Laconfora says " it's highly unlikely"we sign Reggie.

Per Armando's Twitter and Rotoworld:


The Miami Herald suggests that Daniel Thomas is not a candidate to be the Dolphins' starting running back in 2013.
Reggie Bush is expected to walk in free agency, but Thomas has apparently fallen behind Lamar Miller. "Nobody I speak with is saying Daniel Thomas will take over the starting RB job next year. Nobody," said the Herald's Armando Salguero. In his two NFL seasons, the second-round pick out of Kansas State has managed just 3.53 yards per carry. Miller ripped off 4.90 yards per tote as a rookie in 2012.


So you can step back from the ledge, its Lamar Miller and his almost 5 YPC average.

 

I think there's a chance he could still resign.

 

So now Reggie Bush gets sole responsibility for 3rd and long situations.
That is real creative new way to express your hatred for the player.

 

Probably, but it really doesn't change my point.

 

You refuse to admit that there are opportunity costs involved with making draft picks. Sure everyone is going to miss someone (Tom Brady, Randy Moss etc.). But who were the players that were in play at your pick. 5 years out, Jake Long was the WRONG decision. There is no way to sugar coat it. Was he a Ryan Leaf or Vernon Gholston or Jamarcus Russell like bust? No. He played lights out for 3 years than broke apart.

But he was the WRONG decision. No other way to slice it. Atlanta has a franchise (I didn't say elite, just franchise) QB.

If we chose Jake, and he played lights out for 6 years then demanded superstar money and we didn't pay him, that's fine. That's business. That's the NFL. But if we're not paying him because his knees are going a la Dan Marino, than it wasn't the right decision. Looked at in a vacuum sure you can try to argue that. Looked at it in the sense of who we chose not to pick, it's the wrong move. Hindsight is 20/20 here.

 

It isn't a binary outcome. There is no right or wrong. There is a spectrum of outcomes. Jake Long wasn't the best pick, but that doesn't make him the wrong pick.

Anytime you draft someone who gives you multiple pro-bowl seasons, that is a very good outcome. Certainly it may not be the best possible outcome, but still very good.

 

So you're all for shelling out high value resources for players that aren't diverse enough to handle minor scheme changes? Interesting. To each their own.

 

You're talking in circles now. There is no right and wrong? Ever? Or just in this situation? Because you just spoke in absolutes, and only Siths speak in absolutes.

When you're #5, or #10 you can get away with not having the best outcome possible. When you pick #1 you are expected to have the best possible outcome. Any other choice is the incorrect one. There is nobody in front of you.

If we were to redo the draft we wouldn't be taking Jake Long. If our pick was the correct pick we wouldn't change our pick.

That doesn't make Jake Long a bust, or a bad player. But we did not choose the right person. At #1 overall, as you say there may have been better choices, you are supposed to land the right player.

If we picked #2 or #3 and got Jake Long, sure. We weren't in position to take first.

 

The phrase "Hindsight is 20/20" is incredibly appropriate here. The term is basically used to point out that someone is making an unfair criticism of a decision based on information that was not available at the time. That's exactly what you are doing.

There's no way Jeff Ireland should have known that Jake Long would have chronic injury issues. It's not a fair criticism of the decision, because there was at least as fair as I know no medical information to suggest that.

Likewise, I'm not sure there is a tremendous amount of wisdom or value in putting draft decisions in a context where the only possible success is the best possible player at that pick. That's not a measure anyone is realistically going to come out ahead of and ignores a large amount of diverse outcomes. Jake Long might not have been the best all things considered available when he selected, but he could both be reasonably expected and in practice performed quite close to it. That's a good pick.

 

Reggie is horrible. Totally lacks the vision required to hit holes that don't exist.

 

Again, if you want to hold NFL teams to the standard of drafting the best possible player available in hindsight, have at it. Every team can be made to look like fools by that standard. Its not a binary choice. There is a spectrum of outcomes. If Jake Long was the wrong choice, what exactly would Vernon Gholston have been? The wronger choice???

 

It's not a minor scheme change, Bush wasn't that expensive, and it really isn't all that unique a situation.

 

So you're saying if Reggie were a good player he'd have the vision to be hitting holes that don't exist? What?

 

Sarcasm. I'm saying Reggie is a good player who is being unfairly blamed for not hitting holes that don't exist.

 

D'oh. Apologies. It's sad that such blatant sarcasm is being confused for truth on this forum because it is so similar to posts that are meant genuinely

 

The information we had at the time was that we needed a QB, didn't have one, and that Vernon Carey just played LT for us and didn't do too badly. That's the information we had at the time. Turns out that Jake Long is a good LT. And Matt Ryan is a franchise QB.

 

Yes, that is your job, to pick BPA. I'm not saying missing on one pick and you deserve to be fired on the spot. I'm saying, Jake Long was the incorrect pick. That's all. Gholston is a worse pick. You say there is a spectrum, and then you ask me this question? Duh, it's a spectrum. Matt Ryan on top. Perhaps even Chris Long above him (perhaps). Gholston is a disaster.

Every other pick except the BPA is the incorrect pick. Just how it is. You can build a team with incorrect picks as long as they are still good picks. Passing on Tom Brady was a mistake every single pick until his. Those are the facts.

 

Which doesn't at all address how Matt Ryan was perceived at the time. He wasn't at all a strong candidate for #1 overall, even with that need considered.

 

I'm not sure why this is valuable. You're not able to tell a bad draft from a good draft, much less any level of nuance in-between.

 

This is right. Matt Ryan's film at the time was mediocre at best, and really hard to justify as the #1 overall.

The only guy that was really hot for Matt Ryan was Mike Mayock. THE ONLY GUY (that I could remember)

Having said that....opps!

 

And Jake Long was a right tackle!



Nobody was the sure fire #1 pick. IIRC, it was Long, Long and Ryan, with Dorsey behind, and Gholston in the caboose.

Parcells all but admitted the reason he chose Long was he was scared to rate QBs. So we got Long because our FO lacked the cojones to go for a QB that high. Atlanta loved Ryan so much they put out feelers to trade with Miami for the first pick for him. They have cojones.

 

Welcome to the Truth. We have cake. Enjoy.