people act like if we didn't spend the money on Suh that we would've spent the money on 4 or 5 guys who would now all be starting for this team as upgrades. THere's just as much chance, likely more of a chance, that those mid-level starters will now pan out for your team and you ended up overpaying for sub-average FA. We all know the best, most stable franchises, build through the draft. But this team has a 30 year history of NOT being able to do that. So, now we're stuck with filling in holes via free agency.
I think a better question is where is Suh's help coming from? After Reshad Jones and Olivier Vernon who do we have really? Our defense looks bad and it might get worse with Vernon hitting FA.
I think we really need to draft some LB's... Especially a downhill thumping Mike.. As good as Reshard is, there is no reason for him to be leading in tackles. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
there are a lot of teams with good defenses that aren't paying one player $20 mill and that player not being a QB.
You are paying a premium for a premier player who will be built around. Present salary cap worries are overblown. We don't even have enough good players that require large sums of money to re-sign to be worried. Every year is different and new avenues become available to move money around. There is no need to look 5 years down the road. Some people act like we're trying to hold a championship team together. We fail because we draft bad not because we have bad contracts. Wallace, Hartline, Wheeler and Ellerbee were really bad contracts but did not cripple us because of crafty maneuvering. Build around Tannehill and Suh, grab some value FA's and hit on some draft picks. With some good coaching we can win a lot of games.
Missing in the draft has been our biggest problem IMO. We've gotten some average, to above average starters in recent years, but not big major playmakers and game changers. That's a big, big problem.
You do not build a defense around a DT, unless you run a 3-4 and happen to run into an elite NT, especially one that's going to be 29 next year. Tanne is not a QB you want to build around, he's a QB you HAVE to build around, and he will be making way too much money for that type of input. In a couple ways, these guys are the same, both are way over paid, and if you build a good enough team around them to be successful, you don't need them anymore, because bottom line; The offense is a joke, the defense is a joke, so what exactly are these two guys bringing to the table.
The game last week was 0-0 until Jordan Phillips tip changed the game. Then Shelby had a pick 6. A few weeks ago Philly went up 16-3 very early and we won 20-19. I agree the offense is putrid, but saying this D is a joke really shows what kind of a Dolfan you are, you're the real joke lol. Oh yea, and OV is a stud, I knew it all along like I did with Reshad Jones (who btw is a play maker/game changer).
lol, the real joke is you stalking me, with all your "great" football knowledge, as a D, we are 27th in yds, 24th in points and 30th in run D, which is what this stupid FO "said" they signed Suh for. So go ahead and tell me again why this D isn't a joke. lol
I think that's a problem that to a good degree has been fixed since Hickey arrived. Last two drafts we don't seem to have wasted 1st and 2nd round picks, and we've seen some good play from at least one mid/lower round pick in both drafts. Oh, and Landry is a playmaker.
The D isn't statistically ranked high, but that's because the offense has been so bad. I know it's not a great defense, and the secondary is pretty pathetic, but this defense even without Wake is still a formidable unit. You just have a very low football IQ, if our D wasn't solid we would barely have a single win based on how the offense has played.
An offense no matter how bad will not turn a formidable unit into one of the worst statistically. They've not stopped a single formidable. The offense is a problem yes. I'd compare 1st half and 2nd half defense. But they're not as good as you are implying. It's still a pretty bad defense
They've been terrible in the 2nd half. Part of that is adjustments and the other is poor depth. When they're gassed from being on the field too much they simply melt.
I said they are formidable and solid, where did I imply they are really good? And we scored more points on D than the Ravens O did in the first half, and we had 2 turnovers. Let's see if Seattle can do that this week. Also in the Philly game they played excellent, like in the Titans and Texans games. I can understand someone believing this defense isn't particularly good, but calling them a joke is really a dumb statement. They've played very well certain games, excellent really. Can't wait til Monday night.
I agree with both you guys, yes they are on the field too much, but as JD points out that isn't going to crumble a good D, we've had bad O before that left the D hanging, but they didn't turn into turnstiles. Tanne's rookie year for instance, when Tanne was really insignificant, way more than now, we we're 7th in points allowed, 13th in rush yds allowed, 6th in passing TDs allowed and 8th in rushing TDs allowed, we were 21st in yds allowed due to the ineffective O, but that didn't destroy the D's effectiveness.
What would go a long way in improving this team is 3rd down efficiency on offense and defense.. We rank 31st and 27th respectfully. We have an offense that can't stay on the field and a defense that can't get off of it. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You're gonna look really dumb Tuesday morning. If this d was a joke, they wouldn't have performed the way the did against Philly and Baltimore. And that's without Wake.
So, why in this thread is the argument that the defense isn't very good? I've been pointing out all season that the defense doesn't just falter in the second half when they're tired from being on the field all game. Then I get accused of making excuses for Tannehill. You guys flip the argument to suit your particular need all the time. I've consistently argued: Oline is a problem Special teams is a problem Coaching was/is a problem Offense is a problem Defense is a problem In essence, the TEAM as a whole, is a problem. Then people call me a troll, or unreasonable, or whatever, and say the problem is Tannehill. He makes everyone worse.
We're ranked #29 in ToP on defense (33:03 minutes per game on average), and #30 in ToP on offense (26:57 per game). Why the discrepancy? In our case the numbers add up to 60 minutes but that's not true for all teams (I guess there are some special teams plays that count while others don't): http://www.nfl.com/stats/categoryst...eStatisticCategory=GAME_STATS&qualified=false http://www.nfl.com/stats/categoryst...fensiveStatisticCategory=null&qualified=false
What do you make of it? Do you place more blame on one side of the ball than the other? I'll come right out and say it, maybe I'm wrong, but I strongly feel that our offense is more responsible for losing the TOP battle. We don't stick to the running game and we're terrible at converting third downs. How many games have we had where we started out really, really slowly and left the defense on the field? Or just left the defense out for extended periods at a time any time in the game? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Again, finsfandan, who's fault is it, early in games, if the defense cannot force three and outs? Who's fault is it when the defense is giving up double digit scores in the first half of games? Whose fault is it when the defense is allowing 19-27 points in the first half in 5 games (under Coyle or not is pretty irrelevant, since this discussion arose from me disputing the offense being at fault for the defense being tired, an argument been gong on all season)?
Well, at least 3rd down conversion percentage stats are out there. We're ranked #26 on defense, allowing 42.4% 3rd down conversions, and #31 on offense with a 28% 3rd down conversion rate: http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/team/_/stat/downs/sort/thirdDownConvPct/position/defense http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/team/_/stat/downs/sort/thirdDownConvPct So just based on those numbers, both are to blame, with maybe a little more blame on the defense. Of course that's just a starting point for analysis.. as you point out, run/pass balance will affect ToP, and being behind in games late will tilt that towards pass for the offense and run for the opposing offense, etc..
The defense certainly has given up its share of big plays and hasn't gotten itself off of the field at times but really with our offense being so terrible on 3rd downs and not being able to run the ball it does skew the stats on the defensive side. You can't expect the defense to keep holding teams when they are gassed by the 2nd quarter. To the original point of the thread, I don't have an issue with the way Suh is playing. We can argue about whether or not he's worth the money, realistically no one is, but he's been a beast ever since we changed defensive coordinators. He's an all pro caliber dlineman so I don't really see what the disappointment is with his play. When Wake was healthy and playing well along with Suh, our dline was playing lights out. Suh isn't the problem with our defense, to blame him kind of makes me wonder if you really watch the games or not. Its fairly obvious to even someone barely paying attention that he's drawing double teams and blowing guys up in the pocket routinely. Thats what he got paid for. If our LBs were good and we had another quality CB no one would be wondering about the effect Suh has or not.
It's a double edged sword, who's fault is it when the offense goes 3 and out early in games, who's fault is it when they can't convert on third down, who's fault is it when the offense scores zero points in the first half, which they've done 3 times, who's fault is it that this offense has scored over 10 points in the 1st half only 3 times, and who's fault is it that the offense has scored 7 or less points in the first half 7 out of 12 games. The offense is failing more than the defense, by a long shot.
The disappointment is with his play vs his salary, everyone knows Suh is a top DT, but he is getting paid like a top QB, but he isn't having much of an impact on the overall play of the defense, because we are worse this year then we were last year, and Suh is counting nearly 30 mil against the cap next year. We can be a lousy defense for a lot less.
Okay, I have no issue with the stats, but why a little more blame on the defense? My reason for blaming the offense more is the lack of dedication to the run (almost exclusively Lazor's fault) and the terrible third down conversion rate. Is it possible to figure out if the offense tends to disappear for extended periods of time? It seems like they almost always start out slow in first halves, at the very least, if not for other portions during a given game. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
As for the topic of this thread, I think it's safe to say with the injuries we've had, with Coyle sticking around early on, the turnover in the coaching staff, and the incompetence of the offense, we can't blame Suh too much, especially since we've only had him for just 11 games. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
From our coach http://dailydolphin.blog.palmbeachp...olphins-offense-stresses-team-is-still-alive/ That whole article is about the offense not matching the defense. http://www.pressherald.com/2015/11/30/dolphins-looking-to-cure-their-anemic-offense/ http://www.miamiherald.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/armando-salguero/article47105755.html Who does it look like Campbell is calling out?
LOL.. oh wow, good catch. Yeah, I write down #26 and #31 and forget right after writing that down that the first number was defense and the second offense (used to thinking "offense" then "defense")!! Yeah, good catch dude. OK, so based on those stats there's more blame for the offense.
We aren't bad this year because of Suh's salary, he won't be the cause of us having a bad roster next year if that is the case. He hasn't been in charge of ****ty drafts for the last 5 years lol.
I agree, but that doesn't make him any more worthy of that salary, a salary that will hamper the teams ability to keep, and acquire players.
I totally agree about the salary. Buuuut, let's not forget he's only played 11 games for us, had to deal with Coyle early on, turnover with the staff, injuries on defense, bad players on defense and the offense leaving them hung out to dry. I don't think it's possible to get a fair evaluation of him at this point of his stay with us. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Look, I'm not denying the defense being tired by the fourth quarter. But, the defense has struggled to stop opponents in the first half. It's not like the defense has been pitching shutouts in the first half, and getting rolled in the second half because they're worn out. The offense sucking is a massive problem, too, but the defense hasn't been doing itself any favors. That's my point.
I thanked your post because you make a good point, however SUH was supposed to make everyone around him better ---he hasn't IMO SUH is over paid as is Tannehill for what they do for this team. as a result we will be in cap hell for several years all the while trying to bring in a new coaching staff to get rid of the funk that this team seems to embrace. Honestly we were better with the guys we had. Something has to give and I am afraid we are in trouble for years to come because this team needs to be dismantled and rebuilt fro,m the bottom up. we were never a player away from the Superbowl which would have possibly warranted bring in a guy like SUH to put us over the top. The signing of SUH was done to appease the fan base because we were at the point of storming the stadium. Now we are primed for it to back fire in our faces. We all better be ready to open wide because like it or not the medicine is got to come at some point
Believe me, I've said Suh and Tannehill are overpaid. Somebody, I forgot who, said something like between those two, their contracts total $210 million. I don't see how we can win with those two taking up so much cap space . Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
