I think it should be a joint decision. If they're not on the same page, it's not going work. Philbin probably isn't saying, "I want Jennings at $x amount". "He's probably saying I want these types of pieces/players." Ireland should then be talking to Philbin about which players he thinks he could get and how they fit into the team Philbin is envisioning. Philbin would then tell Ireland about any insights he has about those players. For example (and this is a completely fictional hypothetical), Philbin might say, "I want players that attack these areas of the field or players I can use in this way". Ireland might say, "how about a combination of Jennings, WR and Finley, TE?" Philbin might say, " Jennings fits, but Finley drops too many passes or runs his routes too inconsistently". Then Ireland could provide some other options. Ideally, after he identified a few targets, Ireland would provide Philbin with some film on them and get Philbin's opinion on whether or not or how he would use those players.
I think this was the biggest problem with Fisher and why Ross wouldn't agree to his demands. Fisher comes in and all he wants is final say. I think people picture Ireland hissing and shirking from the light when Fisher says this, but in reality Fisher was illustrating he has no interest in being completely collaborative. With Philbin, the crux of everyone's job is clearly defined and that fosters an environment conducive to collaboration. I think, what we saw last off season was a very limited understanding of what Philbin was looking for, and after this full season Ireland has a firm grasp as to what Philbin is looking for. This is also why i have a hard time knocking Ireland for the time Parcells was here. GM's don't just acquire any old player they like, they acquire the right players for the blueprint they are following. I think Ireland will get Philbin what he needs, and if he does then we're in the playoffs. If we don't make the post season, I'll want a new GM.
Absolutely.........NOT. You seriously want to trade a proven solid productive WR in order to find out what Binns Fuller and Matthews has? OR, lets keep the talent we know we have and dump Binns after we draft a wr or keep him and see who pans out. I dont get this addition from subtration thought here KM. I like Matthews, Fuller or Binns can go.
I didn't, because there's a huge difference between not only WR & QB but a back up and an established proven vet.
As I recall Fisher didn't want final say, he wanted it to be 50/50 with the chance to veto a move if he didn't agree. Ross wouldn't budge, which was probably the smart move. That type of convoluted authority and structure was not a good idea.
Good post. IMO Ireland generally found talent that fit what the coaching staff wanted within the constraints of what was available. When the coaches changed, what they wanted changed so Ireland now has to remake the roster to fit what the new coaches want. That doesn't necessarily mean that the evaluations were poor. It could just mean that what you're looking for has changed.
No it isn't. I want player A so we're drafting player A is final say. I want player A, do you agree? No. Ok, we will call Stephen Ross to settle this then. That's not final say. That's a 50/50 power structure.
Why would the money be the same? I think the fact that he switched offenses and had a pretty "meh" season, combined with his skill-set should be a bit problematic.
No. Ireland wants player A and Fisher vetoes it. they don't get Player A. That's final say. Its Fisher basically oking every acquisition. If Fisher with veto power wants Player A and Ireland wants Player B, who ends up on the team if Fisher can veto Player B?
Fisher wanted an arrangement where someone else would settle the dispute, or they would move on to a different player. The term "final say" is contractual language for a reason. It means complete and final authority. Not having that in your contract means you don't have complete and final authority.
http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/20...1_miami-dolphins-owner-jeff-fisher-steve-ross It was a partnership arrangement, but Ireland actually had final say, according to this.
I think you are kidding yourself if you think they wouldn't work together on that decision or that Ireland would spend big money on a player that Philbin coached for years if Philbin says he isn't worth it. If Philbin doesn't lobby for Jennings or say that he thinks he is a great player, I would be absolutely shocked if Ireland were to give Jennings a $10 million per year contract.
How would Philbin not think Jennings is a great player? I mean, based on what Philbin saw Jennings do in 2010 and 2011 it'd be a little absurd to not assume that Joe Philbin thinks Jennings is a great player.
Me too. Wasn't shocked. But I was surprised. You're right. The situation is similar. Like last year, I'll be surprised if Jennings isn't signed here.
The Flynn decision makes perfect sense looking back. Ireland knew he was drafting Tannehill, Moore was still under contract, and he probably had it in the back of his mind that he wanted to take a flier on Garrard. There just wasn't a reason to give Flynn $10M guaranteed knowing all that. No such situation exists with Jennings. I would be shocked if Miami doesn't pursue him.
Because he might think Aaron Rodgers is a great QB who will enable virtually any quality WR to put up big numbers. He might also notice that Rodgers put up 4300 yards, 39 TDs and a 108 passer rating without having Jennings for most of the year. And he might look at the numbers that Cobb and JJones put up in GB in much more limited action this season as confirming this (Cobb's yards per pass route run in 2012 was higher than Jennings' in 2011 and JJones' YPRR in 2011 and 2012 was virtually identical to Jennings'). Nelson's metrics in 2011 were better than Jennings' too. So I guess it is possible that Philbin concludes that it just so happens that GB has had 4 elite WRs the last 2 years, with Jennings being one them, but I think it may be more likely that he concludes that Jennings is just a good receiver, but not special or irreplaceable, and for that one doesn't need to and shouldn't spend $10 million per year.
I think the situation is pretty similar. Based on the amount of collaboration we know Philbin and Ireland have, the Flynn offer looks like a situation where Philbin said that Flynn is a good player who would be nice to have on the team, but he isn't special and shouldn't be paid like he is. It wouldn't surprise me at all if the same thing happens with Jennings. Jennings will probably be looking for a Vincent Jackson/Desean Jackson type contract ($10-11 million per year) and may well be hoping he gets that to reunite with his former OC. Philbin and Ireland obviously didn't think either of the Jacksons last year were worth that kind of money (as neither was even brought in after the Marshall trade) and very well may not think Jennings is worth that kind of money either. They may offer him a more reasonable $6-7 million deal, which may offend Jennings who then signs for that (or a little more) with someone else.
Jennings has been and extremely productive and efficient WR his entire career. Pre-Rodgers AND when Rodgers was new and just getting his feet wet in the league. This, IMO, is the most telling. Philbin was there through all of this. And if I'm not mistaken, there has been research done on this board that proves that the GB offense with Jennings is a more productive offense than without Jennings.
That is certainly possible. Philbin could also tell Ireland that he is a fantastic WR that would greatly improve the Dolphins receiving corps and is worth going after.
Sure, that's possible. I'm not saying Philbin won't say he's worth going after, I just don't think the Dolphins will go over $7-8 million per year for him.
Unfortunately, players cost money in free agency. And yes, sometimes you have to overpay. Had Ireland not put us in this position by both creating a bad situation at WR with the trade of Marshal last year, and then doing nothing to replace him at that time, then perhaps we wouldn't be in this precarious situation and wouldn't have to worry about overpaying Jennings or Wallace or whoever. But such is life. I would suggest that if Joe Philbin has any designs on keeping this job long term then he is advised to win enough games to get us into the playoffs next year. If he doesn't we will likely have a new GM and thus Philbin's seat is immediately scorching. I wouldn't be that worried about overpaying Jennings by a grand total of 4-6 million over the life of the contract
And GB has had a future HOF QB his entire career. Just as they did when Antonio Freeman, Robert Brooks, Bill Schroeder and Donald Driver consistently put up 1000 yard receiving seasons. Freeman, Brooks and Schroeder left GB in their late 20s (like Jennings is now), but did nothing thereafter and were out of the league within a few years. Rodgers first season playing was a 4000+ yard, 28 TD season, so his feet were dripping wet from the time he became the starter. And no, it is not really true that the GB passing offense was more productive with Jennings than without him. Yes, the GB passing offense in 2011 was historic -- the best ever. One can't expect that level of production to be maintained. But its 2012 passing offense (largely without Jennings or a healthy Jennings) was more productive and efficient than its 2010 passing offense.
Players do cost money in FA. You don't really have to overpay, but it does happen and may be warranted at a position or two. I would just save my overpaying for someone I think is special or unique. I just don't think Jennings is. He's a good receiver who has put up nice numbers in an offense in which every receiver has put up nice numbers. He's not especially fast, big, strong or dynamic with the ball in his hands. I wouldn't spend $10 million per year on that. When teams overpay in FA it usually results in regret a year or two later. This teams' experience with that is pretty obvious.
We don't have much choice. Which is the direct result of the way this team has been managed since Ireland has been in charge. Our WR situation is simply that bad. If the guy is worth $7 million per year, I don't have much of an issue paying $10, espescially when the contract can be structured in such a way to minimize the risk via guarantees, roster bonuses, whatever. This team doesn;t have the luxury of another 7-9 or 8-8. We need to be in the playoffs next year.
Of the FA WRs, Wallace is my preferred choice. I'd like to re-sign Hartline too if that can be done without breaking the bank. Wallace, Hartline, Bess and and RMatthews can be a pretty good group. I have some fascination with Tavon Austin, but not in the first. Not sure where he will go in the draft -- I suspect it will depend to a certain degree on his Combine times (as silly as that may be).
We need two quality receivers (wherever they come from), an upgrade at TE, and upgrades at corner, possibly FS. If we could add a pass rusher too that would be rgeat, but not as critical as the other positions. If we did all that, and presuming Tannehill played better, then we could be a playoff team
We certainly could get those things done, but until we do then it's all just talk. Also, I don't presume that you can count on rookies, so even if we drafted Bailey in the 2nd round, I wouldn't necessarily count on him being a huge factor. Much rather handle WR in free agency and use the draft for CB/S/De
That would be my preferred choice too at this point although I still think the Dolphins should draft someone in the top 3 rounds as well with Stedman Bailey being my top choice. I think that gives the Dolphins a very well rounded, young WR corps that would boost Tannehill's development and make this a very potent offense for some time.
I really don't think a 2nd WR is necessary if we re-sign Hartline. Hartline is plenty good as a team's second best WR and Bess is plenty good as a third guy and slot guy. I don't see any reason why Rishard Matthews can't also be a solid contributor. Bailey put up some gaudy stats, but so did Matthews in college and Matthews is bigger and stronger. I don't have a great sense of how fast Bailey really is, but I'm not sure he'll be better than Matthews. We don't need more than 4 legit WRs. Austin is somewhat unique and could be a huge weapon, so he intrigues me if available at the right part of the draft. I'm a big BPA proponent. If the best player available is a WR I'd take one, but I wouldn't necessarily target one if we re-sign Hartline and sign Wallace.
