The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

I was talking with a friend tonight and she said that she was sick of the Packers and didn't want to see them in the Super Bowl because they were an "old team".  I know what she means --- we've seen a lot of them before.  Then I started to talk about how this is a "new" Packers and Rodgers and Favre, etc., etc.

Then another buddy chimed in about ownership and how good franchises can remain good after losing a star player.

It got me thinking at how lucky (or competent?) that the Packers are.  They had Favre and then Rodgers as their consecutive QBs.  That never happens.   Usually, when you lose a stud QB, you have to suck for 10 years to get in a position to draft a new one.

The only other situation I can think of like this is with Montana and then Steve Young...and almost a third time with Garcia, who I think could've been better under different circumstances.

I see our team and think that we need to find a QB that's going to take us for 10 years.  It's almost unfair that teams can have this back to back.

Aaron Rodgers was slated to be a top-10 pick and fell to 20-something on draft day.  It was silliness that he fell that far.  I recall watching him on draft day being the last guy in the green room.  Rodgers was the odd-man-out.

It was Alex Smith, Ronnie Brown, Braylon Edwards, Cedric Benson, and Cadillac Williams.  Rodgers should have been next, but the next 20 teams already had their QB's...  Good for the Packers for recognizing the value pick, cause its paying off now.

Drew Bledsoe and Tom Brady say hi.  

Granted Bledsoe isn't in the same group as Favre, Brady, Montana and Elway but NE had consecutively good QBs. A four time pro-bowler followed by a 6+ time pro-bowler.    

It didn't take the Dolphins a decade to recover from the loss of its first HOF QB -- only three years to get another HOF QB.  So while not quite back to back a three year gap between HOF QB is pretty damn good.  

I am sure I could find other examples if I went looking.  

I'm confused by this...  I assume you're speaking of Griese (Bob) to Marino, and not Marino to Fiedler/Lucas/Rosenfels?

I think the thing that's overlooked here is that Rodgers also had the best possible introduction to a team.

Firstly, he was a higly rated QB that fell. He fell to a good team rather than being picked up high by a weak team. He had years to develop and learn the offense, get used to the players. He may even have had help from Favre but the main thing was that in pre-season, while Favre was engaging in yet another retirement will he/won't he saga, Rodgers was getting all the first team snaps!

I don't know anything about the comparisons between Alex Smith and Rodgers but I am fairly confident saying that had their picks flip-flopped (cue dreamy sigh from certain 49ers fans!) Smith would not have had the tough time he ended up with in San Fransisco.

I'm not trying to say that Smith is as good a QB as Rodgers, but that their introduction to the league could account for the significant difference now.

Off course I am speaking of Griese followed by Marino, not Marino to the series of bums since him.

Bob Griese was a HOF QB.  Three years later the starting QB was Dan Marino another HOF QB.  And the intern guy wasn't a total bum either, Dolphins made the playoffs 2 out of those 3 years.   

My point being that a franchise having success/being an annual contender on back to back or near back to back QBs isn't unique as Dave was suggesting. 

As someone who has watched pretty much all of Alex Smith's career, he was destined to not be a good QB "wherever" he went. His hands are just too small to throw quality mid-to-deep passes with any consistency.

Hoodie, think about it again.  Marino was a top prospect in a QB-heavy draft that fell to the 20's.  Same story as Rodgers.  Its not the norm, you gotta get lucky and have the chips fall to you late in the draft.

Yeah he was.  Woodley was really lucky to have a very good defense and a great coach in Don Shula who made him serviceable.  He had some decent games, but overall he was less talented than Henne by FAR.  Trust me, I watched the guy play and he had nothing.  He could run a bit, but that was it.

I remember when Marino came to the Dolphins as a rookie in '83 and Shula said when you put Marino next to him and watched them both just throw the ball, it was staggering the difference.  Here was a rookie and just throwing the football, was FAR more impressive to look at than this veteran QB.  Shula didn't like playing rookies.  Thought they needed to be groomed.  He didn't start Marino, but after 5 games he just couldn't let him sit on the bench anymore, he was WAY better than Woodley even as a rookie.

Just compare their stats in '83.

Woodley was 43 of 89 (48.3%) with a 5.9 avg/attempt with 3 TD's and 4 INT's and 10 sacks.
Marino was 173 of 296 (58.4%) with a 7.5 avg/attempt with 20 TD's and 6 INT's and 10 sacks.

I remember watching Marino in '83 with my mouth WIDE open.  I had never seen anything like it.  You just knew this guy was history in the making.

I said he "wasn't a total bum."  Not that he matched up well vs. the guy before and after him. 

My point wasn't about Woodley.  It was about Griese and Marino.  From 1967 to 1999 the Dolphins had a HOF QB behind center minus a couple of odd years.  That matches up favorably to the "luck" the Packers have had a QB.   

I know, I was just correcting you on Woodley.  He WAS a bum.  Trust me.  Miami's record had absolutely NOTHING to do with Woodley.  Had Marino come to Miami one year earlier, Miami would have won the SuperBowl in '82, the Defense was THAT good.  Unfortunately by about '86 the killer B defense was on it's last legs and that was the last time they would have a defense worth giving a nickname to.

I'm confused by someone complaining about the Packers, who have not won the SB since 1997.  The Steelers won in 2009 and will be appearing in their 3rd SB in the last six years.

Less talented than Henne ? Well just from what I remember, and I could be wrong, but he played 3 years and was in the playoffs twice and the superbowl once. Henne has not shown the ability to even get to the playoffs, much less win a playoff game and get to the superbowl. If Henne could do what Woodley did we would have won a few of the ones that we lost this year. Just my opinion though......

Did you watch him play?  Do you remember him playing?  I do.  I also remember when Marino played his first game.  I was watching the game and I'm like "Why is this kid on the bench?".  It was about a week or 2 later that Marino was starting.

Miami made the playoffs on the strength of the defense (this was the height of the killer B defense) and an effective running game with Andra Franklin and Tony Nathan.  Their passing ability was no better than this year's Dolphins and it wasn't because the receivers weren't any good as you can see that as soon as Marino started to play the passing game blossomed in '83 and '84.

Woodley was bad enough that he was often replaced when ineffective by Don Strock, hence the nickname "WoodStrock" became common to describe Miami's QB tandem.  They kept Don Strock after Marino became the starter, they got rid of Woodley and he only played another 2 years in the league for Pittsburgh and pretty much sucked.

I got NOTHING against David Woodley, I just hate it when people give too much credit to a QB that doesn't deserve it simply because he has a good team around him and they have some success.  Likewise I hate it when a QB gets too much blame simply because he doesn't have a good team around him.  Henne has gotten too much blame for this year's Dolphins.  They didn't play well as a team, it wasn't all Henne's fault.  The offensive line wasn't good.  The running game wasn't good.  The passing game wasn't good.  The Defense was good at times, but then fell apart at times as well.  The last 3 games of the season every last player should have been ashamed of themselves.

Granted this is taking the discussion quite a bit off topic.....but.....

Pappy, what you are claiming seems to contradict what every single Dolphin fan/Marino apologist has ever said to me.   The claim is often that the team he played with absolutely sucked and Dan Marino carried the entire team and that had he had a supporting cast that was the least bit competent than Dan wouldn't just have a ring, he would have multiple rings.  You seem to be claiming that supporting cast around Woodley was the greatest collection of players ever who carried him along and that the QB been at all decent they would have been SB winners. 

Well, Dave and Dan had basically the same supporting cast. 

So if a total bum can take the team 27-12-1 with a 3-2 post season record.  Than Marino having not much better success than that with the same team says Marino is better than bum, but not by much. 

Please note: I am not saying Dan was a bum.  Just pointing out that if you claim Woodley had nothing to do with the success of the Dolphins and actually was in their way, you implicitly implying Dan was not nearly as good as most people think was and nowhere near what many Dolphins fans claim about him.

Those aren't consecutive.  Like you said, there were three seasons of someone else.

Yes, those are not consecutive.  But the original post also claimed it takes 10 years to recover.  Miami recovered quite nicely in only three. 

I said it usually takes ten years to recover.  I think that Miami, while not consecutive seasons, did pretty well for themselves over that time.  However, that doesn't really go for what I'm getting at.

I'm thinking of situations where the next guy was in waiting.

You could argue that Bledsoe/Brady is one.  There's no doubt that Bledsoe was a good QB, but I don't know if he was a truly great one.  Without looking at his stats, he seems like he was kind of a journeyman, but never became that elite level player that everyone thought.

Bledsoe was not elite.  But he was a four time pro-bowler.
 
I could also argue that Brady/Cassel was a pretty solid combo with the second one in waiting.  Cassel is no Tom Brady, but I would think that had Brady's injury been career ending instead of season ending Matt would be the starting QB for NE and while NE would not be as strong with him as they are with Brady, the team would still be a playoff contender. 

I bet there are many others we never learn about because the back up leaves he league having never had a chance to show his stuff. 

Not really.  Let me take your statements one at a time...

The team did not suck in '84 and '85.  Dan had a pretty good defense in those years and the Dolphins made it to the SB in '84 and to the AFC Championship game in '85.  Unfortunately Dan went up again Montana and the SF 49's in '84 which in my opinion was one of the best teams of the decade.  A bit of bad luck that year that Dan had to face them.  In '85, the Dolphins played terrible in the AFC Championship game and lost to New England when they were clearly the better team.  Again, a bit of bad luck there.  The team didn't suck, just not good enough to win SB's even with Dan.  After '85 the defense fell off considerably and it was never that good again while Dan was there.

Not quite.  If you will remember '82 was a strike shortened year and offenses were behind the defenses.  Miami's D was ranked I believe #1 or #2 that year.  Miami was good enough to make it to the SB, but they were handled easily by the Redskins.  If you look at the score it seemed closer than it really was as one of the Dolphins TD's was on a kickoff return, but without that TD, Miami's offense was pretty much ineffective and that was largely due to Woodley not being able to get anything going through the air.  I believe they had 1 long TD as well, but that's about it.  The Redskins hammered Riggins at the Dolphins D who eventually got tired and Riggins broke a long run for a TD that sealed the win.  The Redskins were a better team, but not in the class of the '84 49'ers.

Well would you say that 60 QB rating is pretty poor?  Well Woodley had an above 60 QB rating only 22 times in those 45 games.  Less than half of the time.

Marino on the other hand from 83-85 only had a less than 60 QB rating 5 times in 48 games.  His record was 33-9 and 3-3 post season.  His post season record doesn't look that hot, but his regular season record was better than Woodley's and his QB rating was MUCH better.

It's not like the Dolphins weren't successful after Marino got there, they made the playoffs all 3 years, they just couldn't win the big one like I already mentioned above.

That's a supremely simplistic way to look at it.  The Dolphins were LUCKY to get to the SB in '82.  It was a strike shortened season, only 9 games.  Offenses were behind defenses all year.  The Dolphins had one of the top defenses in the league.  They got there on the strength of the defense.

In '84 when the Dolphins got to the SB, it was on the strength of the offense.  The defense was still good, but not great like they were in '82 whereas the Offense was #1 in the league.  They lost the SB because Miami couldn't stop Montana, not because of anything Dan did.  He didn't have a great game but only because the Dolphins were down and he had to pass 50 times in that game and got picked off twice.  Had the defense been able to stop Montana and Marino didn't have to put it up 50 times they may havd had a chance.

It's also simplistic to say Dan had sucky teams and would have won 2 or 3 SB's with good teams. He had sucky teams MOST of his career, but in '84 and '85 they had their chance, they just couldn't take advantage.  Part of that was pure luck.  Part of it was poor play.

Basically both your assessment and the assessment that Marino would have won SB after SB if he had a good team are short sided.  Neither is correct.  The QB's just aren't as responsible for winning SB's as we all assume.  A great QB can maybe get you to the playoffs, but you better have something more than that once you get there.  Likewise a great D can get you to the playoffs, but you better have something more once you get there.

The Dolphins had a great D in '82 which helped Woodley get there, they had a great offense in '84 which is why they got there.

This goes to my point.  I think Brady get's too much credit for winning all the SB's for New England when the rest of the team was pretty darn good too, not just Brady.  Even when they lost Brady, Cassel seemed to be able to play well enough to win 11 games.  Does that say more about Brady or Cassel?  I think it says more about Brady than it does Cassel.  I'm not impressed with Cassel.

You're not?  In 2008 they went 2-14, this season they won the division.  Not quite the 1-15 to 11-5 Miami did, but pretty darn impressive. 

They had a pretty ridiculous defense/rushing attack.

Weak schedule.  Let's see them do it again next year.

But, as I know both Spider and I pointed out in a previous post concerning Cassel a month ago or so, there was a whole season--a 4-12 season--in between the 2-14 and 10-6, AFC West Championship season, and besides one game to start the season, Cassel was pretty much entirely at the helm for that 2009 season as well.  What was the huge difference this season then?  Well, I'd say multiple factors, with possibly the most important one(s) being your former NEP coordinators, good ol' Romeo and Charlie Weis, assuming positions with KC in the same roles, as well as what Tepop has referred to....that KC defense is still quite young, particularly on the D-line and in the secondary, but really made some solid advances this season, and then the O-line kinda kept up what they started at the tail end of the '09 season with Jamaal Charles seeing great success.  Throwing Thomas Jones into the mix sure didn't hurt, either.  So, while I'll give you that Cassel played better this season (and I still have to wonder just how much Charlie had to do with that), looking at all the improvements he saw around his team, it makes me think that the team had just as much to do with it as himself.  The few INT's was nice to see if you're a KC fan, though.

Last thing about Cassel and him actually being legitimately good or not...not that Chad Pennington didn't experience some of the same problems two seasons before in the playoffs, but to me, Baltimore really exposed Cassel that game. ...and it's tough to even say that it's because their defense made KC one-dimensional because I believe Charles had something like 87 yards on 8 or 9 carries in the first half (though he did only get one carry in the second half, once Baltimore started jumping ahead and forcing KC to have to pass to make plays).  Dwayne Bowe getting shut down didn't help the cause, I know, but it seems like I remember him overthrowing Moeaki and some of the other skill players a lot as well. 

Anyways, sorry for the continued derail on Cassel...I'd still take him over Henne anyday!   :D .......  :-\

*edited to say that Baltimore did make KC one-dimensional, but I think it was more a result of them pulling ahead on the scoreboard so that KC felt like they had to pass in the 2nd half as compared to the Chiefs not having success running the ball, at least with Charles*

I think you could make a fair argument for Warner/Bulger.

^ Yeah.  Although, Bulger seemed to fade pretty quickly.  He might've been more of a game manager than we thought.  I remember thinking that he was a good player, but he kinda just fell off the map as soon as the "greatest show on turf" started to fall apart.

I already commented on this, but thought maybe a few comments from someone who was there, Nat Moore, might shed some light on this as well as tie this into context with current events. In a recent column by Armando (http://miamiherald.typepad.com/dolphins_in_depth/2011/03/soon-and-very-soon-youll-start-to-read-stories-of-nfl-teams-gathering-informally-and-working-out-or-at-the-very-least-cond.html), Nat made it clear that the Dolphins should try to practice as much as possible during this lockout. He explained how the 2 teams that practiced the most in 1982 during the strike, ended up in the superbowl...

"And in 1982, the two teams that stuck together, practiced every day, got together and go the actual content of what was happening in the meetings, those were the teams that played for the Super Bowl."

Moore was talking, of course, about the Dolphins and Redskins.

"Both teams, we were out 56 days, but we got together every day at Miami-Dade Junior College North and we got a report from (player rep) Jimmy Cefalo about what was going on in New York. And that kept everyone's minds at ease. In the meantime, we worked on practicing and staying in shape and working on the stuff we knew we'd be doing when we got back. And in the process, we were way ahead of everybody we played against. The Washington Redskins, with Joe Theismann and his group, they did the same thing. They practiced three times a week while we practiced every day."

So just because David Woodley led the Dolphins to the Superbowl in '82, he really wasn't that great of a QB. The Dolphins were smart that year and took advantage of the strike to practice and ended up in the SB because they were ahead of the teams that didn't. Woodley and the Dolphins had a built in advantage in '82, Marino had no such advantage in '84.

The reality is that Woodly was rather fortunate to get into the Superbowl in '82, Marino on the other hand deserved to be there.