New Dolphins Center Accepts Challenge Of Tough Division
- Thread starter MDFINFAN
- Start date
ckparrothead
Premium Member
It's nice to see a Miami Dolphins team that has an expectation of winning football games again. It's been a while.
cafinfan408
Punching Bag
If he stays healthy im super exited about this move
That's exactly why I pointed out that part of the article, I thought that was great to hear that the team and organization expects to win, even thought every thing and every one outside of them are expecting doom and loom.. Additude has a lot to do with football, especially when it's a mental game with the physical being the caveat on the field.. if you feel like you can't do something you won't be able to do it, even if you're the superior athelete..
ckparrothead
Premium Member
Seemed like everyone had that expectation to win in 2006, but that year the team made a disastrous quarterback decision. I'm not assigning blame, I thought they made the right choice at the time. But it does go down as one of the worst decisions in franchise history...maybe in NFL history.
Spray Mucus
Ray Lucas' mom didn't take vitamins
:err: come on now.
But yes, it was a bad move. We coulda got Breese without any pick compensation. I can see why they did it though with Scott L as the offensive cordinator. Hindsight I suppose.
RealDriscoll
Still Perfect.. and You're Not.
A lot of people will be jumping on the Jake Grove bandwagon soon enough..I think this a major upgrade to Soft Satele
miami234ever
DenverCheesesteak
I'm still not buying this signing. Until he proves he can stay healthy and is worth the HEFTY contract he got, I will be down on the move. Jason Brown was 8 million more (and is 3 years younger) and we said no, so Grove really has to impress in order to make up for that. He's missed over 20 games throughout his career and isn't exactly young/a long term solution. It just smells like the crap signing of the off-season. I'm usually pretty optimistic on our players, but this was a shock.
good vs. bad decisions
You might call this semantics, but I think it's important because calling a decision bad implies blaming the decision maker. Like in poker...a good play ( one that plays the odds well ) often results in a loss of money, simply due to odds. But that doesn't make the play bad. The player should be commended, not judged, for playing well in these situations, as opposed to the lucky guy who plays poorly but wins. It's a pet peeve of mine that I think contributes to a lot of misrewarding / upward mobility of people who have no business going up in the world. Why? Because odds are odds--in the future, you don't want the lucky guy continuing to get the chance to screw things up by making his bad choices. Over time, the luck loses and skill wins. ( Sorry, seen too much messed up corporate stuff lately! )
And then, on top of that, to be classified as "historically bad", I think it had to be not only obviously boneheaded at the time the decision was made--plenty of those candidates to choose from in a typical NFL season--and then also turn almost single-handedly into an epic clusterf**k. I can't think of any Miami Dolphin examples, suddenly, but I know they are out there--any suggestions? The Saban hire, trade for AJ Feeley, and having Dom Capers run the defense in our 1-win season don't sufficiently pass both of the above criteria, for me.
To call a decision bad, much less historically one of the worst, I don't think you can also say it was a good decision at the time. It may have had bad/disastrous consequences, but to me, that doesn't make it a bad decision. A decision should always be judged based on the information available at the time and all the extenuating circumstances that were present.
You might call this semantics, but I think it's important because calling a decision bad implies blaming the decision maker. Like in poker...a good play ( one that plays the odds well ) often results in a loss of money, simply due to odds. But that doesn't make the play bad. The player should be commended, not judged, for playing well in these situations, as opposed to the lucky guy who plays poorly but wins. It's a pet peeve of mine that I think contributes to a lot of misrewarding / upward mobility of people who have no business going up in the world. Why? Because odds are odds--in the future, you don't want the lucky guy continuing to get the chance to screw things up by making his bad choices. Over time, the luck loses and skill wins. ( Sorry, seen too much messed up corporate stuff lately! )
And then, on top of that, to be classified as "historically bad", I think it had to be not only obviously boneheaded at the time the decision was made--plenty of those candidates to choose from in a typical NFL season--and then also turn almost single-handedly into an epic clusterf**k. I can't think of any Miami Dolphin examples, suddenly, but I know they are out there--any suggestions? The Saban hire, trade for AJ Feeley, and having Dom Capers run the defense in our 1-win season don't sufficiently pass both of the above criteria, for me.
mikethewreck
Just a fan...
I thought the title of the article was funny. Like Grove isn't going to accept the challenge? "Oh no, those big evil nose tackles scare me, I'm gonna hide under my bed!" That's why they pay him the big bucks. "Grove Looks Forward to Facing Tough Opponents in Division" would have made more sense.
All the same, I hope we have a good backup lined up...
All the same, I hope we have a good backup lined up...
yes he is...:up:
Worse in Franchise?!? Worse than not resigning Welker? You apparently weren't around for Yatil Green or Scott Mitchel.
Welker wasn't all that bad because for the longest time, it was a good trade until we saw what went down.Worse in Franchise?!? Worse than not resigning Welker? You apparently weren't around for Yatil Green or Scott Mitchel.
lemonpepperfish
janitor
we had to trade welker. The patsies made sure. We couldn't match what they were offering him. He hadn't become worth making him a restricted free agent at the time.