http://espn.go.com/blog/afceast The last sentence "...fundamentally sound...no history of allowing the big play.." Well, it sounds like DC Paul Pasqualoni was canned for the poor play in the secondary, something Mike Nolan is not known for allowing to happen via scheme. Hate to say it, but I tend to agree, someone wanted Gibril Wilson and Y Bell in the same secondary, Sparano went on to say players will be held accountable. One has to take from that if dear friend Pasqualoni was fired due to big plays, then the players who were involved will be dealt with as well.
You can twist and wiggle words to mean what you want them to mean with a lot of coaches/football people, but you just get the feeling that what Tony says is just what it means...no hidden agenda or pot shots...pure, plain, simple...truthful...
Hopefully that goes for "BOTH" sides of the ball. I would hate to see a defensive player axed because he didn't play up to expectations, but an offensive player kept on who didn't live up to his too.
When DC P was fired the only word was "we thank him for.." this is the first time he has actually mentioned it was the big plays. Granted that is sort of "well Duh" territory but Sparano never said either way until now.
i guarantee this was the fluffy, nice version. sparano was probably furious, yet respectful to PP regarding his performance.
I think that depends, there is a difference between a first year/second year player and an established veteran who was either kept, or signed as a FA who just played poorly. Another interestiing point, Y Bell was voted to the Pro Bowl by his fellow players and coaches, the people who watched him play, or heard of him.
First off let me make it clear IMO Nolan > Paul P. With that out of the way if he was let go fur giving up the big play that's a tough call. He was working with two Strong Safety's who had had trouble covering and 2 rookie CBs with his best cover guy out of the year. Just goes to show you this is a no mercy league lol.
It's ironic that Denver's pass defense improved so much this past season with the additions of Goodman and Hill... makes you want to say,"hmmmmm"
Goodbye Gibril Wilson I don't have as much of a problem with Y. Bell as I do Gibril. He pretty much cost us several games on his own. His deep, over the top, coverage support was atrocious. He, at least, was supposed to be good at tackling and it was just pathetic. Ciao' Wilson
Well, the way I see it playing out is DC P wanted Gibril Wilson in Miami, when he played poorly someone had to fall on their sword. To me that means the end of the FA bust/cut cycle, if the Coaches are going to vouch for a player and they sign him to big money they had better perform.
Another good call. Nolan had.. CB1: Champ Bailey CB2: Andre' Goodman SS: Renaldo Hill FS: Brian Dawkins Of course they gave up less big play's and were a better secondary.
IMO the decision to use two SSs was the biggest problem with our defense this year. I think it led to a ton of big plays against us and made the players look worse than they are. I don't know whose decision that was, but I think it was the key.
I don't remember Paul. P being the one to sign players. You said he vouched for him. Can you find me a link that states that? Because I don't remember reading that.
The only guy who was fired was the DC, Sparano gave the reason why, we all watched the games and Gibril was in 90% of the big play highlights. To me, 2+2=4 on this one, at least that is my read on it.
Aw, come on padre! I'm sure that you couldn't even see Gibril in the play on some of those highlights.
I'm not saying he should be fired but they haven't made (that we know of) any decisions on the players yet. So the most we can say is that DC was the only one fired so far.
I'm not going to rehash what others on this board have already pointed out in far greater detail, but just a quick glance at the contract structures for both starting safeties (Wilson and Bell) would tell you an entirely different story.
I agree that was a big issue. However, even considering that, Wilson had a very poor year in terms of tackling. As a SS playing FS, he failed at what should have been one of his stronger talents. That really adds insult to injury so-to-speak as we not only had 2 SSs, but we also had one of them not tackling well on top of that.
Tackling from the SS position tends to be different than tackling from the FS position. It's often the difference between tackling in a gap going forward and tackling in space running laterally. So, while he tackled poorly in one position I don't think it necessarily means he would be as poor in another position.
Wilson definitely struggled in space. Given all of that though, the coaches still couldn't find a solution or at least something better? Maybe that's what really frustrates me. Was Clemons so bad that it was better to have Wilson play out of position (and play it poorly)? Could we have modified our scheme in such ways to account for or minimize the effect of our weaknesses? I just have to think that there was a better solution in there somewhere even given the personnel we have.
the last sentance in the quote provided is such a big factor in my mind. Allowing the big play and not being fundamentally sound is what killed us this year on D
Yep. It'll be interesting to see if any of the players are also dismissed as well. Sparano said that the players will be held accountable and we'll see how that plays out.
I'm as big a fan of the Phins as you, but I can't honestly think people believe this quite yet. We have a QB going into his second year, no #1 wideout, questions at running back and offensive line, holes all over the secondary, linebacker issues and have you seen the Colts, or Saint's offense? Were not favorites to win the superbowl anytime soon. Im a fan but im waiting for this front office to show me not tell me.. Been hearing this from all the other coaches over the years