Well he was #1 overall so his team did suck when he got there. I'm sure his ability to run kept his own defense off the field which helped them perform much better. Not attributing everything to him, just saying it's a possibility he helped in more ways than just his passing and running yards and TDs.
Well, since I have been a fan since 1965 before the 1st season, and have been on Dolphin Message boards since 1997 or so... I guess you could call me a Homer... but I am not blind. 1. No QB, even Saint Dan, could or can do a bloody dammed thing from flat on his back, hurried in his throws, or while running for his life, which is what our current QB has been doing for the most part of his tenure here. When allowed to actually play in the manner in which most successful quarterbacks play, there has been very little to arouse the ire of a fan other than the type mistakes which accompany a 1, 2, and 3 year quarterback, also noting the even short college career. 2. Despite the having to survive 1. above, the current QB managed to bring the team to an 8-8 season, during which the DEFENSE (not related to the QB except for the uniform worn during the game) gave up two last of the 4th quarter winning drives. A bloody halfway decent defense would have delivered both games and made the season a 10-6 season. 3. Despite 1. and 2. above, the current QB has improved each season in his play, yet the TEAM has not improved. That begs the question, what more could a QB do than improve his game, and if he does so, and the team does not improve - upon whom does the fault lie. 4. I have a sneaking suspicion that there will be a new Head Coach after this season, which will be proven, over time, to be the principle problem needing to rectified in order to improve the team's game performance and record. It would not surprise me if the seemingly improved perspicacity of Tannenbaum (who with the Jest was a kewpie doll laughing stock) will seek to promote Lazor to the HC position, for which he may not be at this time qualified, but with some guidance, could blossom. (The possibility of this coming to fruition and working out is similar to what you get when you cross an Elephant and Rhinoceros [HellifIknow!]) Now, if the quarterback is responsible directly for the offensive line play which is the source of problem 1 listed above, you might be inclined to call a person a homer for supporting the quqrterback's retention; and, if the quarterback also is responsible the the play of the entire defensive unit, you might also have the privilege of calling a person a homer, etc., etc., etc. And, if the quarterback's performance had declined during his tenure under these condition, you might also call a person a homer because that person continued to support the quarterback. So, you could call me a HOMER. And I will stand up and cheer, and say YEP!! I AM!.. However, I am not blind! I see all the team, as I have for 49 years. It is despite all of these, and others, like the San Diego 1982 Divisional Playoff Game, which broke my heart. Or the astounding Garo play in Super Bowl 7. Or any of Marino's wasted years because Shula was an atrocious General Manager. I am a HOMER!! So freakin' What? Ta Ta for now!
Pretty much every reason you mentioned bodes well for my argument that you shouldn't invest so much in a QB without supplying a good enough supporting cast. I especially love your first example. Even Marino couldn't win a ring without enough help, so why are we paying Tannehill so much?
I'M trolling? That's rich. I disagree with your premise, which, as far as I can tell, is simply "I don't like Tannehill but am not willing to say who I'd rather have because then all my arguments against Tannehill would be proven irrelevant." I'm not trolling. I think your stance is silly, and your arguments don't hold water. You have said several times we should have traded for second round picks, and used second rounders on a QB instead of drafting Tannehill. I asked you to review how often we did that since Marino retired, but I noticed you n never responded to that. You are complaining about how expensive you think Tannehill is, but refuse to see that, relative to other QBs, especially ones in his general area of progression at this point, he's not. You blame Tannehill for not improving our record, while conveniently not blaming the other parts of the team who have played worse. You then start chucking insults at me, and responding with sarcastic, snarky remarks, and accuse me of being the troll. My ignore list claims another.
He would generate something similar to the Suh feeding frenzy if he hit the open market, IMO. He would get a massive contract, and have his pick of where to play. Belicheat would probably offer obscene money to have him. I guess then we could get Garappalo for cheap, which would probably make the Tanne haters happy.
When did I specifically say to use a 2nd rounder on a QB? I'm not even responding to the rest until you get your facts straight. I did respond to this allegation once already. Apparently you do all the talking and none of the listening. Edit: I see you continue to put words in my mouth despite me having to correct you when you quote me directly. You ignoring me is no loss to me.
Brunell, Jemele, Mike Smith and now Cowherd are all on the record as saying Tannehill is being overpaid.
Well, Cowherd compared it to Disney charging $7 for a bottle of water...yes its alot but it is worth it to you.
If you're including me on that list, I've seen every single minute of Tannehill playing in the NFL and had a couple of season tickets in Section 116 Row 25 Seats 10&11 and was featured on the Dolphins profile pic with a signed helmet of the 2012 rookie class. You can all stop questioning my fandom now.
Not exactly a glaring endorsement if you ask me. Somebody mentioned that Tannehill's YPA needs to improve. That's spot on because Cowherd mentioned he was 31st in the NFL in that category. That's ridiculous. Now I'm convinced he doesn't deserve this contract.
To everyone questioning if RT17 was worth the contract, I pose a question. If this extension is not signed and RT leads the team to a playoff next year, how would it feel to be forced to either a) let him walk because he is worth too much money in 2017, b) franchise tag him and pay an insane amount of money, or c) be forced to regnotiate/cut key players in order to afford a new contract. a) would be the worst and most likely of the 3 options. If the team makes the playoffs this year his value sky rockets. That contract will be signed AFTER Luck, Wilson, and RG3 sign their next contracts. The team would simply not be able to afford to keep him. Then in 2 years time instead of building a franchise and maybe earning back some respect, the team is starting from square 1. Again. The team was able to lock RT in for 6 more years, on a deal that is team friendly. If he excels, then it can be renegotiated to keep him happy. If he relapses then we are stuck with him a min of two years, and then his contract becomes quite trade-able.
Yeah but Jemele is cute as hell so any sentence with her name in it automatically helps because it distracts me from this trainwreck of a thread... Oh, Jemele...
I'm on the record for saying I like the contract since we can opt out after a couple if years. I hope I'm wrong and Tannehill shuts me up. I'd love to be wrong and have a bargain.
Yeah, that's exactly what I'm saying... It seems like mostly everybody that disagrees with me has to make some accusation out of thin air and put words in my mouth. Edit: Now that I've realized what your username is I understand you're just being a smart"az".
I'd take it as a positive that those people feel that way, except maybe Brunell. Jemele Hill and Michael Smith? really? And Cowherd, that arrogant blathering fool? Same fool who knows so little about the Dolphins that I've heard him repeat MULTIPLE times that Philbin is the reason the Dolphins are even a little good and that Philbin is taking a bad QB and a bad team and doing the best he can with them?
That is actually kind of moot, the market and circumstance is what made that contract what it is. Ofcourse right now he isnt a 90M dollar QB, but they are gambling he will be. The results are TBD.
Exactly, you have to consider the Dolphins past a little bit. I think for a franchise like Miami, this contract was supposed to signify more than just $$$. I appreciate that and in fact, my very first post in response to the new deal centered around that fact.
Well, then lets fire Tannenbaum, Hickey, and everyone else in the building and hire these media guys. Because... they know football! Lets get it done. ... Sure, its easy to make the argument he's being overpaid but you can equally make the same argument he's not. Either way, its a good deal for the team. You can't succeed without a QB. You can't easily find one to replicate the success of Tannehill so far given the circumstances. It's easy to walk away from this deal at the same point in time we could have walked away from them... I really don't get the problem here. He's being compensated like every other well regarded QB who's played well at this point in his career.
I miss Cleo Lemon. With a top ten defense on the other side of the ball and a great run game behind him he would have won a hell of a lot of Super Bowls. We missed a golden opportunity.
What part of "He has improved every year" do you not comprehend. You are so focused on your own argument that reason has stomped out the door unnoticed. The choice as you have expressed it, would be to spend the money on the other missing parts, which would almost of necessity mean that the next year would be Tannehill's last (If he tanked after all, he would be gone. If he did anything approaching well, he would be a free agent, and with the money spent and the cap taking a hit because of Suh, the team would not be able to pay for him.) So that would mean that the team would start all over while not giving an improving quarterback enough tools to see if he would be the quarterback who could lead the team to successful seasons. Further, your mentions of the Colts and Luck as a QB carrying the team ... I laugh in your general direction... The Colt's records for the decade before they drafted Luck! 2002 - 10-6 2003 - 12-4 2004 - 12-4 2005 - 14-2 2006 - 12-4 2007 - 13-3 2008 - 12-4 2009 - 14-2 2010 - 10-6 (Released Manning) 2011 - 2-14 (Painter QB - Drafted Luck) 2012 - 11-5 Luck QB - Imagine that. Luck did not have to come in and carry that team. Winning records did not magically appear because Luck was there... 2011 is one HIGHLY SUSPECT year. In fact, it was the only year in that entire period in which the Colts did not have a winning season, and everyone knew that Luck would be the #1 Draft pick the next draft. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm. What a coincidence?!?!?!?!? All tolled... this does not add up! All in all... I would have to classify this entire argument as just another case of a Tannehill doubter/critic/hater decrying one of the most modest contracts for a Quarterback this league has seen since the Packers got Starr for $6500 with a $1000 signing bonus!
Just a comment as (up till now) a 3rd person observer to this debate.. You keeping accusing others of putting words into your mouth, but I think it's more the other way around most of the time you make that accusation. I mean, you asked people repeatedly to actually quote you, so they do, point out a problem, and you just brush it off with an excuse. You use words that people legitimately interpret differently, then act like they're misquoting you when they can't read your brain. And you think stuff is being made up out of thin air when people suggest a decent analogy to your argument. Anyway, just to state my position for the record.. Until I see a viable replacement for Tannehill (which you haven't given us), then I'm all-in with him because of the outsized importance of the QB position (evidenced by the high correlation between QB performance and team performance, as well as what the market pays: QB's have the highest average salary). There is of course a theoretical maximum salary I'd be comfortable with paying Tannehill, but when Tannehill is being paid like Dalton (!?@!), then yeah this is a good contract.
Probably most of us have read several articles by now, but I thought this one spelled out the money issues pretty clearly. Sorry if it was posted already in the previous pages, but not sorry enough to check. http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/writer...w-risk-high-reward-for-dolphins--and-their-qb
The contract is closer to $100 million than $96 but it doesn't matter since we can opt out soon. If he doesn't prove himself by then we'll be okay.
Quote me then. Edit: Specifically quote where others have quoted me and gave an accurate portrayal of what I was saying.
I don't think Romo is the second best QB in the NFL. But, on the career passer rating list, who do you think are 1 and 2?
Colin Cowherd is also on record saying John Wall will never be a superstar because he did the Dougie before a game. There's a difference between a media personality and an analyst.
You mean career passing list as in active QBs or all-time? If active, Brady then Manning. No debate there. Unless you believe Brady cheated for all of his accomplishments.
Career passer rating is everyone, retired or active, and takes into account all of their passes. Since the beginning of the NFL, Aaron Rodgers is the highest rated career passer. Tony Romo is number 2. This season, Romo was 1 and Rodgers was 2.
