To your point I remember on the eve of the Draft there was a poll taken by 20 different General Managers and 19 of the 20 had Ryan Tannehill as the 3rd best QB in the Draft. The 20th guy had him 4th. I've rarely, if ever, seen that kind of consensus on the #1, #2 and #3 prospects in the Draft at any one position. To even label Tannehill the 'consensus' 3rd best QB in the Draft would be an understatement, because that word is often tossed around where it doesn't belong. I would go a step further and say Ryan Tannehill was the unanimously agreed upon 3rd best QB in a strong QB draft, and he was available at #8 overall, and Miami had naught on the roster but Matt Moore (1 year left under contract) and David Garrard (1 year left under contract).
First, you are generalizing and lumping everyone into some generic line of thinking that you think they are going by. And this line of thinking implies that all of these people are not self-aware and/or are delusional. Second, how can you sit there and tell me how I am thinking? B/c I have a differing opinion than you, that means that I am lying to myself? B/c your opinion being incorrect clearly isn’t an option… it means that my opinion can only be formed by illogical thinking and self delusion? And yet it wasn’t your intention to be condescending and insulting? Either your lying in that regard, or you are the one who is not self-aware.
I don't see that as inconsistent in any way though. Billy Devaney is widely considered a failure in St. Louis. Does that mean Chris Long sucks? Does that mean Robert Quinn isn't rushing the hell out of the passer right now? Does it mean James Laurinaitis isn't a good middle linebacker? Or how about the quintessential icon of GM disasters, Matt Millen? Did Matt Millen's being a bad GM have any bearing on Jeff Backus' now decade long career as an NFL left tackle? Did it make Shaun Rogers any less dominant before he burned out physically? Does it in any way detract from Calvin Johnson's being the most dominant force at wide receiver in the entire National Football League? Does it mean that Cliff Avril sucks? I find this argument to be confusing, and if that's the crown jewel in your rationale for engaging in such wide sweeping disrespect of peoples' opinions...then I stand by what I said.
I'm certainly not lumping everyone into that category. The original post said "many people," not everyone. However, I maintain that if you believe 1) Ryan Tannehill would be playing unlike a rookie if he had better surrounding talent, and Jeff Ireland is at fault for that, and at the same time 2) you are giving no credit to Jeff Ireland for drafting Ryan Tannehill himself, then you have a bias against Jeff Ireland, and it's revealed in your thinking about the matter. If you're not such a person, then fine, you aren't in the category of people I mentioned in the original post, and you can breathe easy knowing you're fundamentally above them.
...or, to use a football analogy... Ireland scored a touchdown with Tannehill, but is still losing the game 57-24 due to interceptions and fumbles earlier in the game. He threw a beautiful 87 yard bomb on that TD. In fact, it could have been the nicest play of the game. But if it happens with 5min left in the 4th quarter and you're still losing by 33 points... he can get credit for the pretty TD, but still be held accountable for losing the game by 33 points.
You don't need a systematic, objective analysis. All one has to do is look at the roster, and the product on the field. We've changed coaching staffs, even changed co-ordinators when Sparano was still here. We've changed QB's also. However, we still, clearly have holes on this team that remain. The OL is still not up to par, our secondary is still lacking in depth and talent period, and it has been since Jeff took over, same goes for WR's. Sure, Hartline is serviceable, and Bess is a good slot receiver, but its obvious to tell this team is not ready to compete, other than with the weaker teams of the league. No systematic analysis, or whatever is required, one just has to look at the product on the field on Sundays. Look at the track record of draft picks no longer on this team, look at the free agency whiffs, look at the way teams defend us and our WR's, constantly attack our weak secondary, its pretty obvious. Yes the QB isn't particularly playing well and making the best decisions, but we don't exactly have talent all around him like RG3 has, or Luck, or Brady, or even Chad ****ing Henne apparently. That falls on nobody's shoulders but the GM. No silly systemic bull**** required. Just because nobody has sat down, and done an analysis of every one of Jeffs picks, compared to other GM's in history, and blah blah blah, doesn't make an opinion unwarranted, especially when its obvious enough to see when watching this team perform for the last however many years Ireland has been in charge.
I've lost count but you're batting a thousand here. I just don't even see that line or reasoning at all. I think it goes without saying that even the ****tiest GM on the planet would nail some picks. Like I said, Matt Millen still picked Calvin Johnson, Cliff Avril, Shaun Rogers and Jeff Backus. And I don't know why we're even assuming Tannehill is a nailed draft pick by the way. I'm certainly not. I don't think he's a bust but that was my pre-Draft eval of him. I had no vision for him being a bust, no vision for him being much less (if at all) than a Joe Flacco. Then again, I don't know if he's going to be top tier, either.
But that's the point. There is no objective evidence we're losing this "game" consisting of the talent elsewhere on the team (other than Tannehill). This is a belief some (not all) people have simply because it's their personal opinion. The won-loss record over the past several years isn't sufficient evidence of that IMO, as it can be easily attributed, again, to the ineffectiveness of the QB during that period. In other words, there is no solid evidence that the roster other than the QB is suffering in the way you've portrayed it. It's entirely possible that the team would be 7-3 or better with QB who's among the league's best, and there would be no perception whatsoever that the rest of its "talent" is holding it back.
I'll give you a tip, it's all personal opinion. The kind of analysis you demand before any move can be made is impossible. And if it were required before making a decision on football matters, no decisions would ever be made.
A bias is an opinion that's slanted to gather evidence in support of it while discounting evidence that runs counter to it. That's what's happening here with Jeff Ireland, with regard to Ryan Tannehill and his supporting cast, IMO.
Your model for what is "opinion" and what is "bias" allows no room for intelligent differences of opinion. Which again gets back to my original point about your habit for disrespecting wide swaths of individuals all on the basis of their not holding the same opinion as you.
Please keep in mind... that it is your OPINION that there is no objective evidence. In my OPINION, there is plenty. You think our situation at Cornerback is great? How about Safety? We are all set on pass rushers? We have dynamic WRs who can make plays for the QB? Same for the TE? Our OL is run blocking well and moving the line of scrimmage and opening holes for our RBs? You are seeing all of that? If that is what you are seeing... and/or you feel that it is just the QB play that is making these positions appear to be playing poorly (or you may not even feel they appear to be playing poorly)... then I would have to strongly disagree with you. But that is just my opinion. You of course are entitled to your own. Just dont tell me that the only way I could possibly form my opinion is from delusion and lack of self awareness.
The reality is that winning in this league starts with the QB and head coach. If you hit on those two, this analogy isn't fitting.
I fail to see why not? I do think he has hit on those 2. But that occured in year 4 (or the 4th quarter to continue the anology). Does his performance in the first 3 quarters not count towards his evaluation since he made a great play in the 4th quarter? Even though they are losing by 33 points due to his performance in the first 3 quarters?
I'm not saying he has or has not hit on Tannehill or Philbin. That needs to be decided after the season. If those picks are deemed failures he should be fired.
But you feel that if he has indeed hit on those 2, then those 2 would redeem him from all of the other poor choices?
I might be wrong, however I think his point is, if Miami had really good coaching and Tannehill was playing at a near elite level, the Dolphins could easily be 7-3 or even 8-2. If that were the case, would Ireland's bad choices be dominate discussion on this board?
Absolutely. In fact, I would say that anyone who hits on those two positions should be handsomely rewarded. QB and head coach are a golden ticket.
So you say, but your basis for concluding that people who criticize Jeff Ireland are "biased" does not manifest a strong process for identifying what is "biased" and what is simply "opinion". Let's take a look at your two standards. 1. "An opinion that's slanted to gather evidence in support of it" So essentially, anyone who has an opinion and presents evidence for that opinion, is in danger of being viewed as "biased". 2. "While discounting evidence that runs counter to it." In other words, if they've heard what YOU believe to be the key evidence in the matter, and they still disagree with you, they're biased.
Yeah, but you won't know. And what's hitting anyway? I would suggest that we would know if we hit if the Dolphins were a playoff team this year. After all, we supposedly have enough talent that only QB and coaching were holding us back, right?
So then you agree that Jeff Ireland should have been fired when Tony Sparano was fired and Chad Henne was allowed to walk as a free agent?
Well...I disagree with your statement of Ireland.... Thats kinda like....not wanting to re sign David Ortiz because hes getting old, but still rooting for him to hit a homerun. He picked Tannehill....you can be high on Tannehill, and still think the over all job of Ireland has been poor. And Im not even saying thats what I think....I just believe thats a flawed statement to make...
While I agree completely with the value you place on head coach and QB... I do think being able to fill out the rest of the roster is very important. And while I have strongly been an Ireland defender (I think he had a great draft this year)... while he's hit on some things, he no doubt has struggled building the roster.
I think if you look at the successful teams in this league, almost every one has glaring holes aside from QB and HC. Not any worse than what you see on Miami's roster.
I personally wouldn't have done it, but certainly would have made sense for him to be fired. It doesn't make sense for him to be fired after hitting on a QB and HC, if that is to be the case.
Ireland has been here for the past five years. He has been the GM of this organization during this entire time. Therefore he is responsible for every player now on the Dolphins Roster. The Dolphins have a combined record of 35-39 during his time as the teams GM. The fact he drafted Tannehill is irrelevant. We have no idea at this time if Tannehill will be a good NFL QB or not. What we do know for sure is that Ireland has done a bad job of drafting or signing enough players with quality NFL talent. The record speaks for itself, as well as all the empty seats at the stadium. It is time for Ireland to go someplace else. Though I doubt any other organization would make the mistake of hiring him as their GM. He might make a decent ball boy for another NFL team.
I dont think the elite teams have as many glaring needs as we do. However, your point is not lost. Great play from the QB and great coaching can mask a lot. However, my question is... how long do you wait to find out if Tanny/Philbin are indeed the truth or not before canning Ireland? Do you give them the proper 3 years before judging Ireland? Any my question would be, even if we did hit on Tanny/Philbin... if we dont have confidence that he can build the rest of the roster... why keep him? Tanny/Philbin are already here, whether Ireland stays or goes. If Ireland hit on those 2, then why not bring in someone else to "finish the job" if you will by filling out the rest of the roster?
And that's the point here. You can't very well believe that Ryan Tannehill has the rare ability to play unlike a rookie if he had a better supporting cast, while giving no credit to the guy who drafted Ryan Tannehill. It's as if the deck is stacked against Jeff Ireland. You can draft a QB we think has the rare ability to play super well during his rookie season, but if he doesn't play super well during his rookie season, then it's your fault he didn't have better talent around him, and we'll talk incessantly about that, rather than about how you hit on a QB we believe has this super ability that should set the franchise up to do quite nicely for a long time. My lord, can the guy win?
To answer the question brought up by CK... Yes...I would have liked to have seen Jeff Ireland canned when Sparano left. And, I believe in all likely hood, the GM that was hired, would have still taken Tannehill at #8.
But nobody drafts a rookie QB with the intent of him playing like a Super Star his first year. The issues we have had on offense, have stretched over several years...not just this one. He does not seem to have the ability to draft game changing play makers, Tannehill being the only one that I see. Frankly, I dont see why Ireland gets a ton of credit for drafting Tannehill. It was the obvious choice in my opinion. What WR has he drafted.....that has been a game changing play maker? None. What TE has he drafted...that has been a game changing play maker? None. What RB has he drafted? None. Hes done a solid job on the lines...but ....if you look at his pedigree, you expect that is where he will be the better judge of talent.
I have three criticisms of this viewpoint. 1. If you admit it would have made sense to fire him because he picked the wrong Head Coach and Quarterback before, then I don't see why that is any less the case now when you also admit the jury is still well out on both Ryan Tannehill and Joe Philbin. Essentially, nothing has changed. 2. I don't think there's much of a case to be made that the choice of Head Coach and Quarterback are all that matter for a GM, anyway. 3. Your assertion that it doesn't make sense for a team to fire their GM if he's hit on the Head Coach and Quarterback also doesn't make sense within the construct of your "all that matters is the Head Coach and Quarterback" framework. If a team has a Head Coach and Quarterback in place then it should be perfectly neutral on the idea of firing their General Manager, to the point where any reason (such as fan non-attendance and widespread blame of team failures on the GM) should move the needle toward firing the guy. If you've got the Head Coach and Quarterback in place then essentially you don't need a GM anymore, is what you're saying. Or at least your choice of GM can be random, without effect. Therefore, if fan attendance of home games would help you win home games, and you're pretty sure fans would attend better if you fired your GM, you should be 100% on board with the firing.
