Under Pressure: Jake Long must prove he fits in

While I do agree that there is a time and place where results/age outweigh $ value and also feel that Ireland is now leaning in that direction .... Example Y. Bell! I don't think Jake has reached that stage yet thus he will get resigned, will he make it to the end of THAT contract, thats another subject altogether.

 

I don't understand the violent, totally intolerant reactions to this idea. The author brings up a point.

The scheme rewards mobile zone type players more than power guys. Jake Long is a power guy. He's an All Pro so he can play in whatever scheme you want but it should be quite intuitive that in some schemes he's a 99 while in other schemes he might be a 92. For a crowd of fans that cheered Zach Thomas for many years, you'd think that concept meets with a little more understanding.

Meanwhile, you're going to have to pay him like a 99 because that's how he played (when healthy) in Miami's power/iso scheme.

Miami's offense is about to undergo a serious transformation. The run plays will primarily be zone plays, with power and iso as only a change of pace to the zone. They'll run a lot of zone runs, and they'll design counters, boots, waggles and nakeds that work off their zone tendencies.

I mean just think about this logically. We KNOW that Miami's passing game is about to make use of a lot more rollouts, correct? Do you need Jake Long to pass protect on a rollout, yes or no? Just this factor alone damages the value that Jake Long has to this team. Add into that the increased screen plays we saw both in Green Bay and in Texas A&M. Tell me, do you need Jake Long to pass protect when all the quarterback is doing is rocking back a few steps and firing off a screen to the right or left side?

What I'm saying is that the design of the playbook does devalue the pass protection a little bit, and meanwhile the changes to the run playbook don't fit Jake Long's game quite as well as the old run playbook did. Yet, we're going to have to give him a contract similar to Joe Thomas' contract, worth $11 or $12 million a year. That's the same as a franchise quarterback. Is Jake Long worth a franchise quarterback? Was he even worth a franchise quarterback from 2008 to 2011? Is he worth a franchise quarterback in 2012 with the changes to the system?

Oh but go on pretending that everything I'm saying is totally stupid and irrational.

 

This arguement keeps coming up time after time. People seem to have short memories and they don't recall all the bad Left Tackles we went through before Jake Long, Wade Smith anyone? Yea I know Vernon Carey was adequate but he admitted he wasn't comfortable at LT and he was far from all-pro at the position. Put Big Jake on the market and see how long he remains available.
I totally disagree with the idea that a good offensive line doesn't make a quarterback better. You have to keep a quarterback upright and healthy to give him an opportunity to succeed. If a quarterback spends a lot, or most of his time running for his life or picking himself up off the ground he is going to struggle or stay injured a lot.
As many questions as we have had about our offensive line, LT has not been one of them. Either you want a good offensive line or you don't and from past experience we have had our fair share of bad offensive lines.

 

Todays game is all about the A) producing the pass, and B) defending it...look at the trends the pass few years.....so again IMO...money and importance should be allocated to...

1) QB
2) CB
3) WR
4) TE
5) D-Line

Left Tackle sure you can make an exception to the rule, because he is important, but the rest ehh....the Giants won last year with an ad hoc O-Line, injuries and guys playing out of position....

Thats why I love Sparano and the Jets coming out talking about ground and pound....lol...the ground and pound era is over...what are they going to do when the Pats put 14 points on them in 6 mins in the 1st qtr? Not much with that painfully slow to score offense. The game now is strike fast and strike quick...Offense leads to defense now and it will dictate the game moving forward....You score quick, it takes the other team out of their "gameplan" now they have to adapt on the fly, take more shots that they wouldnt have normally, and that when turnovers happen....

For example your statement about the Pats is perfect, they had awful YPG defensively, not much the way of pressure (although they did well in the playoffs)...yet they were middle of the pack on PPG, why it that? Teams got uncomfortable playing them being down so quick.....they did it well last year, and will do it again this year....

 

Well, that's quite a generalization...they didn't keep winning simply because they kept Colston over their LT. I think Brees and a few other guys had a hand in things. However, things change as time goes on. If Martin and Egnew are both all pro's going into their contract year, it's a good problem to have and if a decision has to be made at that point regarding keeping one and not the other, fine but that's not where we are at right now with Long.

 

Perhaps, imo though ground and pound is still quite viable as teams switch defenses to more agile players who are smaller.

Problem being, you then have to be more of a complete team which is much harder to build in the free agency era

 

Right and I agree, when you need to run the ball, you HAVE to be able to do it.....O-Line come into play there as well, but again Pads look at the Giants, and the Pats their O-Lines, their running attacks, pretty effective right?

Was that due to the Line, or the passing game? Both of their lines weren't great by any means...

 

Its the perfect amount for a guy who is the best at his position.

 

I'm enjoying this discussion, both sides are making good points , and i'm a huge Jake fan, I think we need to talk about it because of the new offense, so, taking your perspective for a second, would you trade the player and try get something in return?

Man..I don't know...I think Jake is a pretty darn athletic 315 pounder, I know his body is in great shape and he understands that element, he's really an exceptional pass protector, shows tremendous quickness off the snap, good feet,maybe, we can convince his agent that the market is no longer what it once was, lol..Also, if we do sign him I'd like to do some different things, maybe some fullback in goal line situations.

Do you think he doesn't have enough athleticism to excel in this movement scheme?

 

There shouldn't be a tremendous amount of mystery to it. There's no small amount of tape on him in a zone oriented scheme in Michigan. I'd go so far as to say there's a much better chance that Jake Long will improve with the blocking change than decline. He's been a pretty solid run blocker as a professional, but he hasn't been the dominant force as a run blocker as he was in Michigan, and moving back to a zone scheme might be the boost he needs.

You can use bootlegs and things of that nature to make up for bad pass protection, but so what? It's not like you can entirely base your offense off of that, even if you're Mike Shanahan.

 

And again, what is that?

Why is cornerback any different than Tackle? Both positions inherently involve 1v1 match-ups where one player is expected to beat the other to perform or the opposite. It's the same thing with tight end vs. linebacker/db, rusher vs. pass protector, etc. and so on. It doesn't make any sense that you have defensive line there but somehow shutting down the opposing defensive line is not important? How does that make any sense?

 

I do not like thinking of Jake Long not being a Dolphin. He is one of my favorite Dolphins. I do understand the idea that having an elite Left Tackle isn't the best use of funds with a salary cap.

Looking back at the history of the NFL the only hall of fame type left tackle I could think of that has been let go was Tony Boselli. He had injury problems. Teams do tend to hold onto left tackles. Which is why they do make $11-12 million dollars a year. Which is about $5 less than a franchise quarterback.

 

The problem with is you and others are comparing the GB Packers, the NYG, and the Saints to us. Drew Brees, Aaron Rodgers, Eli Manning..vs Ryan Tannehill/Matt Moore/David Garrard. See the problem? Yes a QB is more important then a LT but unless you have an elite QB you should have a very good LT in place. In our case, we have one of the top 2 along with Joe Thomas and until this past year Id have a very strong argument Jake was the best. Back to the point at hand though....

Brees
Colston/Henderson/Moore
Graham
Ingram/Thomas

Rodgers
Finley/Quarless
Nelson/Jennings/Driver/Cobb
Starks

Eli
Bradshaw/David Wilson
Nicks/Cruz/Randle/Jernigan
Bennett

vs

Moore/Tannehill/Garrard
Bush/Thomas/Miller
Fasano/Egnew/Clay
Bess/Hartline/Matthews/Cunningham/Fuller/Moye/etc

We dont have the weapons most of those teams have. We certainly dont have the QB play. If one of the weapons should emerge they will likely be on a cheap rookie deal for a while. There is literally no reason not to resign Long. The next best thing we can do is move forward with a good OL when we will have a young QB playing soon.

Very true. In order to produce the pass though you still need to protect the passer. None of Tannehill/Moore/Garrard have the pocket sense of Brees/Manning/Rodgers and until one of them does we better keep them upright. The NYG won last year in spite of their OL but we dont have their weapons. And until we do, and until Tannehill or someone develops an elite pocket presence like Brees or Manning or Rodgers, bestkeep them upright. Big Jake stays

 

As silly as it seems, they're right........ Throwing all that money at LT is hardly a no-brainer. They'll have a tough decision to make. Can they get by with Martin and murtha at Tackle and use the elite contract money on a WR or DB or LB/DE ? Sounds tempting ! I'm a big fan of Jakes and agree that he was the right pick, but that doesnt mean paying him mega bucks is in our best interests. On the otherside, we've already invested so much in our O-line and it would be a shame to lose the centerpiece. My gut says we resign him, alot of contracts expire next year...... it may ultimately cost us the opportunity to bring back S.Smith, Bush, Moore, Starks etc. though.

 

One thing I would like to mention is one of the benefits of having Jake Long is that it frees up the runningback and the tight end. When you have a really good left tackle who can single handedly take out generally the best pass rusher, it frees up the tight end and the runningback from having to help out. Allowing the tight end to not have to chip and go out on routes. Allowing the runningback to be used to pick up the blitz and go out for passes.

 

I am not sure I agree with those numbers. The only quarterbacks I know of that make $16-17 million are Peyton Manning, Tom Brady and Michael Vick. Manning's average value is $19 million, Brady's is $18 million and Vick's is $16.7 million. Drew Brees will make around that neighborhood, I'm sure.

But Phil Rivers signed for 7 years at $98 million total ($14 mil average). Ben Roethlisberger signed a deal for 8 years, worth $102 million total (< $13 mil average). Tony Romo signed for 6 years at $67.5 million total (> $11 mil average). Aaron Rodgers signed for 6 years at $65 million total (< $11 mil average). Jay Cutler is signed at 5 years, $50 million total ($10 mil average). Matt Schaub signed for 6 years at $48 million ($8 mil average).

I think all of those guys would be considered "franchise" quarterbacks, no? The average price tag on those 9 players is $13.4 million. If Jake Long gets Joe Thomas' contract, which is either an 8 year, $92 million deal ($11.5 mil average) or a 7 year, $84 million deal ($12.0 mil average) depending on which article you listen to, then he'll make more than the contracts given to Tony Romo, Aaron Rodgers, Jay Cutler and Matt Schaub. His contract will be just under (less than $1 million per year difference) what was given to Ben Roethlisberger.

So again I have to beg the question whether Jake Long in this scheme is worth as much to our model for winning as a Ben Roethlisberger would be.

 

If Rivers, Aaron, or Ben signed today they would be getting 15 to 19 million dollar contract. They all signed in 2008, which was 4 years ago.

 

What would be the ramifications if we tagged him for a year (or two)? Anyone know what the tag would pay him?

 

First off no they didn't all sign in 2008. Phil Rivers signed in 2009.

Brady's contract came in 2010 and I think all would agree that he would be setting a high-water mark for QBs. No QB was more valuable than him when he signed for $18 million a year.

Joe Thomas' deal came in 2011, so even that contract could be a year outdated. Jake Long could demand more based on the same inflation you point out.

What I'm getting at is that while obvious elite guys like Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, Drew Brees, Ben Roethlisberger, Eli Manning, Phil Rivers and Aaron Rodgers will surely get the $5 million more per year that you're referring to, they don't represent the beginning and end of the "franchise quarterbacks" out there. Tony Romo won't get what they get. Nor would Jay Cutler. Nor Joe Flacco. Nor Matt Ryan when he signs. Nor Matt Schaub. Nor Josh Freeman when he signs.

It's still a fact that if you were to line up the 15 or 16 guys in the league that are currently considered franchise QBs, you look at their salary cap figures, at any given point any given year most of them will have salaries below this contract you're proposing to give to a left tackle. You may say that's apples to oranges but I don't think I buy that because it's going to be like that every year. The franchise tag tender is not calculated by taking into account average salaries of the top tackles in past contracts and then adjusting for inflation. It's a straight average of the top 5 cap figures at the position.

 

The way the franchise tender works it would give him the greater of: 1) the top 5 salary cap figures at the position, or 2) a 20% pay raise above what he made in the previous year.

That may have changed a little bit in the particulars in the last CBA but I think they still apply. What it would mean is to franchise him you've got to pay him $14.8 million in 2013 since his 2012 cap figure is $12.35 million. I don't think that's very feasible.

 

Oh, 2009, that is SO much later.

I don't think there are 15 or 16 guys in the league that are franchise quarterbacks. Jake Long isn't a 15th or 16th type of quarterback, and my hope is Tannehill is not the next Cutler, Flacco or Romo.

Your final point is exactly right. Franchise tag for linemen is $9.5 million, quarterbacks $14.4, which is about a $5 million dollar difference.

I am going by a contract now, not a contract from the past. If you sign a top quarterback today, you are going to pay around $15 million. If you sign a top left tackle today it is going to cost around 10 million dollars. Why worry about contracts that a quarterback could sign 3 to 4 years ago when talking about contract today?

I think your statement about Jake Long making as much as a franchise quarterback is an exaggeration to prove a point. If Jake Long was a franchise quarterback, a top 5 to 10 in his position, Miami would be lucky to sign him for only $11 or $12 million a year. The contract would be considered a hometown discount.

 

Somehow, I am not surprised. After all, according to you, only draft pick who'll amount to anything is Miller.

 

I'm not sure the article is all that far-fetched.

 

the more i think about it, the more i'm willing to let jake go

 

Players are individuals, not machines. Just because one or two fail doesn't mean that others will as well. The truth is most players dont pan out. You could probably come up with a thousand cases just like this, probably one for every school.

 

Jake obviously has the skill so I think it just comes down to his health.


Sent from the depths of hell
using Tapatalk.

 

The perception of Jake's value today compaired to his Jan. 1, 2013 value to not only this team but also others rest on several things not all of which is under his control.

Yes he is a value piece today but that could change with the develpoment of, say Martin or others, making him a replacable player and at his asking price I would hope they think long and hard about paying him his 12-14 Mil per year asking price if that happens.

One other point should be pointed out again, the O-line plays as a unit, its only as strong as its weakest link! In 2011, with Jake Long, we dropped from 14th in sacks allowed to 30th as a team.

Just as ck and a few others point out no player, save the QB position, should ever be considered so valuable as to not be replaceable. jm2c

 

Only in Miami would this be a discussion. You don't give up top echelon players ever.

To let Jake Long go would just re-enforce the laughing stock perception around the league of Miami. It's absolutely stupid.

 

Jake Long First Dolphin To Make NFL Network's Top 100 Players Of 2012
http://www.miamidolphins.com/news/a...-Of-2012/86b3502c-f40a-4704-b0d2-3f66b1781d35

 

I see two factors impacting the discussion about whether or not Long is worth the very high cap number. One is his health. Back issues are serious and can make even a great player average. Second, the LT has been diminished in importance of late. A larger percentage of most team's plays are designed for the ball to be out in less time than it takes an outside rusher to run the arc. Also pass rushers tend to move around quite a bit instead of just staying on the blind-side. In those cases the LT position is a non-factor. And Miami's offense going forward may feature more rollouts to the QB's stronger side. With right-handed QBs that will mean roll outs away from Long's side. Those are more plays where the LT is a non-factor. As you increase the number of plays where a LT is a non-factor that makes the high cap number more difficult to justify. But who knows what Miami's offense will be. A LT certainly is important on those deep outs that seem to be a large part of Sherman's offense.

 

Thank god we have you to steer us right and tell us that our perfectly valid discussions are stupid and a laughing stock. I don't know what we would do without you.

 

What a joke. Only a true idiot would come up with such well thought out arguments.

 

For everyone that is whining about how we should take this seriously:

1. It was debunked the first time it was brought up after the draft. Ireland said Long wasn't going anywhere for a long time.
2. There's an assumption that he won't rework his contract so its more cap friendly.
3. This is the perfect example of the media manufacturing an issue and why previous regimes told the media to piss off. The 24hour bull**** machine must be fed though.

 

I agree. People forget that the essence of a discussion board is and should be five-word derisions by people who obviously know more than everyone else.

 

Fine why stop there? I mean if anything anyone can just pull out of their *** is open for discussion let's go the whole nine.

I hear Incognito has 11 toes and is transgender. Discuss.

 

As this particular topic doesn't merit my time, I choose not to participate in this discussion.

What a novel idea.

 

You aren't complaining because it isn't being discussed. You're complaining because a made up story isn't taken seriously. That fact that there's 77 posts show its been discussed.

Novel idea indeed.

 

Yes, you are absolutely correct. If this story were to be totally undiscussed, I would have no complaints. What I'm complaining about is the people that for some reason feel the need to butt into a valid discussion that many other people are debating/discussing in earnest, and just sh-t all over it with 10-word derisions as if they obviously are smarter than everyone else in here and it's up to them to let everyone know that their efforts in coming up with well thought out arguments are "stupid" and "a joke".

 

Here's some videos of Jake Long zone blocking:

http://rivals.yahoo.com/video/nfl-draft/NFL-Draft-Mike-Hart-Highlights-180

This video is nearly all zone blocking, and outside of him slipping off a block and missed cut, it's quite good. It's not just a physical mismatch, there's some very good technical displays on some of those blocks.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6eRdhqnDdIg

You can look at pretty much any Michigan highlight run, it's zone blocking. There's a lot of examples of Long in zone pass protection as well.