What hasn't this franchise tried since Marino / Shula? Big Hint - it invovles the QB

I agree it's not the end all be all, but the idea that castoffs and inferior prospects are going to fix the problem is just as ludicrous.

 

So what.

 

Of course some first round picks will be busts...that's why it often takes more than one go to get your franchise QB. But not trying GUARANTEES you won't get a franchise QB in the first round.

 

I don't think you get what I'm trying to say. I'm not saying don't draft a QB in the 1st. I am saying, don't overpay looking for a "franchise qb" in the 1st when the talent isn't there, just bc you're enamored with the idea that you need a "franchise qb" to be successful.

There's a lot of 1st round QBs that are starters, but that doesn't mean they weren't grossly overpaid for and overrated.

Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco, Alex Smith, etc, etc. are all starters and none of which should of been drafted that high.

I'm not at all against taking the 2nd or 3rd, etc. QB off the board in the 1st round, but not to roll the dice just to get a "franchise qb." I'd rather take the BPA to our many other areas of weakness every time.

 

That's fair. But there have been plenty of QB's we could have gotten and didn't that have been franchise in the first round, all because we didn't prioritize QB as our number one need.

 

As a Dolphin fan we can look at our own teams history, the three best QBs the Dolphins have had were all taken in the 1st round. Thats not counting David Woodley because he was drafted in the 8th round and he was not considered to be that good of a quarterback. He shared time as starter with Don Strock.

 

I can live with drafting a great talent in the 1st at a different position and building the rest of the team. Taking solid players that aren't QBs in the early rounds doesn't hurt your franchise.

Taking Ted Gins, Pat Whites, and Daniel Thomas-like guys that early is what kills you in the long-run.

Nobody should piss their pants if we end up with a team like BAL or SF that wins games without having a

"franchise qb"

 

And if they lasted until the 2nd round they wouldn't be

 

And it's mostly their amazing play that got their teams there.

Riiiiight.


So if MIA had one of the two we'd be playing right now too?

 

Not really. Fred Davis did.

 

Which I wouldn't disagree with doing when the rest of your team isn't solid.

But to really go after a QB when you have a team like we did in say 02 with Ricky and a shut-down defense, I'd absolutely be all for.

Which is pretty much my point; the rest of our team is far from there and the QB could be a lot worse.

 

Yea, I meant Vernon. Oops.

Alex played fine. If he played great that game isn't close.

 

Again, if MIA had one of the two we'd be playing right now too?

And again, both of their teams are solid and have won plenty of games without either QB doing much of anything.

 

Then that is the main difference in our philosophies, I see the QB as THE piece you need regardless of where your team is.

 

Yep, I'd sacrifice an amazing QB for a team that can win games with their D and running game and a pretty good QB.

 

I am not against getting a quarterback. If Miami can trade thier first this year and next year plus their second this year and get RGIII, I would do it in a hearbeat.

The question after RGIII and Luck is, who is worth a first round pick?

 

Yea, I think it's a bit early to lump him in with those two.

 

Def a little. Still absolutely looks like we overpaid so far though.

 

Obviously an impossible question to answer . .However IF we DID have one of those two we`d have a MUCH better chance to still be playing then we actually do now.

 

Pretty silly debate here, fellas. The teams with good QB's win Super Bowls, teams that don't, do not. Yes, it's POSSIBLE for a team with an average QB to make a run, but more times than not it's a Franchise QB that wins the Super Bowl.

Rodgers, Brees, Roethlisberger, Peyton, Eli, Brady. These are the last 6 Super Bowl winning QB's (who've won the last 8). Out of the 6, 4 were 1st round picks and 1 was a 2nd round pick who probably could've been a 1st rounder (Brees). Brady is the only anomaly, and arguably the best one out of the group.

So, yes, while any player at any position COULD be a bust, your dramatically improve your chances of finding that franchise QB if you draft one in the 1st round. The stats, whether you want someone to provide them or not, bear that out. I promise you.

I can almost forgive the Dolphins for not drafting a QB the first few years after Marino retired. They had a pretty solid team in place, and didn't want to wait a few years for a rookie QB to develop. Not to mention they didn't have a high pick any of those years (or no picks at all due to the Ricky Williams trade). But from 2004-2011, there's absolutely no excuse IMO.

 

3 of the 4 teams in the playoffs today are there because of their defense.

 

Really? Alex Smith?

 

So does Matt Moore.

 

Completely disagree. And I really find it hard to believe that anyone can honestly say that both of those teams haven't been carried by their defenses and OL/RB play for the majority of the year.

 

Yea, that defense only forced 5 or 6 turn-overs. How they let the best offense in the league move the ball for a few mins is beyond me.

 

I am discouting the QBs because they posted Matt Moore like numbers.

Alex Smith kept the Saints in the game, after the defense had 5 turnovers. There has only been one team in the NFL that has won a playoff game with 5 turnovers.

 

So if those teams don't win, and the Giants or Patriots do, that would further prove the point that an elite QB is almost a necessity wouldn't it?

 

Nice with the "cute response". That is a smug response.

It is not as simple as you are making it.

 

Only the Patriots would prove that now. If the Giants, Ravens or 49ers win the superbowl that will prove that defense is important once again.

 

And you're saying the Giants don't have a really good defense? Not to mention one of if not the best WR corps.

And where was Tom Brady drafted again? Ya, I think you missed the entire point of the first 3 pages, chief.

 

So far, I can agree with that.