There were a couple of things that should concern us from the Denver game. With a lot of rest, we did terrible tackling. Third, The D basically laid down and the secondary was out of position most of the game. 2nd when the game was on the line, we couldn't drive and score, Wallace was hurt on the last drive and without Wallace, none of the receivers on the field got much separation. Most importantly, Philbin and Co was unable to adjust to the blocking scheme that Denver was using on our DTs, a scheme that could have easily been countered by Philbin and Coyle to shut down their run game and force Manning to beat us. I think we still have the talent to win, but with the injuries, not 4-1. We'll get out coached barring a complete turn around by them; playing more press on D and more balance with the run game on O.
Philbin's "team" gives up in the fourth quarter now? Do you believe in the "clutch" intangible? Is Tom Brady really clutch, or does he only appear to be clutch because of Bill Belichick? Like, if Brady was our QB do you believe he would swap places with Tannehill and be one of the worst in the league on this list instead of the best?
The thing is that situation was almost identical to the end of game situation vs the Chargers last year. The difference is Tannehill took a sack on the 3rd and 9 and because of that sack which kept the clock running they ran out of time and we won the game. The difference was the punt was much better in the Chargers game and they had to start from inside the 20. I believe a better punt forcing them to go another 20 yards wins the Green Bay game too. If Philbin ever needed a lesson in game management he should have "learned" from the Chargers game, because that sack ended up working out beautifully for us.
This is whats really impressive to me about coaches like Bill Belichick, Jim Harbaugh and Joe Philbin. When I work out some calculations on coaching decisions they make on the fly they are almost always mathematically correct. Clearly they all have an innate understanding of game theory that most people don't have even with the benefit of unlimited time and zero pressure from their couches. I guarantee even in hindsight Philbin is more concerned with our putrid effort on that second and nine, and Wheelers inability to cover a warm corpse than any of his defensive timeouts...
Were you there? I ask because there is a poster that was there and he said he and a bunch of other fans were begging for a timeout there. And he doesn't even like Philbin but defended his use of the timeout in that situation.
Crunch, I have learned more from club than any other form of information I can find on the team. And other teams as well. These guys are very knowledgeable about football. I may not remember it all but, I sure enjoy it. Thanks to all of you.
Who cares if we were without Branden Albert & JaWuan James? We scored 36 pts thanks to Lazor's offense and Tannehill's sudden emergence this year with Lazor aboard. I don't care what you think Coyle did or didn't do against Denver because the defense had already given up before Denver ever took the lead. lol, this coming from the guy who one paragraph earlier talks about blaming Coyle for the loss. When we win by 13+ on the back of either Lazor's higher scoring offense or Coyle's talented defense, or both, then Lazor and/or Coyle deserve most of the credit. Why wouldn't they when it's Lazor's offense, not Philbin's, and when Joe has nothing to do with defense? If we were winning those games because of stellar head coaching, then Philbin's team wouldn't be losing as many close 4th quarter games as it does, nor would it be blowing as many 4th quarter or 2nd half leads as it does. I'd give Joe plenty of credit for winning 4th quarter games.... if he weren't so busy losing them. So he gets blamed for them instead since one of his responsibilities as a head coach is to prepare his team for these very moments and to have them focused when they arise, both of which he distinctly seems to not excel at. This talented Miami team ranks 9th in scoring and 8th in pts allowed, yet in the 4th quarter Philbin's squad ranks 27th in scoring and 25th in pts allowed. So either Lazor & his quality offense and Coyle & his quality defense are both coincidentally sh***ing the bed in the 4th quarter and losing 4th quarter games or Philbin isn't a good head coach, hasn't been able to get his team prepared for the 4th quarter, and doesn't know how to motivationally, inspirationally, or energetically tap into his team's psyche to get them up and focused for the 4th quarter, for critical games, or for critical moments in games. The 2007 SB winning Giants concluded the season with a 14-6 overall record. They were 5-1 in games decided by 4 or less, including 3 straight in the post season. This doesn't include 4 games they overcame 4th quarter deficits in [7 pts, 3 pts, 9 pts, 4 pts] to win by 5+ points each. Additionally, NY lost only one game they had a 4th quarter lead in [including 4 post season games]. So of 14 games they had a 4th qtr lead in, they lost just 1 [excluding games where NY gained the lead in the final minute and left the opponent with nothing to work with]. That season was with a team ranked 14th in scoring, 17th in pts allowed, 13th in points differential, 26th in turnover margin, 20th in passer rating, 14th in opponent passer rating, and only won 3 games by 13+ points.... But they knew how to win close games and win in the 4th qtr. NY's 2011 SB team duplicated this ability. Through 11 games, Philbin's 6-5 Dolphins are 0-3 in games decided by 4 or less, have yet to overcome a 4th qtr deficit for a win, and have lost 3 games that they had a 4th qtr lead in. This is with a talented team ranked 9th in scoring, 8th in pts allowed, 8th in pt differential, 10th in turnover margin, 9th in passer rating, 9th in opponent passer rating, and have won 5 games by 13+ points. Now, you wanna blab about how the almighty Philbin doesn't get enough due credit for the 1-game-over-.500 job he's done this year with our 10th place team in the AFC, but it seems to me that you don't give enough credit to the talented team Joe has [including the outstanding addition of Bill Lazor]. You act like his 6-5 record is an overachievement while being saddled with a slew of scrubs. Seriously man, if you think Joe is such a great head coach, WTH do think this roster's record would be with an average one? It would have to be 5-6 at best. I mean, if Joe were a good HC then he'd be responsible for at least +1 in our win column, but with the way you're praisingly rambling on about him and talking down to other members who disagree, you obviously think he's Vince Lombardi 2.0 so he's gotta be responsible for at least +2 in the win column. So what you're essentially suggesting is this is a 4-7 team w/o Joe. Allow me a moment's pause to contain my laughter. This team, especially with the addition of Lazor, is good enough to do 6-5 in its sleep, yet that's the best we're doing with Philbust as head coach. A good head coach would have us 7-4. A great one would have us 8-3 or 9-2, b/c we could very easily be that right now. Until Joe proves himself as a HC, he hasn't proven himself as a HC. It's that simple.
If we lose either Jets game or Minnesota game he should absolutely be gone. But he should absolutely be gone if we miss the playoffs anyway. I would give the Coordinators another year or let the new HC hire his own.
not sure what your implying, sounds like your telling those who say they made a mistake in the greenbay game that we shoulnt because of our position, the couch..I'm a very fair critic to our team, coaches and players. this was not a difficult decision unless his players fu##ed up and were not set..if they weren't imo he outthought himself in the moment.. Philbin from my knowledge, is a film rat, he strikes me as someone who wouldn't let it roll in that situation, wouldn't take into account everything that was favoring us in that moment because they are things that weren't tangible, and would do the opposite, ignore it, and take the kodak moment, safer that way.. I can see him playing the odds like a book, but if there was one situation that called for letting it ride, that was it.
yup, can't lose to the vikings at home during a playoff run...the team failed last year in the same situation, cannot repeat at home.. gotta have 10 wins with how these games set up.
That is what he said. He said contrary to what the fans might have felt watching on TV it was not the offense that looked in disarray, it was our defense, and they looked gassed. My general rule of thumb on this matter would be: never assume Aaron Rodgers and the Packers offense is in disarray or flustered. If I called a timeout that 1 in a thousand time that he happened to be flustered, oh well. But I'll continue to play the percentages.
Why is he ballless for trusting his D to finish the game vs an elite QB like Rodgers? He did the same thing vs Brady, Luck, Rivers and Roethlisberger. Was he a coward in those situations as well?
Yes, I get it. You don't like Philbin. I've been not liking Philbin, though not as viscerally as you, since he got here. Ya know, back in 2012-2013 when all losses were Ireland's fault and Joe was the innocent new guy being hamstrung by the old guard, as Lazor is now, according to you that is. Look at the way you reel off team stats that we rank highly in, you even put team in all caps lol. But the ultimate team stat, wins and losses, you separate into losses only and pin it on one guy. That's simply not how it works.
There are a couple reasons to call TO in that spot, primarily bc it gives our pass rushers time to gas up for one last play. Fans should know to get loud before 4th and 10 with or without a timeout prior and even at its loudest Sun Life isn't a significant impediment to offensive execution. Mainly what I take issue is that one decision is being overblown on an epic scale. I'm curious why no one has mentioned the actual 4th and 10 play. The routes, coverages, pass pro, pass rush etc. Guys seem content to just blame the TO call, like the players didn't go out and decide the issue afterwards. Its naive.
Is it? You would disagree with the ranking then? When Tannehill failed to make a first down to close out Detroit and Green Bay he gave Rodgers and Stafford the opportunity at the game winning drive. Tannehill also had the ball for a chance at the GWD at Denver but failed, so Manning got one. That chart doesn't even include this seasons games so he's actually at 5-16 now for a 0.238 percentage.
Yes when you are facing two backup cornerbacks.3-9 run is low percentage play trust your qb and go for the win.
80 yards or more they all needed to score, he also had enough points on fhe board that a FG wasn't enough and needed a TD to win or at least a FG would have just tied it, these losses this year against GB, Detroit and Denver are all on defense Sent from my iPhone 6 Plus using Tapatalk
Well, some defenses don't get put in that position because they have QBs capable of making a first down even in the last 3 minutes of the game. Which is why those QBs are higher on the list, and ours, who is 0 for 9 at closing out games in the 4 minute drill, is close to the bottom.
It's no coincidence that even during Ryan Tannehill's stretch of much better play over the last eight games, the team has been beaten by the three best QBs in the league at clutch play, two of them being the best QBs in the league overall. The game revolves around QB play, and we're not up there with the big boys just yet.
So our defense is considered to be good, especially if they don't have to make a critical stop at the end of the game..really? Should the offense or QB say that The Defense should not be putting us in position because other great QB's have defenses that are capable of stopping 70 yard drives at the end of games? I believe that a few 1st downs would have won those games, but by no means should that be an excuse when the defense has ample oppurtunities to close out games...and they Fail. So we want to consider our D to be above average , as long as they do not have to prove it in the last few minutes.
I dunno, seems to me that OL and DL play have been better predictors than anything else this season. When we control the LOS we win, if not, we lose. We have wins over Brady and Rivers, losses vs Smith and Manuel. Denver dominated the LOS in the 2nd half, that was difference, Tannehill and Manning basically played to a draw. Looking at the last 5 games, NE is the only team that should give us trouble w/o controlling the LOS. If the big boys up front handle their biz there's no reason we shouldn't reach 10-6.
In the 4th quarter, Manning's QB rating was 146, and Tannehill's was 82. In a close game such as that, that sort of outdueling at the QB position in the clutch is going to be associated with a win for the team with the upper hand the vast majority of the time. Peyton Manning essentially became the equivalent of what we used to see with Michael Jordan in the 4th quarter on the basketball court -- an unstoppable player, regardless of the strength or the play of the defense. And that's the sort of clutch play that's beaten the Dolphins three times during the recent eight-game stretch in which Ryan Tannehill has played much better than he had previously. He still doesn't have what it takes to go toe-to-toe with the greats in the league in the clutch. That's not to say he won't get there someday, but it isn't today.
In the Green Bay and Detroit games the defense got the offense the ball back with under 4 minutes left, with the lead still in tact.
And the problem there is that, without the threat of the downfield pass, opposing defenses can crowd the line of scrimmage and take away the run game and the short passing game that teams would most likely want to use to close out a game in a four-minute offense. Consequently the Dolphins are easily stopped in those situations, because they don't pose the threat of the downfield pass. They're essentially relegated to 10- and 12-play drives in those situations, ones that have a higher likelihood of reaching a 4th down and a punt, rather than being able to get down the field more efficiently.
One stat I find strange is Tannehill is 0 for 9 in "close outs" where I define a close out as having a one score lead with under 4 minutes left and at least one pass attempt to pick up the first. Russell Wilson is 2-1 in closing out games, whats strange is we have so many more of those types of situations in about the same amount of games. Wilson has 13 game winning drives compared to Tannehill's 4 however. It seems like we must have the lead in the final minutes much more often in close games than Seattle does, which you would think would be to our benefit, but it doesn't seem to be working out that way.
There are 21 other players on the field and they play a role as well. Dumbing it down to QB play does exactly what the term implies.
In the 227 games since 2004 in which a QB had a QB rating at least as high as Peyton Manning's in the game against Miami, his team won 220 of them (97%). And Manning's QB rating in the 4th quarter was even 11 points higher than it was for the game overall.
We've closed out several teams prior to the last 4 mins. The drive to finish off the Pats was especially satisfying. Right now we're lacking a RB who has the physicality to grind out yards, Moreno was supposed to be that guy. I really think we win the Denver game if we'd been able to run the ball in the 2nd half.
Manning is Manning. I just tip my cap to him. What upsets me is that we didn't stop Manning, and we didn't defend the run either, that's why we lost.
That's what concerns me about the Pats and Baltimore, and any good team we play from now out. Both KC and Peyton were able to expose our D with mismatches, both in the secondary and blocking up front.
In the Green Bay and Detroit game, the defense was on the field with less than 3 min with the lead still in tact. In fact, only had to stop a touchdown to preserve that in tact lead. You keep showing 0 for 9 for RT...any record for the defense on the field with a chance to win with only giving up a TD to lose? This Defense is supposed to be the strength of this team. When we had a better O than D (Marino) I never put it on the defense to close out games. This defense had to hold them out of the endzone, not a FG. The Defense had the advantage vs the Lions and Packers on those last drives...and blew it.
"Close out" means the other team doesn't get another opportunity to score. I don't recall us ever closing out the Pats.
Point being? http://www.pro-football-reference.com/coaches/PhilJo0.htm Joe Philbin: Games over .500: -1 Super Bowl Wins: 0 Overall Championships: 0 Conference Championships: 0 Division Championships: 0 But, hey, Philbin is 7-1 in challenges... so he had that going for him.
