1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Fluffing Philbin

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by Pandarilla, May 23, 2015.

  1. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    13,787
    7,891
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    And, Greg, why is it AGAIN you choose to use playoffs as the measurement of Tannehill? It's not. And handcuffed to a long-term deal? That's hardly a fair assessment, either.
     
  2. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,161
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    I don't think he's the worst coach in the NFL.

    But he's the worst kind of coach. One that isn't bad enough so it's obvious to a man of questionable football accumen like Ross he needs to be fired. But one that isn't good enough to lead anything but the most loaded team to the Super Bowl and win. He's a tweener. And those stick around way too long.

    See Marvin Lewis.
     
    Bpk, Booftard and 3Pmi like this.
  3. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    13,787
    7,891
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Here's a question: If for the next three seasons, Tannehill put up 4k+ yards, a 2:1 td/int ratio, and a mid 90s rating, but we missed the playoffs every year, would you guys still blame Tannehill?
     
  4. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,161
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    He specifically has said, on the record, he didn't work with position players in Green Bay, and he wouldn't work with them here.

    Shocker.

    http://dailydolphin.blog.palmbeachp...herman-and-coaches-to-develop-ryan-tannehill/

    So when someone says you have to give him credit for Tanny's development, I gotta pump the brakes. If you want to give him credit for being forced to fire Mike Sherman, reluctantly, and then get his 3rd or 4th choice in Bill Lazor, fine he gets credit for the guy he never wanted to hire until forced to fire his mentor, and then after the first 3 or 4 guys turned the job down. Sure. He gets credit for that.

    I give Lazor credit for Tanny's jump this year especially since a few games in Lazor saw what Tanny didn't do well, and then tailored the offense to it. Sherman tried to fit a square peg down a round hole. Lazor change the hole into a square one.
     
    Clark Kent, 3Pmi, cuchulainn and 2 others like this.
  5. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh Club Member

    72,252
    43,682
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Wait...what?
     
  6. cuchulainn

    cuchulainn Táin Bó Cúailnge Club Member

    11,132
    9,660
    113
    Sep 7, 2012
    Hattiesburg, MS
    jdang307 likes this.
  7. finsfandan

    finsfandan Well-Known Member

    2,547
    600
    113
    Dec 14, 2014
    That's how I feel. Except that Vikings game this past season where we won off a special teams play and Ross announced a two year extension saved his butt big time.
     
  8. finsfandan

    finsfandan Well-Known Member

    2,547
    600
    113
    Dec 14, 2014
    Depends how efficient he is. His YPA is 31/32. You could put up big stats but if you're taking away valuable possessions from others, it's your fault and the coaches fault that we lose.
     
  9. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh Club Member

    72,252
    43,682
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
  10. Anonymous

    Anonymous Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    14,014
    3,385
    113
    Jul 5, 2009
    Jdang exaggerated the **** out of what he said to make Philbin look bad, lol. Initially he wanted Mcadoo but then he chose the Giants. Then he wanted Lazor but he wanted Detroit then changed his mind and decided he wanted to work with Philbin. Yes we had interest in others but that's called due diligence. How that's painted as a negative I have no idea.

    Let's also not forget the other quality coaches he's hired. He seems to have an eye for that.
     
  11. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,161
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    You are in the Club. Surely you remember the other stuff mentioned. I did not exaggerate. I'll PM you the threads if you need them. No exaggeration. At least the 3rd option. Just like I said in my post.
     
    Bpk likes this.
  12. Anonymous

    Anonymous Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    14,014
    3,385
    113
    Jul 5, 2009
    I'm not in the Club. I used to be. I don't believe everything coming out the club. Been fed too much false info.

    Bottom line he hired Lazor. That's a quality hire.
     
  13. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,161
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    yeah. And as I said, he was the 3rd choice.
     
  14. Anonymous

    Anonymous Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    14,014
    3,385
    113
    Jul 5, 2009
    Lmao, sure. Whatever helps you sleep at night.
     
  15. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    97,936
    50,930
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    your instinct..detecting strong leadership qualities.
     
  16. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,161
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    My baby waking up at 6 am helps me sleep at night.

    Lazor was still the 3rd choice ;)
     
  17. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,161
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    Super bowl wins, playoffs, winning records. You know.
     
    Bpk likes this.
  18. Anonymous

    Anonymous Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    14,014
    3,385
    113
    Jul 5, 2009
    Let's assume that's correct even though it probably isn't. What is the point of mentioning it? His preferred choice was Mcadoo. He's been a success in NY. His second choice was Kubiak. He was a success in Baltimore. His third choice is Lazor. Everyone loves him.

    I just don't see the point in making something up to make Philbin look bad when it really shouldn't make him look bad in the first place. It's a waste of time.
     
    Pandarilla likes this.
  19. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,161
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    I didn't just come up with that in a vacuum. Someone said Philbin is responsible for Tannehill's development this year. So I put that in context. If Philbin had his way, it would probably have been a 3rd year under Sherman with no guarantee of development.

    You don't see the point because you zeroed in on my post instead of following it from the post I was responding to.

    Nothing is made up.

    This is a Philbin fluffing thread. So I fluffed him up. I gave him credit for being forced to fire Sherman, miss on choice #2 which was Macadoo, and hit #3 is Lazor, that's not counting Kubiak, which would make Lazor #4.

    Philbin had a hankering for Macadoo 2 years before, but GB denied him. He was a clear front runner.

    That's fluffing. Giving him more credit for Tanny's development than he probably deserves. If given full control, we'd probably have another season of watching Sherman. Chew on that!
     
    Bpk and Pandarilla like this.
  20. Pandarilla

    Pandarilla Purist Emeritus

    14,275
    4,994
    113
    Sep 10, 2009
    Boone, NC
    You can't fault progress...except in football. Philbin has his plate full in what could be his swan song season. He needs a fast start and the amount of turnover in the roster doesn't tend to favor that. Those first two away games are critical imo.
     
  21. CashInFist

    CashInFist Well-Known Member

    10,071
    2,623
    113
    Nov 30, 2007
    West Virginia
    Got a good laugh out of that. :lol:
     
  22. CashInFist

    CashInFist Well-Known Member

    10,071
    2,623
    113
    Nov 30, 2007
    West Virginia
    Winning...
     
  23. Brasfin

    Brasfin Well-Known Member

    2,435
    1,672
    113
    Apr 27, 2013
    Brazil
    I'm not really sure that's the case.. on defense we only have Suh who plays a lot of snaps, and Phillips and Brice McCain who may play a few, though not as many as Suh... mostly everyone else, besides some other backups, was here last season. On offense we have the WRs and Jordan Cameron, I'll give you that. But last season we were implementing a new system, in which the WHOLE offense had to get accustomed to, yet we still managed to go 2-2 in the first 4 games. I tend to agree with you that the first two games are crictical, because that's likely where we'll experience some hiccups on offense, but other than that, I think we'll pretty much hit the ground running.
     
    Pandarilla likes this.
  24. DolphinGreg

    DolphinGreg Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    4,198
    4,842
    113
    Dec 7, 2014
    I'm saying it because this theoretical coaching candidate the Dolphins are after isn't going to be a fan making excuses, he's going to be someone who looks at the situation and states facts.

    If he sees a QB that hasn't made the Play-offs when 3 out of those 4 seasons the team was very close and virtually any sort demonstration of heroic QB'ing would've gotten the team in, he won't conclude that the QB is bad, but he'll know (as we all would) that the QB doesn't have the ability to carry the team.

    A coaching candidate isn't going to love Tannehill the way you do as a fan. He's not going to look at Tannehill (in the event he has a bad 2015) as this savior of the franchise.

    Again...we're talking about a scenario in which 2015 goes badly...say 8 or fewer wins, no Play-offs, the QB looks middle-of-the-road and the offense once again can't carry the team when the defense struggles.

    In that event, there will be backlash and a coaching candidate will very much question why the team is so confident about their offense when it isn't elite.

    If the team has 10-wins or better, makes the Play-offs and Tannehill puts up the numbers we won't be searching for a new coach so the point is moot.





    I'm not trying to discuss Tannehill or the offense. My previous posts were about how little there is to gain by losing Philbin. You're implying that Miami is going to be an attractive place because Tannenbaum/Hickey are great and Tannehill is great and we have all these great players.

    What I'm saying is...they're only great players if you win. When you have long-term investments and you fail, those same assets become burdens. They're only good assets if you're successful, in which case you're not searching for a new HC!

    Plus, if the team loses then a new coaching candidate isn't going to fix all of what's wrong. The team is tied to its management and it's QB.

    At this point, the HC really isn't having much effect and finding a good coach to take over when he's not given much control and he knows he'll be the first to get fired is way more difficult than anyone wants to make out.
     
  25. DolphinGreg

    DolphinGreg Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    4,198
    4,842
    113
    Dec 7, 2014
    I disagree.

    You have those views because you've followed the team for years and therefore you feel you can confidently trace blame/credit back to this person or that. That's never the case with the new hire because (1) they don't even understand the structure of the company and (2) they don't have most of the facts that a person does who's been following the company for years. A person coming into the job isn't going to be able to understand the Ross-Tannenbaum dynamic so he'll blame/credit both equally. The same thing is true for OC, QB, etc. If the offense hasn't been good enough to make the Play-offs for several seasons, the details will be insignificant. It's the big picture that a new hire will look at.

    In general, my point boils down to this simple analogy...would you join a company that is performing poorly but refuses to get rid of anything more than their accountant? No, you'd probably take the job that either paid more and gave you more authority or you'd take a job with a more stable and reputable company. You're not going to join a sinking ship of a company or one that seems stagnant unless there are major renovations.

    Right now, you're doing what a loyal employee of that company would do. You're telling why it's not the CEO, it's not the engineers, it's not the management. You're telling me it's a great opportunity and I'm looking at it saying, 'if all these people failed the first time, wouldn't I be a fool to believe you?'



    You just have to put yourself outside the perspective of a Dolphins fan which you clearly haven't in your post. You might be able to explain why a new coaching candidate would be successful but if the candidate himself doesn't believe it...
     
  26. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,782
    9,228
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Well.. since you bring it up, you do realize TONS of people take jobs at organizations they don't fully understand the power structure of, don't know the precise history of, etc.. TONS of people accept jobs at companies that are getting rid of just one person in the organization and not starting with a clean slate (actually it's less likely you'll hire someone if you say you're just going to start anew and that this guy is one part of the equation).

    So I don't really know where your intuition is coming from.

    And why do new HC hires accept a new HC job in the first place if it's on a losing team (this is usually the case) AND they are not given GM responsibilities (also usually the case)? Sorry Greg, this isn't what happens in the real world or the NFL most of the time. And like I said, our team has talent, no way Tannehill is going to be a barrier to hiring, so it's actually more attractive than it otherwise would be.
     
  27. DolphinGreg

    DolphinGreg Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    4,198
    4,842
    113
    Dec 7, 2014
    Ok, you're on the right track just keep going...

    Using this analogy, we can easily spot a trend; the worse the company the less qualified their new hires will be. So in terms of the Dolphins--and now I'm explaining the same thing I did a page ago--by the time you get to those coaches that would agree to take the Miami job they are of the same qualification as Philbin thus the team hasn't upgraded. Do you see the point here? There are two big conflicting objectives involved. The worse the team, the more Philbin need replacing, but as the team gets worse so does the attractiveness of the coaching vacancy given that so much control will be held back from the new coaching candidate.

    This IS NOT like every other team with a losing record. Don't make that mistake. What I'm saying is, why take over a 6-8 win team when you have to accept the owner, the VP/DM, the GM, the QB, and the roster that is already in place all the while knowing that it hasn't equated to more than 6-8 wins and that you will be the first one fired if it doesn't get better? If you're a coach looking at that you'll say to yourself, 'if I'm working with the people that made this a 6-8 win team, why should I expect my presence will change that and why would I take the job knowing that I'll be the fall guy when things go wrong?' You can try and get around that but no qualified coach in the world isn't going to have that thought in some form or another. Head coaching candidates--at least the ones who would be considered an upgrade over Philbin--will want control over that stuff and for damn good reasons.

    If I'm going after the CEO of another company because I want him at my company, I'm not going to put a bunch of restrictions on what he'll be allowed to do. If I want to attract him, I obviously have to give him more control than what he currently has and more control versus the majority of the market. Miami will be offering substantially less control than the majority of the market thus they'll have major problems attracting coaches better than Philbin, in fact the entire organizational structure indicates that they prefer a coach like Philbin.




    You may disagree but I really don't think there are any grounds for it here. However, I would expect that most Dolphins fans won't want to hear this as it isn't a comforting scenario. Dolphins fans will look to find a future for the team that is positive and thus will argue based on their inflated impressions of certain individuals within the organization that there must surely be a host of great head coaching candidates just lining up for the Miami job.

    A basic understanding of the system in Miami says that isn't true. Good coaches are like politicians, they want more power, not less--particularly if their reputation and livelihood is on the line during an improvement period. They're not interested in signing up to be someone's subordinate. They want their shot to build a team from the ground up. There are certainly an overwhelmingly number of Philbin-level coaches who Miami could hire and who would all readily take the job as it would be a large promotion but there are few, if any, coaches above Philbin's level that would be interested.
     
  28. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh Club Member

    72,252
    43,682
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    WADR, I'm fairly convinced you're living in a text book and not the real world.

    Nothing your saying takes into account history, human behavior, the structure of the league, etc.
     
  29. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,782
    9,228
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    In almost every case, future job candidates don't know "how well" a company is doing, which in any case can be measured in many ways to give different rankings, so you're not going to find a strong relationship between "how well" the company is doing and quality of new hires, if you control for things like salary and job description, etc... You think someone who wants to work at a fast food chain is going to look at its stock price or financials before deciding where to work??

    Back to the NFL. First of all, most jobs won't be offering both HC and GM responsibilities. No question people want power, so I'm not saying we'd be more attractive than a team offering more control. However, most jobs will be offering HC only. Now.. do you or do you not agree that our roster is better than that of many other teams that might have a (potentially) bad record? So, of all the vacancies (in this scenario), we'd be the more attractive place to work right?
     
  30. DolphinGreg

    DolphinGreg Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    4,198
    4,842
    113
    Dec 7, 2014
    Do you not recognize that NFL head coaching jobs are a system different from fast food? I don't think you appreciate the dynamics involved here if you expect that the same thought processes are taking place at McDonald's. There are 32 NFL HC jobs in the world and these jobs are high-risk. The turn-over is tremendous because the system is nearly chaotic and a small failure like a bad draft (or bad draft pick) can wind up being the reason one team has a franchise QB and another has John Beck or Chad Henne and thus one coach is awarded another contract while another is fired after one year. Even amongst those that manage to get one of these jobs, most never get more than one shot. Fast food is hardly a similar system.

    To your second point, the roster, you are once again failing to appreciate all the facts because you want to believe a certain outcome. Our roster may or may not be considered better but that being out of a coach's control is a major issue. Having to work with a GM you didn't pick is a major issue. Having to work under a VP/DM you didn't pick and may disagree with is a major issue.

    Let me ask you something since you're arguing for change and therefore the burden of proof should be on you. If the VP/DM and the GM are handling the drafts and the QB and the roster are mostly set...what is this new HC going to do exactly?
     
  31. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,782
    9,228
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Greg, just to emphasize the point that almost all HC's do NOT have GM responsibilities, I looked it up and there are only 4 teams where the HC is also a GM or better:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_National_Football_League_staffs

    Those 4 are: Bill Belichick, Andy Reid, Jeff Fisher, and Pete Carroll.

    All the others, and clearly there are many good coaches in this list, took their jobs knowing they wouldn't have GM responsibilities.
     
  32. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,782
    9,228
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    On this one point, of course I understand the dynamics are different. But you told me there should be a strong correlation between how well ANY company is doing and the strength of new hires (controlling for salary and job description), and I'm pretty sure that's not the case because of what I explained (new hires don't even know most of this stuff). So I brought this up only because you did.
     
    Fin D likes this.
  33. DolphinGreg

    DolphinGreg Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    4,198
    4,842
    113
    Dec 7, 2014
    Tell me what the new HC is going to do for the team that is within Philbin's current power and tell me where you're going to get this coach.

    The burden of proof is not on me. It's on the folks who want Philbin to go. We have an organizational structure that won't change. So show me how you can add 3-4 wins by replacing the HC who is not the DC or the OC or the play-caller and most importantly, prove that this coach would be willing to come to Miami given what's here.
     
    Fin D likes this.
  34. DolphinGreg

    DolphinGreg Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    4,198
    4,842
    113
    Dec 7, 2014
    I'm speaking to a general trend.

    You don't think that the more qualified individuals in society tend to get better job offers based on those credentials over the long-term and that the more established and reputable companies tend to attract the better candidates?

    This doesn't seem like rocket science.
     
  35. DolphinGreg

    DolphinGreg Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    4,198
    4,842
    113
    Dec 7, 2014
    Exactly...so if you want an improvement at HC you're going to look at those top-10 or top-5 guys and amongst them there are at least half that have GM responsibilities written in stone, not to mention most, if not all, have an increased voice.

    Again, we are looking for those coaches that would be considered an upgrade, not at all coaches in general. Outside of a few terrible guys, most of the bottom 2/3s are probably doing about the same in terms of management. I don't know that but it's an assumption I'm willing to make.

    I agree with the sentiment that most coaches are "average" while a few are great.
     
  36. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh Club Member

    72,252
    43,682
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    This i agree with, but.....


    ...you lose me with this line of reasoning.

    The NFL is VERY different than other industries/businesses to such a degree that the hiring/firing strategies are not analogous at all.
     
  37. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,782
    9,228
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    HC's want to prove themselves. This is certainly true for all 1st time HC hires. It's also true for those that failed the first time. Maybe they don't think it was primarily their fault the first time. Whatever the reason, don't forget HC candidates are motivated to demonstrate they can lead a team to a SB. So when you ask what a HC can do in Philbin's position, you should ask the HC candidates! They are the ones that clearly think they can do better, and because of our roster, I think more HC candidates will think they can succeed here and not get immediately fired.

    Other reasons why they might choose us. Ross being more patient than some other owners helps. That is, Philbin (for whatever reason) not being fired until possibly his 4th year will help recruit candidates. Also: no one can claim the Dolphins are an unattractive destination for free agents anymore, especially after Suh. So you know you have a FO that will get good FA's. HC's can also see the moves we've made in the last 2 years in the draft to build this roster, and I think they'll approve of that job. Finally, if Tannenbaum can convince great players to sign here, why do you expect that ability to recruit will suddenly go away for coaches?
     
  38. DolphinGreg

    DolphinGreg Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    4,198
    4,842
    113
    Dec 7, 2014
    I find it very hard to believe that the more attractive coaching vacancies...those that may entail a top QB or a top defense or GM powers or the #1 pick in a draft that contains a premier QB candidate...wouldn't be the ones that the most sought-after coaches would choose.

    I find it hard to believe that a premier coaching candidate would elect to go to a team that didn't have those things when he could go to a team that did.
     
  39. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,782
    9,228
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    What? You argued the other way around. You're saying the "better" the company making the offer for the same position/salary, the better the job candidate. Like I said, that's probably not true at all, or if there's a correlation it's got to be hellish weak.

    Of course the opposite is true. The more qualified the job candidate, the better the offer.
     
  40. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,782
    9,228
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    That bolded part is pure speculation, especially given the stats that show only 1/8th of all HC's also have GM responsibilities. If teams wanted a leg up, they'd all offer GM responsibilities. Apparently, that's not necessary to recruit very good coaches in most cases.
     

Share This Page