We're fully capable of winning with Fiedler, and fully capable of winning without him. Ray Lucas was a special case, it took the team a while to switch gears and get use to him. Also, he was just plain terrible at times, no way around that at all.
Its time to stop worrying about the possibilities of what might happen with a different quarterback in the game, and time to start looking at the cold hard facts.
The first fact is, NO MATTER WHAT, Fiedler and his current contract are not here after the 2003 season. His base salary escalates to ridiculous levels and he's due a $2m roster bonus. He simply can't be here in 2004.
The other fact is, even without Fiedler at the helm all we need is competant QB play to win. Lucas despite his shortcomings, showed us that. The players aren't willing to buy the coaches' reasoning that we failed to make the playoffs because we went 2-4 under Lucas.
Nonetheless for me, I would use the unofficial feelers to determine the availability of Couch, Holcombe, and Bulger. I would not go for Warner, as I really think he's just finally lost it and his injury problems are going to stick.
I would not outright replace Fiedler with anyone short of Couch or Bulger, of the 4 QBs you mentioned. Holcombe would have to COMPETE for the job, because he could very well be a one-hit-wonder. And besides, if Couch isn't available on the block then I doubt Holcombe would be, since the Browns could easily just go another season with Holcombe behind Couch...pushing Couch to be better, and giving Holcombe more time to up his trade value.
It is also my firm belief that Bulger is staying a St Louis Ram. If the coaches don't put Warner up for trade, I doubt they'd put Bulger up either. Martz would just go with the hotter hand. But if they do anything, it would be getting rid of WARNER, not Bulger.
So that leaves kid Griese. He'll be available after June 1st, when the market and the money will be dried up. He'd have a tough time finding a starting gig after June 1st, but not an impossible task really. Not to mention he may want to sit the season out rather than play a season as a backup under a one year contract. Money is not a problem for him. Motivation is. He may also have issues coming to Miami and playing under the shadow of Bob Griese and Dan Marino.
I would not, absolutely would not, sign Jake Plummer because he's going to be offered a starter's market, and I'm not willing to pay him starters money and hand him a starters job.
So yes, our eyes should be peeled for QB upgrades, basically just like that have been peeled all along. The only QB move which we could have or should have done in retrospect might have been Brad Johnson, but who can say if BJ is really that good or if its Keyshawn and Keenan, along with Gruden thats turning him good. And besides, the chance to get BJ was I think BEFORE Norv arrived...back when we were running Gailey's system and BJ just wouldn't have fit. I mean sure we could have tried to get Bledsoe, but with what first round pick? Would you have given up on Ricky to get Bledsoe? Not me.
I don't care HOW much you hate Fiedler you have to be very smart when talking about replacing your starting QB who has won games for you. Its very political.
My answer is Mark Brunell. For some reason rumor has it that he's leaving Jacksonville, and I would most DEFINITELY like to have him in Miami and any person who says they wouldn't like him is just being insecure about having a QB that hasn't already played and won for us.
