why is Oline the priority and not WR?

[Digital]

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

Well yes that is true, but let's think about that for a minute. Your high water mark example was 41 ... that's 17 less than Tannehill endured. So Tannehill had around 41% more sacks than your high water mark? That's significantly tougher.

And Tannehill was a 2nd year QB who entered the league low on experience, and was integrating 3 new targets (Wallace, Gibson and Keller), and as 2 of them started to click they went down with season ending injuries requiring him to develop timing with different guys on the fly ... While facing one of the NFL's 10 most sacked seasons ever.

That's a lot to put on the shoulders of a 2nd year QB with no run game.

And consider that you are comparing him to arguably the best QB in the game. You note these things, but at the end of the day there isn't all that much that is directly comparable. What it shows is two things:

1. Aaron Rodgers is fantastic.
2. Ryan Tannehill faced too many challenges last year.

If we fix the OL, we dramatically improve pass protection and open up a run game. Without solving the OL this offense fails and this season is shot. Most likely that means another roster gutting and total rebuild.

I am firmly in the camp that believes we must fix our OL FIRST. Do not pass go, do not collect a 2015 paycheck.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

 

[phinfan40353]

Here's my take on the prevailing problem of re-addressing WR with a top pick this year....

When you focus too many resources on the same position year in and year out, you degrade the quality of your team at every other position. We spent a lot of FA money on WR last year... a lot. Can't produce? Too bad.... coach 'em up. Develop a better offensive strategy.... do everything to fix your mistake before you waste more resources.

A better OL makes for improved WR play. More time in the pocket allows for more opportunities. An upright QB allows for better vision.

Let me give you a quick example of a team constantly addressing the same position 4 out of 5 drafts with 1st round picks....

2003 - Charles Rogers
2004 - Roy Williams
2005 - Mike Williams
2007 - Calvin Johnson

How many Super Bowls have the Lions won? How many playoff games since 2003 have the Lions won?

WRs don't win Super Bowls. Healthy QBs do.

Even after an undefeated with 3 really good WRs each having one of the best years in their career, did the Patriots win the Super Bowl? No.

This is a team game. And when you constantly spend money and picks on the same position, your team suffers.

We have enough talent at WR. If you want to spend resources on the passing game, get some OL and a good/great TE to couple with Clay.

Otherwise, the rest of the team needs help.

 

[Ruckus45]

I'm surprised this topic is still a legit debate. Our top 3 + Clay aren't studs but are pretty darn good. Still the best WR core in the afce.

I think people who want to draft a WR before fixing the OL either never stood behind a weak OL trying to pass or never tried to block somebody way better than them. Without that understanding it's difficult to place appropriate value on the importance for having above average and athletic OL. Our OL is almost there. One or two more pieces and barring injury we will have our line set for a few years. Let's just get that guy this Thursday, close the book on it, and move forward.

 

[Twitches Brew]

When you focus too many resources on the same position year in and year out, you degrade the quality of your team at every other position. We spent a lot of FA money on WR last year... a lot. Can't produce? Too bad.... coach 'em up. Develop a better offensive strategy.... do everything to fix your mistake before you waste more resources.

Let me give you a quick example of a team constantly addressing the same position 4 out of 5 drafts with 1st round picks....

2003 - Charles Rogers
2004 - Roy Williams
2005 - Mike Williams
2007 - Calvin Johnson

This is a team game. And when you constantly spend money and picks on the same position, your team suffers.

We have enough talent at WR. If you want to spend resources on the passing game, get some OL and a good/great TE to couple with Clay.

Those Lions guys are all draft picks though, which cripples your roster building much more than signing FAs does. The other thing is that what you're saying used to be much more true. But because of the new rookie wages, our starting QB makes a fraction of what he would've made six years ago. Same goes for those top WRs. That changes how you can allocate resources. Look at Seattle spending left and right...they can because Russell Wilson makes like $600,000 a year.

 

[Padfoot]

Well yes that is true, but let's think about that for a minute. Your high water mark example was 41 ... that's 17 less than Tannehill endured. So Tannehill had around 41% more sacks than your high water mark? That's significantly tougher.

And Tannehill was a 2nd year QB who entered the league low on experience, and was integrating 3 new targets (Wallace, Gibson and Keller), and as 2 of them started to click they went down with season ending injuries requiring him to develop timing with different guys on the fly ... While facing one of the NFL's 10 most sacked seasons ever.

That's a lot to put on the shoulders of a 2nd year QB with no run game.

And consider that you are comparing him to arguably the best QB in the game. You note these things, but at the end of the day there isn't all that much that is directly comparable. What it shows is two things:

1. Aaron Rodgers is fantastic.
2. Ryan Tannehill faced too many challenges last year.

If we fix the OL, we dramatically improve pass protection and open up a run game. Without solving the OL this offense fails and this season is shot. Most likely that means another roster gutting and total rebuild.

I am firmly in the camp that believes we must fix our OL FIRST. Do not pass go, do not collect a 2015 paycheck.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

I explicitly stated that I wasn't aruing Tannehill should be as good as Rodgers. I also explicitly stated that I wasn't arguing Tannehill was bad or in a good situation. I also explicitly stated that I wasn't arguing we shouldn't improve the o-line. And I also explicitly stated that I wasn't arguing poor o-line play doesn't affect QB play.

My only point was that Tannehill's deep ball issues were not directly attributable to the play of the o-line because he still struggled with it even when he had plenty of time and got the ball off cleanly. DolfanDubbz seemed to imply at first, that it was still directly attributable to the o-line play simply because he was sacked 58 times throughout the season. I only pointed to Rodgers off the top of my head as an example of a QB getting sacked a lot and still performing when he had the opportunity.

Obviously there are differences. I'm not trying to hold Tannehill to that standard. But I do hold him to a standard of hitting wide open wide receivers on plays when he had protection.

 

[walt]

I don't think we're going to go WR high in the draft. There were a lot of good free agent WR's available (I was advocating Edelman), but we didn't bite. Having passed on FA WR's, I doubt we'll invest a high draft pick in one.

 

[hootie249]

I think ppl forget that RT was 10th in passing yards last year, while also getting sacked the most times.

Lamar Miller barely broke 700 yards.

In my mind there are 3 things we had to fix this offseason:-

1-offensive line
2-run offense
3-run defence

I don't think we have handle FA as well as we could have but I do think the additions of Lazor and Benton will make a huge difference. We have to hit on O'line in draft day 1 and we have to get a natural MLB and run stopping DT.

Thank god we have posters on here who actually watch the games. If you have any other opinion then this guy, you simply didn't watch the Dolphins play last year. Keep in mind that rookies actually don't excel in the first year they are drafted.
Now i am of the opinion you draft now for the next few years and we need to make sure Ryan is protected most of all, he is the franchise, don't kid yourself.

 

[Mike13]

OL is a priority because we dont want to see Tannehill die on the field.

 

[Padfoot]

Here's my take on the prevailing problem of re-addressing WR with a top pick this year....

When you focus too many resources on the same position year in and year out, you degrade the quality of your team at every other position. We spent a lot of FA money on WR last year... a lot. Can't produce? Too bad.... coach 'em up. Develop a better offensive strategy.... do everything to fix your mistake before you waste more resources.

A better OL makes for improved WR play. More time in the pocket allows for more opportunities. An upright QB allows for better vision.

Let me give you a quick example of a team constantly addressing the same position 4 out of 5 drafts with 1st round picks....

2003 - Charles Rogers
2004 - Roy Williams
2005 - Mike Williams
2007 - Calvin Johnson

How many Super Bowls have the Lions won? How many playoff games since 2003 have the Lions won?

WRs don't win Super Bowls. Healthy QBs do.

Even after an undefeated with 3 really good WRs each having one of the best years in their career, did the Patriots win the Super Bowl? No.

This is a team game. And when you constantly spend money and picks on the same position, your team suffers.

We have enough talent at WR. If you want to spend resources on the passing game, get some OL and a good/great TE to couple with Clay.

Otherwise, the rest of the team needs help.

While I agree this is a team game and you should go for balance, I don't agree that you should allow the past to dictate the present. I don't think prior bad investments at a position justify not making a present good investment "if" it's the best option at the time.

Going by your argument, the Lions shouldn't have taken Calvin Johnson and that would've been a huge mistake. If a player is a bust there is no "coaching him up." You simply have to live with the mistake and try to do better with the next decision.

If the Dolphins are in a position where the best player available is a WR, and there is little doubt that he is substantially better than the available o-linemen, TEs, and linebackers, then I think they should take him regardless of what they already have on the roster. The draft is less about immediately improving your team and more about the long term.

Now obviously that scenario is not exactly likely, and I too prefer a balanced football team but I just wanted to make the point that focusing too much on balance can also be detrimental if it sacrifices overall talent.

 

[Irishfinfan1]

Here's my take on the prevailing problem of re-addressing WR with a top pick this year....

When you focus too many resources on the same position year in and year out, you degrade the quality of your team at every other position. We spent a lot of FA money on WR last year... a lot. Can't produce? Too bad.... coach 'em up. Develop a better offensive strategy.... do everything to fix your mistake before you waste more resources.

A better OL makes for improved WR play. More time in the pocket allows for more opportunities. An upright QB allows for better vision.

Let me give you a quick example of a team constantly addressing the same position 4 out of 5 drafts with 1st round picks....

2003 - Charles Rogers
2004 - Roy Williams
2005 - Mike Williams
2007 - Calvin Johnson

How many Super Bowls have the Lions won? How many playoff games since 2003 have the Lions won?

WRs don't win Super Bowls. Healthy QBs do.

Even after an undefeated with 3 really good WRs each having one of the best years in their career, did the Patriots win the Super Bowl? No.

This is a team game. And when you constantly spend money and picks on the same position, your team suffers.

We have enough talent at WR. If you want to spend resources on the passing game, get some OL and a good/great TE to couple with Clay.

Otherwise, the rest of the team needs help.

I'm all for drafting oline high but I don't really agree with your cause and effect here. The reason the Lions drafted who they did was because Rogers and Mike Williams were crap, Roy Williams was average. If they had been able to hit on their 2003 and 2004 picks I doubt they would have spent high picks in receivers in 2005 and 2007. The fins have had the same issue, we have invested loads of picks and money in free agency on the oline and got very little in return, in essence we just need to start hitting on our draft picks to be able to spread our high picks across different positions.

 

[airlegend]

The Oline in 2013 was crap and we have to shore it up.
Not only because Tannehill getting sacked way too much, but to increase the effectiveness of our running game.
Yes, the RBs were pretty mediocore last season, but they didn't get much help from the line. They had rarely routes blocked free for them. Even Elite-RBs like Adrian Peterson wouldn't put up great numbers with this kind of support.

The WR-Corps isn't elite, but it's for sure above average. If Tannehills development is on-going, he could make them look better then they actually are. For this, he has to work on his reading D- and deep throwing-abilities. And of course, he needs more protection.

 

[Valandui]

I'm surprised this topic is still a legit debate. Our top 3 + Clay aren't studs but are pretty darn good. Still the best WR core in the afce.

I think people who want to draft a WR before fixing the OL either never stood behind a weak OL trying to pass or never tried to block somebody way better than them. Without that understanding it's difficult to place appropriate value on the importance for having above average and athletic OL. Our OL is almost there. One or two more pieces and barring injury we will have our line set for a few years. Let's just get that guy this Thursday, close the book on it, and move forward.

The Jets and Bills both have better WR groups than we do.

 

[insomnia411]

The Jets and Bills both have better WR groups than we do.

I guess you could make the argument that the Bills are better than us at WR, I think you'd be wrong but you could make that argument.
IMO theres no wat you can say that about the Jets. I know they signed Decker, but let's see how good he is going from Peyton Manning to Geno freakin Smith, and outside of him they have nothing. Kerley is a pretty good slot player but that's it. We're way better than the Jets at WR.
Wallace is a #1 and perhaps the best deep threat in the league. If Tannehill threw a better deep ball last year Wallace would have had 300 more yards. Hartline is def a solid #2, and Gibson could be a #2 on some teams.
Were pretty good at WR. On the o line we are horrendous. The two needs are not close, o line is way more dire.

 

[russianbear]

The Jets and Bills both have better WR groups than we do.

is this post supposed to be satire?

 

[Zounds]

A good GM can find starting quality OL in the third and fourth rounds while also taking potential playmakers high. I'd like to see if we have a good GM.

Thats like saying because Brady was drafted in the 6th round, teams should only look in the 6th round for starting QBs.

Just FYI, 11 out of 12 playoff teams last year had a OL that was drafted in the 1st round. Lets not pretend that OL aren't worthy of a high draft pick.

---------- Post added at 05:11 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:10 PM ----------

The Jets and Bills both have better WR groups than we do.

:tubes: