Knowing what you knownow, Matt Ryan or Jake Long? | Page 10 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Knowing what you knownow, Matt Ryan or Jake Long?

tay0365 said:
It was good, not great, but good enough, can you think of a better receiver Marino had his 1st year better then Roddy White...

Duper- Not yet established
Clayton-Rookie, and learning the Position
Jimmy Cefalo- Not really, maybe good for a bomb or 2
Duriel Harris- Kind of inconsistant
Vince Heflin- LOL..no
Jim Jenson- I did like Jenson a lot, but he was more of a 3rd down receiver, and was not used until 84


Marino had less to start with then Ryan< including RB.
Click to expand...
Duper may not have been established but he did make the Pro Bowl in Dan's rookie season with 51 receptios for 10 tds.
Nat Moore was still a clutch receiver at 32.
Clayton was a punt returner.
Cefalo only played one game. (His injury opened the door for Duper.)
Harris played injured most of the year.

Tony Nathan led the team in receptions with 52.
The TEs caught 75 passes for 736 yards and 7 tds.
 
Geforce said:
Duper may not have been established but he did make the Pro Bowl in Dan's rookie season with 51 receptios for 10 tds.
Nat Moore was still a clutch receiver at 32.
Clayton was a punt returner.
Cefalo only played one game. (His injury opened the door for Duper.)
Harris played injured most of the year.

Tony Nathan led the team in receptions with 52.
The TEs caught 75 passes for 736 yards and 7 tds.
Click to expand...


not to mention this team was runnup in the superbowl
 
dlockz said:
not to mention this team was runnup in the superbowl
Click to expand...
The '83 team lost in the first round of the playoffs...just like the Falcons did.

The '82 team did finished runner up in the superbowl with a QB who was more of a runner than a passer.
 
Geforce said:
Duper may not have been established but he did make the Pro Bowl in Dan's rookie season with 51 receptios for 10 tds.

How did he lok the year before, could Marino been the reason he looked so good?

Nat Moore was still a clutch receiver at 32.
He was on a downslide, still good, but nowhere as good as he used to be.

Clayton was a punt returner.
Marino's fav target was not used the way he should have that year.



Cefalo only played one game. (His injury opened the door for Duper.)
Only talking about his skills, not what happened that year.


Harris played injured most of the year.

He was inconsistant, 1 game he looked good, not the next.

Tony Nathan led the team in receptions with 52.

There was the problem, when your top receiver was a RB



Listen, it seems a few here love Ryan so much, they have awarded him the crown, and no matter what I or anybody else might say, Ryan is awesome, ad the next Marino, I disagree, but that is fine.

Like Vaark said, nobody is denying that Ryan had a great season for a rookie, it was amazing, but can't we just wait til 09 before anointing him the next big thing, the next Marino, and a better choice then Long.
Click to expand...
 
Jake Long

We would have had to trade back into the first round to get a decent LT. We have needed a frachise LT since Richmond Webb retired . . . the position was neglected for far too long.

John Beck was still an unknown and this front office seems to of had Henne as their top ranked QB, atleast from a value perspective. He has looked good, and he may end up being as good or better than Matty Ice. Too early to tell.

Remember that draft proceeded a 1-15 season . . . we had ALOT of issues, and we got our franchise LT, both of our franchise 3-4 DE's and our future QB . . . who has a cannon, in the first 3 rounds. U can't ask for more than that. Matt Ryan could have easily come here and been abused ala John Beck was in 2007 (tho obviously his poise and pocket presence is much better than Beck's but still.)

Getting Chad Pennington was icing on the cake, as I'm sure this front office still makes that move, and who knows if Matt Ryan even see's the field. Too many unknown variables.
 
Geforce said:
The '83 team lost in the first round of the playoffs...just like the Falcons did.

The '82 team did finished runner up in the superbowl with a QB who was more of a runner than a passer.
Click to expand...

Yea Im referring to the team that Marino took over
 
I would have to say jake long because, a probowl left tackle with a youthful quarterback behind him is better than just a youthful quarterback.
 
You take Jake Long. Knowing what you know now still amounts to knowing nothing. You have no idea how Ryan would have performed in Miami. You have no idea if he would have taken a massive beating behind a garbage o-line, and how he would have handled that from a mental standpoint. Half the people on these forums think our wr's are mediocre at best (and I dont argue that). Exactly who would he have been throwing to that would have performed for him the way Roddy White did. As I said before u cant hit recievers laying flat on your back, and its alot harder to find them running for your life.

Now factor in the running game. Michael Turner was a beast for Atlanta, running past, around and over defenders. 1700 yards and 17 TD's. How would we manage that type of production out of Ronnie behind a patchwork o-line w/o Jake Long? Especially facing the likes of Kris Jenkins, Marcus Stroud and Vince Woolfork.

Knowing what I know now I would still take Jake Long over Matt Ryan.
Also Dan Marino > Matt Ryan ...by well more than a mile.
 
moksha said:
Most of you are nuts! I like Jake Long too, but the decision is clear cut... Would you take Marino or Anthony Munoz? It's the same question. Talking about supporting casts and other factors is pretty irrelevant when the question was posed simply as Long vs. Ryan... not will Henne be good or Flacco or what not. Just knowing the talent of the two players as individuals, you have to take the QB every time! Every time! Picking a HOF LT over a HOF QB is an utterly rediculous argument and almost indefensible. Just like those of you who say there are other good QB's, I can say there are plenty of lesser known LT's that do a fine job. So the question becomes do you want HOF QB with very serviceable LT or a HOF LT with a very serviceable QB? There's no doubt! Let me have it, I can't wait to see the homer's rational reactions.

Peace,
B
Click to expand...



ANYONE who says A franchise LT > a franchise QB needs to have their head examined!

The reason people here are so overwhelmingly supportive of Jake is simply because he was the one we drafted.

If rolls had been reversed, it would be 99 - 1 in favor of Ryan.
 
I think Matt was a great pick up for Atlanta and I think Jake was a great pick up for us. We have our alleged Qb of the future in Chad Henne so it would be silly to pick another frachise qb when Jake Long is available. I say good drafts for both clubs that not coincidentally were huge turnarounds and will be solid for years to come.
 
bla bla bla said:
ANYONE who says A franchise LT > a franchise QB needs to have their head examined!

The reason people here are so overwhelmingly supportive of Jake is simply because he was the one we drafted.

If rolls had been reversed, it would be 99 - 1 in favor of Ryan.
Click to expand...

As already stated, Dan Marino was the greatest franchise QB to ever play the game and could never win a championship. Peyton Manning's near the top and he only one. The teams with the best offensive lines, like the 70s Fins and 90s Cowboys, are the ones that are consistently winning championships.
 
jlfin said:
No, you can't have this discussion without bringing up Henne. Obviously, if the front office DID NOT think Henne had the potential of a franchise QB, they likely would have drafted Ryan.
They obviously had (have) a lot of confidence in Henne. Hence the Jake Long pick.
BTW, Ryan had a very solid (not spectacular) rookie season. Dan Marino had a SPECTACULAR rookie season (he carried the offense). Ryan did not.
I wouldn't put Ryan in Canton just yet. :rolleyes2:
Click to expand...


you cant put henne in the discussion because henne wasnt on the team at the time of the pick.

if we would have picked picked ryan then we would have had that second round pick to add another piece to the puzzle.

basically what the choice should be is would you take
1 long and then spend 2 second round picks on qbs and cross your fingers that one will pan out
or
2 take ryan and have 2 second round picks to feel other areas of need.
 
Why can't you put Henne in the equation? The thread is if you knew then what you know now. Do we not know now that we have Henne?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom