Well, there were several cases where I think people were portraying your viewpoint accurately enough, but the one after you kept asking people to quote you was that exchange with resnor around post #325. It's a small point he made, but you didn't have to dismiss it. Nothing wrong with just admitting you should have stated your position better.
Against my better judgement, I'm going to remove ignore, cause I really want to know: Stephen Ross hired you last week as GM. What would you have done for the QB position? Obviously, you wouldn't have given Tannehill an extension...So what would your plan have been? Don't equivocate. You're the new GM, how are you going to "fix"the perceived QB problem?
I don't put that much stock into passer rating. Check out this article: https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2011/03/25/stat-sheet-misconceptions-passer-rating/ Favre's passer rating wasn't that great but he was a heck of a QB.
I'm not going to change my stance on what I've already said. Your question is a trap. I can't win that argument because Tannehill is the best option as of now. If I say I would've TRIED to build a great defense and running game, you can chalk it up as me not resolving the QB position. If you want to ignore me, fine, but it's a shame to miss out on a good debate just because you and I have some disagreements. Edit: Some of the greatest teams of all time were based on those principles and there've been a lot more types of teams like that than there have been teams led by great and/or highly paid QBs.
You're so paranoid. LOL. It's not a trap. You talk a big game, I'm asking, if you had been hired as GM, what would do about Tannehill? If you want a reliable game manager, even the most hardcore Tannehill hater would say that's what he is...and we're not paying outrageous money for that level of a player. So, you'd beef up the offensive line, and make make the defense better. That's good. You should do that no matter who your QB is. It's my opinion that with just an average oline and an average defense, Tannehill and the Dolphins are in the playoffs the last two years. Tannehill well probably never be the best QB in the league. He may not even be two or three. But he's got the talent, I think, to be top five. BTW, I don't mind a good debate. But I haven't had the feeling you were interested in that. I have been telling you what I see in your posts, as have others, and you simply disregard what is being said to you, and try to play semantics, acting like we're all the ones being ridiculous.
Let's just chalk up the semantics argument to me feeling I was being clear when apparently I wasn't. Assuming my role as GM started this offseason I would've tried to negotiate a lower amount considering he hasn't had a playoff win let alone a playoff appearance or winning season. I would've been happy with an average of $14.5 million per year even if it meant more guaranteed money. Opt out option after two seasons. Front load the contract if possible. I also wouldn't have paid Suh $20 million per season. I'd resign Odrick at a hometown discount and wait for an upgrade at another position like CB (could've kept Davis or Smith before). Maybe a MLB if one could've been signed or traded for or drafted (Perryman instead of trading down and getting Phillips or whatever the DT's name is). I'm not a big fan of Parker either. I would've traded down and tried to grab Tevin Coleman and Ty Montgomery. Or I would've waited until Tannehill improved so I could still get him for 6 years $96 million since Alex Smith has already had winning seasons and playoff appearances. Getting us to the playoffs wouldn't have drastically impacted contract negotiations to the point where we have to pay him more than we are now.
Here are just a few http://www.thesportster.com/football/10-worst-nfl-quarterbacks-to-win-a-super-bowl/
Odrick a hometown discount? Good luck. He was way overvalued in FA. Randy Starks declined severely. Suh was a need not a luxury free agent. They went out and got a play maker for the interior DL. A huge need.
that makes sense...so were on the hook for two years, fine, gives him enough time to either earn the rest of the contract, and if not, continue to look for a sleeper while hes does or doesn't
So, to be clear, you wouldn't pay Tannehill based off the non-performance of other parts of the team? I mean, that's what it sounds like when you start basing pay on playoff appearances...which, frankly, is where or disagreement started. Haha. Also, do you believe that Odrick would have nearly the impact of Suh? I get not wanting to tie up the money, but when you consider what he does for the other guys on the line (Wake???), and then think about how that effect trucks to the linebackers and then the corners, there's no comparison between Suh and Odrick. Not to mention, if Phillips is what people say he is, our defensive line is gonna be sick. I disagree with the price of Tannehill not going up. If he improves again next season AND we make the playoffs, his price would have skyrocketed.
How about the last 10 years (it's a different league now)? All SB winners had elite/great or above average QB's. Worst you find is someone like Eli Manning or Flacco, and both of those were great in the playoffs the years they won the SB.
agreed that he needs to use his legs, ive beaten that horse...ryan tannehill average .8 carry more a game than tom brady.. ridiculous.
slightly better passer than newton is not something I agree with at all, if newton didnt have his legs hed be nothing but a backup.
Go look up a list of greatest NFL teams of all time. And many of those teams had QBs who made the HoF. That link you gave isn't greatest teams, it's average QBs who won Super Bowls. Not what you originally claimed. I'm not disputing that average QBa have won Super Bowls, but the greatest teams of all time didn't generally have average our below average QBs.
much more willing is the understatement of the year..ryan is dead, if its not a read option, it aint happening..actually about 6 times in a year...dumb
and here we wind up full circle, yes, hes a decent qb who pisses me off because he wont engage a whole element to his game..or maybe he just doesnt have that element.
season starts in 65 days...at least for me it does...training camp is just as important as the games, preseason just as important, shaping the roster, just as important.
ill show you, but i thought about it a alot Res before I said what i said. now i cant find it...no hard feelings.
I believe Odrick and Davis/Smith with Grimes would be a safer, cheaper bet than paying Suh $20 million per year especially since he can get suspended at any point of the regular or post season. Plus drafting Perryman. I prefer depth in a game where you've got 22 starters and you need backups as well. Basketball is a different story. You could get away with a big 3 and role players. Like I said I believe if you're going to pay a guy a big contract, expect big things in return (at least willing the team to a winning season). Luck and RG3 did it. You could argue Newton and Wilson threaded the needle enough to do it. Edit: I think skyrocket is a stretch. Let's say he appears in a wildcard game. How much more do we pay then? Use other QBs as a comparison.
Tannehill is the guy. He's trending up. He can get it done. I'm thrilled they extended him. I'm also drunk, but that doesn't matter.
Not really. The Seahawks don't expect much out of Wilson and we all know they should've repeated had it not been for the worst playcall of all time. Marshawn and that defense are amazing. Eli had tremendous help with the Giants and took out an undefeated Patriots team that could've gone down as the greatest team ever. Flacco had an incredible TD-INT ratio during his Super Bowl run. He just got hot. Could happen with Tannehill or really any okay QB. There have been a bunch of mediocre to bad Super Bowl winning QBs.
He has it. He lacks the feel of the game because he hasn't always been a QB. That and I'm sure Ross wants to protect his investment.
That list only includes the 10 worst Super Bowl winning QBs. If you expand the list to average/mediocre it would be much more expansive.
Those of you who doubt the talents of Superstar Ryan Tannehill will feel foolish when he conquers the world.
Wilson's a pretty good QB, and not just in the postseason. Flacco and Eli getting hot just shows you need a good QB to win the big game in today's NFL. Keep in mind I was responding to that link of yours, where you could really argue those were below average or even crappy QB's. Don't think most football fans would argue Wilson or Flacco come anywhere close to being on the list. btw.. this isn't saying defense or a running game isn't important. The typical examples are with Elway and Peyton etc.. couldn't win the SB without them. Just saying QB is really important in today's game, and it's refreshing that we as Dolphin fans can finally start worrying about other positions instead of QB.
Ok 1st stop with the pitty party. It is very unbecoming. 2nd we all have our own opinions and if you are going to post make sure you back your opinion with facts and a respectable alternative. Well thought out posts are what wins respect around here. The types of posts you started out with, were not and that is why you got called out like you did. Could the others have been more respectful? Sure. But seriously if you don't agree with the contract that's fine, but don't come here saying I would trade him for picks or trade the #8 for more picks. Who would you have drafted. Who was looking to trade up, you need a trade partner. Keep your head up and keep posting. Just remember to always bring your A game.
