1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Report: Burress wants Dolphins, but they don't want him

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by brandon27, May 23, 2012.

  1. brandon27

    brandon27 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    45,652
    19,304
    113
    Dec 3, 2007
    Windsor, ON. CANADA
    http://sports.yahoo.com/news/report-burress-wants-dolphins-dont-125106405--nfl.html


    Interesting, don't think Burress would be a great addition here. However, I guess as that little article states, if some of these young guys we have on the roster dont look all that great when we get into full practices, if Burress is still out there, at least he becomes a reliable option to consider.
     
  2. Dorfdad

    Dorfdad Well-Known Member

    4,052
    2,347
    113
    Dec 9, 2007
    Honestly don't want him. Hes not that good anymore and hes trouble.. This is a new clean slate here in Miami keep the Jets garbage away..
     
    WharfRat and anthony0187 like this.
  3. padre31

    padre31 Premium Member Luxury Box

    99,377
    37,301
    0
    Nov 22, 2007
    inching to 100k posts
    Would love to have his services in Miami.
     
    SICK, dolfan32323, Sceeto and 2 others like this.
  4. xphinfanx

    xphinfanx Stay strong my friends.

    10,823
    2,214
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    Do they allow firearms in OTA's?

    I hope our young guys step up and give us a nugget or two because i'd rather not bring him in.
     
  5. Boik14

    Boik14 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    75,122
    37,643
    113
    Nov 28, 2007
    New York
    He was a good soldier in NY last year by every account Ive read. While has play has most definitely dropped he was still one of the best red zone players in the league last year. He can definitely help this team if none of these young kids grab the bull by the horns.
     
    Ohio Fanatic likes this.
  6. Ohio Fanatic

    Ohio Fanatic Twuaddle or bust Club Member

    32,073
    22,828
    113
    Nov 26, 2007
    Concord, MA
    if we need a redzone threat, then bring him in as a situational player. We really need a couple of redzone targets. right now, it's pretty fuzzy on whether we have any.
     
  7. BlameItOnTheHenne

    BlameItOnTheHenne Taking a poop

    15,112
    7,311
    113
    Aug 15, 2010
    Davie
    He'd be quite the role model.
     
  8. rafael

    rafael Well-Known Member

    27,364
    31,261
    113
    Apr 6, 2008
    I generally prefer to develop players.
     
    dolfan7171 likes this.
  9. Larryfinfan

    Larryfinfan 17-0...Priceless Club Member

    Yeah, it is fuzzy as to what we have in the WR corps for the most part, but if you bring in a Burress, Edwards, etc you also will never know about one of those fuzzy players...The thing is, those guys are really one dimensional as well. They play WR but not STs or any other packages except for perhaps red zone....is it worth bringing in a guy of that ilk ?? I don't think so...but you are so very right about us not really knowing what we have at the position as of now...
     
  10. ckparrothead

    ckparrothead Draft Forum Moderator Luxury Box

    79,599
    159,162
    113
    Dec 1, 2007
    We can still do that. That's what the practice squad is for.
     
    finyank13 likes this.
  11. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    If Burress isn't the one missing piece that will send us to the Super Bowl this year...then don't do it.
     
    bran likes this.
  12. padre31

    padre31 Premium Member Luxury Box

    99,377
    37,301
    0
    Nov 22, 2007
    inching to 100k posts
    I suspect his 2 yrs out of the gm slowed him early, he did seem to come on later in the yr.

    Ilike developing players, I also think it is better to have someone then to "hope" the young guys can get it done.
     
    Boik14 and Ohio Fanatic like this.
  13. finyank13

    finyank13 Reality Check

    30,718
    5,415
    113
    Jan 6, 2010
    Even better if he signs for the veteran min, which is a good possibility....
     
  14. Ohio Fanatic

    Ohio Fanatic Twuaddle or bust Club Member

    32,073
    22,828
    113
    Nov 26, 2007
    Concord, MA
    exactly. I don't want to bring in an influx of vets. we're just talking one player, in TC, if our young big guys don't show signs of being a strong red-zone threat.
    I'd prefer to develop players too, but not at the expense of no real redzone threat. you can't beat the patriots by scoring 5 FGs.
     
  15. MonstBlitz

    MonstBlitz Nobody's Fart Catcher

    21,176
    10,130
    113
    Jan 14, 2008
    Hornell, NY
    I remember that 3 TD game he had last season. Seems like there's still something there. I don't see how it's not worth bringing him in cheap and seeing what he can do with a full training camp.
     
  16. Ohio Fanatic

    Ohio Fanatic Twuaddle or bust Club Member

    32,073
    22,828
    113
    Nov 26, 2007
    Concord, MA
    He did come on pretty strong in the 2nd half.
     
  17. dolfan32323

    dolfan32323 ty xphinfanx

    12,587
    1,574
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Washington DC
    I'm in favor- bring him on the cheap and see what he has. At least we know he can be a threat in the redzone.
     
  18. Boik14

    Boik14 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    75,122
    37,643
    113
    Nov 28, 2007
    New York
    I like developing players as well but I think the one thing that could bu those players some time is maybe a little more depth at WR. We generally lack outside redzone threats and Im not sure guys like Egnew, Cunningham, Matthews, Fuller are going to help us there immediately. Cant just throw the year out the window. Burress was not good outside the redzone for much of the year but he definitely has some value for us.
     
  19. bran

    bran Senior Member

    4,525
    1,505
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    New Hampshire
    he is not worth the headache anymore
     
  20. ckparrothead

    ckparrothead Draft Forum Moderator Luxury Box

    79,599
    159,162
    113
    Dec 1, 2007
    I'm not saying that Miami HAS to sign Plaxico Burress, but I would like the signing nonetheless.

    My research indicates that even last year at his age he was amongst the most effective red zone targets in football. He converted 1 out of 3 red zone targets into a touchdown. Even if you only count guys that caught 7 touchdowns or more, that's better than most of the other receivers out there, upper quartile I think. If you count all the receivers out there it's more like top decile. So if you sign him, you know exactly what he would be here for.

    This red zone thing is really, really important. There's a reason I emphasize this a lot when I'm talking about Daniel Thomas' red zone failures, or Ryan Tannehill's being the most effective goal line QB in the Draft, or Jonas Gray's being a highly effective goal line ball carrier, or even back before the 2011 season started when I suggested that Miami should consider subbing Mike Pouncey out for Joe Berger in short yardage and goal line/red zone situations.

    In today's NFL with the trends having gone where they've gone schematically, the rules being what they are, it's really not hard anymore for a well coached and well designed offense to move the ball between the 20's. NFL teams used to average 50 scoring trips (offensive TD, field goal) a season 20 years ago. Now they average 62 scoring trips per season. Standard deviation of offensive scoring is at a 20 year high. Standard deviation of offensive touchdowns is at a 20 year high. Yet, the standard deviation of number of field goals is right in the mid-range for the 20 year period. What does that tell you, logically speaking?

    It suggests to me that the league is trending toward more haves and have-nots when it comes to scoring points offensively, but not necessarily in field goal kicking but rather in touchdown-making. More and more, it's becoming easier to get your offense into scoring position, and so you're not going to separate yourself from the rest of the league unless you can go from scoring position to touchdowns. The teams that are separating themselves, and that will continue to separate themselves in the future, are the ones that can continue to punch the ball in the end zone when they get into scoring position.

    Miami sucked at that the last two years. That's why my praise of Brian Daboll has been sparing. Yes, we moved the ball more. We went from ranked #26 in offensive scoring under Dan Henning to #19 in offensive scoring. However, our percentage of scoring drives that ended in touchdown only went from #29 in the league to #26. His offense moved the ball more between the 20's but we really weren't any better at converting scoring position into touchdowns. That was something I noticed in Cleveland as well, the sum-of-parts argument I kept making. You had a great rushing year out of Peyton Hillis, all this promise supposedly shown by a rookie Colt McCoy, a career year from Ben Watson, etc...yet you don't score much. The reality is the Browns ranked #26 in percentage of scoring trips ending in touchdowns in 2010. They ranked #29 in that area under Daboll in 2009. He came to Miami and it was the same thing, a sum-of-parts problem that is really a touchdown/red zone problem. We move the ball, we score more, but virtually the same percentage of scoring drives are ending in field goal as in 2010 when everyone was tearing their hair out about Miami's red zone inefficiency.

    So anyway getting back to Plaxico Burress, he's just another weapon to add that helps you punch the ball through from scoring position to the end zone. That makes him a potentially valuable addition to this team. Yes, I too would like to develop our young players. However, you can do that and still have Plaxico Burress. They're not mutually exclusive. The point is, the teams that are figuring out the red zone are separating themselves from the rest of the league, and to me that means that there are a lot of teams out there stuck in these archaic ways of thinking. Sub your starting center out for a backup in goal line situations? That's crazy! We can't do that just...just...just because it's crazy! Deal with Plaxico Burress' attitude just for his red zone proficiency? That's crazy! No way! I'd rather go with B.J. Cunningham! This kind of thinking, in my opinion, is holding some teams back.
     
  21. dolfan32323

    dolfan32323 ty xphinfanx

    12,587
    1,574
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Washington DC
    I like this stat a lot- very interesting. It just reinforces to me how MISERABLE this team has been getting the ball into the endzone. The frustration of seeing drives consistently fail to end in a touchdown has been sickening to me as a fan. Burress is as reliable as they come in the red zone. We need to do whatever it takes to put points on the board- something this team hasn't been able to do consistently in a long, long time.

    Maybe the young WRs can learn a thing or two about how to convert in the red zone from Burress as well as provide our QB a go to target in the end zone.
     
  22. P h i N s A N i T y

    P h i N s A N i T y My Porpoise in Life

    3,560
    968
    113
    Apr 19, 2012
    Treasure Coast, FL
    Really how many WRs can you put on one PS ? Not everyone is PS eligible, and those guys can be plucked, can they not ? You cant deny that adding a Burress takes opportunities away from someone else we're trying to develop ! He'd take a roster spot, a whole lot of practice reps, playtime, and he'd cost around 3x as much ! Between Egnew, Wallace, Fuller, Les Brown...... i think we can fill that role. We're not winning the super-bowl this year, we're rebuilding..... signing an old washed up WR will hurt more than it will help, unless its Driver, who could mentor. We're trying to develop talent to be ready for Tannehill, we cant sacrifice that just to get Moore or Garrard another weapon on a 1 yr. deal. They'll all be gone come next march !

    It's like when you keep the band-aid on 24/7...... the cut takes longer to heal. We need to stop covering them up and let them heal ! :yes:
     
  23. padre31

    padre31 Premium Member Luxury Box

    99,377
    37,301
    0
    Nov 22, 2007
    inching to 100k posts
    This is one of the reasons why I banged the table for playmakers instead of blue collar types.

    Have to score Td's, any player who is not good at doing that for us really needs to be "evaluated".
     
    dolfan32323 likes this.
  24. ckparrothead

    ckparrothead Draft Forum Moderator Luxury Box

    79,599
    159,162
    113
    Dec 1, 2007
    I think you said it right there. If I were running a team, I would have a "whatever it takes" attitude on converting scoring opportunities into touchdowns. I don't care if I have to think outside the box a little bit. If that means holding some scoring specialists on the active roster instead of a special teams player, so be it. If that means doing things that others think is crazy, like subbing out your center, any of your other linemen, even your quarterback...so be it. If you have to practice and devote time to whole different schemes that seem incompatible with what you normally run, so be it. That's sort of my stance on the issue.
     
    dolfan32323 likes this.
  25. dolfan32323

    dolfan32323 ty xphinfanx

    12,587
    1,574
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Washington DC
    Agreed. At the end of the day that is all that matters is that we score more points than the other teams. Plax can help us do that I believe.

    It's also not like we haven't thought outside of the box. Taking a risk on Pat White and running the wildcat show that we have been willing to take risks; some of which pay off and some of which don't. But clearly what we have been doing is not working.
     
  26. ckparrothead

    ckparrothead Draft Forum Moderator Luxury Box

    79,599
    159,162
    113
    Dec 1, 2007
    Miami has taken risks. But they stopped. They got discouraged by the Pat White failure, and they took their ball and went home pouting because of it. In 2008 and 2009 they made use of the Wildcat pretty extensively. As a result, in 2008 they were 5th best in the NFL at converting scoring opportunities into touchdowns. In 2009, they were still 15th best even as teams figured out how to defend the Wildcat.

    But after Pat White suffered his concussion, they said no mas to this funky way of thinking about scoring in the red zone. They went traditional. That's when they sank to #29 in the league in touchdown conversion. Even with Brian Daboll and his new offense, that only rose to #26 in the league. They needed to keep innovating, and keep thinking outside the box for ways to create spacing and scoring, but they got discouraged by a little failure and stopped.

    Pat White was never really a good idea for touchdown-making. To this day I do not understand how they thought that someone as diminutive as White was going to keep the Wildcat scoring touchdowns. I was against the drafting of Pat White for a long time before that Draft, argued against it constantly even though many people here wanted him to keep the Wildcat evolving. Since I happened to be on the right side of that, I guess it's easy for me to say that Pat White should have been easy to predict in his failure, but I do appreciate the idea they had to keep evolving and innovating the offense. The problem is, as in the process of natural selection, not all mutations increase fitness. Many decrease it, and those mutations are lost because of the decreased fitness. That's what happened with Miami and the PatCat. They had the right intentions but the wrong idea, and they should have been able to learn from it, keep innovating, and head in the right direction. But instead they just gave it all up.
     
  27. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    I don't really see Burress fitting in a WCO. Rather limited in the routes he runs IMO.
     
  28. padre31

    padre31 Premium Member Luxury Box

    99,377
    37,301
    0
    Nov 22, 2007
    inching to 100k posts
    To me, John Martin may have been good value, I also think he was reversion to type.

    Ireland simply cannot resist taking linemen over playmakers, imo his time in KC and Dallas sort of skewed his views on what makes good value in a pass happy nfl.

    Which also means he got very lucky that Egnew and Miller were there in Rd 3 and 4, but even then he reverted to type and only pushed in late rd picks on Wr's, this is why Burress would make sense for us..but I doubt it happens..Ireland just does not place that high a value on vet Wr's.

    In an odd way, Brandon Marshall was as much of a failure as White was and of course he won't make that mistake again!

    :lol:
     
  29. Ohio Fanatic

    Ohio Fanatic Twuaddle or bust Club Member

    32,073
    22,828
    113
    Nov 26, 2007
    Concord, MA
    It doesn't matter who is coaching or who is our QB, if we stuck with the RG/RT combo we had last season, it would still be a disaster. Improvement was needed.
     
  30. gunn34

    gunn34 I miss Don & Dan

    21,755
    3,475
    113
    Jan 5, 2008
    Oviedo FL
    I'd take a shot. You have to consider who he had as a QB last year too.
     
  31. Sceeto

    Sceeto Well-Known Member

    13,501
    6,246
    113
    Oct 13, 2008
    New York
    Jeffy should, at the very least, keep a close eye on his situation and try to see if and when other teams are starting to show interest in Burress. Because if some of these later round, UDFA guys we have don't pan out, then he should again, at the very least, keep that in mind as a contingency plan.
     

Share This Page