« Sunday column: Upgrade talent, get Mike Wallace! | Main | Everything coach Joe Philbin told the media Sunday »

Edwards works out for Dolphins, who are interested

The Dolphins have worked out Braylon Edwards and the team has serious interest in signing him.

First reported on Hard Knocks, the workout showed the Dolphins that the former 1,000-yard receiver is healthy and could be an option for the team in the near future. Edwards wants to revive his career after missing most of last season due to injury while with the San Francisco 49ers.

Edwards has also drawn interest from Seattle.

I'll have more on this and the entire Dolphins wide receiver situation from the team's perspective, in my column tomorrow.

Today's practice was interesting on several fronts.

First, Ryan Tannehill worked for the first time since signing his contract late Saturday night. Tannehill will not be in full pads until Wednesday when the team comes back from its day off on Tuesday. I assume Tannehill isn't going to be off on Tuesday as he has catching up to do.

Nonetheless, he looked sharp today. He threw two interceptions -- one to Gary Guyton, one to Jason Trusnick -- but those came in 7 on 7 drills and both resulted from the fact receivers failed to make otherwise routine catches and tipped the ball in the air.

Tannehill was accurate despite his layoff, which he said wasn't very long as he worked with the receivers last on Wednesday before the opening of camp. I would say Tannehill was the second-most accurate passer in camp today behind David Garrard, who continues to lead the quarterback pack.

Tannehill is a long shot to win the starting job. He's not expected to get as many first-team repetitions in practice as Garrard or Moore initially but he will get some -- a topic around which offensive coordinator Mike Sherman danced today.

“Fortunately, our practices are structured, outside of the preseason games, our practices are structured where we’re getting a ton of reps," Sherman said. "We’re getting 150 snaps, 160 snaps at practice. Normally, your third quarterback, your second quarterback wouldn’t get nearly as many as we’ve since been seen out here. We’re working a couple groups at the same time and getting a lot of reps. When you get into the preseason, obviously only one guy can go onto the field at the same time. I don’t think they’re going to let us go back-to-back and have two groups going, which I wish they did, but you are limited by the amount of snaps you have in a preseason game. So you have to be very selective on who gets what and you have to make a timely decision on who the starter is going to be.

“Today, I just wanted to get him some reps. He got more reps than anybody. He worked primarily with the second group and then eventually we’re going to work him in with the first group once he gets caught up to snuff, which I think will be sooner rather than later because it seems like he’s right on task right now. But you still want to get those veteran guys here reps that they’ve earned and they deserve.”

Tannehill, nonetheless believes he has the opportunity to be the starter as you will see in this video:

Matt Moore?

He connected on a beautiful TD pass to Charles Clay down the seam in team drills but otherwise seemed to struggle with accuracy. He got most of the work with the first team. Moore would have been something of an interception machine today if Miami's starting CB duo had held on to the football. Sean Smith had a ball in his hands that he had to leap for but probably should have snagged for a turnover. Vontae Davis had a ball bounce harmlessly away despite the fact it was right in his bread basket. Davis had another possible interception bounce off his helmet.

Today was the first day in pads for the Dolphins. There was actual football contact.

I was pleased to see that the offensive line seemed up to the task of playing against Miami's defensive line. Remember, offense is typically behind defense this early in camp and Miami's defensive line is considered a team strength while the offensive line has serious question marks on the right side.

But there were no major or obvious breakdowns by the offensive line today. Protection was generally good. There were plays that would be sacks in a game, but a majority were coverage sacks. There were no huge holes on run plays but there were creases, which means there were opportunities.

One side offensive line note: Coach Joe Philbin said the reason Eric Steinbach is working on the left side with the second team is because he is being given a chance to get his footing after missing all of last year with a back injury and he's also working in a new system.

But the coach left the door open for moving Steinbach to right guard or perhaps even moving Richie Incognito to right guard if Steinbach is one of the best five offensive linemen on the team. In other words, don't get too caught up in the fact the starting offensive line has been stable the first three days of training camp.

Change could be coming if Steinbach is his old self. He has started 124 NFL games at left guard.

 

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

brees montana both mannings aikman cris carter and other hof'rs started out slow. i guess the slow witted were stupid for not cutting them.

ajdczar, Please tell us how you got to be such an expert on sizes :P

Keep in mind guys, all we're talking about right now is the idea of signing a guy like Edwards to COMPETE for a spot on this team. If this guy makes the team better I'm all for it and I'm not even an Edwards fan. Not sure why anyone would be against giving a guy a chance.

considering miamis talent on offense, signing T.O. wouldnt be a bad idea if they are working out the likes of edwards and hoping ocho-broko can help much with this years offense....miami has totally brought this weakness upon themselves and now their looking for off-and-on cheap talent to fill holes for this west coast system being installed....Miamis desperate but just not wallace interest desperate*lol*

Hey lew,

You mentioned Mannings (plural)and Aikman...

They were thrown into the fire from jumpstreet on terrible teams...They fared ok! (read Hall of Famers).

Matt Stafford and Andy Dalton played right away...they are fine.

What I can't stand is this notion that if you don't coddle a football player (especially QBs) then its your fault when it bears out that they don't have the talent to make hay in the NFL.

Sure there have been plenty of killer players who's careers where cut short due to injury (Gale Sayers and Dwight Stephenson to name a couple). Maybe even some QBs that never did all they could due to poor OL play. I just stop waaaaaay short of saying that with years of grooming a QB and putting together a Pro-Bowl OL at 5 positions...only then we can have an Offense. That's crap. Good luck on getting ALL those ducks in a row in the here today gone tomorrow NFL.

Player movements, injuries, money ALL play hell with getting and keeping so many Pro Bowl players on one team.

Plus Chris Carter was cut and went from Phili to Minn where he actually woke up and started to act like a pro. Some players need the tough love like Randy Moss reviving his career in NE.

The long and the short is some need some time to develop but you will hamstring your organization more often then not if you try to "coach up" or "groom up" your players ahead of drafting talented players that show up with obvious, can't keep them off the field talent.

I your want to take the crock-pot, slow roasted talent over time direction...that's your choice.

Cheers,

lot of clueless people on here who buy media crap

rob oc, you only backed up my point. aikman started out 0 and 11. carter didn't even begin to shine until his 4th year or after. i guess you would have said we don't need a crock pot slow roast player with them too at the time.

it's a fine line. i don't say slow roast them. i don't say coddle. if you can see there is no chance early on, move on. i just say you can't be too quick to judge or you will often regret it. i for one thought we were dumb to let wes welker go at the time, not talking looking back now.

Great point gman! Actually it sucked and made no sense, thanks for adding nothing. nice waste of everyones time.

for the record, i say make tannehill the starter today and let him take his knocks. let's see what we got. use this season wisely to better prepare for next season. having garrard take us to 8 and 8 is lose lose scenario.

I say let tannehill "EARN" it...giving the riens to him just because someone thinks he's the future(that someone being mostly ireland and ross) doesnt improve their credability as a proven starter in the NFL...If he wants the job..go out there and prove it...just sayin!!!

Hi lew,

The reason that I believe my point is also made with same info is that with Manning(s) and Aikman and hosts of others...you can visually see the talent and thus justify hanging onto that player longer for further development.

With Henne, besides a flash here or there... most could see early on that he had zero pocket presence (would shift towards the sacker at times!), lacked flexibility, questionable progression reads and would look down early on too many plays. That was evident after year two but there was the Parcell's lead regime trotting him out there in year 4!

That's what I am talking about. Some people have a magic player game count that tells the coach when to fish or cut bait. I say I am very intolerant of excuses as every team pulls from the same pile of players every year...some are just flat better at it.

As with Welker he went on to become an absolute star! He has one of the best Coaches AND QBs of ALL time helping him in that endeavor. As much as I would of like Welker to stay at the time I know that moving a kick returner / #3 maybe #2 at times WR that we got off waivers for nothing for a 2nd and 7th round pick...that is suppose to work in our favor.

I would bet dollars to doughnuts that even Brady and Coach Bellychuck himself would not have envisioned all the 100 catch success Welker has had back when he arrived.

Besides Welker are there many if any ex-Fins you would pine to have back as we just didn't coach them up long enough? Ones that got away to become stars?

Some are saying that Henne will be making us wish...are you of that belief?

Cheers,

Welker would have never seen success like he has in NE with the likes of fiedler,lucas,lemon,feeley or culpepper throwing to him all season long....that you could bank on...just sayin!!!

..superPhin..I would guess that everyone here would agree that if Tannehill indeed wins the job..He should play. That would be really suprising to me if this happened this preseason. Not totaly out of the relm of possibility..But a minor longshot.

One of the reasons I think that his odds are long is that I believe the team has the idea that Garrard, or Moore will be the starter. They in turn will get the majority of the reps with the first team..Tannehill would really have to be sharp in his repetitions to even start to take some of those reps away.

I am against just putting him into the fire because of his draft status. I can't get over his lack of experience. Perhaps this is no big deal, as other quarterbacks with similar experience have come in and played. Some well, others not so much. With this team though..We have the luxury of having capable quarterbacks who can see this through until Tannehill proves he is ready to go..when this happens ins't up to me. It could be sooner then later for all I know. I don't know if there is a right way or a wrong way to develop young qb's as far as throwing them into the mix. everyone will have a varied opinion on the matter. To me there is, and should be no rush to start theis kid until the team feels he is prepared.

First off, as with my prior posts...you can see I am not a fan of the draft Tannehill at #8 Ireland move.

That said, given his meager QB starts and WR laced background I am fine with Tannehill holding the clip to try to learn and grow into the pro roll.

My pet peeve will start to come about weeks 10-12. At #8 I feel that should be a talented enough player that he should be forcing his way onto the field one way or another. By passing up #2. By way of injury..whatever.

Locker sat out his first year and now is jockeying with the vet for playing time. If he takes a back seat in year two I simply believe he was overdrafted.

Since many coaching regimes last 3-4 years tops that is why drafting groomers early puts crazy pressure on the later round guys to perform as most early guys are suppose to be plug n play...at least in a perfect world.

If you have every person in college football to pick from and you let others take away the top 7...you should be able to get a hell of a player, a bonafide stud in the top 10. Since there is always the guessing /luck element that is why the can't miss Tony Mandarich guys bust in the top 10.

Cheers,

After reading mosts of today's posts, I can only
assume that more than half of you guys/girls aren't
really Dolphans at all. This site needs to have an
"ignore button" for we fans to hit. And as for the
rest of you, proper spelling only matter if you're
an adult. Have to believe that "Clue" and some of the
others are somewhere in the neighborhood of 13-13 y.o. Go Dolphins !! 10-6, or die trying !

Well said DD @ 3:38

Yet another finely crafted post...gj!

Cheers,

The chances of this FO getting anything right is nil. Its been proven over and over again.

Welker-snelker, the most overated wr in the league. He aint a #1 nor #2 wr. He's proven to be only as good as the recieving talent around him.

@006, his final season in Miami, he had 67 catches, 687yds, 1 td. 2007, with Moss and he plummets to 112 catches, 1000+ yards, 8 tds. he would thrive for 3 more years with Moss on the roster. All 100 catch season and 1000 plus yds.

2010 without Moss, Welker's numbers dived to 86 catches and 848yds. 2011, with Gronk and Hernandez, all of a sudden he's back over 100 catches and 1000 plus yds. He's extraordinarily great only when great recievers are around him.

Can you say "Wes Welker, nfl's most overated wr?"

Thats pretty much the whole point darryl...in order for this guy to start, he has to be not just as good as moore and garrard in camp and in preseason play, but better becuase of his inexperience with only 19 starts regardless of his fimiliarity with the offense...he was already facing a huge uphill climb even if he did report to camp on time, now its almost unnatainable to expect this guy to go out and dazzle people so soon..he needs time regardless of what happens to this team this year as far as wins or losses go, there is absolutely no need to rush him and his progression...his team and most fans will benefit from this in the long run

Fins Stink,

Thats why they spun the wheel and got a new head coach that brought many new coaches behind him. New Def coach, new Off coach and switching schemes on both sides of the ball going to base 4-3 mostly as well as the West Coast Offense.

They added new players in the draft and F.A.

Are you simply trying to say the Fins are cursed because they couldn't change much else trying to fix things.

Bah-Humbug!...I get it. Let Philbin have some time to get things working to his liking, then check back in.

Cheers,

rob 3:27. on that i agree, its just that you have the benefit of hindsight. what were your thoughts on aikmam when he was 0 and 10 compared to henne who looked his best from his first early starts after penne went down? after that season henne never looked worth keeping again so i say they hung on to him too long.

regarding tannehill, the two best chances they had once it was clear henne was a bust was mallett and dalton, so..i'm curios to see a few years down the line who turns out the best prospect between those three.

superfin,

Tannehill will start if the competition between he, Moore and Garrard is even very close. It's a no=brainer if he's better he will start.

It's already been said if qb competition between all 3 qb's is very close Tannehill gets the start and why not? However, with each passing practice the gulf between Moore and Garrad grows even wider.

At this present point, barring near complete meltdown, Tannehill is competing with Moore for the backup to Garrard spot. It may now take a Marino-esque like camp performance by Tannehill to wrestle the starter job from Garrard.

What the hell are you guys smoking comparing Aikman to any qb on our roster. Aikman was a 1st overall pick that went to the worst team in the league his rookie year.

Our talent level is light years better than the Cowboy team Aikman went to his rookie season. You wanna share your drugs with the rest of us? LOL

I wouldnt count Moore out just yet YG....he is a gamplan effective QB, not a training camp standout, thats been that way his whole career and im not sold that garrard is that much better than moore overall...we'll just have to wait and see during preseason play...Everybody will get there shot, hell i wouldnt be surprised if devlin got some time with the first string when this is all said and done

darryl, its not like garrard or moore can be our qb of the future, so what is gained by starting them? unless you believe we have more than a .00000000001 chance to win the sb this year, why not start the pick ireland proclaimed was selected to be the long term starter? why waste time? throw him in sink or swim. let him blow the season, who cares, its a matter of seeing improvement as the season progresses. if we start him now, we will now for sure by the end of 2013, two seasons, if he is the guy or not.

superPhin,

The only time that really hurts the franchise is when the player in question ends up NOT having the franchise talent. This is my prediction. Great kid, says the right things and tries really hard but I believe will not end up a franchise guy. This is cold, calculating talent observation and should not be confused with hating or anti-Finism. As I have said on numerous occasions "I dare Tannehill to make me eat crow!" I will gladly eat it cold in a half barrel.

With the extra waiting to teach and groom him to be the guy you end up passing on other QBs that may have more potential as you already have "your guy" in the fold.

It's the opportunity costs of buying and holding a long term groomer that is the double dagger shot to me. It has been far too long since this franchise discovered a Marino, Zack Thomas, Jason Taylor prospect. We need some to shine as soon as they come in.

Cheers,

superfin,

I count Moore out simply because the same issues he had last season, even thought he finished 6-3 as a starter, has reared its ugly head again in minicamps, ots's, and now the beginning of official training camp.

It's called "INCONSISTENCY". Plus like last year he's still struggling with deepball accuracy. Sure, Moore can be a legit starting qb, but we're talking a career 7 to 9 game a year win qb. That's not quite good enough.

Guys,

Come on! If Garrard outright wins the qb compettion and Tannehill is decisively inferior to Moore. You dont start Tannehill right away. That would be committing career suicide to the oung qb.

On the otherhand, if Garrard or Moore prove to be only "slightly" better than Tannehill by camp's end. Then you hand the day one starting job to Tannehill. Outside of Tannehill proving better than both, that the only way you make him day one starter.

lew,

Thanks for the reply.

I would put my money on Mallet. I think he is a sleeping giant and will only be bench riding as long as Brady still has his all world mojo. I say this even though Dalton has a head start and a killer weapon in WR Green. Hindsight being what it is, both would have been better then Henne in my opinion.

I wanted the Fins to take Mallet badly and was even sure they had traded up to snag him when they got Thomas. LOL, you probably heard the scream from where you watched the draft.

I didn't know much about Aikman back then as information was so much harder to come by back then opposed to now. Plus my brother was a Cowboys fan so I wanted them to flop!

Cheers,

lew,

The guy has got to earn it, I dont care if he is proclaimed to be the next ryan leaf or tom brady, u dont just hand the guy the keys to your whole season becuase he might or might not be the future of this team...if he wants it bad enough, he'll show the coaches and players that he deserves to be the starting QB by week one by proving he belongs out there with the best of them not becuase we should have that whole sink or swim right away mentality with 1st round QBS....

Besides ross and ireland are trying to convince themselves enough that this team can win now and with that kind of thinking unfortunatley doesnt bode well to have ur rookie inexperienced QB start right away especially if he's not ready!!!

lew,

We agree on some things but we definitely don't agree on Tannehill. 'Throwing him in a who cares', is definitely not how you handle a young QB with 19 career starts in College and definitely not how a smart guy like Philbon will operate. Sherman knows this guy better than anybody and I'm sure he knows he won't succeed in the NFL to start. So I'm saying if you know he won't succeed what's to be achieved by getting him in there. Let the Colts and 'Skins and Browns do that with their guys....who cares. But I feel the RIGHT way to handle this guy is how they've done things in GB where Philbin works. Nobody said 'boo' about Rodgers not starting in GB for three years. Yes he played behind Favre but what's to say Garrard and Moore can't have some success here and Tannehill can wait. I think it's sends TOTALLY the wrong message to the vets, that 'hey, we know this rook isn't ready yet and we know he's going to struggle but we want you guys to bust your ass anyways, OK?'. Not going to happen. At least with a couple of tried vets in there we have a chance to succeed. That's the message. Putting a not ready for prime time rookie in there to start is the equivalent of putting the white flag up on the season before it begins. Sorry but that's the case here.

YG,

Well said @ 4:14.

lew and I weren't comparing Aikman to our QBs we were discussing some of the pros vs cons of starting a QB right away vs not. Also how long does a team wait for a player (primarily QB) to hatch into a full blown starter / franchise type guy.

The names were tossed around as they were not instant successes but ended up being plenty worthy to hold. My point was the sheer talent was visible in the midst of those terrible early records.

The other point I was trying to make is too much is made of killing players due to actually letting them play. In Miami's case we have Garrad and Moore so they don't have to start T-Hill right away. I just wish Miami would land a guy that bull dozed into the lineup because his talent level was so high.

As long as there are human beings involved, there will always be discussion of what is too much for rookies vs not. Playing the game shouldn't be the reason your career is lame. Injury or being on a talent lacking team can affect it...Steve Young anyone? Same player...new system and team...different results.

Feel free to take whatever drugs lew has to offer...I got none for ya..lol

Cheers,

Craig M @ 4:22. Nice post! Grats

Cheers,

Thanks for some cool Fins talk folks. Cya later.

Cheers,

Tannehill will never beat out Matt Moore in a fair competition.

craig, rodgers played behind a hof'er. how can you compare situations? if only 19 games experience is a problem, one way to cure that is to give him another 16 games experience this year. i don't buy the take it slow theories. training is better than ever now. theyv'e got playbooks and video on their computers. if a guy is good he will show it whether you start him today or 3 years from now. are you saying rodgers would have been bust had he started sooner? i think you can play or you can't and the sooner you find out the better. if we had a hof'r qb as a starter, then sure you sit tanne, but we don't. we have average at best. i'd rather figure out if tanne has promise sooner than later.

Matt Moore is a top 10-12 QB in the league and team MVP. Tannehill was a reach at #8 and already has shown he's a major project. To throw him to the wolves with these crap receivers would be absolutely moronic. When the team is eliminated from the playoffs(game 13?) they could consider giving him a start if he shows progress.

lew,

I think we could argue this point all day long. With all due respect to you and others who feel the way you do, I'll put my trust in Sherman and Philbin, guys who know Tannehill intimately and have a better clue of what it's going to take for him to succeed. I'm not saying it's the case with you but I think very often when I hear these comments it's more about the fans getting someone to cheer for than what's best for the QB long term.

..Lew. There are some that believe Tannehill should play now. That is perfectly fine if this is your stance. I just disagree. Time will tell. YG made agreat point that I had not thought of. If the competition between the 3 is close. So close there is no differece in how the offense executes..Then sure. we may see him. Tannehill has only had 1 day of full prctice. i wan't there so I don't know how the reps were spread out. I would bet he didn't get as many with the first team as the 2 vets did. Also, from reports. Garrard has been pretty sharp. Even if it is true that moore isn't a great practice player. This staff has to do it's own evaluation. what Moore did last year was a bonus. I don't think that this should have any bearing on the competition now.

I also do not believe the team had any intention of starting Tannehill right away when we drafted him. Things could change, injuries could occur, Tannehill could show he is ready, and is the best option. If he does..By all means he should play. There is a long ways to go in a fairly short amount of time for him to outplay these vets with limited reps to start for the team to announce the job as his. Tannehill will havehis moment. I see no reason to rush it just to validate curiosity of the fan base. He isn't going anywhere.

As far as Garrard, or Moore. I realize they are not the future here. But they have a role. They are the quintissential stop gaps. They understand this, as much as anyone. For them, especially Moore they are competing for a spot in the future that probably is for another franchise once Tannehill takes the reigns.
For Garrard, this could be his last chance to start in the NFL..Both have a lot riding on their performances here.

Shula good post. Some fans dont understand that Tannehill is not Andrew Luck.

Vernon Carey over Vince Wilfork (need over best player) New England then selected Wilfork in the next pick and history was made.

when Braylon Edwards was not injured he ran a 4.48 at 210 pounds at the combine and at 6'.3" he has the body size to handle press coverage.

Bottom line is that training Camp is only a preparation...for the pre-Season Games. It will be there that proper assessment of the Team will be made as compared to the other Teams that are played and individual performances matter little.On Offense, whoever moves the Team best, will be our QB.

Which of our 4 QB's will move the Team best? The one that understands our Offense and the opposing Team's D best. I believe we are all going to see it plain by the 3rd pre-Season Game.

« 1 2 3

The comments to this entry are closed.