Mularkey has no faith in his players | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Mularkey has no faith in his players

Simone007

Simone007

Starter
Joined
Mar 14, 2006
Messages
476
Reaction score
3
Location
Italy
Really... think about it. He has not faith in his players.
I think that the play Mularkey called in the two-point conversion shows all the disrespect he has towards his players: he didnt want Ronnie to RUN, and he didnt want Daunte to PASS.

Maybe hes getting crazy
 
This works out somewhat well for everybody, because it's fairly obvious that the players don't have any faith in Mularkey.
 
I think he should do more than go to the sidelines: he's still too far from the action. He should stay in the middle of his offensive line, he should start a center
 
This year, you all blame it on Mularky, last year it was Linehan, the year before that was Norv Turner.... ITS NOT THE PLAY CALLING THAT'S THE PROBLEM... its the people asked to execute the plays..

The difference between brilliant OC's and idiot OC's is the difference between success and failure.. had these calls actually worked, you all would be calling the OC de jour a hero..
 
SHEDDAWG DOLFAN said:
If the play worked out....People would be saying he was brilliant:rolleyes2
Click to expand...
We should've crushed Houston. Chambers had 1 on 1 coverage the whole game and Daunte+the o-line couldn't get it to him. We shold've killed em.
 
Jeep said:
This year, you all blame it on Mularky, last year it was Linehan, the year before that was Norv Turner.... ITS NOT THE PLAY CALLING THAT'S THE PROBLEM... its the people asked to execute the plays..

The difference between brilliant OC's and idiot OC's is the difference between success and failure.. had these calls actually worked, you all would be calling the OC de jour a hero..
Click to expand...

I disagree. Norv Turner did not utilize the players he had and their strengths and weakness. He still wanted to use plays that or QB couldn't excel at (out routes/timing patterns etc). Linehan was very questionable until coming to the sidelines and gelling with the players and what they thought (Who can forget the two fade patterns back to back in the corner of the endzone directly into the sun where the players couldn't see; Booker was pissed).

Mularky is not utilizing anything. We don't need end arounds, fake reverses, all shotgun, gimmick gadget plays. We need an identity. We need toughness. We need more time for the QB. RUN THE BALL. Forget the gimmicks. The run will open the pass and play action pass. And that will open up the run even more.
 
SHEDDAWG DOLFAN said:
If the play worked out....People would be saying he was brilliant:rolleyes2
Click to expand...

No. It would have been a lucky play but we should still have asked how you take the ball away from our strengths.
 
SHEDDAWG DOLFAN said:
If the play worked out....People would be saying he was brilliant:rolleyes2
Click to expand...

True, but a trick play wasn't needed at the time. The offense all of a sudden was clicking, so I think a simple pass from Daunte to Chambers, Welker, Booker or McMike would have tied the game! I would have prefered a quick sneak with Daunte punching up the middle.
 
Once again... the difference between a successful OC and Turner/Linehan/Mularkey is the players inability to execute the called plays..
 
i dont see why we didnt go to shotgun spread everyone out and have daunte call the play at the line wether to hand the ball off to ronnie or pass...seems like it would have been pretty easy for ronnie to pound it in three yards with a spread formation.
 
Jeep said:
This year, you all blame it on Mularky, last year it was Linehan, the year before that was Norv Turner.... ITS NOT THE PLAY CALLING THAT'S THE PROBLEM... its the people asked to execute the plays..

The difference between brilliant OC's and idiot OC's is the difference between success and failure.. had these calls actually worked, you all would be calling the OC de jour a hero..
Click to expand...

This is among the most boneheaded posts I've ever seen.

There is a proven correlation between passing attempts, rushing attempts, and wins. Teams that run the ball well to set up the pass do better. When your running back is getting over four yards a carry and your quarterback isn't exactly moving down the field, you stick with the run. It's not Culpepper's fault that the offense was bad yesterday. It's Mularkey's fault for putting it on Culpepper instead of on Ronnie Brown.

For an example of this - and there are plenty - flash back to December 14, 2003. The Steelers play the Jets in NY. The Steelers are known as a good running team, and Tommy Maddox is having a below-average season as quarterback. The Jets have the league's 28th-ranked rush defense. Oh, and by the way, it's 30 degrees at game time with a 15 mph wind blowing. Oh, and one more thing. It's being played in the middle of a snow storm.

You'd think the Steelers would run, right? Bettis rushes a whopping 16 times. In total, the Steelers rush 24 times - for 94 yards, just a hair under four yards per carry. Maddox passes 38 TIMES for 137 yards - 3.6 yards per attempt. The Jets rush 37 times for 175 yards while only passing 25 times.

Guess who won that game? Face it. Mularkey was a horrible choice. Most people knew this the instant he was even mentioned as a replacement. Saban gambled and lost, which is becoming a frequent occurrence (Culpepper, Frerotte, Roth, McDougle, Mularkey, and Shelton, for example).

Mularkey couldn't coordinate a Pop Warner offense let alone a professional offense.
 
guido13 said:
Mularky is not utilizing anything. We don't need end arounds, fake reverses, all shotgun, gimmick gadget plays. We need an identity. We need toughness. We need more time for the QB. RUN THE BALL. Forget the gimmicks. The run will open the pass and play action pass. And that will open up the run even more.
Click to expand...

I agree with you 100%
 
when saban signed mularkey no one was endorsing him from buffalo and then we picked up anderson, the OG, from buffalo and everyone said he sucked. that was the first warning sign because surely the ex-head coach would know if bennie was bad. but we signed him anyway. the point is: everyone said mularkey was bad, but the sabanator signed him anyway. where's wanny when we need him?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom