|
There were points last season where Clay was the only player making any catches for large stretches of games. Sure he's overpaid but he also led the team in receiving yards which says more about how bad the receiving group was after they got rid of everyone from 2016.
|
#
?
May 19, 2018 08:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 15:11 |
|
|
I miss Clay, he was/is great. Re the Dolphins, I appreciate that the "character" purge looks bad, but the three main guys the let go (Suh, Landry, Pouncey) were all very highly paid, and their production didn't justify the money. They're all great, but the last three years of Dolphins proved that paying QB money for the best DT in the league isn't effective, paying top 5 money for 8-12 games of a center isn't smart, and top 5 WR money for a guy who isn't a top-5 redzone or big play guy isn't necessarily sensible. To be sure, they'll waste all the money they save on some other poo poo, but in isolation the moves were kind of justifiable.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2018 09:00
|
|
|
tarbrush posted:I miss Clay, he was/is great. Landry wasnt very highly paid. And, we'll never know what his contract could have been if they had simply negotiated a long term deal after the 2016 season. The ludicrous amount he was set to make in 18 was due to the move to franchise tag him. As for his talent, again, hard to say. When his average target puts him in traffic and he only gets downfield targets in the pro bowl, that may be more a failure of scheme. Letting your best players go because they cost tooo much makes good fiscal sense, but it's real hard to argue the team got better.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2018 13:36
|
|
|
torgeaux posted:Landry wasnt very highly paid. And, we'll never know what his contract could have been if they had simply negotiated a long term deal after the 2016 season. The ludicrous amount he was set to make in 18 was due to the move to franchise tag him. As for his talent, again, hard to say. When his average target puts him in traffic and he only gets downfield targets in the pro bowl, that may be more a failure of scheme. Letting your best players go because they cost tooo much makes good fiscal sense, but it's real hard to argue the team got better. Oh yeah, they're definitely not better, and they absolutely should have paid Landry after 2016, but they deserve a small amount of credit for taking hard decisions to get out of cap hell. Watch them give Tannehill an eleventy billion dollar extension...
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2018 13:43
|
|
|
tarbrush posted:Oh yeah, they're definitely not better, and they absolutely should have paid Landry after 2016, but they deserve a small amount of credit for taking hard decisions to get out of cap hell. The move with tannehill that sucks is moving a moderate cap hit this year into a worse situation next year if we dont keep him. Signals confidence, but not sure what it's based on. At his best, he wasnt a franchise guy.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2018 13:45
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:He was an absolute difference maker at RU with just embarrassing talent around him. There is more that story than we know. Yeah he can’t get separation. They force him into games.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2018 13:47
|
|
|
torgeaux posted:Landry wasnt very highly paid. And, we'll never know what his contract could have been if they had simply negotiated a long term deal after the 2016 season. The ludicrous amount he was set to make in 18 was due to the move to franchise tag him. As for his talent, again, hard to say. When his average target puts him in traffic and he only gets downfield targets in the pro bowl, that may be more a failure of scheme. Letting your best players go because they cost tooo much makes good fiscal sense, but it's real hard to argue the team got better. I can tell you this is flat out wrong. He demanded top 5 receiver money from Day 1. Miami offered 13.5 a year. That was more than fair for his production. He was also a dick. Not jay Ajayi level dick, just hyper intense, which isn’t bad but he motivated using negativity and that wore on a few folks. Or so the story goes! I like the additions made in the off-season, and I’m sorry we had to cut Suh. Lord knows he’ll be missed - he was just a beast every play.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2018 13:51
|
|
|
Amy Pole Her posted:I can tell you this is flat out wrong. He demanded top 5 receiver money from Day 1. Miami offered 13.5 a year. That was more than fair for his production. He demanded top 5 receiver money from day one after the 2017 season. After they strung him along a season before and never offered a deal. He was never on a high cost contract, he was still on his rookie deal. His huge contract number for 2018 was only due to his franchise tag...we know this because it was the only contract he had. But, back to other issues: They have Drake behind Gore on the depth chart. Are they going to ruin a relationship with another young player chasing an old players glory days, a la Foster And Ajayi?
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2018 14:04
|
|
|
torgeaux posted:The move with tannehill that sucks is moving a moderate cap hit this year into a worse situation next year if we dont keep him. Signals confidence, but not sure what it's based on. At his best, he wasnt a franchise guy. I think they've shown this season that dead money isn't going to stop them making the moves they want to make. If Tannehill sucks this year, the contract renegotiation this year won't matter. Well, probably. It does seem that the organisation really likes Tannehill, which is confusing for someone barely scraping the Dalton Line.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2018 14:42
|
|
|
Major Ryan posted:I think they've shown this season that dead money isn't going to stop them making the moves they want to make. If Tannehill sucks this year, the contract renegotiation this year won't matter. I actually like Tannehill. He is a perfectly serviceable qb....but committing at least two seasons to him, post injury, just strikes me as insane. They sold out next years cap for this season, and i haven't seen the FA acquisitions to show its a win now year.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2018 15:16
|
|
|
It is mildly hilarious watching them convince themselves this is their year while the patriots dynasty points and laughs.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2018 15:51
|
|
|
torgeaux posted:I actually like Tannehill. He is a perfectly serviceable qb....but committing at least two seasons to him, post injury, just strikes me as insane. They sold out next years cap for this season, and i haven't seen the FA acquisitions to show its a win now year. Even if Tannehill sucks now and they decide to move on from him, there's no one really in free agency next year anyway, and a rookie will take at least some time to adjust, so you might as well keep Tannehill for those two years anyway.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2018 16:27
|
|
|
Kalli posted:Even if Tannehill sucks now and they decide to move on from him, there's no one really in free agency next year anyway, and a rookie will take at least some time to adjust, so you might as well keep Tannehill for those two years anyway. Thats pretty much the only rational explanation, i guess, but doesnt take into account that he may not be physically able to play all this year, yet alone next.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2018 16:29
|
|
|
torgeaux posted:He demanded top 5 receiver money from day one after the 2017 season. After they strung him along a season before and never offered a deal. He was never on a high cost contract, he was still on his rookie deal. His huge contract number for 2018 was only due to his franchise tag...we know this because it was the only contract he had. Again this is wrong man. He demanded it from day 1. Armando’s confirmed it, and Parkey confirmed too. They offered him an extension the offseason in 2017. Same time they signed Stills. Landry refused.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2018 17:37
|
|
|
Amy Pole Her posted:Again this is wrong man. He demanded it from day 1. Armando’s confirmed it, and Parkey confirmed too. http://www.miamiherald.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/barry-jackson/article157106519.html quote:After re-signing Kenny Stills this offseason, the Dolphins don't appear especially interested in locking up Landry for the long term. Offseason contract talks went nowhere, and it seems plausible that Miami doesn't think its slot wideout is worth paying No. 1 receiver money, which is what Landry should rightfully ask for given his production over the past three seasons. Landry's Dolphins didn't play in Week 1 because of Hurricane Irma, but from 2014 to '16, he was fifth in the NFL in receptions and 12th in receiving yards. torgeaux fucked around with this message at 19:04 on May 19, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 19, 2018 18:59
|
|
|
torgeaux posted:http://www.miamiherald.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/barry-jackson/article157106519.html One of those situations we just have conflicting sources. Agree to disagree.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2018 19:01
|
|
|
Amy Pole Her posted:One of those situations we just have conflicting sources. Agree to disagree. Sure, neither of us has personal knowledge. Can you pull up the Armando article that says they offered him that? Because the Armando articles I see say nothing like that. http://www.miamiherald.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/armando-salguero/article194920564.html http://www.miamiherald.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/armando-salguero/article189867619.html http://www.miamiherald.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/armando-salguero/article163245948.html torgeaux fucked around with this message at 19:22 on May 19, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 19, 2018 19:09
|
|
|
PMs!
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2018 19:22
|
|
|
My view is, it's fine to view Landry as not being worth what he wanted, but I don't get replacing him with Amendola and that Chiefs guy. Not that they aren't fine #2 / #3 options, but they're paying them almost what Landry's making, and they gave them an odd amount of guaranteed money, pretty much keeping Amendola for 2 and the other guy for 3 years.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2018 20:20
|
|
|
Kalli posted:My view is, it's fine to view Landry as not being worth what he wanted, but I don't get replacing him with Amendola and that Chiefs guy. Not that they aren't fine #2 / #3 options, but they're paying them almost what Landry's making, and they gave them an odd amount of guaranteed money, pretty much keeping Amendola for 2 and the other guy for 3 years. Dolphins are still idiots, water still wet.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2018 20:55
|
|
|
Kalli posted:My view is, it's fine to view Landry as not being worth what he wanted, but I don't get replacing him with Amendola and that Chiefs guy. Not that they aren't fine #2 / #3 options, but they're paying them almost what Landry's making, and they gave them an odd amount of guaranteed money, pretty much keeping Amendola for 2 and the other guy for 3 years. Yeah, it makes zero sense. It’s almost like the signed Amendola literally to be a positive influence and tell rookies what championships are like
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2018 21:37
|
|
|
Kalli posted:My view is, it's fine to view Landry as not being worth what he wanted, but I don't get replacing him with Amendola and that Chiefs guy. Not that they aren't fine #2 / #3 options, but they're paying them almost what Landry's making, and they gave them an odd amount of guaranteed money, pretty much keeping Amendola for 2 and the other guy for 3 years. It's kinda funny because the Patriots didn't see Welker being worth what he wanted and also tried to replace him with Amendola for basically the same amount of money the Broncos gave Welker.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2018 21:41
|
|
|
torgeaux posted:I actually like Tannehill. He is a perfectly serviceable qb....but committing at least two seasons to him, post injury, just strikes me as insane. I assume they really like Osweiler. I mean, there's a reasonably good chance Tannehill gets reinjured or doesn't perform as well as before the surgery, and they chose not to address that in the draft. After how bad the Cutler experiment went, you'd think they'd be keen not to risk the possibility of that happening again. So, Osweiler - they must think he's the answer. I guess they could just be crossing their fingers and hoping lightning doesn't strike twice. But that level of unpreparedness seems really weird. To have the same QB crisis happen two years in a row would look really careless.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2018 22:17
|
|
|
I figure Osweiler is a break glass in case of tanking QB. Tannehill should be fine, it was just an ACL and he's had plenty of time to rehab it.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2018 22:27
|
|
|
Tannehill really isn’t this injury prone guy everyone is saying he is.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2018 22:40
|
|
|
Amy Pole Her posted:Tannehill really isn’t this injury prone guy everyone is saying he is. No, but his decision to not have surgery the first time was reckless, at best. And, until you see him go 100% on the knee, you won't know if he's one of those guys that never trusts the knee again.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2018 22:53
|
|
|
Amy Pole Her posted:Tannehill really isn’t this injury prone guy everyone is saying he is. He really isn't. But for quarterbacks coming from an ACL the first year can often be a "down" year compared to their normal performance, which could complicate decisions for Miami when the season is over.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2018 23:01
|
|
|
Amy Pole Her posted:Tannehill really isn’t this injury prone guy everyone is saying he is. No, sure. But I think the Dolphins need to consider it a possibility that Tannehill doesn't play 16 games or just doesn't perform that well this season while he's getting back up to speed. Basically I think your backup this season needs to be closer to the 33rd best QB in the league than some Joe riding the bench for 16 games, and maybe actually that is Osweiler.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2018 23:34
|
|
|
torgeaux posted:No, but his decision to not have surgery the first time was reckless, at best. And, until you see him go 100% on the knee, you won't know if he's one of those guys that never trusts the knee again. Major Ryan posted:No, sure. But I think the Dolphins need to consider it a possibility that Tannehill doesn't play 16 games or just doesn't perform that well this season while he's getting back up to speed. Basically I think your backup this season needs to be closer to the 33rd best QB in the league than some Joe riding the bench for 16 games, and maybe actually that is Osweiler. Believe me I’m not happy we’re going with Brock @ 2nd. I thought he was a 3rd QB
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2018 00:07
|
|
|
Print the shirts
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2018 00:14
|
|
|
The worst thing about the Carroo pick is that this forum convinced me he was the best receiver in the draft and we had an absolute steal. I dunno, I still see the Dolphins winning their normal 7-8 games. I think the defensive will be ok despite losing Suh and the offense can only get better though they will probably still finish in the high 20s somewhere. They will win a couple games against good teams that shows their potential, loss a couple more that they absolutely should have won, and squeak their way through against other average teams. Time is a flat circle.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2018 23:33
|
|
|
TheBizzness posted:The worst thing about the Carroo pick is that this forum convinced me he was the best receiver in the draft and we had an absolute steal. have you factored in Jakeem Grant??
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2018 23:54
|
|
|
If our pass rush is anything formidable at all we’re going to be way better on defense. We were getting destroyed on far too many 3rd and longs
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2018 00:08
|
|
|
Amy Pole Her posted:If our pass rush is anything formidable at all we’re going to be way better on defense. We were getting destroyed on far too many 3rd and longs I think the return of the LB, the addition of a cover safety will also help on 3d down. We got eaten on quick passes over the middle. Good coverage there will make the rush more effecient.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2018 00:28
|
|
|
I really think McMillan and Fitzpatrick being added to this defense is going to be a huge upgrade
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2018 00:36
|
|
|
Yeah. Our dline is a step back, but better everywhere else o d is better. O? Scares me they have gore at #1 right now. I like stills and the slot guys will be adequate, but Tannehill is a question, so itll be hard to judge our receivers for a bit. Im afraid we'll get a tannehill not quite as good as 2016, so, average.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2018 00:44
|
|
|
torgeaux posted:Yeah. Our dline is a step back, but better everywhere else o d is better. O? Scares me they have gore at #1 right now. I like stills and the slot guys will be adequate, but Tannehill is a question, so itll be hard to judge our receivers for a bit. Im afraid we'll get a tannehill not quite as good as 2016, so, average. wait FRANK Gore? I thought his rear end retired with all the HoF talk
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2018 01:16
|
|
|
Frank gore is going to be running for 3.6 ypc long after we’re all dead
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2018 01:24
|
|
|
Kenyan Drake will start, that depth chart done by the best writers is laughable. We’re not putting Amendola Y receiver
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2018 01:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 15:11 |
|
|
Amy Pole Her posted:Kenyan Drake will start, that depth chart done by the best writers is laughable. We’re not putting Amendola Y receiver I would eagerly agree but for Gase's history. Foster > Ajayi Williams > Drake ...therefore, Gore > Drake. Seriously, though, I'm not sanguine on that, at all. The reports they intend for drake to get a bunch of Jarvis' touches in the passing game leads me to think Drake may see fewer touches in the run game.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2018 01:40
|
|