the team. I'm comfortable with all 3. Odrick deserved a start though.

 

Time for your medicine. Starks didn't go from 4-3 DT to 3-4 NT, genius, so nice backfire on your part. He was a 3-4 DE in '09 AND '10. He was being conditioned to transition to 3-4 NT during the 2010 offseason but it didn't happen so he remained at end. I'm surprised I have to give you a history lesson considering how outspoken you always are. If you're gonna be condescending at least know what you're talking about.

 

He played NT for one game, the first one. Odrick got hurt in week 1, Starks moved back outside and Soliai became a starter. I thought you were an expert on the Dolphins.

 

This isn't indisputable, smart guy. Odrick played 4-3 end last year so you can't compare his lack of "Pro Bowl" status to Starks' because it's obviously not apples to apples. Or do you just not follow your own reasoning (see your prior post that mentions the difference in positions and how that affects production)?

Do you think Starks would've been a Pro Bowler had he been the one playing end instead?! Hell no. Odrick doesn't get penalized for being versatile enough fill that RDE position when we had no one else capable of doing so. Now that we do have a RDE, Odrick can move back inside where he's better suited, which means he's now on an even playing field with Starks, which means Starks' 2012 "Pro Bowl" status doesn't mean a hill of beans if Odrick is performing equal to or better than Randy and with an arrow pointing upward. Not to mention- Odrick is ON THE ROSTER next year, so if he and Starks are performing at a similar level you're gonna give the starting job to the guy you know for a fact can be the starter next year. Seriously, do you pull your logic out of a Cracker Jack box?

 

It's called depth, rotation, and continuity. The defense is the strength of this team, and the defensive front is the strength of the defense. Maintaining that strength was of upmost importance and significantly more important than franchising a LT who's been a shell of his former self. Not to mention there was no guarantee that we would be drafting Dion Jordan, and there was no guarantee that Olivier Vernon would solidify the starting RDE job, so it was an imperative insurance policy to franchise Starks so that we wouldn't be left with our pants around our ankles at DT in case Odrick was needed back at RDE. So no, you connect the dots. Pretty soon here I'm gonna start charging you by the minute.

 

Since the first week of 2011 through week 1 this year, Starks has 897 pass rush snaps. Odrick has 1004. In that time frame, Starks has 10 sacks, 19 hits, 39 hurries for 68 total pressures. Odrick has 11 sacks, 16 hits, 42 hurries for 69 total pressures. One pressure every 13 snaps for Starks. One pressure every 14.5 snaps for Odrick. That says Starks is a little better at getting to the QB.

 

Time for my medicine?? Whether Starks played 3-4 DE or NT(And I'm almost positive he played both) the role of the defensive line changes in a 3-4 in comparison to a 4-3. If you want to give me a "memory" lesson and it makes you feel better, I accept it happily.

But lets not pretend that 4-3 defensive linemen won't have better stats than 3-4 defensive linemen. (whose first priority is to spring the backers).

I can tell you, I do know well what I'm talking about, when it comes to the game of football.

 

Because at the time they had to do the Franchise tag, no one had any idea that OV was going to be ready and able to capably be the starting RDE. Even had they known that, there is NO WAY they franchise Jake Long, since by his being franchised the year before, his Franchise tag for 2013 would have been something like 16mil. If you do not understand why, go google Franchise tags in the NFL and become apprised of all the parameters and how the cap hit is calculated for a player if Franchised for 2 years in a row.

 

If you really believe we franchised "Depth" at 8 and half million a year... We franchised Starks because he is a beast at DT, whether you see it or not.

 

Easy there buddy - your making this personal. Cracker Jack Box?? Odrick gets the nod at starter because he is signed past this year and Starks is not? HUH. How about Starks gets the nod in Indy this week because he is better than Odrick. Which one of these is Cracker Jack??

 

Because of all the players eligible for the Franchise tag, he made by far the most sense. The other options were Sean Smith, Jake Long, Anthony Fasano, and Reggie Bush. That is really a duh decision, even had they known that OV would be ready to claim a starting job.

 

Unless you want to wipe your backside with them

 

You are correct, I'm sure Jake Long was never an option for them.

 

To be fair, since they all 3 are so talented, the starts should be on a rotating basis between all 3. Starks should get the start this week, ahead of either Soliai or Odrick, and whichever one of those two that starts with Starks, becomes the backup the 3rd week, and so on. That is how I'd do it anyway.

 

I'm aware - but give Starks credit for making himself the obvious choice with his play on the field.

 

Or simply make it a start by production competition week to week. Let the three beasts compete for beast of the week.

 

I don't think it necessarily says that. Do you think Starks' pressures per snap ratio would decrease had he spent 2012 at right end? I'm inclined to think it would.
IIRC, last year during Odrick's limited time spent on the interior he notched 4 or 5 sacks, where as Starks had 4 in full time interior duty. Personally I don't feel a 310 pounder's time spent on the edge should count against his QB pressure production from the interior.

BTW, Odrick's stats seem conflicting. NFL.com Fantasy Football has him with 24 QB hits during 2011 & '12 (15 last year).

[TABLE="class: grid, width: 280"]
[TR]
[TD="align: center"]2012 stats[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]Odrick[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]Starks[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: center"]Tackles[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]35[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]27[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: center"]Sacks[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]5[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]4[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: center"]QB hits[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]15[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]8[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: center"]Tackle For Loss[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]12[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]5[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

 

We didn't run a 4-3 in 2010. We were still a 3-4, so your logic continues to be unfounded.

See above.