Who'd You Rather?

[Regan21286]

Griese (with a reduced contract and a year of experience) stays as incumbent while new rookie QB (Ricky Ray, Rivers, Losman, whatever) learns the ropes. It's what Cincinnati did with mediocre Kitna and Palmer and look what happened. Drop Fiedler and maybe wave Sage as trade bait. If Brunell doesn't want to play with a rookie QB in the wings, tough.

 

[NavyFishFan]

Originally posted by jbond
Sign Brunell, trade next year's #1 pick for Henson (rather then this year's), keep Sage as #2, let Ogun sign somewhere else and leave us with 2 1st round picks, 2 3rd round picks, etc. which would then be applied to WR's and Olinemen and pickup some project Dlinemen later in the later rounds of the draft, as well as maybe pickup 1-2 Olinemen through FA.

That would be about as ideal as we could get I would think. That gives us what we want --- fixes the QB short and long term, gives us the picks we need to get some new blood, and leaves open FA for others....

I totally agree with this rendition of Option 4. I also think it may be tough to pull off, because of wanting to go with a future pick for Henson, but its possible. Has happened before.

Originally posted by Cranx


Let me make this abundantly clear: YOU CAN'T HAVE BOTH BRUNNELL AND A ROOKIE QB, BRUNNELL WILL NOT ACCEPT IT! I hope that clears up that misconception once and for all.

If Brunell's that big of a ***** that he can't go to a team where he's assured a starting spot for AT LEAST 1 year because he's scared of losing to a rook....what does that say about his confidence and faith in his OWN skills? I think just is just pre-positioning by him and his agent, not holy writ. He's been around a while and HAS to know that teams have to look out for their future....and the single hardest position to gain guaranteed future at is QB.

That said....if Brunell really IS serious about what he said and will allow that to block him signing with a team....he can kiss my ***. No respect for that kinda crap.

 

[Dolphins17-0]

Originally posted by Cranx


I don't know where you're getting that from but Pittsburgh, Tampa Bay, Chicago and ESPECIALLY Arizona and theGiants (Fassell has already had dinner with Brunnel recently to "clear thigs up between them) are all possible suitors in this deal.


You guys really need to try ditching the myopia for a minute and look at this thing from a realistic perspective and the reality of the situation is you can't have both Brunell and a top flight rookie QB this year; the two simply won't jel since Brunell has EXPLICITLY STATED that it won't. Please, try to understand that.

so hed go to chicago where they are dying to begin the rex grossman era, are you kidding me? Arizona??? if they don't draft a qb it's because they feel mcown is ready to get a shot, not to mention Arizona is far from what brunell is likely looking for.
Tampa Bay already declared themselves out of the running since gruden said hes keeping brad johnson. pittsburgh already looking into rivers/henson so they could very well be out.

that leaves the giants, and im assuming you meant coughlin had met with him not fassel since hes with the ravens now. The giants have kerry collins, similar to brunell in a lot of ways, and despite patching things up over one meal with coughlin i doubt he wants to go back there, besides ernie accorsi has expressed great interest in trading up to get eli manning if the opportunity presents itself.

so where are all these teams that want brunell, seriously i want to know who else you have that want brunell, are willing to pay him well and will not be looking to get a young qb in the next 2-3 years... these teams are few and far between and dont have the allure that the dolphins have with the talent/location... we can guarantee him one year starting with hensen, and if he earns it, he gets another.
Just because brunell is the top FA QB available doesnt mean there is a huge market for him

im being very reasonable, logical, and realistic about all of this.

Just wondering why you dont see it as even a slim possibility, which teams do you forsee him going to over the dolphins and why?

edit: how many times do pro athletes explicitly state something to gain an upper hand only to go back on it in the end, or change their minds... happens all the time, come on now

 

[jbond]

Originally posted by Cranx


Wow, a bit of a strong reaction from someone who obviously has no idea what he's talking about.

Perhaps that's because you are essentially yelling at me as if I'm a moron on your original statement, before editing, implied I had no idea what I was talking about and I thought was uncalled for.

How about this: I'm not God but I'll trust what the guy says until he proves otherwise, how's that? Based upon that alone I DO KNOW WHAT HE WOULD ACCEPT. Also, what in the name of all that is stupid and unholy does office politics have to do with this situation? Do you even know what office politics are? Apparently not otherwise you wouldn't have used that term in a manner that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

That is rather simple. In order to try to better his position wherever he lands up he is trying to play his cards to ensure a more secure position for him. What he said....is what he said....he did not sign a contract to anyone or any organization saying he wouldn't go here or there. That is called politics....using any leverage you can to try to ensure not only your survival but also the biggest payday.

BTW, if I were Mark Brunell, I wouldn't have to be in disguise since I'm sitting at a computer and you have no idea who I am or what I look like genius so, for all you know, I could be him...although I'm not...or am I? Also, take whatever level of literacy you do have and find the article that was written just a couple of days ago where Mark Brunnell said that he was not willing to accept a position where a team would be drafting a QB with their #1 pick. Again, this is not ME making this up, this is HIM saying this in an interview regarding his future in the NFL, get it?

I have a high level of education and don't feel the need to justify myself to you, although you hinted I had none, originally, by not being able to read any of this thread. My point was that you ARE NOT Brunell and although he said one thing in one context, does not mean that it is a guarantee although you are spouting off as if it is written in stone and that your opinion on it is the only one that matters, which is wrong. I never said you made anything up, only that you DON'T know what he will take although you seem to be oh so sure of somone else's comments. Get it? Gee.....am I....am I not....I'm perplexed here.....I think therefore I am.......delusioinal thoughts....

Given the current state of the QB market, Brunnell should have no problem finding a situation that meets his needs and, therefore, will not have to accept a position that will cause him to have to compromise his EXPLICIT statements. The only way he would contradict himself here would likely be if A) there was no market for his services and he had to settle for anything (not going to happen) or B) he decides that staying in Florida is more important than money or long term starting status (assuming Miami were to also draft a QB.)

Again, these are statements made to ensure that he gets the best position possible. Maybe the phins, or some organization take him seriously and don't go after a QB in the draft....maybe we/someone else does but he resigns to his fate as an aging QB and still accepts. You don't know. And I think it would be common sense that he would rather be the starting QB for a year...or maybe two for a team that has a good shot at the superbowl vs. being a starter for the next 4 years that doesn't go anywhere. But again, you seem to have his actions planned out....how nice. Even then, you illustrated how his "explicit" statement may not come true anyways. So thanks.

Finally, you're trying to make yourself out to be a bit more omniscient than me considering you are saying that you know that the statement Brunell made was false and that he IS willing to accept a position with a team that will be drafting a QB in the first round.

I have only said that I, nor you, know what he would be willing to accept....that's not being omniscient....that's just saying the truth. Take it as you may.


Cheers :)

 

[ckparrothead]

Ok Cranx you're gonna have to learn something about reporting.

One of the keys for Brunell is he doesn't want to play for a team that invests a first-round pick in a quarterback this year. Brunell, 32, believes he can be an effective starter for another three or four years and doesn't want to go through another situation similar to the Leftwich one.

Where did Mark Brunell explicitly say what you think he did? This article was written by Jason Cole and while I tend to respect him I would be lying if I said it was the first time he seemed to put words in a guys mouths or take part in a little irresponsible reporting. He gets criticism from a lot of people (I believe Hank Goldberg for one).

Basically since Brunell wasn't quoted, we don't know WHAT he actually said. Cole could have simply reported this as something he heard from someone OTHER than Brunell. He could have minced up Brunell's words. Or maybe he could have heard Brunell say exactly what Cole reported...he does not WANT to sign with a team that drafts a first round QB. Notice that is not saying he DENIES that he'll sign with a team that drafts a QB or that he WILL NOT sign with such a team.

Saying he doesn't WANT to play for one could merely be a preference that in the end is disregarded. After all, he doesn't WANT to play for a team outside of the state of Florida, where he plans to retire...but he WILL play for one depending upon other factors.

 

[Cranx]

Originally posted by jbond


Perhaps that's because you are essentially yelling at me as if I'm a moron on your original statement, before editing, implied I had no idea what I was talking about and I thought was uncalled for.



That is rather simple. In order to try to better his position wherever he lands up he is trying to play his cards to ensure a more secure position for him. What he said....is what he said....he did not sign a contract to anyone or any organization saying he wouldn't go here or there. That is called politics....using any leverage you can to try to ensure not only your survival but also the biggest payday.



I have a high level of education and don't feel the need to justify myself to you, although you hinted I had none, originally, by not being able to read any of this thread. My point was that you ARE NOT Brunell and although he said one thing in one context, does not mean that it is a guarantee although you are spouting off as if it is written in stone and that your opinion on it is the only one that matters, which is wrong. I never said you made anything up, only that you DON'T know what he will take although you seem to be oh so sure of somone else's comments. Get it? Gee.....am I....am I not....I'm perplexed here.....I think therefore I am.......delusioinal thoughts....



Again, these are statements made to ensure that he gets the best position possible. Maybe the phins, or some organization take him seriously and don't go after a QB in the draft....maybe we/someone else does but he resigns to his fate as an aging QB and still accepts. You don't know. And I think it would be common sense that he would rather be the starting QB for a year...or maybe two for a team that has a good shot at the superbowl vs. being a starter for the next 4 years that doesn't go anywhere. But again, you seem to have his actions planned out....how nice. Even then, you illustrated how his "explicit" statement may not come true anyways. So thanks.



I have only said that I, nor you, know what he would be willing to accept....that's not being omniscient....that's just saying the truth. Take it as you may.


Cheers :)

I'll make this a list response rather than go throught trouble of trying to respond within the quoted portions (that's a pain in the butt!) because I want to address all of your points.

1) I wasn't really yelling at you per say, I was "yelling" at everyone who kept making this same suggestion and you just happened to be the most recent one. You're also correct here in that I did edit the post very shortly after writing it because I realized that making the statement I did to open that reply was out of line. Given your stated level of education you should have realized that I was trying to avoid taking a personal shot at you but, if I offended you, sorry about that.

2) Yes, that is politicking but not "office politics" there's a difference. I was basically smacking you on that portion for your use of a term that was somewhat inappropriate. It's semantics however so it really doesn't matter at all to the overall content of anything.

3) I think you're reading too much into what I wrote in that pre-edit post. I never implied in any way, shape, or form that you are or were illiterate only that you didn't read the thread or the original post. That does not imply illiteracy but rather a lack of attention to detail; there's a major difference there.

I understand that Brunnell's explicit statement may not ultimately turn out to be the way things end up for him however, my point is that his coming to Miami AND drafting a rookie "QB of the future" is not likely to happen and, if it does, then there's likely to be some serious problems associated with the situation and I certainly don't want that at all!

4) You started out with the whole "God" thing so I just ran with it. Obviously neither one of us have any level of omniscience here otherwise we wouldn't be having this conversation; we'd already know the outcome of this situation!

:whew:

 

[ckparrothead]

I don't mean to take a dump on you or anything Cranx. Brunell could easily have said exactly what you think he's said. He could even have meant it.

But I think he just as easily could have said something else that if you heard it, you wouldn't be so absolutely CERTAIN that he won't sign with us if we drafted Rivers or traded for Henson. The thing is you can't take a reporters words as gospel on something like that. If he makes a direct quote, you can take it for gospel. But in a situation like that where he's paraphrasing, Brunell may only have HINTED that it wasnt his desire to play with a team that spends a first round pick on a QB. In which case the whole stipulation would be rather flexible.

Even if he did explicitly say he has no intention of signing with a team that spends a first round pick on a QB, a lot can change between now and when he signs...and I tell you lots of guys make statements about stuff like that and end up eating their words. People can change their minds. In fact considering the preposterous nature of this stipulation of his, I seriously doubt he will be able to AVOID going to a team that doesn't spend a first round pick on a QB, or hasn't already done so. He'll be 34 by the time the season starts.

Given all this it is not at all out of line for people to assume that drafting Rivers or trading for Henson is a distinct possibility to go along with signing Mark Brunell.

 

[Cranx]

Originally posted by ckparrothead
Ok Cranx you're gonna have to learn something about reporting.



Where did Mark Brunell explicitly say what you think he did? This article was written by Jason Cole and while I tend to respect him I would be lying if I said it was the first time he seemed to put words in a guys mouths or take part in a little irresponsible reporting. He gets criticism from a lot of people (I believe Hank Goldberg for one).

Basically since Brunell wasn't quoted, we don't know WHAT he actually said. Cole could have simply reported this as something he heard from someone OTHER than Brunell. He could have minced up Brunell's words. Or maybe he could have heard Brunell say exactly what Cole reported...he does not WANT to sign with a team that drafts a first round QB. Notice that is not saying he DENIES that he'll sign with a team that drafts a QB or that he WILL NOT sign with such a team.

Saying he doesn't WANT to play for one could merely be a preference that in the end is disregarded. After all, he doesn't WANT to play for a team outside of the state of Florida, where he plans to retire...but he WILL play for one depending upon other factors.

Actually, I know quite a bit about reporting but thanks for the belittling comment there CK. This was not the article to which I was referring and, in the article that I read (on either Monday or Friday) Brunell was quoted as making a statement very similar to that which Cole said there. It was in an article that I read off ESPN.com's Insider "Local Links" but I cannot remember the paper from which the quote came since they source EVERY online paper in the U.S.

I also very clearly understand that circumstances change however, the point is that-- based upon the statement he made-- Miami would not be an ideal, or even preferrable situation, for Brunell assuming a "QB of the future is later drafted or traded for."

Also, in response to your earlier comments regarding the playoff teams you clearly didn't read my post otherwise you'd know exactly which two teams I was referring to in the Patriots of 2001 and the Rams of 2002 with Drew Bledsoe and Kurt Warner as the tutors respectively. Try reading the whole post before responding in such a ****y manner.

As for the six teams you pointed out that had "relatively" inexperienced QB's across the board, not a single one of those teams started the season without a QB who had at least some significant time as a starter in the NFL. What you're proposing here is to toss three QB's with virtually ZERO NFL game experience (Sage has "appeared" in what, three games?) and ABSOLUTELY NO NFL starting experience in to start the season. I'm not sure you could find a single person on these boards, or in the NFL for that matter, to agree that doing what you're proposing would not constitute the 'Fins conceding to a rebuilding year.

As I said previously, the 'Fins could get lucky and stumble across a Tom Brady or Dan Marino (no, I'm not comparing the two talent wise but they are the only two QB's that I can think of that lead their respective teams to Super Bowls with absolutely no NFL game experience) but even they had guys on the bench who could provide them with guidence and direction as they progressed throughout their respective seasons.

Finally, when have I brought Sage into the conversation anywhere other than to mention him as a continued backup. I haven't said one way or another whether I think he could or could not be the starting QB in Miami but, based upon the fact that the coaches seem to have little or no confidence in his future abilities, I see no reason put my faith in him. Heck, he might turn out to be great one day but actions speak louder than words and, thus far, the actions by the 'Fins would indicate that Sage is not even close to getting consideration for the starting gig in Miami.

 

[Cranx]

Originally posted by ckparrothead
I don't mean to take a dump on you or anything Cranx. Brunell could easily have said exactly what you think he's said. He could even have meant it.

But I think he just as easily could have said something else that if you heard it, you wouldn't be so absolutely CERTAIN that he won't sign with us if we drafted Rivers or traded for Henson. The thing is you can't take a reporters words as gospel on something like that. If he makes a direct quote, you can take it for gospel. But in a situation like that where he's paraphrasing, Brunell may only have HINTED that it wasnt his desire to play with a team that spends a first round pick on a QB. In which case the whole stipulation would be rather flexible.

Even if he did explicitly say he has no intention of signing with a team that spends a first round pick on a QB, a lot can change between now and when he signs...and I tell you lots of guys make statements about stuff like that and end up eating their words. People can change their minds. In fact considering the preposterous nature of this stipulation of his, I seriously doubt he will be able to AVOID going to a team that doesn't spend a first round pick on a QB, or hasn't already done so. He'll be 34 by the time the season starts.

Given all this it is not at all out of line for people to assume that drafting Rivers or trading for Henson is a distinct possibility to go along with signing Mark Brunell.

Again, the condescention you're spewing out here is tremendous; I'm well aware of the nature of journalists to embellish and sensationalize a situation in order to benefit their position in their particular section of the paper/magazine/periodical for which they report. In this case it was a direct quote which gave me/us some insight into the frame of mind of the player most people on these boards covet above all others. Let's assume here that, since he said it, he meant it. If he said IT and meant IT then it's likely that he would not be a good fit for a team that is interested in drafting a young QB as the chemistry would simply be horrendous.

At this point I'm sick of defending this point against you since you seem to be arguing for the sake of proving me wrong and making yourself out to be the eternally correct hero. Please, step off your high horse; it's getting a bit ridiculous.

 

[ckparrothead]

Alright fine I give up. Everyone who disagrees with you is an illiterate @sshole that refuses to read every miniscule micrometer of your thoughts and implications. You can't be wrong. You just can't. Not even a little. Not even a chance of it. You are the one who knows about the situation unlike the rest of us, because of an obscure online newspaper that you can no longer find who printed a quote that nobody got to read but you. Conveniently it was linked with an ESPN Insider subscription which presumably nobody here has easy access to and even if they do if they can't find the local link to which you speak of, hey thats the breaks we have to take your word on it you saw it and you read it.

Just forget the whole thing. I tried very hard to be civil about the whole thing but everytime someone disagrees with you they are an uninformed, illiterate moron.

 

[NavyFishFan]

MAN.....what was that line Alec Baldwin used in that one movie?

"You ask if I have a God complex.....I AM GOD!"

That's really the way you're coming across Cranx. Not attackin' ya...just offerin' opinion.

 

[Brad528]

We should only give up a 2nd rounder for Henson no way a first if they ask for it oh well. They got him in the 6 and he has yet to prove anything except that he cant hit a baseball against a minor league pitcher. What happens if we give up a 1st for him then go out and flop next year similar to what the Raiders or chargers did. We could be giving up a really good player or pick

 

[jbond]

Originally posted by Cranx


I'll make this a list response rather than go throught trouble of trying to respond within the quoted portions (that's a pain in the butt!) because I want to address all of your points.

1) I wasn't really yelling at you per say, I was "yelling" at everyone who kept making this same suggestion and you just happened to be the most recent one. You're also correct here in that I did edit the post very shortly after writing it because I realized that making the statement I did to open that reply was out of line. Given your stated level of education you should have realized that I was trying to avoid taking a personal shot at you but, if I offended you, sorry about that.

Fair enough, although your response is still trying to take a cheap "shot" at me while meagerly apologizing all the while. Ironic isn't it? Then again, nothing to get my knickers in a twist over :boohoo:

2) Yes, that is politicking but not "office politics" there's a difference. I was basically smacking you on that portion for your use of a term that was somewhat inappropriate. It's semantics however so it really doesn't matter at all to the overall content of anything.

You didn't 'smack' me down on anything. His "office" just requires a bigger imagination or different approach from a traditional cubicle-hell-office to better understand....think of each team as a different department or division within a company or organization where one has to play his cards right to get the right promotion within the organization as a whole. So......agreed basically.

3) I think you're reading too much into what I wrote in that pre-edit post. I never implied in any way, shape, or form that you are or were illiterate only that you didn't read the thread or the original post. That does not imply illiteracy but rather a lack of attention to detail; there's a major difference there.

Perhaps and if so, then no harm no foul. It could have implied anything but in the bigger scheme of things it doesn't matter really. And I didn't make a long drawn out response or attack you personally either....so my respone wasn't really that bad or overreacting etc.

I understand that Brunnell's explicit statement may not ultimately turn out to be the way things end up for him however, my point is that his coming to Miami AND drafting a rookie "QB of the future" is not likely to happen and, if it does, then there's likely to be some serious problems associated with the situation and I certainly don't want that at all!

Not likely....and telling everyone it will not, and in huge letters telling people they 'don't get it' or whatever.....are two different things.....is all. My comment was soley on a hypothetical draft / FA / signing period....which is just as hypothetical as anything else I've seen on this subject. Your constant insinuations to others and me of what is a right or wrong hypothesis (throughout this thread, yes I read it before posting the 1st time believe it or not) is what was annoying is all.

4) You started out with the whole "God" thing so I just ran with it. Obviously neither one of us have any level of omniscience here otherwise we wouldn't be having this conversation; we'd already know the outcome of this situation!

Easy enough :) Unfortunately we don't or else we could all start making some money in the betting world :)

No hard feelings on my part :)

 

[Cranx]

Originally posted by ckparrothead
Alright fine I give up. Everyone who disagrees with you is an illiterate @sshole that refuses to read every miniscule micrometer of your thoughts and implications. You can't be wrong. You just can't. Not even a little. Not even a chance of it. You are the one who knows about the situation unlike the rest of us, because of an obscure online newspaper that you can no longer find who printed a quote that nobody got to read but you. Conveniently it was linked with an ESPN Insider subscription which presumably nobody here has easy access to and even if they do if they can't find the local link to which you speak of, hey thats the breaks we have to take your word on it you saw it and you read it.

Just forget the whole thing. I tried very hard to be civil about the whole thing but everytime someone disagrees with you they are an uninformed, illiterate moron.

Wow, nice response but you're the only one making yourself look like an A-hole here. If you can find one instance where I called anyone a moron, idiot, a**hole or said that they were illiterate I'll gladly bow down to your superior whit! Since that's not going to happen why don't you open your eyes and realize that you're the one trashing me and trying to make everything I say sound as though I pulled it straight from my butt. I know that you like to have people look at you as though you are the all knowing and all seeing CK but that simply isn't the case; you, just like the rest of us, can be-- and frequently are-- wrong and opinionated. Sorry if that's too difficult a pill for you to swallow. Please stop with the...:cry:

 

[Cranx]

Originally posted by NavyFishFan
MAN.....what was that line Alec Baldwin used in that one movie?

"You ask if I have a God complex.....I AM GOD!"

That's really the way you're coming across Cranx. Not attackin' ya...just offerin' opinion.

Yes, the yelling thing was a bit over the top but can you honestly say that you don't believe CK's posts to be rather condascending?