The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

I do think it was a distraction. I'd prefer that they didn't do it. Do I think it would have changed anything? Probably not, but why take that chance? Let someone else do it. I didn't like that they were doing this when the decided to do it and now that we know the outcome of the Dolphins season I'm questioning whether that was a good decision or not. It may not have hurt, but I certainly don't think it helps.

I don't think that Hard Knocks was anywhere near the factor in Miami's disappointing ending as it was just bad timing on injuries.

...but I'd still rather not see them on that show any more.

I am glad they did it.  We didn't lose because we were distracted.  I learned a lot more about the team and the culture and I think it was a good look for the organization, McDaniel, free agency, etc.

We looked like a good group and I think that's a positive.

According to Jevon Holland players who were against it in the beginning said it really was not very invasive as most cameras were in the corner and most people forgot about them. The only cameras following them were on the field or if they agreed to let them go with them.

I don't think it affected them very much, if at all.

Hard Knocks is never a good idea and no team should ever do it unless forced to.

I'm a Dolphins fan and I wasn't even interested, even during the win streak.  I'm still not caught up.

Not me.  I was champing at the bit each week for the content, even when we were losing.  It was like a warm blanket.  When we were on the streak...pfft...forget about it.

Is it a football team trying to win a Super Bowl, or is it a bunch of players trying to produce entertainment?

When you allow something like Hard Knocks, you make the answer to that question more ambiguous than it should be.  The answer to that question should have zero ambiguity.

Professional sports are inherently an entertainment product, so I'd say that's a false dilemma.

Me too as well as my DolFan friends. Wednesdays always resulted in conversations about the previous episode.

If we don't think the players are doing a bit of the same thing themselves, I'd say we are fooling ourselves. Anything that distracts from the task at hand in my opinion is not really something that we should be doing voluntarily. I get that it's probably not really voluntary to a certain extent.

The OP here has his finger on the pulse of the downfall of the season -- a team that couldn't get down to business when need be because its culture revolved too much around fun and games.  A goofball head coach, rehearsed end zone celebrations, and an in-season entertainment production made this team far too circus-like and nowhere near enough businesslike.  When you encounter good teams that are about the business of winning and getting to the playoffs, you'll be ill-equipped to compete against them under those conditions.  It's simply too difficult to flex all the way from "fun and games" to "all business" on the fly, in the middle of a game against a good team that's bearing down against you.  This is why the team's late-season second-half performance was so staggeringly poor in comparison to its late-season first-half performance, and more generally the reason for the season's downfall entirely.  You're not going to beat good teams in the NFL with a culture of fun and games when their culture is far more serious and determined.

LOL ... I know one guy who wasn't watching. Tua had no idea they showed his hurt thumb on the broadcast and was upset to find out. According to Omar he also had no idea he led the league in fan voting the last two years. He has someone who keeps him up to date on the negative narratives so he isn't surprised on the podium but no one is telling him the positive things being said. He just kind of stays in his lane.

While I don't think it necessarily effected us, I don't think Hard Knocks really did us any favors either.

It's an unnecessary distraction that I don't think any team in playoff contention should really have to put up with at such a crucial time in the season. 

https://phinphanatic.com/posts/miami-dolphins-head-coach-mike-mcdaniel-has-one-glaring-flaw-that-he-will-not-correct-01hmry9ab59d?fbclid=IwAR2i7GsGYrkQ_-XU7x7PLP2K12GwfeGHYpt4j8mE9MnquopjvRUsFWI5034_aem_AVbaaS-kyosqOWxOqkvRxVhgvgUVlHsnhBJ9jpi5rjQ3eBQ9BvBHzZ32TEkCJq5yIYc#wjqv7q03df

I love fan articles. "end sarcasm"  Just this morning a Bills friend of mine reached out to discuss the fan fiction of trading Tua to Denver, us getting Justin Fileds etc. Tua led the league in passing, has consistently gotten better each season, and yet silly fans want to act like he's Zach Wilson. He has some weaknesses but history says he will be working on them all off season and at a minimum deserves time to prove he has plateaued to a point we cannot win it all with him.  

If you don't put credence in fan articles, then consider this from a former player, which essentially echoes the fan article:

https://twitter.com/EmmanuelAcho/status/1734716340693524858?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1734716340693524858%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=

This stuff is not hard to see.  When your approach to running an NFL team is an outlier, it'll be clearly evident to anyone who examines the issue.

Doesn't mean much to me either. People had this "opinion" before. They disappeared while we were winning, like you did, but couldn't wait to find something to stick their negative opinions to. We lost to KC in the playoffs in subzero weather with an amplified amount of injuries. Life could be much worse.

I don't think you have any idea how I function on the basis of my pattern of posting alone.  There could be many explanations for that.  Your preferred explanation is nothing more than a Rorschach response about yourself.

If you object to the characterization of your posting patterns, then stop disappearing after wins and magically resurfacing after losses.  Pretty simple.

This is the third? fourth? time you've cited the same Emmanuel Acho post.  You seem to be presenting him as an insightful commentator; do you agree with the multiple and varied opinions he has offered on, say, Tua, or should we only listen to Acho on the rare occasions where he's dumping on the Dolphins?

The video above consisted of multiple and varied opinions.  Acho praised McDaniel fairly heavily for his technical brilliance at the same time he questioned the effect of his coaching style on the team culture.

I don't understand the criticism of team culture.  It seems that our culture is great.  The team is happy to play for each other and we met or over-achieved what was predicted.  We were the victims of our own early success.

We did lose the Titans game, which was a weird collapse.  But short of that, we didn't lose any games we were favored and we won a few where we weren't.  On top of that, we were incredibly injured this year, which was just bad luck.  And it's just likely that these teams that finished ahead of us were just better teams.  And that's OK.  Build on it.

I do think a team takes on characteristics of it's head coach especially if he's a decent head coach. But it doesn't end there, teams also take on the characteristics of it's top players as well, so you need your stars to step up and pull their weight as well. I love McDaniels style, but there needs to be some top players that require accountability and to an extent I think Miami has some of that, but they need more, but some of that comes with having a bit of success. Miami has just recently started to have a bit of success, now we need to build on that. Success doesn't happen in a year, it happens over multiple years, with continued success. I mean sure you see some teams that have success after not haveing any for a while, but those are not the teams you want to emulate, no you want to emulate those teams that are consistently good. Several years in a row of making the playoffs. That way making the playoffs isn't the goal, that's to be expected. Success in the playoffs is how you want to be measured, but the first step to that is making the playoffs every year. We've done that the last couple of years and I'm happy about that. Sure, I'm in a hurry to take the next step of having success in the playoffs now, but I'll temper that with the fact that getting to the playoffs is starting to become a habit. You have to walk before you can run. At least we are walking now, wasn't long ago that we were crawling. Let's not take a step back trying to take another step forward. You have to give head coaches that have tasted a little bit of success time to see if they can develop to even better head coaches. McDaniels is still learning and the team is still learning with him. Give McDaniels time to develop and also time to develop the team.

One other thing: Someone has to lose.

Our big losses were Chiefs, Chiefs, Bills, Ravens, Eagles.  ....two of these are in the Championship game and the others were right there at the door.  Maybe they're just better teams than we are and it's close but we didn't get it done.

The average number of points the Dolphins lost by to the teams they played with winning records on the season (including the win against Dallas) -- OVER AND ABOVE THE CLOSING POINT SPREAD -- was 13.6.

When the Dolphins played a winning team in 2024, they lost by nearly two touchdowns more than expected, on average.

In my opinion that's strongly indicative of a culture in which the team is overwhelmed and overpowered by the good teams it faces.  Label that culture whatever you'd like -- "soft" or what have you -- but it certainly isn't good.

And before that's blamed on injuries, consider that the expected margins in those games considered the injuries that were present for both teams before those games.

What you call culture is what many of us label as a weak ass offensive line that failed miserably against good physical teams. We were basically last in the league on third down &1 yard to go which means we can't run when they know we are going to run. They were also one of the worst at pass blocking but thanks to Tua and Mike they came off much better than they actually were. Culture had nothing to do with it. Our O-line is just as untalented as it was before Mike came here but he is doing his best to make some lemonade.

This is a fair hypothesis, but it's not one I'm ready to make just yet.  I think we had some deeper personnel issues and we were able to rise above it pretty well.  I'd like to roll with what we are doing for more time before I attribute that to a longer cultural problem.

The closing point spread is generated by what's expected from the two teams on the basis of their past performance, along with what's expected in their game against each other.  An offensive line that performed well enough against poorer teams to have the Dolphins' expected margin of defeat against better teams be on average 13.6 fewer points than was actually seen in those games against better teams would certainly indicate a culture problem.  The offensive line -- just like the rest of the team -- is performing far worse than expected against better teams.

Consider as well that the Dolphins were the 8th-best offense in the league in EPA per play in weeks 14 through 19 -- their late-season push and the wildcard -- in the first halves of those games, yet 29th-best in the league offensively in the second halves of those games.  So unless they underwent a magical transformation in their skill and ability at the halves of those games, they have a culture problem consisting of the inability to match or overcome teams that are bearing down on them in the second halves of games, during both teams' late-season push for the playoffs.  Their opponent goes into the locker room and becomes galvanized and redoubles their efforts, whereas the Dolphins are incapable of doing so themselves and are subsequently manhandled.  That's a culture problem.

It's almost like they go into a play not to lose, or just keep it close mentality; but when they needed to turn it on there was nothing there.  If I went back and looked at my Shame of the Game picks I'd bet I chose McDaniel or Tua for the losses.  Poor play calling and poor execution.  I wouldn't say it's a "culture" problem per se, they just need an OC to step in and call the plays.

I've heard this mentioned on gambling shows more than once. Sportsbooks like to have as close to an even amount of action on each side of a bet. This means that regardless of who wins, they will make a profit on the commission they charge, which is the cut the sportsbook takes of every bet before it is paid out. It really doesn't have much to do with past performances as much as public opinion of expectations. This is why professional gamblers win and the average person doesn't. Professional gamblers are paying attention to injuries, weather, and other variables while most people are betting their feelings based on how well they did last week.

The opening point spread is a closer fit to that description.
The closing point spread is moved almost entirely by incoming bet volume, as the house tries to balance action on both sides (with the exception of something like a late announcement of a player being ruled out for the game).

Your continued insistence that casinos have special insight into team quality remains unsubstantiated.  The fact that you are citing how badly the casinos have missed on the outcome of Dolphins' games against teams with winning records is actually evidence against their accuracy.

The opening lines are based on past performance and they don't move much in response to the public's betting.  They certainly don't move anywhere near 13.6 points -- the Dolphins' average margin of defeat against winning teams, over and above the closing line.

Make no mistake -- the Dolphins' average margin of defeat over and above the line against winning teams is highly noteworthy.  They were essentially blown away by winning teams, in comparison to what was expected.

You don't figure the bolded portion above constitutes a culture problem?  What is a culture if it isn't a way a team experiences itself that results in a repeated pattern of performance?

And that (the bolded portion) is determined by what's expected by the public between the two teams in their game against each other.  So the closing line is a combination of 1) the opening line, which is based largely on past performance, and 2) the public's appreciation for variables specific to the game at hand between the two teams, including injuries, etc.

At any rate, anybody arguing the Dolphins' 13.6-point margin of defeat on average against winning teams, over and above the spread, isn't noteworthy is climbing steeply uphill.  Mentioning minutiae here and there certainly doesn't undercut it.  That number could be ~7 and it would still be noteworthy.

Another way to format this phrase is "what everyone thinks."
The idea that the closing line reflects what the public already believes about team quality is not exactly a convincing argument as to its accuracy.

I'd say that anyone arguing for the prescience of Vegas in accurately assessing team quality (WRT the outcome of games) has an even steeper climb if the lines are that far removed from the outcomes.

Do you figure the lines are typically that different from the actual outcomes, or do you figure the Dolphins were unusual in that regard?

If you're asking my personal opinion: I don't attribute any particular insight to the casinos, at all.  The lines end up where the betting money pushes them.

But from your standpoint, your question is self-defeating: if the casinos were particularly inaccurate in their ability to assess the Miami Dolphins - the team we are discussing - then we shouldn't care about what the casinos thought.  The philosophy of judging team quality by point spreads is proven worthless if it's that far off of the actual outcome, and in the specific case of the Miami Dolphins, you are arguing that it was.

Vegas lines are generally far more accurate in predicting NFL game outcomes than they were for the Dolphins against winning teams in 2024.  For the Dolphins against winning teams in 2024 they were significantly more inaccurate, and almost always in the same direction -- with the Dolphins' losing to winning teams by a margin far greater on average than predicted.  Based on the Dolphins' previous performance and the appraisals of the betting public -- which essentially amounts to crowdsourcing -- the Dolphins were expected to perform against winning teams far better than they did.

I just looked and typically only about half the NFL teams cover the spread. This means the line is wrong as much as it is correct. For this past 2023 season Miami was at 55.6% which puts them at 9th in the league for covering the spread. Well about Buffalo's 42.1%. Good thing they weren't on Hard Knocks.

https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/trends/ats_trends/?range=yearly_2023

We're talking about a degree of deviation from the spread here -- 13.6 points on average against winning teams -- not simply a binary "yes/no did they cover."

If you want to compare the Dolphins to Buffalo for example, consider again that the Dolphins' margin of defeat against winning teams, over and above the spread, was 13.6 points.  Buffalo's was 7.1 points in the other direction -- Buffalo did better than expected by 7.1 points on average against winning teams in 2024 (including beating the Dolphins by 28 points when they were favored by a mere 2.5 on October 1).

So, the difference between Buffalo and the Dolphins in terms of how they performed in comparison to what was expected against winning teams was a whopping 20.7 points.

In other words, between the Bills and the Dolphins, Vegas was off by 20.7 points in their games against winning teams.

This is hardly an endorsement of casino accuracy in team evaluation.

So your position is that the fact Buffalo overcame Vegas's estimation by 7.1 points in one direction, and the Dolphins undershot Vegas's estimation by 13.6 points in the other direction, was meaningless regarding a difference in how the two teams functioned against winning teams?