why is Oline the priority and not WR?

[marinotoclayton]

While I too an not overly enamored with the wideouts! The O-line is still in worse shape we can't run or pass effectively if the line isn't up to par! Pick up a couple of linemen and maybe a wideout later! Still havr other needs like LB and maybe RB. Aside from the line.

 

[truedolfan57]

not to mention keeping the QB upright. what's good about having stud WR's, if the oline sucks and the qb gets hurt?

---------- Post added at 04:42 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:41 PM ----------

Fair enough. That wasn't my intention. I like our WRs but feel we can use a playmaker. I also agree we need to improve the oline. Just don't want to reach. Maybe a better question could have been. ....are you willing to take a RT with a 2nd or 3rd round grade just cause we need one?

it really depends. does the team want to risk waiting in the 2nd or 3rd round, and those lineman get taken before Miami can draft? essentially not getting any lineman they wanted, on their board?

 

[D0lphan72]

The stupid **** people come up with. It doesnt matter if you have Jerry Rice and Randy Moss. You aren't getting them the ball without an oline

 

[So Be]

The stupid **** people come up with. It doesnt matter if you have Jerry Rice and Randy Moss. You aren't getting them the ball without an oline

I think that Hartline, who is far from a HOF WR, may differ with that opinion.

 

[Travis34]

None of them are truley special, but they aren't bad either. Our OL is bad, like really bad.

/thread

Seriously I don't know how people can come up with some of this crap. If we were in a true BPA position, taking a wr would be great. but major holes everyone =/= using a pick on a capable unit. It would be like taking d-line in the 1st

 

[MRojas4]

Plain and simple.

If we do not walk away from the draft with a starter caliber RT and OG we are screwed.

Period.

 

[rent this space]

Again, I never said our oline is fine. My point is that I'd not take a RT at 19 if a playmaking WR is there and he's much better than the RT. I want us to draft a RT but at the right spot. You don't take the 54th best player on the board at 19.

we might have to settle for the 5th best tackle at #19, but we can most likely still get the top guard

 

[cangrejero]

Why have a great receiver if Tanny can't throw the deep ball?????

 

[nick1]

Why have a great receiver if Tanny can't throw the deep ball?????

The line didn't allow for him to. You may not realize but a QB has to step into the pass for an effective deep pass. It's also coaching. You have to target Wallace early, easier to hit a 30 or 40 yard pass then 50 or 60. Th pocket stays clean too

 

[Padfoot]

The line didn't allow for him to. You may not realize but a QB has to step into the pass for an effective deep pass. It's also coaching. You have to target Wallace early, easier to hit a 30 or 40 yard pass then 50 or 60. Th pocket stays clean too

I'm not trying to say we don't need oline help (or that this is a reason not to draft a WR) but Tannehill struggled to throw a good deep ball even when he was able to step up cleanly.

 

[DolfanDuBbZ~]

I'm not trying to say we don't need oline help (or that this is a reason not to draft a WR) but Tannehill struggled to throw a good deep ball even when he was able to step up cleanly.

Yep, in between those 58 sacks. My favorite was watching Tannehill get hit on a 3 step drop. That one was for the ages.

How anyone can expect Tannehill to play good QB, despite being hammered at a league high clip, is beyond me. A QB who needs a run game to set up everything he does well. A QB who didn't even have enough oline athleticism to do simple screens, counters or sweeps.

I can over look things for Tannehill, when talking about things he should have done better, when you look at the whole problem. I will not over look the FO putting that **** back on the field.

 

[Padfoot]

Yep, in between those 58 sacks. My favorite was watching Tannehill get hit on a 3 step drop. That one was for the ages.

How anyone can expect Tannehill to play good QB, despite being hammered at a league high clip, is beyond me. A QB who needs a run game to set up everything he does well. A QB who didn't even have enough oline athleticism to do simple screens, counters or sweeps.

I can over look things for Tannehill, when talking about things he should have done better, when you look at the whole problem. I will not over look the FO putting that **** back on the field.

Rodgers did pretty well in 2011 despite being sacked 41 times.

I'm not going to argue that oline play doesn't affect the QB, or that Tannehill should play as well as Rodgers but when you have a wide open target and you get the ball off clean you need to hit that target.

I'm not saying this to rag on Tannehill, I like him a lot and I think he will improve his deep ball this year because the year prior he didn't even have a deep threat. But let's not pretend he didn't have flaws last year.

 

[DolfanDuBbZ~]

Rodgers did pretty well in 2011 despite being sacked 41 times.

I'm not going to argue that oline play doesn't affect the QB, or that Tannehill should play as well as Rodgers but when you have a wide open target and you get the ball off clean you need to hit that target.

I'm not saying this to rag on Tannehill, I like him a lot and I think he will improve his deep ball this year because the year prior he didn't even have a deep threat. But let's not pretend he didn't have flaws last year.

So we are now trying to compare Tannehill who was a 2nd year starter to a then, 7th year vet(SB MVP)? Gotcha. All the while Rodgers beings sacked on avg 1 less than Tannehill per game?

I understand Tannehill's issue with the long ball. But I also understand, that Tannehill thrives in the PA game. And last year....this team was not fooling many with their playaction.

 

[Padfoot]

So we are now trying to compare Tannehill who was a 2nd year starter to a then, 7th year vet(SB MVP)? Gotcha. All the while Rodgers beings sacked on avg 1 less than Tannehill per game?

I'm not going to argue . . . that Tannehill should play as well as Rodgers

I understand Tannehill's issue with the long ball.

That's all I was pointing out. Wasn't saying he's bad or was in a good situation.

 

[truedolfan57]

That's all I was pointing out. Wasn't saying he's bad or was in a good situation.

what exactly are you saying, that's relevant to this thread? or you just here to point out tannehill's flaws?