..looks like he's staying in Oakland. http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/08/01/zach-miller-told-to-stay-patient/
he was the most quiet guy out there, with his potential it was stunning to me that no one really waned him,as it seems we don't know what happened behind the scenes but it sure was quiet about him, maybe he wanted to stay in oakland all along
I want this cat in a Dolphins uniform pretty badly....wonder why the market is so soft for him...as well, it shouldn't take much to sign him either....
It's been 4 years. Pretty clear they will almost always go for the trench player over the skill player. Marshall is the one exception
Don't see how. "Almost always" while not artful seems a pretty accurate description of their priorities
Ronald Fields contract cost is a small fraction of what Miller will likely get, to a degree where it's really unlikely it would have prevented it.
The fact that you think we picked Fields over Miller is the exaggeration. Every move we make is doom and gloom for you, when it doesn't have to be that way.
And every move is apparently sunshine and lollipops for you so what's the difference? The fact is we showed little to no interest in a receiving TE who could have helped us and instead we signed a backup NT and are probably going to sign yet another o-lineman today. We have not looked at any skill guys other than Bush. If we are sticking with Henne, might as well give him all the tools.
The same thing happened with Huff. I'm thinking Crazy Al had a deal with both, once he got under the cap. Otherwise it makes no sense for ALL teams, not only us, to put them on ignore.
Not really. I barely post here so that''s something you pulled out of your ***. They didn't pick Fields over Miller. Fields in no way got in the way of Miller. That's just another assumption made up so you can take a jab at the FO.
Well one guy is signed here, the other is not. Maybe they weren't interested in Miller at all. If that's the case it simply bolsters my argument. Much like taking John Jerry over Jimmy Graham/Hernandez last year. Apparently they feel Fasano is an adequate starting TE. I disagree
Agree 100% Defense is pretty good Offense at this point borderline pathetic considering the real world doesn't know yet what our rookies are going to be like. I think we'd of generated some solid additions but for some weird reason our organization doesn't see the drastic need to put something of substance on that side of the line........We'll good thing is if thats true we should be set pretty nicely for the "suck for luck" category........... It's really a tragedy and humongous waste, because this Free agency has so much to offer to build the future ....... Guess were just destine for mediocrity again. to bad because the Defense looks pretty good....
I think you're missing the part where Zach Miller would be taking away snaps from a skill player thats likely as effective as he is?
Have to agree with anon on this one, schmoo...The fact is we don't know if any interest was shown in a receiving TE (which we really, really need, that we all agree on), but the two best guys out there, Boss and Miller both seemed to be destined to stay where they were at to begin with. That doesn't mean we didn't show any interest in them, that's probably something we'll never really know for sure... What we do know is who they have signed and publicly courted so far... I do have to 100% agree with you that they have not given Henne the tools needed to be successful yet. We still lack speed in the WR group, save for a rookie who may or may not be the answer. We have no seam busting TE and our OL is still a work in progress....One other issue is who the RBs are going to be. I'm not too optimistic that Bush is an every down back, or at least his time in the league so far has shown that to not be the case. Who else is going to compose the RB corps... I digress...we can't be overly critical of what the regime is not doing, if we don't know for sure they haven't tried...
What are you talking about? An all Pro TE acquisition would actally be a negative because he would "take away" snaps from another skill player? It's a mistake to look at it that way IMO. How about the added dimension a top pass catching TE gives an offense? How about the added problems a top pass catching TE gives to secondaries who can't just sit on outside routes? How about the added potential of skill players getting open on big plays if that top pass catching TE is demanding attention? I hope we at least were smart enough to make an inquiry and explore the situation.
Yes, he would certainly add dimensions to the team. But it would be at the expense of Davone Bess most likely. So either way, its a mis-allocation of resources (assuming Miller gets decent money).
Miller is a VG TE, and I would have loved to have him. However, last year Fasano was better at everything, other than the number of passes caught. We REALLY need a 2nd TE. Maybe Clay will be the answer, along with someone who can at least block.
Good point SB. Miller is not an overall upgrade over Fasano for this team, and you can only spend so much because of the much reduced cap.
If you feel that way then the thought process is justified. I don't see it that way at all however. Agree to disagree on that one. Also to stringer's point about ball allocation to players being decreased by bringing in additional talent. I don't get the argument at all. Of course it is. It's a good thing to have more weapons and outlets to get the ball to. That forces a defense from just having a couple players to focus on shutting down. The only true reason this would be an issue is when having to deal with a large ego on the field and then still it's not a good reason to see it as a negative. The thought process is puzzling.
Its not ball allocation, its snap allocation in relation to money allocation. It would be pretty silly to spend millions on a player that will only see 30% of the offensive snaps.
So based on this I'd assume you are one that simply dosen't value the TE position? I'd also point out that we just paid millions for one of those types of players in Reggie Bush who not only dosen't see a high percentage of snaps but also is unable to stay healthy which projects to even less touches. I really would have preferred Miller over Bush.
I dont understand why no one seems to be going after this guy? I havent even heard of anyone sniffing around him?
I think it has more to do with the fact that Fasano is a much better blocker than Miller. I'd like Miller too, but I understand that we have a better all-around tight end in Fasano.
I do value the position. But if you're only running 2-TE formations 20% of the time, then it would be wasteful IMO to spend a lot of money on a 2nd TE. I'm not a fan of the Reggie Bush trade. I do think there were factors other than the on-field considerations. But Bush is going to touch the ball ~15 times per game. Our 2nd TE will probably see 15-20 snaps total. So Bush will probably get more action IMO.
I think Miller is waiting on Oakland to clear cap space. Once they do that, I'm sure he'll go around fielding offers. The TE market is pretty dry, so I don't think he needs to be in a rush.
I'd have to disagree with that. Fasano may be a better blocker but Miller's pretty good at it himself, and I know he's a much better pass catching threat than Fasano.
Nooooooooooo. I'm hoping we were just waiting for Al to restructure and pay way too much for Kam Wimbley.
He did sign with Seattle. Boy, wish he was coming here.... http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/6...r-agree-contract-source-says-worth-34-million
You guys have no sense of reality. Fasano 39 catches for 528 yards (13.5 avg) and 4TD's at a cost of about $2-3 million Zach Miller 60 catches for 685 yards (11.4 avg) and 5TD's at a cost of $17 million guaranteed and is half the blocker Fasano is who stays in a lot more to block. Lot of "Grass is Greener" eyes going on.
