But we CAN see bad decisions. We saw plenty of them. Again I totally agree that Gase should be holding his player accountable and by all means he did... the issue is he can't hold himself accountable as well and that's the sign of a shitty boss.
It doesn't matter how much the O scored. The game is called based on the game score. We had control of that game going into the 4th quarter. FYI Ryan Tannenhill had his highest completion percentage, most yards per attempt and highest QB rating in Gase's first year as HC. Ryan Tannenhill was the starting QB for 4 years before Gase arrived. It's the only time Tannahill had a winning record as a starting QB. It's the only year in the last 11 years that Miami had a winning record.
I don't know why Tannehill is brought up so often. He went from poor to average by playing in a super safe offense that limits risk and has a very low ceiling. I have WAY higher aspirations for Sam than Ryan god damn Tannehill. We'll see how it plays out but one game in, it certainly looks like Gase wants to make Darnold the next Tannehill to fit his offense rather than the next Rodgers to fit a better offense. Not everyone, just the same few who usually miss every point.
He also had 2 Super Bowls as a DC, came close to another with the Jets, won a playoff game as HC in Cleveland and put together a solid staff of coaches, all before going to NE. If the owner didn't pull the rug out from under the city of Cleveland, they were on the verge of something special there. Resumes were nothing at all alike.
I guess so, but man it's going to be an ugly couple of years for Miami. That regime will be lucky to survive it. Karma for all Shula's shenanigans?
Your anecdote is not even close to the same as what happened here. Gase explained what anyone who watched could see. E didn’t throw anyone under a bus , he told the truth with no sugar coating. A foreign concept nowadays for sure. As long as he said the same thing to players face to face I really don’t see a problem with this interview.
I though the first quote was actually directed at the receivers not running the routes they should have based on coverage. Not so much Sam. But again, show me the lie.
Well he did take blame for the kicking situation. I honestly think part of it is he's not media savvy. The NY media, such as Mehta, asks stupid questions designed to rile people up and get headlines so they can write stories throughout the week. And Gase took the bait. Perfect example was Mehta asking why Ty Montgomery only got 5 snaps...the implication being he's a better player than only getting 5 snaps, and thus Gase didn't use him properly. Can you imagine a weaselly guy like Mehta questioning your football decisions if you're a head coach? Gase has a short fuse with the media which led to him saying I'm the coach and I'll make any decision I want. It was an answer out of frustration, and a bad answer because the media will run with that one. He could have just said Ty is a great player, but Leveon was playing really well and he's the number 1 back but going forward Montgomery will get his shots. But he doesn't like the media, and he's not good at answering their questions in a way that doesn't create headlines.
Too many participation trophies results in sandy vaginas when someone actually speaks their mind. I don't know if Gase will work out here, I hope he does, but calling out shitty performances in a press conference is not a reason to get rid of him. If anything I like the accountability assuming (as FJF said) he said the same thing or worse to the players.
Sam the entire premiss of your argument against Gase has been made on what he did with Tannehill, that's why I brought it up. You are making an assumption based on one game against a very good D, going against a very limited O of what Gase's plan is with Sam. Nobody on this board knows what Gase's plan with Sam is. If your point is that Gase is going to handle Sam like Tannenhill with almost zero history to make that assumption why would you say a rebuttal is missing the point. It does nothing for your argument. It makes you look like you're trying to bolster a thin argument with an attack on other peoples understanding. If you can't express yourself with a cogent argument don't blame other people for not understanding it. That's on you.
Mehta is the absolute worst, but he is absolutely warranted and justified in asking that question. Montgomery is a weapon, he can line up in ANY spot as a receiver or in the backfield. The offense had nothing going on... why the hell did he only play 5 snaps? That's a fuck up that Gase responded to like a pussy, and it's exactly what I'm talking about.
I was looking forward to 2 HB sets, and with Montgomery making up a little for Herndon's absence with his versatility. Buffalo has a very stout D, but there were mismatch opportunities to be found. Was wondering all game why he wasn't playing.
First off, my premise had absolutely nothing to do with football AT ALL, the other guy made it about football because he had no rebuttal for what I said. I never brought up Tannehill, the offense, or football in general. I was talking about the way Gase handled himself just as a human being and more importantly, as a boss: poorly. And there's a track record of that, which is ACTUALLY the entire premise of my argument. I only started talking about how average Tannehill is because someone else brought it up, as if we're supposed to crown Gase the king of QBs because of it. And like myself and others have said plenty of times, if this was a one off thing where the offense was stifled and couldn't get anything going so they had to resort to the short game, ok, I'm more than willing to give the entire team and staff the benefit of the doubt. That wasn't the case. What we saw Sunday was an extension of what we saw for THREE YEARS. Do you think it's a coincidence that they went out and signed Crowder, a guy who makes a living at the LOS? Probably not. It's because Gase's offense is predicated on short plays and making the player do all the work after the catch. You know, like what we saw on Sunday. I want nothing more than for this to be a case of a bad offensive roster that hasn't gelled yet going up against a very good D but history dictates that what we saw is more likely than not what we are going to get.
It's kind of a dumb question actually. The reason is because Bell is a much muchuch better player. Montgomery isn't suddenly an all pro. He's got talent but let's not forget no one was interested in him in free agency. He's a back up after all. But it's also the way Mehta asked it. It's a combination of his weasely voice and his condescending tone. Gase answered it poorly, but Mehta is a piece of shit.
How come everything with you is either or? You can play Bell AND Montgomery. Shit, Gase himself said he was looking forward to doing it! You don't have to bench Bell to play Montgomery. They both make each other that much more dangerous. When the offense can't get shit going on top of missing your playmaking TE, why would you NOT add a wrinkle to confuse the D and make things a little easier for your QB? Especially when you pride yourself on being some sort of offensive guru.
100% agree regarding Mehta, his questions would try my patience as well. Total weasel. Regarding Montgomery, I was hoping to see him on the field WITH Bell, not in replacement of him. 2 HB sets, and motion Montgomery all around to keep the D guessing on what position he's actually playing. With Herndon out that would make a lot of sense.
Exactly! With some tough defenses ahead in Cleveland and New England, I really hope Gase gets creative with 88. That's an adjustment I think (or at least hope) Gase will make. He fits in well with the short passing game, will keep the defenses honest on their assignments, and obviously Sunday's offensive game plan did not work.
There are no proven veteran kickers out there who are worth a damn. I'd rather go with a young kicker like Ficken or Fry or the kid from Duke who was in our TC in 2017 & 2018.
