I love the blog Thephinsider. They just published a letter that succinctly sums up the argument against irrational Ireland haters when you look at Ireland's complete body of work, not just this overblown offseason by people who dont know what they're talking about. Its been really annoying that all the "reactionary" or "chicken-littles" anti-Ireland people are coloring those with objectivity & logic as Pro-Ireland people. (I personally have nothing against people who dislike Ireland and voice that belief in a rational manner like Boik, but IMO that shouldn't be confused with fans looking for every excuse to fire him, even if that means throwing logic & reason out the window in order to make something support an argument). This guy seems to have hit the nail on the head: Read the rest of this great insight here. http://www.thephinsider.com/2012/3/20/2886123/finheads-musings-overreaction-edition This guy needs to be in the Dolphins Ring of Honor for this contribution.
Just as annoying as the zombie elitism displayed by the Ireland followers. This issue is getting exhausting for both sides.
..... said they guy who discredits 4 Matt Moore wins in a straw attempt to support an argument (in his signature).
All I ask is that people base what they believe upon factual evidence. That goes for everything in life. You can hate Ireland all you want but do it for real reasons. Don't hate him because he hasn't pulled a franchise QB out of his ***hole and twist his words entirely to suit your point such as with Bell. Just because you hate someone doesn't mean everything they do or have done is wrong.
You take it how you want. It's the reasons I do not trust MEHt Moore as a starter, you have a right to ignore it and believe in him. Just like you have a right to believe in Ireland. But I will never call you names or demean you for thinking differently. It's getting disgraceful the elitism being displayed by some posters.
Good luck with that on this site. As you've seen, a lot of our fanbase likes to base their judgement on how they feel, which often has nothing to do with reality.
Fair, it's a very easy trap to fall into. I'm trying to be more mindful of it, wish some other posters would do the same.
.... said the hypocrite who calls our starting QB "MEHt Moore". Yeah, okay buddie. People with an agenda who irrationally whine and criticize while hiding under the "it's my opinion so respect me" umbrella. Gotta love 'em.
Has anyone told you to move Mike Tyson next to the cranberry juice so I don't have to scroll down as far.
Mike and cranberry juice are about as polar opposites as there are. Putting them next to each other so you can do less work would fall under that Irrational Umbrella.
It is really silly to "take away the 4 games against blah..blah..blah". No other utterance in our debates ever annoys me more. I can always say, you take away Barry Sanders single 70+ yard run he had in most games and his YPC was crappy and he was a crappy RB based on his stats. but guess what? you can't do that. Almost every good QB pads his stats vs crappy teams.
If we are talking about Moore, he is of course. Yet he isn't the only person involved. There are 21 other starters on offense and defense that played a role in the outcome of our games. You single out Moore as if every bad thing that happened was his fault when in reality there was our inability to stop any decent pass rush, poor play selection, having to play from behind, etc and so forth.
IMO that's kinda true b/c in a way the Panthers somewhat robbed Peter to pay Paul. To me, rushing TDs are rushing TDs. I know Cam definitely helps that out, but at the same time the running backs aren't having them if the QB is doing the work, so IMO that should be taken with a small grain of salt, where as passing TDs are passing TDs. For example: would you rather have 30 rushing TDs from your offense?... or 26? In 2008, Carolina's QB ran for 2 TDs. (their backs ran for 28) In 2011, The QB ran for 14 (The same running backs ran for 11) So the rushing TDs I take with a slight grain of salt. But the 21 passing TDs aren't anything to sneeze at. I think Cam working last offseason with the best QB guru in the country (George Whitfield) really helped him out a lot.
I've seen too many fumbles and stuffs in the redzone to give a **** about who takes the ball to paydirt. If Newton does that more efficiently then I see no reason to not add that to the list of other things he does well. Like I said, if he's that good at it, then I don't consider it beefing up his stats either. I've also never seen anyone say a peep about all the goal-line TDs Aaron Rodgers runs in either.
How you got that from my post about football being a team game I will never know. Second part - Which is why I said if. I guess Ireland called all the plays too though. Coaching and talent acquisition are equally important and we were definitely missing the coaching half. This team is not built 1/4 as bad as you seem to want to believe.
IMO the best logic is through objectivity, even when emotion is telling you otherwise, and it's hard to seem logical if you're distorting the facts or leaving some out in order to try and make something appear absolute. Example: Matt Moore won 4 games vs weaker opponents, therefore we need a new QB. Can you kinda see how that could be misconstrued as possibly having an agenda or not seeming logical? I'm not trying to talk down to you here, but do you think maybe saying something like "Matt Moore might not be our answer at QB b/c 4 of his wins came vs weaker opponents while his performance vs everyone else wasn't as high" would sound more objective? I say this b/c if you're hypothetically choosing to discredit 4 wins while still wanting to maintain logic and objectivity, you'd also have to mention how 4 of those losses came during his first 4 games as a starter despite having no first team reps, being in a new system, and having a shortened offseason to prepare. It's wise keep the scale balanced if you plan to either add or take away from one side. More people will listen b/c the person won't seem like they're trying to sell a used car. And no, I don't think your void of logic. I've read enough of your past posts to know that's not true.
Hey, I'm not saying to not add it, but at the same time I'm not saying to give it more credit than it's due b/c numerous players contribute to rushing TDs. If you take a goal line hand off away from DeAngelo & Stewart to let Cam instead run it in, then it looks good for Cam, but not so good now for Williams & Stewart. So there's a little give and take is all I'm saying, not discrediting Cam. IMO 21 passing TDs catches my attention more than 14 rushing TDs b/c we all knew he could run.
I'm not exactly for or against all this. What I want is some positive outcomes for the decisions we have been making this offseason and I want to look back and say " that ended up being a pretty good offseason in retrospect". Whether it be through our newfound build through the philosophy or whatever. I just want stuff to get done. If ireland has to get fired than so be it. I'm not pro "fire ireland omgomgomg" but if the offseason ends up being a total bust with the draft included then I'd be pretty pissed. Im just pro results. I dont care how they happen.
To be honest I don't think anyone would listen, either way. They just continue to go in circles. But thanks for the advise. I will change accordingly.
Ever think you (and by you I mean the people like you such as the guy who wrote that) are just a little obsessed with the people who don't care for Jeff Ireland? OVERLY obsessed?
Personally if you wanted to have a serious debate about why Matt Moore may or may not perform well this season using facts and weighing both sides of the argument I'd be more than happy to do so. Same with Ireland. I'm not pro Ireland or pro Moore. I'm pro fact and looking at a situation in its entirety rather than placing the blame all on one single person. Example: Moore playing well vs bad teams does not make him a good QB much in the same way that his playing poorly against good teams does not make him a bad QB. There are outside circumstances, and once those circumstances have been taken into account you can make a final decision on the subject. My two cents.
See...this is what it is all about. It is about results and to date the results aren't there to warrant him getting another year while Sparano got the boot. Package deal, one goes...they all go. But I am like you....if this year goes down in the tubes (yet again), then he needs to be the first on the train out of town. Can't fire him now. Especially not before the draft. He is here for the next 9 months, like it or not. I hope we go 16-0. I know we won't. But if we are less than 8 wins, his head would rightfully be rolling.
Don't know about your logic.. but I really do wish you would unpack that cute little phrase "zombie elitism" for me. That may not be name calling, which you also mentioned, but it sure sounds like inverted superciliousness and patronizing to me. Expand your thinking so we all might have a better understanding of your reason and intellect behind the phraseology, please.
Interesting how the article refers to things as FACT: Again, Manning said he enjoyed the visit with Miami. It was reported that Manning only visited with coaches, not Ireland or Ross. signed Karlos Dansby...Karlos signed one of the biggest contracts ever given to a LB in FA. Chances are Karlos "wanted" money. We have heard consistent reports Flynn was interested in Miami, meaning it is unlikely Ireland himself changed his mind...This isn't a fact, this is an assumption. What does this even mean? Flynn kept referring to Seattle was "led by the right kind of people" so more than likely Flynn is referring to Ireland or Ireland/Ross. Flynn made it a point after signing with Seattle to say how much he likes Philbin though. Not a word about Ireland. Anyone with half a brain can infer this means the front office. Nobody ever hits on everyone. That includes Bill Belichick...why on earth is the author comparing Miami to the Patriots? Miami fans would have no problem with Ireland if Miami was winning the division nearly every year and going to Super Bowls. Talk about a mute point. Does the author know Miami has finished 7-9, 7-9, 6-10 the past three seasons? The question was a follow-up up by Ireland during a pre-draft interview when Bryant said his father was a pimp and his mother had worked for his father...We don't know if this was a fact or not. This was Ireland's explanation for saving face when the story broke. Dez never confirmed this was the context. The "FACT" is a GM tried to cover his *** with something that may or may not have been true. Amazing that this author tries to pass off this crap as fact when makes numerous assumptions about his so-called "facts." But here is a fact...That article is poorly written and full of assumptions passed off as facts.
Because I'm sure Ireland asked Bryant if his mother was a prostitute for no reason at all or because he thought it might be funny. Secondly it has been reported that Manning met with the coaching staff and Ireland. Ross was not there to the best of my knowledge. The Patriots are actually a pretty terribly built team outside of Tom Brady and their defensive line. The reality is they play in a ****ty division that makes them look a lot better than they really are these days. Not that they are bad, but they are not even close to being the team they were in their superbowl winning days. Yes they made the superbowl this season but Brady along with their coaching staff is what put them in position to do that. The rest of their roster is 1000x worse than ours. Their receivers are average to above average as well, great if you count the TE position. Regardless of what Dansby was after does not change the fact that we acquired him.
The same thing happens every year, Rev---- some people who are dead set on seeing some type of action happen, regardless of the facts or logic involved, feel it's acceptable to rant and rave about it and should be respected while doing so. Then the objective people who have little formed opinion are criticized for either disagreeing with the logic (or lack there of) involved or by not sharing the same opinion. Subsequently, the objective argument is met with the same irrational, childish retort in attempt to discredit them----- "You're just saying that b/c you're an XYZ lover". (Gardenhead is notorious for this which is why I have zero respect for him.) Then when the objective "XYZ lovers" do a little return mocking of their own or point out obvious flaws in a subjective argument, then we're labeled as elitists for not accepting a subjective opinion, especially if it lacks facts. IMO, if "chicken little" type people want to stop being called "chicken littlers", they should probably focus more on not being a chicken littler rather than arguing why it's ok to be. But they don't. Instead, they call subjective people, Kool Aid drinkers, b/c we'd rather take a wait and see approach considering we're not even at the draft yet and b/c there are enough examples throughout NFL history to validate it as being logical.
Facts. you're confusing them with speculation, conjecture, or opinion, one that I don't see as being objective.
