Lay off that **** you are smoking man. If you cannot even admit that we have a very bad defense then there is no point in arguing with you. Sent from my F3111 using Tapatalk
I am sure that over time the argument that "The 2017 Miami Dolphins defense is very bad because hitman8 said so", will be viewed favorably by historians, but it simply doesn't hold water now. The empirical evidence simply doesn't exist. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
The problem with VJ's wide 9 scheme is that we don't have the players and offenses run straight through. 140 rushing yards per game is huge. Just think back to if Marino actually had backs that could average 140 yards per game; Miami would have had several SB victories. A running game like that makes the safeies come in and then we get burned by the play action. VJ should have recognized the lack of talent and failure of his wide 9, then changed the scheme. VJ's lack of adaptatability shows that he is over his head. All of these players have played in other schemes, the transition would have been smooth.
You will have to excuse me if I give the guy who writes about football for a living's opinion (who is not exactly known as a Dolphins' fan) slightly more weight than yours....
Right, like writers don't say stupid **** all the time. You should develop your critical thinking skills so you can think for yourself instead of letting some writer think for you. Sent from my F3111 using Tapatalk
So, did he "take full responsibility" or did he take "partial responsibility"? After answering that, please show how your summary of the article was incorrect.
Theres somthing of a chicken-egg component with turnovers however. When you look at passing stats by win probability teams in the 0-19% group throw interceptions at nearly double the Average and teams in the 80-99% group throw interceptions at about 60% of the average. I can't find the artivcles but in the whole Pats dflategate issue about fumble rates it was shown a similar pattern held with fumble rates (not fumble recovery rates) The working theory being that teams that are way behind take higher risks leading to higher turnover rates and teams with solid leads play less extravagent football and avoid turnovers. So a big chunk of relative turnover rates in the NFL are caused by games situation, not the turnoverrates causing the game situation which is how it is normally reported.
My critical thinking is just fine. You want to impress me with some actual research and analysis? How many total NFL starts did Paysinger, Hewitt, Phillips, Rambo, Lippett, Howard, and Thomas have before this season?
Yeah the argument is really more general than that. Anything that correlates with winning should theoretically correlate with win probability for a simple reason: the more you win, the more you tend to be in situations with higher win probability, so anything that correlates with winning should also correlate with win probability (exceptions would be things that can't occur in high/low win probability situations, like "scoring on the 1st drive of the game", etc..). And that's in general what you see. Passer rating, ANY/A, passing Y/A, passing TD%, INT%, etc.. all have stronger correlations as a function of win probability. But rushing Y/C does not, and it also doesn't correlate with winning. However, rushing attempts and rushing TD% etc.. do. So the chicken and egg problem is really a more general one and isn't restricted to turnovers. And as you point out it's fairly easy to explain if you assume teams in lower win probability situations take more risks. In the passing game, that decreases completion percentage which decreases Y/A, etc.. for the losing team while doing the opposite for the winning team. In the running game, it increases rushing attempts for the winning team, etc..
This isn't even remotely close to the premise. There's no cult of Vance Joseph here, people are just telling you(rightfully) you have no idea what you're talking about when you try to say he's done a bad job or the scheme is somehow inherently bad. Vague allusions to what Joseph would have done differently in hindsight really means **** all in re: to that
Right. Just because you lose key pieces on defense, doesn't mean you can just change your defensive scheme in the middle of the season. You can try to modify some things, but that's about all you can do. Those quotes from Vance seemed to be more indicative of him saying that his modifications weren't enough, not him saying that the wide 9 was a problem.
The entire point of this thread was to convey my concern with vances bend don't break defensive scheme. Against sub 500 teams this year we were toasted and had our offense to save our games. We're now In The playoffs starters or not you need to hold players not bend. We also hd a lot of time to make trades and get players to fill some of those voids which they did not. Vance has not shown me anything to make me miss him if he goes.
Plus, if he goes, it seems like their are other options at DC that maybe better. Rex would be an upgrade and I doubt he gets another HC chance for the next few years.
As much hate as I have developed over the years for Rex Ryan... I would not mind him coaching our defense. Not a great HC but the dude is a defensive mastermind.
After doing some analysis of various stats in the off season, I now believe game situation, which can be measured by win probaility, is the trump card in football analysis. Mediocre QBs can record great stats if they have a great defense consistently putting them into a winning situation. The whole yards per carry versus rushing attempts conundrum. The list of apparent inconsistencies that can be explained by game situation is quite long, and IMO it is the next area football stats should be exploring rather than their current obsession with yardage efficiency.
The first thing Ryan will do is start to undermine the HC. No matter how good he may be as a DC that's the last thing I want on this staff after God knows how many years of internal bickering.
Good point. I did not think about that part of the equation. What if the dude comes here with his foot fetish. He does not undermine Gase and sticks to being a great DC. Would you like that move?
Well.. certainly conditioning by game situation is very informative. That's basically what the "splits" do, and it's what many models like ESPN's QBR and FO's DVOA incorporate. And of course you can do this with win probability and win probability added. But no one has found a good way of apportioning credit to different players on the team even given situational stats. So at least so far, conditioning by game situation hasn't led to an ability to distinguish correlation from causation (e.g. how much was the QB actually responsible for). In any case, you've done some informative analysis in the past so we'll see what you can come up with. Personally though I think the utility of such "situational stats" will be "situational" in nature haha! It'll help answer some questions, but the real tough ones that would revolutionize football analysis (mostly credit apportioning) I doubt will emerge from that.
I like DVOA for team analysis, but it really does seem to get screwy with respect to individual performance. Situational stats are good for explaining why Can Newton had fantastic stats last year but only average stats in other years. 2015 was the season his defense vonsistently put him in winning situations. Situatiobal stats explain the drop in Lamar Miller's yards per rush, whem he was a Dolphin other teams didn't expect Lazor to run, but in Houston opposing Ds are expecting him to get a significant number of carries.
Really you can show that? Defensive rankings for Carolina have varied quite a bit over Cam's tenure on various measures, all while only 2015 was way above normal for him. For example, by both points allowed and yards allowed Carolina in 2013 was 2nd best in the league yet Cam had far worse stats than in 2015 when the defense was 6th by both measures. In fact key 2013 stats like passer rating are closer to his 2012 and 2014 stats when the defense was much worse (e.g. by points allowed 2012 ranking was #18 and 2014 ranking was #21). Well.. I'll let you make your argument.
Heard Florio today say Joseph was the one name he has heard as being almost certain to get hired this cycle.
I wouldn't call the defense "very bad" at all. If you're calling it "very bad", what are you smoking?
Did you not watch the Ravens game or see that Miami has given up 140 rushing yards per game........lmfao! Our defense sucks and if Ben doesn't get hurt early tomorrow, we will se how bad they are.
The defense isn't there. Was it there prior to the Joseph hiring? How LONG have we talked about the LB corps?? Since we drafted Teddy Ginn? This ain't something new, man! Increase in QB pressures? Check. MUCH better on third downs? Check. More turnovers? Check! We had holes prior to Joseph's hire. Those holes increased as the injuries increased. Adam Gase didn't turn down the SF job to bring in Vance on a whim. No one is denying the run D isn't there. But he implemented the wide-9 to sustain some continuity because these guys have been running a 4-3. Vance had to make a choice: run a 3-4 that he's very familiar with when the personnel isn't really a 3-4, or do this. He made a choice. He's well aware of some of these issues, but didn't anticipate them. Ever have a plan go wrong? It's much harder when you don't have the same players in from week-to-week. There's not the same trust between players. Are we going to blame him for the injuries or the players who were already here, too?? The rush was to help the back end (which historically has been an issue the past few years even though we hired a DB coach for a DC). In some sense, it has. Everything can't be perfect right off the bat. We've had issues on offense as well. What do you expect from first year coaches?!? We're in the playoffs!
Sure, but first tell us where they would be ranked had we not faced a hobbled Wilson, a third string QB at New England, a third string QB vs Cleveland, a hobbled McCoy vs Buffalo, Pittsburgh's backup QB, the Jets backup QB, an injury riddled Chargers offense, a rookie QB making his first start at LA, the torrential rains vs Arizona, the Jets third string QB and no Gronk.
Can't include the cases where our defense injured the opposing QB haha! And we did that quite often, including Suh injuring Wilson, Kiko doing the same to Garropolo, Phillips injuring both Roethlisberger and Fitzpatrick, and Suh and Wake sandwiching Bryce Petty (OUCH on that play). In fact, our defense actually made the schedule easier for other teams. So I don't see evidence our opponents had more key injuries than a normal NFL team might face.
We are going to need some of that game play today. If Ben makes it through the whole game, it could get ugly.
The point is you can play the 'we would be ranked here had this happened/not happened' until you're blue in the face but the ranking is the ranking. And if Joseph gets the credit for injuring opposing QBs then who gets the blame for our own players being hurt? Also, I understand defensive yards given up doesn't correlate strongly with winning but how does being ranked last correlate with good or bad coaching? It would probably be a lot of work to find out but my feeling is when you're ranked last in anything its not a good sign and I would bet more often than not its the poor coaches that have been ranked last in yards. And lastly I don't believe you necessarily have to prove you are a great coordinator to be a great head coach, it would be a nice confirmation if our defense was beasting but not a deal breaker. If the rumors are true it sounds like Elway agrees and he was going to hire Joseph regardless of how good or bad our defense was.
VJ is clearly over his head. If you don't understand that, then you clearly don't understand football and are not watching the Steelers r4pe our defense. Miami is getting embarrassed! VJ should be FIRED after this.
Another horrendous game by vance and the defense today. I dont know how anybody can say at this point that vance is anything special as a coach. Offense and special teams are holding their own, defense downright sucks. Good riddance if he goes to another team. Sent from my F3111 using Tapatalk
Exactly right bro! The Steelers didn't even have a pass play on that last drive. Just handed off to Bell every play. Miami's offense can't even get on the field to get a rhythm. Hell, I've seen college defenses that are coached better.
My concern is what if he does t go anywhere!! We need this defense to win one for us to get rid of him
This is just personal preference but I don't like his demeanor on the sideline. Reminds me of Tony Sparano.
This basic premise that bad defensive performance = bad coaching is fundamentally dumb. If you can identify specific examples, by all means- but none of the usual suspects has done it and I'm sure as **** not going to hold my breath looking looking at this thread
It really isn't worth it, Pate, but thanks for fighting the good fight anyways. If he's hired for Denver you'll probably see a fantastic defensive year from them next year because they have so much more talent than we do on that side of the ball.