1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

A Crisis of Leadership?

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by shouright, Nov 6, 2012.

  1. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    A logical explanation would be that a team without an elite QB won't win every time they are put in situations like Miami was against the Colts. This is a 4-4 team. This is a team with a rookie QB. In all honesty the only person who's performance surprised me was Long. The rest was pretty predictable for this team.
     
    ssmiami and RoninFin4 like this.
  2. FinNasty

    FinNasty Alabama don’t want this... Staff Member Club Member

    24,217
    36,005
    113
    Dec 1, 2007
    How about the simple fact that we just played a much better QB that was able to take advantage of our weaknesses on the back end? Our secondary is not good... and has never been good... and on top of that it is banged up missing a starter. It just doesnt get exposed against scrubs like Sanchez. Against Luck, who is flat out awesome... it was exposed.

    Its pretty simple... and a better explaination IMO than the one you've provided.
     
    ssmiami likes this.
  3. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    Do teams ascend at such a consistent pace? I think when you're looking at a team and trying to find a narrative, its convenient to expect that, but I think in practice there is a lot more bumps in the road.

    There were a number of big plays against the Colts. Reggie's run. Olivier Vernon's blocked FG. Ryan Tannehill also finished with a passer rating of 91. One big difference between the Colts' and Jets' games is that the Colts made their own plays, while the Jets didn't.
     
    ssmiami, RoninFin4 and shouright like this.
  4. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    Leadership for me in this context is defined as recognizing the magnitude of the game and playing in a way that's consistent with it. Being the guy who takes the bull by the horns and shows his teammates how this team is going to play this game, thus likely inspiring them in the process.
     
  5. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    Quite possibly not, but I think what can account for that lack of a consistent pace is the need for further development of leadership. That could in fact be what causes the bumps in the road. When the leadership gets ironed out, the bumps in the road may become fewer and further between.

    I agree about the Jets' performance in comparison to the Colts', but you can also turn that around and say our defense was playing with its hair on fire versus the Jets, while going through the motions by and large against the Colts.

    And we did make some plays against the Colts, but they were far fewer in number than against the Jets, and they didn't represent any one player's taking the bull by the horns and coming out and having a great day, with the exception perhaps of Tannehill, who played very well for a rookie.
     
  6. FinNasty

    FinNasty Alabama don’t want this... Staff Member Club Member

    24,217
    36,005
    113
    Dec 1, 2007
    But the Colts offense is FAR better than the Jets. Does that not come into play? I mean, we're talking about Andrew Luck vs. Mark Sanchez. And their WRs are far better than the Jets as well.

    Comparing our defensive performance against the Jets and the Colts will be very different... b/c the offenses our defense were facing were also very different.

    Why is that massive difference disregarded?
     
    ssmiami likes this.
  7. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    That makes no sense.

    Let's say for argument sake, the hold on Wake on the TD is called and that becomes a FG instead and that was the ONLY difference. We'd win by a point if everything else happened the same. Would be on here saying we have a crisis? No of course not.
     
    ssmiami likes this.
  8. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    111,651
    67,546
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    Somebody plagiarized the original post on another site..lol.
     
  9. DePhinistr8

    DePhinistr8 Season Ticket Holder

    3,123
    2,247
    113
    Mar 24, 2008
    Someone did that to one of your posts as well DJ...
    We have a copy-paste bandit.
     
  10. jsizzle

    jsizzle Banned

    2,935
    496
    0
    Jan 3, 2012
    You mean Jmal305 ISN'T Shouright???
     
  11. Califin

    Califin Well-Known Member

    2,050
    403
    83
    Nov 26, 2007
    What stood out to me, is the degree to which adding Luck to the roster, improved that entire team from an apparent 2-14 bottom feeder.
    I remember our noteworthy turnaround, following our 1-15 season. We had Parcells behind the scenes, a seasoned vet behind center, and imo, nothing close to that talent on our team.

    They may have won, but I'll always view Irsay and that squad for the bogus, freeloading flop artists they are. The NFL needs to change the process for determining draft order, to the worst averaged record over "two" seasons. Just as its difficult to get to the top, it shouldn't be any easier to get to the bottom.
     
    djphinfan and jsizzle like this.
  12. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    111,651
    67,546
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    not sure I am either, just making the point.

    You don't think our situation is inordinately disproportionate , Especially with the specific vets on this team.
     
  13. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    111,651
    67,546
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    No, and I did just see a post from myself that dude copied and pasted..lol..that's funny..
     
  14. jsizzle

    jsizzle Banned

    2,935
    496
    0
    Jan 3, 2012
    Dang! I was going to make fun of him too. Now what will I do??
     
  15. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    111,651
    67,546
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    I agree strongly with what your insinuating..I think Irsay sabotaged that team thru many opinions he stated publicly, knowing full well how good Andrew Luck was going to be...hence getting rid of arguably the best Qb of all time..no way he could fail getting Luck, it was his only way to redeem himself, all the talk with Lucks dad, visiting the campus during a regular season, and many more planted seeds, it was obvious to me what he was doing..
     
    ssmiami likes this.
  16. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    111,651
    67,546
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    See how far he goes lol
     
  17. RoninFin4

    RoninFin4 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    23,681
    44,611
    113
    Dec 11, 2007
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    For a minute I thought RealDriscoll was back.
     
  18. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    And you can rest assured that ain't me, despite the response of "finjim" on the other site. :lol:

    My username is also "shouright" on that site, and if I wanted to post under an alias, I'd sure pick something a helluva lot better than "Jamal." :rolleyes:
     
  19. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    So why were we underdogs against the Jets, and favored against the Colts. All because of the difference in their defenses? :headscratch:

    There would still be a stark difference in how the team played versus the Jets compared to how it played against the Colts, in terms of the number of plays made by the number of players who made them.

    And again, you could easily argue the Colts game was more important than the Jets game in terms of this team's progression toward becoming a good one, from a big-picture perspective that is.

    It's as if the players show up with their hair on fire in a game in which they're inspired by trash talk, but in a game in which they should be inspired by helping this team turn the corner and establish a new identity, little if any of the same intensity is present.
     
  20. FinNasty

    FinNasty Alabama don’t want this... Staff Member Club Member

    24,217
    36,005
    113
    Dec 1, 2007
    What does where Vegas sets its odds to try to get even money on both sides have to do with the fact that the Colts offense is far better than the Jets?

    You were comparing the performance of the Jets game vs the Colts... and the Jets were unable to capitalize and expose our weaknesses (secondary). Where as the Colts were with far better QB play.

    So... b/c Vegas misevaluated how the teams matched up... that means we don't have good leadership? You are disregarding tangible differences between the Jets and Colts game, and only recognizing hypothetical intangibles. You don't see any fault in that logic?
     
    Fin D likes this.
  21. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    I'm frustrated.

    I'm frustrated because you are neglecting EVERYTHING else involved in winning and losing and focusing on one part. It truly is like talking to the Fireland crowd. Its worse actually, because at least I know you're capable of understanding that the game/team depends on numerous factors some equally important as others, while the Firelanders can't.
     
  22. jsizzle

    jsizzle Banned

    2,935
    496
    0
    Jan 3, 2012
    Does luck count for anything? Couldn't the Colts have just gotten lucky? Does every loss have to have some deeper meaning. Maybe they were lucky, period.
     
  23. DrAstroZoom

    DrAstroZoom Canary in a Coal Mine Luxury Box

    9,033
    9,005
    113
    Jan 8, 2008
    Springfield, Ill.
    I'd be more on-board with this thread if it were titled, "A crisis of crappy secondary play."
     
  24. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    Neither you nor I can distinguish with any degree of certainty the tangible from the intangible differences in these games.

    You see tangible differences in the quality of the talent between the teams involved in the two games, and I see differences in the intangibles in terms of the number of players who made plays and the overall number of plays made.

    Who is right? You? Me?
     
  25. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    Feel free to start that one. It sounds like you'd have plenty of agreement with that simple observation that nearly anyone could make. ;)

    Nowhere in this thread have I denied that we had crappy play in the secondary. What I'm proposing is that there may be a deeper reason for it that doesn't revolve completely around insufficient physical talent.
     
  26. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    I'm neglecting nothing that you've centered on as your explanation for the performance. I've acknowledged that the physical performance was not good enough. I'm simply proposing a possible reason why.
     
  27. FinNasty

    FinNasty Alabama don’t want this... Staff Member Club Member

    24,217
    36,005
    113
    Dec 1, 2007

    Just answer this question...

    Are the Colts more equiped to expose and capitalize on our weaknesses (secondary) than the Jets?

    And was there a drastic difference between how our secondary played against the Jets vs. the Colts?
     
  28. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    Yes, but not to the degree reflected by the differences in their talent, IMO.

    In other words, the Colts' offense is indeed better than the Jets' offense, and more equipped to expose our secondary, but the reason why the Jets looked so bad against us and the Colts looked so good against us is explained by something far beyond their differences in talent IMO.

    That explanation could very well have a lot to do with how inspired and well-led our team was in each game, could it not?
     
  29. jsizzle

    jsizzle Banned

    2,935
    496
    0
    Jan 3, 2012
    Me. I am always right and I am older than both of you. Thread closed. I win.
     
  30. Califin

    Califin Well-Known Member

    2,050
    403
    83
    Nov 26, 2007
    Exactly. Seems to me we entered the game under the impression they were an up and coming 4 -3 team much like us, when in truth, it was basically Luck with Peyton's customized war cabinet of weapons, and tailor fitted armor.
    There was a reason we never breached Luck's watertight pocket all afternoon, and whose recieving corps
    was as efficient as we've seen all season. The defense was Indy's stout, capable, standard issue.

    This, while Philbin has been working with a mixed assortment of parts, and for the most part, doing a remarkable job.
     
  31. FinNasty

    FinNasty Alabama don’t want this... Staff Member Club Member

    24,217
    36,005
    113
    Dec 1, 2007
    I dont see how its explained by anything more than the fact that Luck was outstanding, and FAR FAR superior to Mark Sanchez. When we got pressure on Sanchez... he crumbled and either took the sack, threw picks, or threw terrible passes no where close to receivers. When we got pressure on Luck, he calmly slid around, kept his eyes down field, and found the open WR.

    Thats the only difference in the game. We made the EXACT same type of plays in the Colts game as we did the Jets (which you are ignoring). Reggie's run. Vernon's blocked FG. Wake's strip sack. A big return. Multiple jumped routes by our DBs.

    But we couldnt quite recover the fumble, we got a big return called back on a bogus call, and we almost had the INT's but they were dropped or mis-played at the very end. Those things have nothing to do with leadership or how inspired the team was...
     
  32. Sethdaddy8

    Sethdaddy8 Well-Known Member

    13,006
    6,368
    113
    Dec 6, 2007
    NJ
    You can speculate all you want on why we showed up to Indy, flat as a pancake. But we have clear leaders on this team. They just didnt show up last Sunday and perform.
     
  33. DrAstroZoom

    DrAstroZoom Canary in a Coal Mine Luxury Box

    9,033
    9,005
    113
    Jan 8, 2008
    Springfield, Ill.
    If we were lacking in leadership, I don't think we'd have four wins at this point.
     
    Fin D likes this.
  34. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    You are more than posing it, you are staunchly defending it. Like I said, you're doubling down.

    Again any number of things beyond our control could have turned that game because it was so close. Even more minor single events could have changed it, like catching an INT instead of dropping it. Because the game was close as it was, one dropped interception could have been the difference between great and terrible leadership? That is just crazy.
     
  35. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    It sounds like you may be missing the subtle distinction I've made between the types of leadership I'm talking about here. There's leadership, and then there's leadership driven by a sense of ownership of the team and its future direction.

    The former we appeared to have in abundance against the Jets, and the latter we appeared to be lacking against the Colts.
     
  36. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    No, but it could've been the difference between little or no leadership, and leadership that was sufficient to win the game.

    Why is it not just as crazy to propose that there is some huge imbalance of physical talent that accounted for only a three-point loss?

    You can't use a close win as evidence to refute one explanation without also applying it to the other.
     
  37. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    Why could that not be caused by a defense that was playing with its hair on fire against the Jets, and uninspired and with far less intensity against the Colts?

    Luck may be superior to Mark Sanchez, but those two players were also going against a defense that could've been playing with far more intensity in one game than the other, thus accounting for at least some of the difference in the success those quarterbacks had.

    Why is that so difficult to understand?
     
  38. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    111,651
    67,546
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    Think we got beat by an exceptional Qb who played an exceptional game..

    The good news, our boy hung in there with the best, while injured, and less experienced, with far worse protection.
     
  39. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    So then it sounds like we're agreeing.

    Now, what is your explanation for why, in a game that carried the magnitude of potentially redefining this team's identity, its leaders didn't show up to play?
     
  40. shouright

    shouright Banned

    22,845
    8,861
    0
    Dec 13, 2007
    But that explanation involves redefining Andrew Luck's ability as a rookie based on what he did against us, when it's entirely possible that he simply faced a defense that was uninspired and playing with very poor intensity.

    Funny how I didn't hear anyone anticipating that kind of performance by Luck before the game, but after the game the knee-jerk explanation is that he's that great and our defense is terrible.

    Luck wasn't playing that well going into that game, folks.
     

Share This Page