Are we too dependent on the RPO for our own good? This writer thinks so. I find it interesting that Tua has worse stats when he has more time to throw. https://www.theringer.com/nfl/2021/12/1/22811214/tua-tagovailoa-rpo-offense-miami-dolphins
The best thing an offense can do is take what it is most successful at, and then stop it. That makes sense.
Some interesting considerations on the RPO offense and what Miami might be trying to do, however, there's also a lot of assumption here. The authors comments about the Offensive Coordinator and the designs etc. were far too general and there's no way he has that level of insight to know what's going on inside the Dolphins. Then he makes a mention of how crucial the run game is: "And finally, however you’re running the football—zone blocking or power blocking, multiple tight ends or spread sets—it had better be effective, so that the first letter of “RPO” still works." But only makes a couple of brief references to the OL struggles. It seems to me that if the run game is so significant, one would have to give consideration as to what difference a good OL might make to all this, but that analysis is lacking. Then there's the stats about Tua when he isn't throwing quickly. Maybe someone with more insight can dig into this however, if we're careful about the data, the stats about Tua throwing after a period longer than 2.5 seconds says nothing about the conditions under which he made those throws. Were they intentional deeper players where the plan was to hold the ball longer or were they plays where he was running for his life and just took longer to throw? There a big difference between saying "when Tua had longer than 2.5 seconds" and "Tua threw the ball after 2.5 seconds". There may be other reasons for the statistical drop off with those longer plays other than that Tua can't somehow throw the ball with time on his hands. The author doesn't even attempt to ponder reasons why that might be, he just sort of assumes out of hand that Tua is Mr. RPO and simply cannot throw longer developing plays. He offers no reason for that. This strikes me as an author who thinks he sees something and so strings the facts together to support that notion, without actually trying to be circumspect and consider things from different angles, and dig deep. So this is, at best, a big 'possibility' but not really any sort of substantial analysis.
I looked up some Twitter responses to the piece to see if anyone had any insightful replies. I don't know how accurate these statements are, but worth considering:
How far can we go? Tua's slightly above average statistically right now behind a really bad OL and an equally bad running game (we have the 2nd worst Y/C in the league atm). And that's with a 2nd year QB that himself should improve in years 3-4. So I think we can go pretty far with Tua as long as he keeps improving and we get him better protection and a better RB. That article is informative but it's just click bait. Nothing says we can't make the RPO work consistently. It'll be our offensive identity.
To counter the original article- Tua very rarely has drop backs of 3+ seconds, and when he does it usually involves pressure. The article states that Tua is just as accurate in non-RPO situations. The article states Tua's turnovers come mainly in non-RPO situations, which is factual since we don't run RPO a ton. That's just basic math...you do something more often, you have a wider variety of results. The article shares that Tua throws for less yards in a non-RPO scheme. Now's a good time to mention all those offensive line stats of being worst in the league. It's also a good time to bring up our top receivers being out. We're built around quick releases because that's all we really have with this offense. The sample size for RPO's is limited and therefore the conclusions are limited. But I've never heard a negative about someone being the best in the league at something positive. In conclusion, the Dolphins are winning with Tua despite not having many of the tools they need on offense. You don't bash a QB for that and look for problems that have very little to do with him. You want longer drop-backs and longer developing plays? Protect your QB....that's the only answer. And it would help to give him a WR1 as well. These stats aren't a knock on Tua at all though- he's doing what he can in a crippled offense and actually making it look impressive. What other QB's were able to do that? Take a look at HOF QB's...they generally had that in common regardless of how good/bad their offense was around them.
The offense is, very clearly, going to limit what the team can do. Flores and company have been making chicken salad recently, and are clearly adept at making sure that the Fins beat inferior teams. Thats positive, and something that former coaches struggled with. But we're also only beating teams that either suck on offense, are missing key players to injury, or have a team/scheme that our defense happens to match up well against. This year, we're 5-0 when the other team scores 17 points or less, and 0-7 when they score more than that. Last season, they were 7-0 when allowing 17 points or less, and 3-6 when allowing more. Its not going to probably get much better this season, but we should be OK the next two games vs the Giants and Jets. Hopefully, the offseason brings new coaching and more quality players.
Waddle is incredible, but I'd say Gisecki is closer to a prototypical WR1 than he is. For me, the key is getting Fuller and Parker on the field with those guys so we can really open up the offense.
Waddle is leading the team in recpetions, yards, and touchdowns. How much more does he need to do to be a WR1?
To me, being a #1 Wr is more of a subjective thing than a numbers thing. I mean, you weren't calling Brian Hartline a #1 when he was leading the Fins in catches or yards, right?
The Ravens would say otherwise. The problem with the offense is still the same problem we've had for years, our offensive line is garbage -either due to personnel or coaching. Quite possibly both. Until it is finally fixed we will never see what any of the skill position players are truly capable of. And I'm not referring to Parker, Fuller or Williams. All 3 of those guys need to be gone after the season ends.
The Ravens are not a good passing team. They never were. And hopefully the Fins have given the league a template for exposing Jackson as a one trick pony. Regarding Parker, the team gains very little by cutting him after the season, and he's signed as an affordable #2 WR for two more years. Cutting him, when we lead the league in cap space and have no other options behind him, is just being spiteful.
Then it is a meaningless term. Waddle is the go-to Miami Dolphins wide receiver. He is going to be the person they put their best guy on and he will still beat him. Comparing Brian Hartline to Waddle is just insulting.
Parker in terms of games played every year is actually not affordable at all. All evidence shows he will not play a full season and in reality plays about half the games every year + or - 2. Sure the Ravens\Lamar are not a good passing team but to say they don't have a good offense is quite disingenuous.
I think getting his and Jones contract off the books should be priority 1 over this off-season or next. I think our off-season draft and Fa targets need to be LT, WR, CB and RB. Hopefully we can get a few more years out of Howard but also need to be thinking about that. Really would love to see us go LT and CB in our first 2 rounds unless we sign a LT in FA. Hell, I’d even get behind taking David Bell in the 1st or 2nd round as a big bodied compliment to Waddle.
I certainly wouldn’t hitch my wagon to Parker - you simply can’t count on him to be available on a weekly basis. With that being said, I doubt they move on from him next year. I certainly hope that Williams, Wilson and Fuller are all gone.
Unless he restructures his contract, I just don’t know how you can keep paying a player who’s had 1 full season in his NFL career. Even beyond the missed games, how many week is he banged up and playing at less than 100%?
