For the most part it seems like the majority of this board now sees the importance of the QB position and what it means to a franchise. However I can remember back to draft debate between Jake Long and Matt Ryan, when this board overwhelmingly wanted an OL over a QB. Many posters on here claimed that a great team has to be built from the trenches.

So here it is in 2012, the offensive line is still poor, so what has changed the viewpoint for so many of you to finally admit that a Quarterback is the most critical part of an NFL team?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/19/2012 07:15AM by Hokie Phin.

Hokie Phin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> For the most part it seems like the majority of
> this board now sees the importance of the QB
> position and what it means to a franchise. However
> I can remember back to draft debate between Jake
> Long and Matt Ryan, when this board overwhelmingly
> wanted an OL over a QB. Many posters on here
> claimed that a great team has to be built from the
> trenches.
>
> So here it is in 2012, the offensive line is still
> poor, so what has changed the viewpoint for so
> many of you to finally admit that a Quarterback is
> the most critical part of an NFL team?


I have always argued the importance of the qb position and the folly of building the team first. It's so hard to find franchise qb's in the first place. It's even harder to time finding them so it coincides with the team u built first. I've always argued it was best to find the qb, no matter the price. After that you have 10-12 years to build the team around him.

Even so, I was one of those that preferred long over Ryan. Mostly because I wasnt sold on Ryan being better than flacco, and I figured we'd get both.

I was wrong. The ravens traded up for flacco and my dreams went up In smoke.

Over the last five years I've come to realize that LT is the most overdraftsd, over valued, over paid position in the sport.

No way I'd pass on Ryan if we held that draft over today.

Hokie Phin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>so what has changed the viewpoint for so
> many of you to finally admit that a Quarterback is
> the most critical part of an NFL team?


The artist formerly known as "phinsfan2"

Anyone can go back and see I was all for Ryan over Long.

The QB position is the most important position on a football team, and until you land the right guy your team will remain average.

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

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

Hokie Phin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> For the most part it seems like the majority of
> this board now sees the importance of the QB
> position and what it means to a franchise. However
> I can remember back to draft debate between Jake
> Long and Matt Ryan, when this board overwhelmingly
> wanted an OL over a QB. Many posters on here
> claimed that a great team has to be built from the
> trenches.
>
> So here it is in 2012, the offensive line is still
> poor, so what has changed the viewpoint for so
> many of you to finally admit that a Quarterback is
> the most critical part of an NFL team?

Here is one huge difference. Matt Ryan got a $72M contract. Last year's #8 pick, a QB, Jake Locker, got a 4 year, $12M contract. Picking a QB is very risky. But, the new CBA has changed the risk factor substantially. If you are wrong, and shelling out $70M, your franchise is handcuffed for a long time. For a guy making $3M a year, the financial/salary cap risk has become minor.

Here's an interesting stat line for those that think Tannehill's stats are weak.

Matt Ryan, Senior Year, 59.3% completions, 6.9 yards per attempt, 31 TD, 19 INT, 127.0 passer rating, 2 rushing yards

Ryan Tannehill, Senior Year, 61.6% completions, 7.1 yards per attempt, 29 TD, 15 INT, 133.2 passer rating, 358 rushing yards

I do think I remember Aqua being for Ryan.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/19/2012 08:09AM by Hokie Phin.

Mark, those are nice stats. However the Boston College teams that Matt Ryan played on had terrible talent around him. He got the absolute most out of the guys on that team, whereas alot would say that Tannehill and A&M greatly underachieved.

Truth, you may have always argued the importance of the QB position but Phinsfan2 preached the need to build an offensive line first.

I've been pissed since they passed on Quinn for a Punt Returner. I know Quinn never turned out to be anything great , but that doesn't excuse not trying o get a decent QB. We passed on Drew Breeze, Aron Rodgers , over and over . Last year when they moved up to the second I was sure they were finally going to Grab Mallet. Then I heard a RB and I went ballastic. Lets hope they can make a better choice this time around. No matter who or what round.

I don't know how talented those A&m teams really were. I don't think they had a ton of NFL talent on offense. Definitely more talented than BC but it's not like he was surrounded by studs. They had Cyrus Gray, RB, who will probably be a 3rd rounder and Fuller, WR, who will be late rounder. There should be some more guys drafted next year, like Ryan Swope and maybe two lineman but none of them will be first rounders.

I was and still support the decision of taking Long when we did. Here's why:

1. Jake Long was and is an Elite, not a run of the mill LT. They don't come along all the time.

2. Miami at the time had been thru about 6 second round picks or trades trying to upgrade the QB position and pretty much whiffed on all but a few flashes of good play, until injuries ruined that.
- One could reasonable argue that some of them could have succeeded if they had better OL support.
- Yes I know that 2nd round doesn't = franchise QB

3. Matt Ryan was a question mark at the time at the next level, and as noted above the penalty for a wrong choice was high, whereas Jake long was a sure thing.

That is why I supported taking Jake Long, and stand by that choice despite the retrospective view (unfair as it is when the time was to decide we didn't know or even have high confidence that Matt Ryans would be great.

This year we have two great QBs, once again I'm not sold we have a star in Ryan, and thus won't lose my mind if we don't select him at 8, and certainly would nopt move up to get him.


None of this means that I don't respect and value the improtance of an elite QB, just that we haven't really had that chance ... except for Breeze, and even then there was questions about his health ... but wish we would have taken him more than I lament over not takling Ryan over jake Long

I agree Jake Long is an elite LT. But what impact would you say that he's had on the Dolphins?

LOL...good point.

It's kind of like asking, what would you rather have....the best QB in the league or the best LT in the league?

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

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

Hokie Phin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Truth, you may have always argued the importance
> of the QB position but Phinsfan2 preached the need
> to build an offensive line first.


No I didn't.

This site is LOADED with arguments I've had about the importance of qb vs anything else. Just ask crowder and CB.

My philosophy has ALWAYS been...get your qb first and then build from the line of scrimmage back on both sides of the ball.

In the jake long draft I thought it best to take the sure thing LT first because I didn't think there was much separating HENNE and Ryan, and the qb I thought was the best of the bunch was flacco who I hoped to get at pick 32.

Clearly I was wrong in my hope to get both long and flacco and in my preference for flacco over Ryan.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/19/2012 09:16AM by THE Truth.

I think he's done an excellent job keeping the best pass rusher from the other team from killing the guys we have had back there. If we'd had a Colombo type on the left side, I don't think we would have a living QB on the roster.

Rick

Hokie Phin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I agree Jake Long is an elite LT. But what impact
> would you say that he's had on the Dolphins?


More importantly, as I posted months ago, what importance has the LT position played in winning the Super Bowl?

This really isn't about long who has played on a miserable team.

It's about the fact that of the last ten super bowl winners, only one had a LT drafted in the first round. One. That was Tarik Glenn, and he wasn't even selected in the top half of round 1.

Hokie Phin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I do think I remember Aqua being for Ryan.


He was.

I don't think the question is as simple as you put it, Hokie. I challenge your premise that EITHER ONE is the right or wrong way to go.

I think it depends on the circumstance and how you find the team.

1983 was a prime example. We went to the SuperBowl with David Woodley and a GREAT defense, the Killer Bees.

Although Woodley did not complete a single pass in the second half, we came within ONE PLAY of winning the game.

That play was where we had forced Joe Theisman into scrambling for his life back in the endzone. He tried to pass and Bokamper hit the ball as it left Theisman's hand and the ball went straight up.


All that year when the same thing had happened, Bokamper on many occasions caught the ball for a touchdown. This time Theisman grabbed his arm and kept it from assisting the other arm and the ball fell harmlessly on the ground.

One play we would have won the superbowl with a quarterback who couldn't complete a pass in the entire second half.

The point is that if you can get to the SuperBowl and almost win it with a quarterback like that, that is an argument for the quarterback not being absolutely necessary.

The next years of the Dolphin franchise makes the same point from the opposite standpoint. We had Marino, the greatest passer of all time and not much of a defense, although a great offensive line but not much of a running game. We did the same thing, went to the SuperBowl without winning.

I think you have to look at your team at the time you are making the assessment.

If you HAVE the offensive line that you desire, get the QB. If you HAVE THE QB you desire, get the offensive line. If you have both of those, get the defense. If you HAVE the defense, for example, then with your top pick, pick the quarterback who ranks higher among quarterbacks if the offensive lineman that is available does not rank as high among the offensive linemen available. The same is true if you plug in running back, wide receiver, etd.

But the same holds true when you lack TWO of any position. You make the best upgrade you can.

To me, do you accept an inferior questionable lineman because he is the best on the board and the best you can do? Only if you've got the quarterback you desire or if the quarterback choices are more questionable.

However, what some people on this board refuse to recognize is that the same is true of quarterback. You don't reach for a quarterback who is not of the same caliber of the linemen you could pick in that situation.

AGAIN, DO NOT FORGET this is in the situation wherein you have critical needs AT BOTH POSITIONS.

I think we are in that situation.

Therefore, the question is not as simple as what you do everytime go for the QB or go for the lineman.

I think what you are trying to do is set up the easy answer that a QB is more valuable than an OL BUT THAT IS BESIDE THE POINT.

A more relevant question is when you need both, what are the relevant classes of the two players, QB and otherwise, from whom you have to pick.

Matty Ryan has not set the world on fire. Imagine Matty ball here WITHOUT JAKE LONG.

Off hand I'd say he would have been worse than we did under Pennington, Henne, Moore etc. WITH JAKE LONG!

Okay, so we didn't win the SuperBowl with those QBs AND JAKE LONG. The point is that we certainly would not have won the SuperBowl with Matty Ryan WITHOUT JAKE LONG.

YOU CAN'T PLUG MATTY RYAN INTO THIS TEAM and KEEP JAKE LONG. You have to choose ONE WITHOUT THE OTHER.

I know it's attractive to compare Matt Ryan STRAIGHT UP with Chad Henne or Matt Moore.

YOU CAN'T DO THAT!

That's not LOGICAL!

You have to compare Matt Ryan on this team WITHOUT JAKE LONG TO BLOCK FOR HIM!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/19/2012 09:30AM by ChyrenB.

problem with going back to 1983 to prove this point is that the league has changed 180 degrees from those days. passing rules, not a ground and pound scheme. you can't win like that anymore, except when all the stars align as with BAL in 2000 (which by the way was over a decade ago).

________________________________________________________
The beatings will continue until morale improves.

if you have 2 players rated the same, and one is a QB and the other is not a QB, and you need both, you take the QB. if the QB is lower rated, you still take the QB. If the QB is lower rated by a lot, then you have a tougher decision. I think 25 years ago the analysis was different, because passing is now the most important aspect of the game

________________________________________________________
The beatings will continue until morale improves.

berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> if you have 2 players rated the same, and one is a
> QB and the other is not a QB, and you need both,
> you take the QB.

Yeah, but this is a straw man because I don't think the controversy on this board is that the players we could draft at other positions are of the same caliber that Tannehill is regarded as a QB.

I think most people who oppose taking Tannehill do so because they think he is not of the same value at QB as the WRs, DL, or OLs are of the caliber that we could pick at 8.

One may argue that or not but no one is contesting the argument that if the players are "rated the same" then you go for the QB. No one is arguing that QB is NOT the most important position on the board./


if the QB is lower rated, you
> still take the QB.


There you might get an argument.

If the QB is lower rated by a
> lot, then you have a tougher decision.

You definitely get an argument there because to a lot of us, there is no question if the lineman you can get is BY FAR of a greater pedigree than the QB available.


I think 25
> years ago the analysis was different, because
> passing is now the most important aspect of the
> game

I see what you are trying to say but you are stretching the point beyond credulity to imply that we (or anyone else) should OR EVEN WOULD take a C ranked QB over an A ranked "other position of need."

This is no disrespect to you at all CHyren,

but sometimes I think you still believe the football that was played in the 50's, 60's, and 70's, is still being played today.

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

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

Chyren, 99% of the time I agree with your posts on here. But not in this case. You can't compare today's NFL to 1983. Two completely different games.

And yes I would prefer Matt Ryan without Jake Long. We could build around Matt Ryan. Did the Packers build around a LT or Aaron Rodgers? The Giants built around Eli. The Colts built around Peyton. The Panthers built around Cam.

How well did Sam Bradford do last year without an offesive line... HE looked like a pinata and got hurt again. All of our QB's in the time period before Jake Long were getting trucked... How did Gabbert or Ponder look without much protection?

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

Bradford got injured quite a bit at Oklahoma with a stud offensive line. Blaine Gabbert looked poor because he's simply not that great of a QB. Same can be said for Ponder.

Crowder, how did Cam Newton look behind the same line as Matt Moore in Carolina?

Chyren, let's look at the recent days of the NFL. Tell me if you see one thing in common with the recent Super Bowl winners?

2012-Giants-Eli Manning
2011-Packers-Aaron Rodgers
2010-Saints-Drew Brees
2009-Steelers-Ben Roethlisberger
2008-Giants-Eli Manning
2007-Colts-Peyton Manning
2006-Steelers-Ben Roethlisberger
2005-Patriots-Tom Brady
2004-Patriots-Tom Brady

no-name left tackles?

________________________________________________________
The beatings will continue until morale improves.

And as for my rose-colored glasses, they tell me that Matt Ryan was drafted by a 4-12 Atlanta Falcons team. He went there without having Jake Long to block for him, as you referenced. Yet somehow the Falcons organization found a way to build their franchise around Matt Ryan. And 4 years later that franchise is in MUCH better shape than Miami.