Why? Because if they are that tired, right from the get go, then there is a huge issue with our conditioning coaches and program. Is it really your contention that is the offense's fault that the defense is routinely giving up 19-27 points IN THE FIRST HALF? There is literally no way that the defense is that tired. See, I get accused of "blaming" other parts of the team, instead of putting the "blame" where it should be, supposedly, only on the offense, specifically, on Tannehill. However, all I'm trying to do is point out, that the entire team, in all aspects, is really lacking. There is nothing you can say that will defend the defense giving up 19-27 points in the first half of 5 games. We lost those games, by the way. Now, one can argue that the offense is struggling too. And they are. But that isn't an excuse for the downright poor play of the defense in the first half of games.
False. It's happened 5 times this year, 3 of which were at the very beginning of the year (Week 2-5) when the team was in complete disarray and Coyle finally got the boot.
I honestly don't understand why we aren't communicating properly. I know you think he's been evaluated on his ability to audible. I'm saying you are making an assumption that he was evaluated on audibling at all. For all you know Lazor didn't want anyone changing plays he called and didn't evaluate Tannehill on his ability to audible at all. You are making an assumption. Your post before this one was about you questioning another poster about them making assumptions, but you're doing that here.
Further: Game 2, Jax: 1st Q 10 points, 2nd Q 10 points Game 3, Buf: 1st Q 14 points, 2nd Q 13 points Game 4, NYJ: 1st Q 10 points, 2nd Q 10 points Game 7, NE: 1st Q 7 points, 2nd Q 12 points Game 8, Buf: 1st Q 9 points, 2nd Q 10 points So, the defense gave up an average of 8 in the first, and 11 in the second through those games. Games 9-11: Eagles, gave up 16 in the first Dallas, gave up 14 in the second Jets part 2, gave up 7 in first and 7 in second So, yes, against the Jets, I agree, offense should be able to score 1 td a quarter. But, overall, the defense has been giving up points early and often, and people are blaming the offense, saying the defense is "tired." That's garbage for the first half. The defense didn't stop teams, allowing them to string together long, time consuming drives. It's a team game, guys.
Best to adjust this to NET points given up in the 1st half. That means you subtract 7 from those numbers for each INT returned for a TD by our defense, and also subtract 7 for each INT returned for a TD by the opposing defense (because that's our offense's fault). At the bottom of this page you see when those occurred (including which quarter): http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/mia/2015.htm Basically you have to subtract 7 points from those numbers from 4 games: #3, #6, #10 and #12. This is actually important statistically speaking because the average given up in the 1st half then becomes 11.4 points per half, which basically gets you to 23 points per game, which is exactly the NFL average. So our defense is average in the 1st half.
All happened in the first half, as you can see in the link. And in principle one could look at safeties too, but that's so small an effect it won't make a difference.
Or defense scoring points has nothing to do with how many points are given up. I'll agree that we should deduct points from those first half numbers for pick sixes thrown by Tannehill. How many pick sixes has Tannehill thrown this season?
Tannehill's thrown 2 pick 6's, one in the first Buffalo game and the other against Dallas. And of course you should look at net points instead of just those the defense "gives up", especially when you put "win" or "loss" next to those numbers. Giving up 14 but scoring 7 in the 1st half leads to a vastly different win probability than giving up 14 (and scoring zero).
Buf paRT 1, int for td, 2nd Q Dallas int for td, 2nd Q So, Defense only allowed 6 points in the second quarter of the Buffalo game, instead of 13. Defense allowed 7 points in second quarter against Dallas. Also, we scored int for tds against Tennessee, Houston, and Baltimore. None of those were games where the defense gave up 19-27 points in the first half.
Sure, the point wasn't really about win/loss, that was like a secondary point, and in that regard, I agree, net points is important. The point, initially, was to dispel this myth that the defense is only allowing teams to score once they're tired out.
The only thing I'll say is that considering how quick Lazor gave up on the running game when we were down, should play a factor as well. I don't know much of a factor it should play, but it should be counted somehow.
...... and there you have it. 11.4pts per 1st half SHOULD be competitive enough. Of course we're talking about a pitiful scoring offense led by Ryan Tannehill. Sadly, some will remain obtuse to it.
From the get? No, but by the first half if the offense can barely stay in the field, you can expect them to be tired. Routinely 19-27 in a half? Five times out of 11 is bad and nobody is saying it's not but if the offense helped out more, it'd happen less often. The higher end would be closer to 15-20. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It happened five times total. Three of them were in Weeks 2-5 before Coyle got fired. Then again, CBrad just provided the adjustment for one of them (Buffalo game) because Tanny had a pick 6. The defense hasn't been world beaters, but they've been competitive enough in the first half. Unfortunately the scoring offense is dreadful.
Because, his figuring doesn't discount what I'm arguing against. I'm arguing this notion you're proposing that the defense allows points because they're tired. I'm showing you that's not the case.
Yeah, I was editing my post lol. Exactly, 3 out of 5 were with Coyle and Tannehill had a pick 6. So it's happened twice since. I knew there was something off about that. It hasn't felt like that. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You're not showing that at all. Coyle was responsible for 3 out of 5. You're still not juxtaposing 3rd down conversions and time of possession with points allowed. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Again. What is preventing the defense from, you know, playing defense, and stopping the other team? Answer: the defense is not that good either. Like I've said, you guys want to lay all the blame for everything on Tannehill, when the reality is, these are complete team losses.
In the 2nd half they're most definitely gassed in many of these games. They're getting no help ...... I don't know how you can sit there with a straight face and argue about it.
WHY WOULDN'T TWO NFL OFFENSIVE COORDINATORS OF THE SAME DAMN TEAM EVALUATE THE SAME DAMN QUARTERBACK'S ABILITY TO AUDIBLE?????? ARE YOU KIDDING ME??? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'm not arguing second half. I don't know how you can sit there with a straight face and say that to me.
It's easier to come up with conspiracies of shackles and chains than accepting the obvious. Strange I know.
Yeah, just like the offense. I've said this numerous times. You aren't getting me on that. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
No, that was directed at Rock, and others, who claim I'm making excuses when I point out these same things for the offense. Like, it's possible to be unhappy with the offense, or Tannehill, without laying all the problems unfairly at his feet.
The offense averages just under 4pts per 1st half this year. Think about that. EDIT: This is wrong. That stat was during the stint RESNOR mentioned when the defense gave up double digit first halves.
I'm not misrepresenting anything. I'm pointing out flaws in arguments that have been made all season long. Including when Coyle and Philbin were still here. It's hilarious that I'm the one that's accused of being intolerant of others views, and being rude to posters in an attempt to supposedly run them off the site.
Can you please juxtapose 3rd down conversions and time of possession with points given up at the half? If you're not gonna do that, there's no context. Like Rock and cbrad mentioned, you factored in a Tannehill pick six. I believe Rock mentioned that our offense has scored 47 points in all first halfs combined through 11 games. That's beyond pitiful. Any defense would suffer greatly with play like that on the other side of the ball. To clarify, Rock, you mean offense exclusively and you're not factoring in special teams or defense, correct? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I didn't even factor in the defense and S/T. Those 1st half scoring numbers for the offense might actually be different (i.e. less). I'm just too tired to go look it up.
Wait a second... You mean to tell me we've scored 47 points combined in all 11 first halfs and some of that may be from defense and special teams? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
EDIT: Need to re-read the site I just posted. This site is showing us as dead last in first half TOP % share: https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/1st-half-time-of-possession-share-pct
No surprise there. We don't stick to running and Tannehill can't convert a third down to save his life. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Incorrect. They are averaging just over 10 points in the first half. Maybe there's a reason why the OC was fired?
I couldn't agree more. We've given up 25 per game on average, but we've been blown out 4 times (41 & 33 against Buffalo, 36 New England, 38 Jets). In the other eight games though, we've given up an average of 19 per game...that's 3rd overall in the league. And it's hard to say they suck when in 8 of 12 games, they've been a top 3 defense in points against.
You can do it, if you like. We've scored a total of 127 points in first half. I didn't go through and find the pick sixes, so, it might change a bit. I find it hard to believe it will drop our overall offensive points from 127 to 47 in the first half.
