Kirk Cousins looks awful. I know Nebraska has a good defense but I am not seeing anything that impresses me right now. He has made bad decisions left and right. I still can't believe he threw a 5 yard crossing route when it was 4th and 9. His pocket presence is really bad and he doesn't move around the pocket effectively. He has also bad bad coverage reads and held the ball too long. I don't see him going higher than the 6th or 7th round.
Honestly I was a big fan of his early on in the season, but man has he progressed. You have to love this kids upside. I think when it's all said and done he ends up in the 1st. Wow.
Honestly I was a big fan of his early on in the season, but man has he progressed. You have to love this kids upside. I think when it's all said and done he ends up in the 1st. Wow.
Jones put on a show. Weeden was very good. Luck with a great start and now let's see Barkley. Barkley is just so quick with the ball.
Man, that fact that this time next year Andrew Luck, Matt Barkley, Landry Jones, or even potentially Weeden will be our QB is making me so happy. They all have a few minor flaws here and there, but damn are they talented.
Ryan Tannehill is a guy that is growing on me. He's one of those that may not look outstanding now, but you see a lot of things in him that make you think that he could be the 2nd or 3rd best guy out of this draft 3-4 years down the road. The guy has a very quick release, and I'm impressed with how he has adapted to the quarterback position after playing wide receiver and leading TAMU in receiving for two seasons. The best compliment I can give him, IMO, is that he looks like a quarterback who is athletic, not an athlete that is playing quarterback.
Draft day strategy will play such a huge role in our approach. Presuming we dont end up with #1 pick in 1st round....the decision to TRADE UP.....or more realistically stay in 2 or 3 and most likely take Playmaker, and then follow up with QB in round 2 (or trade back into round 1) will be very interesting. Certainly QB with round 1 is still an option, then playmaker in round 2, etc. I do think besides Luck, Weeden could be fastest "ready" QB....but do love Tannehill for long term as well. Obviously, Barkley and Jones are no slouches for long term investment either. Draft Day DraftNiks will be very, very, very busy in the coming weeks!
Best to remember he was a star high school quarterback, so his time as a WR was more of a detour, not necessarily a case where he's new to the position. But I agree he's a good player. I think he's a guy that you might want to sit for a year or two learning your system and working behind someone, then see how he comes out. If I were the Colts, this is the guy I would put behind Peyton Manning, not Andrew Luck.
Man if the Colts have #1, and they agree with your thinking....the Number of teams willing to trade up to get Luck....the Supply and Demand PRICE will be insane. Even if Miami does a Ditka and says the entire draft....that may not be enough based on other teams ammo. Wow....Kings ransom for Luck!
Personally im starting to feel that if we miss out on luck and are unable to do a deal for him to sit pat and draft Barkley or Jones and keep our draft. It may not Be the golden goose, but I do feel they would improve our team.
barkley or jones will be fine...i get that luck is tabbed as the best, but i wouldn't trade the draft for him...miami needs so much help they can't afford it...draft barkley or jones in the 2 or 3 spot, where ever the fins end up and go from there...re-acquiring a 2nd would help...now here's the real question: if for some reason the Dolphins get the #1, do you listen to offers and fleece some team for that pick and draft barkley and build up you LB's, OL, and DB's through the draft for the next 2-3 years with the picks you get for the #1?????
I disagree that this team needs "so much help". I see important holes at QB, RT, TE, FS and second pass rusher (and RT and TE are holes you fill with later picks or FA). That leaves QB, FS and pass rusher to address early in the draft and/or FA. Obviously they could use a G and thumper MLB, but those are minor positions in terms of impact. I also don't understand why you said "re-aquire" a 2nd. I believe we still have our 2nd. So while I like Barkley and Jones, I would not pass on Luck for a even a boatload of picks.
I'd put it this way- If Luck is indeed the prospect that Elway and Manning were, would you have traded down from one of them and drafted a Ryan Leaf or a Todd Blackledge just for a few extra picks? And that's not meant to paint a Barkley or a Jones in a negative light. They could be great the same way Kelly or Marino were. But if Luck's as close to a sure thing as has come out in years, then you have to pull the trigger IMO.
I wasn't saying trading down doesn't work, though. It has a higher risk factor, and when you have something that's supposedly close to a sure thing do you really want to risk that for a couple of extra draft picks that you don't know for sure will work out?
I wouldn't trade down. The draft is all about odds. The guys higher up are considered better prospects b/c they have higher upside and/or lower downside. Trading down just gets us a 'less likely to succeed' QB. I'd rather take the player with better odds of success at the most critical position. Now, if believed that the other QBs were basically just as good (even if nobody else agreed) then I would trade down. But I feel that Luck is a step above the others.
If we're drafting 2nd or 3rd, I'd consider swapping picks with Washington plus their 3rd or 4th and Laron Landry (after franchising him and Landry working out a good faith long term deal with us). Then I'd try and resign Henne and take Tannehill with our 1st. The competition would push them both, give Tannehill a chance to ease in, and it would give Henne a chance to continue developing so that we could likely recoup a 2nd round pick for him in 2013.
Meanwhile, we continue to stink. This is the sort of move that teams with established franchise QBs have the luxury of making; we aren't one of those teams. He's not being fancy, he's just stubbornly standing on the deck of the S.S. Henne even though it's capsized and sinking.
I think the chances of us ending up with the number 2 pick is higher than us ending up with the number 1 pick. The obvious thing to do is to trade up for Luck. I doubt the Colts, if they end up with the first pick, will listen. That may disappoint some, but I like Barkley a lot. I wouldn't be all that disappointed.
Matt Barkley is not a toaster, absolutely. But it would be a shame to be this bad and not wind up with Andrew Luck.
That's a ridiculous statement and completely disregards my post, but that's what I've come to expect from you. How the hell is drafting a talented QB in the top 12 considered "standing on the deck of the SS Henne"? I happen to think Tannehill possesses the 2nd greatest upside behind Andrew Luck, and IMO he's the guy with a greater potential to become Aaron Rodgers-like than Barkley or Jones. However, I wouldn't want him starting from day 1, and I'd want him to have some competition. The only thing better than competition....... is competition that could potentially net a return draft pick.
Ryan Tannehill is not a top 12 pick, nor is Ryan Tannehill so good that he's worth a. keeping Henne and b. passing on Barkley, Weeden, or even Jones. Your plan continues the proud Dolphins tradition of relegating the QB position to second-tier status, but that's what I've come to expect from you. The worst part of your proposal is that you think you're actually addressing the position as the top priority with the best available talent. You're not. You're putting a sub-average QB out there yet again and banking that maybe you can get away with snagging a QB a bit later in the draft and fielding him after a couple years of riding pine. That's just shrugging your shoulders at the position, not addressing it.
Ryan Tannehill is a good prospect but he's a project player, IMO. Andrew Luck, Matt Barkley and Brandon Weeden would instantly come in and be better than anything we've had since Chad Pennington was having his second Comeback Player of the Year bid.
I agree, they'd instantly "be better", but when you have to think long and hard about it, how much do you like Tannehill's upside over Barkley's immediate reward? Weeden is a different story as we both know; I'd take Brandon over Barkley any day of the week; however, Tannehill's upside potential is so freakin enticing that he's almost worth the risk over a guy like Barkley who's been groomed for the position since he was a zygote. IMO Tannehill is like a rare 5 tool baseball prospect. He has NFL size, an NFL arm, athleticism, mobility, and a good head on his shoulders from what I've seen. I can't say the same for Barkley who has less than ideal NFL size & arm and could only dream of making some of the throws that Tannehill can. I know he's raw (which is why I'd like to resign Henne and use him until Ryan's ready) but his potential is limitless with great coaching IMO. With massively due respect Chris (b/c I know you're not a fan of Henne's) but none of these guys outside of Luck would offer an immediate improvement over Henne, especially Barkley. Look how long it's taking Sanchez to evolve in NY and he was a top 5 pick. Sanchez has an average to below average NFL arm and below average NFL size, just like Barkley; Mark's needed guys like Homes & Edwards to make plays for him b/c he wasn't capable of truly making them on his own. Now compare that to Henne's game vs New England. None of these rookies (or Sanchez) wouldve been capable of lighting up the Pat's D the way Henne did in that same situation. We all have to admit that. The kid (Henne) still has some special skills & abilities that possess value that others yet have. There's no way Barlkey, Weeden, or Tannehill comes in and has that some type of aired-out game. The only thing Barlkley would have going for him is his smarts, but that would temporarily be erased b/c he'd be in a new system in a new league.
