Peter King picks us to win | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Peter King picks us to win

With the exception of maybe New Orleans and Philadelphia, I agree with most of his picks including Miami over Atlanta.
 
I don't agree with Miami over Atlanta. Maybe some of you think that means I'm a traitor or anything, but no matter how you put it, Atlanta is a better team than we are right now, and as for the "intangibles" of the game, yes we tend to be strong at home, BUT we're also very weak coming off a win. Unlike the Broncos game, there should be little to no heat factor involved here either.
 
ckparrothead said:
I don't agree with Miami over Atlanta. Maybe some of you think that means I'm a traitor or anything, but no matter how you put it, Atlanta is a better team than we are right now, and as for the "intangibles" of the game, yes we tend to be strong at home, BUT we're also very weak coming off a win. Unlike the Broncos game, there should be little to no heat factor involved here either.


You would not be a traitor CK. You have been consistant with your assessment. Frankly, i dont know who will win. I do know we have changed our style and have stopped the penalties for two weeks in a row. As for coming off a win, I dont think that means anything unless we were on the road for this one.
 
Feck. Now we need Prickso to pick us to guarantee doom. :shakeno:
 
We have I believe 18 penalties over the last three games. That's only 6 a game, as compared to 14 a game over the first four games. Somehow Saban got these guys to play more disciplined, and thank god for that.

But as for a style change...I'm not sure I have actually seen a style change. Our style on offense has always been opportunistic. The Saints gave us the run, because they couldn't stop it, and the defense didn't allow the Saints to convert third downs to stay on the field. So, we ran the ball. A lot. That was an opportunity call, not a "hey we're going to run the ball 40 times this week because I've decided we pass the ball too much" call.

I believe that when we allow the opponent to get out to a quick 7-0 lead, as we've done in all four of our losses, that sharpens our offense's sense of opportunistic tendencies. Most teams have decided to defend us by defending the run first, then the pass. Understandable. If our opportunistic sense on offense has been sharpened by us giving up a quick 7 point lead, we're much more inclined to "take what the defense is giving us" which is almost always the deep ball. Of course, our quarterback is not connecting on these deep balls enough to make the D pay for their bets.

When we are tied, or have a lead, there is less of a sense of going for what the defense gives us, and more of an emphasis on balance for the sake of balance, rather than for the sake of what the defense is giving us.

I wish we could just play without knowing the score at all. People try to say that being down a touchdown means the game is still in reach and doesn't change the play-calling at all, but they are wrong. The expectation of the players and coaches right now is that our offense is only going to score between 13 and 24 points in a game even if they are doing well. Being down 7 points early then puts a lof of pressure on all involved, despite the common feeling that down 10-3 or down 7-0 shouldn't change the game plan.

Anyway I have seen nothing to suggest that our style in particular has changed. IMO, the best thing we did against the Saints was only allow them to jump out to a 3-0 lead instead of a 7-0 lead. A 3 point lead doesn't phase players or coaches at all, it's as good as tied to them, because when it comes down to it they always take for granted that at worst we can drive far enough in using a no-huddle to score a FG to tie it up.
 
ckparrothead said:
I don't agree with Miami over Atlanta. Maybe some of you think that means I'm a traitor or anything, but no matter how you put it, Atlanta is a better team than we are right now, and as for the "intangibles" of the game, yes we tend to be strong at home, BUT we're also very weak coming off a win. Unlike the Broncos game, there should be little to no heat factor involved here either.

So I guess upsets never happen. Hmmm, wonder if Tampa Bay shares your line of reasoning.
 
Anyway you hack it you have to get the ball to the playmakers and WE have more bonified playmakers than Atlanta. If Gus has a good day then we take Atlanta, otherwise we'll have to depend on the defense. Not meaning that we'll throw more, but if we must it's up to him to get the ball to Chambers, Mac, Wes, Booker, Ronnie and Ricky.

I keep saying this but I believe that a little cohesion is starting with this team and part of the reason is Saban's relentless support of his starters. Miami turns it up this week, I just have a feeling...
 
When ahead or tied, we have run the ball with running backs (Morris, Minor, Williams, and Brown) 89 times and passed 93 times. That is balance. When behind, we have run the ball with running backs 69 times and passed 153 times. That is anything but balance. Using some pretty rough calculation and guestimation, it looks to me like we pass the ball between 60 and 65% of the time when we're down by between 1 and 10 points. That should not be the case.

Again, I'm not saying that we abandon the game plan the moment we're down by 7 points. I'm saying that we become a more opportunistic team when that happens, meaning we're more likely to try and take advantage of what the other defense is giving us instead of attempting to maintain ratios.
 
jlfin said:
So I guess upsets never happen. Hmmm, wonder if Tampa Bay shares your line of reasoning.

Man, get a grip. Peter King just predicted a Miami victory. That means he feels there's a better than 50% chance that Miami will come out on top. I disagree with that assessment. I would put the chance at around 20%. Upsets happen, but they are called upsets because nobody PREDICTED the other team to win. While all the blind homers are out there PREDICTING victory, they had better get use to losing, because i'd say chances are bout 4 out of 5 that we'll lose.
 
Ck, I could've sworn Saban said he wanted to ideally run the ball 40 times for last weeks game, not really opportunist. Maybe I'm wrong though.
 
Back
Top Bottom