Not my preference (I'd like to see the Phins go for RGIII) but I have a feeling I know what the Dolphins will do.

They will sign Flynn as a Free agent and they will also go after Tanerhill in the 2nd or 3rd round. Mat Moore will battle it out against Flynn in camp .

We will get a O Lineman and a receiver in the draft as well on the first day. Then go defense.Plug the holes in free agency.

Not my prefence , but thats the way I see things shaping up.

mizzou15 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Go F yourself.
>
>


That's nice. Do you talk to your family that way?..wait don't answer that, I just thought of some of the way my own cousins and uncles address each other.

Anyway, let's cut that out that kind of talk, shall we?

I was really surprised to see that phrase. For someone to say a player sucks, though vulgar, yet it still keeps it on the level of what we are here to do and that is to discuss the merits and lack of merit of the football players.

Unless you happen to be related to that player, Mizzou, I don't see where all the emotion comes from.

But then again, TT goes so wild over my posts that he is probably taking out papers right now to have me committed.

Although Manning and Flynn only cost money, the risk is not the same. Manning, because of his health status, is going to get a deal that a team will be able to get out of after 1 year. He may only get a 1 year deal. Or, if it is for more than one, the second year's salary will be largely a roster bonus that a team could easily avoid paying by cutting him. Flynn, on the other hand, is going to get a 5 year deal, with plenty of guaranteed money. If you are wrong on Flynn, the franchise signing him will be hurt for multiple years.

I'm still surprised that some folks are supporting Moore as a starter. There was a lot less to Moore's performance than meets the eye. Sure, he ranked 11th in the league in passer rating. But, if the team's football people felt that he was legitimately a top 15 QB, do you think Ireland and Ross would be so blatantly open about needing an upgrade at QB? He was brought here because of his familiarity with the Charlie Weis offense, which Daboll runs. A need for that familiarity is now gone. I think you can actually make a decent argument that he won't even be on the team in 2012. He has never run a west coast offense. And he seems a very poor fit for a west coast system. It demands quick decisions, and that is one of the biggest knocks on him, how he holds on to the ball too long. It also demands precise accuracy and timing on those short passing routes, and that's not his strong suit either. The Fins could save $3M against the cap by cutting him. They could opt to do that, and bring in a backup QB with WCO experience.

This is Philbins shot . Guy just lost his son , so I imagine he is throwing everything he has at this right now to cope.......

If he is willing to stake his career on Flynn (he knows where Chad Henne got Saprano) He's knows the kid better then anyone, so I'm allright with it. He knows the pieces he needs to build a Green Bay stayle offense around him. the Key is him getting to know Miami and what we are missing. I think that was a big part of the CFL Fullback aquisition. More Pass blocking. Thats were his mindset is now. Not who he is going to pick, but how to help and develop them once they are here. I could be wrong, its not the first time, but thats how I see it shaping up. Without the Flynn option, Miami would be moving up the draft.

dolphaholic Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> dolphin1423 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Moore will have to battle for the starter job
> but
> > even if he is the declared starter then he
> still
> > would play for his current contract. He is not
> in
> > a position to ask for starter money or a new
> > contract unless he has a great first half of
> the
> > year and the fins are winning. He might "want"
> > starter money but so does every player. Moore
> is
> > under contract and there is zero chance he
> holds
> > out for starter money.
>
> If they declared Moore the clear cut starter, that
> would mean they'd have confidence in him being the
> long term solution, I doubt they'd want their long
> term solution playing on the last year of his
> contract. As far as this supposed competition, if
> not Manning/Flynn/RG3, then who is coming in here
> to "compete" with Moore?

They won't declare Matt Moore the starter. They have said publicly that the #1 priority is upgrading at QB. They would be morons to think Matt Moore is the long term solution at this point. Does anyone think that? Someone will be here competing with Moore since the FO has stated that they WILL UPGRADE THE QB POSITION.

The only way Matt Moore is the clear cut starter before the season is if we draft a rookie and Moore beats him out in pre season and so before the season starts Moore is named starter. But that doesn't seem so clear cut to me.

As I said before, the only way Moore gets an extension this season is if he has a great first half of the season and the organization starts to believe he might be viable long term. Then they lock him because of his play this season. NOT BECAUSE HE WAS NAMED THE STARTER BEFORE THE SEASON.

Come on man, your arguing that Matt Moore will be named starter and long term answer after his performance last season and that is a ridiculous premise.

Treasure, Tannehill will be a first round pick unless his stock plummets for some reason. We have no shot at him in the second or third round.

Also, if we get Flynn then Flynn will be the starter from day 1. There will be no battle in camp. As dolfanmark posted, Moore is a bad fit for the WCO. We might be better off trading him for a fourth. I think cutting him would be a bit too much unless we really need the cap space to get a top FA.

dolphin1423 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> dolphaholic Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > dolphin1423 Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Moore will have to battle for the starter job
> > but
> > > even if he is the declared starter then he
> > still
> > > would play for his current contract. He is
> not
> > in
> > > a position to ask for starter money or a new
> > > contract unless he has a great first half of
> > the
> > > year and the fins are winning. He might
> "want"
> > > starter money but so does every player.
> Moore
> > is
> > > under contract and there is zero chance he
> > holds
> > > out for starter money.
> >
> > If they declared Moore the clear cut starter,
> that
> > would mean they'd have confidence in him being
> the
> > long term solution, I doubt they'd want their
> long
> > term solution playing on the last year of his
> > contract. As far as this supposed competition,
> if
> > not Manning/Flynn/RG3, then who is coming in
> here
> > to "compete" with Moore?
>
> They won't declare Matt Moore the starter. They
> have said publicly that the #1 priority is
> upgrading at QB. They would be morons to think
> Matt Moore is the long term solution at this
> point. Does anyone think that? Someone will be
> here competing with Moore since the FO has stated
> that they WILL UPGRADE THE QB POSITION.
>
> The only way Matt Moore is the clear cut starter
> before the season is if we draft a rookie and
> Moore beats him out in pre season and so before
> the season starts Moore is named starter. But that
> doesn't seem so clear cut to me.
>
> As I said before, the only way Moore gets an
> extension this season is if he has a great first
> half of the season and the organization starts to
> believe he might be viable long term. Then they
> lock him because of his play this season. NOT
> BECAUSE HE WAS NAMED THE STARTER BEFORE THE
> SEASON.
>
> Come on man, your arguing that Matt Moore will be
> named starter and long term answer after his
> performance last season and that is a ridiculous
> premise.

Wow, you missed my point completely.

TreasurecoastPhinsfan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> They will sign Flynn as a Free agent and they will
> also go after Tanerhill in the 2nd or 3rd round.
> Mat Moore will battle it out against Flynn in camp
> .

Gil Brandt, who is the ultimate draft guru, has Tannehill as his 8th best player in the draft. This is early list, and things will change after the combine and pro days. But, if Gil has him that high, no way is he lasting until round 2.

We'll see. He just got his foot out of a boot. I think its going to be Flynn or Tanerhill or both knowing the history of Philbin and Sherman.

Treasure, I think your probably right with Flynn or Tannehill. We have the most inside knowledge of both and if we don't pull the trigger on either then we either made a massive mistake (unlikely) or the other team just overdrafted or overpaid.

dolphaholic,

what is your point then?

are you saying that if ,inexplicably, the FO named Moore the future at QB and named him clear starter then he would demand an extension?

are you saying that if Moore is named the starter going into camp then he will demand an extension based on being the starter of a team coming off a 6-10 campaign in which he went 6-7 as a starter?

Please illuminate me.

dolphin1423 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> dolphaholic,
>
> what is your point then?
>
> are you saying that if ,inexplicably, the FO named
> Moore the future at QB and named him clear starter
> then he would demand an extension?
>
> are you saying that if Moore is named the starter
> going into camp then he will demand an extension
> based on being the starter of a team coming off a
> 6-10 campaign in which he went 6-7 as a starter?
>
> Please illuminate me.


It's a pretty simple point really, we don't currently have starters money alotted to a starting QB, for everyone that's freaking out over how much money it's gonna cost to get Flynn, EVENTUALLY we're gonna have to pay someone starters money, if that's Moore or Manning or some mythical "competition" that you keep talking about, someone's gonna get the chedda.

As far as me using Moore as an example, IF he somehow won the starters job in camp, and the new coaching staff saw enough in him to deem him the long term solution (Which I don't think he is), they would be fools not to lock him up long term.

Illuminating enough?

dolphaholic Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> dolphin1423 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > dolphaholic,
> >
> > what is your point then?
> >
> > are you saying that if ,inexplicably, the FO
> named
> > Moore the future at QB and named him clear
> starter
> > then he would demand an extension?
> >
> > are you saying that if Moore is named the
> starter
> > going into camp then he will demand an
> extension
> > based on being the starter of a team coming off
> a
> > 6-10 campaign in which he went 6-7 as a
> starter?
> >
> > Please illuminate me.
>
>
> It's a pretty simple point really, we don't
> currently have starters money alotted to a
> starting QB, for everyone that's freaking out over
> how much money it's gonna cost to get Flynn,
> EVENTUALLY we're gonna have to pay someone
> starters money, if that's Moore or Manning or some
> mythical "competition" that you keep talking
> about, someone's gonna get the chedda.

The competition is not mythical. I gave examples. Tannehill, RGIII, Flynn, Wheeden, or a FA like Jason Campbell. Or signing Flynn or Manning. Someone will be competing with Moore. I don't know what your talking about with "mythical".

And yes I agree that eventually we must pay someone the chedda but I think people are freaking out about the Flynn contract because he is such an unknown. The financial commitment of a rookie QB would be much more palatable but obviously the picks we would give up would be the real commitment.

> As far as me using Moore as an example, IF he
> somehow won the starters job in camp, and the new
> coaching staff saw enough in him to deem him the
> long term solution (Which I don't think he is),
> they would be fools not to lock him up long term.

Agreed.

> Illuminating enough?

Yes thanks.

Jason Campbell is a scrub, as is Kyle Orton. Neither is even an upgrade over Chad Henne.

As far as that goes, I'd be fine with bringing back Henne to let him compete with Moore and $DRAFTPICK, assuming we don't go nuts and trade the world to get RGIII. If we sign Flynn, we should still draft a QB later in the draft as insurance, or bring back Henne.

If we get Peyton, and IF he's healthy, then keep Moore as a backup and (again) still draft a young QB as insurance.

If we Grab Peyton I think Tanerhill is a done deal at the 9th pick.

If we go Flynn in Free Agency chances are we go O lineman with #8.

If we do not pick anyone up in Free Agency ......RGIII is a Huge Possibility . I don't see this happening unless we are desperate.

TreasurecoastPhinsfan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If we Grab Peyton I think Tanerhill is a done deal
> at the 9th pick.
>
> If we go Flynn in Free Agency chances are we go O
> lineman with #8.
>
> If we do not pick anyone up in Free Agency
> ......RGIII is a Huge Possibility . I don't see
> this happening unless we are desperate.


Signing Manning and drafting Tannehill would not make much sense. Signing Manning means we are trying to win in a 2 year window. As such, you need to maximize your picks to surround him with the talent to win now. It would make no sense to waste a first round pick on a guy that would not help Manning at all. If Manning is the choice, then a RT in the first one may make the most sense of all. Protecting Manning would become paramount.

If we go with Flynn, then I think we get a pass rusher in round 1 before the top prospects are gone. Then, you grab an OT in round 2, someone who you can develop.

What if Peyton Goes down? What about after 2 yrs? Sherman has intamate experience with Tanahill, I don't see them passing on getting him to learn from a HOFer like Manning.

Treasure, why would Peyton come here to groom a young guy? Couldn't he just stay in Indy and do that? Like D-mark said, if we sign Manning, its balls out to win a title in the 2/3 yr window we'd have with him.

TreasurecoastPhinsfan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What if Peyton Goes down? What about after 2 yrs?
> Sherman has intamate experience with Tanahill, I
> don't see them passing on getting him to learn
> from a HOFer like Manning.


I guess it comes down to preference.

I'd be in favor of signing manning and trading up for griffin because I believe RG3 will be a huge star in the Nfl.

I don't see that when I watch Tannehill so I wouldn't like the idea of using a top 10 pick on a guy I didn't believe would be a francise qb for a decade after manning left in a year or two.

I think with a healthy manning we are one or two role players Aaway from being a title contender. So I have no problem drafting a qb that would replace him in a year or two.

I think I'd rather have Wheedon in round 2 than Tannehill at #8/9.

But that's me.

dolfanmark Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> TreasurecoastPhinsfan Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > If we Grab Peyton I think Tanerhill is a done
> deal
> > at the 9th pick.
> >
> > If we go Flynn in Free Agency chances are we go
> O
> > lineman with #8.
> >
> > If we do not pick anyone up in Free Agency
> > ......RGIII is a Huge Possibility . I don't see
> > this happening unless we are desperate.
>
>
> Signing Manning and drafting Tannehill would not
> make much sense. Signing Manning means we are
> trying to win in a 2 year window. As such, you
> need to maximize your picks to surround him with
> the talent to win now. It would make no sense to
> waste a first round pick on a guy that would not
> help Manning at all. If Manning is the choice,
> then a RT in the first one may make the most sense
> of all. Protecting Manning would become
> paramount.
>
> If we go with Flynn, then I think we get a pass
> rusher in round 1 before the top prospects are
> gone. Then, you grab an OT in round 2, someone who
> you can develop.

I dont care who our QB is, if our RT position isnt solved, then he is going to get killed.


Rilly Reiff has to be the pick. Marc Columbo is gonna get someone killed.

---------------------

"When you suck long enough, you get a Hickey"