That's just words that sound good when said fast, but don't really hold up. As Contrarian Bell, pointed out, Martin sabotaged the locker room. That's not a problem with control. That's a problem with the person. Philbin did not have the power to get rid of Martin. That's dumb. If Martin can be developed than any player can, and if a player busts out then its always the coaches fault. Also, you're now stepping all the hell over your own argument form earlier. So we're all clear, its Philbin's job to develop players, so when martin busts out its his fault but when tannehill improves Philbin had nothing to do with it. Weak sauce.
That's vague, I don't see the logic in a GM who brings in Dansby and Bush then to turns around and lets them walk, your admitting you made two large mistakes..
Yes, any player can be developed. That doesn't mean any player can be developed into a good player. But it certainly is reasonable to expect some improvement to a certain degree. Jon Martin ended up worse when he left than when he arrived. And I literally said the Martin pick was a black eye for the front office. The selection of the player and the development of the players should be evaluated separately. And when the hell did I say Philbin had nothing to do with Tannehill's development? I have no idea who to attribute his development to.
WADR, that makes no sense. For your argument to make sense, then GMs around the league would rarely get rid of players they brought in.
I'm all for a head coach doing it his way for the allotted time he gets..I'm just not gonna ignore the signs of the way he wants to shape the team.. He gets his third year, with support from me.
No, not any player can be developed. That's absurd. Wait, help me out here, you know Philbin is at fault for not developing Martin, but you have no idea who is at fault for helping Tannehill develop?
That's funny since he was cited as one of the most overpaid players by Forbes magazine. http://blogs.trb.com/sports/custom/business/blog/2012/09/miami_dolphins_dansby_3_jets_a.html Even Armando cites Dansby play as the reason he was cut. Now Armando does mention that Dansby irked Philbin at times but then dismisses it as something they could have work around had he played better. Read more here: http://miamiherald.typepad.com/dolp...phins-to-cut-karlos-dansby.html#storylink=cpy http://miamiherald.typepad.com/dolphins_in_depth/2013/03/dolphins-to-cut-karlos-dansby.html This notion that Philbin had everyone on the leadership council removed from the team makes a great conspiracy theory but two of the players in question were in the final year of their contract and we know the Phins made an effort to bring back Long.
I believe Dansby was released, and Bush exuded supreme professionalism and good production, why would the GM who brought those two in want out?
The two aren't the same thing, no matter how many different ways you've tried to make them the same thing through the course of this argument. We had insider info on the Martin stuff that was later confirmed (much later) through the media. The Dansby thing had speculation and nothing more. But even if it wasn't, it had no bearing on the Martin thing as the majority of the martin stuff happened when Dansby, Long & Bush were there already.
- Dansby didn't live up to his contract nor did he provide the skill set Coyle was looking for. ireland found a younger & cheaper replacement who did have the skill set Coyle was looking for. - Bush was at the end of his contract and old for a RB. We felt Miller would provide exactly what Bush did but younger and cheaper. Ireland has never displayed an ego when it comes to cutting bait on a player. He's shown an ego in many other ways, but not that one.
Actually, Philbin says he doesn't get involved with developing players, that's up to the positional coaches. So he is ultimately responsible, because he hires the positional coaches, yes. But he says he's hands off when it comes to developing players. His words, not ours. Philbin's culpability, if any, is hiring the wrong coach. http://blogs.palmbeachpost.com/thed...herman-and-coaches-to-develop-ryan-tannehill/
Its not my argument, its Stringer's. Also, I'm not arguing with you, but do you have a link to that, because I have not read that?
This. The staff Philbin brought in with him was bad. The lockerroom culture fell apart. The team fell apart with the playoffs on the line. To me those are very Head Coach-related problems.
Maybe Lazor is fine with Taylor. Maybe he likes having a guy that already has Tannehill's rapport and trust. Everyone always said that Taylor sucked, but they never really gave a reason why they thought that.
People assumed that he was only hired due to nepotism but maybe he is good at his job. It was the same with Tony Sparano, Jr but he has stayed on with the Jets after his Dad was canned and was even recently promoted.
I don't think either of these things have anything to do with Philbin, or if they do it's very faint praise. I don't agree at all, if anything the team was worse than the record change suggests. This team folded with the kind of intensity normally seen by winners in a lot of key situations. I like the Lazor hiring. Not that it amounts to anything, but I think I mentioned him as an OC candidate I liked before he was brought up by anyone else. That doesn't mean even if it turns out to be a good hiring it outweighs all the bad.
