Here’s where the Dolphins stand at offensive positions and their options to fill holes | Page 5 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Here’s where the Dolphins stand at offensive positions and their options to fill holes

SCOTTY said:
Come on, tanny at #8 was a miracle to you and not a forced pick. LOL. That's hilarious. Do you know anything about his college career. Beat out by Jerrod Johnson (that's right who??) And had to move to wr. Got sometime towards the end of his junior year. Started as a senior, short career going into the NFL draft. He threw 29 TDS to 15 Ints. A ratio he had duplicated his entire pro career. That's a miracle pick to you. Baker is a heisman trophy winner coming from one of the top college programs in the country. Almost a 70% completion % and has 129 tds to 29 ints in 47 starts. Tanny was a stretch. Baker would be a mircle.
Click to expand...
Yet Tannehill (based on mock drafts) was considered a better pro prospect.
 
SCOTTY said:
Saying everyone of them has serious questions simply isn't true. They are nothing like locker, gabbert, ponder. It will take a couple years of evidence to prove but I'm willing to revisit. This class will go down as best in 20+ years.
Click to expand...
Of course it is true.

Mayfield- size and maturity
Rosen - attitude and durability
Allen - accuracy and level of competition
Darnold - turnovers
 
Things seem to be shaping up nicely for us at pick #11.

What do you feel the front office should do if one of the teams picking from #12 to #21 is willing to swap positions with us and give us their second round pick?

Can we take the trade and still get a first round pick that will be about as good as what we can get at pick #11, or do the choices thin out too fast from our #11 pick position? Is it a feasible trade if the trading partner is at pick #17?

I've felt we should trade down if we had the opportunity to get an additional second round pick, but now I'm not so sure. If we stay where we are it looks like we will have an opportunity to get a good player at one of several positions of need. We also don't have to pay the steeper costs of a 1 through 10 pick.

Considering what we've done in Free Agency, I'm not sure an extra pick in the second has as much value to us now as our opportunity to get a player we really want (and need) at pick #11.

Based on all the comments I've read here the last few days, I am very curious to see how the board feels about this kind of trade.
 
FinfanInBuffalo said:
Of course it is true.

Mayfield- size and maturity
Rosen - attitude and durability
Allen - accuracy and level of competition
Darnold - turnovers
Click to expand...
Again, you're claiming "serious" questions about all the qb. I'm saying not true "serious". Every scouting report had strengths and weaknesses. Are you a tannehill support? Let's go to his pre draft: bad anticipation, bad ball security, too many ints and fumbles, small hands, only 19 college starts. Not a tanny fan. Pick another qb.
 
SCOTTY said:
Again, you're claiming "serious" questions about all the qb. I'm saying not true "serious". Every scouting report had strengths and weaknesses. Are you a tannehill support? Let's go to his pre draft: bad anticipation, bad ball security, too many ints and fumbles, small hands, only 19 college starts. Not a tanny fan. Pick another qb.
Click to expand...
We shall see. I don't want any of those QBs. IMO, at least two possibly three will bust.
 
FinfanInBuffalo said:
Mayfield

Walter Football has Mayfield as a round 1-2 prospect. They had Tannehill as top 25.
Click to expand...
This cracks me up that you believe tanny was touted as a better qb prospect than heisman winning Mayfield.
 
Ray R said:
Things seem to be shaping up nicely for us at pick #11.

What do you feel the front office should do if one of the teams picking from #12 to #21 is willing to swap positions with us and give us their second round pick?

Can we take the trade and still get a first round pick that will be about as good as what we can get at pick #11, or do the choices thin out too fast from our #11 pick position? Is it a feasible trade if the trading partner is at pick #17?

I've felt we should trade down if we had the opportunity to get an additional second round pick, but now I'm not so sure. If we stay where we are it looks like we will have an opportunity to get a good player at one of several positions of need. We also don't have to pay the steeper costs of a 1 through 10 pick.

Considering what we've done in Free Agency, I'm not sure an extra pick in the second has as much value to us now as our opportunity to get a player we really want (and need) at pick #11.

Based on all the comments I've read here the last few days, I am very curious to see how the board feels about this kind of trade.
Click to expand...
A very good player will be there at #11, so imo we should stay put. Need to add top talent to our roster.
 
NyPhan23 said:
He sounded pretty serious (fwiw)...

CK‏ @ckparrot Mar 13
What’s funny about getting Wilson and Amendola (and Woodhead, you watch, not joking) for underneath is Stills a proven deep threat, and Jakeem Grant shows flashes of that too. He’s un-jammable. He’s too tiny and fast. Try getting a jam on a live chicken sometime. It’s not easy.
Click to expand...

Excuse my reading comprehension, but who did CK say was un-jammable?

Oh, on a side note, I am going to call the name of our offense the "Rhythm method". Shallow, shallow, shallow, shallow, DEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEP! Shallow, shallow, DEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEP! Shallow, shallow, shallow, shallow, DEEEEEEEEEEEEEEP! TOUCHDOWN! (Someone please pass me a cigarette) ;-)
 
Beach Bum 91 said:
Excuse my reading comprehension, but who did CK say was un-jammable?

Oh, on a side note, I am going to call the name of our offense the "Rhythm method". Shallow, shallow, shallow, shallow, DEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEP! Shallow, shallow, DEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEP! Shallow, shallow, shallow, shallow, DEEEEEEEEEEEEEEP! TOUCHDOWN! (Someone please pass me a cigarette) ;-)
Click to expand...

Haha - I like that one... I think he is saying that these little WR's are very hard to jam because of their size.
 
Albert Romano said:
Haha - I like that one... I think he is saying that these little WR's are very hard to jam because of their size.
Click to expand...

Thank you! I wasn't sure if he was talking about all of them or just one of them. I know not everyone agrees, but I am excited to see what these guys can bring to the table. We haven't been able to implement it because of the situation we had last year, but if I remember correctly, I think Gase would like our offense to be more variable from week to week based on who we play.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom