Here's how the thinking of many folks in the forum is going nowadays: We're 4-6 and have lost three in a row. Playoff hopes are slim. This is no different from how I felt last year, or the year before, or the year before. Someone must be blamed and become the target for my frustrations. I don't want to blame Ryan Tannehill, even though he's a rookie, because that would diminish my hopes in this team's future success. Therefore I must blame his surrounding cast and act as though he'd be doing much better if the players around him were better. Who put together his surrounding cast? Jeff Ireland. Ah yes, Jeff Ireland. I can blame him. That's easy to do. Therefore Jeff Ireland should be fired. He will be my scapegoat. Once he is fired, we will most definitely obtain a GM who can put together a better roster. There's no doubt about it. That better roster will help the QB I want to have hope in win games. Then my team will be good, and I'll feel much better. The irony of this situation is that JEFF IRELAND PICKED RYAN TANNEHILL. If you're hellbent on preserving your positive impression of Ryan Tannehill so as to maintain some hope in this team's future, then how can you at the same time blame the person who picked Ryan Tannehill? Anyway folks, let's come back to reality here, please. We have a rookie quarterback. Do a simple rundown of what rookie quarterbacks have typically done in this league. It ain't pretty. Here's some objective evidence: http://www.twominutewarning.com/qbrd1.htm This is a rebulding year folks. The hope you can get from this year is that Joe Philbin and company were good enough to mask a raw rookie's weaknesses to the point that he's had several good games against NFL competition. That's your bright spot for the future here. Now, sit back, relax, and enjoy the rest of the season.
The lengths some of you go to to defend poor job performance is truly amazing. Jeff Ireland is rebuilding now? Yes of course but what was he doing the past four seasons? The problem isn't the W/L record it's that his roster shows little promise outside of maybe the QB, the center, and Cameron Wake. We have a GM who thought that the best way to bring along a new franchise QB was to surround him by mediocre at best skill position players. Yep, he gets it.
Where is the evidence that the new QB would be doing any better if the players around him were better? Or is this just a theory that some people believe is true simply because they think it?
Maybe he sucks too. I don't know yet. What I take exception to is the idea that Jeff Ireland is just a 'scapegoat'. No, he's not. He's done a poor job.
Well he sucks right now! We know that! The point is that you can't possibly know how good a job Jeff Ireland has done with the rest of the roster when you're looking at how a team is doing through the filter of a rookie quarterback who has a 70 QB rating. Now, if someone wants to do a systematic, objective analysis of Jeff Ireland's performance, I'm all ears, but until then, this "theory" garbage is self-indulgent nonsense that ignores the objective evidence regarding rookie QBs IMO.
This is kind of a silly question. It's pretty much common sense that one plays a team sport better when one is on a better team, and that goes across all skill levels and positions. The real question is whether or not the team around Tannehill is bad enough to justify the performance on the field the last two weeks.
It's not a silly question if you consider that the performance of the quarterback contributes to a team's success at a level that determines, ultimately, whether the team is good or bad, regardless of the talent of the rest of its roster.
I think the irony is that the team has been rebuilding for a decade and we don't even know if the foundation is poured.
Well then say "I don't know" rather than "Jeff Ireland should be fired." "I don't know" is a whole helluva lot less grandiose and more realistic.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA Holy hell. "If you're hellbent on preserving your positive impression of Ryan Tannehill so as to maintain some hope in this team's future, then how can you at the same time blame the person who picked Ryan Tannehill?" In what universe am I not allowed to like Ryan Tannehill and dislike Jeff Ireland's performance at completely separate positions? I have hope that Ryan Tannehill will develop into an elite passer. I have little confidence that Jeff Ireland is capable of surrounding him with talent that will maximize his ability.
I was lead to believe the process had been moving forward for quite some time. If your leadership hypothesis has the merit I believe it does, the workmanship was shoddy at best.
In every universe except the one in which it's supported with objective evidence that the rest of the roster is responsible for the team's performance right now, rather than its rookie QB. Good luck locating that one. I sure haven't seen it anywhere here.
When there is a nucleus of players with leadership ability who also have long-term contracts with this team, I suspect you'll see a big difference. Assuming the QB is good, that is.
Yes but the talent of the roster contributes to the performance of the quarterback. This is undeniable, and it's silly to question that. Name a good team that has a good QB, but no talent elsewhere. Name a team that has won a super bowl solely based on the talent of its QB. I can name teams that have won despite the talent of their QB. Mark Sanchez made the conference championship as a rookie. Tell me how good he is.
Jeff Ireland picked Ryan Tannehill? Really? You think the lovechild of Jerry Jones and Daniel Snyder was the mastermind behind selecting, what was a viewed as a near-unanimous reach? You don't think his college coach, Mike Sherman, on staff as the offensive coordinator, had any pull?
When I criticized Parcells and Ireland for passsing on Matt Ryan for Jake Long, people, defending Ireland for the pick, said it's because Ryan had weapons around him, and he would have failed in Miami because there are no weapons. So they are defending the pick of two guys they have no faith would have stocked Miami with such weapons. But they are partially right, we have no weapons. Oh the irony.
The Dolphins are like a machine that jettisons fans at an exponentially growing rate. I know yr 5 and looking at losing 2 gms to the pats yet again is unacceptable. To many guys who simply are not playmakers on both sides of the ball, Wilson and Dansby dropping game changing int's, a kicker who misses to many field goals, an OL that is high priced, but sucks, sooner or later that hen comes home to roost in Ireland's coop.
I have defended Jeff Ireland in the past. Hell, I was defending him 3 weeks ago. I will do so no longer. He has simply not done enough to warrant his "untouchable" status some have given him. The last thing I want to do is fire ANOTHER G.M. and start ANOTHER "new era" but this G.M. has not done enough to warrant keeping his job. An 8-8/7-9 season and Ross would retain him because of apparent progress. A 4-12/5-11 season gets people that have a much better track record than Jeff Ireland fired all the time, I don't see what he has done to be thought of differently. G.M.'s and coaches are essentially hired to be fired.
I don't think it's out of the question that Ross could find a new GM who would play ball with Philbin. The strongest justification it seems to keep Ireland is just that it would require another total overhaul. I don't know if that's necessarily true. Philbin survived regime change in Green Bay so clearly there are people around who think highly of him. It's not easy to survive a head coaching change when you're an assistant. Philbin has already pulled that off.
QB rating differential has one of the strongest correlations with winning, and the QBs with the highest ratings are the ones widely considered to be the best ones. Your cherry-picked Mark Sanchez made the AFC Championship as a rookie with the #1 pass defense, the #1 overall defense, the #1 rushing team, and being #5 in the league in turnover margin. If you're debating the importance of the QB because you're waiting for all that to come along to support him, don't hold your breath.
So you were defending Jeff Ireland immediately before our rookie QB's recent total collapse, and now you're not?
Well Tannehill being something special was really one of Ireland's only saving graces. If that doesn't end up happening....
Precisely. Then Jeff Ireland will be to blame, and at that point he should be fired. But obviously that assessment can't be made reliably right now.
It's a good thing fans don't make daily life affecting decisions the same way they make ones about their football team Edit: While saying that, I totally understand that following *this* team can drive anybody off the edge.
Well, and I suspect if they were Stephen Ross and part of their financial fortune were on the line, rather than being able to make the decision from the comfort of their laptop with little if any of their finances riding on it, they wouldn't be so impulsive.
Yes, Tannehill is playing poorly right now but WHY is he playing poorly? I have a few ideas. 1.) Lack of a running game. A young quarterbacks best friend. These are Jeff Ireland's running backs. Yes, the coaching staff gets some of this blame. They need to get Lamar Miller more carries. 2.) Is an extension of #1. The offensive line. Pass protection has been inconsistent and the running game is going NO where. We can't block the run game. Our guards are trash. Our rookie right tackle is a little over his head right now. This is Jeff Ireland's offensive line. The third different line he has built. 3.) Wide receivers. I supported trading Brandon Marshall, still do. That said, we have two guys and not much else. 4.) Tight end. Anthony Fasano has not been good lately. I like him but he is not a #1. Our "seam buster" has done nothing but wear a suit on game day. 5.) Our defense. This is Jeff Ireland's defense. What do we have? No pass rush (outside of one guy). No playmakers (hey Karlos Dansby, make a ****ing PLAY). Our secondary is trash (I supported and still support trading Davis). This what Jeff Ireland has built. How poor we have played lately is much more than Ryan Tannehill.
Yep, over 4+ years. But hey he's rebuilding now. I guess as long as he stays in a perpetual state of 'rebuilding' he'll never have to be accountable for the team's lack of performance and results.
You really think Ryan Tannehill is playing poorly because of all that, rather than because he's a rookie? Rather than because he had so few starts at QB in college? Rather than that he was considered raw coming out by almost everyone? Rather than because of the objective evidence I put in the original post showing that few rookie QBs play well in the NFL? My lord, if you can't see that as a bias against Jeff Ireland, or some recent need of yours to have a scapegoat other than Ryan Tannehill, I don't know what to tell you.
Teams in the NFL are dependent on their quarterbacks for success. If Jeff Ireland wasn't responsible for drafting Chad Henne, and I wouldn't be suprised at all if he wasn't, given Bill Parcells's personality, Ryan Tannehill is really his first crack at success as a GM.
He was the GM, he was responsible. I don't give him a free pass because Parcells was around. I've heard no accounts of Ireland begging to draft Matt Ryan and being shot down by the rotten tuna.
Well... sure, Ireland was in charge of picking Tannehill. Yes... way to split hairs. We all know its Sherman who's name should really be all over that pick. Hes RT's former head coach, he's now the OC here. Sure, Ireland called the pick in... but he hardly is the only reason RT is here. So that kind flaws the logic here doesnt it?
Could it possibly be both because Tannehill is playing like a rookie and the rest of the team is playing really badly?
Jeff Ireland should not be judged until his draft picks have had 3 years to prove themselves. Each and every draft pick. So he will be here perpetually.
Possibly, but go through and compare this team's starting lineup to that of the 2008 team that went 11-5 with Chad Pennington, who had a 97 QB rating that year. Here, I'll save you some time: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/mia/2008_roster.htm Now, tell me the guys on that roster played a whole lot better than the ones on this one, and then factor in the fact that QB rating is very strongly correlated with winning, and that the difference between Chad Pennington's QB rating that year and Ryan Tannehill's QB rating this year is 27 points (97 versus 70).
So do QBs with good QBRs have good or bad teams? Does the QB lessen the opponents QBR, your stat was differential. I'm not debating the importance of the QB, I'm debating the importance of a team to a QB. You seem to dismissing the fact that more talent around the QB helps the QB perform. I also asked you to cherry pick an example. You don't seem to be able to.
Now I'm really confused. Are you saying Mr. Ireland has intentionally failed to add leaders and play makers to the team because he didn't have a QB to build the team around? If that's the case, not drafting Mallett should have ended his career.
We're talking about a rookie QB here. The objective evidence shows that even rookie QBs who are drafted at the end of the first round, presumably by teams who are drafting late because they played well the year before, don't play well.
