Alternate Theory of last year and our current team......

I've never personally bought into the "strength of schedule" debate, because any team can beat any other team on a good day.

With that said, I believe that you hinted at one of the biggest issues that buried the 2013 season- the inability to run and create lanes at the line of scrimmage. Once you eliminate the chance of a run, then defenses stack the box and come from crazy angles...which is exactly why Tannehill spent so much time on his back. The line was exceptionally bad, yes, but there was plenty of blame to go towards the front office, the offensive coordinator and the line coaches as well. We made very few adjustments on offense throughout the season and ultimately, it caught up with us in a big way.

So what makes this season different? Honestly, just about everything. New offense, new offensive line, receiver upgrades, RB upgrades and a more confident quarterback that's been given the green light on scrambling. If I didn't talk about anything else here, that difference alone is night and day from 2013...and it will make a massive impact on how Tannehill plays. As I've said in other posts, I expect the defense to be their usual solid self giving up 13-24 points per game, so the only question is "Can we score 25?"

In this offense, with this coaching, I believe that the answer will be "Yes" in 10 of the 16 games. Tannehill will thrive early as other teams get taken by surprise, and he will plateau around week 10- where we will well well on our way into a playoff berth. Honestly though, I think this team just needs a reason to feel confident and get fired up, and the rest will take care of itself.

 

Here's a different perspective on the theory that we always played down to our competition: we struggled specifically against top 10 defenses (according to DVOA). Tampa Bay was a top 10 defense. Buffalo was a top 10 defense. In fact, we were 1-6 vs top 10 defenses and in our only victory it took overtime and our defense to score most of our points.

We were 7-2 vs defenses outside the top 10 only losing 2 games. One at Foxborough (good luck with that one) and the other week 17 hosting the Jets, who I believe was also ranked just outside the top 10 in DVOA.

I don't think those records are a coincidence, we simply couldn't put points on the board vs top defenses. There were a multitude of reasons for that but first and foremost for me was Jeff Ireland. He was way too slow in putting a proper team around Tannehill and he inexplicably kept $24 million in cap space while spending less on offense than every team in the league (except the cash strapped Raiders).

Right now I think we're teetering on the brink of being a good team but we'll only go exactly as far as Tannehill can take us. Joe Philbin is not going to get in the way of that, regardless of the stage, the guy is cool as a cucumber under pressure. You put any top 10 QB on our team last season and we win 10+ games, no doubt about that for me. So what else can you ask for from a head coach?

Here's what people are going to ask for: people seem to be under the impression that, if the QB stinks a good head coach should be able to just get the rest of the team to magically play better. That seems like a silly premise to me. I would hope the coach has the team playing to the best of their ability regardless of how good or bad the QB is playing. It occurs to me that teams never beat us, the Dolphins always did something to screw up. After every loss: we should have done this, Philbin could have done that. The very idea that their team could possibly be simply more talented than our team doesn't seem to exist. Which would mean Jeff Ireland must have assembled a 16-0 team if we just performed up to our potential. Yeah, thats it...

 

Must be close to the season opener. The words of yesterday have been licked clean, ready for a fresh layer of salt to blanket them around week 10 of this season...

Ahhhh hope....the great first half adrenaline rush...

 

Remember that theory George Costanza had about leaving on a high note?

You hit the high note... And then mentioned Daniel Thomas. lol.

 

Like you I was one of the early birds to get on the Joe Philbin Bandwagon. Here are some other points to ponder, IMV:

Every one blamed Mike Sherman for all the offensive poor results, his play calling uninspired and narrow minded, with the reasoning that a good coach adopts to the players he has therefore his use of RT was handcuffing both RT and the offensive line. However considering the O line's on and off field problems just maybe it was them who was handcuffing Sherman and his use of RT all along.

Knowing the interoffice infighting that occurred from the moment Philbin and his staff stepped into the building it really is amazing that Joe hasn't pulled a Nicky boy trick on us. The man's intestinal fortitude, after putting up with so much grief from Ireland, has been a major strength and thru it all has not only survived but continued to grow as a HC and person.

I, for one, wish him and our team all success in this coming season and for years to come.

 

I like him as a pass catcher and I think he gives 100% on the field. I'd just like to upgrade

 

Yeah I don't think Sherman was as bad as he's being made out to be, or at least its hard to give a fair evaluation of him because as you say, he was handcuffed by the same rotten groceries as the rest of the offense. I do think he was simply too old to handle the position though, a position that I think may be the most mentally demanding job on the team, maybe even more demanding than the head coaching position. Thats not to say he's stupid, its just he may not have enough mental stamina to keep up with everything. If you follow poker you might have heard the phrase that "its a young mans game." And that is true. Look no further than the final tables at the World Series of Poker, its comprised of like 90% of 20-somethings these days. There are exceptions but more often than not mental stamina is a difference maker.

This aspect is what has me excited about Lazor more than anything. I think we're going to see a creative, exploitative offense each and every week. No more easy INTs simply from going back to the well too often.

 

Id be fine with that. In my opinion he is a third down back who can pass protect, take a screen pass if its set up well, and take the occasional draw play for a nice gain. I think hes been miscast here as an every down back.

If he went to NO for example and was used I could see success.

 

We got out coached in rhe first Buffalo game. In fg territory sack and you run the same play again, Columbo sack fumble. Sherman called it worse than a monkey.
Against Carolina with the lead and less than 2 min left and Carolina has a 4th and 10 at their 20. They hurry to the line we fail to call TO and don't stop the 10 yd reception. Philbin error!
Against Tampa we take an early two score lead and can't secure a win against a team we were superior to.
Judging by pre season, I don't see that Philbin has improved to have the team in position to win the games they should win which is why we're pegged at 8-8.

 

1. Sherman called a run that play and Tannehill changed it to a pass. I have no problem with the audible but if you're going to do it MAKE A ****ING PLAY!!! Scratch that, he didn't even have to make a play, all he had to do was make sure their defense DIDN'T make a play. That is not how you want your franchise QB to finish, especially considering he started horrible too digging us into a huge hole.

2. For one thing we were a 4th and 10 away from winning the game. I'm not sure what the odds are but they would have to be really good. Secondly, going for it was a stupid decision by Riviera, why would you want to call a timeout and give him the opportunity to come to his senses? Remember when the idiot Sparano called the timeout against the Saints at the end of the half allowing them to change their mind from going for the field goal to going for the TD? Thirdly, that timeout gave us the opportunity to still win at the end. Remember the ball going off Walalce's hands in the endzone on the last play? We never get the opportunity at that shot had we used the timeout on that 4th and 10.

3. The Tampa game came at the peak of the "bully"-gate scandal. I'll admit the team looked like **** for that one but I don't know if there are three coaches in the league that could have successfully negotiated that distraction.

 

Sure, I agree with you 100%...but there's also a lot of deception there too. For example, when we started out with a win over the Browns last year, people said, "Okay, the Browns stink...we were supposed to win." And the Browns went 4-12, so the peanut gallery was correct. Then we took down Indy and Atlanta, two teams mentioned as division leaders, and nobody knew what to think. Was this the year we would go all the way? Months later though, we see that Atlanta was just as bad as Cleveland. So maybe we weren't so great after all.

We still beat all three of the AFC division champs we played though (NE, Indy and Cinci), but lost five games to teams that were at .500 or below (and 4 of them were WAY below). That's why I call it a flawed science, because I don't think the margin between the best NFL team and the worst one is as big as we imagine. On paper, purely by statistics, we should have gone 10-6 last year and lost to five of the teams we ended up beating. That's the beauty of football though, we never really know who's going to rise up on any particular Sunday and play like champions.

So respectfully, I just don't buy into "strength of schedule" at all, because that "strength" itself is too subjective.

 

Id agree that you cant predict how hard a schedule is except a few games each year. For example you know Denver will be tough, Seattle, New England and so forth. I do think after the season though you can look back and tell obviously.

 

I wasn't aware that a college team was trying to entice Philbin to come to their program and become one of the highest paid head coaches in the nation. That is why Saban left the Dolphins and headed to Alabama.

What exactly Philbin put up with from Ireland is all speculation on this forum. Only those two men actually know their true relationship. I have no doubt that Philbin would have still remained with the Dolphins, even if Ireland had not been fired after the 2013 season.

He has yet to prove that he is a good head coach. So it isn't like there are any other teams, NFL, College or even high school who were going to be trying to hire him for a head coaching position if he had left the Dolphins because of his relationship with Ireland.

As far as showing intestinal fortitude for putting up with Ireland. He took the job knowing he was going to work with Ireland. No one forced him to become the head coach of the Dolphins. He also is paid very well to put up with this so called grief. I will assure you that their are millions of Americans who go to work every day and put up with plenty of grief from their supervisors and co-workers and they are paid a heck of a lot less than Philbin.

Perhaps he will show this year that he deserved to be hired as an NFL HC in 2012. That is to be determined, but if he fails to get this team into the playoffs, hopefully he will be joining Ireland as a former Dolphin employee.

Three years is plenty of time to show if you are a good head coach or not. This is year number three for Philbin and he still has a lot to prove as an NFL head coach.

 

Problem is, he could be exact same HC he was last year and they could make the playoffs, if this offense clicks early. They were VERY close as it was last year. If that happened, what will he have proven?

He's already not exactly the same HC he was last year though. He's opening up, talking with the players more, showing concern, getting heated and jumping asses, none of which we've seen from him in previous years. Is it enough? We won't know for a while, but like you, I think this is his year to prove it. The hard part will be being able to determine if he made any noticeable improvements that made the success happen.

He could be the same old Joe we all think we know, playing in the 2nd round of the playoffs, and we may never be the wiser. In that case, maybe he had what it takes all along, we just didn't see it?

If they shutdown the run game again this year, and miss the playoffs, buh bye.

 

I read about a study done by Dick Vermeil a couple of decades ago. He concluded that SoS was one of if not the biggest factors for team success. Basically it showed that the vast majority of SB teams had weak SoS schedules during the regular season.

As for DT I never minded him. I wasn't a fan of his in the draft, but for us he was a decent all-around player given his salary. I felt he was better than given credit for as a pass blocker, runner and receiver. He was never great though and I didn't think he showed much potential. I always expected that he'd never make it past his rookie contract. This preseason I felt that both Williams and Darkwa showed greater potential and were close enough as pass blockers to justify the switch.

 

Well, to an extent, if a team is like Seattle, Denver, New England, of course their schedule will seem easier...they're better teams. Good to no-good teams are usually not considered to even have a chance against them, compared to those same teams having a better chance against, say, and divisional 3rd place team.

4th place teams arguably have tougher outlooks on the impending season, because they're not good.

 

SoS is a fixed number. It's not dependent on how good you are.

 

Then it's inherently broken.

 

??? SoS just looks at the quality of opponents. Adding some subjective opinion about what teams seem better would be the flaw.

 

It looks at "past" quality of opponents...it can't see into the future.

 

But here's the thing- strength of schedule is based on what you did in the past. So when a team has a great draft/free agency, their QB suddenly figures something out or a number of other factors, then you have what's thought to be a "weaker team" playing all the other weak teams 4-6 times per year. It's not like you get the 16 weakest teams anyway, so the effect is marginal even if it really is a factor.

Here's something else to consider as well. Strength of schedule is set based on what the NFL expects to be the very best team...all the way down to the worst. Yet in the past 14 years, the perceived strongest team has only won the Super Bowl once. Furthermore, a 2nd or 3rd place projected "strongest team" has also only won once. That means out of 12 of the last 14 Super Bowls, a long shot of 10/1 or worse won it every time. So how can strength of schedule work if the NFL is wrong about the best teams 86% of the time?

By the way, I completely understand in theory that New England, Denver and Seattle will be tougher games to win, but that also creates a "Miami Heat effect" in every one of their match-ups (I just made that phrase up, BTW). Teams always want to beat the best, so they come out playing much harder against tougher opponents. For the more elite teams, that's both good and bad, but it makes it a lot harder to dominate the league when everyone is gunning for you.

 

I wonder if those SB winners he's talking about had a weak SoS, determined after the season, or if it was a weak SoS going into the season? Before the season last year, our SoS was a lot lower than it ended up being at the end of the season (I think we were like 6th toughest SoS after the season was over?).

 

It was based on the results after the season. Pre-season SoS numbers are just based on the previous season's records and don't account for any improvements or subtractions. After the season numbers are the actual SoS.

And nobody is trying to argue that preseason SoS are predictive. This thread is about a look at what happened last season. That's the title of the thread and the OP specifically states that we won't know what this year's SoS will be until after the season. But since last year's SoS was so high, the odds suggest that our SoS will end up being lower than it was last season.

 

In a small way it is isn't it? I mean if you beat a 1-0 team they go from 1.00% to .500%. A good team would hand out more losses and lower their SOS.

Unless Im being dumb and it doesn't count the game you played them.

 

Ahhhhhhh...sorry, mistook the angle. I've just always been a hater of the, "we have such a hard schedule coming up this year" excuse.

 

Correct, a team's own games are excluded.

 

Ted Ginn got more hate than Daniel Thomas.

 

This year is all about about Tannehill taking it to the next level. I was very disappointed how he finished last season.

 

I don't exactly know how SOS is calculated, but if it's just going on final records I think that's flawed. You have to understand records are not the same year to year or even in the same year, so just bc NE was 12-4 doesn't mean they were as strong as previous years of the same record or better, or that a 12-4 AFC team is the same as a 12-4 NFC team. Same with the Jets, a horrible team last year that also falls under the "500 or better" teams, along with the Steelers and others. IMHO last year the AFC was downright horrible and even if we improve substantially we could still finish with the same record or worse. Win pct alone can't define how tough a schedule is, u have to look at circumstances and match ups.

 

I'm just saying regardless of the fact that NE was 12-4 and the Jets and and others were 8-8, I don't feel like they were tough opponents. Not all 8-8 teams are alike. Not all teams matchup well. Not all teams got Thad Lewis twice (yet still lost), ditto for other teams injuries.
Does a weak SOS increase your chances of having a good record? Hell yeah. But I personally think last years schedule was weak and we screwed it up on our own.

 

Yes Bama came calling, yet, do you REALLY think that Satan would have quit had he been successful here rather than looking like that "Brown Trout eye look" he kept using for players he felt were soft and lost????? Bama was his get out of jail Free card ..... no more no less.

As for the rest .... just maybe you should join "The Club" I'll say no more.

 

That's like the 5th "club" recruiting tactic I've seen in the last week. If you refer a member, do you get bonus perks, points, discounts, etc...?