This, part of Ireland's demise was not finding suitable competition for Jerry at RG. He signed Artis Hicks and Lance Louis who couldn't even make it out of training camp with injuries. Jerry was pretty much the starting RG by default.
No, I think the main problem is bad coaching with poor talent. The right OL coach could have made this line look "meh".
Yeah, I had sorta high hopes for Louis. Did he even play anywhere this year? Agreed. Shd have been better w/ better coaching
Am I smoking something? Did you write Miami had a slightly better defense than Seattle? The same Seattle that allowed 100 less points over the year, and about 90 yards less per game? Maybe I'm just misreading you. But their offense was indeed much more efficient, 9th in yards per play, gaining over 100 points more over the season on less plays ran than Miami (plus Wilson had a much higher ypa)
You know this how? You have studied Turner's coaching techniques so closely that you just know he is incapable of being a good coach when he has some decent talent to work with? McKinnie's opinion of Turner as a coach are disregarded because they go against your pre-established prejudices?
Even considering the typo, a defense that allowed 100 less points and 90 less yards per game is only slightly better? Since you mentioned PFF earlier when comparing Seattle and Miami's OLs, it is pertinent here IMO to look at their ratings for the defenses. Overall, Seattle is the #1 defense in the league. 6th best run defense, 1st in pass rush and in pass coverage. Miami is the 10th overall defense, 21st in run defense, 5th in pass rush, and 11th in pass coverage. That may be how you define a slight difference, and if so that's fine. To me however, I'd say the difference is fairly significant.
Gotcha. I figured it was a typo. But couldn't figure it out because I thought their defense was a lot better than ours, like top of the league vs. bottom third. But then I agree with your point on the offensive side of the ball. There isn't a lot more talent on that team except I do think Wilson is better at adapting to a run for your life oline, and Marshawn + commitment to the run.
The pre established judgment of him getting worse as the season went along that is backed up by pff data? You are really reaching.
Pre established by whom? Where is the proof he got worse as the season went along? There were more sacks in the first half of the season than in the last half. As for PFF, they show Clabo getting better as the season went along. The other O-linemen's ratings did not show any drop off as the season went along. They also ranked this year's OL better than last, 19th, up from 23rd, and about middle of the pack. Looks to me like you are the one who is reaching.
It was in an article by PFF Clabo did get better, but he was terrible at the beginning. Everyone looked lost. Every young lineman looked lost. The punch was gone, their footwork looked bad, they looked poorly coached. A relative ranking means little. They went from middle to middle. It is obvious you like the guy for whatever reason. I have seen nothing that is going to change my mind. Might as well agree to disagree. I do not see a good coach. It isn't because of anything that I bring into it. I want him to be a good coach. My track record as a fan is always rooting for whoever becomes a Dolphin. You see something different. That happens.
I felt Miami was a top 10 defense this year. And they would have been better if the offensive play calling had improved and they were on the field less. I see Miami's front four as superior and Seattle's secondary as superior. But both units for each team played very well this year. The LB units were the difference in terms of production. but overall a top 10 defense should be easily good enough to get you in the playoffs. So I don't see the difference there as huge. I stand by my initial point that far and away the biggest difference between Seattle's level of success and Miami's level of success this season was the offensive play calling.
Well, of course Seattle stuck with the run game. They had a back who, though often getting hit at the LOS or 1-2 yards beyond, would shake it off and get 7-8 yards. The difference was that Miami's backs don't break tackles like Lynch. And, Seattle knew that Lynch would get the job done in crunch time. They also had a lead in games and a defense that was top 2-3 if not #1 so you can afford to risk a 3 and out by running the ball twice. The Dolphins did not have a D to put that much pressure on their shoulders. I do agree that PFF rankings should be taken with a grain of salt. But, while a John Jerry may not be a total failure - he is nevertheless not a winning player at that position. His position needs to be upgraded.
Lynch averaged 4.2 YPC while Miller averaged 4.0 YPC. I watched a ton of Seattle this year and those 7-8 yard runs that make the highlight reels were usually bracketed by stuffs at near or even behind the line after the OL whiffed. As for Jerry specifically and the OL in general being upgraded, I agree. My point of contention is that many believe/claim that Miami couldn't win b/c the OL was so bad. But Seattle is a team with an even worse OL and fewer offensive play makers that is still a SB contender. So that wasn't the incredible obstacle that many claim.
Is it right to say the OL was an obstacle...FOR the system we are running though. Basically it seems like you're saying we should have changed the system to adapt to our players.
Exactly, that was my point. I've seen a few people say there's no way we could have succeeded b/c the OL was so bad. I felt we could have if the coaching had adjusted better to the strengths we did have and provided an example of team with a worse OL that made better adjustments to the strengths they had and was more successful.
I am of the belief that coaches who adapt to their players and do it successfully are not that common in the league.
Completely agree, but I feel that Chip Kelly is one that does and that makes me hopeful that Lazor is a proponent of and/or learned from that example.
