3rd and 9...run play Philbin strikes again.

Dan Patrick: "The Dolphins ... if that were late in the season, that loss would be a fireable offense. Inexcusable ..."

"Da 'Fins wrote:

Dan Patrick: "The Dolphins ... if that were late in the season, that loss would be a fireable offense. Inexcusable ..."

I'm really glad that both Rodney Harrison and Dan Patrick called out the Dolphins coaching staff, last night and this morning. I think that as a national narrative builds up that Joe Philbin is a bad coach, Steve Ross can fire him without too much hand-wringing and it won't discourage quality candidates from taking the job.

"Galant wrote:

"Until the final touchdown, Miami held the Packers to just 20 points, and the defense just needed to execute on a single play to walk away with a win. Instead, Philbin allowed the Packers to gain the advantage by regrouping twice, and with an all-world quarterback and deep receiving core, executing on a few plays isn’t as hard.
Philbin’s excuses and lack of accountability are astounding. The Dolphins have a talented roster, and their second-half performance should give the team confidence they can compete with almost any team in the NFL. But overcoming their head coach in the final 11 games will be a major challenge, if not impossible."

Ian Wharton - BR

This is really excellent.

"Springveldt wrote:

Yes actually, I am happy he went for it on 4th down as I felt it was the correct call even if the play didn't succeed.

I'm not happy with the run play, they already tried to pass on 2nd down so show some balls and ask your QB to win the game on 3rd down. You already know the defence is selling out so it makes it an even easier call.

Right call a qb boot to the right with run pass option,if pass is there quickly take it, if not run and stay in bounds. Gives the option an Ryan can run

"finfansince72 wrote:

Getting the first down was the game, we lost the game on that play. Since we passed on 2nd you have to throw on 3rd, there was no justification for it.

There isn't? If Finnegan manages to tackle the guy in bounds on the fake spike we win. Had that happened the decision to run on third down would have won the game, why am I the only one that can see this?

If he would have attempted the pass you guys would have found something else to whine about, especially if the pass attempt results in a sack/strip/turnover like what happened last year after the bye vs Buffalo.

The real irony for me is if we would have attempted the pass then Philbin would have used his timeouts to try to conserve time in the event they got the TD, which of course again people would have complained about.

Our guys didn't make the plays we needed to with the ball in hand. Their guys did. Its as simple as that. You guys expecting Philbin to out duel Aaron Rodgers through masterful time out usage are being ridiculous.

Joe Philbin explained that they had met as a staff, all of the coordinators and him, and decided that in those kinds of situations against this particular quarterback they would go for the 1st downs no matter what. And so when it came to that sequence of downs where they passed on 2nd & 9 and then ran on 3rd & 9, that's what they did.

The problem of course is that if you're going to pass on 2nd & 9 to try and get the 1st down then why are you running on 3rd & 9 knowing full well it won't get you the 1st down?

The answer I don't think I WANT to hear is that Lazor called that run play because he genuinely thought it might get the 1st down. Should that even be a possibility we think about? Well, yeah. Because he's done it before. Lazor has called run plays this year on 30% of their 3rd & 7 to 3rd & 10 situations this year. Only one other team has dialed up a run play on 3rd & 7-10 as often (as a percentage) as the Dolphins this year.

But going back to the meeting and the decision, this is really vintage Joe Philbin. As a result of this meeting he created a self-imposed rule and then he rigidly stuck to it no matter whether the surrounding circumstances called for adaptation. That's pretty much his M.O.

This rule would've been great if Miami were leading by only 3 points or fewer. Yes absolutely you cannot count on an Aaron Rodgers failing to lead his offense down the field into field goal range. Yards in the mid-section of the field are too easy to gain.

HOWEVER, with the Dolphins up by 4 points that genuinely changes the circumstances. Rodgers would now need to march his offense all the way down the field AND cap off the drive in the red zone where spaces get tighter and things get harder. And if you run out the clock, burn all their timeouts, AND take the 2 minute warning away from them...then they have 1:50 to do that, as Armando Salguero recently calculated.

I'm sorry but no matter what rigid self-imposed rules you've placed on yourself, that's a very low percentage situation against a defense that had physically harrassed Rodgers all day, and the percentages increase dramatically when you give them the 2 minute warning and even start calling timeouts for them. But that's not Philbin. He made a rule.

"roy_miami wrote:

There isn't? If Finnegan manages to tackle the guy in bounds on the fake spike we win. Had that happened the decision to run on third down would have won the game, why am I the only one that can see this?

If he would have attempted the pass you guys would have found something else to whine about, especially if the pass attempt results in a sack/strip/turnover like what happened last year after the bye vs Buffalo.

The real irony for me is if we would have attempted the pass then Philbin would have used his timeouts to try to conserve time in the event they got the TD, which of course again people would have complained about.

Our guys didn't make the plays we needed to with the ball in hand. Their guys did. Its as simple as that. You guys expecting Philbin to out duel Aaron Rodgers through masterful time out usage are being ridiculous.

If Finnegan makes that tackle, We win IN SPITE of the dubious calls by Lazor, Philbin and Coyle.Thats a fact. When Non phin fans call out this coaching staff on TV and in the papers...I know that my eyes and gut are not lying to me. Maybe thats why you are the ONLY one not seeing this.

Its funny everybody seems sure that the percentages would have been more in our favor had we just done something different, but nobody can agree on what that different thing would be. One guy says we surely win if we just pass it on all 3 downs. Another guy saying we should have ran it on all 3 downs. And still another saying we should have ran on second and passed on third.

So lets revisit the Buffalo loss last season when everybody was up in arms after we attempted the pass that resulted in the infamous sack/strip/fumble. In that game we attempted the pass which everybody said was stupid at the time. In this game we attempted the run which everybody is saying was stupid. How can both of those statements be true? Surely Philbin must have gotten one of them right, so which "game costing" decision was actually wrong?

"roy_miami wrote:

Its funny everybody seems sure that the percentages would have been more in our favor had we just done something different, but nobody can agree on what that different thing would be. One guy says we surely win if we just pass it on all 3 downs. Another guy saying we should have ran it on all 3 downs. And still another saying we should have ran on second and passed on third.

So lets revisit the Buffalo loss last season when everybody was up in arms after we attempted the pass that resulted in the infamous sack/strip/fumble. In that game we attempted the pass which everybody said was stupid at the time. In this game we attempted the run which everybody is saying was stupid. How can both of those statements be true? Surely Philbin must have gotten one of them right, so which "game costing" decision was actually wrong?

Factor in the O line from last year and the game circumstances...Answer is pretty clear. Not close to being the same

"Da 'Fins wrote:

Dan Patrick: "The Dolphins ... if that were late in the season, that loss would be a fireable offense. Inexcusable ..."

The problem with this is Ross isn't your typical owner. It takes more than being a bad coach to get you fired. And when you do get canned, it's a few years too late and he'll ask the new potential HC if you're willing to retain the old HC on your staff doing something else.

Why was Wheeler in the last play in coverage? He gave him the inside for the easy winning score.

Sent from my LG-D851 using Tapatalk

"LI phinfan wrote:

Factor in the O line from last year and the game circumstances...Answer is pretty clear. Not close to being the same

So if he turns it over attempting a pass you would not have complained?

"roy_miami wrote:

So if he turns it over attempting a pass you would not have complained?

Not really..not even complaining that much today. Just not absolving the blame after the fact.When you factor in some aspects, like Rodgers on the other sideline, I would have preferred a more definitive plan. Seemed like the coaches were not sure whether to kill time or be aggressive... so they did both and neither.

"LI phinfan wrote:

Not really..not even complaining that much today. Just not absolving the blame after the fact.When you factor in some aspects, like Rodgers on the other sideline, I would have preferred a more definitive plan. Seemed like the coaches were not sure whether to kill time or be aggressive... so they did both and neither.

I agree that this is a pretty valid complaint. The third down playcall doesn't make any sense if we were indeed trying to push for first downs. That's a give-up and run the clock play, and it isn't very useful when you haven't already committed to running the clock.

I don't care who was in coverage he was in off coverage was not long enough of a play to have that much separation. I know you want to keep it in front of you, but that off was too easy

"LI phinfan wrote:

Not really..not even complaining that much today. Just not absolving the blame after the fact.When you factor in some aspects, like Rodgers on the other sideline, I would have preferred a more definitive plan. Seemed like the coaches were not sure whether to kill time or be aggressive... so they did both and neither.

It doesn't have to be one or the other, either run clock or go for the first down. There was no guaranteed path to victory by either running it all 3 downs or passing it all 3 downs, either way Rodgers with ~2 minutes left can win the game for his team. We have 3 downs, using one of them to try to go for the win and two to take time off the clock is just as viable as any option. I would say the fact that we were one tackle from ending the game speaks to it being a decent strategy.

The fact of the matter is if Tannehill makes a play on that second and nine we probably win the game. But he didn't.

"roy_miami wrote:

There isn't? If Finnegan manages to tackle the guy in bounds on the fake spike we win. Had that happened the decision to run on third down would have won the game, why am I the only one that can see this?

If he would have attempted the pass you guys would have found something else to whine about, especially if the pass attempt results in a sack/strip/turnover like what happened last year after the bye vs Buffalo.

The real irony for me is if we would have attempted the pass then Philbin would have used his timeouts to try to conserve time in the event they got the TD, which of course again people would have complained about.

Our guys didn't make the plays we needed to with the ball in hand. Their guys did. Its as simple as that. You guys expecting Philbin to out duel Aaron Rodgers through masterful time out usage are being ridiculous.

moot point. when I looked at the replay, Finnegan was already flat footed and the WR was already running to the outside. Finnegan was trying to keep the guy from scoring at that point.

"ckparrothead wrote:

Joe Philbin explained that they had met as a staff, all of the coordinators and him, and decided that in those kinds of situations against this particular quarterback they would go for the 1st downs no matter what. And so when it came to that sequence of downs where they passed on 2nd & 9 and then ran on 3rd & 9, that's what they did.

The problem of course is that if you're going to pass on 2nd & 9 to try and get the 1st down then why are you running on 3rd & 9 knowing full well it won't get you the 1st down?

The answer I don't think I WANT to hear is that Lazor called that run play because he genuinely thought it might get the 1st down. Should that even be a possibility we think about? Well, yeah. Because he's done it before. Lazor has called run plays this year on 30% of their 3rd & 7 to 3rd & 10 situations this year. Only one other team has dialed up a run play on 3rd & 7-10 as often (as a percentage) as the Dolphins this year.

But going back to the meeting and the decision, this is really vintage Joe Philbin. As a result of this meeting he created a self-imposed rule and then he rigidly stuck to it no matter whether the surrounding circumstances called for adaptation. That's pretty much his M.O.

This rule would've been great if Miami were leading by only 3 points or fewer. Yes absolutely you cannot count on an Aaron Rodgers failing to lead his offense down the field into field goal range. Yards in the mid-section of the field are too easy to gain.

HOWEVER, with the Dolphins up by 4 points that genuinely changes the circumstances. Rodgers would now need to march his offense all the way down the field AND cap off the drive in the red zone where spaces get tighter and things get harder. And if you run out the clock, burn all their timeouts, AND take the 2 minute warning away from them...then they have 1:50 to do that, as Armando Salguero recently calculated.

I'm sorry but no matter what rigid self-imposed rules you've placed on yourself, that's a very low percentage situation against a defense that had physically harrassed Rodgers all day, and the percentages increase dramatically when you give them the 2 minute warning and even start calling timeouts for them. But that's not Philbin. He made a rule.

Very good points. It would have been different for sure. And a better scenario than what played out. That's still a good bit of time though and the risk of a loss, not a tie. But, running all three teams is definitely a better case scenario than run-pass-run. Although, imo, I'd have been aggressive all the way (perhaps because I've been burned way too many times the last 30 years watching the Dolphins trying to burn the clock and wind up losing).

However, the problem I have (as you note) is that if you are really trying to be aggressive - you don't go, run-pass-run. What Philbin said and what Miami actually did were two different things!

(On why the team didn’t run the ball more on their final possession.) – “Well, I’ll have to go back, but when we met as a staff, all the coordinators – we know the type of quarterback that we’re playing against – we decided. I told Bill [Lazor, offensive coordinator] that we were going to do whatever we have to do to get a first down, whatever the call. I told them to be aggressive. Kevin [Coyle, defensive coordinator] knew that, Bill knew that, Darren [Rizzi, special teams coordinator] knew, everyone in the department knew that and that’s what we decided to do.

No, actually, Joe, that's not what you decided to do.

"ckparrothead wrote:

The answer I don't think I WANT to hear is that Lazor called that run play because he genuinely thought it might get the 1st down. Should that even be a possibility we think about? Well, yeah. Because he's done it before. Lazor has called run plays this year on 30% of their 3rd & 7 to 3rd & 10 situations this year. Only one other team has dialed up a run play on 3rd & 7-10 as often (as a percentage) as the Dolphins this year.

And surprisingly, that strategy isn't half bad, according to the following:

http://community.advancednflstats.com/2009/01/is-3rd-and-6-running-down-in-nfl.html

A run might not be a bad call there...except it was a run up the gut to a defense selling out up the gut. I wouldn't be so upset with the call had I seen the read option there.

"Dolphans Unite! wrote:

And surprisingly, that strategy isn't half bad, according to the following:

http://community.advancednflstats.com/2009/01/is-3rd-and-6-running-down-in-nfl.html

Philbin called it....and you can take those stats and file them....total BS call...totally the wrong call...frustrating to the Nth degree

"Springveldt wrote:

Yes actually, I am happy he went for it on 4th down as I felt it was the correct call even if the play didn't succeed.

I'm not happy with the run play, they already tried to pass on 2nd down so show some balls and ask your QB to win the game on 3rd down. You already know the defence is selling out so it makes it an even easier call.

Hey at least you are consistent. I'm wondering who actually called that run play. Was it Tannehill checking into it? Lazor's direct call? Philbin had said "get the first down at all costs" apparently. Do they still even let Tanny audible a run in that situation? Lots to consider.....

"djphinfan wrote:

it's more complex than that, they called two run plays after they were put in a 2nd and 3 rd and long, both coming against full on blitzes..

Lazor should of had a counter or misdirection because if you watch it, they sold out on both plays with no regard for containment.

That may be, and i'll be the first to admit i'm not privy to every defensive formation and it's impact on playcalling.

I'm not trying to attack any poster here, my main point is how relative to the outcome these calls are. There is tons of outcry today about philbin, i'm just not there yet. I saw a pretty good team yesterday miss tons of opportunities to win the game - by the players, on that final GB drive that philbin's (or whoever's) calls set up. I'm still holding out hope that can translate to enough wins at the end of the year to matter. I'd rather see this regime succeed, and I think they can, than rush to start over.

"ElNino wrote:

Hey at least you are consistent. I'm wondering who actually called that run play. Was it Tannehill checking into it? Lazor's direct call? Philbin had said "get the first down at all costs" apparently. Do they still even let Tanny audible a run in that situation? Lots to consider...

If you're talking about the run on 3rd & 9 at the end of the game, Philbin said in his presser today that he told Lazor to run it.

"Brasfin wrote:

If you're talking about the run on 3rd & 9 at the end of the game, Philbin said in his presser today that he told Lazor to run it.

I really do not care. After considering the sequence for a full day, I lay the blame for this 100% on Tannehill. The 1st down call for a quick screen to WR with the depleted CB for the Packers was a good play call. The defensive player made a play on the ball, but Tannehill has a large number of batted balls. He has to find a way to deliver the ball.

On second down the line fails Tannehill, but he escapes the rush with an opportunity to run for a few yards or a small loss. He throws it away. My largest criticism for Tannehill is he consistently makes the wrong choice with throw away decisions. If time is not a factor, he holds the ball to long instead of throwing the ball away. When time is a factor, he throws it away. In this case; his throw away really, really, hurt.

I refuse to blame Philbin even 1% when his QB lays an egg on consecutive plays.

Finnegan tackling skills suck, I think he is now afraid of contact or seemed to shy from it yesterday. And grimes absolutely was abused yesterday

K

"jcliving wrote:

I really do not care. After considering the sequence for a full day, I lay the blame for this 100% on Tannehill. The 1st down call for a quick screen to WR with the depleted CB for the Packers was a good play call. The defensive player made a play on the ball, but Tannehill has a large number of batted balls. He has to find a way to deliver the ball.

On second down the line fails Tannehill, but he escapes the rush with an opportunity to run for a few yards or a small loss. He throws it away. My largest criticism for Tannehill is he consistently makes the wrong choice with throw away decisions. If time is not a factor, he holds the ball to long instead of throwing the ball away. When time is a factor, he throws it away. In this case; his throw away really, really, hurt.

I refuse to blame Philbin even 1% when his QB lays an egg on consecutive plays.

when your calling run plays up the middle against full out 8 in the box run blitzes your not giving your team a chance to convert, Ryan should of checked out of those plays you see but at that point it wasn't about converting, it was about milking clock, both philosophies were failure on the drive.

The third level of failure was not calling the right play on first down..they were coming and our coaches should of been able to predict that, some sort of misdirection, boot, rollout or read option was the right call..they didn't see it..