I wouldn't discount the possibility that two weeks from now we're discussing how Henne is likely to be shoved aside before he even gets that half a season. The Dolphins have kept pretty quiet about what they plan on that position other than that they plan to bring someone significant in to compete with Henne. We should take them at their word on that. If they bring in a Matt Hasselbeck, Donovan McNabb, Kevin Kolb, Kyle Orton, Vince Young or Carson Palmer...I don't think Chad Henne is getting that half a season you're talking about.
Same here with Mike Mularkey. I did always like Cam Cameron's offense though. But there were plenty of people in San Diego that grumbled about Cameron, more people in Miami that grumbled about him, and as many people in Baltimore that grumble about him.
Not so much, when a good defense can focus on one aspect of the game they take it away, that's why they are good, when you cannot run the ball effectively, that leaves Henne vs Whichever Good Defense, in his second yr as a starter? Henne is not that sort of player, which is why "neutral" for Henne is not that poor, not with the running game disappearing. Which is one of the reasons why opinions are so strong about Chad Henne, some see Neutral and think "not bad, can live with it" others see neutral and say "unacceptably poor, need to upgrade" and nothing stats wise can tilt the argument. All the more reason to pump resources into the running game as good or bad from Henne, that should remain a constant.
Well think about this, aside from Palmer, who is not likely to be traded, each one of those Qb's either missed time due to injuries or were flat out benched in 2010 or benched due to injuries that were kept quiet. INOW, none are even remotely sure to play 16 games...which means Henne will at least play in 2011.
Plenty of Miami fans don't much besides whether we won or lost, so I'd rather not rely on the opinions of the casual observer. Within the league, both Cameron and Mularkey are well respected coordinators who were asked to groom young QBs. You could just as easily say that Ryan and Flacco's success were a product of having good coaching and direction from thier respective staffs. Instead, you seem to be crediting Flacco & Ryan for the success of two coordinators who were having NFL success long before either of those QBs ever put on a uniform. Cameron for instance, was the coordinator in San Diego when Brees & Rivers entered the league. On the other hand, I cant name any young QBs that blossomed under Dan Henning's tutelage and I haven't heard anyone else name ay either.
Well, my thinking is not quite so charitable towards Henne GMJ, what if Defenses simply run blitzed on running downs as they knew Henne would not go over the top on them so there was very little risk in doing so? Where is the risk to run blitzing if the worst that will happen is a 10 yd completion?
Its like no one remembers the 17-10, 17-15, 21-19, 16-12, 16-3 & 14-9 games we won in 2008. When the running game wasn't working, like against Baltimore, yes. The offense was hideous. When the run game was clicking and the offense was on schedule, it was an efficient unit. Similar to what we saw w/ Henne the past couple years.
The risk is that Henne will have a huge window to hit Marshall on a deep in route because your LBs are up near the LOS and not in their passing lanes, and if one guy misses a tackle we're talking about a big gainer. What DC would want to take that risk, if our running game hasn't shown that it can consistently create positive yardage? If we can break off 4-6 yards rushing the ball on early downs, it will force defenses to cheat a safety up or run blitz. And that will open up passing lanes down the field, the only thing left to do is anticipate when the blitz is coming and execute. The Jets do an excellent job of keeping teams off balance this way. So did we, up until last year.
Not many, which is predicated on the Tony Sparano philosophy. Keep it close, don't turn it over, don't take many risks (though he did go for it on 4th and short far more often in 2008 IMO), get the points available to you, and try not to let the other team score as much. I think philosophically, he's sort of like how Jimmy Johnson was here at the twilight of Marino's career - he'd rather win a game 14-10 and get the heck out of there. When you can't run and control the clock, or your QB throws interceptions, his philosophy is shot because it's not built to come from behind. Just my two cents, but aside from the Oakland game this year and the unveiling of the wildcat against New England in 2008, I can't think of a game Miami won where the issue wasn't in doubt right until the bitter end. Hopefully his almost (and should've in my opinion) getting fired makes him play more to win the game, rather than playing not to lose it, if you get my drift. Sorry that's long-winded. Just that I think his prevailing philosophy has held Miami back in some regards.
Gotta keep something in mind when you're talking about that 2008 offense. That was the first year of the rebuild. Jake Long was a rookie. Davone Bess was a rookie, didn't even do anything noteworthy until the second half of the season. Greg Camarillo was a starting receiver. Ted Ginn was...well, he was what he was. The offensive line wasn't much better, if at all, compared with 2010. I remember the offensive line struggling to run the ball on non-Wildcat plays well into the second half of the year. I mean let's take the 2010 surrounding cast and transport them back to 2008 with that schedule and with Chad Pennington having a career year and the Wildcat being unveiled to the league for the first time...I think we win some of those games by a bit more than 17-10, 17-15, 21-19, 16-12, 16-3 & 14-9.
If there's a way to develop a young QB that doesn't involve INTs, I'd love to hear it. And if we were out there shutting teams down, forcing turnovers, scoring on ST, pounding it on the ground etc. but we couldn't win b/c Henne kept screwing up, that'd be a different story. The problem, IMO, was that the TEAM wasn't good enough to absorb the INTs and still win games. We needed Chad Henne to carry the offense not facilitate it, and he wasn't ready. But IMO that's more an indictment of the team than the QB.
Both of them have solid track records of putting good offenses onto the field, w/ multiple different QB's. Cameron, especially. I'm sure people complained about McDaniels as well, but the Rams just hired him to oversee the development of the one of the best QB prospects to come out in a decade. So much for what the fans think.
I never even implied that. You can roll your eyes for as long as you want. Through six games, Ronnie averaged 52 yds/G while Ricky averaged 48 yds/G. Do you really think DC's would overload on the running game after six games of that crap just for the fact that they had a good 2009 which Ronnie didn't even finish? Through that time, Henne had thrown for a rating of 85, 1,452 yards, 8 TD's and 6 INT's. I'd wager by that time they weren't really focused much on two ineffective RB's and rather tried to focus more on the young QB who had no running help. First, you tell me I implied something I didn't. This post shows why had I even implied that, by at least week 7, 2009 would be an afterthought. Or do you really think Rex Ryan sat there fretting over Ronnie Brown or Ricky Williams to pick up 4 ypc?
Then there is Henne's terrible play action fake motion... Have you noticed Henne's general inaccuracy on deep passes? More or less with Henne, he HAS to have the running game to succeed, at least based on his past body of work, that is not to say he cannot or will not improve, as I do tend to think Henne is what I'd call a learn by experience type of person and 2 yrs of starting experience should be right around where his learning curve flattens imo./
Aaron Rodgers and Philip Rivers both got to sit though. Matt Hasselbeck started off on the bench and the Seahawks are trying that with Whitehurst. Blaine Gabbert is most likely going to the bench and so is Jake Locker. Jimmy Claussen didn't start until it was guaranteed Matt Moore was bad. Kevin Kolb sat behind Donovan McNabb. It's an overblown statistic IMO.
I don't see how it's disingenuous. Ray Rice had 1,220 yards with a 100 more carries than Ronnie Brown. Michael Turner had 1,371 yards with a 130 more carries than Ronnie Brown. You used examples of total yardage against a running back by committee team? That's absolutely no correlation there whatsoever. The best, most telling stat is absolutely YPC, because it tells the fact of the average of a single running play for that unit. Had Ronnie Brown or Ricky Williams received carries in the same manner the guys above did, I'm sure they would have been in the 1,100 yard range. Hell, Ricky did it in 2009 and was only the lead runner for 8-9 games.
I don't think there's anything special about the decision to start a guy right away or to sit him. Both have their flaws and both have their benefits.
Compared with what time period? I think the game has gotten easier for quarterbacks with talent to show that talent earlier in their careers, which in turn leads to impatience with guys who go years and years without turning in good performance. The game is different now than it was 20 years ago. Less physical for quarterbacks and now even for receivers. It's led to it being easier for quarterbacks to be efficient by efficiency rating standards, and given quarterbacks more ability to affect the bottom line of the games.
Nonetheless, passer ratings have been on a steady incline, especially at the top. There were more QBs in 2010 with 90+ full season passer ratings than in the history of the NFL. And if you look year by year, that number has been on a steady incline throughout the decade...with 2004 being the only abnormal spike that doesn't fit along the smooth upward slope (if you recall, 2004 was the first year after they instituted the 'Ty Law' rules).
So what you're saying is that Dan Henning had two 1,000 yard rushers and didn't let them run enough? There's a reason why they didn't run those extra carries.
There's no one way to skin the cat but it's pretty clear that passer rating differential (offense minus defense) is the most highly correlated stat out there for winning championships. On the other hand, rushing attempts is highly correlated with winning. But I think this one is a classic cause of "correlation is not causation". The implication of pointing out that teams that run the ball 30 times win far more often than they lose is that if you run the ball 30 times you win. That's false. More likely the correlation is the other way around. Teams that are winning and physically dominating, run more. But the reason I say there's more than one way to skin the cat is because some passing games are more efficient because the ground game is so good and scary. Some passing games on the other hand are the strength of the offense. There's nothing statistically I don't think that shows that you need one or the other. But you do need passing efficiency and you need to destroy your opponent's passing efficiency, if you want to win. That much is clear.
Not at all. What I'm saying is that neither Michael Turner or Ray Rice had to share carries to the extent that Ricky Williams or Ronnie Brown had to. If they were to handle the load like those backs did their total yardage would be much higher. The Ricky Williams example of 2009 showed that pretty clearly. So, this idea that their total yard gains is more of a genuine use of a statistic than CK's YPC statistic is false. It isn't even remotely relevant or analogous to the point he was trying to make.
No stat is going to explain the things you'll see on tape, like how many yards they left on the field, how few times they created yards on their own, and how limited the running game was with them as the lead backs. When FA starts I think we'll get some answers as to how the decision makers feel.
Exception? Mark Sanchez threw for more yards and the same amount of TD's last year as Ben Roethlisberger. The Steelers have made 3 Super Bowls with Ben Roethlisberger. All 3 of those years he has thrown for 17 regular season TD's. 3,301 was his highest yardage total in those 3 years. Tom Brady has never thrown the ball 4,000 yards in a Super Bowl winning year. His one year losing the Super Bowl, they could not run and he had record breaking stats. My point isn't that it's only a running game. My point is there is no magic formula of great passing or only running that wins the Super Bowl. My secondary point is that you need balance and it depends on the specific team. EDIT: For perspective, in the last 11 years, that's 5 of the Super Bowl winners under 4,000 yards. Counting 2000,s Trent Dilfer 6. Throw in Brad Johnson for 7. Eli in 2007 for 8. I am of the opinion that the league is about plays being made more so than stats being accumulated.
Have all of the problems one may wish to have with it Aqua, the fact remains running the ball, playing solid D and ST, wins ballgames and greatly aides the development of a young Qb, Brady, Ryan, Rivers, Brees, Rothlesberger et al before they were "star" Qb's they had a Feature Back who made their lives far easier. Simply stated, it is far rarer for a Qb to develop without a running game then it is for them to develop with one, and that is a Fact. Watch, I'm not a huge fan of Christian Ponder, however when you have Adrian Peterson to hand the ball off to 300 plus times, he'll do fine.
Don't you think that the predictability of the offense may have something to do with the results. Also Cam was the HC in Miami and please compare Flacco to Henne see if Flacco is that much better. I think this Henne thing is became personal to you. Your buddy Boomer seem to still like him and was worried that he may not recover his confidence. I guess we'll find out when the games are played.
