Rosen’s Slow Start

[fansinceGWilson]

"Imaginary barrier of people pretending things"...

We have literally had a thread created in the last couple weeks titled "We have the best quarterback situation in the league" and it was not satire, but thanks for letting me know people aren't saying the things they actually are.

If you're going to be this make-believe forum lifeguard sitting in your shaded high-chair blowing your whistle and calling foul when people make proclamations that you believe aren't true, at least have the common courtesy to be right.

"A" thread. But you said "literally teeming"

 

[PhxSunFan34]

"A" thread. But you said "literally teeming"

A thread in which most people disagreed with even.

 

[Kamelion4291]

"A" thread. But you said "literally teeming"

"Prove it or it didn't happen!" Nice. Well, I'm not going to go into every thread I've read and quote everybody making excuses for Rosen and why he's the possible future, which would imply elite QB, to prove your point so I guess you win and I'm wrong.

Does ANYBODY on this forum want to make an ACTUAL point regarding Rosen, or are we just going to continually make posts over and over talking about what I said or why I said it without ever mentioning football whatsoever? Where are the mods? This is super annoying.

 

[russianbear]

Why do people think anyone is “giving up” on Rosen?

We’re just entering into the season knowing what he’s done (nothing good, albeit on a crappy team), and how he’s been during camp (Luke warm)...while keeping in mind we have a delicious QB class staring at us next year.

He has all the time in the world to develop and show he can be a great qb, but if I don’t see anything this year....he can do the developing on another team.

Maybe I’m scorned by “wait and see” approach with Tannehill but that’s my stance take it or leave it.

#HotTake

 

[The Goat]

"Prove it or it didn't happen!" Nice. Well, I'm not going to go into every thread I've read and quote everybody making excuses for Rosen and why he's the possible future, which would imply elite QB, to prove your point so I guess you win and I'm wrong.

Does ANYBODY on this forum want to make an ACTUAL point regarding Rosen, or are we just going to continually make posts over and over talking about what I said or why I said it without ever mentioning football whatsoever? Where are the mods? This is super annoying.

I know, right? Maybe you should get your own shaded high-chair.

 

[PhinFan1968]

"Prove it or it didn't happen!" Nice. Well, I'm not going to go into every thread I've read and quote everybody making excuses for Rosen and why he's the possible future, which would imply elite QB, to prove your point so I guess you win and I'm wrong.

Does ANYBODY on this forum want to make an ACTUAL point regarding Rosen, or are we just going to continually make posts over and over talking about what I said or why I said it without ever mentioning football whatsoever? Where are the mods? This is super annoying.

Speaking for myself, "the future" at the position does NOT necessarily imply elite...but it certainly implies franchise. There are plenty franchise QBs (and plenty who have won SBs) that aren't "elite." Conversely, there are several elite QBs who have never won a SB. To me, elite is hands-down top 2 or 3, during most times.

 

[Kamelion4291]

Speaking for myself, "the future" at the position does NOT necessarily imply elite...but it certainly implies franchise. There are plenty franchise QBs (and plenty who have won SBs) that aren't "elite." Conversely, there are several elite QBs who have never won a SB. To me, elite is hands-down top 2 or 3, during most times.

Me personally, I think franchise and elite are synonymous. I guess elite should technically imply a Brady/Manning/Rodgers since those type of guys are a cut above the rest, but it's always been to-ma-to to-mah-to for me.

 

[Vaark]

These days, most starting QB's are into their 30's. It often takes that long to become good/elite. So don't be so quick to give up on Rosen if he isn't clearly a "franchise" QB this season.

If the rest of the roster and/or the coaches stink a "franchise" QB isn't going to get you where you want to go. Look at Green Bay as an example.

Me? I just as soon we have a poor record, trade down to teams looking for a QB, continue to draft skill players and then rebuild the OL trenches in FA......and draft Trevor Lawrence the following year. Maybe by then all the teams that suck, and are drafting high, will have already picked a QB and it won't cost us so much to trade up if necessary.

I'd be happy if courtesy of Coach Flores, he's on a bit faster trajectory than Steve Young once he hooked up with Walsh, but ends up in the same place

 

[Vaark]

My positions on this competition are, and have been, that:

1) I'm pretty sure the coaches have made up their minds because while people on the outside may see the first week of training camp as being "early" they look at it as more like the halfway point within the context of an entire off-season of learning, classroom work, workouts, OTAs, Mini Camp, etc. The body language coming out of them on this thing was strong.

2) Conversely, Ryan Fitzpatrick is NOT some herculean figure that Josh Rosen should not be expected to beat in camp. He's old, doesn't have fresh legs or a fresh arm, isn't all that talented to begin with, and his 14 years in the NFL would be appropriately characterized as sub-mediocre for a starter. You'd never have ranked this guy in the Top 15 at his position even in his prime.

Now, it could very well be I've misread the body language coming out of the coaching staff and Rosen is very much in this thing, maybe even about to overtake Fitzpatrick. If that's the case I'll gladly admit it. But I'm pretty solid on the second point, and we've seen that play out. For every practice Fitzpatrick has had where he drew raves, he's had some stinkers in there as well. I believe a true elite franchise level QB, even in only his second year, should be able to crush him.

What about one of your volatile broadcasting partners who petulantly announced that he will not root for the fins success so long as Rosen is under center? Has he calmed the **** down? and hopefully you are no where as intractable in your position :up:

 

[Rowdy1972]

I'd be happy if courtesy of Coach Flores, he's on a bit faster trajectory than Steve Young once he hooked up with Walsh, but ends up in the same place

Speaking of Steve Young. I hope we get the next one coming out of Bama next year.

 

[fansinceGWilson]

"Prove it or it didn't happen!" Nice. Well, I'm not going to go into every thread I've read and quote everybody making excuses for Rosen and why he's the possible future, which would imply elite QB, to prove your point so I guess you win and I'm wrong.

Does ANYBODY on this forum want to make an ACTUAL point regarding Rosen, or are we just going to continually make posts over and over talking about what I said or why I said it without ever mentioning football whatsoever? Where are the mods? This is super annoying.

OK, "football" - I mentioned it.

We're back to the same debate on - hate to say it - Tannehill. (Hope I don't live to regret that.) In this case, it's Rosen. what's the difference between an "excuse" and an observation. Rosen had a poor OL. No one refutes that. Is that an "excuse" or an observation. IMO, it depends on the poster.

I do want to give you credit for acknowledging some think Rosen is "the possible future." I do. It's possible. But, like most here, no one will know without evidence and that's a few weeks off. There are some, not blaming you, who seem to think if I have guarded optimism Rosen will play well, that's a code for elite. Nope. It's just that - guarded optimism. Somewhere close to the opposite of unguarded pessimism. Yes, people make points (what you call "excuses") on Rosen. Improved recently. Quicker decisions. On the flip side, poor stats last year.

As for "elite," I make a distinction between "franchise," "top 10," and "elite." I don't like "Franchise." Sanchez was a franchise QB. Now, take the top 10 QBs on any list. How many of those teams try to upgrade to an "elite" QB. Not draft a QB to groom behind the current starter. How many try to draft an "elite" QB. Top 10 is good enough. Yes, I'd like the next Marino or Montana. Yes, try for an "elite" QB. But ACCEPT a top 10 QB because that's what your team will do. But, IMO, franchise doesn't equal elite. Accept a 2-4 year try out of the next possibly "elite" QB before they try again. Murray is the outlier. Go with the 'standard' team methodology.

 

[Kamelion4291]

OK, "football" - I mentioned it.

We're back to the same debate on - hate to say it - Tannehill. (Hope I don't live to regret that.) In this case, it's Rosen. what's the difference between an "excuse" and an observation. Rosen had a poor OL. No one refutes that. Is that an "excuse" or an observation. IMO, it depends on the poster.

I do want to give you credit for acknowledging some think Rosen is "the possible future." I do. It's possible. But, like most here, no one will know without evidence and that's a few weeks off. There are some, not blaming you, who seem to think if I have guarded optimism Rosen will play well, that's a code for elite. Nope. It's just that - guarded optimism. Somewhere close to the opposite of unguarded pessimism. Yes, people make points (what you call "excuses") on Rosen. Improved recently. Quicker decisions. On the flip side, poor stats last year.

As for "elite," I make a distinction between "franchise," "top 10," and "elite." I don't like "Franchise." Sanchez was a franchise QB. Now, take the top 10 QBs on any list. How many of those teams try to upgrade to an "elite" QB. Not draft a QB to groom behind the current starter. How many try to draft an "elite" QB. Top 10 is good enough. Yes, I'd like the next Marino or Montana. Yes, try for an "elite" QB. But ACCEPT a top 10 QB because that's what your team will do. But, IMO, franchise doesn't equal elite. Accept a 2-4 year try out of the next possibly "elite" QB before they try again. Murray is the outlier. Go with the 'standard' team methodology.

Thank you! An actual talking point.

I don't discount that Rosen "could" turn out to be real good, or at least good enough to worry about the rest of the roster positions instead. I've just been weary of the constant stream of excuses being thrown his way, not saying you specifically, for why he hasn't played up to his potential. Excuses or observations, it does matter depending on the poster, but sometimes they're not disconnected and the quarterback is responsible for what his surrounding circumstances are. The problem is that we, as in forum posters, generally lack a true source of necessary data to back our observations. If a person says, "Rosen doesn't have a chance because his Oline is bad", is it reeeeeally the fault of his Oline? If there were readily available data that everybody knew about stating that Rosen is a bottom 3 quarterback in terms of average time holding on to the ball for his throws, it would definitely skew the perception more towards an "excuse" that his Oline is "bad" rather than just a disconnected observation. A quarterback like that would require a Dallas Oline to be able to function, something that isn't realistic as a basic for judging him as a legitimate starter.

And as you said, this is definitely related to Tannehill because it bothers me to see the same rhetoric happening here in regards to Rosen, and Henne before that. I want quarterbacks to earn the benefit of the doubt. I don't know for sure whether Rosen will end up being a bust or not obviously, but is it really heresy to ask what he's done in the NFL (and in college, because that counts too) and conclude that he's currently heading in that direction based on what he's done so far?

 

[Dolphinitis]

Tanny threw 3 ints the day before he was crowned as our saviour. Maybe give Rosen a couple of games.