Am I the only one that cringes at EVERY single trade up scenario ? | Page 10 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Am I the only one that cringes at EVERY single trade up scenario ?

YES times 1000%.

You‘re not afraid because you get it. SF and TEN are great examples for just this season. Yes, neither team won, ultimately, but they were certainly playing well enough to win during the playoffs.

MIA once had the ultimate franchise QB. Yet only appeared in ONE Super Bowl. Dan Fouts, Jim Kelly, Warren Moon and numerous others were never part of a title winner. Meanwhile the lIkes of Jim McMahon, Doug Williams, Mark Rypien, Trent Dilfer, Brad Johnson, and Nick Foles all have.

As you pointed out, Rodgers and Brees have combined to play around 30 seasons as starting QB’s. They each only have 1 title each to speak of. And they‘re as elite as elite can be.

It‘s more about the team and system. See the New England Patriots.



The Patriots have 6 titles. Brady was just part of them.

The Patriots have managed to win 6 titles because they built the perfect storm program. And managed to keep it consistent. And cheated numerous times, allegedly. But I digress.

Besides Brady, NE has had the most accomplished coach of all time. Not just during his time in NE, but also in NY with the Giants. They also had the most accomplished and clutch playoff place kicker of all time. And numerous other HOF’ers or soon to be.

I’ve made the argument many times that the first couple SB’s the Patriots won were on the strength of their defense and special teams, notably Vinatieri. Who made the two kicks against OAK in the snow to advance to a SB then game winners in two of the Super Bowls.

In short, it’s been a team and organization accomplishment above all else.

IMO, the Patriots have a ton in common with the 80’s SF 49ers. Numerous HOF players on both sides of the all. HOF head coaches. And an organizational system that was ahead of it’s time.

It wasn’t all on their QB, or even mostly.

And there was a bout a 10 year gap where NE didn't win a SB. Either factors other than Brady count, or Brady wasn't very good those 10 years.
 
Why are people using the 49ers and Titans as examples?

Both teams were *** until a good qb came in a changed their fortunes. Both teams were picking top 5 before the qb came in a picked em up.

You’re kidding, right?

If you believe Garoppolo and Tannehill changed either teams fortunes, rather than top rushing attacks behind top offensive lines and arguably the top defense in the league (in SF’s case) there’s no helping you to understand what you don’t understand.

Nick Bosa getting drafted and playing as well as he did is what took the Niners defense to the level it reached this season. Defense and their run game, neither of which has anything to do with Garoppolo, is what that team is built upon.

And Tennessee? I’m not gonna even bother explaining that one. It’s clear what their strengths were and weren’t.
 
How many times and in how many threads are you going to regurgitate this same false narrative?

As I said in one of the other threads, football is the ultimate team sport. Building a well balanced team matters. The ’other’ positions matter.

Yes, it would be nice to draft the next Aaron Rodgers. But look how much GB has underachieved because they can’t surround their elite QB with enough talent.

Same thing happened with our Dolphins during the Marino era. They HAD the QB yet were largely “dead in the water”.

Meanwhile SF and TENN both threatened to win the SB this season with Jimmy Garoppolo and Ryan Tannehill.

The Dolphins can find a QB like them in more than one way. @BeatCrazy2 is spot on in saying that they have many options besides panicking and trading away draft picks.

They can get a QB at 5. Or 18. Or in round 2. Or via free agency. Or via the 2021 draft.

And the better team the Dolphins build, the less they’ll need from their QB. Of course everyone of us would like a Patrick Mahomes that can cover up deficiencies, but it’s not a complete and utter necessity.

Your assessment is inaccurate. Hyperbole.

OK, dude. Go ahead and rely on the outlier. Miami has been doing that for 20 years. Might as well go for another 20, yeah? We’ll stand by and watch KC, Seattle, and Baltimore consistently make the playoffs while you mess around trying to find your franchise QB late in the draft. :rolleyes:
 
And there was a bout a 10 year gap where NE didn't win a SB. Either factors other than Brady count, or Brady wasn't very good those 10 years.

Good point. I’d only add that they were still contending for titles, even though they didn’t win them. Even the season Brady was injured all season in 2008, they still won 11 games with Matt Cassell behind center.

They‘ve always been a good team above all else. Because Belichick has been their the entire time.
 
You’re kidding, right?

If you believe Garoppolo and Tannehill changed either teams fortunes, rather than top rushing attacks behind top offensive lines and arguably the top defense in the league (in SF’s case) there’s no helping you to understand what you don’t understand.

Nick Bosa getting drafted and playing as well as he did is what took the Niners defense to the level it reached this season. Defense and their run game, neither of which has anything to do with Garoppolo, is what that team is built upon.

And Tennessee? I’m not gonna even bother explaining that one. It’s clear what their strengths were and weren’t.

That same Derrick Henry wasn't Derrick Henry when they had zero passing threat. He wasn't taking over games, he wasn't carrying a team, he was average because teams were not worried about the pass.

The 49ers went 4-12 with a good defense and bad qb play. Insert Jimmy G and the offense becomes top 8 with the same rushing attack they had last year and will always have with Kyle Shanahan as their playcaller.
 
Why are people using the 49ers and Titans as examples?

Both teams were *** until a good qb came in a changed their fortunes. Both teams were picking top 5 before the qb came in a picked em up.

Because they don’t understand the argument. We are talking about consistent competitivness, not a playoff appearance every few seasons. They think using an extra first rounder is more important than trading it for a chance at a real franchise QB, which is an absurd stance to take if you look at the last 20 years of super bowl winners.
 
OK, dude. Go ahead and rely on the outlier. Miami has been doing that for 20 years. Might as well go for another 20, yeah? We’ll stand by and watch KC, Seattle, and Baltimore consistently make the playoffs while you mess around trying to find your franchise QB late in the draft. :rolleyes:

Outlier, my behind. There are far more examples in favor than against. No matter what examples are pointed out, it’s clear you’re gonna dismiss them.

You’re just in denial. Plain and simple. I’ll leave you in your state.

As you were.
 
YES times 1000%.

You‘re not afraid because you get it. SF and TEN are great examples for just this season. Yes, neither team won, ultimately, but they were certainly playing well enough to win during the playoffs.

MIA once had the ultimate franchise QB. Yet only appeared in ONE Super Bowl. Dan Fouts, Jim Kelly, Warren Moon and numerous others were never part of a title winner. Meanwhile the lIkes of Jim McMahon, Doug Williams, Mark Rypien, Trent Dilfer, Brad Johnson, and Nick Foles all have.

As you pointed out, Rodgers and Brees have combined to play around 30 seasons as starting QB’s. They each only have 1 title each to speak of. And they‘re as elite as elite can be.

It‘s more about the team and system. See the New England Patriots.

A little OT, but FH needs to come up with ONE descriptive term for the desired QB. In this thread, we see "elite," "Franchise," and "good." Maybe "top 10," I forget. I think everyone wants a "good" and "top 10" QB. I can live without elite. Someone has a "franchise" definition in their sig, but I doubt most fans use that definition.

As for trading up, it seems there are 3 positions,
1) "whatever it takes"
2) I'll spend a little, grudgingly, to move up
3) Never
My inclination is Miami won't spend big to move up
 
Outlier, my behind. There are far more examples in favor than against. No matter what examples are pointed out, it’s clear you’re gonna dismiss them.

You’re just in denial. Plain and simple. I’ll leave you in your state.

As you were.

Whatever you say, big guy.
 
The only issue with wanting to build a team like the 49ers / Titans is they all come due.

49ers won't be able to keep all those pieces that lead them to a SB, they'll all need big money and it is not feasible. Then what? Pray you get lucky in the draft again and hope the next decade brings that many top 5 picks to hopefully become all pros? They will also have regression, a team lead be defense and running game can't sustain it for multiple years straight, it won't happen and it can't happen. To many variables involved for it to work unless the qb you have can win with his arm while the other parts go through rebuilds like all great teams do. Seattle is a great example.
 
That same Derrick Henry wasn't Derrick Henry when they had zero passing threat. He wasn't taking over games, he wasn't carrying a team, he was average because teams were not worried about the pass.

The 49ers went 4-12 with a good defense and bad qb play. Insert Jimmy G and the offense becomes top 8 with the same rushing attack they had last year and will always have with Kyle Shanahan as their playcaller.

You‘ve got it completely backwards with Tennessee. When Henry and the o-line was dominating, their play action passing game worked. Tannehill was successful. Like every other freaking QB in that same situation.

When the rush attack was slowed or stopped, what game did Tannehill step up and win by slinging it play after play when the defense knew he was going to do it? You’re killing me, Smalls.

Regarding the 49ers, again, they are led by their defense and offensive line. Not their freaking QB!

Did you miss the SB or something?? When the chips were down and his team needed him to throw them back into the game and to win, what’d Garoppolo do?

I live around 49ers fans. It’s funny, pretty much every single Niners fan I know recognizes Jimmy G for what he is. An average-to-slightly-above-average QB. He’s nothing special. And that’s the freaking point.

Nick Bosa was the most impactful addition the Niners had this season. Ask Arik Armstead, who owes Bosa for saving his career.

It’s crazy how little of a clue some fans here have about the 49ers. Or Tennessee.

Neither of their QB’s are better than an ancient Ryan Fitzpatrick. They just play on far better teams.

Unbelievable.
 
You‘ve got it completely backwards with Tennessee. When Henry and the o-line was dominating, their play action passing game worked. Tannehill was successful. Like every other freaking QB in that same situation.

When the rush attack was slowed or stopped, what game did Tannehill step up and win by slinging it play after play when the defense knew he was going to do it? You’re killing me, Smalls.

Regarding the 49ers, again, they are led by their defense and offensive line. Not their freaking QB!

Did you miss the SB or something?? When the chips were down and his team needed him to throw them back into the game and to win, what’d Garoppolo do?

I live around 49ers fans. It’s funny, pretty much every single Niners fan I know recognizes Jimmy G for what he is. An average-to-slightly-above-average QB. He’s nothing special. And that’s the freaking point.

Nick Bosa was the most impactful addition the Niners had this season. Ask Arik Armstead, who owes Bosa for saving his career.

It’s crazy how little of a clue some fans here have about the 49ers. Or Tennessee.

Neither of their QB’s are better than an ancient Ryan Fitzpatrick. They just play on far better teams.

Unbelievable.

Its remarkable how someone can watch the same game that the rest of us do and come away with a lesson that’s the complete opposite of true like this. I’ve also never seen a fan clamoring to be like 2 teams that lost to the eventual Super Bowl champ instead of wanting to be like the Super Bowl champ. Yikes.
 
Last edited:
Hindsight is always 20/20.

You’re conveniently listing a couple examples that worked. But how about the ones that didn’t? I guarantee you there are more examples of those.

Furthermore, the situation for KC was different than the situation MIA is in. In many ways.

One example would be that KC moved up 17 spots from 27 to 10. It cost them only 1 additional 3rd round pick from that same draft. They also traded a 1st rounder from the next draft.

And, again, they moved up 17 spots. And didn’t target a player with a questionable injury history and recovery.

However, in the Dolphins case, the cost to move up just 2 or 3 spots is much, much more expensive. And much, much more risky.

It‘s an apples to oranges comparison.
Not to mention the fact that KC was already a playoff caliber team, that didn't have 15 gaping holes to fill.
 
The only issue with wanting to build a team like the 49ers / Titans is they all come due.

49ers won't be able to keep all those pieces that lead them to a SB, they'll all need big money and it is not feasible. Then what? Pray you get lucky in the draft again and hope the next decade brings that many top 5 picks to hopefully become all pros? They will also have regression, a team lead be defense and running game can't sustain it for multiple years straight, it won't happen and it can't happen. To many variables involved for it to work unless the qb you have can win with his arm while the other parts go through rebuilds like all great teams do. Seattle is a great example.

The flip side is Marino, Rodgers, Brees, Kelly, and others. The QB can't get his team over the top without a solid team around him. Before responding, I want a top QB. Make every reasonable effort to get one. And, yes, top QBs get to the playoffs consistently. But this isn't either/or. It takes a top HC, a top QB, and a supporting cast to be consistently good.
 
Not ignoring it at all. But if the high pick QB is found by our evaluators to not be worth the time and value we would need to put into him, then maybe the FA QB is the better bet? You can't ignore that either, can you?

I would absolutely HATE a FA QB. I hated the decision to bring in Fitz. And now, look. How can you not retain Fitz?

Say what you want about Fitz but he made chicken salad out of chicken sht AND he helped discover that Preston is a deep threat beast plus the Parker resurrection. He had the cajones to put it up and those fellas went up for huge catches/plays.

I'd much rather form a solid oline, one that can give the QB proper time and give Rosen another shot. Again, that's predicated on actually forming a competent line.

We have our starter and expensive back-up. Now we just need to see what happens in the draft.
 
Back
Top Bottom