We will have no offense. We will be the first team in the history of the league to score zero points in a whole season.
Last edited:
The case against Landry
- Thread starter absoluteLance
- Start date
We will have no offense. We will be the first team in the history of the league to score zero points in a whole season.
mwestberry
Club Member
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2012
- Messages
- 4,540
- Reaction score
- 11,632
The offense will come when we stop running it through a slot receiver as our best option to move the chains and thinking that if we just key on Landry we will average enough points per game to be relevant...not logical or doable....
....the slot receiver should be used because the main options are covered...or as a distraction to open up more lethal options...NOT as the main threat....is Landry valuable??? ABSOLUTELY....but to be worth more than 10 million a year he needs to line up on the outside and be a playmaker there...not the slot...he needs to score TD's to justify the kind of money he wants...he needs to be a threat...
He's not...
IMO
AquaXI
Active Roster
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2012
- Messages
- 462
- Reaction score
- 326
For those saying that without Landry we are doomed is funny! Sure Landry is a big part but if we can't replace a receiver with FA/Draft/next man up/ then I'll change the FO/Coaching and get someone who can pick/Coach up/ the good position we are in the draft/FA.
I'd be willing to go 11mil, but I have a limit.
I'd be willing to go 11mil, but I have a limit.
Butterfrog 2.0
Pro Bowler
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2004
- Messages
- 5,513
- Reaction score
- 1,914
Why do I have this sneaky suspicion that the offense would improve without Landry on it? I could be wrong of course but I just get this feeling that losing Jarvis is the Only way Gase and Co will ever truly open up the offense.
PBay Fin Fan
Active Roster
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2012
- Messages
- 1,625
- Reaction score
- 800
If we do not pay Laundry 14 per, someone will. I was watching The audible a week ago and both Bokamper and Rose said “pay the man”. I agree.
His agent went full gloves off at this point , never usually works out well when you start attacking the team like that publicly. I saw where someone posted on Twitter his agent has only 14 players, not sure if that’s true or..
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2011
- Messages
- 30,103
- Reaction score
- 15,374
His agent only having a few players is not a bad thing. If anything, as a player, I'd be inclined to look at agents who only represent a few people, because that means they have more time available to devote to promoting me and landing the best deals possible for me.
I think the bigger issue here is that his agent just threw a live hand grenade at Mama Bear Gase and his quarterback cub room.
I think the bigger issue here is that his agent just threw a live hand grenade at Mama Bear Gase and his quarterback cub room.
At this point great let someone else pay the man.
Elle Clouds
Active Roster
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2006
- Messages
- 2,384
- Reaction score
- 778
Develop talent. Let them walk. 8-8. Rinse and repeat.
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2011
- Messages
- 30,103
- Reaction score
- 15,374
But I guess to get back on the topic of the thread, I think the real case against Landry, if I were to make it, would be this:
1. Much of his production is scheme driven. Pointing to his number of catches is not really something in his favor. Yes, it's true that he is always available -- and that's a great trait for a football player -- but does anyone here think that Leonte Carroo or Jakeem Grant can't catch a screen pass? Or get schemed country mile open on a fake reverse action?
2. The Dolphins have not had an explosive offense when Landry is the primary target. In my mind, the best winning streak the team has had -- the most dangerous the offense has been during his time here -- happened in 2016 when our offensive identity was running the football and going downfield to Kenny Stills. I'd further add that we actually had Dion Sims catching a lot of underneath stuff during that run, and he was pretty good at it.
3. As the conclusion of points 1 and 2, does anyone here truly feel that Landry's production can't be replaced? Because I recall reading similar things here about Wallace and Bess. And even Hartline. Granted, I believe Landry is a better player than all three of those guys, but again, I ask, do you truly believe that we can't find another player to play his role?
So that's those are three factors you have to consider when examining...
4. Landry's production is not something we should consider irreplaceable, and he doesn't offer an exceptional downfield or jump ball threat. So that brings us to the question: Why should he be paid like someone who offers irreplaceable production OR an elite playmaking trait? Is "tough and passionate" really a pairing of elite traits that the team can't replace with a cheap draft pick?
And then we continue with an examination of Landry as the teammate, the person, and the guy outside the lines:
5. Domestic violence. Personal fouls. Fights. Ejections. Ending a guy's career with cheap shot block. Hotheaded behavior. Even if you like the guy, I think you have to agree that he behaves in an 'immature' manner quite frequently and has shown terrible judgment on and off the field far too often.
And finally,
6. Landry the student of the game. We have pretty much confirmed now (Thanks for the hit piece, Armando) that Landry was one of the players specifically called out by Adam Gase on that Friday afternoon after the Baltimore game. The press conference in which he said that some players weren't learning their responsibilities, weren't taking their work home with them, and caused him to make compromises on how he runs his offense. In other words, that Jarvis Landry was one of the players holding back our offense from reaching its full potential. That he was limiting the playbook.
That's the case against Jarvis Landry. A guy who is not worth 8% of the total amount of resources a team can allocate to its 53 man roster.
Now please keep in mind, this was the case AGAINST Jarvis Landry. I think you can also make a case FOR Jarvis Landry, but that's for another thread. :)
1. Much of his production is scheme driven. Pointing to his number of catches is not really something in his favor. Yes, it's true that he is always available -- and that's a great trait for a football player -- but does anyone here think that Leonte Carroo or Jakeem Grant can't catch a screen pass? Or get schemed country mile open on a fake reverse action?
2. The Dolphins have not had an explosive offense when Landry is the primary target. In my mind, the best winning streak the team has had -- the most dangerous the offense has been during his time here -- happened in 2016 when our offensive identity was running the football and going downfield to Kenny Stills. I'd further add that we actually had Dion Sims catching a lot of underneath stuff during that run, and he was pretty good at it.
3. As the conclusion of points 1 and 2, does anyone here truly feel that Landry's production can't be replaced? Because I recall reading similar things here about Wallace and Bess. And even Hartline. Granted, I believe Landry is a better player than all three of those guys, but again, I ask, do you truly believe that we can't find another player to play his role?
So that's those are three factors you have to consider when examining...
4. Landry's production is not something we should consider irreplaceable, and he doesn't offer an exceptional downfield or jump ball threat. So that brings us to the question: Why should he be paid like someone who offers irreplaceable production OR an elite playmaking trait? Is "tough and passionate" really a pairing of elite traits that the team can't replace with a cheap draft pick?
And then we continue with an examination of Landry as the teammate, the person, and the guy outside the lines:
5. Domestic violence. Personal fouls. Fights. Ejections. Ending a guy's career with cheap shot block. Hotheaded behavior. Even if you like the guy, I think you have to agree that he behaves in an 'immature' manner quite frequently and has shown terrible judgment on and off the field far too often.
And finally,
6. Landry the student of the game. We have pretty much confirmed now (Thanks for the hit piece, Armando) that Landry was one of the players specifically called out by Adam Gase on that Friday afternoon after the Baltimore game. The press conference in which he said that some players weren't learning their responsibilities, weren't taking their work home with them, and caused him to make compromises on how he runs his offense. In other words, that Jarvis Landry was one of the players holding back our offense from reaching its full potential. That he was limiting the playbook.
That's the case against Jarvis Landry. A guy who is not worth 8% of the total amount of resources a team can allocate to its 53 man roster.
Now please keep in mind, this was the case AGAINST Jarvis Landry. I think you can also make a case FOR Jarvis Landry, but that's for another thread. :)
Let's stop making it personal. It's not about Landry in my mind. It's about his position. There are just some positions that you are smart to keep replacing with cheap draft or FA talent. Slot receiver is one of those. Paying a slot receiver even 10M/yr simply doesn't make sense unless that player is a game-changing talent, and unfortunately Landry lacks the size or speed to be that. Now if he had Grant's jets? Yeah, then he might have been a true game-changer at slot.
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2011
- Messages
- 30,103
- Reaction score
- 15,374
Unfortunately, I think you have to examine the person as part of this process. When the person starts a stupid fight that gets him and the starting tailback ejected from a game, that's a problem. When the person gets your team in 1st and 35 because he can't control himself, that's a problem. When the person is getting himself on TMZ for bad reasons during the middle of the season, that's a distraction. When the person is throwing his teammates under the bus through his agent because he's mad at the front office, that's a locker room issue.
I don't think he is a selfish person, but he's a very impulsive and petulant person at times. When you're looking at allocating a significant chunk of your team's resources to this person for an extended period of time... it HAS to be personal on some level. Trust matters.
And again, I feel like this is the sort of issue where if the Dolphins move on from Landry, fans will bash him. If the team keeps him, fans will love him. I feel like he deserves both the love and the scorn. It's all going to be personal from here on out.
Note: I screwed up the quoting in the previous post, attempting to quote gofins60. I can't seem to fix it so I'll paste my reply here.
***
Great summary. I hope you don't mind that I quoted only the midsection of your post. I thought it covered everything perfectly.
I think Gase went on tilt with Ajayi and all the recent coaching changes partially because he didn't understand why we were so successful in 2016. It wasn't short passes. It was exactly what you emphasized...the balance between physical running game that had to be respected, in combination with lethal downfield throws. They fed off each other and enabled each other.
Even though the close victories were not sustainable entering 2017 and beyond, there was reason to be encouraged based on that dictating running game and newly found quick strike capability. I didn't particularly mind that 2017 figured to be regression. We found something that was going to help Tannehill.
Then we gave it away. Late in the season there was tons of rationalization that the offense was better off with Drake. No, it was not. It may have looked clever and cute but that type of offense is incredibly fragile. Second tier scat backs do not scare the league. It becomes a finesse offense not backed by elite personnel. As soon as you think you've found something with that second tier scat back the weaknesses show up and you realize an upgrade is necessary.
We led the league in percentage of pass plays this season, at above 63%. That's not where we need to be. It is a return to the idiotic Philbin philosophy. Tannehill as a moderate quarteback cannot be asked to throw 40ish times per game, especially without benefit of a frequent power running game and play action threat. Nobody is going to care if we are faking handoffs to that second tier scat back and throwing 63% of the time. The offensive line will look and function worse than it is via that imbalance.
Worst of all the high percentage of pass plays are fed through a little jittery receiver running irrelevant underneath crossing routes. It's difficult not to laugh at the prospect of that. Here comes our #14...tearing up the league 8 yards at a clip.
Tannehill even if he wants to utilize his newly more confident downfield prowess has that little #14 running sideways at the line of scrimmage, and a head coach who loves the short passing game.
What could go wrong?
***
Great summary. I hope you don't mind that I quoted only the midsection of your post. I thought it covered everything perfectly.
I think Gase went on tilt with Ajayi and all the recent coaching changes partially because he didn't understand why we were so successful in 2016. It wasn't short passes. It was exactly what you emphasized...the balance between physical running game that had to be respected, in combination with lethal downfield throws. They fed off each other and enabled each other.
Even though the close victories were not sustainable entering 2017 and beyond, there was reason to be encouraged based on that dictating running game and newly found quick strike capability. I didn't particularly mind that 2017 figured to be regression. We found something that was going to help Tannehill.
Then we gave it away. Late in the season there was tons of rationalization that the offense was better off with Drake. No, it was not. It may have looked clever and cute but that type of offense is incredibly fragile. Second tier scat backs do not scare the league. It becomes a finesse offense not backed by elite personnel. As soon as you think you've found something with that second tier scat back the weaknesses show up and you realize an upgrade is necessary.
We led the league in percentage of pass plays this season, at above 63%. That's not where we need to be. It is a return to the idiotic Philbin philosophy. Tannehill as a moderate quarteback cannot be asked to throw 40ish times per game, especially without benefit of a frequent power running game and play action threat. Nobody is going to care if we are faking handoffs to that second tier scat back and throwing 63% of the time. The offensive line will look and function worse than it is via that imbalance.
Worst of all the high percentage of pass plays are fed through a little jittery receiver running irrelevant underneath crossing routes. It's difficult not to laugh at the prospect of that. Here comes our #14...tearing up the league 8 yards at a clip.
Tannehill even if he wants to utilize his newly more confident downfield prowess has that little #14 running sideways at the line of scrimmage, and a head coach who loves the short passing game.
What could go wrong?
Landry is very good, but he isn't going to torture anyone. I too get emotional about my team but that seems to be the only way you look at things. All subjective.
Rest assured if Landry walks our O won't fall apart and struggle to score. I agree that his fire and passion that you're so fond of are not easily replaceable..... but that scheme driven production is. He needs to go get his #1 money elsewhere. People need to stop confusing "best I our O" with "best in the league". Being great on this offense isn't saying much. You're way over valuing him.