Truth is I have no idea whats going on in terms of the power structure in the organization. Everyone has been obsessed with the "Lazor" offense. Who knows how much freedom he has in running it. My feeling is that given Philbin's offensive background he still has his hand in the pot in a big way. This is further evidenced by the fact that Lazor came in with Philbin in place, and the apparent full support of Ross. At a more existential level the offense, and the team in general "feels" like Philbin. The same cautious, limp, "even-keeled" aura permeates this team. I've watched the same philosophy that led to benching Reggie Bush in 2012 after a fumble (Who was obviously our best player) trickle to every aspect of this team. It may be hyperbolic but it was beautiful to watch Knowshon spark this team game 1. That energy was the antithesis of Philbin. Mike Wallace lowered his ****ing shoulder into a db for Chrissakes. I'm not a football expert or an insider but I don't think starting Moore over Tannehill is going to make much difference or vice versa until this team can play without a pedantic head coach obsessed with putting training wheels on everyone.
I was giving Philbin the benefit of the doubt if he was just using it as a motivational factor to light a fire under Tannehills ***. If hes SERIOUSLY considering starting Moore over Tannehill then he should have kept his mouth shut and made that decision behind closed doors . Then, after the decision was made he could tell the media it was his decision to go in a different direction and he already discussed it with his staff and players. That would be the right way to do it as far as I`m concerned. EDIT: Just read Tannehills taking first team reps. Makes at least a little more sense...for now.
Guys...Philbin is always non commital. Hes always said best 46...hes just not smart enough to realize or just doesnt care..how that sounds when your QB is struggling... I liked Lazors answer better ..much better
I think Tannehill will be the starter in London on Sunday. It's too early to make a change like this. I like Moore as a backup and always have, but I guess I am one of the believers in Tannehill and I think a win against Oakland will do a lot for him and the team. A win against Oakland puts them at 2-2, which was a reasonable outlook to the start of the season anyway, given the schedule. Give Tannehill a couple more games to prove his worth.
I think the issues start with Ross. I think he genuinely wants to do the right thing, but the people he has in place below him have absolutely trashed our organization. We've had to settle for a lot of our second and third choices for HC, GM, etc. I don't know if Marino can turn that around. He has value as a name but the Dolphins as a brand continue to be a laughingstock.
By the way it may have been said but according to VT who was listening to Joe Rose, Philbin explained that the "best 46" answer has been Philbin's policy on how to answer roster questions consistently across the board and he doesn't understand why this is a controversy as he's just trying to be consistent. This is the first time I've heard Philbin use that best 46 answer though, and the explanation does not foot with Armando Salguero's confirmation from multiple sources that Philbin intended to hold a meeting with the coaches yesterday afternoon on whether Tannehill would continue to start.
I think Ross knows this. Hes just dropped 300 mill plus to renovate Sun Life. They probably have the best IT setup with Apps etc..in the NFL. He knows he cant correct all of his mistakes over night...but hes listening hard to football guys whos only agenda is getting the Dolphins back on top.
Yeh..to be honest I dont specifically remember him using best 46 before either..thats just what they said this am on Joe Rose. I guess he would say the same thing if they asked about Cam Wake..but to me..in this day and age of social media..its a really dumb stance to take.
the "using the best 46" is such a non-committal weasley cop-out answer. If it was a general question asked about who would be traveling to London based on injuries and you wanted to be coy, sure. but it was a direct question about your starting QB of the last 2 seasons and 3 games, ever since he was drafted under your watch, and now you want to be coy or cute or play the "I don't have to answer the media questions" approach. Come off it. If the question was who is your kicker or punter, do you think the same flippant "we will take the best 46 to determine our kicker or punter" would be given....just an asinine move by Philbin. that's all it was....asinine. Starting a QB controversy when none existed.
Philbin is either doing it intentionally, in which case he's obfuscating his answer and using this as a way to bench Tannehill either next week or at some point in the season. I personally think it's stupid to bench a QB who is learning a new offense, but then again I'm not an NFL head coch. Or, Philbin is doing this unintentionally, in which case he's not really in touch with how his comments - especially about the starting QB - could be taken out of context. I personally think that a head coach that is that out of touch probably shouldn't be coaching, but then again I'm not an NFL owner. Either way, the listless, limp, pathetic effort I saw on Sunday really needs to change, and quickly. Unfortunately, given our schedule, I don't see that happening.
Theres a reason we look like we just woke up from a nap every Sunday and the jets look like theyre hair is on fire every week
This is the reason I can't and won't follow every story that comes out. It's half cocked garbage. All this bull**** over nothing. Philbin gave an answer which implied that they will look into everything, as he always does. I believe the PBP article left out the word "No" when they quoted Lazor when asking him if he had any doubt Tannehill would start. That made Lazors quote confusing to me. Side thought - I love the way Lazor handles himself and the media/vultures so far. Tired of the nonsense.
After listening to the actual interview, this is a whole lot to do about absolutely nothing. Its right at the beginning of the interview so I would encourage everyone to listen for themselves. [video]http://www.miamidolphins.com/multimedia/videos/Philbin_Answers_Questions_From_Reporters/c99929cb-cff6-45c6-b384-9a61dd50985a[/video] This is nothing more than a controversy crafted by the beat writers. They conveniently leave out the fact that Philbin praised Tannehill in the post game interviewing saying he had some nice throws and was let down by the protection and dropped passes. [video]http://www.miamidolphins.com/multimedia/videos/Philbin_PostGame_Press_Conference_vs_Chiefs/ee7981f6-c4a0-4891-a029-b4040e232c5d[/video] and again in the "Joe Philbin show" which aired right around the same time as the "controversy" broke. [video]http://www.miamidolphins.com/multimedia/videos/Coach_Philbin_Show_Chiefs_Game_Recap/4050a808-49ab-41cf-a503-07e1aea7e57c[/video] But lets not let that get in the way of a good QB controversy.
Actually Philbin may have created a dilemma in the Raiders game plan by refusing to commit to Tannehill being the starter this week. Because of the long distance travel to England, the Raiders are not going to have as much time to prepare for the Dolphins. If they feel that Moore may be the starter, they will now have to spend part of their limited preparation time in studying Moore as well as Tannehill. I expect Tannehill to start the game, but if the Raiders have any doubt as to who the starter will be, this just might turn out to be a benefit for the Dolphins.
Now the media members laugh at everyone while counting their bonuses/website hits etc... It served their purpose beautifully.
1) Philbin lets you pick the color of your checks? 2) He addresses all his players as "your name here"? 3) He doesn't understand what the memo line is really intended for? 4) You're willing to work for $675.80?
I never said Philbin was smart enough to come up with this plan. I merely stated that there might actually be a benefit by causing the Raiders to prepare for two QB's instead of one. I think Philbin gave the answer he did to the media because he was just trying to be difficult in his press conference and not because he had any other motive.
It is very clear the majority of our receivers are struggling. Dropped passes are one of the areas of struggle. I just cannot defend Tannehill's performance in any way, so I disagree with the tone of your post.
What is interesting surrounding the hysterics of the local beat writers and the fans they have stirred up is that Philbin never answers those types of questions (1) and the reason he is asked this question is the poor play of the QB and the offense (2). So the QB plays poorly, and a reporter doesn't ask about that, he goads the coach and creates a narrative to run with. And so many are all too willing to run that race, as we can see here and elsewhere.
Yeah, as in, get the **** outta my face w/ your stupid *** questions. Philbin was more dead pan about it but their answers were pretty much the same.
I'm curious as to how many teams have local media types who are so transparently looking to invent controversy (and undermine the team) this way. And how many fan bases are populated with people gullible enough to fall for it.
How's this? Tannehill has done a good job with his decision making, pre/post snap reads and cadence. His 2 INTs in 124 pass attempts is pretty good considering he's spent most of the year playing from behind and facing off against some of the better DL units (Buffalo/KC) and better secondaries (NE) in the conference. He's reading the defense correctly and choosing the right targets. His failings are inconsistent accuracy and being too slow to evade pressure when it comes.
I think if you were to look at the media in cities where their team has been mediocre for as many years as the Dolphins have been, you would probably find that the media in those cities are similar to the media in Miami in regards to writing or talking about controversial issues related to their team. It's the job of the media to not only report, but also to create controversy in an effort to remain relevant. Individuals in the media don't care if you like what they are reporting or not. All they care about is that people are discussing what they reported. Based on how many comments are posted on this forum related to articles by the local media, the sports media seems to be getting exactly the reaction they are being paid to create.
I dont care whther you like my tone. My tone means nothing. Nor do you have you have to believe or support my post, neither one of us controls what happens so it doesnt matter. The point is unrealistic expectations and blame. wr drop passes for all qbs, that pass gibson dropped, didnt matter who threw it, he dropped it, changing qbs doesnt mean the drops stop. Tannehill didnt cause spec teams gaffes, or wr running wide open or complete meltdowns on defense. the issue isnt tannehill is great or bad, its noone on the team is playing well and that doesnt get fixed by replacing qb
