Ok he had one good year in Houston. Cincinnati's defense was middle of the pack during the time he was there. At most he has shown he is a pretty good DB coach and gets along well with players. Lets wait until he actually accomplishes something before we start saying he is a great coach and comparing him to belichek. You guys are like the people who believe rusia hacked the election just because the cia says so eventhough we have seen no actual evidence. Just because some people around the league say vance is a great coach and are talking about offering him a head coachinf gig you guys believe it eventhough there is no actual evidence in terms of on field performance to indicate he is actually a great coach. Sent from my F3111 using Tapatalk
I don't think this analogy helps your argument.. unless you believe the CIA is going to reveal its sources and publish the evidence for everyone to look at. Absent that evidence, I'm siding with our intelligence agencies over Assange.
There is no evidence russia hacked the election, there is only some circumstantial evidence that some hacking groups related to russia or ukraine might have hacked John Podesta's emails. I don't believe assange or the cia, even though assange actually has a much better record for being truthful than the CIA does. I believe in evidence and until I see actual evidence one way or the other I'm not taking anybodies word for it. Sent from my F3111 using Tapatalk
Do you really believe in evidence? Why do you keep dismissing evidence that yards allowed isn't the best measure of defensive ranking as it relates to winning? No.. you've repeatedly ignored evidence that points allowed should take priority over yards allowed.. evidence is correlation to win%.
Points allowed is not entirely dependent on the defense. It is also related to time of possesion and wether the offense is rumming the ball successfully or not. Even so If you allow a team to drive 80 yards down the field and only hold them to field goal at the end I dont label that a success as you allowed them to eat up the time of possesion, tire out your players on defense, and not allowed your offense to get on the field and get in rythm. Also when your offense is running the ball well as we have with ajayi that contributes to less points being scored on the defense since they are on the field less. Sent from my F3111 using Tapatalk
Go back and look at post #90 where I agreed with you that it's a concern. Then the subsequent discussion leading to post #100 should have cleared things up about where I stand. I only said points allowed is relatively speaking (far) more important than rushing yards allowed, not that rushing yards allowed is "unimportant". I hope I don't have to repeat this again..
And yards allowed is ENTIRELY dependent on the defense and not at all influenced by time of possession or the offense? C'mon.. correlation to win% is very strong evidence you should be using points allowed, and we are ranked #18 this year. In post #200 you said if we were ranked there you'd agree the defense overachieved. So the defense has overachieved with Vance Joseph using your criteria + evidence-based metrics for defense. .. at least if you actually care about evidence-based reasoning.
So...20-25 would be "over achieving," but 30th is Vance being completely terrible? Frankly, a defensive unit featuring basically 2 starting caliber players is overachieving to be ranked anywhere over dead last.
I said high teens to low twenties which would be 18-22. And I never said vance is completely terrible, I just said that he has not shown himself to be this great coach that alot of people are making him out to be. And you are exagerating about the number of starters we have. Cam, suh, branch, mitchell/phillips, alonso, abdul kudus, byron maxwell, and tony lippett have all shown themeselves to be starting caliber players and have been healthy for most of the season. Sent from my F3111 using Tapatalk
No one (to my knowledge) has compared him to Belichick, or thinks he's behind hacking a Vermont electrical substation. We're simply saying that he seems to be a good coach and a bunch of folks who matter think the same thing. Everyone starts from somewhere, man. I'm glad he's starting here.
Please dude. Isa has missed significant time, as had Maxwell. We were down both starting corners at one point, believe. Lippett wouldn't be starting anywhere. The two starting caliber I was thinking if were Suh and Cam, obviously. I'll agree with Kiko, so that makes three. Branch/ Mitchell/Phillips aren't all on the field at the same time. So, we have 4, at best, starting caliber players?
From the horses mouth himself. Vance blames himself and problems with his scheme for our inability to stop the run this season. Not so much the players. Kudos to vance for taking responsibility. http://www.miamiherald.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/barry-jackson/article124755264.html Sent from my F3111 using Tapatalk
He could have done what all of you guys are saying and just blame it on injuries. Sent from my F3111 using Tapatalk
In what way? In terms of what vance said about the defense not being able to stop the run he takes full responsibility. Sent from my F3111 using Tapatalk
I was not disingenuous, he blamed himself for the most part. He said the defensive end play was not great "early in the season". The defensive end play is not the issue now and we still cant stop the run. He clearly is puting most of the blame on himself and "his scheme up front,". Sent from my F3111 using Tapatalk
Ah yeah, this is clearly Vance Joseph admitting that the Wide-9 scheme is bad and problematic and he should never have run it. Rather than him talking about uh...snap counts, bad play from FA DEs they relied on, and some of the personnel realities unfolding like they did.
So, now it's "blamed himself for the most part," and not "took full responsibility"? And you still want to claim you weren't being disingenuous, even though you're now admitting that your first statement want really correct.
You are arguing semantics. The point is he himself admits there are problems with his scheme. Which is contrary to what you guys are saying which is that the scheme and coaching is not a problem and all the blame lies with the players and injuries. Sent from my F3111 using Tapatalk
So you are just going to ignore his own critique of his own scheme? His critique of the defensive en play was "early in the season" when cam wake and branch were not starting. The de play is no longer a problem per vances own admission, and according to the article his mission in the off-season is going to be to improve his scheme. Sent from my F3111 using Tapatalk
It's not semantics, dude. You said he took full responsibility, which was untrue. He took part of the responsibility, but laid blame, albeit generically, on the players. I get sick and tired of trying to have discussions where people are simply spouting false information add truth. If someone didn't read the link, only your summary, they would not have the correct view of what was said in the article. Again, would you like the defensive coordinator to poor his players on blast publicly right before a playoff have?
If there was no problem with the scheme and it was just the players fault he would not be saying there is a problem with the scheme. Sent from my F3111 using Tapatalk
It's not a lot.. but it's not zero either (so it matters somewhat, but nowhere near something like points allowed). Generally, opponent rush yards per game has a correlation of anywhere between -0.2 and -0.3 with winning percentage while points allowed per game has a MUCH stronger correlation of -0.7 or -0.8.. (for those unfamiliar with the negative sign, it's because it's for the defense.. meaning the more the opponent has, the less likely it is you win, so you want to compare the absolute values of those numbers). Among key opponent rushing stats, the one that has the least correlation (often close to zero) is opponent yards per carry. However, opponent rushing attempts tends to be higher than opponent rush yards per game.
And? No one is saying the scheme is perfect, cause no scheme is. I'm arguing you misrepresented what vance said. And you did misrepresent it, and are continuing to.
This went from ignorant to incoherent. Your point is that the scheme and/or Vance Joseph aren't good. What does that have to do with any of this? Vance Joseph vaguely made a mistake by relying on Jason Jones and Mario Williams?
And he implemented the wrong scheme per his own admission. Something he now has to fix in the offseason because he couldn't adjust during the season. All of these are bad coaching decisions. This is his first year as a DC and he deserves another year to correct his mistakes, but that doesnt mean we cant criticize him for the mistakes he has made this year. Mistakes which alot of people seem to want to ignore. Sent from my F3111 using Tapatalk
No, that's repeating what you already said that didn't make any goddamned sense in the first place. How was starting Jason Jones and Mario Williams a schematic mistake rather than about personnel?
A lot of this is related to the fact that rushing is often related to clock management. Teams rush more, and opposing defenses expect runs making rushing less efficient when the team has a lead. Teams rush less and opposing defenses allow higher ypa when teams are behind.
Are you guys brain dead? he said the defensive end play was part of the problem "early on", not anymore. And that a big part of the problem lies with "the scheme up front", which he has to fix in the offseason. Playing mario williams and jason jones over andre branch and cam wake early in the season was a coaching decision, and the scheme that is being used is also a coaches decision, both of which fall under vances responsibility since he is the dc. Vance made mistakes and he admits them, yet you guys just want to ignore it and act like he has done nothing wrong and its all the players fault. Sent from my F3111 using Tapatalk
It's nobodies fault, because the premise that the defense is performing poorly is faulty. The defense is 12th in YPA, 8th in fumble rate, and 10th in interception rate. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Gtfo, so there is nothing wrong with the defense? What the f are you smoking man? Its one of the worst defenses in the league the coaches themselves admit it. We almost always have to outscore opponents in a shootout if we want to win games becaue the defense can hardly ever stop anybody. Sent from my F3111 using Tapatalk
And again...what is the point? You've got literally no idea what he is referring to because it isn't explained, and there's very little chance you would understand it if he specifically referenced it. You're basically saying "SEE, HE MADE A MISTAKE!" while being totally unable to tie it to anything.
When he refers to "the scheme up front" it is obvious he is referring to the wide 9 since that is the scheme they have been running all season. You continue to try and ignore the fact that there are problems with the scheme, that vance has made some bad decisions this year both personel wise and scheme wise and he admits it. He is not this great infallible coach which alot of you paint him out to be and the blame for the defense performing poorly is not all the fault of the players or injuries. That is the point. Sent from my F3111 using Tapatalk
Yeah.. it's worth mentioning that among stats that have NO scoring component in them (for offense or defense), the ones that generally correlate the best with winning have to do with takeaways/giveaways, so it's good when your offense or defense does well there. Generally the correlations for takeaways are in the 0.4-0.5 range while for giveaways they're often stronger than -0.5. The best one tends to be the one that summarizes it all: turnover differential. TO differential (per game) is correlated at around 0.6-0.7 to win% so it's a really good stat. Dolphins ended +2 which is tied for #13.. not bad really (of course that's offense + defense).
It would be a logical fallacy to pose this question - you could find things wrong with the overwhelming majority of NFL defenses. Feel free to share anything where a coach places the teams performance into context of their relation to other teams. Miami has not been in many games that would be considered shootouts, and the times they did could be pretty strictly categorized as games against Tyrod Taylor and Colin Kaepernick. Your argument at this point is that the defense is bad, and the most you're willing to do to establish your argument is stating that "it's one of the worst defenses". The empirical data simply don't support the premise. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
