...lol Kiper.

 

That would be fantastic IMO.

 

I would be good with the first two picks, not sure about Brown and Boykin, don't know much about them.

 

Disagree... We NEED a pass rusher! T-Hill won't even play this year most likely, I believe in Matt Moore. We need someone opposite of Wake, if he even plays with us next season due to his holdout... He leaves, and we pick qb first and wr second our pass rushing sucks outside. WE NEED A DE/OLB MORE THEN WE NEED A QB!! Ingram or Coples would be instant starters and upgrades, I would preferably pick Ingram who played DE,DT, and OLB and fits perfectly in our 4-3 hybrid defense

 

I think Kiper does a pretty good job, but the notion of trading down to "dare teams to take Tannehill" is moronic. If you want him, why mess around like that? Makes no sense.

Also, I'd be beyond shocked to see Kendall Wright available at 42 and he pretty much says he shouldn't be available there. So why pose it as a possibility?

 

Boykin in every bit as good as advertised. Very few wr's will beat him. He has speed to burn. Loved watching him his entire career at UGA. I have seen him play about 15 times in person.

 

I'd be very surprised if that happened. I'd set the over/under at 4.

 

Id sign for this right now but if we could: - James Brown + Marvin Jones or Ryan Broyles that'd be cash money :lol:

And I can see the logic in daring teams to take Tannehill. I wouldnt play with fire like this but if youre going to be an NFL Gm you have to have some brass balls. If Ireland can move down to like 15 and grab and extra 2 this year and 2 or 3 next year the only real threat to take Tannehill in that range is KC and I dont think they'd pull the trigger.

 

Jim Thorpe winner, (most versatile)played some offense with his good hands, punt returner, slot corner duty.

 

There have been reports that several teams including Buffalo, K.C., Philly and even Seattle like Tannehill enough to take him so I don't see Kiper's drop down plan as a smart one.

 

It's just not worth the risk of losing him if he's your guy by moving down. If you believe he's good enough to take at 15, then you believe he can be a franchise QB and that's enough to take him at 8. Trying to get greedy and pick up a pick in the process is just taking an unnecessary risk IMO.

 

Tannehill will play after week 5 and fans start chanting his name because moore throws his 6th pick of the season... isnt that how it always goes? haha

 

I think some fans just get married to the idea that somebody is a reach b/c they didn't hear his name up there in the media or on the fan sites. It happens every year as the team's stack threir boards differently. It's pretty obvious that the Dolhins have been high on Tannehill since before the end of last season.

 

He is every bit Hester like in that when the ball is in his hands you feel like he can score every single time.

 

Haha true, but at that point I would actually prefer Garrard. We constantly gave Henne a chance, why not give similar chances to Moore and Garrard?

 

It's been confirmed that Philly loves Fletcher Cox. Buffalo, KC, Seattle all have QB's with significant contracts already. I'm not saying I would do it but if Jeff Ireland has better info then we do about who those teams actually want, and I have my doubts personally that he does lol, then there's nothing wrong.

 

Brandon Boykin is a baller.

 

Peter King's report on Monday was that while Seattle would not trade up for Tannehill, they would take him at their pick despite signing Flynn b/c they're that high on him. That's just one example. The point is that the rookie salary cap lets you take a QB you like early even if you have another QB. It's just a bad gamble to dare these other teams to take him.

 

It makes perfect sense ESPECIALLY if the prospect is not considered to be a high ceiling but high bust prospect. With everyone admitting Tanny is a project there's no reason to overpay. If you can trade down and extend your reach in the draft and are still likely to get the prospect or still be in reach to get someone like Weeden it makes perfect sense and is incredibly smart.

 

Helmet head Kiper is the same guy that berated the Dolphins for not taking Brady Quinn a few years ago. While he has made a name for himself through his self promotion as some kind of draft guru. Over the years he has had had some bad misses on first round quarterbacks.

I have always felt that if he was half as good as he thinks he is, an NFL team would have hired him a long time ago to be the head of their college scouting unit. The fact that he is okay with the Dolphins drafting Tannehill in the first round makes me that much more wary of Tannehill as a quality NFL QB going forward.

 

The only thing I am concerned about is how "desperate" the Jaguars appear to want to trade out of number 7. You almost wonder if they would take like a 1st and just a 3rd to trade down with the Seahawks or Chiefs. At that price I would expect both teams to really consider trading down. I bet the Jaguars are targeting someone that will be there late into the 20's and they just want to move back to pick up some more picks. I could see them targeting a Kendall Wright.

 

I am not pulling for the Dolphins to draft Tannehill, so I would have no problem with a team trading up to seven and taking Tannehill before the Dolphins select at eight. I think Weeden and even Cousins will be more productive in the NFL than Tannehill. I hope the Browns take Tannehill with the fourth pick or one of the teams interested in him trade up to seven and take him.

I would rather the Dolphins take a player with the eight pick who can come in and start immediately. If they are going to draft a QB who is going to have to sit and learn for a few years, I would prefer Weeden or Cousins because they at least won't cost the Dolphins a first round selection.

I don't think any of the QB's after Luck and RG3 will ever be anything but mediocre starters or backups in the NFL, but if the Dolphins are intend on taking a QB in this draft, I just hope it isn't Tannehill unless they can get him in the second round. To me he just is not worth a first round pick.

 

I watch Kiper but I don't care to much for him as I don't see him as a draft Guru as he see's himself. He has a huge ego and is a GM wannabe.

 

Would love that draft, but substitute Kendall Wright for Sanu!

 

Nope.

The draft has changed and its changed BIG. People need to factor that into their strategies.

Before the penalties for missing on a 1st rounder were astronomical. That penalty is gone. You cannot remove the biggest penalty associated with the draft and expect it to not dramatically change the strategy.

 

he's prob basing it on other teams and their needs plus players in front of wright.

you trade down, build up picks and maybe get another shot at tannehill or weeden.

 

I do agree that it changed, but it mostly changed for the first 5 or so picks. Picking a quarterback around 8 or so have never been a huge investment.

 

It's still cut the money in half. McClain's contract at #8 the year before guaranteed about $23 mill. Locker's contract at #8 last year guaranteed about $12 million. That's not even factoring that Locker is a QB or the fact that contracts tended to be about 10% higher than the previous year.

 

I'm not sure that's true. I don't have a lot of time to research but in a quick search I found that Earl Thomas got a 5 yr deal worth $21 million at the 14th pick, while Locker only got $12 mil over 4 years at the 8 spot after the CBA.

 

I stand corrected

 

Financial penalty is gone.

Just to illustrate what the penalty for missing on a QB is:

DOLPHINS RECORD SINCE 2008:


Games that Chad Henne appeared in: 14-20 (.412)
Games Chad Henne did not appear in: 17-13 (.567)

Now when people come out and say Ireland should be fired because of the team's record, will they take that into consideration?

Clearly, there is a cost to missing on a QB. Financially it may not be very bad anymore, but there is a cost nonetheless, especially for the GM.

 

Not a fair comparison. The reason is now you can take another QB the following year, with little penalty. With Henne we didn't have that till last year. Not too mention what you described is always there and has nothing to do with where a player is taken.

 

"Now you take another QB"? Under what circumstances? If the QB you just drafted blows? In that case, the penalty is a year of poor QB play.

If you draft a QB in the first round, he very likely will get ~30 games as a starter. It wouldn't be fair otherwise.

In theory its great to say "if he sucks, just move on". But in reality thats not how these things work. There are many variables which are taken into account. After Henne's first year, everyone said he would be a great QB if we just got him better receivers. Then it was better coaches.

Heck, even Blaine Gabbert, who has looked as bad as any highly-drafted QB I can remember, is getting another year. Its not realistic to expect the team to cut bait on a first round QB after one season.

 

Unless you have an up & coming back up and a former pro bowler to mitigate that part of the risk of the draft. I think with the right staff in place you're gonna have an idea if your new QB is going to be able to transition to the NFL game or not after the first off season.