Yup. He played a great game today. Made smart decisions, was careful with the football, and as you said, avoided negative plays. Exactly what we needed him to do against the best D in the league.

I'm going to disagree a bit here... while I agree that yes, we should have done better with the early opportunities we had, but what happened at the end of this game is inexcusable. There's a team of guys out there who are being paid to ensure fair play. They blew it today. That's just wrong.

After yesterday's performance, I feel even more confident in this team, that we can play anyone, and be extremely competitive. As long as we stop shooting ourselves in the foot, with dumb penalties, dumb playcalls, and poor execution, this team can be very dangerous, and beat anyone IMO.

I think Ross stays the course. The team has clearly improved. I think some changes should happen offensively, I think we need to go another direction there, especially after watching the growth of Henne for the rest of the season. I don't expect any major changes really.

 

I posted this in another thread but it makes sense here as well:

Ok, logic test for the ones who say we shouldn't of even been in position to have the game called by a ref:

If no team should be in that position, that means every single close game is because of teams not playing their best. However, if every team did play their best that would mean you'd have a close game. Logic loop. Which means that line of thinking is flawed.

In the end, we made the necessary plays to win the game (forcing and recovering a fumble) and it was negated by the refs atrocious decisions. Saying anything else is devoid of logic.

 

Perfectly written and I couldn't agree with you more!

 

We had more then two minutes to drive the ball about 35 yards to kick a winning FG. He failed. The loss may not be entirely Hennes fault, but he is to blame. Did you watch the pre game show that showed him being asked about Parcells? He was asked about Parcells leaving...the reporter said Parcells didn't believe he had it in him to be an elite QB in this league. That is one of the reasons he left like he did. The truth is the elite QB's (Marino, Elway, Big Ben, Favre, Rivers) always look down field first. If nothing is there, they extend the play by moving around then take their shot down field. Henne quickly throws it 2 yards when 6 is needed. I like Henne, but I see what Parcells is talking about. Henne is more like Feidler.

Those early FGs should have been TDs. We did have a chance to win even afterwards.

The Lions are tough too, but the bottom line is the W column. I do like what I see from this team compared to the past. I remember how soft we were when CamCam was the coach. I like the toughness of this team. We just have to make a few adjustments.

Alot of people are always wondering why the Pats have so many picks every year. It's because they place the team and winning first. Note they traded Moss prior to the deadline for a pick. That was smart. They won nothing with him, but got something for him. Team winning first. I would have loved to see the Phins trade Ronnie Brown for a pick too. We have won nothing with him, and could have gotten something for him. I like Ronnie alot, but making a decision like that keeps the Phins in the hunt fro a long time. The more picks we get, the better we get. Potential only goes for so long in my book. For players and coaches. Sometimes you have to let friends go to improve.

 

35yds? So you think a ~60 yrd FG would have been possible? The game I watched had the Dolphins at about the 25 yrd line with 2:19 left.

This illogical thinking around here is baffeling to me. The Dolphins scored enough points to win if the refs don't blow that call. What else do you want them to do? Blow out the best defense in the NFL by 50 points? Hell, we scored more points against the Steelers than anyone they've played this season. Why is that not good enough?

Let me put in another way. If the game ended and we won 22-20, but the league decided to give the Steelers 3 points for a 23-22 win, would you say these same things? Because that's what happened. The refs gave the Steelers 3 points. That is not up for argument. Also, we scored more points than the Steelers when they don't get help from the refs. Again, that's not up fro argument.

 

My bad. We needed 40 yards. We needed to get to their 35 yard line for a 52 yard attempt. Well within Carpenters range.

What's illogical is thinking we automatically win the game. It's not automatic. Pitt had 3 time outs left. Look at our play calling. What do you think we wold have done? We would have tried to be ultra consertive. We would have ran it three times. Pitt would have called a timeout each time. They would probably have gotten the ball back with anywhere from 1:30 - 2:00 minutes left. They could have then went 40 yards or less (depending on how we tackled them on the special teams) for a winning FG.

You don't know what the outcome would have been. I think we possibly could have won that game if not for the call, but that's not a given.

 

Anyone who blames yesterday on Henne needs their head examined. He looks to be at the least a good QB, and maybe even a very good. Will he be Manning or Brady good ? Probably not, but surround him with a good stout and tough defense, and he should be able to produce at the least an AFC Championship appearance, and with luck, a SB appearance or even a win.

 

I don't blame Henne. But I do understand why Parcells thinks that. Parcells is looking for a QB who would win that game in the end. He doesn't have faith that Henne is that QB.

Is it Henne or the play calling of Henning? Some here have said each of them.

 

I think you can win with Henne, but not with Henning. His play calling is just not right for this QB and team the way it is structured. They seem to be a rhythm offense, and Henning seems to like to call to many change-ups and it breaks the flow of what they get into.

 

You are confusing logic and speculation. Logic dictates we were in the lead and should have had the ball. At the point time the refs screwed the pooch, we were in the lead. The refs took that lead away. Plain and simple.

 

A forced fumble and recovery by our defense when it mattered was taken from us when it mattered.

Henne and the defense played well enough to win that game.

 

45 to 50 yards would have been better.

Also, I realize that a win would not have been automatic. However, what was automatic is we would have been leading with 2 minutes or less left in the game. I like that scenario better than us being behind and having to drive 45-50 yards with 2 minutes left.

 

Is this bizarro world?

 

*against the best defense in the league.

Not to mention having to go and do that right after getting kicked squarely in the nuts by the Refs. I mean morale does play a part in this too.

 

regarding Henne .... exactly who is he learning from ... ah yes, CP -- an incredible down the field passer

i stated this at the end of last year .... whilst CP IS one of the smartest players in the league, he doesn't go deep all that often either - less play action (which he is very good at) .... we needed Henne to spend the off season with 1- his WRs to develop timing tendancies, etc (which he still does not have with Marshall) and 2- Marino to better understand trusting your arm and throwing downfield.

CP, if he isn't going to play this year .... has outlived his usefulness to Henne, because Henne is NOT at all like CP -- but is trying to play like him. It's just not a good match.

I'll let others look at film, but not sure just how often Henne is provided an opportunity to go deep .... we don't have a Wallace, and we don't have a Ward either .... we have Marshall and Bess and we know that the opponents defense scheme is to take Marshall away. Fasano is doing 'ok', but we need someone else to step up .... conceding that we are playing a lot of max protect.

 

Nothing you wrote disproves my point. Sorry.

You're speculating. I don't know how to be more clear, though I suspect I could do the thinking for you and get your brain to agree with this basic logic, and you'd still tell us all how bad the dolphins suck.

 

I don't see him saying the Dolphins suck. Just most people here seem to think that without that horrible call we automatically win. Automatically. There was still enough time (and time outs) for (potentially) both teams to get the ball. We would have to had gotten 2 or 3 first downs to ice it.

trust me...I think the whole fan base is pissed. No one is more pissed then another. I would like to have seen us in the right call to see what we would have done. Hopefully playing Ricky for the win.

 

I'm going by his past posts. If you read my post he quoted, you'll find that I'm not saying we'd have won.

 

The bold part of your statement is a matter of faith. Fact remains, we got screwed royally.

316 has faith that the Dolphins are a second-rate team not worthy of competing at the level of the "elite" teams, which, time and time again is debunked as false.

 

We always compete with the "elite" teams. We have just come up short lately. I think with a playmeker on offense, we win these games. We need a Chris Johnson or Percy Harvin type playmaker.

 

Very well put.... I am tired of ppl saying we should not have left it to the refs

 

Every single thing in bold are what ifs. So if you can say they need to play better, or should have scored more early then it HAS to be ok to also point to the refs as a reason for losing, or at the very least, having a much better chance to win in the end.

The facts are the facts.
The what ifs are the what ifs.

 

me too...we needed to beat them twice, and we couldn't, once wasn't good enough...However, I gotta good grip on my team moving forward, and I feel good about them.

 

Gunn, you thinking Parcell's left because of Henne is funny..and wrong imo..

 

Your points that they needed TD's in the first two drives were what ifs. Yes! What if we scored 10 instead of 6? We would have won. What if.

What if they made that stop on the big play that brought them near the goal? That most definitely is a what if which is fine but what you're trying to make us forget is that the absolute biggest play happened on the Qb draw right after that. But we're supposed to just drop it because it meant nothing towards the Miami loss?

We should not blame the call is a what if. The call was admittingly incorrect at the goaline. What if they had let it play out and found Miami to be in possession?

Full of what ifs and I don't need to be better than anything. I'm just fine, and correct in saying my assessment of all situations of that game.

 

My biggest problem was the D not being able to stop the long ones.
I understand one but three.
People talk about Henne but the D particularly the Cbs are a concern