Interesting thought on Miami

[oldtimer 84]

One of the Scouts that is frequently on the NFL Network's satellite radio show said something interesting.  He believes Miami traded their LT because Tua is a left handed QB.  He will need a stud RT and the LT will be of much less importance.  That makes sense, even if they are seemingly planning a full year ahead and many factors could change between now and the draft.  I do not know the guy's name as I was just driving during lunch.  He also said from what he's heard inside the organization, they will try to build up the offense in the draft, possibly using their first 5 picks on a QB, WR, and offensive line, but use their salary cap space on the defense.  It's always a waste of time to prognosticate so early, but it makes sense.  If nothing else, they will be fun to watch and discuss in the offseason. 

[Ray_T 587]

1 hour ago, oldtimer said:

One of the Scouts that is frequently on the NFL Network's satellite radio show said something interesting.  He believes Miami traded their LT because Tua is a left handed QB.  He will need a stud RT and the LT will be of much less importance.  That makes sense, even if they are seemingly planning a full year ahead and many factors could change between now and the draft.  I do not know the guy's name as I was just driving during lunch.  He also said from what he's heard inside the organization, they will try to build up the offense in the draft, possibly using their first 5 picks on a QB, WR, and offensive line, but use their salary cap space on the defense.  It's always a waste of time to prognosticate so early, but it makes sense.  If nothing else, they will be fun to watch and discuss in the offseason. 

it's possible, but the reality is you win and lose games on the line, and the line as a whole will suck badly.

its also worth noting that lots of players can transition from RT to LT and back again.     Some cant make the transition, but a lot can and do make the switch.

This trade was made to stockpile draft picks and to tank the season.  I hope they have the good sense to draft some LT/RT players early in the 2020 draft to protect that huge investment they are gonna make at QB

[IGotWorms 3,302]

That is interesting but also possibly slightly stupid. What if Tua falls on his face or someone else emerges as the clear cut #1?

[Ray_T 587]

odds are pretty good if they spend a #1 overall on Tua, he is playing.

GM wont let someone else take the job unless Tua gets hurt and they light it up to a degree where he has no choice.

[IGotWorms 3,302]

7 minutes ago, Ray_T said:

odds are pretty good if they spend a #1 overall on Tua, he is playing.

GM wont let someone else take the job unless Tua gets hurt and they light it up to a degree where he has no choice.

I meant #1 draft pick

[Ray_T 587]

3 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

I meant #1 draft pick

yeah, its not a given it will be him.

At this point it is only worth noting he is likely the current front runner.

[kilroy69 993]

10 minutes ago, Ray_T said:

odds are pretty good if they spend a #1 overall on Tua, he is playing.

GM wont let someone else take the job unless Tua gets hurt and they light it up to a degree where he has no choice.

That actually depends. Ask mahomes or his dad what sitting behind smith did for him. 

[Ray_T 587]

1 minute ago, kilroy69 said:

That actually depends. Ask mahomes or his dad what sitting behind smith did for him. 

having him sit behind a veteran for part or all of a year  is different than handing the job to a lower drafted prospect.

I dont think its unreasonable to let him sit a half year or even a full year (in the event the line is still a trainwreck)

 

[AxeElf 787]

#LoveHurts

[kilroy69 993]

20 minutes ago, Ray_T said:

having him sit behind a veteran for part or all of a year  is different than handing the job to a lower drafted prospect.

I dont think its unreasonable to let him sit a half year or even a full year (in the event the line is still a trainwreck)

 

They have rosen and if they were smart they could bring in a vet to tutor tua. 

[AxeElf 787]

1 minute ago, kilroy69 said:

They have rosen and if they were smart they could bring in a vet to tutor tua. 

"I'm already tutoring two tots, you want me to tutor Tua too??"

[sderk 1,040]

Miami is the new Cleveland. Hell, Cleveland it the new Cleveland too.

[shorepatrol 1,736]

They needed to tank the year Trevor Lawrence comes out. 

[Gepetto 979]

That Left Tackle Miami traded to Houston is overrated too.

[GobbleDog 816]

As a fish fan.... no Tua.   Grandma would thrive at Alabama.

[IGotWorms 3,302]

45 minutes ago, GobbleDog said:

As a fish fan.... no Tua.   Grandma would thrive at Alabama.

And she could start for Miami

[zftcg 84]

4 hours ago, oldtimer said:

One of the Scouts that is frequently on the NFL Network's satellite radio show said something interesting.  He believes Miami traded their LT because Tua is a left handed QB.  He will need a stud RT and the LT will be of much less importance.  That makes sense, even if they are seemingly planning a full year ahead and many factors could change between now and the draft.  I do not know the guy's name as I was just driving during lunch.  He also said from what he's heard inside the organization, they will try to build up the offense in the draft, possibly using their first 5 picks on a QB, WR, and offensive line, but use their salary cap space on the defense.  It's always a waste of time to prognosticate so early, but it makes sense.  If nothing else, they will be fun to watch and discuss in the offseason. 

I don't believe that's true -- sounds more like the kind of thing someone makes up to fill time on a radio show -- but if it were, it would be the dumbest strategy ever. They don't know for sure they will get the No. 1 pick, they don't know for sure it will be Tua, and the LT/RT thing has been overrated almost since the moment Michael Lewis published "The Blind Side". Can you imagine a team with a right-handed QB saying, "We traded away our RT; as long as we have someone good on the left side, we're fine." Hell, the Raiders signed Trent Brown to a big FA contract this offseason and then moved him (back) to RT.

Occam's Razor: They traded Tunsil because he was a good, not great, player and they got a haul for him.

[The Bard 11]

Not sure what is interesting about Miami, other than Miami Vice back in the day. Great show Sonny, or did I mean Tubbs?

[titans&bucs&bearsohmy! 2,745]

7 hours ago, The Bard said:

Not sure what is interesting about Miami, other than Miami Vice back in the day. Great show Sonny, or did I mean Tubbs?

Dexter was pretty good too. And the golden girls. 

[shutdown 40]

11 hours ago, zftcg said:

Occam's Razor: They traded Tunsil because he was a good, not great, player and they got a haul for him.

Exactly.  The offer for Tunsil was one that they couldn't turn down.  Odds are that with 2 firsts and a second they get at least one player of Tunsil's ability and you have the chance to do even better than that if you draft well.  I don't think they were actively shopping Tunsil, but the offer was too good to pass on.  Plus he was only under contract for one more year, now the Dolphins get 3 players on rookie deals.  They may still botch the draft, but this was a trade they had to make.

[oldtimer 84]

Personally, if I were running the Dolphins, I would see what I could get to trade down.  I think they have great potential to have the first overall pick.  They could possibly turn that into a major haul with the top 5 - 7 college guys being considered Blue Chip type guys.  Maybe I'm in the minority, but I'm not sold on Tua anyway, at least not to be a franchise savior.  It's too difficult to tell how good he truly is when he has an offensive line better than Miami, better WR's, a better TE and a better defense.  lol 

Do you think Tua is everything he's being made out to be?  I love watching Alabama, but there are games against above average teams where he hasn't looked good throwing deep.  That's also on his scouting report.  He won't have a deep threat who catches everything thrown to him and can outrun everyone if he's on the Dolphins.  He may be the next Manning for all I know, but he doesn't seem to me to be everything certain Scouts and online sites are making him out to be. 

[zftcg 84]

3 hours ago, shutdown said:

Exactly.  The offer for Tunsil was one that they couldn't turn down.  Odds are that with 2 firsts and a second they get at least one player of Tunsil's ability and you have the chance to do even better than that if you draft well.  I don't think they were actively shopping Tunsil, but the offer was too good to pass on.  Plus he was only under contract for one more year, now the Dolphins get 3 players on rookie deals.  They may still botch the draft, but this was a trade they had to make.

From Peter King's "Football Morning in America" column, quoting Miami GM Chris Grier:

Quote

I called Laremy about the trade, and Laremy walked in my office and saw [the terms] on the board and goes, ‘I would trade me for that.’ 

 

[zftcg 84]

2 hours ago, oldtimer said:

Personally, if I were running the Dolphins, I would see what I could get to trade down.  I think they have great potential to have the first overall pick.  They could possibly turn that into a major haul with the top 5 - 7 college guys being considered Blue Chip type guys.  Maybe I'm in the minority, but I'm not sold on Tua anyway, at least not to be a franchise savior.  It's too difficult to tell how good he truly is when he has an offensive line better than Miami, better WR's, a better TE and a better defense.  lol 

Do you think Tua is everything he's being made out to be?  I love watching Alabama, but there are games against above average teams where he hasn't looked good throwing deep.  That's also on his scouting report.  He won't have a deep threat who catches everything thrown to him and can outrun everyone if he's on the Dolphins.  He may be the next Manning for all I know, but he doesn't seem to me to be everything certain Scouts and online sites are making him out to be. 

I think if you believe there's a franchise QB in the draft, whether it's Tua or Herbert or whoever, you take him No. 1. Look at how the Browns pissed away two years after trading the picks that became Wentz and Watson.

If you're not sold on any of them being franchise QBs, then you trade down. But you better be right or you'll be joining Sashi Brown in purgatory.

[Ray_T 587]

I dont know that they had the team to build around Wentz and Watson.  

At the time there was a lot wrong with the team as a whole.

if you draft a QB and putt him into a terrible situation, that's largely how you ruin that prospect.

I think the way they setup the rebuild was fine.

it may be that all they need is to replace the coach now.

[oldtimer 84]

1 hour ago, zftcg said:

I think if you believe there's a franchise QB in the draft, whether it's Tua or Herbert or whoever, you take him No. 1. Look at how the Browns pissed away two years after trading the picks that became Wentz and Watson.

If you're not sold on any of them being franchise QBs, then you trade down. But you better be right or you'll be joining Sashi Brown in purgatory.

You are comparing apples and oranges there.  When Wentz was drafted, the Eagles had (still have) a great offensive line and an offensive guru at HC (and O-Coordinator).  Miami has neither.  Watson has nice weapons at his disposal and when he was drafted, the line wasn't the crap group they have today (outside of LT).  Last year for Watson would be about as close as you could get to Miami's line, but Miami's is even worse.  There are too many examples of "franchise" QB's being absolutely ruined by bad lines and the wrong head coach.  Tim Couch & Carr are the first two that come to mind.  If they take him at #1, I hope they sit him until they have someone in front of him capable of blocking.  Put him behind that line they have today, with those WR's and coaching staff and I say you wasted your #1 pick. 

[zftcg 84]

58 minutes ago, Ray_T said:

I dont know that they had the team to build around Wentz and Watson.  

At the time there was a lot wrong with the team as a whole.

if you draft a QB and putt him into a terrible situation, that's largely how you ruin that prospect.

I think the way they setup the rebuild was fine.

it may be that all they need is to replace the coach now.

Eh, things change quick in the NFL. Did the Rams have the team to build around Goff when they took him?

Of course, this is the Browns we're talking about, so they probably would have found a way to screw things up regardless of who they took.

[zftcg 84]

2 minutes ago, oldtimer said:

You are comparing apples and oranges there.  When Wentz was drafted, the Eagles had (still have) a great offensive line and an offensive guru at HC (and O-Coordinator).  Miami has neither.  Watson has nice weapons at his disposal and when he was drafted, the line wasn't the crap group they have today (outside of LT).  Last year for Watson would be about as close as you could get to Miami's line, but Miami's is even worse.  There are too many examples of "franchise" QB's being absolutely ruined by bad lines and the wrong head coach.  Tim Couch & Carr are the first two that come to mind.  If they take him at #1, I hope they sit him until they have someone in front of him capable of blocking.  Put him behind that line they have today, with those WR's and coaching staff and I say you wasted your #1 pick. 

It's an interesting question to ponder. Yes, you could say that Couch and (especially) Carr were ruined by playing behind subpar lines. Or you could say they were ruined by playing for subpar organizations, and one piece of evidence of that mismanagement was their inability to build a line in front of their franchise QB.

By contrast, after Goff's rookie year everyone thought they had made a mistake, but their organization was strong enough that they a) hit the jackpot with their head coach, and b) signed a number of key vets (like Whitworth) who stabilized the line. Then again, I'm not sure how replicable the Rams' model is; there are only so many McVays out there.

I still maintain that you should take a franchise QB when one is available, and if you're worried that you can't build a good roster around him, chances are you've got bigger problems than your QB.

[oldtimer 84]

1 hour ago, zftcg said:

It's an interesting question to ponder. Yes, you could say that Couch and (especially) Carr were ruined by playing behind subpar lines. Or you could say they were ruined by playing for subpar organizations, and one piece of evidence of that mismanagement was their inability to build a line in front of their franchise QB.

By contrast, after Goff's rookie year everyone thought they had made a mistake, but their organization was strong enough that they a) hit the jackpot with their head coach, and b) signed a number of key vets (like Whitworth) who stabilized the line. Then again, I'm not sure how replicable the Rams' model is; there are only so many McVays out there.

I still maintain that you should take a franchise QB when one is available, and if you're worried that you can't build a good roster around him, chances are you've got bigger problems than your QB.

I'm not in disagreement.  I live just outside of St. Louis, about 10 minutes.  The Rams were a horrid mess while here.  Their model, I feel, would be nearly impossible to replicate fully.  As you pointed out, several things happened that are unlikely to come together for many teams the way it did for the Rams.  They not only hit with McVay, but they hit with the GM as well.  Whitworth has been an addition that doesn't get enough attention.  They were great with the draft picks they used and people like playing for them.  As much as I cannot stand Kroenke, for obvious reasons, he got it right and did the right thing for the franchise as a whole. 

I believe you take a franchise QB if you have the right people in place.  I'm not sold on anyone in Miami, including ownership, to have a football IQ high enough to get them out of the gutter.  Most teams drafting at #1 overall have some holes.  Miami has 21 of them.  From what I've seen, they have one solid defensive player and none on offense, although it's hard to judge how some of their players would play if they had talent around them.  For them to seriously rebuild, they need to do something Cleveland couldn't for the longest time;  Hit on their draft picks.  It isn't as easy as we all make it out to be.  Some players I've absolutely loved in college have bombed big time in the NFL.  A good GM is worth his weight in Gold. 

[AxeElf 787]

2 minutes ago, oldtimer said:

I live just outside of St. Louis, about 10 minutes.  The Rams were a horrid mess while here.

Other than winning the Super Bowl, you mean?

[oldtimer 84]

1 minute ago, AxeElf said:

Other than winning the Super Bowl, you mean?

I guess you didn't see the horrid decade from 2005 to 2015?  We were rated by NFL.com as having the worst drafting success over that ten year period as well as the worst record in the NFL.  The good times were few and far between.  The 'Greatest Show on Turf' days were awesome.  I had 2nd row season tickets directly behind the Rams bench.  Unfortunately, as those guys left in free agency and retirement, we were never able to replace them. 

[AxeElf 787]

11 minutes ago, oldtimer said:

I guess you didn't see the horrid decade from 2005 to 2015?

I did, but the Rams were in St. Louis for TWO decades, and they weren't a "horrid mess" during the one from 1995 to 2005.

That's why I said, "Other than winning the Super Bowl, you mean?"

[oldtimer 84]

Ummm, you are a complete moron.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Los_Angeles_Rams_seasons   I lived here and attended the games.  We had 3 good seasons, one above average season and 6 HORRIBLE seasons in that ten year stretch.  Buzz off loser.  lol

[oldtimer 84]

4 minutes ago, AxeElf said:

I did, but the Rams were in St. Louis for TWO decades, and they weren't a "horrid mess" during the one from 1995 to 2005.

That's why I said, "Other than winning the Super Bowl, you mean?"

We had 4 total winning seasons in 20 years.  Man, we were good.  Look at the link moron.  LOL  You crack me up.  Such a loser.  Nothing intelligent to ever contribute, as usual, so you try to bug others.  Nice. 

[AxeElf 787]

1 minute ago, oldtimer said:

We had 4 total winning seasons in 20 years.

The four teams who have never even been to the SuperBowl would probably trade for the St. Louis Rams' successful years in an instant.

[oldtimer 84]

Just now, AxeElf said:

The four teams who have never even been to the SuperBowl would probably trade for the St. Louis Rams' successful years in an instant.

Again, once refuted, you shut up and don't comment on anything else.  I'm done with you.  Again.  LOL  You make zero sense and obviously have little fantasy knowledge and even less NFL knowledge. 

[AxeElf 787]

1 minute ago, oldtimer said:

Again, once refuted, you shut up and don't comment on anything else.

Wait--you're refuting that the Rams won a Super Bowl while in St. Louis?

lol

[zftcg 84]

Good Lord, get a room you two! Or at least stop taking this conversation off the rails.

[jgcrawfish 232]

you guys are cute when you have  

[Ray_T 587]

6 hours ago, zftcg said:

Eh, things change quick in the NFL. Did the Rams have the team to build around Goff when they took him?

Of course, this is the Browns we're talking about, so they probably would have found a way to screw things up regardless of who they took.

well, Goff's sat most of his rookie year.    they said it was because he wasnt ready, but I think it may have also been a case of not wanting to put him in behind a leaky line.

Keep in mind, the team already had a very good Defense (close to elite)

yes,  if you have a franchise QB that could change the fortunes of your team, you should  take him, but you  put that player in a position to succeed when you put him in.   if the O  line is beyond terrible, you can still draft your franchise QB in year 1.   but in round 2 of that draft you draft someone you can plug into the interior of that O line and then you sign a Decent veteran QB to start and play behind that leaky line for a year and mentor your young QB.    Then give him a couple starts late in the year.

then in year 2 you draft an OT and sign a solid veteran to at least make the line somewhat respectable.    The player you drafted in round 2  the previous  year should (hopefully) be a starter by this time, and the OT you draft in year 2  should (hopefully) be a plug and play starter on the line.    the dude you sign in free agency should be enough to make that line at least adequate.

that would be 3 new bodies on the line  over 2 draft years.    Your  #1 overall QB (whoever he may be) will go into a situation where  he can be successful.