I don't really follow college football so closely anymore. Which players do you think we will be/should be targeting with our 1st round pick so I can pay attention during bowl season? I imagine we will be picking somewhere between 9-15. No OL, please.

________________________________________________________
The beatings will continue until morale improves.

thanks truth. I really don't want to take another OL in the first round. I'd rather sign a FA RT or something and use the draft pick on a pass rusher, DB, or receiver. Is that ND LB the real deal? If so maybe we should take him if he is there. Doesn't sound like this is a very good draft to take a WR in the 1st.

I expect we take a RB in the 2d or 3d as well.

________________________________________________________
The beatings will continue until morale improves.

I am really curious to watch the Texas A&M vs Oklahome game. Lots of talent on that A&M squad. A few you didn't mention from that game are...

Damontre Moore, DE/OLB (fast riser) and Luke Joeckel, LT.

Joeckel may go very high (top 3) in the draft as may Moore.

I also want to get a look at....

Taylor Lewan OT, Michigan vs S. Carolina
Bjoern Werner, DE Florida St vs Northern Illinois
Star Lotulelei, DT Utah vs Toledo (Like Soliai, another Samoan from Utah)
Demarcus Milliner, CB Alabama vs ND
Sheldon Richardson, DT Missouri (fast riser not in a bowl game)
Ezekiel Ansah, DE BYU vs SD state

My wishlist....

Damontre Moore, Dee Milliner, Jake Mathews, Terrance Williams, Tony Jefferson (2nd round), Tyler Eifert, Manti Te'o

.....................................................................................
“I'm here" You're welcome!" - Kenny Powers

The big problem with that is that there are no FA right tackles...

Andre Smith is the best one and he has huge weight issues and probably does not fit the zone blocking scheme.

Most of the tackles on the market are looking for LT jobs and LT money.

Anyone beyond these are no better than Nate Garner or Lydon Murtha.

The other issue is that if we sign a quality tackle like Brandon Albert (who plays LT), he is going to cash in on a contract in the 10 mil a year range. We can get a rookie in the lower 1st for 2 mil a year.

I agree we need play makers in the top rounds but it may not be feasible unless we go DE or trade down for a TE.

.....................................................................................
“I'm here" You're welcome!" - Kenny Powers

berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> thanks truth. I really don't want to take another
> OL in the first round. I'd rather sign a FA RT or
> something and use the draft pick on a pass rusher,
> DB, or receiver.

I hear ya...but I think you have to keep all your options open. What can you get where,, and for how much?

An elite tackle is going to cost a ton of money on the open market. So is an elite WR. Both are HUGE needs for us.

An elite WR in the draft is going to have a year or two adjustment to the NFL. An elite OT in the draft can play right away at a high level.

I don't want us to blow our cap on an elite OT and WR.

I'd prefer to get an elite WR who plays at that level right away and an elite Guard in free agency.

That allows me to be cost effective and draft an OT (Matthews or Fisher) who, like Martin, who can play both sides. Plus I'm not betting my young QB's progress on the development of a Rookie WR with huge expectations.

Ideal scenario for me is to sign Wallace or Jennings at WR and a Guard like Levitre, then draft an OT.

That leaves me 4 picks in rounds two & three to get a TE, CB, FS and pass rusher.

Be even better if we can trade down in the first and and a 5th choice in the 2/3 range.






> Is that ND LB the real deal? If
> so maybe we should take him if he is there.
> Doesn't sound like this is a very good draft to
> take a WR in the 1st.

There are a ton of ways to approach this off-season and a lot of needs to address. The important thing is to hit on the majority of our moves. No big FA busts and 4 out of 5 picks in the first 3 rounds.

If that happens we'll be a playoff team next year. And in position to address the final needs on our roster next off-season.

As for T'eo...he's another way to skin the cat.

I think he's a stud. Think Zack Thomas at 250lbs. Not quite the freak athlete Ray Lewis is but still a terrific athlete in his own right. Very intelligent/instinctive player. Tackling machine.

If he's there when we pick I'd sprint to the podium.






>
> I expect we take a RB in the 2d or 3d as well.


I don't see it.


I think we sign a FA on the cheap and if a guy falls into the 5th or 6th we could draft a RB.

I agree, berk, I would flip THE Truth's preferences around. He would prefer to draft an offensive lineman in the first round and find a WR in free agency. I would rather find an offensive lineman in free agency and draft a WR in the first round.

I also agree that we might want to look at the middle of our defensive line or linebacker. Manti T'eo, ND or Kawaan Short DT Purdue (who you could get in the second round even) would be good picks.

THE Truth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> berkeley223 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > thanks truth. I really don't want to take
> another
> > OL in the first round. I'd rather sign a FA RT
> or
> > something and use the draft pick on a pass
> rusher,
> > DB, or receiver.
>
> I hear ya...but I think you have to keep all your
> options open. What can you get where,, and for
> how much?
>
> An elite tackle is going to cost a ton of money on
> the open market. So is an elite WR. Both are
> HUGE needs for us.
>
> An elite WR in the draft is going to have a year
> or two adjustment to the NFL. An elite OT in the
> draft can play right away at a high level.
>
> I don't want us to blow our cap on an elite OT and
> WR.
>
> I'd prefer to get an elite WR who plays at that
> level right away and an elite Guard in free
> agency.
>
> That allows me to be cost effective and draft an
> OT (Matthews or Fisher) who, like Martin, who can
> play both sides. Plus I'm not betting my young
> QB's progress on the development of a Rookie WR
> with huge expectations.
>
> Ideal scenario for me is to sign Wallace or
> Jennings at WR and a Guard like Levitre, then
> draft an OT.
>
> That leaves me 4 picks in rounds two & three to
> get a TE, CB, FS and pass rusher.
>
> Be even better if we can trade down in the first
> and and a 5th choice in the 2/3 range.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Is that ND LB the real deal? If
> > so maybe we should take him if he is there.
> > Doesn't sound like this is a very good draft to
> > take a WR in the 1st.
>
> There are a ton of ways to approach this
> off-season and a lot of needs to address. The
> important thing is to hit on the majority of our
> moves. No big FA busts and 4 out of 5 picks in
> the first 3 rounds.
>
> If that happens we'll be a playoff team next year.
> And in position to address the final needs on
> our roster next off-season.
>
> As for T'eo...he's another way to skin the cat.
>
> I think he's a stud. Think Zack Thomas at
> 250lbs. Not quite the freak athlete Ray Lewis
> is but still a terrific athlete in his own right.
> Very intelligent/instinctive player. Tackling
> machine.
>
> If he's there when we pick I'd sprint to the
> podium.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >
> > I expect we take a RB in the 2d or 3d as well.
>
>
> I don't see it.
>
>
> I think we sign a FA on the cheap and if a guy
> falls into the 5th or 6th we could draft a RB.


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

I mentioned in another thread that if Miami traded down, then I could possibly go for an offensive lineman. The only caveat I would have is if Miami ends up in the 15-20 pick range, then it would be possible that the best on the board at the time could be an offensive lineman, then it is a no-brainer. Unless that is the case, a playmaker from either side of the ball would be my pick, if that guy is at the top of my list at the time.

A one to two year "breaking in" period is the norm for an "elite" WR, but that is not always the case. If Miami could get that "elite" receiver in the first round, then I would grab him (again, unless there is another position with a body that is higher on the draft board). This guy has to have speed with a really good college resume. Even if he takes a year or to to develop, speed kills! He would open up the field for RT.

Signing Wallace or Jennings is great, but....they are going to cost big bucks. Along with that, Jennings is in his what...50th year? I wouldn't mind Jennings, but again, he will cost too much plus he won't be around much longer, and....he has been hurt a lot over the past few years.

Wallace? Grab him as fast as you can, unless his contract demands are outrageous. He has the speed and is young.

T'eo is the real deal, but he won't be available when Miami picks. I foresee him as a top 10 pick.

I don't see a RB in the 2nd or 3rd round either. (1) RBs aren't the premier position players anymore and (2) Miami has way too many holes to fill.

eesti Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I agree, berk, I would flip THE Truth's
> preferences around. He would prefer to draft an
> offensive lineman in the first round and find a WR
> in free agency. I would rather find an offensive
> lineman in free agency and draft a WR in the first
> round.


>
> I tend to agree that we can't afford to wait and
> gamble on a high risk rookie WR to contribute.
>
> Can you explain your thinking on this?
>
> What OT are you referring to? Not many good RT's
> in free agency this year.


Exactly right Berk. Very very few elite OT's ever make it to free agency. You can probably find a stop gap guy like Murtha who can give you a solid season or two but its not really a big upgrade.

The issue with drafting a WR high isn't that he won't eventually play at a high level...its that it takes longer for him to get there. Sure, as Cap pointed out, its not always the case. Sometimes you get a guy who is a legit Number one or Number two WR right out of the gate.

But the vast majority of them take 2 or 3 years to reach their potential.

When it comes to drafting O-lineman the opposite is true. Most of the guys taken high are able to contribute very quickly.

We need a #1 or #2 WR for NEXT year to improve our offense and we need a #3/4 guy who can contribute 30 catches, who can run after the catch, and who can develop into a starter down the road.

There is no AJ Green or Julio Jones in this draft. Taking a wr in the middle of the first round is a HUGE gamble, not just on that player and how long he will take to develop but you are risking Slowing Tannehill development as well.

Now if we traded down say from 10-15 to 25-30 and took a WR I'd live with it because we'd be adding another 2nd round pick. And in the late first round you might find that BPA at our need positions is a WR.

If we stay in the 10-15 range then BPA at a need position has to be a guy who plays right away.

Sure drafting a WR in the first round is the same as drafting a QB. You 1) take a risk he'll be good at all and 2) take a risk that he may need a year to develop.

However, that's the same as for QB and we can see what taking cast-off QBs got us over the year. Although Duper was selected in the 2nd round, sometimes WRs can do quite well in their rookie seasons. I don't think Justin Blackmon is stinking up the place.

Another thing to consider is unless there is a GREAT wide receiver whose contract has run out and he is willing to put himself up to the highest bidder, you are going to end up with head cases like Brandon Marshall or someone who is deficient in one aspect or another (Brandon drops passes in the endzone).

You are talking about a speed burner WR. No rational coach or GM is just going to let such a guy go.

On the other hand, you are talking about being ASSURED that the lineman you draft is going to be a top notch guy????? Yeah we succeeded with Mike Pouncey but Jake Long was just drafted in 2008 and he won't be around for 2013, that's pretty short for a career and HE WAS A PRO BOWLER, so that's not counting on the "miss" factor which can happen with any pick.

I think that most would agree that it is easier to pick a long lasting stable o-lineman, PARTICULARLY AN RT, in the 2nd and later rounds than there is either a QB, WR, or RB.

Another point, although an OT can add to the protection of Tannehill, which, OT or WR is more vital to his progress?

Definitely a WR.

Many people on this board have correctly pointed out that since we have no real deep threat WR speed burner, the other teams just cover all the short routes and come in like gangbusters on RT.

RT's only options are then to 1) throw up a Hail Mary and I do mean Hail Mary or 2) take off running.

If RT had a deep threat, regardless of that inadequate RT, he gets rid of the ball so fast that our offensive team effectiveness will increase.

However, with an adequate RT and no deep threat, next year will pretty much look like this year because, despite the fact that RT will have more time, his options for passing will still be nothing.

It just makes no sense to prioritize lineman over wide receiver.

Do you guys think we can find a better tackle in FA this year then Jake Long? If Jake is not ridiculously overpaid and willing to take a hometown discount, why wouldn't you sign him and draft a WR early.. Seems easier then taking a guess on a FA tackle or guess on a draft pick in the first few rds. Dumping Long just creates one more hole to fill on an offense that has more pressings needs IMO. While I agree you can't overpay for Long but I think there is a reasonable deal to be made... Which gives us the ability to use our draft picks elsewhere....

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

Ireland dumped Marshall and did nothing to fill that hole. IMO if we dump Long, we will have a hole at tackle next year just like we have a hole at WR this year from Marshall's absence.. At least that is a major concern of mine regarding Long leaving...

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

Crowder52 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Do you guys think we can find a better tackle in
> FA this year then Jake Long? If Jake is not
> ridiculously overpaid and willing to take a
> hometown discount, why wouldn't you sign him and
> draft a WR early.. Seems easier then taking a
> guess on a FA tackle or guess on a draft pick in
> the first few rds. Dumping Long just creates one
> more hole to fill on an offense that has more
> pressings needs IMO. While I agree you can't
> overpay for Long but I think there is a reasonable
> deal to be made... Which gives us the ability to
> use our draft picks elsewhere....

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

Don't know the FAs that will be available, but as far as Long goes....You are correct and it is what I have been saying all along....if he (or his agent) don't ask for a ridiculous contract (and based on his injuries and skill-set going down) then yeah, re-sign Long. He is still a good LT, but no longer a great one, unless he somehow shakes the injury bug and comes back and plays the way he used to.

True, dumping Long does create a hole on the OL that must be filled, but is it worth an outrageous contract demand? I don't think so.

We do, no doubt, have many, many holes to fill. Until Miami does so, they won't be sniffing the playoffs. If we resign Long and his injuries, once again, get the best of him, then Miami is right back where they would have been had they let him go and found someone else for the line. Plus, Miami will then have to struggle to fill that void during the season, where a team would normally only be able to get a guy who no one really wants.

I go back to my other posts....if Miami trades down, then if that OL is there that is pretty high up on Miami's "want" list, then grab him. If Miami drafts in the top 15, then they have to go after the playmaker that is going to (hopefully) make a difference.

Capt, you take the same level of risk with a FA tackle or drafting a tackle that you do with Jake Long.. We paid Richard Marshall pretty big money last year to upgrade the secondary, it didn't work out so well..

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

I don't think his position in anybody's eyes strengthened this year.. If he demands to be the highest paid tackle in the game then he walks.. His play this year doesn't support that..it's nice to agree with you Truth

-----------------------------------------------------------------
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 don't think his position in anybody's eyes
> strengthened this year.. If he demands to be the
> highest paid tackle in the game then he walks..
> His play this year doesn't support that..it's nice
> to agree with you Truth

You should try it more often....

So what's the reasonable deal you have in mind?

I think you shoot for a little more then you paid Richard Marshall last year which I believe was 7 million. If you are willing to pay Marshall 7 for 2 years long is surely worth 8-9 a year or less with bigger bonuses for play.....The length of the contract is going to be the juggle.. Long has to feel like he will be rewarded if he outplays his contract... But if you remember Long signed a smaller contract then Matt Ryan did at three. Then after he proved himself his contract was redone his second year to compensate... So both Ireland and Long have shown the ability to be reasonable and fair.. So I have hope, my only concern is if Jake and his wife would rather live somewhere else with his Midwest country lifestyle...I am hoping since Jake met his wife in south fla she wants to stay here...

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

The teams argument is he is on the decline and injured. Longs argument is he was in a brand new zone system, his tenure which includes probowls, stats, leadership on and off the field, always doing the right thing as well as others who want him no doubt. Any team in the league would take Jake Long at 7 million a year.. We have to convince him why to take Miami for just a little more knowing we will make him right if he outplays that number..

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

I offer 35 million on a 4 year deal with protection in case of injury, back end a decent amount of the deal but a reasonable signing bonus like you did with Wake to make him feel warm and fuzzy about the deal...

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