I was not aware of any of this.

 

Parcells is a Hall of Famer :shifty:

 

It's not nearly as wacky as you're acting. A pretty small minority of draft picks sign second contracts, and the correlation between that and merit is quite a bit looser than is being suggested.

You need to put in effort to make a well-reasoned assessment. It's very easily possible for it to be a good decision to draft a player and a bad decision to re-sign them, or even the reverse.

 

Parcells error wasn't in who we drafted per se, its in who he made coaches.

The talent that was brought in was fine for his antiquated system, Sparano & Henning were horrible in developing talent and putting together a game plan.

We have no one left from that draft because the players don't fit our current system.

 

As much as I despise Quitcells, that was a bad draft class anyway....none of the top 10 guys have really panned out. You can argue Matty Ryan, but what has he really won ?? Let's also keep in mind that all those guys are still in the league, just not here... Jake left on his own accord and his body has broken down of late... All are players that can contribute, but none are 'all pros' save for a healthy Jake...

I've said this a couple of times, but I think we'll see even more guys leaving after their first contract with the new CBA...it's inherent in the structure of the NFL and the CBA that these guys will be choosing more money over any percieved loyalty to any team...yes, I know that 2008 class was not in the new CBA, but the point is that it's happening and going to continue to happen...


At any rate, none of that helps us now...lets worry about what we do from here on out....

EDIT: Clarify...the entire 2008 draft was mediocre, not just our picks...

 

true about not being able to develop the talent, but they drafted wrong that year as well...

Merling was number 32 that year....

 

I'm dumbfounded by this discovery.

 

I somewhat share that opinion. Henne might have been a much better player with better coaching. Langford and Thomas were fine. Merling was either really terrible or miscast in the role they envisioned him playing.

Our opinions differ only because I am reluctant to write that draft off completely because of bad coaching/wrong system as you have.

 

Actually it's a pretty successful draft. Not re-signing with a team has dick all to do with the success of a draft. To me it's players who stick in the league.

Jake Long/Kendall Langford scored big deals. Donald Thomas never should have been cut. That was daft at the time. He just scored a 4 year $3.5 million a year deal. For low round running backs both Parmele and Hillard are still kicking in the league (Parmele had 47 touches last year for the Jags). Even our 7th rounder Dotson kicked around for 4 years. The only outright bust was Murphy.

Is it sad we have nothing to show for it 5 years later. Yes. I'm sure quite a few teams are like that also. However, going forward with the Joe Philbin style team...I look at the money were not paying Vontae, Smith, Langford, Long, Thomas as opportunity for change.

By the way don't look ahead to the next couple drafts. All we have left from 2009 is Hartline/Clemons. 2010 is Odrick/Misi/Jerry/Carroll/Jones/Spitler. However outside of Jones does any of them fit long term? 2011 is also looking like a Pouncey only year once Clay/Thomas and Wilson get the boot.

 

I get it....but no one consistently hits on all their picks. A lot of the guys that we picked are playing on other teams as contributors.

People need to really understand the definition of a successful draft pick. It seems right now people think successful pick only equals top 3 player at a position and still on the team....and that is not the definition of a successful pick.

 

To repeat a point from another thread:

 

I know what a successful pick is....

all of those guys with the exception of Long and Langford arent.....ironically they are both in the Lou right now...

 

Your stance confuses me though.

You recognize the problems outside of player talent and admit many players from that draft are fine....but you aren't willing to take the next logical step.

Its kind of like you admit the animal in front of us swims, has web feet, has a bill, admits it quacks, is a bird.....but you're not willing to call it a duck.

 

2 players that are really good like Long & Langford make a pretty good draft.

 

When you have zero players left from a draft 5 years out, that is a horrible outcome. Theoretically, the guys from that draft should be your core veterans.

Had we made different/better choices where we picked the players would fit any system and would still be here. This isn't even an Ireland thing, as it really doesn't matter anymore who made the final call. They were the wrong calls. Merling was the worst of the selections actually.

 

Thank you. I always love how when this crap happens it's a Dolphins thing and NEVER another teams problem also.

 

It's a theory by fans...not a reality as Astro just pointed out. 42 of the top 64. Willing to bet it's a common trend year after year also.

 

This is a Dolphins board though. I don't think most of us care what other teams did five years ago

 

That is simply not true. There are not a lot of players that fit any system. You are just saying things you think you should be, even if that's not how reality works. Why would the FO that year even be looking for players that fit any system anyway?

If we had overpaid for Long and kept him here, then following your logic, it would have been a slightly less bad draft.

Draft quality is not based on what team the player ends up.

 

It is. No other profession has employers taking in the same number of new employees each year.
Think about it. The draft contains the same number of players each and every year. There are no new teams, which means the attrition rate is = to draft picks and UDFA

 

It should...especially when it's a common trend throughout the league and that perception just isn't reality.

Plus I do love all the ranting this morning considering the fact most folks realized months ago we weren't keeping Jake. But a little tease drew folks back in.

 

Point taken lol! I was more or less trying not to be argumentative. I should have elaborated.

I don't admit the players taken we're fine. 2 of them were (Langford and Thomas). I don't like the idea of passing over Ryan for Long and Henne. Thats a big one. Merling was a big miss for a #32.

 

Meh, don't believe the media hype.

Matt Ryan is a very pedestrian QB. The numbers don't lie.
He has been lucky to have the weapons and team around him. IF we had taken him instead of Jake, he would've already been long long gone.

 

Oh wow...someone who agrees with me. I take a crap kicking if I point out how pedestrian Ryan was. It wasn't till this past year he put up some actual franchise numbers..but look at what he has there. With that type of talent I expect a 100QBR QB ;p Basically the first 4 years Ryan played like Long has the past 2 and only reached Long's first 3 seasons of play this past year (that make any sense whatsoever? lol).

 

Well that explains why I was confused, lol.

Let's say a player can be GOAT, elite, good, solid, role player, poor, WOAT. Let's also assume a given team's draft has 7 picks.

Based on those to things, how many players need to end up being good, elite or GOAT to consider a draft successful in your eyes?

 

You could plug LOTS of QB's in with that team and they would put numbers up that would make Matt Ryan look like a wishbone throwback. Cmon, he has 3 potential all world recievers, and very good running stable and a very very solid front line...and yet, we keep seeing Ryan blow reads, or just miss an open target...and it's next to impossible to miss either Tony G or Roddy White...but he certainly manages to...too often.

 

http://www.nfl.com/player/mattryan/310/profile

Ill take those numbers! I don't agree that he would've been long gone. No point in over thinking it though because we will never know....

 

I'm not sure I can give you a number or % of what a GM has to hit on. I'll never pretend I can do better but I cant' get past Ireland (or whoever) taking Long and Henne over Ryan. We needed a QB in the worst way and they scouted him for god knows how long. So IMO that particular draft was a miss.

Offtopic: I've seen "GOAT" a lot lately, what does it stand for?

 

I would say his last 3 years are pretty eye opening. I'm not Ryan's biggest fan or anything but you can't ignore those numbers with or without the weapons they've put around him.

 

How is it a theory? If you are "building through the draft" like everybody says you're supposed to, that implies that you are drafting players you plan on keeping long term.

If Wannstedt had drafted the 2008 class and they were all gone 5 years later he would be pilloried at every turn. But because it was Ireland, and there is a strange desire to stand up for him by many on this board, it is seen as no big deal, or something that happens to a lot of teams.

 

Greatest Of All Time.

They viewed Ryan and Henne as similar. They are. They were both equally suited to run the offense we wanted to run when they were picked. The problem is, we changed the offense AFTER they were picked. We didn't change it because of a flaw in Henne, we changed it because of a flaw in Penny.

 

It's a theory because we already showed you the number. 42 of the top 64 picks from that draft aren't with their original team. It's a common trending stat. Hence it's a nice thought/theory but the practicality isn't there.

 

Yes but put him here during that time and maybe we have another Henne. Ryan's been blessed with amazing talent all around him..but I think you could plug in about a dozen quarterbacks into that system and get equal or better.

What I am saying is I expect even more with the talent he has there then what he's doing with it.

Hell we are lucky Tannehill played as well as he did with how our offense was. This is why I am loving what they have done so far. Get this boy some weapons and give him the best chance to succeed.

 

You may be right but using cut and dry results Ryan is twice the QB Henne is/was. Maybe if Henne was put into a perfect system for him he would be ok but I personally doubt he would match Ryan's ability.

Henne played scared a lot. I remember posting way back when that I thought it could have been that the leash was too tight and that he looked to be afraid to make mistakes. He has never progressed though. When things went bad for Henne they REALLY went bad! He IMO has a lot more weaknesses than Ryan. Accuracy for one, and you'll never see Henne get a name like "Matty Ice" when it comes to keeping composure while under duress.

 

The point is, had we been a WildCat team during that draft, we might not have taken Henne. I just don't think you can bag a draft if the system changes AFTER you pick.

 

Just playing devils advocate, but if an average of 33% of the 2008 draft are with their original team then the Fins are far below that average at 0%.

However, the fact that this team completely revamped the coaching staff and the system, makes this much less of a problem in my eyes.

 

I would expect a little versatility or adaptability from at least SOME of our prospects, wouldn't you? Schemes change, but it seems like we are the only ones constantly purging former players because of that very reason.

 

Sure, but when you're drafting on the Parcells blueprint, then no. Never forget, we scouted Henne and Ryan based on the Parcells QB checklist:

http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2011/1/20/1945893/2011-nfl-draft-quarterbacks-bill-parcells

Ryan did not meet those requirements, but Henne did.