why are u just looking at the last 7 games. why not the last 9? people use stats to benefit whatever they are trying to say. if you go back 2 more games we are 5-4 but i guess that would have ruined the point you are trying to make.
The raides let two of their own guys walk off the field without medical attention, that was a gross display of organizational dis funtion.
That hits it on the spot. As good as the win was yesterday, I'm curios what happens the next few games, against better competition. On the one hand we beat a bad team but on the other hand we crushed them, the Patriots seemed to have had a hard time against them. Another thing that makes me thinking a little bit positive is, that after the bye week we're getting players back that can make us a lot better.
here it is again....instead of enjoying this win, the micro managers are back at it, i don't give a damn if the raiders are a bad team or not...we beat them and we made it look easy and there is nothing that will make me feel bad about this even if the usual suspects have to question everything
Look....it was the Raiders. But everyone saying..whaaa it was the Raiders...we still suck. When is the last damned time we were served up a sacrificial lamb, and went for the slaughter? This was exactly the result we needed before playing Green Bay in two weeks, who by the way have one of the worst run defenses in the NFL, while we have one of the best Run offenses. We should have Koa Misi and Reshad Jones back for this game as well. And our very good rushing offense will only get better as we FINALLY get Mike Pouncey back. And ..look at the starters we didnt have playing either. How many Lbs are we playing with. We didnt have Starks in. So its not like we had our best 46 on the field either.
Last season, at the Jets. We beat them by 20 points. In 2012 we beat the Raiders in Miami 35-13, the Jets at NY 30-9, and the Jags in Miami 24-3.
This is my thought on everything. With the scheduling matrix the way it is, we drew the AFCW and the Raiders. It was a win when the schedule came out and it's a win now. They did what they needed to do and didn't screw around in doing it. Maybe this is a building block? I don't know. However, I'm not taking much stock in it either way. It was great to FINALLY see a stat sheet with 0 sacks. I was hoping it would include 0 TOs also, but of course a Landry muff, a Miller fumble at the GL, & an inaccurate throw and poor catch INT...Still 0 sacks is nice.
That says more about the Patriots, I think, than it says about us. I'll be interested to see what they do against the Chiefs, who dominated us.
Agreed. Also why the hell didn't their coach call a time out when it was obvious his QB couldn't walk? Wtf is that? He let him play more snaps on a busted leg
Every year the logic changes from game to another. Last year we lose the Bucs and we're told good teams win the games they are supposed to. This year we stomp a mud hole in the Raiders and we're told it means nothing. Which is it? So what's the constant? Negative outlook of the team coloring the events.
Wrong. The constant is mediocrity. Look at the record over the last decade. THAT is the constant. The fans' outlook is colored by the record.
Being mediocre does not in any way explain why the benchmarks change. In fact, it should mean the benchmarks don't change until they are achieved. Explain why not beating a bad team is indicative we suck one year, but destroying a bad team the next year means nothing IF our play is consistently mediocre?
The explanation is, no one including most fans is going to believe we aren't mediocre until we make the playoffs again. Period. No matter who we beat or by how much, if we don't finish with a winning record and make the playoffs, no one is going to believe in this team. The Fins have shat the bed at the end of the season too many times for anyone to take them seriously until they prove it.
I don't think the Pats will take the AFC East this year, like I stated before. I think the Bills will take it this year. Even though it was just the Raiders, I'm curious if we can turn this thing around when our starters return after the bye. I think we have the talent to do so, I'm not so sure we got the coaching though.
I see what you're saying, but it doesn't apply to all fans. Doesn't color my outlook. The past decade has absolutely nothing to do with the current team...it's history.
Yes I am. You're asking why people question victories over a bad team as meaningless but then when we lose to bad teams they see it as a sign we're bad. I gave you the answer. People don't believe the Dolphins are for real, so they won't give them credit for overwhelming victories over bad teams. It doesn't matter who they beat or by how much, people won't believe they're for real till they follow through.
That's not a realistic way to look at the NFL. When there is any carry-over, the past is part of the present. We still have the same HC, the same QB and the same owner we did the last two years. We have a very similar defense as we have had the last two years. Unless the whole team changes along with ownership and the front office, the past DOES matter.
People are changing the meaning of nebulous benchmarks. That is more human nature than the actual record of the team. For example, if we were a really good team and we laid an egg against a poor team, no one would say good teams beat those teams, they would say oh well any given Sunday, it doesn't mean anything. In that example, they still change the benchmarks.
If you are playing against a poor team then you go out there and put them to the sword. Phins did that and more. Nobody was expecting the Phins to hammer the Raiders because we played poor in the last 2 games. They did. Looking at in positively i'd say it was a good team effort and they did what any decent team would and should have. Misi, Jones, Pouncey, Starks back after the bye hopefully then the Phins are in good shape to at least be competitive in the East.
Of course, because those aren't real benchmarks, they're just guesswork based on a game or two. The real benchmark is whether a team makes the post-season. We've done it a grand total of once in the last 13 years. That's the real bar that we've got to hurdle, not whether we beat a bad team by a lot of points.
Not a sure one, no...but it's really all we have to go on. If a team has been mediocre or bad for years, the safest prediction is that the trend will continue unless something drastic changes, eg the Broncos getting Manning or the Cardinals getting Kurt Warner.
WADR, I don't think you understood what I was talking about. I wasn't arguing we are good team or anything like that.
The Raiders are 8-28 since 2012 started. They lined up 1 guy against 3 Dolphins WR's at one point. It helped, but the Dolphins also executed well. But it will take more than executing well to beat the Packers with Aaron Rodgers slinging the ball around. Looking at you, secondary. And we're 5th in the NFL in rushing...use it! Don't want to see them retreat from it on short downs like against KC.
I understand that, I'm just saying that you're complaining that when we do something positive as a team then the critics move the benchmark and say we still aren't good, but when we do something bad it just confirms their bias that we're a bad team. I'm trying to say that's not because of any logic or serious reasoning on their part, it's because they don't believe the Dolphins are going to be better than mediocre and they're rationalizing things to match that bias.
ok, but that's what I said but your first post in response to that started with "Wrong." So that's why it seems to me this was a long way around and back to the point that you agree with me.
All I know is when the Pats lose tonight we will be tied for 1st place in the AFC East. After 4 games not too many would have predicated that.
come on alex, you'd have to be turning the other way to ignore how the team has responded after wins, there is legitimate jeckyl and hyde been going on for a while..and when i say that i mean no consistency in staying competitive, after wins weve been getting blown out,so i dont blame some folks.
Since we only have a sample of 1 win this season I would say it's a little premature to say there is a pattern. Other seasons have zero to do with this season on how they respond.