Beck Water Posted January 12, 2023 Share Posted January 12, 2023 3 minutes ago, Turbo44 said: Probably means that some team tried to poach him from our PS so we had to elevate him to the 53 No, I don't think that's what it means. Practice squad players are free agents, they can say "No Thanks, I'm Good Here". 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevewin Posted January 12, 2023 Share Posted January 12, 2023 35 minutes ago, 17islongenough said: I haven't really watched him play. Why is he a running threat. I looked up his stats and he's run 14 times for 21 yards He'a a threat to run for 1.5 yds/carry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikemac2001 Posted January 12, 2023 Share Posted January 12, 2023 10 minutes ago, Turbo44 said: Probably means that some team tried to poach him from our PS so we had to elevate him to the 53 The player does not have to sign with that team they still have the ability to decline bills probably plan on using him the rest of the year Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turbo44 Posted January 12, 2023 Share Posted January 12, 2023 8 minutes ago, Beck Water said: Oh, now that's interesting Keep in mind that while we have unlimited practice squad call ups for each player in the playoffs, we can still only elevate 2 per game without making a roster move. No, the call-ups re-set. Good point - that could be the reason for the elevation too - they want to move 3 up and only could move up 2, so cut Murphy and replaced him with Beasley Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beck Water Posted January 12, 2023 Share Posted January 12, 2023 1 minute ago, SWATeam said: John Brown and Brandin Bryant is my guess Brandin Bryant for sure But there's a numbers game for the game-day actives. A typical game-day roster would feature 2 QB 8 OL 5 RB (including Taiwan Jones) 2 TE 5 WR 4 Edge 4 DT 6 LB 9 DB (3 safeties, 3 CB, 1 "switch", 1 nickel CB, 1 dime CB) 3 specialists So if, for example, we want to have 6 WR active, we need to take a spot from another position group 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HereComesTheReignAgain Posted January 12, 2023 Share Posted January 12, 2023 15 minutes ago, Turbo44 said: Probably means that some team tried to poach him from our PS so we had to elevate him to the 53 I don't think there is any fear of Beasley signing with another team off the practice squad. He would simply refuse the offer. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikemac2001 Posted January 12, 2023 Share Posted January 12, 2023 McKenzie might be out also with the bease news 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turbo44 Posted January 12, 2023 Share Posted January 12, 2023 11 minutes ago, Beck Water said: No, I don't think that's what it means. Practice squad players are free agents, they can say "No Thanks, I'm Good Here". Yes they can, but they make much more $ on the active roster than PS, so, maybe Beasley forced their hand? Maybe not, we'll never know 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beck Water Posted January 12, 2023 Share Posted January 12, 2023 3 minutes ago, mikemac2001 said: The player does not have to sign with that team they still have the ability to decline bills probably plan on using him the rest of the year 3 minutes ago, Turbo44 said: Good point - that could be the reason for the elevation too - they want to move 3 up and only could move up 2, so cut Murphy and replaced him with Beasley What's interesting is them doing this on Thursday. I was thinking that Beane might have given Beasley his word that if he was a "good soldier" and lived on the PS, he would bring him onto the 53 for the playoffs if injuries allowed. But doing it early can be seen as a "tell" They don't have to make a roster move until Saturday. So Turbo44 could be right, but it seems unlikely that 1) another team would try to sign a player who is most useful if the QB has a mind-meld going on with him, when they have like 2-3 days 2) Beasley would accept if another team tried, since he seemed sincere about wanting to be here, in particular This seems like a bit of a "chess move" to me - like McDermott and Dorsey saying "you know all those plays we used to run with Beasley in the lineup last year? well, hey y'all, Better get busy and look them up and add them to your defensive prep work....." In other words, it's a 'Tell' we want the Dolphins to see. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Turk Posted January 12, 2023 Author Share Posted January 12, 2023 1 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beck Water Posted January 12, 2023 Share Posted January 12, 2023 5 minutes ago, mikemac2001 said: McKenzie might be out also with the bease news That's a possibility, but he was looking pretty lively in the video clilps that came out from practice - and again, Beane would not need to make this move until Saturday, when there are two more days of practice and three more days of treatment to look at Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dollars 2 donuts Posted January 12, 2023 Share Posted January 12, 2023 @NewEra , brother, that $95 return has got to be going up now on that $20. Just no good news coming the Dolphins way in the last 24 hours. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mango Posted January 12, 2023 Share Posted January 12, 2023 35 minutes ago, Turbo44 said: Probably means that some team tried to poach him from our PS so we had to elevate him to the 53 Why would they? He has 2 catches for us for a total of 18 yards and a 3rd down drop against a CIN game we didn't finish. He has been unemployed all year and provided zero production to either team he has been on. Beasley on the 53 and playing on game days is a favor to JA17 per his request. Not because he is a meaningful piece of this offense. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pokebball Posted January 12, 2023 Share Posted January 12, 2023 Miami has got to try to manufacture points elsewhere - defense and special teams. Bill's offense needs to protect the ball and our special teams needs to play sound. I wouldn't be surprised to see Waddle and/or Hill returning kicks/punts. Without points from defense/ST, I don't see how Miami can win this game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Straight Hucklebuck Posted January 12, 2023 Share Posted January 12, 2023 (edited) There are several candidates for cut if Hyde or Crowder come back, including Mayden. I agree with others, call-up with be John Brown and Brandin Bryant. That Phillips video from this past weekend was eye-opening. Edited January 12, 2023 by Straight Hucklebuck 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mango Posted January 12, 2023 Share Posted January 12, 2023 11 minutes ago, Straight Hucklebuck said: There are several candidates for cut if Hyde or Crowder come back, including Mayden. I agree with others, call-up with be John Brown and Brandin Bryant. That Phillips video from this past weekend was eye-opening. I likely would have had JB on the 53 and Beasley on the PS. At least he can stretch the defense. I also think Shakir is an option we refuse to use underneath. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CSBill Posted January 12, 2023 Share Posted January 12, 2023 16 hours ago, EmotionallyUnstable said: Anyone care to take a guess at how the defensive philosophy might be different with no Tua? Double down of the McFraiser style we’ve come to love and loathe? More zone, less pressures? More pressures, tighter press? More mixed coverages? Yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted January 12, 2023 Share Posted January 12, 2023 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevewin Posted January 12, 2023 Share Posted January 12, 2023 Settle leaving field with trainers is unSettling 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WideNine Posted January 12, 2023 Share Posted January 12, 2023 3 hours ago, Generic_Bills_Fan said: Wouldn’t that be ‘the best way to stop the bills is stopping throws to diggs’ then? Lol which is the opposite of what RGIII said. the last three Super Bowl winners were in the bottom 10 in rushing ypg during the regular season. RGIII is mistaking ‘teams with leads run the ball’ with ‘you have to run the ball to win’ Probably a lot more nuanced than run or pass to win. Although game plans featuring runs to manage the clock and keep an offense off the field are still viable. I think the Rams were close to leading the league in play-action % and runs when they had Goff, but Goff is a QB who likes to operate under center and does not excel at off schedule throws or extending plays. Running the ball and play-action works for him. When the Rams acquired Stafford their use of runs and play action dropped considerably as Stafford has more comfort operating with empty sets and from the shotgun. Detroit has done the opposite with Goff incorporating more runs and passes out of the same sets and had some success this year. So they have an increase in play-action passes for Goff, keep throws on schedule, and have added a bit more depth to those passes to help better move the chains. Play action (IMO) is not nearly as effective out of the shotgun which we use a lot, but we also have a very mobile QB which opens up RPO's which neither Stafford or Goff would pull off very effectively as defenses don't really fear them as runners. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.