Read whole article here, stroll towards the bottom
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap30...-blake-bortles-as-qb1-cutler-set-for-big-year
Jay Culter in Miami:Why this could be his year..NFL.com
- Thread starter MDFINFAN
- Start date
Read whole article here, stroll towards the bottom
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap30...-blake-bortles-as-qb1-cutler-set-for-big-year
NJPHINFAN79
Active Roster
As fins fans we should all be hoping that perspective plays out in reality
Wow. That's a whole lotta talk of roses and unicorns. I do believe in miracles, which is what that would be. So....bring it!
raving
Active Roster
I have said it here before think Jim Plunkett! Plunkett played for the NE Patriots, The 49ers and another team as a starter and the teams he played for were fails - in large part because his supporting cast sucked. And he got injured.
Then he went to the then LA Raiders. Behind Pasterini - who then got injured - and the rest is history....
Plunkett was a leader, a tactician, and used his talent around him - he had great defenses and Marcus Allen - and he won 2 superbowls - thank you very much!!!
Best case scenario Cutler = or > Plunkett.
The ghost of Plunkett returns to Miami!!!
Then he went to the then LA Raiders. Behind Pasterini - who then got injured - and the rest is history....
Plunkett was a leader, a tactician, and used his talent around him - he had great defenses and Marcus Allen - and he won 2 superbowls - thank you very much!!!
Best case scenario Cutler = or > Plunkett.
The ghost of Plunkett returns to Miami!!!
hoops
Tua time!
Plunkett was also what 40 years ago they didn't ask the qb to do half what they ask them to do now so let's all pump the brakes on the time machine references
Xbrett82us
Starter
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2004
- Messages
- 1,204
- Reaction score
- 575
Problem is Jay is not a leader nor a tactician, doesn't have a great defense around him, and J Train is no Marcus Allen.
I just don't agree that Jay cutler gives Miami a better shot than a healthy tannehill
Well, even though I disagree with the Jay at his best is better then what Ryan could do at his best, Jay still can be very effective is held under control.
As for Jay not being a vocal leader, he does not have to be that type of leader, he just has lead with his actions. AS for being a tactician, how many QB are really good to great tacticians? Gase will do that for Jay, and make sure he is prepared every week.
Not having a great defense? Neither did the Raiders really until they started playing like a great defense. Miami's problem is not talent, it's consistency, and if they can put it together, they can be a good defense.
J-Train not being Marcus Allen? No he's Jay Ajayi, and if he has a 1500+ yard season, with again 2 or more 200+ yard games, will/should anyone have a problem mentioning his name along with Marcus Allen? We still don't know how good Jay will be, odds of him being as good or consistent as Allen are not great, but there is also a chance Jay could end up being better then Allen.
Interesting. You have this article to go with ESPN dropping Miami into the 20s in Power Rankings. I saw on Twitter a Power Poll yesterday from Tom Byrne that had Miami 24th.
Also who is Jay Culter?
JakeemThe Dream
Active Roster
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2016
- Messages
- 1,449
- Reaction score
- 672
Marcus Allen had three 1k seasons in 17 years. He literally had 2 good years and a great one. After that, he had only 3 seasons over 800 yds and the rest very mediocre. He never had over 4.6 ypc. 7 seasons he had less than 4 ypc. Ajayi is already a top 5 RB with huge potential to get even better. I personally hate Marcus Allen as a person (biggest A$$hole that I've ever met) but that's here nor there lol I give credit to his longevity for sure. Ajayi isn't going to play 17 seasons but as good as he looks, the sky's the limit for his career. Remember, we had a pro bowl RB with one of the worst line problems in the league. The majority of his yards were after contact. It's too early to say but in 10 years let's see if Marcus Allen was as good as Jay Ajayi. Only time will tell
http://www.nfl.com/player/marcusallen/2499399/careerstats
Please tell me this is an attempted joke. Otherwise it's beyond unbelievable.
Quarterbacks in that era didn't have bugs in their ear. They called every play. Plus there wasn't a restricted strike zone for charging defenders. Quarterbacks were slaughtered in the face and knees and instead of begging for flags the spectators roared in approval while replays were savored. Defensive backs early in Plunkett's career with New England could do almost anything they wanted including wiping out receivers completely before the ball was thrown. Our Dolphins contributed to some rules changes like the so-called Isaac Curtis Rule which aided the passing game. Then head slaps were eliminated in the late '70s. And further softening to pass defense rules in 1978.
There's no question the NFL was more quarterback friendly in the early '80s during Plunkett's two title years than it had been when he entered the league. That's one of the reasons Bill Walsh's schemes fit the early '80s but wouldn't have been as successful if he had come along a decade earlier. But there's even less question that right now the league is an absolute farce in terms of defensive rules and application of them than it was 35+ years ago.
Heck, I've seen the argument here that Dan Marino would throw for 9000 or 11,000 yards per season in this era. The adjusters take it so far I can't keep track of all the zeros. So how can a assertion like that be taken in combo with the idea that Jim Plunkett had it so easy in the '70s and 'early '80s? I guess Dan Marino had it only slightly less simple beginning in 1983 and especially 1984.
The answer, obviously, is quite basic. The Happy Adjusters and tape guys take anything and everything wherever they want to take it. They literally would be laughed out of the room in the settings I frequent. That theme may not be appreciated here, and sometimes I tell myself it's not necessary to point out all the absurdities, but then something like the above quoted material shows up and there's no way I can ignore it without betraying myself and anyone who grasps the real world in football terms.
I learned early in life that I shouldn't comment on eras I didn't witness while alive and old enough to fully evaluate myself. Some of the adjuster sites like Football Outsiders don't understand that aspect. I've seen their head guy make laughable comments about passing realities in the '60s and '70s, things he didn't witness in real time.
Besides, Jim Plunkett was a collegiate superstar and Heisman Trophy winner. That alone gave him potential to return to elite level, a level Jay Cutler has never occupied. I was very interested in Plunkett given that huge upside. Frank Gifford was among the few media members who grasped as much. He started touting Oakland as potential Super Bowl champ during a Monday Night game relatively early in the 1980 season, causing Howard Cosell to scoff alongside him in the booth. Quite memorable
hoops
Tua time!
Your 2nd to last paragraph is fair but I find it hard to believe that qbs that long ago were making all the checks and audibles and protection verifications etc that they are in this era. headset in the helmet thing again fair but I don't think there was much altering what was called at the los based on what the defense shows.
If you can point me in the direction of some clips or even YouTube old stuff that says different I'm all ears. Of course then it becomes your words dreaded tape evaluation and analysis.
And I made no reference to the type and amount of contact qbs were taking then. I know full well that they were fair game. It still doesn't impact what my argument is in terms of responsibilities at the los etc.