|
Title: Play calling vs Rams Post by: Dave Gray on November 21, 2016, 11:02:52 am Did anyone else notice that our play calling was especially conservative against the Rams?
Tannehill wasn't playing particularly well early, in terms of downfield throws, and our guys dropped a couple, too, but it seems like we abandoned any downfield passing at all...everything was dump offs or swing plays or flat passes or outs. Was that fear of weather, fear of the Rams' D or just a confidence that the Rams weren't going to score so you were trying to be conservative until the end of the game? Or just bad play calls? Title: Re: Play calling vs Rams Post by: Dolfanalyst on November 21, 2016, 11:18:21 am I'm not sure how to tease apart how aggressive or conservative the play-calling is intended to be from what players choose to do once the play unfolds.
Title: Re: Play calling vs Rams Post by: Spider-Dan on November 21, 2016, 11:21:35 am I think it was the weather.
Title: Re: Play calling vs Rams Post by: fyo on November 21, 2016, 11:38:19 am Did anyone else notice that our play calling was especially conservative against the Rams? Yes, except conservative in the short-throws sense, instead of running the ball. Considering how poorly the Rams play on offense, I wouldn't have been against 6 straight handoffs to start the game, even if it resulted in two 3-and-outs. Quote Tannehill wasn't playing particularly well early, in terms of downfield throws, and our guys dropped a couple, too, but it seems like we abandoned any downfield passing at all...everything was dump offs or swing plays or flat passes or outs. Hard to throw much downfield when your offensive line is so bad. After Tunsil left, the Dolphins seemed like they were in max-protect on most plays. Not going to get much passing going from that. Title: Re: Play calling vs Rams Post by: Dolphster on November 21, 2016, 11:48:30 am I think it was intentionally conservative. I was scratching my head about it during the game, and of course hindsight is 20/20, but I think they made the assumption that it was going to be a low scoring game because the Rams offense sucks and their DL is really good. So I think maybe the game plan was just to keep the game close and hope for the kind of opportunities that did in fact show up in the 4th quarter. Just a guess on my part of course.
Title: Re: Play calling vs Rams Post by: Dave Gray on November 21, 2016, 12:12:26 pm I'm not sure how to tease apart how aggressive or conservative the play-calling is intended to be from what players choose to do once the play unfolds. Good point. Hard to tell if the downfield stuff was there and Tanny was choosing the dump-off. Or maybe the coaches were telling to be really careful not to throw a pick. Title: Re: Play calling vs Rams Post by: Baba Booey on November 21, 2016, 01:55:29 pm Did anyone else notice that our play calling was especially conservative against the Rams? Tannehill wasn't playing particularly well early, in terms of downfield throws, and our guys dropped a couple, too, but it seems like we abandoned any downfield passing at all...everything was dump offs or swing plays or flat passes or outs. Was that fear of weather, fear of the Rams' D or just a confidence that the Rams weren't going to score so you were trying to be conservative until the end of the game? Or just bad play calls? They are a Top 5 defense in the NFL. They are really really good. Can only do so much against them. Playcalling is fine considering 3 best olinemen were out Title: Re: Play calling vs Rams Post by: CF DolFan on November 21, 2016, 04:23:14 pm It was conservative because we had in a very weak offensive line. It's a pretty good indication when you are throwing so many screens ... or attempting to at least. We didn't have a run game and apparently we couldn't handle a wet ball. I don't think we were too worried about them putting up a lot of points and it showed.
|