I'm happy about Clay, but would like to see him play well for a few games before I proclaim him a 6th round gem.

Overall, this young team is really showing a ton of promise. If we can continue to execute (and for some reason, maybe it's Philbin, I think we will) then the sky is the limit in 2014, 2015.... etc.

 

1 carry, 1 td. Clay might become a fantasy gem for a few people.

 

I'll do it for you.
Clay looks like a 6th round gem.

 

Clay has already done more than the typical 6th rounder.

 

Egnew didn't get mentioned in the TE section, but he made a good block on Miller's TD run. He sealed the corner and knew when to let the defender go so he wouldn't get called for holding. That was impressive to me, both from a physical and mental standpoint.

 

whats up with CK he opened a thread about his grades at FH...why not here ?

 

He's hiding because he predicted the Colts would win... :tongue2: Perhaps you can get away with that over there but here the Homers are like Piranha. :lol:

 

Yehhh...honestly...I guess because Im a pretty proud member of ThePhins.Com....and frankly....I think our site is so far and away superior as far as quality of its people, I was kinda bummed to see him post over there, and not here. Not to mention, if you saw how much flak the guy takes over there, geeeeeeezzzzzzz...

But yeh...he did predict a Dolts win...and I am sureeee gonna remind him when he shows up!

 

You know....Egnew has impressed me quite a bit with his blocking. From that standpoint..he isnt close to being the same player. With Big Play Clay...Sims, and Egnew...as the season wears on...we may have legit threats at that position

 

I'm sure at some point he would here, but as someone that wants views, they have more traffic over there. Quality or not, isn't CKs concern with things like this.

As for the grades, I came away agreeing with pretty much every one of them. I felt like the safeties could have been dropped even lower, but I understand the grades. Clemons had TWO opportunities to pick the ball off. One behind the receiver and another when Luck lead the receiver to much and Clemons didn't have his eyes up.

 

CK attributes Freeman's strip sack to Clabo, but on the lost fumble (that I still contend should have been a pass - see Andy Dalton doing the same thing last night and having it be incomplete) it was Lamar Miller who was blocking Freeman. I thought Clabo was blocking someone else.

 

IIRC, Lamar lost his man and got beat for a strip/sack on the other side. Martin kicked in and Lamar took the outside guy. Who beat him and knocked the ball out.

 

Freeman came from the right, no way Martin had anything to do with Lamar's blocking. And I don't know how Lamar lost his man when he was immediately between Freeman and Tannehill and trying to hold him at bay.

 

Maybe your right. Now that I think about it, the play I'm talking about, someone cut block at the line, Martin blocked in, and the guy got up with a free run at the QB.

 

We 'stole" one from the Colts?

 

In the sense that they were favorites, and at home where they have been very, very good under Luck.

 

I guess. I always heard that expression used for either a win by bs/luck (like a bad call or a hail mary) or a legit big play to take the lead at the last second.

 

I'm only guessing. :confused2:

 

No, you're ugly too.:tongue2:

 

From my pov we dominated the Colts in the 2nd half, Luck had what 70 yds passing in the 2nd half?

Agreed with his grades for the most part.

 

and 3 points. Talk about adjustments.....not close to "stealing" one imo.

 

yeah i posted this at FH as well, i didn't like the word "stole" and also calling that illegal shift penalty ticky tack, it was a legit call

 

Especially considering the culprit. Reggie Wayne has been doing this a long time, he knows the rules.

 

Being a fan and a journalist/reporter can be at odds with one another

 

I've had more people specifically request them over there. I don't really plan to open up a thread every time I write a new piece.

 

Time for a change of plans :wink2:

 

No sir, that will not do... You must post your stories here as well, preferably first. :)

 

As for the sacks, I had them like this:

Sack #1: Bjoern Werner beat Tyson Clabo off the edge. Simultaneously Pat Angerer beat Mike Pouncey. They both met at the QB.
Sack #2: Jerrell Freeman beat Lamar Miller to hit the football as Tannehill threw it.
Sack #3: Jerrell Freeman beat Daniel Thomas up the middle to sack Tannehill.
Sack #4: Robert Mathis beat Tyson Clabo off the edge for a strip-sack.
Sack #5: Robert Mathis beats a cut block by Charles Clay to sack Tannehill 4.0+ seconds into the play.

Looking at it, you're right for some reason I attributed Jerrell Freeman's sack to Tyson Clabo and I meant to attribute it to Lamar Miller.

 

Well if you guys like I'll do it here too.

I might stop doing it over there. There's more douche bags over there anyway.

 

Ck postulated that we perhaps should blitz Luck less, I disagreed b/c to me if your identity is a blitzing defense, you have to stick with it.

As you do more of it, you work out the kinks and actually see which matchups are better exploited, granted live by the blitz you will also die by it, to me if you want to make a playoff run you have to be able to blitz effectively.

Post season, sitting back in zones will get a defense shredded.

 

This is key against Brady too. We need to be able to bring pressure up the middle on him. Something I think we did well against Indi.

 

Andrew Luck had a 98.6 passer rating versus the blitz and a 64.8 passer rating versus a normal rush.

I never said the Dolphins should just sit back the entire day. I merely stated that the Dolphins should dial back the blitzing approach they understandably took against Brandon Weeden.

For most of the game, blitzing was more burden on the defense than it was benefit. Late in the game when Luck was forced to go into come-from-behind mode, the blitz helped. But that's exactly when you WANT to blitz, no matter how conservative you were in your tendencies prior to that.

The worst is when people look at the 4th & 10 and Phil Wheeler's pressure on Luck and they say see, there's proof the Dolphins needed to blitz Luck in this game. To me, that's wrongheaded. A 4th & 10 in that situation is very nearly an automatic blitz in my book. I was a vocal critic of Kevin Coyle in a similar situation against the Arizona Cardinals in 2012 when he chose NOT to blitz Kevin Kolb on 4th & 10 from the Miami 15 yard line. So if I sit here and say that 4th & 10 is a situation where you blitz even if you've not shown the tendency during the game, don't accuse me of being inconsistent.

Statistically, the Dolphins had slightly MORE players rushing the passer per pass play against Andrew Luck than they did Brandon Weeden. They had an average of exactly 4.50 pass rushers per pass play against Weeden, and 4.55 pass rushers per pass play against Luck.

Simply stated, I don't agree with that indiscriminate approach of treating all quarterbacks the same. I thought the approach was justified for Weeden and a little less so for Andrew Luck.

 

After alot of the responses over there....Im surprised you touch the place with a ten foot pole.

 

So am I.

 

Wouldn't you want to blitz at the times he has shown to be less effective....and not when he has? I would think you would want to do what ever it is you could do...to present a different picture then what Luck may be expecting, and because we are versatile on our defense, we should be able to do that.

 

I thought Coyle had to blitz b/c Wake was not generating pressure from the base defense.

 

It most certainly was a ticky-tack call. It did not impact the outcome of that play in any way. Wayne could have stopped for a second before setting in motion and the play would have gone exactly as it did - except it would have been a touchdown.

Its one of those 'thank god' penalties. Where you're not pissed that they got away with something, but more pleased that lady luck decided to gaze upon your ****ed up coverage for a change.

 

Agree. But I'd add another criterion. HOw many people should we blitz with?

A four man rush is the ideal way to pressure Luck, obviously, if you can do it, as we would still have blanket coverage. But with Wake ineffective, we needed some help sometimes.

A five man rush, imo, was the optimal way to bltiz him as your 'go-to' blitz as it assisted the Dline (Wake was being blanked, sadly) but does not open the secondary to easy completions.

Six and Seven man rushes = Terrible idea. You aren't brinigng enough people to guarantee you get to him in under 2 seconds, but you ARE guaranteeing there will be some glaringly open receivers in coverage. Against Luck, this will kill you. He proved it.

Eight man rush - This is something I would dial up maybe twice in the entire game, at key moments. You don't come after Andrew Luck half-assed, you make SURE you get to him, and quickly. Force him to throw under great duress with the absolute certainty he will be hit hard as he does. Anything less than 8 men (like 6 or 7) and he will find a lane to run, or have time to slide and hit a wide open receiver.


That was my thought process. Rush 4 men about 45% of the time, 5 men another 50% of the time and 8 men 5% of the time

 

Hence The Great Migration of 2007