Huizenga has ruined this organization

[KYPhinFan]

I was actually saying when we were 8-6 that Dave should be fired. However, I disagree with what I said now. Our team finished 10-6, which, like some of you had said guarantees a playoff position 90% of the time, at least. This year was a year in which several AFC teams posted better records than Miami... it doesn't happen very often.

Second, our team could have EASILY been 11-5, 12-4, 13-3, 14-2, or 15-1. Every single game minus the Titans game was winnable and we blew our opportunities. Dave Wannstedt was NOT the person blowing those opportunities. A coach can only take it so far but it relies on the players to execute and our players simply don't execute when they need to. That's not something Wannstedt can help, that's something that they have to work on themselves.

Hopefully by bringing in new offensive talent, we can end that struggle.

 

[phinfan27]

Coaching has a lot to do with winning and losing close games, so for the most part, I disagree on that statement.

 

[themole]

Originally posted by phinfan34
Coaching has a lot to do with winning and losing close games, so for the most part, I disagree on that statement.

What statement are you refuring to? You didn't include a quote!

 

[phinfan27]

Originally posted by KYPhinFan
Every single game minus the Titans game was winnable and we blew our opportunities. Dave Wannstedt was NOT the person blowing those opportunities.

That one

 

[themole]

Originally posted by phinfan34


That one

oh!

 

[DrAstroZoom]

Originally posted by phinfan34


Give them (the Seahawks) 4 years.

He's had five.

 

[DeDolfan]

Originally posted by Brad528
Everyone keeps saying why should he be fired when he won ten games and stuff. But when 10 games doesnt get it done and you lose all of the games that are important you should be fired. I do believe he has done good things in Miami. We didnt have Ricky untill he got here and he has seemed to try to improve. The problem is are play calling in big games situations and i blame that on Dave along with Norv. They are conservitive at times and dont run the right plays for Ricky.

Actually, i had broken it down after last year and again this. If we went all 4 years [under Wannstedt] at 18-0 and lost all 4 SBs, there would still be a big problem. Unless you win the SB, you always expect improvement. I have shown before that Wannstedt has this team declining each year in spite of his "fabulous" record all of his supporters keep harping on.

 

[DeDolfan]

Originally posted by MDFINFAN


You've asked this questions several times, and I've yet to see anyone answer it. If Wanny had gone like 5-11 or 7-9, I could see us replacing him, but a 10 wins avg over 4 years, people on this board must be nuts to replace him. He said at the begining of the year, they much coach better, apparently it didn't happen, he started finding new coaches quickly. Oblivously he felt that was one of the weaker areas. So he's changed alot of players, now coaches. This year will be a do or die year in terms of implementing a higher standard. Can these coaches get out of the players what previous coaches couldn't do? Time will tell.

Where were you when all the debating about possible coaches, like green, Coughlin, Stoops, Saban and about a zillion others were being discussed? But it's a rather moot point now since all the better candidates have been placed by now. of course if we went 12-4 and missed the playoffs i guess it would be more nuts to fire him then, yes??

 

[DeDolfan]

Originally posted by DrAstroZoom
First, there is no quantifiable way you can say we have "Top 5 talent." According to whom?

Second, this year in the AFC was an aberration. If you go 10-6 in the league, you have something like a 90% chance of making the playoffs. We were very nearly 12-4, but we barely came out on the short end of two close contests against the eventual Super Bowl champ -- a team which strung off 15 victories in a row.

Did the team not meet expectations? Sure. Did it underachieve? Very hard to say, but I would argue "no."

Doc, I know what you're saying, but aberration or not, bottom line is that we controled our own destiny. The playoffs were ours for the taking but we simply just cannot get the job done when we need to. It's a pretty simple task. We have no problem against the also rans of the league. If we played nothing but winning teams, we'd be lucky to have 4 wins. Regardless of the GM/personel we have, wannstedt still has to coach them and he just canot get this team over the hump.
Did the team really underachieve? Possibly and that is debatable. But one thing for certain, IMO, it was underCOACHED.

 

[DeDolfan]

Originally posted by dolphan39
personally, I think we can never win our division, let alone our conference while our stadium is named after a company that went out of business years ago - c'mon Wayne :goof:

39, Wayne is driven ONLY by the almighty $$. He won't rename the stadium cuz it just costs too much for all the new signage and such. Much like he will make no real changes for the betterment of this team/fans as long as tic sales hold up and he gets another tidy profit.

 

[DeDolfan]

Originally posted by DrAstroZoom



Baltimore Ravens, 2002-2003 (Brian Billick)
Seattle Seahawks, 2001-2002 (Mike Holmgren)
Kansas City Chiefs 2001-2002 (Dick Vermeil)
Pittsburgh Steelers, 1998-2000 (Bill Cowher for THREE seasons)
Oakland Raiders, 1998-1999 (Jon Gruden, though it was his first two seasons)

Do I need to go on?

Just curious, Doc, but what were those teams' records those years??

 

[DeDolfan]

Originally posted by DOLFANMIKE


BS

If you think he doesnt make adjustments you need to learn more about the game.

What kind of adjustments does he make??

 

[DeDolfan]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Huizenga has ruined this organization

Originally posted by Cranx


And you wonder why everyone on this thread thinks you're an idiot. Try a rational argument backed by some FACTS (you know, those things that are absolutely true regardless of opinion) then someone might respond to you in the manner you seem to be begging for. Until then, emotional outbursts that are closer to those of a three year old toddler than a rational, intelligent human being are just making you look like a complete moron. Maybe you should quit while you're only light years behind and not completely hopeless.

Fact-2000, 11-5, AFCE champs, lose in 2nd rnd.
Fact-2001, 11-5 again, lose in 1st rnd
Fact-2001, 9-7, missed playoffs on last day after controling the #1 seed earlier.
Fact-2003, 10-6, missed playoffs a week sooner than in '02.

See the declining trend despite the W-L record? that's what he's pissed about. just some "facts" you may be interested in.

 

[DrAstroZoom]

Originally posted by DeDolfan


Just curious, Doc, but what were those teams' records those years??

Under Mike Holmgren, the Seahawks didn't make the playoffs for three straight seasons (2000: 6-10; 2001: 9-7; 2002: 7-9)

Under Dick Vermeil, the Chiefs didn't make the playoffs for two straight seasons (2001: 6-10; 2002, a year in which they had five Pro-Bowlers: 8-8)

Under Bill Cowher, the Steelers didn't make the playoffs for three straight seasons (1998:7-9; 1999: 6-10; 2000: 9-7)

 

[DeDolfan]

Originally posted by KYPhinFan
I was actually saying when we were 8-6 that Dave should be fired. However, I disagree with what I said now. Our team finished 10-6, which, like some of you had said guarantees a playoff position 90% of the time, at least. This year was a year in which several AFC teams posted better records than Miami... it doesn't happen very often.

Second, our team could have EASILY been 11-5, 12-4, 13-3, 14-2, or 15-1. Every single game minus the Titans game was winnable and we blew our opportunities. Dave Wannstedt was NOT the person blowing those opportunities. A coach can only take it so far but it relies on the players to execute and our players simply don't execute when they need to. That's not something Wannstedt can help, that's something that they have to work on themselves.

Hopefully by bringing in new offensive talent, we can end that struggle.

90% of the time is probably correct. Several teams did post better records than us and that's why we missed the playoffs again. Funny thing is that 5 of those "several" teams are ones we lost to. Again, everyone harps on our record, which actually does us little as far as where we want to go. Granted, we need a certain amount of wins overall to make the playoffs, sure, but some have to be against good teams, otherwise, the playoffs are all for naught anyway. I think it was Yogi Berra that said som's like, "You have to play 50-50 ball against the good teams and beat the hell out of the rest". Oh, we beat the hell out of the chumps but fell waay short 0f 50% of the others.