The powers that be were hoping if they paid the money it might actually be true. Just because they paid Ryan Tannehill franchise QB money does not mean he is a franchise QB. Unfortunately, this most likely will hurt the team for many years going forward as far as cap money is concerned and to be able to get another QB.

tonybaby5 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The powers that be were hoping if they paid the
> money it might actually be true. Just because they
> paid Ryan Tannehill franchise QB money does not
> mean he is a franchise QB. Unfortunately, this
> most likely will hurt the team for many years
> going forward as far as cap money is concerned and
> to be able to get another QB.

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

RT's contract won't hurt the team in the least; many teams pay their QBs the big bucks...just the way it is.

Is Ryan elite? Will he ever be elite? Doubtful, but surround him with talent (i.e., a good OL), then we will have a true picture of what he is or will be. He is a good QB and can lead any team to the playoffs; just give him some help. This year he has a good group of receivers and good running backs. Give him a solid OL, then let's talk about where he is or will be.

Tannehill still has no pocket presence and just can't seem to recognize a blitzer that will take his head off. There he was again , just standing there in the endzone of all places and being creamed for yet another safety. I really don't know how he was able to get up after that hit and you wonder how many more hits like that can he withstand before he is seriously injured. He has guts, that I admit but when will he make the adjustments necessary to avoid so many sacks.

I don't care how good an offensive line a QB has, you have to be able sometimes to avoid the defense and what they are trying to accomplish or do to you. It is called study, study, study and learn what the defense is probably going to do and be able to recognize it .

This is going on his soon to be fifth year and he still takes way to many sacks. His offensive linemen need to have big signs on their butt saying, warning, this is too close get rid of the damn ball !!

Same old 'Henne argument' Give him a Line, receivers, a running game, a big bad defense, this, that AND the other thing. THEN we'll see if he's any good...good grief. How do you know he doesn't HAVE receivers?...maybe if THEY had a QB to throw to them? The guy is average at best. Against the Titans, or the Texans, or any team QB'ed by Mark Sanchez that MIGHT be good enough, but it ain't good enough, so far to even get us a winning season. If we are gonna 'change the culture' we have to quit being ok with mediocrity at THE most important position on the field.

davdoldew4 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Tannehill still has no pocket presence and just
> can't seem to recognize a blitzer that will take
> his head off. There he was again , just standing
> there in the endzone of all places and being
> creamed for yet another safety. I really don't
> know how he was able to get up after that hit and
> you wonder how many more hits like that can he
> withstand before he is seriously injured. He has
> guts, that I admit but when will he make the
> adjustments necessary to avoid so many sacks.
>
> I don't care how good an offensive line a QB has,
> you have to be able sometimes to avoid the defense
> and what they are trying to accomplish or do to
> you. It is called study, study, study and learn
> what the defense is probably going to do and be
> able to recognize it .
>
> This is going on his soon to be fifth year and he
> still takes way to many sacks. His offensive
> linemen need to have big signs on their butt
> saying, warning, this is too close get rid of the
> damn ball !!

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

From what I understand, RT is not allowed to audible.

Why? Is it because the coaching staff doesn't trust him? Is it because he just doesn't understand defenses (as many here are saying)?

Much of the problems lay with the play calling. The play you are referring to, davdoldew, when he got sacked in the end zone...it is obvious Miami's OL isn't that strong, so why have him drop back there? Maybe a quick drop and quick pass? How about just drop back and let it fly? I would have called a running play (because of that OL) and would have had Ajayi in the backfield.

BTW. That sack came on the left side of the OL...Albert's side. :-(

If i remember correctly that sack was a blitz

if anyone knows the oline isn't that good it's tannehill. with that said you'd think he'd know he can't camp out back their flat footing waiting for a play to develop.

Phil Simms wasn't elite, but he won 2 Superbowls.

Brad Smith...Trent Dilfer...well, we know about them.

Do you remember Jake Delhomme, Neil O'Donnell, and (ahem) David Woodley? All 3 played in Superbowls, although they didn't win.

Colin Kaepernick and Russell Wilson have also appeared to have fallen back to Earth.

My point is you don't need a real "franchise" QB to make it to the big dance (and to win). If RT is simply an effective game manager, we could do well giving him a good running game (Miller, Ajayi) and defense.

What we really need is a good coaching staff!!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/18/2015 03:24PM by montequi.

Montequi - I agree with you.

The term "Franchise" QB is a misnomer. What people really mean is that we need a "Hall of Fame" QB. In each decade, there are really only a handful Hall of Fame QB who end up taking their teams to a majority of the Superbowls (note: list below my be incomplete)

70s - Griese, Bradshaw, Staubach, Tarkenton, Stabler
80s - Theismann, Montana, Marino, Elway
90s - Elway, Kelly, Aikmann, Farve
00s- present - E Manning, P Manning, Rothlisberger, Brady, Warner, Rodgers, Brees

There have been tons of other teams that have made it with solid defenses, strong running games and a good, steady QB

Thanks largely to unrestricted free agency and salary caps, trying to build, much less keep together a team that is top 5 in almost every category for more than a couple years is nearly impossible. Today more than ever, the way to have an NFL team that can be successful for 5-10 years is to have a top QB. Sorry, it's just the truth. Sure, you might have a flash in the pan like the '99 Bucs or the '13 49ers by building a power running game a great defense and a whiz bang coaching staff, but we have suffered for so long, i'm not interested in a flash in the pan year or two and then a plunge back to mediocrity as our players are lured away by the highest bidder. I want to see this franchise restored to what it was until about a dozen years ago, a annually competitive team.

Free agency started in 1992 Since then, 23 superbowls. Here is a list of the winning QB's:

Super Bowl 27. Troy Aikman
Super Bowl 28. Troy Aikman
Super Bowl 29. Steve Young
Super Bowl 30. Troy Aikman
Super Bowl 31. Brett Favre
Super Bowl 32. John Elway
Super Bowl 33. John Elway
Super Bowl 34. Kurt Warner
Super Bowl 35. Trent Dilfer
Super Bowl 36. Tom Brady
Super Bowl 37. Brad Johnson
Super Bowl 38. Tom Brady
Super Bowl 39. Tom Brady
Super Bowl 40. Ben Roethlisberger
Super Bowl 41. Peyton Manning
Super Bowl 42. Eli Manning
Super Bowl 43: Ben Roethlisberger
Super Bowl 44: Drew Brees
Super Bowl 45: Aaron Rogers
Super Bowl 46: Eli Manning
Super Bowl 47: Joe Flacco
Super Bowl 48: Russell Wilson
Super Bowl 49. Tom Brady

Not Exactly 'TONS' of guys on that list that are not 'elite', 'franchise' or at least a top-tier QB (meaning the QB is NORMALLY in the top 20% or so stat wise). I'll give you Dilfer and Johnson. Arguably include Flaco. to me the jury is still out on Wilson (3 complete years, 2 superbowls ratings of 100, 101 and 95, not exactly journeyman stats although he is having an off year this year). So say 4 out of 23, thats 17%. The other 83% of the last 25 years worth superbowls have been won by the 'other' type of QB some say we don't need.

Even if we just want to GET there, here are ALL NFL starting QB's that have been to more than 1 superbowl (WIN OR LOSE):

6 Tom Brady 4–2
5 John Elway 2–3
4 Terry Bradshaw 4–0
4 Roger Staubach 2–2
4 Joe Montana 4–0
4 Jim Kelly 0–4
3 Troy Aikman 3–0
3 Peyton Manning 1–2
3 Kurt Warner 1–2
3 Fran Tarkenton 0–3
3 Bob Griese 2–1
3 Ben Roethlisberger 2–1
2 Russell Wilson 1–1
2 Len Dawson 1–1
2 Joe Theismann 1–1
2 Jim Plunkett 2–0
2 Eli Manning 2–0
2 Craig Morton 0–2
2 Brett Favre 1–1
2 Bart Starr 2-0

Except maybe Morton and again, to soon to tell with Wilson IMO, WHO on that list was not a top tier QB in their time? Seems a top tier QB is ALSO the best way to get to more than one superbowl. WHich HAS to be what a fan wants for their team right?

MOST IMPORTANTLY, look at the number of repeat names on the first list and the scarcity of names on the last list given 50 years of superbowl history. A TOP TIER QB IS THE SUREST WAY TO HAVE A YEAR IN, YEAR OUT, COMPETITIVE, RELEVANT TEAM. ESPECIALY IN THIS ERA OF UNRESTRICTED FREE AGENCY...PERIOD.

Hard to argue with that.

So 15 different QBs have won the last 23 SB's. And 5 of those guys were NOT 1st rounders...representing 9 SB wins. 6 winners were not with their first team (i.e. that team gave up a SB-winning QB ). I'm not going to do the math, but my guess is that the average time as a starting QB in the league for the winners is 5+ years in the league...and that's conservative.

Meanwhile, the NFL QBR stats right now in the vicinity of - and mostly below - Tannehill are littered with former #1 overall picks (Alex Smith, Cam Newton, Matt Stafford, Sam Bradford, Jameis Winston, Mike Vick, Andrew Luck, Peyton Manning)...not to mention other high first-rounders who weren't #1 overall.

I have no problem recognizing that a franchise QB is the best way to consistently compete for and - hopefully - win a Super Bowl. I think recognizing that is the easy part. The hard part is answering:
- do I have one or not?...would hate to part with him if he is and just hasn't shown it yet (Brees, Favre, Warner...undrafted & went to NFL Europe)
- if I do keep drafting QBs "until I get one" how do I know when to put him in as starter over the incumbent who I don't know to be one or not? (Kurt Warner/Trent Green...Bledsoe/Brady)
- given that football is such a team game...yet you'd build around your franchise QBs strengths (as NE does with Brady)...how do you build your offense if you don't have a franchise QB...or you do but don't know it yet...or you might...or whatever. Edelman on any other team? Welker for that matter with us vs. NE? It's hard to assess an offensive player's value if you don't have an elite QB,
- what if my team's trajectory looks like it can consistently compete for a SB in spite of not having a QB (Ravens w/Lewis & crew)...should I spend my resources strengthening my team outside of QB or pursue a franchise QB as if it were the most important thing for my team at that time. This is a fairly outdated example, but could come back.

I guess the question is - if we don't have one right now...are we sure about that and what are our next steps? I'd say the odds are against us and probably 25+ other teams that we have one of the HoF-worthy QBs of the next 10 years. If I had to narrow it down to a course of action I would take, I would continue to build around Tannehill for the next year or two and work to develop him while taking a QB in every draft somewhere in the 2-5 round to see if we stumble upon a Brady or warner or Brees. If by year 6-ish he has simply proven beyond a doubt that he has no more room to improve, then I go spend my high pick (that I'll have cuz he has proven beyond a doubt not to be the answer) on the best QB I can draft. All the while keeping my eye out for once-in-a-blue-moon chances like Warner to AZ...or Palmer to AZ or Brees to Miami, I mean New Orleans - doh!

As a final disclaimer, my course of action is largely in recognition that I don't know how to get a certainly-better starting QB than Tannehill in the near-term.

Can't believe what I just read concerning RT not being allowed to audible. Here's what Dan Campbell said:

“When you do that, there’s two schools of thought,” interim coach Dan Campbell said Thursday. “When you do that, certainly Ryan can handle that mentally but you take the chance it slows him down in his rhythm. You open the full playbook up, those are sometimes the problems you run into. I’ll be honest with you. His first few years with Mike Sherman, he somewhat had that a little bit."

What?

You gonna tell me those QBs from the 60s, 70s, 80s, etc., had their rhythm messed up because they were allowed to audible?

Give me a break, Dan.

Lazor also said RT can audible, but with only two plays for that particular play; pass to run or run to pass. Woo Hoo. Boy, I bet RT is doing flips over how much freedom he has on the field.

And how many good pocket QBs are not even allowed to audible?

he is not the answer. Start looking for a replacement, move on like SF has with kaepernick, we really aren't much better

Try to get chase Daniels or Aaron Murray, worth a look.

Wilson off year is because his OL is terrible, and he has no big #1 WR

Let me try to put this in perspective. If Tannehill were a MLB pitcher he'd be winning about 4 out of 10 games and most if not all would not be complete games. He would not be the primary team pitcher to start the rotation. In fact, he might not even be in the rotation but in the bull pen with a chance every 2-3 games to throw an inning or two. Good enough to make the team, but not the guy anyone would expect that could win 20 in a season.

Tannehill's maturation has hit a plateau. His skill set is just so-so and from the comments Campbell made about switching plays at the line, it strongly implies that he's not savvy enough (not enough field presence) to do it.

I agree, its time to pursue a better QB. Sad but true.

How? Because its not all on Tannehill.

Our defense wilted in the fourth quarter, our OC stopped running the ball in the first half, our receivers can't catch the ball, Our O-line can't block worth a crap, we seldom use our TE, Our Special Teams seldom makes a play, we are in third and long every possession, We can't ever seem to get our players in space, Our LB'ers can't shed blocks, Our OG's just plain suck, We can't pick up a blitz to save our lives, none of our players win a contested play with regularity, and none of our receivers or RB's ever make a guy miss and take it to the house, or turn a little play into a big one...like happens all of the time in every other game I watch each week.

But yeah, it's all on RT...

Moore is not the guy, never has been the guy, and as such, should have been released two years ago, IMHO.

I do agree with the taking a QB in every draft (or at least every other draft) school of thought however.

I agree it's not all on him, actually. And, in fact, I would say that yesterday was a day when more went bad around him than he was responsible for himself. Dropped passes...stopping running when the running game is 5 YPC...penalties, penalties, penalties. In spite of his play, he got 2 TD passes to pull us even.

However, when the heat was on he appeared to simply not process things fast/well enough...and that's a tough thing for me to see so regularly with him.

Moore isn't the future but neither is tannehill. There's a reason they used "Go and Go Go" under Sherman and a reason Lazor only gives him 2 plays to choose from. He's not very good.

So I think you owe it to the rest of the team to start Moore and see if he can spark the offese that's averaging 14 pts per loss and 20.5 pts/game.

It sure appears that what we see is what we get (WYSWG). We can't expect any more than poor line play on the offense, weak play calling, dropped passes, under thrown passes to receivers, short passes behind receivers, an interception or two, a variety of rushed passes, a few sacks, bumbling plays from our guards, no real help from the linebackers, missteps and erratic coverage by corners and safeties, questionable 3d down calls and poor execution, failed efforts to have a running attack, weak special teams play and penalties that stop progress, if any...and the beat goes on.

No, the problem is not strictly Tannehill but he is a major let down in the execution department.

It also appears we are stuck with Tannehill for this year and maybe next. We need to bring in a veteran quarterback as the starter and groom a draft pick to replace Tannehill. (easier said than done, I know.) Maybe we can trade Tannehill for (fill in the blank) _____________. Honestly, I don't think that bringing in Moore to start would improve our chances of competing with an opponent because the O-line is so pathetic at guard and at RT.

Ken Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> How? Because its not all on Tannehill.
>
> Our defense wilted in the fourth quarter, our OC
> stopped running the ball in the first half, our
> receivers can't catch the ball, Our O-line can't
> block worth a crap, we seldom use our TE, Our
> Special Teams seldom makes a play, we are in third
> and long every possession, We can't ever seem to
> get our players in space, Our LB'ers can't shed
> blocks, Our OG's just plain suck, We can't pick up
> a blitz to save our lives, none of our players win
> a contested play with regularity, and none of our
> receivers or RB's ever make a guy miss and take it
> to the house, or turn a little play into a big
> one...like happens all of the time in every other
> game I watch each week.
>
> But yeah, it's all on RT...
>
> Moore is not the guy, never has been the guy, and
> as such, should have been released two years ago,
> IMHO.
>
> I do agree with the taking a QB in every draft (or
> at least every other draft) school of thought
> however.

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

Well, Ken, it isn't going to do any good trying to say it is anyone else's fault except RT. Remember, just a few weeks ago he set the NFL record for completions and also had a perfect passer rating, but some folks still found fault with him. Give it up, Ken and anyone else who tries to support RT. In fact, I've read a few posters' comments here that surprised me. Up until now, it seemed as tho they understood what was going on with the Fins, but I guess I was wrong.

Stop looking for a QB? Nope, always draft one; one never knows what will happen (Brady comes to mind). Dump RT and draft one in the first round in the 2016 draft? There isn't anyone that good that would be available, and besides that, Miami wouldn't be in position to get that number one guy.

You pretty much nailed the problem, Ken. EVERYTHING is wrong with this team, from the owner on down to the waterboy(s).

People not pointing fingers at the defense? How about a 3rd and 15 and Dallas RUNS for a first down. Yeah, a real good defense...but its RT's fault.

Oh, BTW, just thought I would mention it...3 or 4 passes were DROPPED in the first quarter and a little into the second, and Mr. Hands himself (Landry) dropped two of them! But, everyone seems to look at RT's stats and say its his fault. Oh, much is being said about RT not being able to get first downs. How many 3rd and longs were there? And...not all were on RT. Penalties, guys! Real stupid play by both sides of the ball, along with special team gaffs, and as I have said before...play calling that left me scratching my head.

But, I guess it is just easier to blame RT.

I will rant a little more on other posts. :-)

Yes there are far more problems than Tannehill. But with the exception of a couple of games we have not been blown out in any games. That means we have been in every game. Pick sixes and safeties don't help. Blowing receivers who are running toward the endzone butt naked does not help either. In fact that means that some of those losses could have been wins.

Yes, if your whole team sucks, you need to replace A LOT OF PARTS ON YOUR WHOLE TEAM.....but that don't you guys realize the problem with what you are saying.........??????????????????????????????

Let's not replace Tannehill because the o line sucks... but let's not replace the o line because the running backs suck...and why replace the running back because the receivers suck....and why replace the receivers because our linebackers can't tackle THEIR RUNNING BACKS WORTH a damn and why replace the linebackers because the secondary sucks but why replace the secondary because after all, with the exception of Suh, our defensive line sucks.......................... on and on so that we don't replace anybody for the reason that everybody needs replacing.

ChyrenB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yes there are far more problems than Tannehill.
> But with the exception of a couple of games we
> have not been blown out in any games. That means
> we have been in every game. Pick sixes and
> safeties don't help. Blowing receivers who are
> running toward the endzone butt naked does not
> help either. In fact that means that some of
> those losses could have been wins.
>
> Yes, if your whole team sucks, you need to replace
> A LOT OF PARTS ON YOUR WHOLE TEAM.....but that
> don't you guys realize the problem with what you
> are saying.........??????????????????????????????
>
> Let's not replace Tannehill because the o line
> sucks... but let's not replace the o line because
> the running backs suck...and why replace the
> running back because the receivers suck....and why
> replace the receivers because our linebackers
> can't tackle THEIR RUNNING BACKS WORTH a damn and
> why replace the linebackers because the secondary
> sucks but why replace the secondary because after
> all, with the exception of Suh, our defensive line
> sucks.......................... on and on so that
> we don't replace anybody for the reason that
> everybody needs replacing.

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

I think I know what you are saying, Chryen, and granted, it is not realistic to replace all positions, although that would be nice.

IMO, EVERY position on this team is replaceable, except two...RT and Suh. Why? They are making too much money for anyone to even consider trading for them, so...that means other positions on the team need to be looked at.

RB? Miami is fine with LM and JA.

WR? Good stable of WRs, but Jennings probably won't be in Miami next season, which is why I said (earlier) that Parker needs to be on the field more.

TE? Miami is only OK at this position. If they can get a really good one, then do so.

OL. Cripes, where does one start? Pouncey is the only sure thing. Albert? Good player as long as he can stay healthy and at his age, that is no sure thing. Miami needs another T where if he goes down they have someone who can step in and do a good job, and soon take over. James will do on the right side. Guard? We have zip.

DL? Suh is a mainstay; he is going nowhere! This is the last year of Vernon's contract. What to do about Wake? No one else to really speak of.

LB? Miami has decent backers, but needs more solid play/players.

DB? Grimes is good, but not good enough to handle the top receivers. Seen him getting beaten too often this year. Who else is on the roster that can man the other side? No one.

S? Jones is having a very good year. He needs a partner.

K game? The rookies are doing well.

ST? Need someone to man the fort. Get Landry off the ST before he gets hurt.

Coaching? Gonna have to clean house.

FO? Not sure about what Miami has.

Ownership? Ross has to get his s**t together and get the right FO and HC otherwise this team will go nowhere.

There ya have it.

Maybe when i get to be chrens age i will be able to see the phins win...


Dial me up another 25 aprils.

Let's start Moore and see what happens. He is the last QB to lead the Dolphins to a winning record.

He reads defenses faster and has a quicker release.

That simple move would determine if the issues are OL, playcalling or the QB.

zaCK That MF.

Moore would play worse than RT...bank on it. (and I'm not saying RT is bad mind you.)

We need: OG-X2, LT-X1, CB-X2, LB-X2, S-X1, DE-X1 and WR-X1. After all of that is taken care of we need to take a backup QB.

Whoa. You're back dolphin.