Guys, had to ask this question as I am surprised to see a good majority of people believe in Lazor and the system he has put in place. I am struggling to find what he has done to warrant his job/performance as salvageable? So, Lazor should he be kept regardless or no? Please give me some real examples other than he's not Sherman, lol.
I personally don't like his style of dink and dunk (all the time) offense. I'm not sold on him by a long shot thats for sure. Also... he doesn't commit to running the ball. I believe Lamar Miller had a 4.7 avg on the year. But only gets 13 attempts per game? I want to pound the rock to pull the defense up to make throws down field. That's the kind of offense I like.
I am one of those individuals who don't think Lazor is that special. If the next head coach wants to retain Lazor as the OC, I'm okay with it. I just don't think that keeping Lazor as the OC should be a requirement for the next head coach to get the job.
I continue to be surprised by comments like yours. Each play has a number of routes. There is a progression, but very few plays are designed to go to a single player. The QB chooses where the ball goes based upon the defense. It is not dink and dunk.
I think there's certainly a Joe Philbin influence on Lazor that is resulting in a risk-adverse, conservative play-calling. Ultimately though I'm not sure Lazor is in himself that good of a coach, or that he's simply a guy riding Chip Kelly's coattails with a handful of "new" concepts that will no longer be a big advantage once it's normalized into the NFL.
I think he's okay, but I certainly wouldn't make him the head coach, or tell a new head coach he should keep Lazor.
A basic question to ask would be, have we begun to see the offense transition into something new? To that I would say yes, we did. We've seen the best weapons on this offense (Tannehill, Wallace and Milller) all show statistical improvement in one form or another. Do we need to be more aggressive in pushing the ball downfield? Do we need to call more running plays in the 2nd half of games? Do we need to find more weapons for this offense to help us in the red zone? There are plenty of questions right now, but in general, I think we've begun to see flashes of progress with the implementation of this new offense. I wouldn't expect anyone to have strong feelings on Lazor one way or the other.
I like lazor. I don't think the dinlk and offense we are running is what lazor necessarily wants to run as opposed to what he has to run due to the talent level given him. I think that right now we have to upgrade the oline and get one tall receiver who can fight for the catch. We probably have to get another runnimng back since moreno will probably be let go. I think if you see an oline that can pass protect next year you are going to see more vertical playcalling. If the oline doesn't improve then expect the same. Its all based on how many seconds protection you can get to determine how long you want your qb holding the ball
Once Albert went down and the talent on our OL fell to 2013 levels, this offense has looked no better and no more efficient than a Mike Sherman led offense. And this is with a QB with 1 more year of NFL experience running it.
yesterday, we were finally taking some shots downfield. pass to Wallace (x2). dropped TD by D Williams. The plays are there. THere's also something to say about continuity. QBs do not evolve when you change offensive systems every year or two. I can't see the new coach being okay with Lazor, so it's a moot point.
Along with what else has been said, one of my biggest questions about the offense this season is why Lamar Miller is coming out of games on such a regular basis. He was doing it before the injury, so its not just that. There would sometimes be two whole drives where he wouldn't see the field, and this was also when Moreno was injured. Is is a Lazor descesion to rotate backs and not give the clear best one carries? Is it Philbin? Is Miller just that frail that he can't handle 10-12 carries a half?
I like the development I've seen in Tannehill. Specifically, I see improvement in his footwork, mechanics, decision-making and accuracy. I like the run offense and how Miller is developing. Before the season I doubted Miller would do much. But this offense fits his skills enough that I see him as a nice piece. I think that if Moreno had not been injured that our run game would have had a nice 1-2 punch and a much better receiving option out of the backfield. I think that's a key cog to this offense. I like that our PPG has jumped from 26th in the league to 12th. I don't know what our pace is now, but before Albert got hurt we were on pace for the highest scoring offense in over a decade. That is despite the key injury to Moreno. I also think the season long limitations afflicting Clay hurt a ton. So while I don't claim Lazor has been perfect, I do see real improvement in our production and in the use of our player's skills. I also think think that continuity would help Tannehill much more than making him him learn yet another system. Doing that would stunt everything for at least half a year and probably result in another year of "wait til next year".
When you look at the number of QB's who have taken their teams to the playoffs in the first year of a new coaching regime in recent years, this seems to go against your argument that Tannehill needs continuity at the OC position. What he needs is better talent around him on offense and on the defensive side of the ball. What he needs the most though is a head coach who actually knows how to prepare his team to play an entire game, instead of just one half of most games. With more talented players and a top tier head coach, I think Tannehill will have more success whether Lazor is here or not.
when is the last time we saw ryan do what tom brady did on third and long? he took off from the pocket, joked a pathetic linebacker with a pump fake, ran for 17 yards, lowered his shoulder on the defender, and got up and talked sh%$..after that play, they scored 28 strait. their both responsible for this inexcusable missing piece of qb'ing.. do I like him better than sherman, yes..do I question his play calling in terms of timely misdirection yes, do I question the severe lack of rollout and bootlegs relative to the skill set?, yes, do I question the lack of carries from a read option standpoint when the executioner is averaging about 2 and a half a game at 6 1/2 yards a carry..yes, do I question why ryan is not sometimes just looking at 2 reads and bolting instead of sitting there like a dead duck, yes, Do i question why the coach is not instilling him to change that?, yes.
Huh? Ryan has done that several times this season minus the talk **** part. For as much as you like running QBs Deej, sometimes I wonder if you have actually seen all of Ryans runs?
excellent post rafael and we dont always see eye to eye. i think the continuity factor is very important, not just for tannehill but the offense as a whole. it allows hickey to draft the same types of players instead of having to do an about face if we got some brand new offensive philosophy here. i think if hickey can add two pieces to the oline and get us one more receiver we are going to have one crazy offense next year
Lazor seems like he spends the first half watching what the opposing defense does, adjusts to it at halftime, the opposing team adjusts to what he did, and he needs a second halftime and a third half so he can make further adjustments. Clear sign of learning on the job.
Pretty confident Moreno was a 1 year contract. Aaaaaand I could be wrong. I'd love a healthy Moreno back.
Well, you gotta take into account Philly's offense last year revolved around the downfield passing game. It was a big part of their production and success. Actually, something like 47% of their passes were either beyond 20 yards or behind the LOS, neither of which can be executed effectively with Hartline whom RAC and downfield ability are foreign to, nor while Tannehill endures growing pains as he develops his deep ball [hopefully]. Basically we have an offense that can't take full advantage of the system b/c of its personnel's downfield inconsistencies and Hartline's RAC/YAC inability. So Lazor had to adjust it to account for these shortcomings. As a result, it now grudgingly revolves around the 1-10 yard passing game which is a disservice to a system that wants to emphasize explosive plays. It's like taking the hook and uppercut away from Mike Tyson and making him get by on jabs alone. We'll have a better idea of Lazor's true ability when Hartline is replaced by a receiver who actually fits the scheme and when Tannehill improves his efficiency beyond 20 yards.
Agreed. There clearly were improvements statistically. I think Lazor was partly learning on the job and will improve. I also think that Philbin may have handcuffed him. And, I think he was handcuffed by the above points you bring up. In fact, if those improvements you mentioned were there this year (RT improved deep ball; different WR to replace Hartline) - I don't think there's any doubt we'd have had an even more explosive offense. Finally, injuries pretty much did Miami in. They simply don't have the depth that other teams have to weather the storm of those injuries. Injuries in the interior OL, then to Albert (huge loss) really created havoc on the OL. Clay's injury hurt. So, too, Moreno. No team is going to remain perfectly healthy, of course. But, the loss of arguably the biggest key on the team (Albert) was really bad. And, not having a reasonable replacement for Moreno also hurt.
What specific things can even a great head coach do though to prepare his team in this way? Not sure some of this can be taught. I'm kind of leaning more towards personnel being the problem on this one---esp. our defensive line can get worn down because of their size, and on offense I think it's mostly just experience/reps and lacking the personnel to score consistently in the red zone. As for the original question, I think the run game is markedly improved from last year without vastly different personnel. I do question the misuse of some of the receiving corps ( specifically the total abandonment of route combos that worked so well to Hartline ). We are top 5 in the NFL in getting into the red zone---perhaps this offseason, we could focus on getting one or two targets who are red-zone specialists? Could also benefit from a short-yardage power back, with some obvious overlap there. I'd like to see what can be done with a big-play receiver ( one who can go deep but with a bigger catch radius than wallace ), a red-zone TE plus a polite-like short-yardage back, and two league-average guards. As for continuity, there was an obvious change in comfort level after maybe game 5 or 6. Personally, I think Lazor has shown enough to make avoiding another 5-6 game adjustment period worth it.
I would like to give him one more year under a different HC, however, I dont want not firing Lazor to be the reason we keep Philbin. So, if firing Philbin means Lazor gotta go to, then the Lazor gotta go.
several as in what..4 times in 14 games lol..its a gross misuse of his ownskillset and a complete neglect mentally of the impact. VT, he hasn't taken off and ran for ages...hes averaging 2 1/2 read option keepers a game..those are two different types of runs. why the hell would you question whether I've seen all his runs..are you smoking grass man...im extremely aware whenever his legs cross the los...and unless he's keeping it on the read, he ain't budging, but a few times all season..its just not acceptable to a qb who is trying to be his personal best..not cool that our team is not getting that part of the game.
Near the end of the fourth quarter, on our last offensive possession when we were first and goal in the red zone, Ryan took two sacks that put us back outside the 20 before we turned the ball over on downs. I don't recall whether it was on 3rd or 4th down, but the camera showed a replay of an open Charles Clay whom Ryan obviously never saw. The play was there to be made, but either because of bad vision or pressure, or both together, Ryan didn't make the throw. He is clearly not Fran Tarkenton in terms of escapability or Marino in terms of vision. But the Pats were generating pressure that was resulting in sacks with a three man rush, and our offensive line could not cope. Fix the offensive line and you give Ryan the opportunity to grow out of the vision and long ball problems. Don't prioritize the offensive line, and you'll end up ruining him like the Texans ruined Carr. Most of this team's problems flow from the ineptitude of the offensive line.
Lazor is not going to be retained, that's a given. Our offense is nothing special. The question is whether the new staff chooses to move on at QB or stick with RT.
I'd keep Lazor if possible. I'm guessing this first year on the job taught him stuff and will end up being his toughest (as is usually the case). Seems like a really sharp guy. We didn't quite get Chip Kelly South, but I think he's turning things in the right direction. That said...if getting rid of Philbin means you have to get rid of Lazor, so be it. I would just hope that the new HC is cool with the current OC.
I prefer keeping the staff in tact for at least one more season in order to keep RT on his current trajectory. Losing Moreno left us with one viable RB, who could only handle 12-15 touches per game. Blame Miller's lack of durability or the lack of depth behind him, but that's not a coaching issue. Ditto for Albert. Moreno's injury forced the staff to be more dependent on passing, only to lose their best pass protector and once again expose RT to heavy pressure. Again, that's a personnel issue not bad coaching. Coyle had to deal with massive injuries in the secondary and at LB, taking a sizable portion of his scheme off the table. Add some depth, hope for better health and above all continue to develop the QB. That's the path to contention for this team. Overreacting to a bad year isn't going to help much of anything.