What do you think our plan is at QB?

Sorry guys, but holy f*ck, it's Joe Burrow.

"thetylernator wrote:

Sorry guys, but holy f*ck, it's Joe Burrow.

I just got done reading and was about to post that exact thing.

"gilv13 wrote:

That's classic Tannebaum there. Puts a premium on a QB's size and athleticism vs his actual ability to play QB.

lol.

He put a premium on size alone there. He’s clown shoes and I’m glad he’s long gone.

"AGuyNamedAlex wrote:

I think the issue is his argument works for every position except QB simply due to the demand of the position.

Also 25% is huge. If a team thought a QB had a 25% chance to be Russel Wilson they would take him #1 overall. The real odds are much lower.

I'd guess the projected odds of a non first round QB having a significant impact are probably under 3%.

If they believed he had a 25% chance to be a franchise QB they would take him in the first. The reality is using percentages actually shows how little the Seahawks did value him.

Historically about 14% (roughly 1 in 7) number 1 overall QBs turn into a HoF QB. Although that sounds low it is MUCH higher than any other pick in the draft.
So if your evaluation is that he had a 25% chance of being a HoF QB then you trade heaven and earth to get him.

When i think about it.. i think the plan should be to draft two qb’s..

i wouldnt mind drafting Anthony Gordon from Washington State with a 4th round pick.. but i get the feeling hes going to go earlier than that.. when I watched him play against Oregon a few weeks ago, i was like wow that kid is a baller..

Here is some vid.. he outplayed Herbert by a lot

“I think Tua is a good quarterback- but we're not looking for someone good at this time. Tannehill was good, Fitzpatrick is good. We're looking for a 10 year starter and I think Tua is nothing special compared to the average NFL talent today.”

This is a very inaccurate evaluation of Tua, Tannehill and Fitzpatrick..imo..

"Vertical Limit wrote:

When i think about it.. i think the plan should be to draft two qb’s..

i wouldnt mind drafting Anthony Gordon from Washington State with a 4th round pick.. but i get the feeling hes going to go earlier than that.. when I watched him play against Oregon a few weeks ago, i was like wow that kid is a baller..

Welcome aboard.
Now for a hard question. Are you willing to spend 2 of our 3 1st rd picks on 2 QB's? Not packaging 2 to get 1. Picking 2 Legit 1st round talents.

That's what I think they should do, and pick someone in the 5th or later to go with it. And pick a 1st rd QB next year too. Just keep shooting until you hit it.

"Puka-head wrote:

Welcome aboard.
Now for a hard question. Are you willing to spend 2 of our 3 1st rd picks on 2 QB's? Not packaging 2 to get 1. Picking 2 Legit 1st round talents.

That's what I think they should do, and pick someone in the 5th or later to go with it. And pick a 1st rd QB next year too. Just keep shooting until you hit it.

How will you ever find enough touches to determine the hit if you are drafting 3 QBs a year? That's insane.

I think the Cardinals showed a fairly bold way to go in ditching a first rounder quickly, and the Redskins with RG3 and Cousins wasn't a bad thing, but no, your proposal is way too much, especially for a team as generally starved of talent as we are.

"texanphinatic wrote:

How will you ever find enough touches to determine the hit if you are drafting 3 QBs a year? That's insane.

I think the Cardinals showed a fairly bold way to go in ditching a first rounder quickly, and the Redskins with RG3 and Cousins wasn't a bad thing, but no, your proposal is way too much, especially for a team as generally starved of talent as we are.

Before the rookie salary cap yes, I agree, too many QBs might be bad. Need three every year on the roster. Anyone we have now irreplaceable? Starting over couldn't hurt, keep Fitz and the top 2 rookies to fight it out.

Now...A Brees / Rivers type competition would be easy, Keep them both for a year, or two even to thoroughly evaluate if needed. If they both hit, trade one for another 1st or 2nd rounder, Like the pasties did with Jimmy G or the Chargers with Brees or damn near any QB thats ever started a game can get a 2nd seems like. Arizona traded their bust for a 2nd. The depreciation on 1st round QBS is low. We shouldn't draft 2 or 3 QBs every year, but we have the ammo next year and we HAVE to hit the target. People are willing to throw away a whole season to get the first pick in order to make sure we get the QB we want. Whats the difference? Take the shots. And yes, draft a QB EVERY year. It's THE MOST IMPORTANT POSITION. Why not have 2, or 3 and be a seller?

Would you guys sign Kapernick if his workout goes well?

"Not So Fast wrote:

Brian Flores, on Kaepernick's workout: "Like all players, we do our due diligence. We'll have someone there."

— Adam Beasley (@AdamHBeasley) November 13, 2019

Would you guys sign Kapernick if his workout goes well?

If he wanted to be the backup, sure.

"Not So Fast wrote:

Brian Flores, on Kaepernick's workout: "Like all players, we do our due diligence. We'll have someone there."

— Adam Beasley (@AdamHBeasley) November 13, 2019

Would you guys sign Kapernick if his workout goes well?

With our current roster and short term goals? Probably not.

"AGuyNamedAlex wrote:

If he wanted to be the backup, sure.

Do we really need a damm circus around here?

"pumpdogs wrote:

Do we really need a damm circus around here?

This season has been nothing but a damn circus

"Dol-Fan Dupree wrote:

This season has been nothing but a damn circus

Lol!Can't argue with that.

Although we will probably draft a QB, I don't think the Dolphins have given up on Rosen. Armando has an interesting article about how Rosen is working to improve behind the scenes. We all know he has the physical tools. He needs to improve the mental aspect of the game. Time will tell, but at least he is working his butt off and hasn't given up.

https://www.miamiherald.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/armando-salguero/article237362129.html

"Surfs Up 99 wrote:

Although we will probably draft a QB, I don't think the Dolphins have given up on Rosen. Armando has an interesting article about how Rosen is working to improve behind the scenes. We all know he has the physical tools. He needs to improve the mental aspect of the game. Time will tell, but at least he is working his butt off and hasn't given up.

https://www.miamiherald.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/armando-salguero/article237362129.html

If I were to try and fix Rosen, I would watch the tape with him and let him know that you cannot just trust your line, you have to have your escape route planned when you see the rush coming, the plan would be to play offscript a bit til they back off, step up immediately in the pocket, take off running when there is a lane, and just play to win, do not sit back and pretend that everything is going to be ok.

"djphinfan wrote:

If I were to try and fix Rosen, I would watch the tape with him and let him know that you cannot just trust your line, you have to have your escape route planned when you see the rush coming, the plan would be to play offscript a bit til they back off, step up immediately in the pocket, take off running when there is a lane, and just play to win, do not sit back and pretend that everything is going to be ok.

What they are doing is timing his throws and working on speeding up his progressions.

What is the plan? That's the million dollar question that none of us can answer isnt it? I'd hate to be the guy in the FO tasked with making it, but ultimately what I hope is that the GM, HC, & OC are all on the same page with 110% conviction that whoever they select is the guy. If they're wrong, they're wrong; it happens. It'll suck, no doubt, but for once I'd just like them all to be on the same damn page!

What do I hope or think? I like Tua the more I watch him. That being said though, I'd be nervous about selecting him now given the injury history. My other concerns are the fact that Alabama a few weeks ago didn't seem to miss a beat without him. When he was hobbling out there against LSU though, that effort won me over a bit more. To play as well as he did, while clearly fighting through pain/injury was impressive to me. My biggest concern though is the team he plays on. Is he a product of his environment, or is he one of the reasons they're as good as they are? I think he helps, no doubt, but the amount of talent around him & the lack of talent he routinely faces is cause for concern. If you watch HIM though, I think you see the talent & fundamentals that make him a good prospect. My concern though would be what happens when he's not surrounded by elite players everywhere in comparison to the competition. It already feels as if his body is breaking down, so what happens when he's got a lesser OL & bigger, stronger, faster players on D hitting him and chasing him around? Afterall, this isn't a 1 or 2 year commitment were making here, this is hopefully 12+ years we're talking about. So, to me, that's important.

I think Burrow has shown he deserves to be in the conversation right there with Tua. He looks like he's also got all the important traits you're looking for in a long term QB prospect as well. He's got alot of talent around him too, but I don't believe it to be anywhere near the level of that around Tua in Alabama. Fact of the matter to me is that the kid has simply shown that he's a winner & leader & has the skills and talent to go with it.

That being said I really wouldn't be surprised if this team elects to not take either of them that early. I think that would be a mistake though, although that being said, I haven't really researched some of the "lesser" prospects than the premier two.

I can see this team looking at filling as many holes as possible this year. Afterall, they created a large number of them. I can see them trading down with our first pick to accumulate more picks. I can see them drafting a QB later in round 1 with one of those additional picks. I can see them looking for another vet in the offseason, afterall, isn't it possible that Cam Newton is available? We have a plethora of picks next year as well, so it really wouldn't surprise me if they choose to fill holes this year. I'd prefer they take a QB early, but I can see them electing not to. Heck, with the draft capital we have this year and next, I'd take one this year & if it doesnt work out, take another next year. Keep doing it until you get it right.

All that being said, I can also likely see this team making a trade to get Ryan Tannehill back if he continues to have success in Tennessee. :sidelol: I'm kidding of course... but then again... that would be a total Miami Dolphins thing to do. :lol:

Personally, I feel Burrow is the best QB in the nation but there's no reason to talk about him at the moment since he'll be a Redskin or a Bengal. Neither of those teams will catch us in wins and neither will trade down.

Hebert and Fromm are a step down from Burrow/Tua in my opinion, but I think Fromm may have a little more upside since he hasn't had that one unstoppable go-to receiver that the others we're talking about had this season. I wouldn't hate either of these picks if we got them in the middle of the 1st round, but I think it's a mistake to take either of them at 3, 4, or 5. If either of them are the goal, I'm hoping we trade back and not pick in the top 5 at all.

Jalen Hurts...he's exciting since he's a Lamar Jackson clone that's done well with multiple college teams. His passing looks sharp this season and he's running all over defenses, but I don't think he's worthy of a 1st rounder. If we could get him in the 2nd or the 3rd then I'd be all-in on him as a prospect to be groomed for a couple of years...he is definitely not our 2020 starter though! So even if we took Hurts this team still needs a QB (unless we're starting Fitz or Rosen...which I'm fine with).

Jordan Love might declare this year but I personally haven't seen him play extensively. He seems to have a pump/hitch in his release though (sort of like early Tannehill) and he's probably a mid-rounder at best. I'd pass entirely. There are a few other names that will be in the mix, but I don't think any of them rate better than Hurts/Tua/Burrow/Fromm/Hebert.

That leaves us with Tua, who could definitely be had at #5 (and possibly even #35). With three 1st round picks, I think it's a no-brainer to grab him with Pitt's pick if he's still on the board in the mid/late teens...I'm not sure I get him at 5 though because even on the day of the draft, we still won't know if that hip is 100% NFL ready. The more I think about it though, I think it would be insane for him to return to college and try to prove he's the real deal on a sound hip- that could be a $15M+ mistake on his part.

Here's one other thing to think about though- we have 3 first round picks while most other teams have 1. For us Tua is a gamble, for everyone with one pick it's an insane bet on the kid's future. New England has shown interest and I think we'd have to take him in the first no matter what...even if we're not sure he will ever play at a high level again. The last thing we want is for Tua to be Brady's eventual replacement a few seasons down the road so I'm drafting Tua in the 20's no matter what if he's still on the board....even if we take Hebert or someone else earlier.

My gut reaction- we draft Tua in the teens and possibly Hurts in the 3rd round. Then we part ways with Rosen and plan on Fitzpatrick starting for 2020 and beyond...until Tua proves he's 100% or we release him. it's impossible to predict though because other teams could be all-in on Tua and willing to pay a top-10 pick for him....so we really just have to keep our ear to the ground and see what happens.

"KeyFin wrote:

Personally, I feel Burrow is the best QB in the nation but there's no reason to talk about him at the moment since he'll be a Redskin or a Bengal. Neither of those teams will catch us in wins and neither will trade down.

Hebert and Fromm are a step down from Burrow/Tua in my opinion, but I think Fromm may have a little more upside since he hasn't had that one unstoppable go-to receiver that the others we're talking about had this season. I wouldn't hate either of these picks if we got them in the middle of the 1st round, but I think it's a mistake to take either of them at 3, 4, or 5. If either of them are the goal, I'm hoping we trade back and not pick in the top 5 at all.

Jalen Hurts...he's exciting since he's a Lamar Jackson clone that's done well with multiple college teams. His passing looks sharp this season and he's running all over defenses, but I don't think he's worthy of a 1st rounder. If we could get him in the 2nd or the 3rd then I'd be all-in on him as a prospect to be groomed for a couple of years...he is definitely not our 2020 starter though! So even if we took Hurts this team still needs a QB (unless we're starting Fitz or Rosen...which I'm fine with).

Jordan Love might declare this year but I personally haven't seen him play extensively. He seems to have a pump/hitch in his release though (sort of like early Tannehill) and he's probably a mid-rounder at best. I'd pass entirely. There are a few other names that will be in the mix, but I don't think any of them rate better than Hurts/Tua/Burrow/Fromm/Hebert.

That leaves us with Tua, who could definitely be had at #5 (and possibly even #35). With three 1st round picks, I think it's a no-brainer to grab him with Pitt's pick if he's still on the board in the mid/late teens...I'm not sure I get him at 5 though because even on the day of the draft, we still won't know if that hip is 100% NFL ready. The more I think about it though, I think it would be insane for him to return to college and try to prove he's the real deal on a sound hip- that could be a $15M+ mistake on his part.

Here's one other thing to think about though- we have 3 first round picks while most other teams have 1. For us Tua is a gamble, for everyone with one pick it's an insane bet on the kid's future. New England has shown interest and I think we'd have to take him in the first no matter what...even if we're not sure he will ever play at a high level again. The last thing we want is for Tua to be Brady's eventual replacement a few seasons down the road so I'm drafting Tua in the 20's no matter what if he's still on the board....even if we take Hebert or someone else earlier.

My gut reaction- we draft Tua in the teens and possibly Hurts in the 3rd round. Then we part ways with Rosen and plan on Fitzpatrick starting for 2020 and beyond...until Tua proves he's 100% or we release him. it's impossible to predict though because other teams could be all-in on Tua and willing to pay a top-10 pick for him....so we really just have to keep our ear to the ground and see what happens.

Fitzpatrick starting in 2020 and beyond? Some of you are just gluttons for punishment. Yikes.

I think you guys are all wet when it comes to the plan.

You are all basing plans on who is to be selected or if you are unsure of who is to be selected you throw your hands in the air and say we just have to wait and see.

Well, the wait and see part is probably correct, but not for the reasons you have given.

The plan should be obvious. We have "baited our hook" with a lot of draft picks and have a lot of cash to use if we don't like the fish that are available for our hooks. This probably means that our plans are not person specific as much as they are position of need specific.

When our first selection comes up the FO is probably saying things like offense or defense, and in either of those cases it will probably be a lineman. If there is a positional player or a big fish (BPA) that can improve our Team more significantly than some extra picks could help us, then we take whoever that may be. If we can trade to get 3 or more picks for this pick we are likely to take it considering we have at least 2 more 1st round picks and enough cash to use in free agency to offset what we could not get with a known NFL commodity.

It is the option of having a very large number of these pick options that is the plan.

We will get the best of what we need the most, as our picks come up. To try and say it should be so & so or claim it must be position "A" is over focusing and impractical. The FO knows we need a lot of help in a lot of places and it will not all come in one player or even one draft. The fact that we are already set for a huge number of picks screams to me that the plan is to use our picks that best address our weaknesses with the players available at that point, tempered with the knowledge that we have a lot of selections this year and next year and can get some solid FA help in the near term if appropriate players are available and some usually are.

Our plan is to have an inordinate number of draft picks so that we are not limited in who we should consider at any point in the draft due to a low number of draft picks remaining. This is more likely then not to include trading down for even more picks if the reservoir of available talent for our greatest needs warrants it. This is a very different way of thinking about the draft and I think it is a great approach as long as we would have almost twice the number of picks as our competitors.

"Irishman wrote:

I think you guys are all wet when it comes to the plan.

You are all basing plans on who is to be selected or if you are unsure of who is to be selected you throw your hands in the air and say we just have to wait and see.

Well, the wait and see part is probably correct, but not for the reasons you have given.

The plan should be obvious. We have "baited our hook" with a lot of draft picks and have a lot of cash to use if we don't like the fish that are available for our hooks. This probably means that our plans are not person specific as much as they are position of need specific.

When our first selection comes up the FO is probably saying things like offense or defense, and in either of those cases it will probably be a lineman. If there is a positional player or a big fish (BPA) that can improve our Team more significantly than some extra picks could help us, then we take whoever that may be. If we can trade to get 3 or more picks for this pick we are likely to take it considering we have at least 2 more 1st round picks and enough cash to use in free agency to offset what we could not get with a known NFL commodity.

It is the option of having a very large number of these pick options that is the plan.

We will get the best of what we need the most, as our picks come up. To try and say it should be so & so or claim it must be position "A" is over focusing and impractical. The FO knows we need a lot of help in a lot of places and it will not all come in one player or even one draft. The fact that we are already set for a huge number of picks screams to me that the plan is to use our picks that best address our weaknesses with the players available at that point, tempered with the knowledge that we have a lot of selections this year and next year and can get some solid FA help in the near term if appropriate players are available and some usually are.

Our plan is to have an inordinate number of draft picks so that we are not limited in who we should consider at any point in the draft due to a low number of draft picks remaining. This is more likely then not to include trading down for even more picks if the reservoir of available talent for our greatest needs warrants it. This is a very different way of thinking about the draft and I think it is a great approach as long as we would have almost twice the number of picks as our competitors.

This thread is "what do you think our plan is at QB"....hence why we're talking about quarterbacks here. And unless Rosen is eventually going to be the guy, then we absolutely have to draft a QB this season. That's the whole point of tanking, trading away Tannehill, etc...we have to get our QB.