If Paxton Lynch were available at #13, wouldn't that be considered "falling into our lap"?

Considering he was the projected #1 overall pick and 1st QB taken for quite awhile before Goff solidified himself and Wentz jumped up the board like a mad man.

mizzou15 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "Drafting a QB in round 1 follows the same path of
> handcuffing Tannehill instead of helping him. "
>
> This thing is about helping the Phins more than
> Tanne. Tanne has been here for 4 seasons again
> crap or get off the pot and that goes for the
> other guys too.
>
> Misi has been here what 7, and finally had an avg
> year last year and people are crowing about it.
> His solid has been very mediocre.
>
>
> So yeah Im still banking that guys like Taylor,
> Turner and Thomas can improve with better coaching
> like everyone else.

RESPONSE: Way to preach the Gospel!

ChyrenB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> JoeFootball Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Drafting a QB in round 1 follows the same path
> of
> > handcuffing Tannehill instead of helping him.
> >
>
> Like Shula did to Woodley by drafting Marino?

Well that was a reach.

Woodley is not Tannehill and Lynch sure as hell is no Dan Marino.

captkoi Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ChyrenB Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > JoeFootball Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Drafting a QB in round 1 follows the same
> path
> > of
> > > handcuffing Tannehill instead of helping him.
>
> > >
> >
> > Like Shula did to Woodley by drafting Marino?
>
> **************************************************
> *****
>
> Apples and oranges.
>
> Marino fell into Shula's lap.

and the 1983 Dolphins were a team that was filling a need as well as taking BPA They needed a QB badly. We just went to a SB with a piss poor QB.

What we did in 1983 was more similar to Denver in this years draft than Miami.

They won a SB with piss poor QB play and great defense. We went to the Superbowl thanks to the Killer B's (and a strike).

Denver won a SB with 3900 passing yards, 19 td's and 23 int's.

Don't think for a minute that they wouldn't give their 1st pick and probably next years first pick for a QB that threw for 4200/24/12. They already offered a 2nd for Sam Bradford.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/28/2016 04:33AM by JoeFootball.

ChyrenB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Depends on how you define "falling into a lap".
> True, Marino was the Sixth QB drafted in the first
> round and most had rated the others ahead of him
> but it was because they downplayed his success at
> Pitt.
>
> But the important link I brought up was the fact
> that Woodley had been in the SuperBowl the prior
> year.
>
> When thinking of a shopping lists, his position
> would normally not be on an organizations'
> shopping list, particularly that very team that
> had made it to the SuperBowl a few months earlier
> with a quarterback basically only in his second or
> third year (was it) after Griese had retired.

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

Sure, Miami went to the Super Bowl with Woodley as its QB, however, it wasn't Woodley who got them there. Miami had an excellent defense, and as far as offense went, it was WoodStrock that got them there.

Shula was shocked when Marino was there for Miami's pick.

As Shula said: "Woodley was an athlete playing QB; Marino was a QB playing QB."

Phins5.0 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If Paxton Lynch were available at #13, wouldn't
> that be considered "falling into our lap"?
>
> Considering he was the projected #1 overall pick
> and 1st QB taken for quite awhile before Goff
> solidified himself and Wentz jumped up the board
> like a mad man.

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

No, Lynch would not be "falling into our lap" at 13.

True, way back when there was talk of Lynch being the #1 QB in this year's draft, however, for some reason, he has fallen. Right now, he is projected as a second rounder with someone probably moving up to take him late in the first. There have also been rumblings the last couple of days that he just may go in the top 15.

Hard to say how any team is looking at QBs. Miami is not taking a QB in the first round.

He will fall just like Joe Flacco did in 08....oh wait.

ChyrenB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> JoeFootball Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > ChyrenB Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > JoeFootball Wrote:
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > > -----
> > > > Drafting a QB in round 1 follows the same
> > path
> > > of
> > > > handcuffing Tannehill instead of helping
> him.
> >
> > > >
> > >
> > > Like Shula did to Woodley by drafting Marino?
> >
> > Well that was a reach.
> >
> > Woodley is not Tannehill and Lynch sure as hell
> is
> > no Dan Marino.
>
> RESPONSE: Come on, Joe. I've never known you to
> play fast and loose with the discussion before.
>
> First off, I, for one, said nothing about Lynch, I
> remember in this thread or another I said if we
> could trade up to 3, I'd take Goff or Wentz so if
> someone else said Lynch, reply to them.
>
> Secondly, for all the passing effectiveness we
> have, we might as WELL have Woodley as Tannehill.
> At least he got his passes off and given our
> running game, that was not as important a part of
> our offense. And when we lost in the SuperBowl to
> the Redskins..............err.............THEIR
> RUNNING BACK, A GUY NAMED JOHN RIGGINS, did a tiny
> bit to help them win that game by running the ball
> TOO!!!

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

Trading up to 3 would have gotten neither QB.

RT vs Woodley and you would take Woodley? I "think" you were around for that period of time and watched the games. Woodley was no RT. RT is way better than Woodley. Woodley had some good games, true, but there is no comparison between the two.

I also mentioned in a different post...during that time, it was WoodStrock that got Miami to the SB.

As I also previously mentioned, Shula described his QBs as such: "Woodley was an athlete playing QB; Marino was a QB playing QB."

RT is a QB playing QB, who happened to also be a WR for a while.

Can't agree Cap. It is no measure of objectiveness but I am far more frustrated with Tannehill than I ever was with Woodley. Maybe expectations has something to do with that but it is the truth as to my feelings.

need to trade for Aaron Murray or Kevin Hogan

ChyrenB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Can't agree Cap. It is no measure of
> objectiveness but I am far more frustrated with
> Tannehill than I ever was with Woodley. Maybe
> expectations has something to do with that but it
> is the truth as to my feelings.

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

Woodley had a much better team around him AND....a HOF coach.

captkoi Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ChyrenB Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Can't agree Cap. It is no measure of
> > objectiveness but I am far more frustrated with
> > Tannehill than I ever was with Woodley. Maybe
> > expectations has something to do with that but
> it
> > is the truth as to my feelings.
>
> **************************************************
> *****
>
> Woodley had a much better team around him AND....a
> HOF coach.

True but that only stretches so far. If Woodley were on this team, I just couldn't see him taking as many sacks. In fact, he was more than a bit of a runner himself.

I guess 33 years passing tends to cloud the memory.

Woodely was sacked on 1 out of 8.9 attempts in his last year as a starter in Miami. Tannehill was sacked 1 out of every 13 attempts last year.

Now could that have been that you took Woodley's worst year and Tanny's best?

ChyrenB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Now could that have been that you took Woodley's
> worst year and Tanny's best?

No. I took both of their most recent years in Miami and each of their 4th seasons. Tannehill's "best" year or when he had the fewest amount of sacks, was his rookie year with 35. It was about the same average per attempt.

I'm not sure Woodley had a "best year". LOL

This is a guy who is a true testament to the theory that a bad QB can still win games if surrounded by talent and/or great coaching.

He has a 27-12-1 record in Miami but his best scoring season was when he threw 14 TD's and 17 int's. As a matter of fact, he never threw more TD's than int's in Miami, has a 52.8 career completion percentage and never threw for more than 2,470 yards.

I think your lack of frustration with him (compared to RT) stems from the fact that we won games (despite him), thanks to the Killer B's.

JoeFootball Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ChyrenB Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Now could that have been that you took
> Woodley's
> > worst year and Tanny's best?
>
> No. I took both of their most recent years in
> Miami and each of their 4th seasons. Tannehill's
> "best" year or when he had the fewest amount of
> sacks, was his rookie year with 35. It was about
> the same average per attempt.
>
> I'm not sure Woodley had a "best year". LOL
>
> This is a guy who is a true testament to the
> theory that a bad QB can still win games if
> surrounded by talent and/or great coaching.
>
> He has a 27-12-1 record in Miami but his best
> scoring season was when he threw 14 TD's and 17
> int's. As a matter of fact, he never threw more
> TD's than int's in Miami, has a 52.8 career
> completion percentage and never threw for more
> than 2,470 yards.
>
> I think your lack of frustration with him
> (compared to RT) stems from the fact that we won
> games (despite him), thanks to the Killer B's.

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

Also had A. Franklin at FB.

Woodley was not a great QB, but it was a different era; and it's very hard to compare QBs of that era with QBs of this era. Woodley's best year for Miami was 1981. The NFL leader in QB rating that year was Fouts at 90.6. (With that rating, Fouts would have been 20th in 2015.) In his best year, Woodley's QB rating was about 21 points lower than the league leader. In 2014 and 2015, Tannehill was about 21 points lower than the league leader in passer rating.

Everyone is concentrating on passing and missing the point that Woodley had running legs as well.

Tanny stands back and gets sacked and does not either have the common sense or the authority to take off and run when nothing is open.

Deer in the headlights.

Northeast Fin Fan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Woodley was not a great QB, but it was a different
> era; and it's very hard to compare QBs of that era
> with QBs of this era. Woodley's best year for
> Miami was 1981. The NFL leader in QB rating that
> year was Fouts at 90.6. (With that rating, Fouts
> would have been 20th in 2015.) In his best year,
> Woodley's QB rating was about 21 points lower than
> the league leader. In 2014 and 2015, Tannehill
> was about 21 points lower than the league leader
> in passer rating.

You said you cannot compare them but then you proceeded to compare them.

A few things are certain. A QB is more valuable in this era and the QB's of today are better passers with more skilled weapons.

One other certainty....David Woodley was NEVER a more productive QB than Tannehill. He threw the ball to to the other team more than he threw TD's.

As a former LSU QB, I would rank him right up there with Phil Roberson.

I didn't compare them at all. I compared how they did relative to other QBs in their eras.

It was a different era. Go back to Stabler and Namath. They both threw more INTs than TDs; yet Namath is in the HOF and Stabler should be. NFL rules and style of play made passing much harder in the 70s and early 80s than it is today.

hard to compare years. the coverage allowed back then made for lower ratings.

Northeast Fin Fan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I didn't compare them at all. I compared how they
> did relative to other QBs in their eras.
>
> It was a different era. Go back to Stabler and
> Namath. They both threw more INTs than TDs; yet
> Namath is in the HOF and Stabler should be. NFL
> rules and style of play made passing much harder
> in the 70s and early 80s than it is today.


I always thought that the only way Joe made it to the Hall was because he played in NY.

Playing in NY helped; but leading the first AFL team to win a SB helped too. Also the fact that he guaranteed victory.

A HOF QB with a career passer rating of 65.5.

One can made a decision and still not get sacked. One just has to make it faster.

He doesnt even has that thing that when a defender is getting near by...he just slides to either side avoiding the rush.......then delivers the ball....


Not comparing him to marino..never going to happen.......but marino had that sense that he slid to either side and bought time...


It seems tannehill locks into a receiver and doesnt let his eyes off a receiver until he gets sacked.

He is just not very good at it....



And for everyone else that supports tannehill......All this happens when you are a receiver turned Qb....And only played a handfull of games in college....