You're still acting like I'm ****ting on Wilson. But fine... In 3 years in NE, he went to the playoffs twice. In the two years in Sea before Wilson, he went to the playoffs once. In his 9 years in the Pac 10, his team was first for 7. You can pretend that isn't stellar, but you'd be 100% wrong. And with all of that, he needed a great QB to come along. However, he had to be smart enough to not neuter that QB. He had to be smart enough to adapt to that QB's style of play. If he hadn't done that and forced Wilson to play not only handcuffed but not as himself, Wilson wouldn't be the god you worship now.
Pete Carroll took a Super Bowl team and made them worse each year and was fired. Aka the Barry Switzer (less successfully). Funny thing about Shula and Marino. I know Shula is a hallowed name around here. But I fully believe If Jimmy was the coach when Marino was still in his prime, we probably have a superbowl or at least a couple of appearances. Notice the teams success was during Marino's early years, when we still had a good defense and a running game. 1983 Dolphins had the #1 defense in pts allowed. 1984 it was #6. Yes we made the playoffs with crappy run games and defenses, but why was a Don Shula team fielding a crappy run game and defense? That was what he was known for. They made the Superbowl in 1982 with that team minus Marino. Jimmy built a damn good defense. So good, we were projected to the Super Bowl with Dave Wannstedt as coach and Jay Fiedler as our QB. Jimmy plus a less crippled Dan Marino would have been money. As Sollozzo said in the Godfather, the Don ... was slippin'.
Don was Don for most of those years. The difference was Bill Arnsparger leaving in 1984. He built that no-name defense and it took 2 years before our defense crumbled.. in '84 I guess the new DC couldn't undo things quickly enough (#7 in pts according to this: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/mia/ ). But yeah, from '85 onwards our defense was crap compared to the Arnsparger years. If Bill stayed for a few years longer, Marino has 2 SB's IMO.
I dont mean to imply your sh$$ing on him, you've already called him a great qb, I'm just trying to tell you that the difference between the qbs in question is larger in isolation then you think, while there may well be some numbers being changed if the qbs switched team, it wouldn't be that much because both variables on offense haven't been the greatest for either qb, and wilson showed you he could do it with out lynch.. so your really left with coaching, you think that wilson was allowed to play and ryan was nuetered..well, to that I will say a monkey could coach wilson, you just let him play his game, it aint rocket science..how much being held back by the coaches we will see..i have a hard time believing head coaches telling ryan not to make plays when he sees fit..
No you really aren't getting what I said at all. I didn't say or imply Wilson needed special coaching. I said he needed a coach to not neuter him. He needed a coach to not take away everything and put him in impossible situations. He needed a coach to let him be him. Thill hasn't had that. You cannot argue that.
if ryan was on the seahwaks the last four years he wouldn't of put up these incredible record breaking numbers or the amount of wins as wilson..is that easier?
I never said he would. Thill would however, put up drastically better numbers in Seattle than he has here and no one on Seattle would be calling for him to be benched, replaced, etc and they'd feel comfortable they have a franchisee QB.
i will give you that his numbers would be better, how much ? well, neither of us can quantify that.. relative to wilson I would say not close...wilson is so efficient from the pocket, does so much outside the pocket and does so much to effect the run game positively. the debate all winter and the past four years has always been folks demeaning the performances of wilson and saying in the same breath that ryan could do the same if he were there..thus calling wilson overrated.. what bothers me now is in light of all the data we have from wilson over the past 4 years we still have some holding on to their original narrative, and thats what bother me most..if you cant isolate a player that good then I dont know what to tell you..
He had limited audible powers. Not in limited in the same way he did with Lazor, but he didn't have what people generally consider audible powers.
Comparing Tannehill to Wilson i stupid. The only thing they really have in common is that they were drafted in the same year. Wilson is a scrambler not a pocket QB, he plays in the NFC for a run heavy team with a consistently good D. If only there was another pocket QB drafted in the 2012 who plays in the AFC, who has a pass heavy team, inconsistent D. Oh wait there is.Andrew Luck. Objectively Luck has not been a better passer than Ryan Tannehill over his career.
I'd bet almost every HC in the NFL would choose to have Luck over Tannehill if given the choice (assuming salaries are equal). So while passing stats can be argued to be similar in many respects, I think most NFL commentators/experts agree Luck > Tannehill as a QB that can help lead a team to victory.
This is true,a bout Wilson passing less than Tannehill. For example, it takes Tanny 590 passes to get to 4,000 and Wilson 480'ish. So Wilson passes it a lot less. If Wilson were a pure pocket passer at 580 passes he'd have 4900 yards last year. What a slacker.
I agree for the most part but you really should take a look at wilsons numbers from the pocket..they will blow you away.
I agree, but if Arnsparger was the reason we were good, what does that say about Shula? Shula started to fail epically in the draft, in a decade he couldn't fix the run game or the defense, nor did he even add much to the passing game. I think that Shula's name, and especially Marino's arm, extended Shula's career beyond it's natural course.
Hard to fire a coach when your team almost always has a winning season and/or gets into the playoffs year after year. Even into the mid 90's that was true. Shula was never the reason our defense was great. That was Arnsparger. However, there is no question it was Shula's ability to get the most out of his players during games (we've missed that sorely for awhile in the last decade) as well as the ability to adapt - especially switching the offensive system to one built around Marino after winning SB's using a diametrically different approach (most people won't change what worked so well for them like Shula did) - that played a great part in the Dolphins' success over his tenure. You say Marino extended his career. Yes, well Shula made that more likely by building the offense around Marino. Put Marino on Bill Walsh's team and yes Marino wins a ton of SB's, but no way he's allowed the kind of freedom Shula allowed him. None of this means Shula was great at everything. I think when he hit in the draft, it was less skill than luck, precisely because it didn't happen that often. The worst part about Shula was not having the balls to fire an underperforming assistant coach when necessary (maybe he was too loyal). But he was more than good enough in other respects that he deserves a ton of credit for the success the Dolphins had, not just in the 70's but in the 80's and 90's.
It's just inevitable to end up talking about Tannehill on these threads. I don't know what it's going to take for these supporters to realize that Tannehill is NOT the answer. Luck hasn't been a better passer? I'd like to know what you're basing that statement on.
One area that Shula did not change, was his drafting philosophy, and I think it's a huge reason his drafts became so poor, he drafted smart or football smart players, even if they were athletically challenged, which a great many of them were. Athleticism became a much bigger part of NFL football, but he disregarded that for the most part, and I think his poor drafts, and the players we got reflect that.
That could be valid because some of those guys on the early 70's teams were really smart, Anderson, Scott, Griese, Kuchenberg.
Shula was pretty vocal about, especially when he was asked "why this guy" or "why not that guy", and most of his good players drafted from the mid 80's on reflected that, like Offerdahl, who was good but very limited range because he was Olineman slow, OJ, who was a smallish, not very fast WR, Landry is McDuffie 2.0. Those drafts weren't bad, they were pathetic, after Marino, Shula had 13 first round picks 7 were busts, which is hard to believe. The entire 84 draft was a bust, Bud Brown was a late pick that was on the lower end of mediocre, the only good pick. The best pick in 85 was Dellenbach in the 4th, then Fuad Reveiz in the 7th. 86 the best pick was Offerdahl in the 2nd, TJ Turner in the 3rd was a decent pick, also Reyna Thompson was a good ST guy in the 9th round. 87 was pretty much a bust, Mark Dennis in the 8th was the best pick. 88 was the best draft since 83(sad because it was not a good draft all in all), Jarvis Williams in the 2nd, Harry Galbreath in the 8th and Jeff cross in the 9th were all good, Brian Kinchen in the 12th was a decent find, never did a thing for us, but was good enough to get kicked around the league for a decade as a back up. 89 was even better, Louis Oliver in the 1st, Jeff Ulenhake in the 5th, Pete Stoyanovich in the 8th, and even though neither of these guys were that good, finding them this late was, Bert Weidner in the 11th and JB Brown(toast) in the 12th. 90, for the first time since 82(Foster and Duper), they nailed the top 2 picks, Webb and Sims, also got Scott Mitchell in the 4th. 91, Bryan Cox in the 5th was the best pick, also OG Williams was a solid back up also in the 5th. 92, two 1st round picks that were good, Vincent and Coleman, Webster in the 3rd was a decent pick, Hollier in the 4th was a good pick and Dave Moore in the 7th, much like Kinchen, he was a good enough back up TE to get kicked around the league for a decade and a half. 93, Chris Gray in the 5th was the best pick, but OJ in the 1st, Kirby in the 3rd and Bradford in the 4th were all adequate picks for where they were taken. 94, the Tims, Bowens and Ruddy, 1st and 2nd round respectively, Boyer in the 6th was a good ST guy. 95, final draft for Shula was yet another dud, Norman Hand in the 5th was the best pick, Pete Mitchell in the 4th was ok. That is a horrible decade of drafting, not 1 high quality offensive skill player, and very few stars, a lot of solid Oline of the picks that were good, you can't build a winner drafting like that, and this is the reason Marino never got back to the SB.
No, he's saying if Wilson were in the same situation as Tannehill. In other words, Wilson is on the Dolphins, and isn't allowed to scramble or audible, with the same terrible oline, and with a head coach and OC attemating to get rid of him. If Wilson had THE EXACT SAME HANDCUFFS, he would not look as impressive.
I agree.. Shula was bad at drafting and that's one reason Marino never made it back. btw.. you forgot to mention major flops: Bosa in '87 and Kumerow in '88.
Yeah, that was just to save typing, so I just pointed out the 7 out of 13 1st round busts, not to mention all the bad 2nd and 3rd round picks, it was really bad, lol.
It's horse ****, FinD, because when discussing a scenario of Wilson on the Dolphins, no one factors in how Wilson would be affected by not being allowed to scramble, and how him not scrambling would affect how defenses play him. Plus, no one has seen Wilson play without a stout run game.
Career passer ratings. Tannehill 85.2. Luck 85.0 Deeper discussion here http://www.thephins.com/forums/showthread.php?88973-Comparing-Tannehill-to-Luck
lol, wilson would not be allowed to scramble..lol..youv'e got to be kidding me..yall are off the deep end.
http://ftw.usatoday.com/2015/12/rus...le-seahawks-playoffs-touchdowns-interceptions you really don't see how good this dude has been since entering the league do you...its about the most obvious thing in football.
Yeah and on top of that you have to factor in that he wouldn't be allowed to throw accurate passes down the field also.
''noone factors in how wilson would be affected by not being allowed to scramble'' sorry, made me look twice wtf are you talking about..do you think any coach would ever do that to a talent like that?..if you do your a lost pup.. ive heard some out there things before on message boards talking football but that one is up there.
Never mind the fact that after the Raiders game Philbin praised Tannehill for making plays with his legs saying something like 'if you want to win in this league you need plays like those from your QB.'
i swear im going to pull my hair out..your saying to us no'one has seen wilson play without a stout run game?? did you miss the part where he played his best football without Marshawn Lynch and his subpar oline...oh, did you not watch him in college for cripes sake set records for proficiency and efficiency?? have you not noticed his four year start is about the best start in football history, do you not realize he's doing this sh$$ with doug baldwin as his #1? your defiance with such an overwhelming amount of data staring right at your face is downright weird.
ladies and gentleman the undrafted Thomas Rawls is the secret to russell wilsons success... Damn..how could we all not see that..
thats correct...but since then he's on double secret probation.. Ryan tannehill, do you swear to never break the pocket and make a play so help you god? lol..gotta tell ya though, the whole wilson would not be allowed to break the pocket is some funny sh##
Dear god Deej.... I am not saying he isn't good. You've gone off the deep end and I'm not sure there's any bringing you back on Wilson. You literally think anything short of cupping his balls is a slight.
