I think Berkeley is on drugs. I am not even trying to explain it to him.
What 1st rnd o-lineman has been a bust for us? Jerry is beginning to emerge. Pat White, John Beck, Fiedler, etc we have just as many qb busts as o-linemen.

Actually Cousins is a better qb than Tannehill RIGHT NOW. Tannehill's value is his potential. There are potentially 4 qb's in the 2013 draft who are better than him. We grab Cousins in the second and if neen be we still can get a qb that is higher rated than Tannehill in 2013. I am not a Tannehill hater just keeping this thing realistic.

I am on drugs, but I am completely lucid on this one. You proved my point. We drafted good lineman in the first round and we still suck. Our OL sucked last year. We haven't made the playoffs since 2007. The answer is not spending MORE top 15 draft picks on the freaking O line.

________________________________________________________
The beatings will continue until morale improves.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/12/2012 11:50AM by berkeley223.

mizzou15 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think Berkeley is on drugs. I am not even trying
> to explain it to him.
> What 1st rnd o-lineman has been a bust for us?
> Jerry is beginning to emerge. Pat White, John
> Beck, Fiedler, etc we have just as many qb busts
> as o-linemen.
>
> Actually Cousins is a better qb than Tannehill
> RIGHT NOW. Tannehill's value is his potential.
> There are potentially 4 qb's in the 2013 draft who
> are better than him. We grab Cousins in the second
> and if neen be we still can get a qb that is
> higher rated than Tannehill in 2013. I am not a
> Tannehill hater just keeping this thing realistic.

I was with you until you suggested drafting cousins in round two this year AND taking one in the 1st next year.

I have no problem with the idea that there are better qb's to be had next year. But if that's the case why waste an early 2nd on a guy that will be a backup to the guy you take next year?

That seems like a colassal waste of a 2nd round pick to me.

How long have you been Intellectually challenged? We would have sucked regardless of who we drafted in the years we took Pouncey and Long and if you do not fix your O-line you will continue to suck. Go ahead and have the last word on this that is so important to you.

ok thanks, will do

________________________________________________________
The beatings will continue until morale improves.

Tannehill's dad is a coach, he has great work ethic, his leaderships skills are amazing, he was the hardest worker on the A&M team.....

McShay said Tannehill has a higher ceiling than Matt Barkley.

I still don't think we get him, even if he is on the board at #8.

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

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

really a and o? who do you think we take instead at 8 (assuming RT is there)?
I do think we take him at 8

________________________________________________________
The beatings will continue until morale improves.

I don't know bro....


I just think this has a weird Brady Quinn feel when everybody in the world thought we were gonna take Brady, but we took Ted Ginn.

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

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

Cousins better than Tannehill right now? that's laughable.

Michigan State fans are already shocked that Cousins is considered a 2nd round pick. The guys skills are so average at a pro level.

Cousins is gonna fall to the fourth round.

berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Just to reiterate where I stand: I am OK with him
> at 8, hell if we traded up 2 spots at the cost of
> a 3d I could live with that but that's the end of
> it. We need to come out of this draft with so many
> things---WR, pass rusher, etc, we will need our 2d
> and 2 3ds, and we shouldn't be giving up future
> picks any more unless it's for an RG3 type (or a
> pick after the 3d rd)


RE: But Berk, Tannehill IS an RGIII type...he just has less overall experience. And no, I don't want us to give away present or future picks either. I want him, but I want us to get him at #8 so we can use our picks for other things.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/12/2012 04:12PM by Ken.

tannehill isn't close to rg3, in either athletic ability or performance.

________________________________________________________
The beatings will continue until morale improves.

berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> truth would you give up next year's first and this
> year's first and 2d to get Ryan Tannehill?

****************************************************

You asked Truth, but I would like to add my two cents.

No!

He is not the top rated, can't miss QB in this year's draft. The (probable) plan for Tanny is for him to sit this year and learn, then hopefully fight for the job next year. It's very possible, however, that he could end up starting before this season is done.

But, no one in his right mind will give up two first rounders and a 2nd for the third best QB, and one who is slated to sit the first year. You give that up for an immediate starter.

The only scenario I would consent to is a trade of this year's first rounders and probably a second. That's it.

However, I am all for remaining at 8 and if he is there, great, if not, get the highest rated player on the board.

ChyrenB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> captkoi Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> >
> > Your comment about trading up for Tannehill
> will
> > be a major debate for years. My opinion? Do
> that
> > ONLY if the brass has a conviction that
> Tannehill
> > IS THE GUY and will be the guy for the next 10
> > years. The only way any of us will know if
> that
> > was a smart move will be a couple of years down
> > the road after Tanny has played. Until then,
> none
> > of us knows anything. There is a lot of smoke
> > being blown in the NFL right now, i.e.,
> Cleveland
> > taking Tanny at 4, KC trading up to grab him,
> > Minny being open for trade talks, etc., so
> Miami
> > just has to concentrate on what it is they are
> > willing to do or not do.
> >
> > So, if Miami has a conviction, but not a strong
> > one, on Tanny, then they will wait to see if he
> > drops to them at 8, if not, then they either
> (1)
> > take another player at 8 or (2) trade back to
> get
> > an extra 2nd rounder.
> >
> > IMO, after the first 5 or so picks, the "elite"
> > players are gone and what's left can be taken
> at
> > pick 15 or so. Reiff nor DeCastro will be
> picked
> > at 8 (by Miami). If either is there at 15 (or
> > wherever Miami ends up in their trade down)
> then
> > it's possible they will grab one of them there.
>
> I have underlined two portions of the above post
> that I find either contradictory or at least
> interesting.
>
> I agree with the last that after basically 5
> picks, the elite are gone.
>
> And what we are talking about is ONE POSITION,
> quarterback.
>
> It is rare for a Elway-Marino come out in the SAME
> YEAR.
>
> NEVER have there been THREE GREAT quarterbacks in
> the first round. There may have been three GOOD
> quarterbacks or even three "starting" quarterbacks
> but not THREE GREAT quarterbacks.
>
> We know LUCK and RGIII are TWO great quarterbacks
> so what are the odds that Tannehill is a third
> GREAT quarterback or an "Elite" quarterbacks.
>
> If history is a guide the odds are pretty long.
>
> And you cannot ignore (although you have the
> perfect right to reject) the argument that
> Tannehill's stock is inflated mainly due to the
> emergence of the TWO GREATS, Luck and RGIII, and
> the frenzy created by the Peyton-Flynn-Tebow free
> agent activity and the resulting pressure for
> every team to get involved in the quarterback
> activity.
>
> So if you say the "elite" "players" are gone by
> the sixth pick, how much more likely is there to
> be an "elite" quarterback at 8.
>
>
> Now, one might argue, "all we need is a starter or
> someone to compete with Moore."
>
> Then, in my opinion, just my opinion, you don't
> draft even that kind of quarterback at 8 here when
> you can go elsewhere at 8 and pick up Weeden, the
> same or even better, later.
>
> --------------------------------------

Chyren, not sure where the "contradictions" come in (per your underlines). Or is it you just found them uninteresting? And if that's the case, why is it uninteresting?

captkoi Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Chyren, not sure where the "contradictions" come
> in (per your underlines). Or is it you just found
> them uninteresting? And if that's the case, why
> is it uninteresting?


I did not mean that you had contradicted yourself but what I meant was that everything you pointed out in those two underlined sentences suggests to me that if you pick a QB in the first part of the first round (prior to 15), you better be damn sure that he IS going to be a Luck or RGIII or Marino or Elway. When you talk about a QB for the next 10 years and "elite" then you are saying that a team SHOULD be able to tell the world this is that kind of QB.

What I meant by interesting is it is interesting that some people (not you) are demanding that we draft Tannehill while not wanting to assure themselves that he fits the bill but more or less want to do so because 1) We haven't drafted a QB in the first Round since Marino and 2) we might as well roll the dice.

I thought you were saying that you don't roll the dice. You have to KNOW.

berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> tannehill isn't close to rg3, in either athletic
> ability or performance.


RE: There are a lot of people that would disagree with you about that.

We'll all just have to wait and see how this whole thing turns out.

That's true Ken. But in this instance, I completely agree with Berk.

Berk, I agree that I doubt we draft an olineman, with 8. Although we had one of the worst olines last year as you stated...
I am not a big fan of Tannehill, but he is very athletic, his athletic skills are closer to RG3, then any other QB in the draft.. That is one of the main reasons he has gotten so much hype.. His feet, and athletic ability give him that strong upside...
I think it is a coin toss if we draft him, if he is available...
Does drafting Tannehill buy Ireland another year, or does drafting Tannehill and him sitting, a negative for Ireland... At the end of the day, that unfortunately are the deciding factors... Alot of people say Ireland's job, cant afford to have a 1st rd pick on the bench next year... SO if Miami does poorly and Tannehill is on the bench, does Ireland get fired... Or does the possibility of Tannehill's development down the road buy Ireland more time as our GM, while Tannehills future success is worked out over the next 3 years or so....
That is the question IMO, it is about Ireland, dont anyone fool yourself... WHy is it about Ireland? Becasue he makes the decisions and holds the power, and he is on the hot seat... SO which move buys him the most time to work out our teams problems.... IF we lose alot of games next year and he didnt draft Tannehill, he is probably out as well... I am unsure, about the answer, just sure about why it will be made...lol

-----------------------------------------------------------------
All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Nietzsche



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/13/2012 02:00PM by Crowder52.

I believe drafting Tannehill buys Ireland some time and lattitude especially so, if he does not play. Drafting him and his promise, after allowing him to develop in 2012, will give the fans going into his sophmore season a solid reason to hope for 2013.

If he doesn't draft Tannehill; and Moore, Gerrard, and Devlin go on to have poor seasons. The spotlight will be focused squarely on him for not taking the chance on a very promising young talent at QB.

Even drafting a guy like Wheeden, Cousins, Foles, Osweiler, etc., will only go so far...and none of them will provide the degree of cushion and optimism Tannehill will.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/14/2012 04:29AM by Ken.

I'll be shocked if we don't take a QB early, so if its Tannehill, Weedon, Cousins or Osweiler, it'll still buy Ireland a few years, picking the right one keeps him employed after that, he's not stupid.

I think you guys are right, not drafting a qb early, puts Ireland on the greatest hot seat, drafting a Qb early who doesn't start buys Ireland the most time.. If he doesn't draft a qb early his future as our GM will all rest on how we perform next season... My guess is he makes the move that buys him the most time... And that is the deciding factor in all of this....

-----------------------------------------------------------------
All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Nietzsche

Crowder52 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think you guys are right, not drafting a qb
> early, puts Ireland on the greatest hot seat,
> drafting a Qb early who doesn't start buys Ireland
> the most time.. If he doesn't draft a qb early
> his future as our GM will all rest on how we
> perform next season... My guess is he makes the
> move that buys him the most time... And that is
> the deciding factor in all of this....


That idea ignores the facts in front of us to presume that Ireland fears for his job at this point.

Clearly he doesn't.

Just look at the facts as they have played out:



Fact #1 - Ross chose Ireland as his GM over offering total control to Cowher and Gruden 18 months ago.

Fact #2 - Ross chose Ireland over giving total control to Jeff Fisher this off-season.

Fact #3 - Ross and Ireland took the unusual step (for this franchise) of publicly acknowledging the need for, and their prioritization of acquiring a franchise QB.

Fact #4 - Ross reaffirmed his choice of Ireland despite "enormous" fan pressure (some of those 20 protesters were pretty big) to fire him after "missing" on Peyton manning and "whiffing" on Matt Flynn.

Fact #5 - We didn't overpay for Matt Flynn or RG3. Clearly this indicates that Ireland isn't reactionary or in fear for his job. If he was, we'd have over paid for Flynn and drafted a QB, OR we'd have been in a bidding war with Dan Snyder over RG3 so he could say he did everything in his power to get a QB. We did neither of those things.


I agree with the notion that the only way Ireland gets fired (eventually) is if he fails to go all in on a QB in the draft.

I think the facts clearly indicate he's not at a point in his tenure where he has to do that now, nor does he FEEL as though his job is on the line right now and he must do something/anything to secure his position for even another year or two.

I know a lot of you guys don't like him, but the seat he's sitting in isn't going to start to get warm until he fails to have attached his future to a high profile prospect AFTER next years draft.

If we get to that point, he's dead man walking.

Until then he ain't going anywhere...and he KNOWS it.

THE Truth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Crowder52 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I think you guys are right, not drafting a qb
> > early, puts Ireland on the greatest hot seat,
> > drafting a Qb early who doesn't start buys
> Ireland
> > the most time.. If he doesn't draft a qb early
> > his future as our GM will all rest on how we
> > perform next season... My guess is he makes
> the
> > move that buys him the most time... And that is
> > the deciding factor in all of this....
>
>
> That idea ignores the facts in front of us to
> presume that Ireland fears for his job at this
> point.
>
> Clearly he doesn't.

RE: I don't think he's in fear for his job right now either but if he does not address the QB position to the satisfaction of the fans the fire him protests will become larger and more frequent...and the owner cannot turn a blind eye to this for very long.
>
> Just look at the facts as they have played out:
>
>
>
> Fact #1 - Ross chose Ireland as his GM over
> offering total control to Cowher and Gruden 18
> months ago.
>
> Fact #2 - Ross chose Ireland over giving total
> control to Jeff Fisher this off-season.

RE: Yes but the owner has the viewpoint that both jobs cannot be done properly by a single person...a thought that I for one happen to agree with. Total control almost NEVER works and even when it does it only works for a very short period of time.
>
> Fact #3 - Ross and Ireland took the unusual step
> (for this franchise) of publicly acknowledging
> the need for, and their prioritization of
> acquiring a franchise QB.

RE: Yes, so I think we draft one, or two. But getting the right guy will in fact boost his security factor regardless of whether he feels he needs it right now or not. If they draft a guy the fans view as a scrub it'll only exacerbate the bad feelings.
>
> Fact #4 - Ross reaffirmed his choice of Ireland
> despite "enormous" fan pressure (some of those 20
> protesters were pretty big) to fire him after
> "missing" on Peyton manning and "whiffing" on Matt
> Flynn.

RE: Yes, but twenty fans is a long way from hundreds or even thousands if they don't take steps to give the fans hope for the future.
>
> Fact #5 - We didn't overpay for Matt Flynn or RG3.
> Clearly this indicates that Ireland isn't
> reactionary or in fear for his job. If he was,
> we'd have over paid for Flynn and drafted a QB, OR
> we'd have been in a bidding war with Dan Snyder
> over RG3 so he could say he did everything in his
> power to get a QB. We did neither of those
> things.

RE: yes, but maybe he simply feels that better offerings are available in the draft...maybe, just maybe, the concensus is that Tannehill, Wheeden, etc., are just as good as Flynn was, and maybe better, with coaching. Maybe Tannehill, or Wheeden, or someone else in the draft, has been the guy all along and everyone else was viewed as stop-gaps after Manning, if healthy.
>
>
> I agree with the notion that the only way Ireland
> gets fired (eventually) is if he fails to go all
> in on a QB in the draft.

RE: He might not get fired then either but it certainly wouldn't help him.
>
> I think the facts clearly indicate he's not at a
> point in his tenure where he has to do that now,
> nor does he FEEL as though his job is on the line
> right now and he must do something/anything to
> secure his position for even another year or two.
>
> I know a lot of you guys don't like him, but the
> seat he's sitting in isn't going to start to get
> warm until he fails to have attached his future to
> a high profile prospect AFTER next years draft.

RE: That's why he must address the situation now with a quality prospect before it gets out of hand for him. Drafting Tanehill gives him a minnimum of two more years regardless of what happens this next year.
>
> If we get to that point, he's dead man walking.
>
> Until then he ain't going anywhere...and he KNOWS
> it.

RE: Again, that's why he can't allow it to get there...there is no reason why he shouldn't draft Tannehill and buy himself and the team a little while longer to put things together.

Then he should secure his position (and the rest of the staff's) a little bit more by taking still another QB in the 5-6th round to further hedge his bet since the draft is so deep.

Don't wait until your seat is heating up to do something...be pro-active and do it now. The absolute worst thing that would happen is that we take someone else next season...and even that shows that the team is trying and willing to do what they need to do. The fans would positively respond to that...less so if they don't.

I seen a lot of "but maybe's" in your post Ken.

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

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

Look at the last decade . We have consistantly Sucked becuase we refuse to draft a 1st round QB. I Know that Quinn is past history , but I'd feel alot better if we had at least went to the plate and took a swing on him like we should have. Last year its not that I have a boner for Mallet so much, but what Value does a running back really give us that we had to Trade up for one? With Rickey Williams still available and willing to come back?

I know that in the past there was a finacial commitment made with a 1st rd QB as well. But its a chance you need to take. At least every 3-4 yrs if you want to win. Look at our past history the last 20 yrs. if we took a shot at a franchise QB every 3-4 yrs until we hauled one in we would have been much better off.

This Year we should have gave up 3 ist rounders and just did it for RGIII. If Tanehill is gone after Pick4 we need to think hard about doing next season for Berkly.

Ken Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> RE: I don't think he's in fear for his job right
> now either but if he does not address the QB
> position to the satisfaction of the fans the fire
> him protests will become larger and more
> frequent...and the owner cannot turn a blind eye
> to this for very long.

The only thing that is going to satisfy the fans is a franchise QB.

Not the act of drafting a QB high for the sake of appearances. That might satisfy them for a few weeks but the first "bad" day the guy has at camp is going to put an end to that honeymoon.

Its not like he's not TRYING to get a franchise QB so what "blind eye" are you referring to?

Ross job here is not to be reactionary. Its to find a GM with a plan that he has faith in and NOT be the George Steinbrenner of the NFL and run into his office every time some fan sends him an article from Bleacher report.

I don't see how any reasonable person can look at the last 18 months and conclude anything OTHER than that Ross has found "his" guy in Ireland.

Fans may freak out if we don't get Tannehill or Wheedon but I think its pretty evident that Ross isn't going off the cliff with them.

Now if he doesn't get a guy by the end of the 2013 draft, all bets are off.





>
> RE: Yes but the owner has the viewpoint that both
> jobs cannot be done properly by a single
> person...a thought that I for one happen to agree
> with. Total control almost NEVER works and even
> when it does it only works for a very short period
> of time.
> >


Agreed, that's why I think Ross is headed in the right direction as an owner.

Having a Coach who is also the GM can work for the short term buts its impossible to sustain. It burns the coach out trying to do two full time jobs.



> > Fact #3 - Ross and Ireland took the unusual
> step
> > (for this franchise) of publicly acknowledging
> > the need for, and their prioritization of
> > acquiring a franchise QB.
>
> RE: Yes, so I think we draft one, or two. But
> getting the right guy will in fact boost his
> security factor regardless of whether he feels he
> needs it right now or not. If they draft a guy the
> fans view as a scrub it'll only exacerbate the bad
> feelings.


Drafting a QB in the first round or very early 2nd "starts the clock" on Ireland's tenure. Once he ties himself to a guy that high his career will follow that players development. If its a good pick he will be here a long time as GM. If its a bad pick he'll be gone before the QB is.

NOT selecting a QB this year with either of our first two picks is a punt. He's not on the clock. As in the game itself, punting can be the right move, but it doesn't put points on the board. Eventually you have to score or in the GM's case, go all in on a QB. You can only punt so many times before the game gets out of control.

Ireland can punt in this draft. He's only been looking for a franchise QB for a few months. Its not like they grow on trees or we'd already have one.

If he punts next year, it could cost him his job.

Ireland has shown he doesn't panic. I seriously doubt he's going to draft a handful of mid round QB's and hope he gets lucky.

Its not his M O.







> >
> > Fact #4 - Ross reaffirmed his choice of Ireland
> > despite "enormous" fan pressure (some of those
> 20
> > protesters were pretty big) to fire him after
> > "missing" on Peyton manning and "whiffing" on
> Matt
> > Flynn.
>
> RE: Yes, but twenty fans is a long way from
> hundreds or even thousands if they don't take
> steps to give the fans hope for the future.

What steps are those?

Besides, HOPE is not a strategy. If all you want is hope then you are never going to get the position settled.

Ross job is to IGNORE reactionary fans who are being overly emotional and to make rational business decisions and evaluations of his organization.

The day we start making moves just to appease the fans is the day this front office cuts its own throat.



>
> RE: yes, but maybe he simply feels that better
> offerings are available in the draft...maybe, just
> maybe, the concensus is that Tannehill, Wheeden,
> etc., are just as good as Flynn was, and maybe
> better, with coaching. Maybe Tannehill, or
> Wheeden, or someone else in the draft, has been
> the guy all along and everyone else was viewed as
> stop-gaps after Manning, if healthy.


That's the point. He looked at Flynn, made a rational assessment of his ability and value and PASSED on him DESPITE fan outrage at "missing" on Manning. The easy way out for a guy worried about his job would have been to overpay Flynn and draft Wheedon or Osweiller in the 2nd to say: "lookie here! We did the best we could to satisfy the mob. We got the 2nbd best FA QB and a developmental guy in the 2nd round!"


This is why Ireland's job is NOT in jeopardy and it should clearly tell anyone who is paying attention that he isn't going to cater to the fan mob or make a panic move.

He's going to get a QB he values for the price he wants to pay. Of course, if he waits to long to pull the trigger on that move he'll be replaced before he ever gets the chance.



> >
> >
> > I agree with the notion that the only way
> Ireland
> > gets fired (eventually) is if he fails to go
> all
> > in on a QB in the draft.
>
> RE: He might not get fired then either but it
> certainly wouldn't help him.


No franchise QB = no chance in the NFL. If he doesn't get one that Ross can sell to the fans AND who wins games, then he'll be gone.

Question is when does Ross reach that breaking point.

Again, all the facts...all of Ross decisions and Ireland's actions since the end of the 2010 season point to the fact that Ireland is not under the gun to find that guy this year "or else."




>
> RE: Again, that's why he can't allow it to get
> there...there is no reason why he shouldn't draft
> Tannehill and buy himself and the team a little
> while longer to put things together.


Sure there's a reason: that reason would be if he agrees with Brian Billick. If Ireland DOESN'T believe in Tannehill AND he drafts him in round 1 then he's a bigger idiot than some fans already believe him to be. I don't think this is the case, or that he'll do that, or as I said before: Flynn would already be signed to a 5 year $60M deal.


>
> Then he should secure his position (and the rest
> of the staff's) a little bit more by taking still
> another QB in the 5-6th round to further hedge his
> bet since the draft is so deep.


Drafting a 5th round QB has ZERO impact on his or the staff's job security. those guys are selected to be backups of fill in starters. He's already brought in two guys better than that in Moore and Garrard.


>
> Don't wait until your seat is heating up to do
> something...be pro-active and do it now.



This is where you are missing the boat Ken and where Ireland gets it. You don't "do it now" to be "pro active". You can't force it. Either you have a chance to draft a QB you believe in or you do not. Drafting a QB or, god forbid, multiple QB's you don't believe in just to say "look how hard I'm working" is career suicide and a sure plan for failure.



> The
> absolute worst thing that would happen is that we
> take someone else next season...

Why not two or three guys next year also?

The idea that you are taking flyers on multiple QB's this year with the backup plan that we can always take flyers on multiple QB's next year is a HUGE waste of assets.

I applaud the "do whatever you have to do to get a franchise QB" philosophy, but finding franchise QB's late in the draft is a fools errand.

If we spent every 1st round pick we had for the next 5 years on a top notch prospect I could live with it. We'd be seriously invested in finding a QB not doing it halfheartedly by taking the leftovers and hoping one is the next tom brady.




> and even that
> shows that the team is trying and willing to do
> what they need to do. The fans would positively
> respond to that...less so if they don't.

The only thing fans are going to respond to is success. You either get a guy or you don't. "Trying" isn't going to keep anyone employed.

TreasurecoastPhinsfan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Look at the last decade . We have consistantly
> Sucked becuase we refuse to draft a 1st round QB.
> I Know that Quinn is past history , but I'd feel
> alot better if we had at least went to the plate
> and took a swing on him like we should have.

Bingo! Nothing in the draft is for sure. But you have basically a 50/50 shot when you draft a 1st round talent at QB in the 1st round.

That success rate drops off dramatically as you get deeper in the draft.

I'll never get mad at our front office for taking a QB with their first pick. I might quibble over the selection, but not at the decision to shop for a QB in round #1.

If you want 24 carat gold you shop at Tiffany's...not Walmart.



> Last
> year its not that I have a boner for Mallet so
> much,

lol...sure you do.....


> but what Value does a running back really
> give us that we had to Trade up for one? With
> Rickey Williams still available and willing to
> come back?


Nobody was a bigger Mallet fan than I was. But that's based on Youtube clips. He clearly had #1 overall skills but you can't argue with not taking him if his off the field problems were so bad that ever team in the league passed on him TWICE and some even 3x despoite all that talent.


>
> I know that in the past there was a finacial
> commitment made with a 1st rd QB as well. But its
> a chance you need to take. At least every 3-4 yrs
> if you want to win. Look at our past history the
> last 20 yrs. if we took a shot at a franchise QB
> every 3-4 yrs until we hauled one in we would have
> been much better off.
>
> This Year we should have gave up 3 ist rounders
> and just did it for RGIII. If Tanehill is gone
> after Pick4 we need to think hard about doing next
> season for Berkly.


That would have been FOUR 1st rounders and that presumes Crazy Dan Snyder wouldn't raise the bidding even higher than that!

Sometimes, you just can't get what you want.

ChyrenB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> captkoi Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Chyren, not sure where the "contradictions"
> come
> > in (per your underlines). Or is it you just
> found
> > them uninteresting? And if that's the case,
> why
> > is it uninteresting?
>
>
> I did not mean that you had contradicted yourself
> but what I meant was that everything you pointed
> out in those two underlined sentences suggests to
> me that if you pick a QB in the first part of the
> first round (prior to 15), you better be damn sure
> that he IS going to be a Luck or RGIII or Marino
> or Elway. When you talk about a QB for the next
> 10 years and "elite" then you are saying that a
> team SHOULD be able to tell the world this is that
> kind of QB.
>
> What I meant by interesting is it is interesting
> that some people (not you) are demanding that we
> draft Tannehill while not wanting to assure
> themselves that he fits the bill but more or less
> want to do so because 1) We haven't drafted a QB
> in the first Round since Marino and 2) we might as
> well roll the dice.
>
> I thought you were saying that you don't roll the
> dice. You have to KNOW.

*****************************************************

Thanx for clearing that up, Chyren. That's the problem with words on paper instead of vocal. Can lead to misunderstandings.

The problem with what you said (above) is that unless a team has one of the top three picks in the draft, it will be (almost) impossible to draft a Marino-type later in the draft. Granted, there are always exceptions; i.e., Marino fell to Miami in the late 20s and Brady was drafted in the 6th round. But that is a rarity.

As far as "elite" QBs, that is impossible to predict. Luck is supposed to be that "elite" QB this year, but he hasn't taken an NFL snap, yet. Ryan Leaf was supposed to be "elite" but we all know how that worked out. I am not classifying Tanney as "elite" but if he turns out to be a damn fine QB, then Miami struck gold. Miami HAS to take that chance since they haven't had a franchise QB since Marino retired. They are in a very good position right now to do that, unless of course someone grabs him before Miami's pick. Still, there is no guarantee that Tanney will be the guy at 8, although everyone figures that is the way it will play out.