Nice pic, Cansez...but I digress... If he was the best corner we have, why was he the 3rd corner ?? Davis was a guy that in his 3rd yr still didn't get it. He was potentially the best corner we've ever had, but he never showed that potential consistently. He was benched by both Nolan and by this staff...there's a trend there. That isn't my lying to myself. The fact is, while he may have been our best corner talent-wise, he never showed enough of that on the field, at least to this point... I hope he does well in Indy, but he never set my toes afire here... Whether we suck again this year or not has nothing to do with whether VD would be better than Marshall at the CB spot, but whether the acclimation of the rookie QB, our poor WR staff, and the how quickly the rest of the offense and defense picks up the new schemes.
I will say this. To rebuild you would have had to have something constructed. This house hasn't been finished for some time.
I have been far too optimistic for this team..for way too long. If you noticed (I know you did), I was very positive when the Miami Heat was a mid pack playoff team shedding cap space for a particular year. That was three years worth of a plan. A plan that I could see although others didn't (Padre). But it was a plan. This is not a plan and looks like a complete hustle to me, ...a wasted year. In the NFL you don't waste years. A wasted year is a year off the prime of Jake Long, Cam Wake, Dansby, Pouncey, Smith, etc... You try to compete each and every year. Ireland has no interest. The NFL is unlike the NBA, where cap space is a real commodity to be protected and cultivated. You build a winner in the NFL with talent acquisition and building an asset base down the line has little value, because you can't project that what you have NOW will have value THEN.
Vontae Davis on his best day was good enough to float the idea that trading him was giving up on a season.
it's called a cumulative effect. Not bothering to enhance the offense in any way whatsoever with an entire offseason while starting a rookie QB is just the blaring siren that they don;t have any interest in competing this year.
I think that's a philosophy that could make you mediocre for years on end. Sometimes you have to take a step back to take a bunch forward.
why take a step back? You can build upon what you have without tearing it down and standing pat with a torn down product. All they have done is subtract.
I think there are times you have to take a step back in terms of physical talent in order to "pull the weeds" on the team and (eventually) create the team culture you want. If this were a team with an established head coach, a leader and adequate player at quarterback, and a healthy team culture, I'd be all for keeping players like Vontae Davis for their physical contribution. But on a team with a first-year head coach, a rookie QB, and a team culture that's heavily in flux and currently in the process of being established, Vontae Davis is a weed that needs to be pulled IMO.
I think you don't understand what a strawman is. Your own argument is that you build for now. Most people say when you bring in all new coaches and a rookie QB you aren't expecting to win now. That's why I asked a question. What's curious is instead of answering it you took the time to find a gif.
This is how they addressed their needs this year: Need: Playmakers in the passing game: Traded their best playmaker in the passing game for picks (Marshall). Drafted Tannehill. Drafted Egnew. Right side of the offensive line: Drafted J. Martin. Pass Rush help for Cam Wake: Incomplete. Safety: Stand pat. Overall DB depth: Traded the best DB on the team for picks, added R. Marshall. Where is the plan? Who have they added?
Bringing in a new offense, 2 new QBs (a Pro Bowl vet and a star rookie), a RT, a receiving TE, a handful of WRs and a potentially star RB is not enhancing the offense? This fan base still needs an enema.
Your post was a strawman. Trust me...rookie QB's make the playoffs. Having a rookie QB is not an announcement of futility.
Its confirmed, I just read the definition of strawman and it says its whatever Section wants to call strawman is a strawman. So my apologies. However, you only addressed half of the scenario. I guess if you addressed all of it then you'd realize....
This is what is called a "positive spin". They made one real net addition in Tannehil. ONE. and gave him no help.
let me see if you can understand this. I never said this. You seem to intimate that those things signify that we had no intention in competing. I say that's incorrect as rookie coaches and rookie QB's make the playoffs and compete all the time. I never argued against bringing in new coaches and a rookie QB. THUS...the strawman.
Do you genuinely think that Egnew, Miller or Martin will help Tannehill this season to a degree that a proven #1 WR would have? Really?
"Hey man, you can't expect them to address EVERY need in one offseason." "There were so many holes to fill, etc." The funny thing is that the guy who isn't a bad GM had a roster with so many holes that he didn't know where to begin. Ah yeah, that's right, I forgot. Every NFL team has a bunch of holes every year. Every team has a hole at QB, WR, TE, S, RT and DE. EVERY TEAM LOL.
well..the NFL says that you have to have 53 warm bodies on gameday. They don;t specify whether those warm bodies have to be any good at playing the sport. So you have that.
I explained it very well. I also didn't say you did, I asked if you felt that. Funny things about questions, they aren't statements. I know, weird. Here I'll explain it agai......nah why bother. We are in Sectionland where in a offseason with major turnover, you've decided we've made one move and move only. Sigh.
Yes, they made one positive move. That's obvious to everybody, SO FAR. (feeling pretty good about that number staying at 1 since Martin and Egnew have been terrible so far)
Lol, there you go pretending your opinion is not just fact but shared by everyone. Oh wait, I forgot we're in Sectionland. Egnew is not terrible and he hasn't been. Martin is improving and we'll see how everyone feels at the end of the year. Oh wait, there I go again, forgetting my place in Sectionland where its perfectly acceptable to decree a players worth after 3 preseason games.
Wow, Egnew hasn't been terrible and Martin is actually improving. I gotta say..I like FinDLand better than SectionLand. It's really positive and rosy over there. it's a Utopia. I will take a condo with a view please.
I think what Tannehill needs this season are receivers who run precise routes and are in the places they're supposed to be when he throws the ball. When this team is ready to contend, that can change to being receivers who can do that and who have greater playmaking ability.
That's precisely the issue I'm having with Jeff Ireland. If you evaluate him based strictly on how he drafted, he's indeed pretty average. There are GMs that do a whole lot worse than him on draft day. But for all the average drafting, he hasn't managed to build a team. Every offseason, we invest major ressources in the OL, and every offseason we have issues at OL forcing us to invest even more ressources (which, in turn, results in us having to neglect the already neglected positions). WR was a sore point when Ireland arrived and is an even sorer one now. With the exception of Cam Wake in FA we haven't done anything in the pass rushing department but stockpiled 3-4 DEs like there's no tomorrow. The one receiving TE he chose to draft comes from a program that's known for producing receiving TE busts.
You sound like you're in a position where you're tired of this team's losing, and you want to win now. Unfortunately that isn't going to jibe with a first-year head coach, a rookie QB, and the establishment of a winning team culture IMO. You're probably going to be pissed off all season.
Egnew: http://www.thephins.com/forums/showthread.php?71456-Michael-Egnew And Martin was 10 times better in the Atlanta game than he was in the Carolina game. That's improving.
He had to build a team that was after Parcells blueprint. Henne proves that. Parcells left and Sparano was just fired. Now he has to build a team that matches Philbin's blue print. Tannehill proves that.
Jibed pretty darn well with San Fran who never bothered to play the rookie QB and almost made the Superbowl with a QB that no one in here wanted over Matt Moore. The difference? For all the perceived lousiness of the Nolan and Singletary regimes, Harbaugh inherited a pretty strong nucleus of young prime players that's simply lacking on this team. The issue isn't the rookie QB or the rookie HC, it's that this roster has way too many holes to get fixed fast. And there's a reason for that.
I'd rather have him build a team that matches the fundamental principle of acquiring good talent. You can draft stud players that work in multiple systems. Unfortunately, Ireland acquired quite a lot of players that didn't even work in the system they were acquired for.
That's all well and good, but in the end you have two different teams, for precisely the reasons you've illustrated. Either way, you have to operate from where the team is now.
Because Ireland already conned Ross into believing there was enough talent on the roster to win. They just needed a better coach. And that new coach is Mike McC.......I mean Joe Philbin.
You also have to evaluate how you got there, and the guy in charge of talent acquisition is the logical starting point.
I suspect they're doing that. Notice that this coaching regime, unlike the last one, started with the drafting of a quarterback in the first round. Jake Long could've been Matt Ryan. This time "Jake Long" was Ryan Tannehill.
Sparano didn't pass on Matt Ryan to draft Jake Long. Ireland did. And let's not distinguish between coaching regime and personnel regime. The same guy is making personnel decisions.
