1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Gase Week 1

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by Limbo, Sep 11, 2016.

  1. Limbo

    Limbo Mad Stillz

    2,476
    1,128
    113
    Mar 21, 2013
    Curious to hear people's thoughts on our new head coach after his first real game.

    For me it's mostly positive. I thought the team was engaged and locked in with more intensity than we saw in the Philbin years. Defensively especially I thought guys looked like they knew their assignments and were in the right spots for the most part. We are lacking in talent in the back 7, so the way they performed was pretty impressive imo. Excellent gameplan and execution on that side of the ball.

    Much of this is due to opponent, but I thought the offense did start to feel like it has the past 4 years: stuck in a box, lacking aggression, too much horizontal stuff. We did find some space on a few big dump-and-run plays, and I know it's Seattle...but for me it's something to keep an eye on as a thing that has to change from the Sherman/Lazor days.

    On a related note I wish they would just play Jarvis Landry at RB if they're so set on using him like one. I thought Gase would know better than to force-feed him the ball on that gimmicky stuff. He can run real routes...please let him be a real WR and help this offense get down the field more efficiently on a per-play basis. 10 targets out of 29 pass attempts is too many for a low-yardage guy and with all the nonsense plays involved. I know I post about this a lot, but I think it's important and I was hoping to see a shift away from it.

    I wasn't upset with going for it on 4th. Gase wanted to set a tone, and it was the first quarter. At that point it wasn't so clear we were in such a low-scoring game. In hindsight obviously it looks bad, but I wasn't really against it in the moment.

    Feel good about Gase's first outing, all things considered, on the road against a SB contender.
     
  2. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Yeah, we NEED a threat over the middle, who can consistently catch those 10 yards balls. That should be Landry. Run Cameron up the seam, and on corner routes. Stills can run deep until Parker gets back. Heck, maybe Caroo can run those 10-15 yard routes? Have Foster and Grant on those short hitters and screens.
     
    Shane Falco and DolphinGreg like this.
  3. DolphinGreg

    DolphinGreg Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    5,227
    6,527
    113
    Dec 7, 2014
    To me it wasn't very good. I saw some things from Arian Foster that impressed me. He's definitely more than what I thought he was. I'm surprised we didn't get more from the other RBs but we weren't able to sustain many drives. To me, that was the critical issue. That seemed to be the biggest problem under Philbin and Lazor and so it was the area you'd hope to have seen some improvement on under Gase. The Philbin/Lazor offense seemed to be one of the NFL's worst in terms of 3-and-outs. That resulted from being out of position and doing a terrible job on 3rd down. We got a lot of those against Seattle which forced our defense into bad spots time and time again.

    Tannehill seemed willing to push the ball down the field which was good but I think DeVante Parker is a much-needed element in this offense for that to be successful. Landry invites the short stuff which plays into the defense's strengths half the time. Once they start inching up, they want you to throw it short to Landry. I'd feel more comfortable if Landry was moving downfield more. I agree totally with what resnor said above about both he and Cameron.

    In general, the team needs to run the ball more effectively (which may not happen) and they need to be smarter about minimizing the negative plays that put them in 3rd-and-long.
     
    BigNastyDB13, Redwine4all and resnor like this.
  4. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    I think he outsmarted himself by not calling a QB sneak on the 4th and inches in the first. Other than that, we were prepared and ready to play. Stills catches a gimme, and Gase would have broken Seattle's streak in his first game a s a HC.
     
  5. DolphinGreg

    DolphinGreg Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    5,227
    6,527
    113
    Dec 7, 2014
    Oh, and if we're seriously judging Gase we need to be critical of the 3-points he left on the field by being aggressive early and going for it. Any way you slice it, that was a very aggressive call. Knowing who Miami is and who Seattle is, it also seems like kind of a dumb call if I'm honest. I didn't like it. I didn't sense Miami had enough momentum to get it and the play call was not at all a sure thing. It was the opposite really.

    Combine that with the use of time-outs at the end (using them while the defense was on the field instead of saving them for your offense) and I think Gase did a rather Philbin-esque job of managing the game.

    1 game doesn't ruin you in my eyes but I'd say it was a bad game for Gase. Just my 2 cents.
     
  6. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Yeah, that 4th and inches, if you're going to go for it, it HAD TO BE A QB sneak. That's it. If you ain't runnin the sneak, kick the field goal.
     
  7. DolphinGreg

    DolphinGreg Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    5,227
    6,527
    113
    Dec 7, 2014
    As long as it took I was convinced they were faking it and were going to take the 5-yd penalty and kick a slightly longer (but still easy) FG. When that didn't happen I just shook my head.

    Terrible call and I can't begin to give him a pass on that other than to just say, young coach, first big call, f-it. I don't want to be like the people who complained for months about how Philbin managed the GB game. To me, the team had plenty of chances to win despite Philbin. This was a slightly different situation where the HC literally probably took 3 points off the board that may have directly won you game.

    Maybe not, but it was huge and seemed to be waaaaaay too aggressive considering the circumstances.

    To me, it was such a weird situation in which to go for it you almost wonder if Gase was thinking straight or just got caught up in the moment. Damn dude...lesson learned...I hope.
     
  8. Limbo

    Limbo Mad Stillz

    2,476
    1,128
    113
    Mar 21, 2013
    Oh I get that. I'm fine with him going for it. But yeah the execution was obviously bad.

    A quick-snap QB sneak was very VERY available, but I don't know if that's an option that's built in for Tannehill. It seems to be in the strategy with most teams in that scenario, but one never knows knows with this team. Such is life for Phins fans.
     
  9. DolphinGreg

    DolphinGreg Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    5,227
    6,527
    113
    Dec 7, 2014
    I think it's one of those things where you just do it

    I remember when Cleo Lemon was playing (I think it was the first London game actually). There was a play where he ran to the right side of the field and just barely scored a TD. They reviewed it and the footage showed he didn't hold the ball over the pylon. He had it in the wrong hand of whatever.

    I remember people basically pointing to that and saying...look...that's pretty direct evidence you're not cut out for playing NFL QB. The sentiment being that if you're too f'ing stupid to hold the ball out, you're just not quite the guy for the job, lol.

    Now, that's harsh I know, but the sentiment always stuck with me. Sometimes you just have to know what to do without it being scripted. I don't think all of Brady's QB sneaks are scripted. Hell, I'm not sure half of 'em are.
     
  10. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    There were 2 decisions on that play.

    1. to go for it or not
    2. what play to call

    He did the right thing going for it, but he called the wrong play.

    Going for it sets the tone for the season. It didn't cost us the game as the Stills drop and the blocked FG which would have been the difference happened AFTER that.
     
    Tin Indian, Bpk and resnor like this.
  11. DolphinGreg

    DolphinGreg Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    5,227
    6,527
    113
    Dec 7, 2014
    It's one drive in one game that decides whether you get 3 points or something else. Taking 3 points is generally considered the thing to do. The VAST majority of times it's what coaches do. It definitely doesn't make you a wuss.

    And it hardly sets the tone for the season. I'm not buying that at all. The players are who they are. They aren't going to transform based on a few play calls here or there. On that note, if you're implying we're going to get more of that "go for it when we can." Well, I would hope not. It's going to fail most of the time with this O-line.

    I know I'm cynical at times but I just feel like I'm being honest there. :(
     
  12. Pennington's Limp Arm

    Pennington's Limp Arm Well-Known Member

    1,528
    1,136
    113
    Mar 7, 2014
    Ontario, Canada
    That first timeout in the 2nd half was Philbinesque.

    3rd and 4 I believe, around the 50, with the play clock running down to 3 seconds on Wilson and he gives them time to think about that play. (and what they are going to do on 4th)
     
    number21 likes this.
  13. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    I didn't say it would transform the players.

    Seriously what is going on this site today?

    It would set the tone for the season. The last coach was notoriously queasy. Showing the team (and fans) he's willing to go for it makes sense.

    Again, we could have missed the FG too you know. That actually DID happen in this game.
     
    Shane Falco and Bpk like this.
  14. dWreck

    dWreck formerly dcaf

    5,200
    2,975
    113
    Oct 23, 2011
    Sebring, FL
    You go for that 4th down....
     
  15. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    10,488
    12,821
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    Overall I thought that Gase did absolutely fine considering that he had the toughest draw you can possibly have for a first-ever NFL opponent. Well, maybe at New England is worse....but you get my drift. Gase started out in an impossible situation with these first two games, yet we beat Seattle in every metric except for the one that matters most- points. So for that alone, I say he did a solid job with game planning and schemes- especially on defense.

    However, I also have to get critical of a few things-

    1) I was fine going for it on fourth and inches, but furious that we ran straight up the middle on a pure vanilla run play. Bootleg Tannehill...throw the quick slant...anything except run into a box where 9 of 11 Seattle defenders are at.

    2) Gase looked like he was losing it during the final minute of the game....he visibly looked confused. That's a very bad sign but for week 1, maybe he deserves a pass.

    3) The red zone offense was terrible. In fact, most of the playcalling was on offense....despite us moving the ball enough to win the game on multiple drives. We kept running up the gut and throwing passes behind the line of scrimmage...I did not see the "mismatches" we were promised.

    4) Where was the no-huddle offense? Did I miss something here? I didn't see up-tempo at all.

    5) Why in the hell did we waste two timeouts when Seattle was going for it on critical plays on that final drive? Wilson was choking bad and we called timeout on 4th and 1 right at the snap...I wanted to kick the TV!

    Again though, that's being critical and if we won I would have nothing but positive things to say.
     
    resnor and Limbo like this.
  16. MAFishFan

    MAFishFan Team Tannehill

    3,561
    447
    83
    Sep 20, 2011
    Massachusetts
    I think he was fine. I'm with everyone on the 4th down call. I don't understand why the QB sneak is never used. Gase can't be faulted on the dropped bomb or the blocked FG. Defensively I think Miami did what they had too, they just were gassed at the end, which is a shame. Tannehill did what we've all been asking and put the team on his back and drove them down the field for the go ahead score. It's just something we've all seen, all too often.
     
    resnor and Bpk like this.
  17. Bpk

    Bpk Premium Member Luxury Box

    The concept of team culture and player 'buy-in' are well established as a major part of what head coaches (especially new ones) value and what they do with their teams. Don't think we need to debate that one. You'd be debating against what's commonly accepted and practiced in this league.

    And we love you despite your cynicism. Sometimes it helps to offset our homerism. :)
    SaveSave
     
    DolphinGreg and resnor like this.
  18. Man-U

    Man-U New Member

    47
    33
    0
    Sep 28, 2015
    He went for it on fourth and short and failed, he kicked the field goal on fourth and short and failed.
     
  19. Destroyer

    Destroyer There for every play.

    3,770
    1,500
    113
    Oct 25, 2010
    Maryland
    This feels like the same team as last year. Can't wait for the new regime. Maybe they'll finally hire a defensive minded coach.
     
  20. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Not sure if serious.
     
  21. Redwine4all

    Redwine4all Well-Known Member

    1,216
    686
    113
    Feb 4, 2016
    I agree. So far, nothing special.
     
    DolphinGreg and dolphin25 like this.
  22. Brasfin

    Brasfin Well-Known Member

    2,435
    1,672
    113
    Apr 27, 2013
    Brazil
    I think the crowd noise was the biggest factor that contributed to slow tempo. Looked to me like we couldn't communicate and had to slow down to make sure everyone was on the right page in order to avoid more costly mistakes. On top of that we had our backup center playing, who is the second most important player in regards to setting the tempo and it was the first game under Gase's system. I don't think it's quite fair to expect an up-tempo offense under all of these circumstances.
     
    thisperishedmin, Fin D and Limbo like this.
  23. dolphin25

    dolphin25 Well-Known Member

    6,338
    2,400
    113
    Nov 22, 2014
    I would say a C.

    Should have taken the 3 points early on. It would have been a real positive for the offense, I was disappointed on his going for it. Would have not been so bad if they had rushed and snapped the ball when Seattle was taking its time getting set, but we were kind enough to wait for their defense to get set.

    Wilson was clearly hurt, yet we didn't tighten the box or try to put additional pressure on him. Blood was in the water and we just let it wash away.

    Didn't we call a time out for them late in the game when it was 3rd and 4 and time clock was at like 2 seconds?and they hadn't gotten set. Shades of Philpin.

    Play calling was hmmmm at best. There was one 3rd down call that was designed for one play only, if that didn't work no chance for a first down, it didn't work.
     
    Redwine4all likes this.
  24. Soul Train

    Soul Train Banned

    7
    9
    0
    Sep 12, 2016
    I think the biggest positive that was apparent with Gase were the open plays downfield. The two long passes to Stills, the one that was dropped and the other that was overthrown, were indicative of knowing how and when to exploit an opposing defense, with plays that were makeable by Tannehill.

    Those plays have been few and far between during Tannehill's first four years, and in only one game, against a good defense, there were already a couple of them. That's a good sign, because you can't constrain yourself to 12 and 14-play drives down the field in this league. Quick, easy scores need to happen from time to time if you're going to be competitive.
     
    josh and DolphinGreg like this.
  25. Rocky Raccoon

    Rocky Raccoon Greasepaint Ghost Staff Member

    30,224
    36,965
    113
    Dec 2, 2007
    Jersey
    I said this in Club but I'll say it here too. I can't believe so many people are giving Gase **** for going for it on 4th and inches. That's the same thing we all bashed Philbin for. Not having a spine and playing it safe.

    It didn't work out but I love the aggressiveness, and I hope to see much more of it in the future.
     
  26. Springveldt

    Springveldt Season Ticket Holder

    I thought it was an obvious call to make. It's your first game and you want to show your offence that you have belief in them. It was 4th and about 4 ****ing inches, I get that it was a rookie C in there but you have to sneak that. Tannehill just falls forward and makes it.

    Kicking the FG there would have sent out the wrong message to your offence imho.
     
    Fin D, Rocky Raccoon and LI phinfan like this.
  27. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    10,488
    12,821
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    Well, we ran it throughout preseason...so it wasn't exactly the first game under Gase. And when you go no-huddle, you're usually calling in 3-4 plays that are shared BEFORE you pick up the tempo. I can see why it would be so hard to audible in that loud mess, but I thought the offense as a whole could have been a little more dynamic and shut that crowd up.
     
  28. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    10,488
    12,821
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    It was UNQUESTIONABLY the right call...if we got the first down there then all the momentum changes. I respect the call, but I hated the run straight into Seattle's defenders stacking the box. We saw how agile Foster is carving out lanes; he should have been sent outside and allowed to do what he does. Or a quick slant, a QB sneak, a bootleg off the play action.....anything works better than running off guard in that situation.

    Then again, if it wasn't for the later mistakes (dropped TD's, blocked field goals, etc.) I don't think we would even be having this conversation. Great call, poor execution.
     
  29. Soul Train

    Soul Train Banned

    7
    9
    0
    Sep 12, 2016
    I don't see any problem with the fourth down call early in the game, but I think it's a mistake to think that if a few plays had gone differently here or there, the Dolphins would've won. It's entirely possible the Seahawks were playing down to the level of their competition all game, until the final drive when they had to score to win, and that if the game had gone more in the Dolphins' favor earlier on, the Seahawks would've simply turned on the juice earlier, given the situation.

    Then again it's possible the Dolphins are a juggernaut, the 10-point spread was a big mistake, and the Seahawks were going all out all day long. We'll know in about mid-October.
     
    DolphinGreg likes this.
  30. DolphinGreg

    DolphinGreg Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    5,227
    6,527
    113
    Dec 7, 2014
    Very true. Nobody ever says it but it is very true. You change 1 thing and you change all things.
     
  31. pumpdogs

    pumpdogs Well-Known Member

    5,185
    2,907
    113
    Sep 22, 2009
    delaware
    The right call was to go for it and **** the fieldgoal but yes hurry up to the line and qb sneak would have been the better call.
     
    Fin D likes this.
  32. roy_miami

    roy_miami Well-Known Member

    1,385
    560
    113
    Oct 11, 2013
    Yeah that was bizarre. I thought the refs must have made a mistake when saying we called it. Only thing I can think of is we had too many men on the field. If not dumbest timeout I've ever seen.

    Plus we wasted a lot time before calling the other timeouts to stop the clock. Huge difference between 0 timeouts with 26 seconds left and 1 timeout with 40 seconds left.
     
  33. Agua

    Agua Reality: Try It!

    5,257
    1,725
    113
    Apr 28, 2008
    I'm fine with going for it on 4th and inches, but a GD QB sneak on a quick snap would have been a gimme. I don't know if Tanny audibled out of that or what.
     
  34. Vengeful Odin

    Vengeful Odin Norse Mod

    21,837
    10,818
    113
    Dec 2, 2007
    Kansas City, MO
    Hard to say what happened there. To me it looked like Tannehill possibly audibled into the handoff. We probably won't find out if that's actually the case.
     
    Agua and Fin D like this.
  35. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    If Tannehill audibled out of a QB sneak there, that would be a huge issue.
     
    Pauly and Fin D like this.
  36. Rock Sexton

    Rock Sexton Anti-Homer

    2,553
    1,793
    113
    Mar 14, 2015
    It's only Week 1.

    For this game, I didn't see anything different out there than what I watched in the previous 2 regimes. A real lack of aggression.
     
  37. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    The quick snap issue is easy to fix. If Gase is worth his salt this should be fixed soon, and if it's not I think it says something about Gase.
     
    resnor likes this.
  38. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Agreed with both.

    Whether it was Thill or Gase that didn't do the quick snap QB sneak, that is a mistake but not one that can't be fixed going forward.

    It also didn't cost us the game.
     
    resnor likes this.
  39. Pandarilla

    Pandarilla Purist Emeritus

    14,282
    5,005
    113
    Sep 10, 2009
    Boone, NC
    Gase did well, no turnovers, few penalties and we nearly won. Both sides of the ball looked competent.
     
    resnor likes this.
  40. BigNastyDB13

    BigNastyDB13 Well-Known Member

    767
    386
    63
    Oct 12, 2012
    Exactly my thoughts. If you arent smart enough to sneak it knowing out line gives up a ton of negative runs then just kick it and tie the game. I wouldve been ok with any of the following 3 options, in this order. 1)QB sneak 2) FG 3)Play-action pass....if you have the balls to run this play it works for a long play almost everytime. The D is over committing to stop the run thats why you either sneak it, kick it or pass it. Running with the RB is exactly what the D is over selling to stop. Im disappointed in Gase to be honest. I expected more.
     

Share This Page