Bright future

[Clipse]

We're comparing the scrubs on our roster to Jerry Rice and Dwight Clark. Get a grip people. This is ridiculous.

 

[luduporcu]

I has been a Chad Henne's supporter for years, but after seeing several videos of Ryan Tannehill I have to admit Henne will never pan out as desired and Jaguars are in trouble, as they have nothing at the QB position.

Why? Well I admired the arm power of Chad Henne and his bravery while playing, there was a point in the first three games of 2011, where it was obvious he was playing above his capabilities and he accepted every fault when his receivers were dropping balls in the red zone.

But Henne lacks of the leadership that Ryan Tannehill is showing in his first days as a Dolphin, Chad wanted to win by focusing in bettering himself, while Ryan wants to know each teammate and his efforts are on making everyone around him better day by day. Jeff Darlington recently expressed on miamidolphins.com he was amassed on how this kid resembles some of Chad Pennington's leadership. As example, Ryan shared with Michael Egnew a resumed version of the playbook he handled in TX A&M, just after the TE was drafted by Dolphins, so he could be on the same page during rookie camps. That's a huge difference about leadership.

Chad Henne has a cannonball but lacks of touch, he always is looking a way to improve as player, but even playing at his 110%, he proved inefficient.

On the other hand Ryan Tannehill is proving he has the physical skills, the touch and enough power on the arm, but more important he wants to improve as a complete leader.

It's easy to see a bright future in Miami with Ryan Tannehill, once he learns some tips about adjusting to the pro-level and handling his offense on the pocket. That surely can be taught, leadership is more unlikely to be learned.

That's the reason why Chad Henne never will lead his team to important goals.

Also our WR situation seems to be better than expected.

Why? Well, WCO uses a lot of TE & route WR to win short to medium yardage and move the chains. Go-to receivers & running backs that can catch add more potential but rarely define a WCO system. Brandon Marshall would be a risk and a huge luxury for Philbin's offense. The guy is a got-to receiver who has dropped important passes consistently. This offense can't afford such thing.

So having in mind Davone Bees owns excellent hands and has fine routing abilities, while Hartline has the size and speed of several go-to receivers in the league, we have solved WR1 & WR2, but WCO requires at least another pair of WR. Clyde Gates is a promising piece of this offense, while Legedu Naanee was added to improve the spot but is a long shoot.
The hardest piece of this offense is there are going to be several two-TE packs so Fasano requires a complement.

Dolphins could have a nice arsenal of receivers if ...
... Brian Hartline is above his 2008 production & Davone Bess recovers his best level.
... Clyde Gates can catch above 75% of the throws in his direction.
... among 2 years developing receivers (Roberto Wallace, Julius Pruitt & Marlon Moore) we could find at least one who outplays Legedu Naanee.
... can develop Jeff Fuller & Derek Moye at the same speed than Ryan Tannehill.

Also the tight end spot is solved once Anthony Fasano stays healthy and ...
... Jeron Mastrud adds ability to lose his mark and betters his blocks. Which seems very feasible.
... Michael Egnew learns some blocking foundations and adopts the pro-level speed.

Drivel. Homey borscht.

 

[luduporcu]

I can't find the right video on Youtube, but there was an interview of Walsh he pointed the natural weakness of all defenses and how nobody could stop his WCO once timing was adjusted, because the key element is a QB who can react and learn this offense in the best way as WCO offers multiple options for the passer on each play.

This is a longer video where he explains his quarterbacking fundamentals and mentions some of the multiple options he created for Joe Montana.

[video=youtube;D9TcFkDRJso]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9TcFkDRJso[/video]
PART 1

[video=youtube;rdBQH8_Koeg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdBQH8_Koeg[/video]
PART 2

"Begs the question"! If you've got a MONTANA, or a UNITAS, or a MARINO, or a FARVE, or...etc., you can install any system the he'' you want, and it'll be successful. Add 2 above-average WRs (e.g., RICE and STALLWORTH), a solid TE and HB, and a solid "D", and you're a SB contender year after year after year after ever-lovin' year. BUT...

Go up against the RAVENS' "D" or the GIANTS' "D", or the STEELERS' "D", or N.E.'s "D" (during the period 2000-2010) w/anything less, and you won't do squat. You'll get your WCO, and your a**, wrapped up in a nice pink bow and HANDED TO YOU. Ask yourself this, as to SF, for example: was it the "system", or was it MONTANA, plus RICE, plus STALLWORTH, plus the SF "D", etc..

Preseason jibberish.

 

[Batroc]

Just saying....

Matt Moore is as good as Joe Montana
Jerry Rice had no impact on the WCO, he was just a "route runner"
The WCO offense fixes all problems and you don't need good receivers
And Davone Bess will be close to Jerry Rice in this new offense

Are those the points you are agreeing with the OP on?

So why doesnt every team just run the WCO and win the superbowl every year?

You bringing up Montana winning two SB's has nothing to do with any of the points I was making. I never said Montana couldn't win a SB before Jerry Rice, or that the WCO was a terrible offense unless you had a number 1 receiver. I'm arguing with this ridiculous notion that the WCO is some magical offense that turns crap receivers into stars. You know what turns crap receivers into usable receivers, and good receivers into great receivers?.... Great Quarterbacks. Joe Montana is one of the best that ever played the game, but im sure he had nothing to do with making his receivers any better, it was all just a product of the WCO. Matt Moore is just as good as Joe Montana because of the WCO, and Davone Bess is the new Jerry Rice... lunacy lol, pure lunacy

again, somebody please attempt to bring in some real evidence that backs up this ridiculous claim that the WCO doesn't need a talented number 1 receiver. please dont post another 40 minute quarterbacking video on walsh that teaches quarterbacking mechanics instead. Find the one that says the WCO turns "crap receivers into stars with mediocre qb".

Wow. Nice diversion. You totally sidestepped my point by trying to lump my FACTUAL post (Montana did win 2 Super Bowls with Freddie Soloman and Dwight Clark as his biggest threats at wr) in with the OP's misguided comparisons of Rice/Bess- Montana/Moore. The point about Montana winning without Rice was relevant to the conversation because YOU stated that the latter was a big part of the 49ers Super Bowl success- in the process making an argument for the need for an "alpha" wr in the WCO.

The wildcard here IMO is Tannehill. I've seen posts in this very thread that have stated that Tannehill is a poor qb prospect as if it's written in stone. I say that's still to be decided. Is our WR corps Super Bowl caliber? Of course not, but Rome wasn't built in a day. I don't think they're quite as bad as a lot of you are making them out to be either. Bess and Hartline have proven themselves to be capable wrs and Gates/Cunningham are wildcards much like Tannehill. Who knows what they can achieve in this offense. I do know that Tannehill/Moore/Garrard will not be burdened with a stone-handed diva wr screaming at them to throw more passes his way just so he can drop them with the end result being points left on the field.

 

[luduporcu]

You do realize that Montana won two of those Super Bowls before Rice even arrived right? I don't think Dwight Clark and Freddie Solomon were that much better than what we have on the roster now by a large margin. Just saying...

That's a JOKE, right? I sure hope so. Not "that much better than what we have on the [for sh*t MIAMI] roster now"...????????

 

[Batroc]

We're comparing the scrubs on our roster to Jerry Rice and Dwight Clark. Get a grip people. This is ridiculous.

LOL! Jerry Rice I totally agree with you on, but please explain to me how (other than "The Catch") Dwight Clark is some untouchable standard of greatness at the TE position? I'll be waiting for this because to my knowledge he's not a hall of famer. I mean he was solid but certainly not on the pedestal you seem to have him on.

 

[Batroc]

That's a JOKE, right? I sure hope so. Otherwise, you're SURELY joking.

Are Clark and Solomon Hall of Famers? What did I miss? No joke. How do you know that in this offense Bess/ Hartline can't reach a level of production near theirs? Oh yeah that's right you don't lol.

 

[Batroc]

MIA doesn't have a TE right now, that can hold Clark's jock. And the fact you think he isn't much better than what is on the roster now, goes to show the silly nature of your homerism.
:rotfl1:

LOL I love how you Jr. GM's pull out the "Homerism" tag to solidify your argument. It's about as lame and predictable as a desperate politician pulling out the "liberal" or "conservative" card. I wouldn't expect you to understand my point which is just a variation of the OP's original sentiment: We haven't seen Bess/Hartline/Gates/Egnew etc play in this offense, so just like Tannehill we don't know how ANY of them will perform under Philbin.

Look, the OP went waaaaaay overboard comparing Bess to Rice- that's the equivalent of football sacrilege. As for Clark/Solomon- I still maintain that they were solid players but certainly acheiving their level of production is not an unattainable goal for this young group. You can call it blind "homerism" or whatever lame term you message board warriors are using for a poster actually letting the new system play out before passing judgment, but I'm willing to let it play out. My bad lol. Stick with that jaded pessimism thing though, it works for you bro:up:

 

[Batroc]

LOL! Jerry Rice I totally agree with you on, but please explain to me how (other than "The Catch") Dwight Clark is some untouchable standard of greatness at the WR position? I'll be waiting for this because to my knowledge he's not a hall of famer. I mean he was solid but certainly not on the pedestal you seem to have him on.

Actually to correct my own post Clark was a TE but the sentiment remains the same.

 

[DolfanDuBbZ~]

LOL I love how you Jr. GM's pull out the "Homerism" tag to solidify your argument. It's about as lame and predictable as a desperate politician pulling out the "liberal" or "conservative" card. I wouldn't expect you to understand my point which is just a variation of the OP's original sentiment: We haven't seen Bess/Hartline/Gates/Egnew etc play in this offense, so just like Tannehill we don't know how ANY of them will perform under Philbin.

Look, the OP went waaaaaay overboard comparing Bess to Rice- that's the equivalent of football sacrilege. As for Clark/Solomon- I still maintain that they were solid players but certainly acheiving their level of production is not an unattainable goal for this young group. You can call it blind "homerism" or whatever lame term you message board warriors are using for a poster actually letting the new system play out before passing judgment, but I'm willing to let it play out. My bad lol. Stick with that jaded pessimism thing though, it works for you bro:up:

When Fasano can threaten a seam talk to me. Jaded pessimism? Such big words to use against a message board warrior.

I would post the numbers to compare the 2 TE's, but its just laziness on your part not to know them. I will put it in the most simple way possible. Fasano is terrible. Dwight Clark wasn't. Dwight Clark did more in a few seasons, than Mr Fasano has done in his career.

Dwight Clark's worst years were his first and last years in the league. And those numbers are a bit more comparable to Fasano's career numbers than Clarks. When Fasano can reel in 85 rec for 1100 yards, then I will eat crow. But he won't and I won't. But keep drinking the kool aid and 'hoping' that someone who isn't will.

Now I will move on. This debate is stupid to be mild about it. Dwight Clark and Anthony Fasano are 2 totally different type of athletes. One actually made a difference for their team, the other made little difference to their team.

And the JR GM's goto the guru's. I'm just a warrior as you put it. Please get your labels straight.

 

[Etuoo33]

The starting receivers for the 49ers in the 1982 Super Bowl were Freddie Solomon and Renaldo Nehemiah... Not Jerry Rice. Dwight Clark was not a TE. WTF. The WCO exploits natural gaps in the D's coverage with timing and precise routes, Yea it would help to have Rice at R, but with other mis-matches not necessary.

 

[NY8123]

When Fasano can threaten a seam talk to me. Jaded pessimism? Such big words to use against a message board warrior.

I would post the numbers to compare the 2 TE's, but its just laziness on your part not to know them. I will put it in the most simple way possible. Fasano is terrible. Dwight Clark wasn't. Dwight Clark did more in a few seasons, than Mr Fasano has done in his career.

Dwight Clark's worst years were his first and last years in the league. And those numbers are a bit more comparable to Fasano's career numbers than Clarks. When Fasano can reel in 85 rec for 1100 yards, then I will eat crow. But he won't and I won't. But keep drinking the kool aid and 'hoping' that someone who isn't will.

Now I will move on. This debate is stupid to be mild about it. Dwight Clark and Anthony Fasano are 2 totally different type of athletes. One actually made a difference for their team, the other made little difference to their team.

And the JR GM's goto the guru's. I'm just a warrior as you put it. Please get your labels straight.

Fasano is the farthest thing from terrible. Is he Tony Gonzalez....no but the man does more than he is given credit for. As for comparing a WR to a TE, that is ludicrous enough, let alone transcending two eras of football to do so....that is just farcical.

 

[Dolphinsman08]

Miami Dolphins has a bigger fanbase in Mexico than Jacksonville Jaguars in the entire world.
:up:

i dont think so

 

[DolfanDuBbZ~]

Fasano is the farthest thing from terrible. Is he Tony Gonzalez....no but the man does more than he is given credit for. As for comparing a WR to a TE, that is ludicrous enough, let alone transcending two eras of football to do so....that is just farcical.

:lol2:


:
I guess disappearing games at a time is what TE's do, huh? See, since his first year in MIA, Fasano has been terrible at being consistent. 1 week he shows up and then he disappears for a few weeks. Now that may be ok with you, but for a team breaking in a young qb, its not. See, Flacco, Ryan and Sanchez all have/had quality TE's. To sit here and think that a guy who doesn't threaten a seam and struggles to NEVER break the 40 rec mark as a who does more than he is given credit for, is silly. What the hell is a TE suppose to do for a young QB? He is the security blanket. Not a 6th offensive lineman. Unless your playing in a Martz style offense.

As for the comparisions, the OP and the 2ndary poster stand by their assessments. Which I still find BS to compare the 2. One mattered for his team, the other struggles to matter from week to week.

 

[Awsi Dooger]

The starting receivers for the 49ers in the 1982 Super Bowl were Freddie Solomon and Renaldo Nehemiah... Not Jerry Rice. Dwight Clark was not a TE.

Skeets was still a full time hurdler when that 1982 Super Bowl was played. He tried out for NFL teams a few months later and eventually signed with the 49ers.

I have no idea how anyone is knocking or downplaying Freddie Solomon. When the 49ers burst onto the scene in 1980, and obviously 1981, Solomon was the most dangerous weapon. Very high yards per reception for that system, more than 3 yards higher than Dwight Clark in 1981, and 5 yards beyond Montana's average per completion.