This is a moderated phorum for the CIVILIZED discussion of the Miami Dolphins. In this phorum, there are rules and moderators to make sure you abide by the rules. The moderators for this phorum are JC and Colonel.
I would for sure take a first from any suckers willing to do that. 2nd or 3rd I really don't know. Maybe a swap for 1st and a second.
I do think Tanne will recover this season and play well. Do I think we make the playoffs? No...Too many holes to fill...He is a QB that can take you places if you have a good team around him. He is not good enough to do it on his own. There are very few of those around any more.
Hence the reason I do not agree on drafting a QB in the first. Or at least reaching. If one of these top 4-5 QB's that everyone drools over is available when we pick I would not be upset. I do not think it would be the right move but I would leave with it.
> Hey the phins gave landry for peanuts.
> Maybe there are other suckers like the phins out
The only way that happens is if Tannenbaum is fired, gets hired by another team, and we trade Tannehill to that team. Tannenbaum is like that nerdy kid that can only make friends by giving away all of his toys.
If we were to trade RT for a first...not gonna happen BTW, and then draft Mayfield we would not be in a better situation because we'd still need another QB and we'd still not know if the new kid is any good.
As far as RT is concerned, he will be fine, after all he has never been a great scrambler anyway, more of a roll out threat and a throw on the run guy. He will still be able to do that.
I strongly support drafting a QB this year who will (a) push Tannehill now and (b) be a legitimate long-term option for being developed into the kind of QB who can lead a consistent competitor (i.e. challenging for playoffs & more year in, year out). If that guy is there at 11 and you're convinced he's that guy (don't have the time, inclination or heart to delve into the idea of Tannenbaum being "convinced he's that guy"...but nevertheless) then I don't have a problem with the 11 pick being used on him. I'm not saying KC & Houston have been proven right or wrong by having selected QBs they were convinced about last year in about the same position of the 1st round, but they had their convictions and pulled the trigger. For us this year, the pick # isn't as important to me as the idea that they're more than just a (cue Brady commentary) 6th round afterthought that's barely gonna see any attention given to his real, legitimate development.
That said, I do believe Tannehill demonstrated in an injury-stopped 8-game run in 2016 that he can succeed at a relatively high level in Gase's system. In that run - which included a stinker w/Baltimore where the whole team sucked - he had a cumulative rating of 100. Assuming he's healthy (I know, big assumption), I don't see a good reason why it shouldn't be expected that he could continue to have success in Gase's system. I think the OL should be stronger than 2016. In interest of seeing how Landry's departure might impact him, I noticed that in 2016:
- in the games leading up to PIT where Tannehill began a good 8-game run, Landry was racking up yards and catches in what were, generally speaking, losses (catches/game except TEN were 7+)
- in the 8 game run, the only time he had more than 7 catches was the stinker BAL loss where he had 11
- every game except PIT in 2016 where he had 7+ catches, we lost...every game he had 6 or fewer (except TEN) we won
I'm not saying this is a rule or anything especially because of the small sample size, but Tannehill seems to play best and the team wins most when the offense (a) doesn't require Tannehill to throw 35+ times (i.e. is balanced) and (b) the passing game doesn't revolve too much around Landry
Not trying to prop up Tannehill or bad-mouth Landry...just letting the data/results speak for itself. This may speak to what Gase had in mind in letting Landry go and "replacing" him with 2 players that seem relatively different from one another.
I also have no problem with us drafting a QB this year...I just think trading RT and replacing him outright with a rookie is stupid. Chyren, a scrambler to me is a Vick, Young, first year RGIII type guy...RT has never been that type of player. RT is mobile but not like that.
RT also has been cleared for full off season participation which is as close as your going to get to a doctor saying he's good to go. He'll be fine.
All that said, if I'm the GM, I take Falk in the second this year. I just don't get rid of RT to do it. I don't think any of the top four make it to 11 and I don't trade up because of the cost involved and our team needs.
A LB at 11 and Falk in the second is to me our best option. Unless you think you can work with Jackson over the next two years and fix his throwing, like the Pats apparently do.
Future of the franchise earning valuable benchtime is an extremely silly (being kind)statement. Only valuable time is on the field. Want to trade him? Fine get a damn fine replacement, but you better get him an Oline and running game also. Cant do it without draft picks.
You guys may want to take a closer look at this "magical" 6 game streak. Take a look at the competition, the horrible starts and why we had to come from behind, and ajayi's contributions in those games.
Tannehill was very pedestrian.
Hanging your hat on 6 games against bad teams in his 5th year isn't the best argument.
We've tried upgrading the talent around T-hill but have never given him any real competition. It's time we do that.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/14/2018 04:21AM by jsm08.