Just some comments from this article really made my head spin. http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports/miami-dolphins/fl-dolphins-0830-20160829-story.html
At first this looks like standard new coach boilerplate.
Whoa. WTF! If our DBs had worked out the routes then 100% our opponents had too.
Seriously WTF! This is straight up saying last year the opposition could look at the formation and diagnose what routes we were going to run.
Page 1 of 4
-
-
Just like we could sitting at home. It's no secret that the previous staff was incompetent save for a couple of coaches.
Shane Falco, Ohio Fanatic, eltos_lightfoot and 1 other person like this. -
Remember when simple minds thought Philbin was a great hire??
So glad we have someone who won't run off talent and get the most out of his team.
Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkShane Falco and dolphin25 like this. -
Shane Falco, resnor, Tone_E and 1 other person like this.
-
Now.. supporting Philbin after at latest year 2 is another story.RevRick, Boik14, rafael and 1 other person like this. -
As others have said before me, what the previous coaches did to our players last season was malpractice. The success the players on offense had was in spite of the situations they were put in, not because of it. If Gase and his staff are even average, then the difference should be huge, and I think that Gase is special.
Rickysabeast and fin13 like this. -
I still think Philbin did a lot of good as HC, in terms of preparation. But when it came time to make actual decisions he was hopeless. Philbin had all the tools available to be successful, but froze like a deer in the headlights when it came to actually do things. Running off players with a mind of their own regardless of talent was just another symptom of his weak character.twistedjay likes this. -
roy_miami, Pandarilla and jdang307 like this.
-
Secondly, It's easy to look like genius when you follow a bozo. Our expectations had been lowered by Sherman to the point where walking and chewing gum at the same time was considered a significant achievement.Rickysabeast and Fin D like this. -
Turns out Lazor had many of the same failings as Philbin. He couldn't adjust when defenses caught up with his scheme. -
Clark Kent and P h i N s A N i T y like this.
-
-
danmarino, jdallen1222, eltos_lightfoot and 4 others like this. -
-
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk -
What I learned from the Lazor experience was that play-calling doesn't change and coaches are who they appear to be. It seemed like Lazor got a lot of credit for "cleaning up" Tannehill's stats in 2014. The media say 2014 as a "break out" year. The INTs were down and the completion% was up. That's kind of the same thing Gase did with Cutler last year. The problem is, you still need a vertical game to bite off big plays. Without chunk yardage that all important YPA measure never goes up. We didn't get that in Lazor's 2nd year and that's when I gave up. It seemed at that point that Lazor was out of his depth as an OC and play-caller.
In terms of Gase I see a lot of improvement already. Tannehill is back to being more instinctive in the pocket like he was under Sherman. The footwork is getting better. The velocity is improved on certain throws. Tannehill looks more confident and more capable. We'll see if that continues in the regular season.
I still see a lot of short-passing and quick-hitting stuff which bothers me because the execution tends to be somewhat sloppy. Dropped balls and receivers not quite get open have been an issue. Parker is going to be average as a possession receiver. His strength lie in getting down the field. The most complete receiver might be Stills, quite honestly, although Landry will probably get more looks as the possession guy moving the chains.
All in all, I think this season we'll see the passing offense really start looking more legit--at least to the point that we look back on the Philbin-Lazor-Taylor era as a real dark period. -
It really isn;t more complicated than that.Rickysabeast likes this. -
Why did you start your post with "No?"
-
What the data does indicate is that running the ball late in games is corollary with passing efficiency. Teams run the ball to reduce clock stoppage and shorten games. That provides value to the passing game, but it generally isn't going to be opening up anything, just reducing the number of passes they have to throw while behind.Fin-O, jdang307 and Rock Sexton like this. -
not sure if this was posted, but this regime is making internal and external roster moves quicker. Dallas Thomas was guard for 1 game. that was it
-
I'm sure if we went back and looked, we would find discussions on things we were enamored with that Philbin was doing differently than Sparano in his first year as HC.DolphinGreg likes this. -
-
I still believe the Dolphins are a few years away from being a playoff team. They just have too many huge holes on defense at this time, IMO.
Yet I think Gase will be able to get more out of this team than Philbin ever did. I believe Gase could be the best head coaching hire for the Dolphins since Jimmy Johnson. Hopefully he will have better luck building the defense over the next few years than Johnson had building the offense while he was the head coach of the Dolphins.
For the first time in years, I see reason to be optimistic about the Dolphins future. We may have to suffer though a couple of more mediocre seasons before it all comes together, but I believe Ross might have finally hired the right head coach.
Hopefully Tannebaum doesn't screw it up. -
-
So first of all, passing efficiency has a high correlation with winning while rushing efficiency has a low correlation with winning. That's especially clear once you see the distribution for playoff vs. non-playoff teams. I have those graphs if you need them again, but the result is clear: both on offense and defense what you should aim for (however you get there) is to maximize passing Y/A and minimize opponent passing Y/A.
Now.. in a separate thread (forget where) the question turned to whether QB rushes open up the passing game. As expected the correlation with rushing efficiency was near zero. Then Fin-D suggested looking not at rushing efficiency for QB's, but instead looking at overall rush yards, and the result was better though the correlation still relatively low. For example, for Tannehill, the correlation of his rushing efficiency to passer rating is near zero, but between his rush yards and passer rating is 0.23 so low but clearly higher.
Then I think Pauly suggested looking at the first year vs. later years because the defense might not have adapted as well for a new QB. The result was whopping. Tannehill's rush yards (not efficiency) in his first year is correlated with his 1st year passer rating by 0.62!!
OK.. so that's talking about just QB rushing, and it varies quite a bit for different QB's. For rushing in general, it's also true that rush yards are better correlated with passer rating than rushing efficiency. In Miami's case it's steady at around 0.32.
So that's what I found. All of that could be consistent with what Stringer Bell is saying because he's talking about different periods during the game first of all whereas I'm looking at whole-game statistics.
But one thing I will support about what Fin-D is saying is that just in general it's rushing attempts and rush yards that matter more than rushing efficiency. This link suggests the correlation to winning between rush attempts is pretty high at 0.58, even higher than correlation of rush yards to winning, which is 0.45, at least in 2007 for the entire league:
http://archive.advancedfootballanalytics.com/2007/07/what-makes-teams-win-part-1.html
Of course, those are correlations and don't tell you on their own what led to what. I mean.. it's an obvious point to make that you run more when you're ahead so that could explain a good portion of that and be consistent with what Stringer Bell is saying. In conclusion, rush attempts/yards matter a lot more than rushing efficiency, but the causal relation behind why they matter is a bit unclear. -
I think the simple minds were the minds inside the skulls of the last coaching regime.P h i N s A N i T y and Fin D like this. -
I believe it is going to come down to them being able to put together a solid defense over the next few years before we will be able to determine if they will put together a 5-6 year playoff run. Right now they just don't have enough quality starters on defense and that is why I have been saying all along that this is a 4-6 win team this season.
I am just hoping to see improvement throughout the season and then hope they are able to start upgrading the defense in the off season. I think they will need two more solid drafts before they can be considered a perennial playoff contender.
Of course this is all dependent on Tannehill showing that he can be the QB for the next 5-7 years. If he doesn't have a productive season and they decide to go in another direction next year at the QB position, that would only delay the rebuilding process of the entire team.LI phinfan likes this. -
Infact WHO trashes the QB? Show me an example...
I see nobody saying he sucks, nobody saying he shouldn't be our QB...so you are making **** up because it's allowed.
I'll be waiting for your reply, or maybe you should just "pretend" to put me on ignore so you can avoid answering my question.
Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkFinster likes this. -
http://www.thephins.com/forums/showthread.php?89352-How-much-does-a-QB-contribute-to-winning
Short version:
In situations where NFL teams rush at a higher rate than average then pass efficiency is higher.
In situations where NFL teams pass at a higher rate than average then pass efficency is lower.
It is a consistent pattern which applies across all the splits that I found.resnor likes this. -
The precarious thing about this upcoming season is if Tannehill has an excellent year and we don't have a good record, there will be some ignorant fans and pundits who will call for Tannehill to be replaced. If that does happen, we have to find another quarterback and take another 3-4 years developing him.
-
For example.. suppose Tannehill posts an average rating of 100, throws more TD's than ever and has a huge leap in Y/A while keeping INT's low, but the defense gives up the most points in the league and we lose a lot of games.
Trust me.. most people here arguing Tannehill hasn't proven himself yet will be blaming the defense, not Tannehill, for our losses.Finster likes this.
Page 1 of 4