What do Philbin and/or Tannehill need to do to win back your support?

[SkapePhin]

I like Philbin, but not as a Head Coach. He's just not good enough to get this team to play consistently well; one week they look good, the next week they suck. It's not all his fault, as Ireland shares the blame and this has been going on since before they were hired.

As for Tannehill, if I were Ross I'd sit Ryan, Philbin, and Lazor down and tell them this: I'm paying big bucks to Wallace, and it is a complete waste of my money to not use his speed. When he gets open behind the defense, I expect my QB to connect on a lot of those deep passes. If you can't do it, then I'll find someone who can.

That said, I think that Tannehill would do better behind a big, strong o-line... a huge wall of beef. He doesn't look very good when he's constantly under pressure, as in the Buffalo game, and even against the Raiders in the second half.

No QB looks good when they are consistently under pressure. If Brady started his career behind an OL like last year's or this year's Dolphins squads, he may never have developed into the HOF QB he is today. Brady has proven to crumble when pressured.

Not saying Tannehill will be anywhere close to Brady's level, just pointing out that there isn't a QB in the league that performs well under constant pressure.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Zounds]

The team WAS flat.

Are you serious? Our first 4 drives netted us 3 touchdowns and a field goal. The score at halftime was 24-7. How in the world is that "flat"???

 

[roy_miami]

Mike Wallace drags guys into the endzone and you guys are still trying to claim you were right about the team being flat. My god, you guys just don't have a clue about anything.

 

[Zounds]

There's a lot of revisionist history in this thread. People remember things they way they want to remember, and not how they actually happened.

 

[SkapePhin]

Are you serious? Our first 4 drives netted us 3 touchdowns and a field goal. The score at halftime was 24-7. How in the world is that "flat"???

He first series for each squad netted a TD for the opponent which looked like our D wasn't even on the field. The O and Tannehill followed that up with a decent drive that was squandered by misfires and immaculate throws. If they were playing anyone other than the Raiders, that inconsistent "flat" play may have continued past just one series.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[greasyObnoxious]

He first series for each squad netted a TD for the opponent which looked like our D wasn't even on the field. The O and Tannehill followed that up with a decent drive that was squandered by misfires and immaculate throws. If they were playing anyone other than the Raiders, that inconsistent "flat" play may have continued past just one series.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

one bad throw. don't make things up

 

[Zounds]

He first series for each squad netted a TD for the opponent which looked like our D wasn't even on the field. The O and Tannehill followed that up with a decent drive that was squandered by misfires and immaculate throws. If they were playing anyone other than the Raiders, that inconsistent "flat" play may have continued past just one series.

24-7 at halftime. We scored on every possession in the 1st half. I think you are trying desperately to make a point that just isn't there because you hate Philbin so much.

 

[SkapePhin]

one bad throw. don't make things up

Lol Autocorrect changed "innacurate" to immaculate


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---------- Post added at 03:39 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:38 PM ----------

24-7 at halftime. We scored on every possession in the 1st half. I think you are trying desperately to make a point that just isn't there because you hate Philbin so much.

Don't worry, I'll pull the stats for all Philbin-led teams. We will see if the data backs up the assertion that the teams don't consistently start slow under Philbin


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Zounds]

Don't worry, I'll pull the stats for all Philbin-led teams. We will see if the data backs up the assertion that the teams don't consistently start slow under Philbin

I'm not talking about slow starts under Philbin. We were talking about YESTERDAY'S game, which you said we started "flat".

 

[darefugee]

win

 

[PCmor]

Tannehill -- Just do what he did for most of the first three quarters yesterday on a reasonably consistent basis. Doesn't have to be an all-the-time thing, but it definitely needs to be a most-of-the-time thing. He was much more pinpoint in his accuracy, and I thought he maintained his composure in the pocket very well even when he was about to get hit.

Philbin -- This team better not come out flat for the Packers. We'll start there. He's got a ways to go, but that will be a start. If this team lays a first quarter egg against Green Bay coming off the bye, I'll pretty much have given up on him even if they win, because that's happened far to often under his watch. This team doesn't build on its success. The GB game is the ideal way to do it: Big home game against a marquee opponent coming off an extremely impressive win on the road and a bye week. There is absolutely no excuse for this team to start slowly. Also, he better no embarrass himself with more of that kind of nonsense with Tannehill a week ago; if you think it, think it, don't go halfway and don't apologize ... if you don't think it, keep your mouth shut, because going back and forth and saying you're sorry makes you look fake and/or wishy-washy.

 

[roy_miami]

He first series for each squad netted a TD for the opponent which looked like our D wasn't even on the field. The O and Tannehill followed that up with a decent drive that was squandered by misfires and immaculate throws. If they were playing anyone other than the Raiders, that inconsistent "flat" play may have continued past just one series.

If your QB needs to be "coached up" to avoid going 1-3, or for any game, you best start looking for a new QB. A good QB needs to be a coach in his own right and do his part to motivate the rest of the offense.

 

[Sherif]

I think Philbin has a good team and since nearly half the teams in the NFL make the playoffs, 14 out of 32, he would need to put in a good showing in the playoffs and not just make the playoffs. Philbins overall 3 year record needs to be over .500 and he needs a 1-1 playoff record or I think he should be gone.

To keep Tannehill, I think his QBR needs to be in the top 15 this year and his 3 year record needs to be over .500.

 

[greasyObnoxious]

I think Philbin has a good team and since nearly half the teams in the NFL make the playoffs, 14 out of 32, he would need to put in a good showing in the playoffs and not just make the playoffs. Philbins overall 3 year record needs to be over .500 and he needs a 1-1 playoff record or I think he should be gone.

To keep Tannehill, I think his QBR needs to be in the top 15 this year and his 3 year record needs to be over .500.

12 out of 32 teams make the post season

 

[retarmyfinfan]

It remains to be seen if they are the answers, and I have some doubts about both, but I support them. I think we need to make the playoffs for both of them to secure their jobs long-term, but I'll stop short of making ultimatums like "playoffs or clean house". You never know what can happen over 12 games.

Philbin is not the answer. I agree that he is not a leader and his team will jot respond to him. Not sure on Tannehill yet. 1 good game out of 4 is not good enough. Hopefully he stays consistent, and finally quits making the same mistakes over and over again. We got the rest of this season to find out. If he can't get it right our new HC will have to find somebody new.