Hayden Fox's Week Four Assessment

[PCmor]

Not much to complain about today. About the only major things were the fumble-itis, the first defensive series and the way the Dolphins started the fourth quarter ... I realize the game was out of hand, but I'm a firm believer in building good habits, and doing the details correctly and playing hard is an every-time thing if you want to do be able to do it when you need to do it most.

I guess my only other big complaint is how can this team be so wildly all over the place in its performances. There's not a lot of in between. It's either really good or really awful. The Tannehill throw to Hartline was one of the best throws I've seen. It's why I still have hope for him. And then I'll see games where he can't complete a screen pass. It's maddening.

Liked the play-calling and how Lazor mixed things up today. Lot of good things happen if you don't abandon a certain part of your game. The defense rebounded after a shaky start and played nearly three quarters of excellent football.

Yeah, I know it was just the Raiders, and that's not a very good team. But they did stay competitive with the Pats, and the AFC East in general looks more and more like it might be a total crapshoot. The line looked good and should improve immensely when Pouncey returns.

It'll be interesting to see how the Dolphins come out of the bye. For what was looking like a trainwreck of a week, they really managed to put it all together and show what they could be. But they need to do this consistently, and, in spite of the win, there are things to clean up ... we can't continue to have these fumbling issues.

 

[roy_miami]

I was surprised as well until it dawned on me that since it wasn't called a fumble by the refs they would not have awarded the Dolphins possession and it just would have been spotted where the player was tackled anyway. Philbin would have won the challenge but Raiders would have remained with possession despite the fact that Finnegan came out of the pile with the ball. I've seen that particular play happen before in the NFL with no change in possession after a challenge.

This is correct. Hayden Fox is incorrect to classify this as a negative. Would have been a dumb challenge.

 

[roy_miami]

I guess my only other big complaint is how can this team be so wildly all over the place in its performances. There's not a lot of in between. It's either really good or really awful. The Tannehill throw to Hartline was one of the best throws I've seen. It's why I still have hope for him. And then I'll see games where he can't complete a screen pass. It's maddening.

This is by design. We're a high variance team. Which is exactly what you should be striving to be even at the best of times, but especially if you have an inconsistent QB.

 

[TheWalrus]

The INT was not a bad throw. Against zone coverage Sims should sit on that route, not keep going.

 

[Sons Of Shula]

The INT was not a bad throw. Against zone coverage Sims should sit on that route, not keep going.

There was a camera shot of a coach in his ear following that play seemingly explaining, what I can only assume, was the same thing you just posted.

 

[TheWalrus]

There was a camera shot of a coach in his ear following that play seemingly explaining, what I can only assume, was the same thing you just posted.

Yeah, it's a very basic sight adjustment, really. 101. On a drag (or whatever they call it in Kelly's offense) if it's man you keep running but in zone you sit down between the defenders. In the NFL defenses pattern match in zone coverage so sometimes it will look like man when it's zone but this was pretty clearly zone.

Now, there are exceptions to this. Sometimes a receiver's job will be to run through a zone to draw off a defender so that a different receiver can exploit the gap. That wasn't the case here, at least not from what I saw. Sims should have stopped.

 

[whizafriz]

How about a little recognition that Joe Philbin effectively found a way to light a fire under Ryan Tannehill's butt by the public non commitment.
In some of the early games, Tannehill was lackluster but in this game he appeared far more passionate and desperate for a win. I am still of the view that Joe worded things carefully but it was a deliberate strategy to put some pressure on his QB.
The general impression is that Joe bungled but just maybe he knew precisely what he was doing to fire up Ryan.

I do not buy that narrative. Cannot do it my friend.

Joe was reckless this week. For the short-term, Joe might get something out of RT and the team, but when adversity hits, I do not see this team selling out for Philbin and that is on Joe.

Although I'd like to really believe that Philbin used it as a motivator, I'm starting to think more and more that this was all simply created by the media.

Philbin's policy as we know has been to not name starters. As Wannyheimer has pointed out in other threads, yes there's been exceptions to that -- but from what I see, Philbin wanted to uphold that policy in the face of increasingly burning questions about Tannehill, likely to avoid distraction to his QB in a very important game coming up.
In doing so, his silence had the exact opposite effect. The media twisted it to sound like the guy doesn't have faith in his QB.
Why? Because #1: They can be very evil, and #2, It's an easy story. Tannehill was playing poorly; what better way to chalk up a QB controversy than taking anything an Also Hot-Seat coach says (or doesn't say) and twist the words to no end.

I think Philbin does support Tannehill. The fact that he started the game anyways just proves that the "I'm not naming my starter" deal had no effect on who started at QB, and was just a (stubborn) formality by Philbin. The fact that Tannehill very quickly got on good terms with Philbin within days of the incident is even more evidence of that. This wasn't deep-seated trust issues or smoldering player-coach relationships. It was a mistake that he apologized for, and now they're peachy, which is exactly what happened in the end.
At least, that's what I'm going to believe, amongst the other theories floating around FH. This one makes the most realistic sense to me.

 

[roy_miami]

Although I'd like to really believe that Philbin used it as a motivator, I'm starting to think more and more that this was all simply created by the media.

Philbin's policy as we know has been to not name starters. As Wannyheimer has pointed out in other threads, yes there's been exceptions to that -- but from what I see, Philbin wanted to uphold that policy in the face of increasingly burning questions about Tannehill, likely to avoid distraction to his QB in a very important game coming up.
In doing so, his silence had the exact opposite effect. The media twisted it to sound like the guy doesn't have faith in his QB.
Why? Because #1: They can be very evil, and #2, It's an easy story. Tannehill was playing poorly; what better way to chalk up a QB controversy than taking anything an Also Hot-Seat coach says (or doesn't say) and twist the words to no end.

I think Philbin does support Tannehill. The fact that he started the game anyways just proves that the "I'm not naming my starter" deal had no effect on who started at QB, and was just a (stubborn) formality by Philbin. The fact that Tannehill very quickly got on good terms with Philbin within days of the incident is even more evidence of that. This wasn't deep-seated trust issues or smoldering player-coach relationships. It was a mistake that he apologized for, and now they're peachy, which is exactly what happened in the end.
At least, that's what I'm going to believe, amongst the other theories floating around FH. This one makes the most realistic sense to me.

I don't believe there have been exceptions to that policy because there is a big difference between naming a starter in preseason and talking about starters hours after a devastating loss. By rule we have to release depth charts and give injury reports every week, you should be able to infer from the depth chart who the starter will be.

People are upset that it was over the QB? Is the QB not a regular member of a team? People are upset he's not putting Tannehill above his other 52 teammates with respect to the policy?

Ryan Tannehill is a professional competitor. He should be upset that he received 1000 texts from his friends. He should not be upset over the idea that other professional competitors are eying his job. I said it before and I'll say it again: Ryan Tannehill, if you want to avoid further controversies: continue to play better.

 

[royalshank]

The INT was not a bad throw. Against zone coverage Sims should sit on that route, not keep going.

either that or stop jacking his biceps up so much. Presented a big target for the ball to ricochet off of!

 

[ChrisTRD]

I got so excited when the Dolphins briefly scored over 40 points.... sigh. Good win all around heading into the break.

 

[whizafriz]

I don't believe there have been exceptions to that policy because there is a big difference between naming a starter in preseason and talking about starters hours after a devastating loss. By rule we have to release depth charts and give injury reports every week, you should be able to infer from the depth chart who the starter will be.

People are upset that it was over the QB? Is the QB not a regular member of a team? People are upset he's not putting Tannehill above his other 52 teammates with respect to the policy?

Ryan Tannehill is a professional competitor. He should be upset that he received 1000 texts from his friends. He should not be upset over the idea that other professional competitors are eying his job. I said it before and I'll say it again: Ryan Tannehill, if you want to avoid further controversies: continue to play better.

True point.
I originally wasn't on Tannehill's side to begin with in this, and still am not. Philbin may not be the brightest guy to avoid media landmines, but in my mind, he's not the Tannehill-Doubter some ppl want to think he is. He even said Tanne had a very good game afterwards. I don't think he'd say that to the public if he really didn't want him to continue to start.

I think something in all this made Ryan play better than he normally would have. He mentioned in the presser he was anxious to get the distraction off his mind. That's a good start to motivation, not just proving to the NFL and fans you're a good QB, but to your fellow players and coaches too.

 

[Canadi-Phin]

The one thing I don't like is Coyle's defense on opening drives. I always feel like he needs to see what the other team is doing instead of dictating from the very start. I wish, versus young QBs, he would show press or play it a little more. Just make them have to hold the ball for a extra second. Versus EJ, we kept giving Watkins free releases from the line, especially on drag routes and we did the same yesterday at the start. See if the guy can beat your team on press not the opposite. Anyone should be able to complete a 5 yard pass against 8 yard cushion. Just my take. Or stop playing 8 yard cushions and play 5 yard ones. Free releases or getting to your spot without a hand on you is a receivers dream.

 

[MartinTheSNAKE]

Yep and there was a play earlier where it looked like he didn't even want to hit the player...nevertheless the pick is a confidence booster like I said. For a guy coming from FCS to the NFL it's a big jump and some guys wonder if they can really play in the NFL early on...just see Jamar Taylor...a play like that could give Aikens the confidence that he can play in the NFL. Heck, how many picks has Jamar Taylor and Will Davis come up with in their short careers? I'd say Aikens has a leg up on them now.

And that was a very nice read and play on the ball.

 

[ohall]

I don't believe there have been exceptions to that policy because there is a big difference between naming a starter in preseason and talking about starters hours after a devastating loss. By rule we have to release depth charts and give injury reports every week, you should be able to infer from the depth chart who the starter will be.

People are upset that it was over the QB? Is the QB not a regular member of a team? People are upset he's not putting Tannehill above his other 52 teammates with respect to the policy?

Ryan Tannehill is a professional competitor. He should be upset that he received 1000 texts from his friends. He should not be upset over the idea that other professional competitors are eying his job. I said it before and I'll say it again: Ryan Tannehill, if you want to avoid further controversies: continue to play better.

I hear what you are saying, but the reality is no the QB is not like any other position on the team.

 

[Awsi Dooger]

* I couldn't wait for this game to get to halftime. It was annoying beyond description not to have a bet on Dolphins -3.5. We were playing a pathetic team with a rookie quarterback. The Dolphins were finally in a favorable situation as a team coming off a loss playing away from home. A poster I greatly respect on footballsfuture.com posted after week two that he wasn't sure the Raiders would win one game this year. That guy is not prone to hyperbole. Then a week later somehow everything is thrown toward parity based on Miami's awful effort against Kansas City combined with Oakland's misleading tight game at New England. That type of thing happens all the time, a team overachieving as a big underdog and then flopping when expectations are higher. We actually had posters here picking Oakland last week.

Major kudos to Ian Eagle, the play by play announcer. That game didn't fit any of my systems so I sat out. Not until Eagle spotlighted the Eagles' dismantling of the Raiders last season did I remember that game and how it looked, like a college game with a 40 point favorite. This was similar. No reason to get scared or cute at halftime. Bet the advantage and salvage something. And 14-7 was plenty to collect. Big thanks to Walk Aikens for that interception. I had to sweat the final 8 minutes, after being furious when our touchdown to 45 was disallowed, followed by Miller's fumble.

* Great game by Tannehill and scheming by Lazor. We finally had dangerous wrinkles that were hinted in the opening possession of the first preseason game. We pounced on a vulnerable opponent. That's what you have to do, a vital first step. As I posted in preseason we aren't in a position to care about the handful of teams that will abuse the current level of our offense. You have to savage the weaklings and find advantage against teams on our own level. This was encouraging along those lines.

* As I posted last week, Tannehill's 5 yards per attempt were so far below his normal level of 6.7 to 7.2 that it meant he likely would have a stretch of games well above his norm. Now he needs to keep it going. I still think we rely on too many sideways passes as opposed to downfield aggressive darts. But in this case it was hilarious that the opponent was doing that even more than we were. That's the beauty of opposing a rookie quarterback.

* When Jimmy Clausen was highly touted in college, a friend of mine dismissed him as, "just another Clausen." In other words, just like his brother who had failed coming out of Tennessee. This Carr similarly looks like just another Carr. Throw out the adjustments. I'll be wagering against him often when sensible

* While attending the Canes game on Saturday night, I was struck at how absurd it is that many Canes fans believe that Al Golden is on the hot seat. His crime was losing as 4 point underdog at Louisville and 7.5 underdog at Nebraska. Those are not fireable offenses. Likewise, even if many of us would prefer an upgrade to Ryan Tannehill, a third year quarterback with moderate skills and nearly a 50-50 won/loss record is not in jeopardy. We've got to root for the happy adjusters to be correct. Tannehill is our guy for the foreseeable. I'm with it, even if hardly thrilled. I'm more disgusted with the Sun Life patchwork decision than any personnel decisions of late. Mike Dee gone and Jeff Ireland gone shouldn't be overlooked as a dual bonanza.

* During Ryder Cup week I don't pay much attention to football. Sorry for not watching the linemen carefully. I did find the weekly chuckle at the expense of Earl Mitchell, specifically his pass rush attempt on the first play McGloin entered the game. Mitchell tried his typical wheel route, this time on a pass rush, and fell flat on his face. I was in hysterics. Mitchell reminds me of another flawed defensive tackle, Larry Chester. He was touted in my early months on this site. Unbelievable. Chester was a stationary guy with no skills. Mitchell's playing style is exactly the opposite but he's similarly overrated. He's a slanting guesser with few instincts, no pass rush despite his quickness, and who runs himself out of one play after another. Anyone who believes in Earl Mitchell is already wrong and will continue to be further wrong. I'm going to be sick if we regulate ourselves with that guy for 4 seasons. Oakland also abused him on the first down running play from our red zone on its first possession. At least that play was highlighted by CBS. The network coverage has been very kind to Mitchell so far this season in ignoring all his brutal errors.

* Not much else to criticize. Wallace, Miller and Landry are fumblers. We already knew that. Kickoff depth needs to improve. Overall a great outing and boosted by the 49ers' rally to defeat the Eagles. That was the only remaining team I held some concern toward remaining unbeaten deep into the season.