GM Jeff Ireland: We violated our principles by drafting Ryan Tannehill

Suffice it to say you're skipping to like step ten of a process.

 

It doesn't really matter. It's a minor, casual observation that everyone seems to want to make into a BFD. It's like they take it personally when someone points out the obvious, that Gil Brandt pretty much directly refuted Jeff Ireland's story that he loved Ryan Tannehill since long before Sherman arrived.

I don't know why people take it so personally but you're right, it's not a very big deal.

 

If Tannehill really does have 4.55 speed, he's almost as fast as Hartline and faster than Bess.

Aces.

 

Best receiver on the team?

 

Going by reputation, yup.

 

No, actually you are, by being the one to hold up the contract as proof Parcells didn't force his will on things. The only way the contract matters is if Ireland decided to take Parcells to court or the league. You think the contract dictates what happens. It doesn't and its impossibly naive to argue that it does.

Ireland could have very easily been against the White pick and Parcells ordered him to do it anyway. He could have been 100% behind it and convinced Parcells it was the right move. We don't know. What we do know is that Parcells said it was his call and Ireland's contract doesn't prove a damn thing.

 

LOL. Ok.

"I know you are, but what am I"

 

That's not what this is so stop it.

 

you made it that.

 

The **** I did.

 

It doesn't matter. I consider the discussion to be over anyway.

 

Typical.

 

Typical

 

wtf?

 

You are the only one making it a BFD. Brandt didn't refute Ireland's story at all. You have no idea how much later that second conversation was. You seem to assume it was months later, but there is no factual basis for that assumption. All Brandt said was "later on." It could have been later that same day or same week. It could have been Ireland holding things close to his vest in the initial call and then calling Brandt back shortly thereafter to try to make sure Brandt wasn't calling others to tell them how good he thought Tannehill was. And Brandt didn't say Ireland called him back to say how much he loved Tannehill at all. All he says is they talked and Ireland asked him who else he talked to about Tannehill and said he hoped Brandt didn't call anybody else.

I don't know what the actual timeline was. None of us do. But it is entirely plausible and sensible that Ireland may have liked Tannehill very much in January. He gets a call from a guy who spends much of his time talking to other coaches, GMs, and sports radio hosts asking about a guy that Ireland may have liked at a key position. As far as I can tell, chat it up with "insiders" and speak to the media about it is just about the only thing that Brandt does. Rather than wax poetic about Tannehill and tell Brandt how much he loves him, Ireland may logically have been very coy with him. "He's alright; nothing special." Shortly thereafter (maybe a few hours or a few days), Ireland may have started worrying that Brandt might be out there blabbing to others about how great Tannehill is and so Ireland might have called him up to see if he was, in fact, yapping about it to others (something he would only be concerned about if Ireland did like Tannehill much more than he let on to Brandt).

Yet you continue to call Ireland a liar based on your assumptions that (1) the second Ireland/Brand conversation was a long time after the first and (2) that Brandt's retelling of the story is almost verbatim accurate. And while you say it is not a very big deal, you have brought it up and essentially called Ireland a liar about this in at least 3 separate threads despite numerous people pointing out a variety of plausible scenarios in which Ireland's story may be entirely true.

 

God, can Ireland just succeed or be fired already?

Even I'm getting tired of rehashing the past. Im' ready to move on to praising him or slamming him for upcoming moves.

 

Gonna be a long couple months for you

 

Never going to be that simple of an evaluation.

 

This.

i'm just as ready for one as I am the other. KILL ME

 

Well, it is. We'll either sign/draft a bunch of good players this off season and that will result in more wins, or we won;t and he'll be fired.

Now, I'm sure you want to argue oportunity, cost, etc., but not me. Win or go home.

 

It was a shared mistake. They share the same philosophies. That's why Ireland is talking about his philosophy today, the one he shares with Parcells. Who is no longer here.

 

There are plenty of things that could result in more wins. Improving the talent is one of those things. The maturation of the QB alone should warrant some improvement.

 

I'll make it simple from my point of view.

10-6 or better, Ireland can stay. Anything less, he's gone. And there aren;t that many compelling excuses I can think of that would change that equation for me.

 

Sure there is, and teams do it every year:

"We got exactly the guy we liked most"

When is the last time you heard:

"Dammit, the guy we loved got taken the pick right before us"

It's called playing external PR and internal politics.

 

So if they have a historical anamoly with demonstrated increase in talent (say... we bring in a FA WR who puts up 1300 yards with 5 TDs, Lamar Miller runs for 4.5+ YPC and 8 TDs after 200 carries, and we have a noticeable improvement in pass rush and/or secondary play) yet we for whatever reason end up 9-7, you want him gone?

That seems a bit silly. I'll accept noticeable improvement and he can stay. Seriously, if he's been kept this long and keeps producing quality talent, like it appears (thus far) he did last season, why on earth would you kick him to the curb?

I'm not even advocating that he only has to match this past off-season. His FA signings were an absolute bust and his draft picks were all in all "very good" with regards to value.

If Ireland signs Jennings/Wallace/Bowe to a relatively good contract, drafts for high value while hitting our most apparent needs, I think that's a home run. After that, it's player development.

 

Right, I'm just saying that they can go 10-6, and that may not mean anything about the job Ireland does this offseason.

 

Yes. And had he said anything similar to that, I'd agree that's probably a lie. Ireland, didn't say that though.

 

Few on this board have argued for reason and logic when it comes to Ireland than me. I'm supremely confident in our coach and QB. If we don't make it to the playoffs next year with those two components, then chances are Ireland is a problem and he'll have to go. I doubt there will be some crazy anomaly or anything like that. If there is, I'll revisit my stance, but its not unreasonable to expect the playoffs next season.

 

If that stuff happens and we still finish 9-7 then either other players, particularly on defense did not play well or our coaching was monumentally bad. Both scenarios get Ireland in hot water with me.

Now if we finish 10-6 but because of tie breakers don't get in the playoffs, I can live with that. It happens sometimes.

 

I disagree, only because I think it very unlikely that this team, as constituted goes 10-6 against next year's schedule without significant upgrades and a leap by Tanny.

 

Okay, I can live with your last statement. I just think giving a hard line "We MUST end with 10-6!" stance is a bit much, but I understand where you're coming from and for all intents and purposes, agree.

We have quite a lot of changing pieces to this team next season, so if Miami is able to show promising futures from those players let alone improve with regards to overall record, I consider that a huge victory.

I mean, we're replacing how many starters? By my count, and obviously this is subject to change depending on re-signings, but I've got 7 right now. Out of 22. Being replaced with younger talent (except for WR, likely) for multiple seasons.

 

If we're still cool with 8-8 or 9-7 six years into a rebuild...isn't there something wrong with that?

 

My hard line is playoffs, so I assume that 10-6 will get you there. Now we could go 9-7 and get in and 10-6 maybe not, but either way, I could live with that result.

As to the rest of your comment I disagree mainly because Ireland is just replacing players that he picked that weren't good enough. I see nothing to convicne me that he has significantly improved in that regard. If he has, then great. I'd much rather enjoy a playoff season then talking about the draft in November.

 

Yes.

But if we went 9-7 and got in the playoffs, I'd probably give him another year.

However, my basic stance is that a 3 game improvement to 10-6 is more than reasonable and is frankly the bare minimum of acceptable improvement.

 

LOL. Yes, clearly this is not a big deal to you.

Tell me more, in 5000 words, how much this is not a big deal.

 

Playoffs? Yeah I'll take playoffs.

 

Not on this board too. Please leave your nonsense at that other board

 

Relax, spend your time in the harmony and peace of the new logo/colors thread.

 

He is or he wouldn't have mentioned "Breaking" the rule.

Parcells and the group also picked up Pat White. Suggesting Parcells isn't married to the blueprint either.

It's not like his Blueprint was Peyton Manning but he takes Tim Tebow. Ryan fits the mold of a QB in Parcells blue print just missing the requisite starts.

If he had taken C Kap last year, then maybe.

 

That's about as intellectually lazy as you can be. But at least your clear about it.