I never saw that before, thanks for digging that up! I have to laugh, Paul Zimmerman, of Sports Illustrated, is dumb founded by the selection. In a way, I can see why if he is a guy who looks just at the stats. Danny boy's completion percentage was 58.4% and he threw 17 TDs and 23 interceptions his senior year. Thankfully, the Dolphins had a little more sense than some of those so called football experts.

 

Now THAT is a laser rocket arm!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

And if anyone thinks that drafting is an exact science and that the game is more advanced now you only have to go back a few years to see the same mistake made again when the pundits and so called experts dissed and overlooked Aaron Rodgers

 

Am I the only one who can't hear the audio on this?

 

Opinions are like

oh screw it you get the point lol

 

What a great memory. I remember watching this with my dad. He was upset that they picked Marino up too. :) Marino showed them all though.

 

Paul Zimmerman always said he'd never live that down. One of his most embarrassing moments.

And a year later, Don Shula was considered one of the top QB coaches in the league. :) He accelerating Marino's development by making him call his own plays from Day 1 in training camp.

 

is there a video of Paul Zimmerman....after the season has started...:lol:

 

Don Strock

 

Strock was truly a gem of a football player.

 

Thanks for that - made my day!!

 

After his junior year Marino was considered neck and neck with Elway for the best QB in college football. I was a big fan and even had a Pitt hat, although my favorite QB in that draft was Jim Kelly (I watched a ton of UM football then). Marino dropped after a horrible senior year and drug rumors. If you base it on his stats, as many here are prone to do, there is no way he deserved to go in the first round. But his skill set was obvious. Marino was never great at reading defenses (particularly post-snap), not even in the pros. He was criticized for a tendency to lock on to WRs. So he was seen as a great passer, but raw. I imagine that the same people here today that are trashing prospects based on their college stats and saying they're too raw would have reacted much like Paul Zimmerman did.

 

We are just glad the USFL didnt get him.

"The first college player drafted by the USFL (by the LA Express) was Dan Marino. He didn't sign."

 

What were the Dolphins doing?! They should've taken a DL or RT there. Oh Jesus, the guy's probably gonna be a bust and set the franchise back years.

 

Any QB prospect this year fall into that category? Great passer, but raw? This is one of the reasons I was so disappointed Miami didn't roll the dice with Ryan Mallet. He seemed to me a pretty close description of Dan Marino pre-draft. Right down to the drug rumors...

 

If a QB came out today with the exact same stats as Marino's final year of college and we drafted him, people would lose their ****. Of course, if we drafted a lock like Leaf we'd be praised...until he blew.

That is why there should be no such thing as playing it safe with QB's. They are too vital and it is too hard to predict a winner. Value in the draft when it comes to a QB, is crap and irrelevant. If you feel the guy can be your franchise, you take him first chance you get. Especially now that misses in the draft aren't as painful.

If Tannehill/Weeden have 65% chance of being it, tajke them with your fist pick and be grateful you got the guy. Get cute in the draft, when the target is a CB, not when the target is a QB.

 

I hated Mallett. I didn't feel he handled pressure well. I didn't feel he had the feet. I don't see that as a raw thing. I saw that as a skill thing. That's why I had him as a second - third round prospect before the draft. The closest example to Marino in this draft is Tannehill. He's considered raw, but has elite passing and athleticism. He arguably has the best pocket awareness in the draft (the only competition would be Luck). But he's criticized for unimpressive stats, locking on to his receivers and not reading defenses enough (like Marino). Also like Marino, Tannehill was struck with poor receivers. In his case, they had something like twice the average drops. Skill wise, he reminds me of Rodgers whom I see as the new prototype (Marino was more the old drop-back prototype). And unlike most QBs in the draft, he's spent his time in college working in a pro-style offense. In Miami's case it would actually be the same pro-style offense.

 

I can imagine if this board or any board existed back then, if any did exist probably trashed the pick except for a select few. I guess this is a good example of keeping an open mind and respecting other peoples opinions because they have as much of a chance of being right as they have of being wrong. Its easy to pat one's self on the back if your right but it is much harder eating crow and admitting that you were wrong and maybe didn't know as much as you thought you did.

 

I wouldn't lose my ****, because I know the upside of a QB is MUCH higher than that of say, a DL. Times have changed. You miss on a QB in the first Round it doesn't set you back nearly as much as it did even 3 years ago.

I agree with your last statement. If you think there's a CHANCE one of the guys could be your Franchise QB, you take him.

 

Only speaking for myself, but I'd be so relieved to finally see Ireland identify a QB with franchise potential and draft him in the first round. It hasn't been done since Marino. If the QB failed, I would not blame Ireland. I blame him for not trying. I blame him for doing nothing to address the QB position. I blame him for not properly valuing the QB position. I won't blame him for trying and missing.

 

after i watched that video i got stuck now surfing through 2 hours of dan marino clips...the conclusion is...i miss that guy... :sad:

 

Whether you draft a QB or not, you're probably getting fired anyways.

 

Just to nitpick here, yes the draft itself isn't a science (and nothing is an exact science, not sure how this term got started). But that's because science is a method that we apply to things. It's a form of logic used to explain and predict things. And if you aren't applying scientific methods to the draft then you are basically throwing darts at a board. Even though football is less statistically inclined than other sports, there are attempts to measure things everywhere, especially with the draft. And that attempt to measure everything about the player and the game is the scientific method at work.

Just because it may be difficult to measure some things doesn't mean we shouldn't try or that the means of using science is flawed. Take one of football pundit's and fan's favorite words, intangibles. Even though from a theoretical standpoint I think it's more difficult to be scientific using qualitative methods than quantitative, every team is using interviews as a way to measure these things like leadership and mental capacity that are lumping into the intangible category. They may not view it that way and they may not be using the best available methods, but they are being scientific.

End of nerdy rant. Great video. I'm glad he had a crappy last year at Pitt. Given that year it's incredible that he was able to be so good so early on in the NFL.

 

Triple fist pumps!!

 

this was a good thread but when i saw he title I thought this was a dedication to Eddie Moore thread. or about howmanydraftbut we had.

i miss Dan and I have to say I do miss Hunter Goodwin, Oj McDuffie and the Marks brothers

 

stats don't matter when the talent is actually there. lol watch the clips even in the orginal video. the "oh marino was a first round qb we should reach on a bum this year" logic is moronic. that was prob the best qb class of all time. tanny has a real high bust potential but just know this logic yall are using is horrible.


btw, matt ryan with all those weapons got shut out in the playoff last year.

 

I think you're completely missing the point of the thread. The point is a lot of folks had the same perception of Marino as you have about the prospects this year. People thought the same about Aaron Rodgers when he slid. Could every QB not named or even including Andrew Luck and Robert Griffin be busts? Sure. But if the people making the decisions see franchise potential you pull the trigger. Dolphin GMs sitting on their hands because a QB might be a bust or because the incumbent might be good enough for the past 12 years is a huge part of the reason this Dolphins team presently sits mired in mediocrity while teams that took a chance in the first round are winning superbowls.

 

A shame there isn't another Dan Marino for us to draft.

 

Let the QB they draft create his own identity. There won't be another Marino, Montana, Elway etc.

 

Unless we clone him...

 

Is that uncle Rico?

 

Me too. One of the videos has a debate between Brees and Marino. And this comment, which is gold:

 

That's hysterical, shows draftniks have always made mistakes.

"Shula only had Griese"? Guy never heard of Unitas?

Was that Bob Ley and Boomer? My, have we all gotten old.

And I must confess I also wondered at the time taking a QB with Woodley and Strock in the fold.:cry:

 

"And maybe with some good coaching he can be as good as Strock"

I almost pissed myself when i heard that comment near the end of the video. As good as Strock...we can only hope...LO Fn L

 

and I'm pretty sure Shula's teams with Griese were ground and pound, Defensive dominating teams...Griese was good, but let's not paint him as Montana, Elway or Marino.

 

reaching for the sake of reaching is stupid. I wouldn't be that upset with a tannehill pick at 8. I wish we had lost a few games last year so we wouldn't be in the spot we're at now though. pretty ****t pick at 8 in all honesty and the best move would be to trade out of it.

 

Again, the point is if a GM sees franchise QB potential a franchise QB is NEVER a reach. Never.

 

My favorite part is when they show highlights...of a punt.