Even the Hennenator could roll out and zing one down the field, Tannehill never rolls out, as in maybe once per game...maybe..
I would say that's more of an indictment on the play caller as opposed to the player. They may not be comfortable cutting the field in half with him.
I suspect they are not comfortable with a lot of things, in the face of their failures they should re-examine everything.
Exactly. Someone mentioned Eddie Lacy earlier in the thread. When I was doing some research on Brian Gutekunst, Green Bay's Director of College Scouting, I found some stuff he had said about Eddie Lacy. He essentially said that at 230 lbs, he had the ability to STOP PEOPLE COMING AT HIM. He then said that they felt really good about him considering some of the things they do. What we are seeing in Miami with our pass pro isn't just an OL issue. It is a RB issue as well. Some wonder why Reggie Bush wasn't used more as a receiver last year. The reason is, in this offense, the running backs just aren't a big part of the passing game. Their biggest responsibility in the passing game is their PASS PROTECTION. In Green Bay, they have a scouting staff that knows this, so they draft a bigger back who can pass protect. In Miami, we don't. We go from one below average pass pro back in Reggie Bush and now split time between two below average pass pro backs in Lamar Miller and Daniel Thomas.
Am I the only one not really all THAT impressed with the figure that Wallace ran 26 clear-outs out of 45 pass plays? I don't think that's all that out of the ordinary, given his role. He probably did the same in Pittsburgh but Big Ben used to extend plays and get the ball out to him anyway. As for the Dolphins running less of what worked against Indianapolis with Wallace...Tampa Bay is not Indianapolis. It strikes me as context-less to criticize based on them using that call less. You need to hear what their reasoning was. I'm not saying our coaches are doing a bang-up job. But I don't agree with letting Mike Wallace off the hook for his poor performance, either. The difference between he and a Brandon Marshall is pretty goddamn stark, and I'm not even referring to Chicago Brandon Marshall, I'm referring to Miami Brandon Marshall who took all kinds of sh-t from the fans for drops and whatnot but was still very clearly an alpha bad@ss muthaf-cking receiver. Mike Wallace hasn't looked like that a single time in Miami. Not once. Not even in his best game.
I think it is out of the ordinary to have a 60 million dollar receiver be a decoy for more than half of your pass plays. 26 Clear outs is abnormal. At least it is this year. Last guy that had these wacky decoy numbers was James McKnight. And I do consider a call that had some success for us to be something you might want to incorporate more. Even it is for other players. It has just disappeared.
Just an example....and this is from a very very small sample size, with two quarterbacks. But Brandon Marshall vs. GB. 6 Decoy routes. vs. Detroit...5 Decoy Routes.
Consider the history though. Mike Wallace had essentially James McKnighted himSELF prior to this game. Forget the money. He's been playing worse football than Ted ****ing Ginn. And he didn't exactly rub it in the coaches' noses for turning him into a James McKnight with the effort he gave last night, which was abominable.
Why would Brandon Marshall run decoy routes? He doesn't threaten to blow the top off a defense. I don't think you can compare the two. The allure of Mike Wallace was that even on those decoy routes he still might be open and you still might be able to get him the football.
I appreciate the info. I don't know I completely agree with your conclusion but the info is great. That said, Mike Wallace isn't half the player Brandon Marshall is.
yeah, I mentioned Lacy. I loved him and thought his size, ability, and skill set would translate incredibly well to the NFL and lead to outproducing his prior 1st round Bama counterparts. I'm a huge proponent of situational football success, so I really didn't care about his lack of speed b/c I thought he was worth his weight in gold at gaining 4+ yards on first down [to consistently leave the offense in unpredictable, easier-to-convert 2nd & 3rd down situations], moving the sticks in short yardage to sustain drives, improving redzone/goal line efficiency as well as making us tougher to defend in the redzone, improving the effectiveness of play-action, and serving as a 4-minute-offense bell cow to eat up clock and close out games. Not many backs I've seen can take a minimal 1 or 2 yard gain and turn it into 3-4 yards b/c of his incredible power and phenomenal forward lean to finish off each run.
well, that is the whole point. When Wallace was featured in a game plan, he was productive. As a decoy, he is being wasted since he is not even getting targets.
As far as Mike Wallace goes, I do agree the coaching staff has done a horrible job of getting him involved in the offense. This is another case of the coaching staff refusing to adapt to the players and continuing to "do what we do". If you have any doubts about the kind of passing game the Dolphins want, here is a nice little snippet I read while waiting on my nurse to check three patients in for me: http://pocketdoppler.com/2013/07/03/the-packers-offense-under-aaron-rodgers-the-a-gun-the-j-gun/ So, with Mike Wallace, we have a player that can make the big plays in the passing game that Joe Philbin wants, but he doesn't have the route diversity that Joe wants. This offense is a slot receiver oriented offense, and in an ideal world, Mike Wallace would be making plays out of the slot for Miami. His route tree isn't diverse enough though, so instead of adapting to him, they use him as a decoy a lot to clear out for those on the team that are better and more diverse in the routes.
That is the issue to me, if you are going to run clear outs, you do have to at least try to feed him the ball for the effort. "Gosh Mike, just run deep each play, we need you!"
I disagree with turning it into such a black-and-white thing. That has not been the only time they've tried to get the football to him. He's disappointed during other games when they've tried to get him involved, and just generally showed a lot of his shortcomings.
You are looking at things the way some don't. Some love to look at standard stats and make an evaulation on that. You identified a particular situation, an important one at that, and looked at how said player did in that situation. In Eddie Lacy's case, he was pretty much automatic to get 4 yards on first down. For comparison, what is the better gain? Getting 4 yards on first down to give you a management 2nd and 6, or getting 8 yards on a 3rd and 12?
As opposed to standing in the pocket and getting sacked a record number of times behind this offensive line? Yep, the play calling sucks.
I think it is. We have a successful call. At least it has been when run. So Naturally...you make those calls for Brian Hartline, Gibson and Now Matthews...... and not your 60 million dollar receiver who was the MOST productive with that call.
I don;t have time today..but maybe tonight, I am gonna try to get a compilation of load side clear outs for the Packers when completely healthy this year. I suspect that James Jones might be the best receiver in the NFL with healthy clear out numbers.
What bothered me, sitting in the stands, was seeing Vincent Jackson line up in the slot against a linebacker twice in the first half. Both times he ran a slant and caught a pass. How come we aren't able to do that? It seems we're rarely able to get mismatches in the passing game.
There are so many variables you're not taking account of at all in this. You don't know how the other teams even played that call. Just because it worked against the Colts doesn't mean it will work against the other teams. For all you know it hasn't been successful a single other time.
I've stated this in several posts in the past, but the most infuriating thing about the current staff is they want to do things one way, and are very reluctant to change anything (apparently, Ross has to call them into a meeting to get anything moving).
You see Section, you're too simple to understand what is going on here. It was so successful against the Colts and ravens and patsies, that the Bucs must have expected it after watching film. Since they expect it, run what they don't expect! Like a sweep on 4th and inches, with a slow RB, a slow Oline that can't block. They'll never see it coming!!!!
thats the playcall? lmao...no wonder our offense is slow and terrible. i dont know how they remember all that code word shyt. here's an example of a gus malzahn (one of the best offensive coaches in college football)play: ace right, 66, y-drag, z-go. it is simply a shotgun, trips right play. 60 lets the oline know its a quick read. x and h receivers runs a 7 yd come back. y and z receivers are self explanatory. the rb runs a check-swing to the left. how do i know this, because i used to coach and he ran a coaching clinic at the fca convention in tennessee. make your calls simple, so that the players dont have to think so damn much. here's an option read run call: ace yo 32. simply a shot gun formation with a te and 3 receivers. rb lines up left of the qb and its a read option running to the right. how hard is this???
Not to get off subject but maybe this applies to Wallace and your comment as well. I've watched a couple Carolina games and Ginn actually looks decent to me running slot and short-to-medium crossing routes. Whereas wasn't Wallace's biggest game the one against Indy where they attacked with him from different positions? To your point maybe if he was involved a little more he would get into the feel of the game and with it gain some confidence. Maybe even try to block.
because all eyes are on him? IMO it has more to do with the level of attention the player receives rather than whether or not he's vertically oriented. Besides, Marshall might not be able to blow the top off a defense but Trestman & his QBs have shown no hesitation in throwing Marshall an up ball which the 6'5 beast can convert, so with DC's and defenders aware of this, Trestman could effectively run Marshall as a decoy to either pull the safety or clear out for vertical or horizontal stretch concepts 26 times a games like Wallace if he wanted, but he'd clearly prefer to give his playmaker more chances to make plays and design more plays to get him the ball in space. For instance, in 2010 our offense attempted 557 passes but only 147 went to Marshall; however, 300 went to our starting slot receiver, backs, and TEs. This seems like Marshall was utilized quite a bit as a decoy, which is somewhat disturbing to me considering those 300 targets went to players who as a collective aren't world-beaters by any stretch in the passing game. Hell, Bess was almost targeted as much as Marshall. Chicago on the other hand has attempted 770 passes since last year, with Marshall receiving 287, and Earl Bennett, TE's, and backs accounting for 343. So in Miami, the players whom Henning would use Marshall to clear out space for received twice as many pass attempts as Marshall, whereas in Chicago it's been much closer to a 1:1 ratio.
i dunno i was kinda drunk at the game yesterday but it seemed like wallace was open a decent amount from where i was sitting
I thought Wallace ran a 2 yard slant (maybe crossing). Unfortunately it was 3rd and 19 and we had no mismatch.
I'd rather have an 85 yard/game running back and consistently be in 2nd & 6 or less all game long with play-action capability live & well than to have a 120 yard back who breaks a few big plays but leaves us in a greater number of 2nd/3rd & long. Not to mention, I'd rather see an offensive coordinator mix in a big chunk of high-percentage quick passes & WR screens for 4+ yards like Denver does so well [even though they have a friggin HOF'er at QB] than to constantly opt for pass plays that allow for greater yardage but rely more on proper reads, proper routes, blocking execution, and a greater degree of QB accuracy. Seriously, Peyton Manning murders defenses with the quick passing game, and amidst it all his playmakers break a few off for big gains/TDs like we saw Sunday from Demaryius Thomas & Julius Thomas's 34 & 74 yard catch & run TDs. Not to mention it sucks in safeties and makes coverage vulnerable over the top on pump or play fakes. IMO it's critically unacceptable how little we use our athletic pass catchers in this manner [Wallace, Matthews, Clay, and even Egnew & Thigpen]. I feel like I'm watching a variation of Dan Henning.
I'm so tired of seeing Wallace line up in the exact same spot every single play. I think he went in motion once. I don't think I saw him in the slot at all. We have no creativity. We're not even trying to put Wallace in a position to succeed.
A lot that is due to the fact that Wallace himself is a limited receiver because of his limited route tree. What we have here is a mixture of poor overall talent evluation and the lack of adaptation to a skill set. There were some of us that noted the bad fit in this offensive scheme prior to the signing.
What potential OC..that may be avilable..would anyone most compare in style to Sean Payton. The way he uses his players...his creativity I really like. Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2
Honestly, Payton's offense in New Orleans and the offense Green Bay ran when Joe Philbin was there are about as similar as you can get. While they may differ some in the pass concepts used, the goal of both teams is to attack the seams and stretch the field vertically while having multiple receivers (at least 4) in route to have horizontal stretches.
In other jobs and other business's isn't that the remarks that are usually made about inept workers or management, that it's like they want to get fired?
