The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports/miami-dolphins/fl-dolphins-playoff-chances-1122-20101121,0,4568765.story (http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports/miami-dolphins/fl-dolphins-playoff-chances-1122-20101121,0,4568765.story)

story By Steve Svekis, Sun Sentinel
November 21. 2010

are u shittin' me Steve?  I wish the media and Miami would stop talking about playoffs (insert your Jim Mora youtube video here)

this team is in disarray, injury riddled and all-around in a funk.  first and foremost, the Phins have too many injuries at key positions to entertain playoffs ideas.  I think also there are too many teams ahead of Miami that are just BETTER teams then them, pure and simple.

I think this team is also in disarray, from the firing of ST coaches, to benching Henne, to the OFF playcalling, to the mishandling of Marshall, etc, this team has alot of internal problems that need to be addressed before they can move forward.

Sparano seems like a good guy, a players' coach so to speak.  but after this year, he's gonna have to fire his OC, which will be his 3rd coach he's canned.  and like so many of you have said on this board, who's gonna want to play for a HC if he keeps firing guys that are below him and doesnt place the blame on himself.

I believe if the team tanks even further this season and we go 5-11 or 6-10, you have to really consider canning Sparano and starting over.  we have gone downhill since 2008.  you can only use the Injury excuse for so long (other teams deal with it) and I don't see any progress from the team as a whole.

one more thing about Sparano, even though I think the players like him, he should have dealt with Marshall more abruptly than he has.  after the taunting call thursday nite, I would have yanked his a$$ to the sideline and sat him down.  pretty much he is giving the rest of the players a free pass to do whatever they want.  I think he lost some respect with the other players.  this is 2 weeks in a row that Marshall has shown his true colors and I think this an issue.  Marshall is talented no doubt, but no one is above the rest of the team.

I don't think "disarray" is a reasonable description of the current state of the team.

They are injured and have several significant injuries -- and a coaching staff that, for one reason or another, doesn't appear to be quite up to the task (NO, I'm not saying Sparano should be fired, neither now nor after the season, but that's not the topic of this thread).

Players are working well together, however, and with one notable exception, everyone appears on the same page. They just aren't good enough to win a lot of games.

All talk of playoffs should have died out already, clearly.

The reality is that Miami was in "must win" mode this passed Thursday and played their worst game of the year in my opinion.  That pretty much tells you all you need to know.

Only thing left to do now is find out what you have.  I'm hoping that Henne can still play a few games and if he gets in there, he needs to be given an ultra-aggressive game plan and see if can pull it off.  No more taking what the defense is giving you approach BS, let's see a "do what we do best and see if they can stop it" mentality.

I'd like to see the same kinda thing on the defensive side of the ball.  Put the corners on an island and blitz every down.  See who has skills and who doesn't.  I'd rather see us lose by 30 than win by 3 the last 6 games.

This is a perfect example of carrying a post one sentence too far.

Seriously?  You WANT to see us win games?  Why?

Let's suppose the impossible happens.  Let's suppose we actually make the playoffs with a conservative gameplan.  Then what?  Once the playoffs start, you aint winning with that gameplan, pure and simple.  So we have accomplished what exactly?  Nothing.  Zero.  Zip. Nada.

When do we actually start caring about not making the playoffs, but putting together a contender?  When does that start?  In my opinion if you start once you've made the playoffs you've already lost.

For me it started sometime back in the 90's, still waiting.....but I really enjoyed that kool-aid Saban poured for me.

What are the realistic odds we can win enough games to make the wildcard? This is not the pathetic NVC where 8-8 will get you in.

Like it says on the back of my favorite TDMMC t-shirt...

"Almost there...since 1974."

Well from the pyschological aspect of the players I do want to see us win games, or at least keep it close.  Losing breeds losing, just look at the Lions (all though they are playing with a little heart this year).  I agree the Fins should change things up and take some risks to see what works and what doesn't, but if you just go totally crazy you really don't learn anything.

Nice! Where do I get one of those??

Selfishly, because I feel just tad happier when we win! :D  people on the board seem to be less grumpy......

Because I never root for my team to lose and seriously doubt any "fan" that does.

Unless of course...it works and we start winning by 30.  I wouldn't mind seeing that just once.

To those who want us to lose games for a better pick:

When has that ever worked?  God knows there have been plenty of pathetic Bengals, Lions, Raiders, Cardinals, etc. teams that have gone out there and furiously laid down.  What did that do for them, besides result in more losing?

Let's suppose we run the table and lose every remaining game.  That would put us at 5-11, which (last year) was good for roughly a #7 pick.  Will picking 7th instead of, say, 14th make a huge difference in the quality of our team for years to come?  Of course not.

To quote that coach of that other team, You Play To Win The Game.  This "I hope we lose" sh*t is dumb.  It doesn't do anything.  This isn't like basketball, where one high draft pick can turn you into a champion.  Football picks miss way too often to be worth tanking a season.

You have to mercilessly hound the moderators of this site until they agree to do another batch. ;D

IMHO, if week 17 a loss can make you the first pick instead of the second and there is a clear #1 pick....I could see tanking...otherwise no. 

One more thing: we currently have a #2 overall and #1 overall pick (that we drafted) on our roster.  Neither are busts.  How many more do we need on our team before we are "ready"?

Let's be clear, I didn't say I was rooting for them to lose, I said I'd rather have them lose by 30 than win by 3.  I'm rooting for them to win by 30.

^^^ But if they don't you would rather they lose. Your words not mine. I'd never say I want my team to lose and you basically did.

Well I guess I don't buy into the whole notion that you get style points in football.  Either you are a good team or your not.  Mediocre isn't really any better than bad in my humble opinion.  Mediocre is what Miami has been for the better part of 10 years now and frankly I'm tired of it.  It's gonna take changes to get Miami back to good.  Real changes.  Not simply making fewer mistakes, but making more big plays than your opponent.  The only way to make big plays is to TRY to make big plays.  Hell Buffalo is making big plays.  If you asked me which team I'd rather have right now, Miami or Buffalo, I'd take Buffalo.  That's pretty damn sad.

Really?  So you didn't mind 2007, when we struggled to win a single game?  When we lost to even the garbage dreck of the league, and lost twice to a Jets team that went 2-12 against everyone else?  When we are eliminated from any sort of postseason hopes before the halfway mark?  You prefer that to a 9-7 season?  I don't think you're going to have much company.

I don't even understand what your goal is.  Do you think we are going to go straight from 3-13 to Super Bowl champions?  Shouldn't there be some mediocrity in between?

I agree.  If my team gets a W, I don't care if it is by 1 point or 60, as long as it is a W.  I would take a 1 point win over a 30 point loss any day of the week and twice on Sundays. 

No, I hated 2007.  Just like I hated 2006, 2009 and now 2010.  Maybe winning 8 or 9 games is OK with you, but it's not for me, I want more.  I got news for you, we were eliminated from any serious postseason hopes at the halfway mark of THIS year.  I'm not saying that I'm not gonna support the team anymore, I'll be right there on Sunday cheering them on and I'll be right here on Monday bitching about if they lose.  Sorry, but that for me is the definition of a Dolphins fan.

That's just my opinion, I could be wrong.

Theoretically, a team could go 3-13 during the regular season and win the superbowl.  (not likely but 3-13 is the theoretical worst record a team could have an make the playoffs. 

How, you may ask.  Well all four teams in the division would need to lose all 10 non-division games.  And all 4 division teams would need to split each division series.  That would give all 4 way tie at 3-13.  One of the teams would must be the division winner and would get the #4 seed and host a home game wild card weekend.  The first relevant tie breaker would be strength of schedule.  Get hot and win the next 4 and with a 7-13 combined regular and post season record be the world champions. 

This completely contradicts your win by 30 or lose mentality of earlier.

I don't agree.  There are times when a W isn't as important as the big picture, like once you know you are out of the playoffs which is where Miami now sits.  Every team starts with the goal of making the playoffs, but once you know that is no longer an attainable goal, then your goal changes or at least it should change.  The goal of this team now is NEXT year's playoffs.  That's the only real goal this team has now.  If you ask me if I would sacrifice that goal of making the playoffs NEXT year for winning a game this year, I'll say absolutely not.  That's the reason they should shut down Jake Long for the remainder of the year, to make sure he's ready for next year.

Now if you aren't sacrificing that goal, that's fine, so let's not take what I said out of context.  I didn't say I would rather lose than win by 3 points.  That's not what I said.  I said I would rather lose a game than simply try not to lose.  Trying not to lose games is different from trying to win them.  Sparano seems to think you can win games just by eliminating mistakes, ie trying not to lose.  I don't.  I think to win games you have to try to win.  You have to take chances.  You have to attempt to make the plays that will win the game for you, not simply avoid making mistakes by trying "safe" plays.  I'd rather lose by 30 trying to win than win by 3 trying not to lose for the remainder of the year.  That's what I said and I stand by it.

I don't think you really understand what I said.  Read the previous post by me and see if that clears it up any.

Let me give ya'll another example of what I'm talking about.

I'd love to have Mike Martz as our offensive coordinator.  There are people that think Mike Martz is too aggressive and that his style only works if you have the necessary players to pull it off and if you don't then you take too many risks.  Well I don't believe there is such a thing as being too aggressive on offense and I also don't believe that there are any pre-requisites to which players can pull it off.  I believe that all you really need to pull it off is 11 guys who believe 100% that you can pull it off and time.  Given enough time, anyone can be taught how to run his offense, but they have to buy in and they have to buy in 100%.  You can't have guys that don't believe it will work.  If you don't believe it will work, then it won't.  But if you believe it will work then it will work.  It may not happen right away, but eventually it will.  How long it takes is the only question.

In some ways I believe the same is true on the defensive side of the ball.  You must be aggressive and you must have guys that buy into the scheme.

In my mind, if you could get both your offense and your defense thinking that way, you would blow people out.  That's what St. Louis did back when they were winning Super Bowls.  Now it's not always going to work.  There are times that all that gambling isn't gonna pay off and you're going to have to take your lumps.  There are games when you are gonna lose by 30.  But that's ok, because there are games you are gonna win by 30 too.  That's what I want.  Try to win by 30.  If you fail and you lose by 30, I'm OK with that.  What I'm NOT okay with is playing it safe and hoping to squeek by in every game.  Maybe some people like that approach, but I don't.  To me that's a lack of confidence.  A lack of confidence in yourself and a lack of confidence in your players.  Give me Mike Martz any day of the week and twice on Sundays.

I WANT THAT SHIRT!!!!

when are they gonna put that back in stock?!?!?  that's essential for every tru Dolphins fan!

We made these about 7 years ago (?). Haven't had them in awhile. We had another batch as well, with a different saying. There's a thread in the Off-Topic forum titled "TDMMC Tshirts across America" which shows them.

That's exactly what you said.

Lest you try to play the "context" card, here is the very next sentence you posted:

Please explain how NOT wanting to see us win games squares up with wanting to see us win games.

Again, I don't understand your logic.  We lost by ~30 in the NE game... was that gameplan better than the one against PIT?  We were completely dominated by CHI... was that better than the last-second loss against NYJ?  Do you prefer the stomping that BAL gave us to the close wins over GB or MIN?  How does getting blown out indicate a better job by the coaches?

This is the same Mike Martz that lost the Super Bowl to the second-biggest underdogs of all time, right?  The one that has never won anything as a head coach and won ONE, singular, Super Bowl (as a coordinator) with 3 years of some of the greatest offensive talent to step on the field at the same time?

To clarify exactly what you are asking for: you are looking for a coach that, when wielding an offense that is one of the best of all time, facing a defense that was 26th in the league in points allowed, still managed to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.  You want a coach that goes down as losing to one of the worst Super Bowl champions ever.  OK.

Fixed that for you.

Maybe what you wrote isn't what you meant, but I completely understood what your wrote. Maybe you didn't understand?

That sentence was at the end of a paragraph which explains the sentence as well as the previous paragraph.  If you take that one sentence out of the post it has a different meaning than if you read it as part of the whole post.  The sentence also contained the words "the last 6 games" which you have carefully omitted.  Whether you want to admit it or not you are both taking it out of context to try to prove a point.  That's fine.  I'm not going to argue with you about what I said.

I would rather see a blowout loss than a game robbed from us like Pittsburgh. I'll take a one point win over ANY loss any day.

Watching my favorite team lose.  Hmmmm.

Yeah.  That's what I want to do. You know, because there hasn't been enough losing around these parts over the last seven or so years.

Holy God.

So let's play the context game, then.

In "the last 6 games," based on what you have said, this appears to be your preference on outcomes:

1) win by 30 (or some undetermined large amount)
2) lose by 30
3) win by 3
4) lose by some other undetermined amount

In your list of desired outcomes, a loss (by 30) is higher than a win (by 3).  How is that anything other than preferring a LOSS over a WIN?

The last 6 games are still Miami Dolphins football games, right?  They count exactly the same in the record book as any other regular-season game in any other year.  You have declared that you would prefer a loss by 30 to a win by 3 in said games.

Now, you may have whatever rationalizations you like as to why you want us to lose.  I didn't mention them because I don't care about them; they are irrelevant.  The point is that you prefer a loss (in a specific manner, but still a loss) to a win (a specific kind of win, but still a win).

That's what I categorically object to.

^^ Guess Phishfan was right after all.  Should have stopped 1 sentence sooner because nothing I have said prior to or since has been heard by you.  I doubt very seriously anything else I say will be.  I get it, you don't like what I said.  I can live with that.

It's not that I don't like what you said (or at least, that's only part of it).  It's that you're trying to pretend that you said something different than what you did.

Hey, if you would really rather see us lose by 30 than win by 3 over the last 6 games (<--- I guess this part is important?), that's your prerogative.  But at least own up to your statements.  Don't try to tell me that it means something other than the clear and unambiguous meaning that you attached to it: a boring, unimpressive, close victory is "worse" than a blowout loss in which we try to be creative.

Not creative.  Aggressive.  Yes, I'll take a 30 point loss where we try to accomplish something different than what we have tried to accomplish the first 10 weeks of the season over a win that accomplishes nothing.  You seem to be just as convinced as Tony Sparano that we can't win that way, well I'm not.  I'd like to see it be given a chance to work.  I'd like to see Henne do a no-huddle offense with 4 wides for a half to see what happens.  I'd like to see us blitz every down of every play and see what happens.  I'd like to see us go for it on 4th and 5 rather than punt and get a net gain of 20 yards.

If all that results in a loss by 30 points, so be it.  And it doesn't really have to be that exotic, just throwing the ball downfield on go routes to Hartline about 5 times in a game would be enough for me.  I wouldn't even care if 4 of them were picked off, if just 1 hit for 50 yard TD, that would tell you something.  It would tell you that it can be done, because at this point we don't know if it's possible or not because it's never happened.  And if you run it 5 times a game for the rest of the year and you don't hit a single one then I think that tells you something too.  It tells you that you either have the wrong personnel on your team or the wrong coaches coaching them how to do it.  If Buffalo can do it, there's no reason that Miami can't.

There is no such thing as a win that accomplishes nothing.  The win IS the accomplishment.

yeah i don't get the whole rather see the dolphins lose thing, but to each his own...

anyway, being able to do something one time or on very rare occasion at the nfl level proves nothing. even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while. what separates the real ballers from the wannabe's is the ability to make plays consistently. being able to sack a qb, when everyone knows your rushing and they are double teaming you. being able to complete the pass downfield, when everyone knows you are throwing it deep and they are double teaming the receiver. being able to pound the rock against a stacked line, etc...

consistently being good at something, anything, is what this team lacks. other than kicking field goals, the dolphins aren't consistently good at anything. it's not the coaching, it's the players.

Pappy has made it abundantly clear that during a season where no SB run is realistic, he'd rather see the team actually try something on the field, even if they risk getting beat. Although his initial statement may have been unclear, his subsequent explanations leave little to doubt. He's further stated that he actually believes trying something on the field would improve the team's chances of winning.

I agree with him on both points... a rarity, believe me.

So could the dead-horse-floggers give it a rest, please?

I see what Pappy is saying.

I think he's trying to say that winning isn't relevant if they are smoke and mirrors wins.  When you know you're out of it, you're better of trying to use your time with your team as an assessment for future years, than to try to eek out wins, that in the context of a lost season, don't mean much.

We all have that mentality, but just maybe not as extreme.  There are times when we've been done for the year, and I wanted to see us play different, less experienced players, down the stretch, to see if they were up for it.

I don't agree with him overall, necessarily -- I think that there is moral victory in winning; it creates a culture over time.  Losing breeds complacency with losing.  However, I don't think his point is entirely without merit.

I would actually take it to the extreme.  Once the team is completely eliminated, (BTW the Dolphins are not, I mean it would impossible to make the playoffs even if you won every game and every game you needed went your way you could not make the playoffs.  e.g. Bills and Carolina).

I would do the following:

1. Any player that will be a FA next year that I did not plan to resign and would not sign a contract large enough for comp pick gets cut.

2. Any player that doesn't need experience and has as much as a paper cut gets sent to IR.

3. With my freed up roster spots I sign promising players off the PS and raid other teams PS looking for talent for next year.

4. On game day I play the rookies and second year players that need the experience.  Benching vets that don’t.  My 6 best players are the ones not active on game day.

5. On game day WE PLAY TO WIN.  Balls to wall aggressive win.  Go for it on fourth.  Try 2 point conversions instead of PAT.  On side kicks in the first quarter when winning. 

This is ALL that I'm asking for.  Nothing more.  On 3rd and 19 if my QB throws a dump off to a RB, I'm yanking him and putting in someone who will throw a damn 20 yard pass even if the WR is double covered.  If I have the ball and there's 20 seconds left in the half and we are on our own 20, I'm putting the ball up and trying to score points before the half.  Once we get inside the 35 yard line, on first down I'm taking a shot into the endzone with the ball and again I don't give a freaking shit if the guy is double covered, throw the damn thing up and see if our man can come down with it.  Marshall is supposed to be able to do that, right?  Try it.  That's all I want.  Just try to win rather than play not to lose.  Hell it might even work and you might end up saving your season.  Who the hell knows?

I don't like that plan in the slightest. You play your best players (taking injuries into consideration) and give your best efforts to win football games. Anything else gets me on the fire Sparano wagon. As a fan I wouldn't watch the games you are describing. I want less preseason games, not adding more for next season onto the back end of this one.

Filling a roster full or practice squad players and benching everyone is not an acceptable answer from my perspective. What example does that set for your team? If you think the Vikings didn't support Childress what do you think players with incentive clauses are going to do if a coach tries pulling this?

As long as your WR can tackle this is not a bad plan.  Punts are usually about net 20.  So if the WR catches the ball you get a 1st down.  If the CB does same field position as a punt just one play sooner. 

Miami Hearld is reporting Henne is taking 1st team reps with Thigpen this week. He may start vs Oakland.

Dumbest thing ever to rush Henne back. Sparano is going to KILL Long and Henne for the next head coach in an effort to save his job this year. Our two cornerstone and franchise players being rushed on the field to play at less than 100% is one of the most foolish things I have ever seen. I'm shocked Ross hasn't stepped in yet and put a stop to this. I think he might very soon though.

So you're a doctor now, are you? With access to Henne and Long's medical records?

If the team doctor says they're putting themselves at increased, I'm confident they won't be playing. On the other hand, if it's just a question of reduced effectiveness or pain tolerance, then I'm perfectly fine with them playing.

IOW, they shouldn't be rested just because they aren't 100%. They should be rested if there's a long term risk to playing them.

IMPORTANT players shouldn't play in meaningless games when injured. Miami is realisticly eliminted from the playoffs. It makes no sense to play IMPORTANT players like this and risk further injury which might effect them beyond this year

The "when injured" doesn't add anything unless there's a long-term risk associated with it. That was my criticism and since you clearly disagree with that, your argument boils down to:

"IMPORTANT players shouldn't play in meaningless games."

I agree with that... but what we DON'T agree on is what constitutes a meaningless game. Winning is a mentality. There's a big difference between Miami going 9-7 and 7-9, even though neither will get us to the playoffs. The more games we win, the better the team works. Winning begets winning. Young players improve more on a winning team, hell, everyone improves more on a winning team... if you're a sub-par player on a good team, you won't feel nearly as overwhelmed as you would on a team that's just getting its ass kicked every week.

Games aren't meaningless just because the playoffs are out of reach.

9-7 or 7-9 and where both are not in the playoffs, there is no difference. Please.

Yes they are!

Seriously, it's like talking with a 5-year-old.

I disagree. I said we would disagree. I explained WHY I disagree.

Your response is infantile and utterly meaningless, contributing absolutely nothing.

because you are wrong. Games with no playoff implications are meaningless. It's pretty obvious.

Omar Kelly is reporting the word in the Fins lockeroom is Henne will start Sunday

Ahhh... the old "because" argument. I'm trying to teach my son not to use that, with considerably more success, I might add, that with you.

Good teams don't forfeit games (through pulling players or otherwise) on down years. They simply don't. Whether that's because a winning mentality is an important one, because pulling your best players would trash the locker room / team cohesion, or whatever... believe what you like, but teams don't do this -- at any level. Even when the coaches job is 100% secure. Why is that?

Perhaps a few words following "because" (other than "you are wrong") might help my feeble mind understand your brilliant logic.

who said forefit? You brought that up into it. I just said the game is meaningless.

ESPN reporting Thigpen is expected to start Sunday

ESPN reporting Marshall not traveling with the team, he is staying in Miami. Dansby is questionable for Sunday

What is the difference between the Jets' season last year and the Rams' season last year?  Apparently, only that the Rams had a higher pick.

MikeO, are you seriously of the opinion that there is 1 Super Bowl winner and 31 wasted seasons every year?

I never said that at all. You Totally missed the point. I am saying teams that aren't in the playoffs playing in games in Nov and Dec with no playoff implications for them are "meaningless" games.

I have an idea...You should go coach the Patriots when Belicheat retires.

For the record:

At this point last year, the New York Jets were 4-6, one game worse than Miami is now, with a division record of 1-4.  MikeO's advice to the team that made it to the AFC Championship game?  Shut it down!  You're done for this year.

Not at all. Because the "landscape" in the AFC was very different last year. VERY DIFFERENT! Plus the Jets (per your example) held some tiebreaker options last year. They beat New England early in the season last year which gave them some bit of hope within the division and had other wins inside the AFC (Houston, Tenn..etc). Miami THIS year, lost tiebreakers to Pitt, Balt, and by losing at home to both Jets and Pats pretty much gave those tiebreakers away inside the AFC East.

If you can't see the difference you are putting your head in the sand and ignoring the obvious

So, is "the landscape is different" actually something that can be quantified, or just an abstract concept with the right tone to support your statement? Does the use of quotation marks, underlining and capitalization intensify that tone in your mind?

^^^ Those are both actually facetious questions...

How dare you try to make a logical argument with  MikeO.  Furthermore, how dare you bring FACTS into the argument.  When are you going to learn that whatever MikeO's stated opinion is like Gospel from God, and you (we) are all wrong???