Armando: Ross will offer Philbin a contract extension

There is plenty of evidence that strongly supports the science behind motivation. There is nothing fantasy about the primary responsibilities of a head coach.

 

I'd like to see the science of motivation applied to the 2014 Miami Dolphins to show that decreased motivation, as attributable to the head coach, was responsible for a lesser number of wins than would be expected given its level of talent. It all sounds great in theory, but when you actually have to support it objectively, you're bound to struggle.

 

For every example someone can point out to support the notion that the team could've done better with another coach, another example of the good coaching it had could be nominated to counter it, and we'd be no closer to having any certainty with regard to the effect Joe Philbin had on this team in 2014.

When we talk about teams with comparatively little talent that play very well, or the converse, where a team with tremendous talent plays poorly, it's far easier to support the notion that the effect of coaching was paramount in either instance. When we have a team with average talent that plays at an average level, however, it makes the effect of coaching far more uncertain.

And that's not to say that Joe Philbin didn't do a poor job; it's only to say that we can't know for certain either way under these circumstances.

 

You literally had players state that Philbin failed to motivate them. Beyond that, last season a player quit and subsequently attempted to sabotage the team. Not only were players not motivated to play, they were motivated to bring the team down.

 

You have yet to prove the team had average talent.

There also aren't many examples of "good coaching" you can cite. The only redeemable trait of Philbin cited thus far is being organized. He certainly isn't respected by his players.

 

We also had this:

So how much weight do we give these sorts of sentiments versus the ones you mentioned, and what does that say about using such sentiments as the means by which to evaluate the coach? Again, when you have a team with average talent that performs at an average level, it removes the most reliable method of evaluating a coach -- an over- or underperformance with regard to talent. When the team performs as expected, we're reduced to quotes from players and other such subjective evidence, whose weight or meaning can't be determined with any certainty.

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports/...to-miami-dolphins-in-2015-20141221-story.html

 

I don't go by sentiment, I go by actions. Players going AWOL. Players making obscene gestures toward the staff. Players yelling at the head coach. What a player says on record is not very going to be useful information.

 

The team had average to slightly above-average quarterback play, combined with a number of Pro Bowl and AP All-Pro players that's far more consistent with a non-playoff team than with a playoff team. The overall team DVOA was 15th in the league. All of these things point toward "average." I'd like to see a case made that the team had something other than average talent.

 

The bottom line is Ross has made another mistake. And we fans have to suffer for it.

 

All the measures of talent you use also include the effect of coaching, and can't be used. Having average QB play is an indictment of Philbins inability to develop Tannehil beyond an average level. You need to use something independent of their performance on the Dolphins. Maybe their performance elsewhere or something utilizing market efficiency.

 

Like I've said before, we can go 'round and 'round about this, and what will happen in the end is a philosophical difference of opinion regarding the effects of coaching, versus the effects of individual talent, on players' and teams' performance. And that difference of opinion can't be resolved with anything definitive. You're giving coaching a far bigger coefficient in your regression equation than I am, and neither of us can be proven right or wrong.

 

I wonder if the extension would give Tannebaum power over Philbin and then allow Tannebaum to fire Coyle.

 

That's what we said last year.