See, this right here is what kills me. Tanehill is what, the 3rd or 4th passer in the NFL with a clean pocket. What does that tell you? It tells me that upgrading the QB is about the lowest priority on a list that is a mile long. Landry? I want him back at about 11 million, nothing more. But letting him go creates another hole unless people believe Caroo can step up. I believe he can, but I'm an old Scarlet Knight so I am biased.If Landry ran deeper, we would need more qb’s on the roster. There isnt enough time to throw. Also, Is Landry freestyling it or is running routes he is asked?
Landry is an important part of this Dolphins team, but the feeling I get is that the FO seems to be tired of him and his antics, not to mention his salary demand. This is just an opinion of course but the mere fact that we haven't resigned him although he is the "heart and soul" of this team not to mention that according to some he is our only legitimate receiver speaks volumes. If we resign landry I will not be surprised, but there is more going on here behind the scenes.
See, this right here is what kills me. Tanehill is what, the 3rd or 4th passer in the NFL with a clean pocket. What does that tell you? It tells me that upgrading the QB is about the lowest priority on a list that is a mile long. Landry? I want him back at about 11 million, nothing more. But letting him go creates another hole unless people believe Caroo can step up. I believe he can, but I'm an old Scarlet Knight so I am biased.
So what you're saying is that if he didn't get a lot on his first 4 years then we need to make up for it by over paying for him? Then let me ask you this, will Parker, James and Harris give back some of what they made on their early years because they didn't played like first round picks?
Sorry but that makes no sense to me. You pay them what they're worth now and you need a pay structure. Once you start making exceptions you'll end up with a team full of them.
Ozzy rules!!
I agreed with this also. I think if you finally lock down the god damn TE position, letting Landry go wouldn't hurt and probably help even more. I keep thinking of Phillip Rivers living off of Gates and co at TE all these years. Amazing how over 3 or 4 regimes we can't fix the OL and get a friggin TE worth a s**t.Great post.
For me it is not complicated. I have a life long hatred of short passes. I have laughed at screen passes and specifically third down screen passes for 30 years.
I don't like to make exceptions. When you make exceptions you are fooling and betraying yourself. This board and Dolphins fans in general understand that a feature wide out with low yards per reception is not ideal, and that a penalty-craving jerk is not ideal. But we want to make an exception for Jarvis Landry. That's the same type of thinking that lends itself to low percentage adjustments at other positions and in personnel acquisition period.
As I posted the other day, the argument is reversed:
* What would we do without him?
Nope
* Imagine what we could do without him
Someone here posted that Tannehill's YPA plummeted a full half yard in 2016 due to screen passes alone. I don't have to guess who was on the other end of a large percentage of those screen passes. In 2018 we figure to have an uptick season, based on the natural bounce after you drop from 10 wins to 6. Once the arrow is in your favor it's possible to dramatically exceed the expectation, not to merely nudge beyond it. You have to take full advantage of those seasons. To allow Tannehill a chance at a true breakout season and to establish himself as a Top 10 quarterback at long last, we need to be throwing aggressively downfield and to actually score enough points to place ourselves in great position toward a high playoff seeding, not barely squeaking in as the 6th seed.
Take a risk for a change. It actually feels good. There is nothing risky about dump off passes to jittery little Jarvis Landry barely on either side of the line of scrimmage. If you give Tannehill that bail out he'll take it. Don't give him the chance to take it. Again, it's like that look into the future and protecting the future, another version of, "Edith Keeler must die." Those short crossing routes on 3rd and 10 must die.
Besides, a guy with a skill set like that does not improve over the years. He won't get any faster or become more of a downfield threat. His style logically lends itself to the reverse, to getting dinged up and breaking fewer and fewer tackles. There were already indications of that this season. He never showed the ferocity similar to that catch and run against the Cardinals in 2016. Landry seemed to sense he was less of a threat so he resorted to more antics, more emphasis on catch numbers, and pathetic touchdown celebrations.
No, I'm saying that it would be nice to have a consistently clean pocket. Tannehill has shown ability to maneuver and create time, but he should not have to do it more than half the time.So we need a clean pocket for some Tannehill consistency?
Yeah I'm not sure I buy the you were cheap for us so we're going to give you more... But thats fine! You view Landry as a top 10 WR, and I disagree... He's a great slot receiver, but he is limited. I don't think he should be counting more than 12M against the cap. Ideally he'd be around 10 but with the WR FA market the way it is this year, it's not realistic.
No, I'm saying that it would be nice to have a consistently clean pocket. Tannehill has shown ability to maneuver and create time, but he should not have to do it more than half the time.
I mean I view Landry as a vital piece to the Gase offense and to Ryan Tannehill . . . not the rest of the league. Statistically he is a top 10 WR so if you are taking stats and then taking importance to the offense . . . I think he has more than proven his worth, especially to this team.
People keep saying he is limited . . . so are we saying in a game where 85% of the offensive plays happen inside of a 10 yard box, we shouldn't reward the guy who works that box as good as anybody in the NFL? We should reward the guy who is a factor on those other 15% plays and that player automatically qualifies as a top 10 WR because of that skillset while the other guys does not?
I just don't feel that way. I get the consensus will go against me but the undervaluing of Jarvis Landry is borderline criminal around here. Like I said earlier on a team full of supposed talent at the skill positions . . . he was the consistent threat in the redzone that made the play to put points on the board.
To think he is some replaceable piece is just shortsighted but I get that the team has other needs and smart decisions need to be made. He is priority 1 on my list.