« Randy Starks open to giving Dolphins a discount, not wild about 'clearance' price or franchise tag | Main | Fewer LTs on the market, but solutions still available to Dolphins »

Starks to be Dolphins franchise player ... what that means

The Miami Dolphins intend to place the franchise tag on defensive tackle Randy Starks.

It is not a surprise. Indeed, it is the only logical move the team could make as the team's other looming free agents -- Sean Smith, Brian Hartline, Jake Long -- either would have been too expensive to tag or can be easily replaced this coming season if they play elsewhere.

Starks will be on the books for up to $8.4 million. That comes directly off Miami's salary cap space, which is now around $37 million. That is still enough to tender restricted players, sign draft picks and sign or re-sign a full complement of free agents.

A note: Did I mention Sean Smith is not Miami's franchise player? Seems that so-called report that said Smith would be tagged was as erroneous as I've been telling you.

Anyway, there will be fallout from the Dolphins action today.

First, Starks is not happy. He didn't want a one-year tag. He wants a multi-year contract. He may still get it as the two sides can continue to discuss such a deal, but much of his leverage is effectively removed because free agency is no longer a viable option.

Secondly, expect Jake Long and Sean Smith to hit free agency. The club has talked with both players and that has led to, well, no deal with either. Both players have a very high regard for themselves (which is good) while the team has a more realistic regard for them (which is also good). In plain English that means both Smith and Long expect to make much more in the open market than the Dolphins have been discussing.

The market is the tiebreaker. The players will go into the market to determine their value. The Dolphins want both back but at their price. The players want their price. I would say the chances of Long returning to Miami are much better than Smith.

Smith is eager for the start of free agency so that he can "get paid," according to a source. That is his priority. He doesn't as much care where he plays as he does about being paid playing there. The Dolphins believe they can replace Smith with a comparable if not better player either in free agency (more expensive) or the draft (much, much less expensive).

I would say cornerback is a major need for the Dolphins now as they traded away their best cornerback, Vontae Davis, last year and are about to lose the other starter of the tandem Davis once crowed was the best in the NFL.

Long?

He doesn't want to take a pay cut. And considering he made $11.2 million last year, that's saying something. The Dolphins meanwhile are looking around the NFL and seeing that the price for outstanding left tackles is more in the $8-$9 million annual range. Assuming that goes up a little bit, I'd say it's probable the market will have to determine Long's worth.

The Dolphins still want Long back -- probably moreso than they want Smith back. They see Long as a quality player whose play falters when he gets injured. They see Smith as an inconsistent player even when healthy.

On Hartline, the sides continue to talk. Agent Drew Rosenhaus is nothing if not persistent. Hartline wants to remain in Miami and believes he has a chemistry with quarterback Ryan Tannehill. But he also wants $6 million per season.

Obviously, the Dolphins have so far resisted this price point. Both sides at this point believe something can get done before the start of free agency.

It is possible the Dolphins might decide paying $8 million for another, more accomplished wide receiver such as Greg Jennings is better than paying $6 million to Hartline. The Dolphins are almost certain to chase Mike Wallace as their top free agency target, as well.

 

 

Comments

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

WNP,

So, Odrick was drafted in the first round of the draft based on what he didn in College as a 4-3 DT & you're still trying to convince everyone he isn't capable of being a Pro 4-3 DT?

OK well, I don't know about anyone else except Mark who appears to agree wtih me but, I'm haveing a hard time believing you are being remotely accurate on the topic..

Zgonina was a smart and very very versatile player. If Odrick plays that long than my opinion of him will raise. Which wasn't even bad in the first place. I like him as a player. He is productive and cheap.

db, i read that odick wants to drop 20 and stay outside.

If I read correctly, guy wanted a 4-5 year contract, wanted to finish his playing years here. Jeff will sit down with him next year and offer Randy a long term contract like he did with Soliai. Don't worry.


However, I truly realize these "FACTS" will fall on the deaf ears of many in here. LOL...

Posted by: Yesterday's Gone 4Ever! | March 04, 2013 at 01:27 PM

The fatcs are that Odrick was a first round pick based on what he did in a pro style defense as a 4-3 DT.

So, you see, it has nothing to do with believing every 3-4 end can be a DT. It has to do with him being a highly rated 4-3 Dt prospect that makes people believe he can be a 4-3 DT.

PS YG, as you can see I clearly disagree with you which should dispell the conspiracy theories pushed forth by Bobby, craig & easy choice that we are the same person.

Just goes to prove that when you AS*ume you usually wind up just looking like an A*S.

Defense still wins and stopping the run is the key to every d, sf and Balt just played in the Super Bowl, the giants and the d line they have the steelers and even the packers won it all with the no 1 d that season. NE won the 3 super bowls behind a great d but has never won it all with this great offense with Brady and welker and the tes

btw, this FA class is a never before seen one in quality and depth due to the small or none cap space of many Teams. Watch Ireland pounce on those FAs when the Boom starts on March 12.

Can someone please help me to understand who is Dimitri Patterson and why are we paying him 4.5m next year? I'd much rather cut him, restructure Starks (that will definitely happen), and use that money we save plus what we'd give Hartline and bring in a Jennings (8m). Get Wallace(10m). Bring in a vet pass rusher(4m) to platoon with Vernon. Let Smith walk and try to bring back Long (8m), and if Long doesn't come back move Martin over and sign a Vet RT (4m). Leaving us with about 15-19m in cap space for additional FA.

That would leave us to draft CB, WR, TE, S, LB with our first 5 picks, and still have plenty of cap space to fill additional holes.

I'd cross my fingers on the Pack waiving Finley(6m). If he became available I'd sign Hartline instead of Jennings and sign Finley...if and only if I was able to sign Wallace. I'd then look to draft a RB in the 3rd rd.

If that is done we'd still have plenty of cap to resign any other players we want to keep.

So losing Long is not a big deal and I'd have no intention of resigning Smith. I just want to start seeing some back fill for our impact players. Dansby and Burnett aren't young and Misi has peaked. Time to groom their replacements.

Odrick is a good player but isn't strong enough to be an nfl dt. It is different holding the point against 18 yr olds and grown men.

Josh Kaddu probably will start next Season.

Kaddu is going to be good and dimitri may start but will be our nickel back at worst

Shawn,

If you were to cut Patterson, who would you have playing CB next year? Marshall? Carrol? Doesn't really leave us with a lot of options, does it?

I suppose it's possible that the team cut Patterson or even re-do a deal with him but I don't believe that time is now. I actually don't mind Patterson and I don't believe that deal is all that ridiculous. Now if you have a plan to replace him I'm all ears but my guess is your plan includes drafting a guy high and signing someone in FA, which will likely be more than $4.5 mil for one year. Even if they cut Patterson that will mean that in the span of 12 months they will have gotten rid of Davis, Smith, Patterson and very likely Clemmons. Not saying any of these guys are great but that's a lot of turnover in a short period of time.

good to have starks back. step one done. lets keep it going

WNP, agreed on Zgonina overall. he was all blood and guts and deserves a lot of respect. But Odrick is a more talented guy, that's all I meant.

No doubt. I just wished we had some more guys with that Zgonina/Zach Taylor/warrior mentality. The truth is that both Dansby & Burnett are kind of soft. I wouldn't be shocked if Ireland either restructures Dansby's deal or releases him.

2012 Total Team Sacks

1. Denver 52 Bounced in 2nd rd
2. Rams 52 Did not make playoffs
3. Bengals 51 Bounced 1st rd
4. Packers 47 Bounced 1st rd
5. Vikings 44 No playoffs
6. Texans 44 1st rd
7. Dolphins 42 no playoffs

There you have it. We finished 7th in the league in sacks. Only 1 team with more sacks made it to the 2nd rd of the playoffs.

SF was tied for 11th(38 sacks) and The Ravens were 15th(37 sacks). Yet they played for the sb title (Ravens won).

The Pats only had 37 sacks, and Buff after all they spent for Mario Williams, had only 36 sacks last season.

The Miami dolphins clearly had the afc east's best pass rush. Yet you uninformed idiots continue to scream we have no pass rush.

As Rams fans does a great pass rush even guarantee that you'll make the playoffs. Their defense finished 2nd in the nfl(52) and couldnt even sniff a wildcard playoff position.

It can be a safe bet that Ireland will sign a top corner in FA if he thinks Patterson is not worth it.

"WNP, agreed, tagging Long would have really hurt. The only thing to remember, we might use that #12 on an OT now."

That could happen. If this kid Ogletree didn't have the off the field sh#t then ILB could have been in the mix too.

Good move by Ireland. It could be argued that tagging no one would be better, but this is far better than tagging Long or Smith.

Mark you say that no one runs anymore, but I think most of the best teams have elite defensive tackles. Baltimore has Ngata, the 49ers rotate Justin Smith to DT frequently, the Pats Wilfork, Packers have Raji.

I don't think Starks would go for much less than 8.5 mil a year on a 4 year deal. 7 is as low as I could see him going. I base this on even Langford getting 6 million a year over 4 years from the Rams last free agency.

I also agree with what the person above said to cut or make Patterson take less pay to save some cap room. Pretty sure he is not worth 4.6 million a year.

db, i read that odick wants to drop 20 and stay outside.
Posted by: 2 watt | March 04, 2013 at 01:34 PM

This would be a great decision by Odrick!

course u cut marshall and patterson way overpaid

Can someone please help me to understand who is Dimitri Patterson and why are we paying him 4.5m next year?

Posted by: Shawn | March 04, 2013 at 01:41 PM
-----------------------------

Shawn.... I asked the same question a few months back. Did a bit of background stats and found that Patterson has a respectable stat line. He normally lines up on a slot receiver (nickle back) so he is a bit less high profile then some CB's are.

He's a journeyman CB with 8 years and 5 teams (Including Miami) on his resume. He's got 5 int's and 30 pass defended. So he's good at knocking it down, but cant catch (LOL)... But, when he does make an int, he is a monster with the ball...He averages 12 yards and has a 40 yard return also.

Truth being said... with his experience and veteran leadership, the $4.5 is pretty much right where it should be. CB's are high paid skill positions, man. That is why it is so important to get good ones in the draft who can give you 4 years of solid play before they get a REAL BIG raise. You only resign them if they are elite... See Sean Smith and Vontae Davis for what to do should they NOT be elite...

Hope it helps...

The fatcs are that Odrick was a first round pick based on what he did in a pro style defense as a 4-3 DT.
So, you see, it has nothing to do with believing every 3-4 end can be a DT. It has to do with him being a highly rated 4-3 Dt prospect that makes people believe he can be a 4-3 DT.
Posted by: LOL | March 04, 2013 at 01:35 PM

Think back on this carefully now. Odrick was drafted with the idea having to move Randy Starks fron DE to NT. Because it was predicated on allowing Soliai to walk. Stark was going to be the new NT, so Ireland drafted Odrick to play DE.

Odrick was never drafted to play inside.

The Ravens won the SB, YG? Nahhh

Pay the money for Mike Wallace!!! Let sucky Smith walk!!! Long will go too but he's not gonna get the money he thinks, out there!!! Get us a book end DE to match Wake too!!!

WNPM....

I have a question for ya, We Need Play Makers... Or anyone else who would care to chime in...

I agree that franchising Long would have hurt. In all honesty, I don't feel long was the type of LT that Philbin and Sherman wanted. Quick and Athletic over prototypical.

What would you do id be some happenstance Chance Warmack fell to #12?

There is no doubt he is a top ten player when speaking from a "Best player available" point of view... But a Guard at #12 may cause looting and anarchy... What would ya do,,,?

So, Odrick was drafted in the first round of the draft based on what he didn in College as a 4-3 DT & you're still trying to convince everyone he isn't capable of being a Pro 4-3 DT?

OK well, I don't know about anyone else except Mark who appears to agree wtih me but, I'm haveing a hard time believing you are being remotely accurate on the topic..

LOL,

First of all we were running a 3-4 defense when he was drafted so he was meant to be a DE. Now that Coyle is running a 4-3 if they thought Odrick was a DT then he'd be playing DT right???

If Ireland & the coaches thought Odrick could play DT then why did they choose to franchise Starks??? That makes no sense. Do you think they want to spend an extra $8.4 Million when they already someone younger & cheaper on the roster??? Clearly they don't see him as a DT.

I don't get the confusion on odrick.

He came out known for strength & his motor. Those are qualities of a DT & thats where they played him.

In Miami he played 3-4 end which does not require speed as much as it does strength.

You can't teach the speed & quickness needed to play a 4-3 DE. Either you have it or you dont.

He does not have Wake, JT like speed to be effective as an end. You can however help make someone stronger to play DT.

Whether he's strong enough to be a DT is less a ? mark than whether he'll ever be quick enough to be an end.

If you look at things in the most basic context, there are no brainers. Draft & play guys based on what they can do, not what you hope they might be able to.

To all you haters out there- tagging Starks was an excellent move. Anyone that can't see that truly does not know what they are talking about. I love the one post I read- "no one runs the ball anymore. It's parcellian." Dude, all due respect, you don't know football then. The most successful teams can both run and pass and notice that the final four teams in the nfl playoffs this year all ran the ball effectively. Long-too much to tag. Sean smith- not worth it. Reggie bush- not worth it. Brian hartline- not worth it. Starks was a pro bowler last year who for 8.4 million is a decent value. His open market price in FA would be as much if not more. Most importantly, the strongest part of this team was kept intact. This move was not only excellent but necessary. Come on people- I know we are all passionate about the team but common sense must prevail in this situation.

Odrick is a good player but isn't strong enough to be an nfl dt. It is different holding the point against 18 yr olds and grown men.

Jay,

LOL doesn't understand what you're saying. Apparently if you're 305 pounds & played DT in college then you're good enough to start in the NFL. We just franchised Starks even though Odrick is just as good inside even though Odrick never started a game @ DT....

Posted by: finfan23 | March 04, 2013 at 02:03 PM

First of all, the coaches see Odrick everyday in practice. It wasnt concluded Odrick couldnt play inside. It was concluded, based on what they actually witnessed(and they are far more knowlegeble than us), That they dont trust Odrick as a:

FULLTIME, EVERY DOWN DT.

Believe Odrick would do in a pinch. But we dont need a pinch if Starks were allowed to walk. We would need a fking vise grip.

YG,

I think you're missing the point. Nobody has said we need to have more sacks. What some of us have argued is that this defence doesn't get enough turnovers. What's one way to get more turnovers? Improve the pressure on the QB, which leads to strips and forced passes when the receivers aren't ready. By forcing the QB to throw before the play is set up, he'll make more mistakes. The true stat on a pass rush isn't simply sacks.

And btw, should our plan every be 'let's just count on Wake to get us 12-15 sacks every year'. I think you need a better plan than that, in case of injuries, double-teams and declining play.

Is there a reason you feel thinking like that a plan like that makes us 'uniformed idiots'? Is it because it doesn't jive with what you want?

SEPARATING SHEEPS FROM GOATS, MORTARS FROM STONES, WHEAT FROM TARES, SELFISH FROM UNSELFISH, INDIVIDUAL EGOS FROM TEAM EGOS.

Posted by: finfan23 | March 04, 2013 at 02:03 PM

This also why Armando created the blog a few weeks back about he thinks to Fins should trade Odrick because he really doesnt fit in this defense(4-3).

He's not a fulltime dt in this defense, nor a fulltime de.

Mark,

I've got to take exception to your comment that teams don't run the ball any more. Then why are the Ravens playing Ngata $17 million to play the position? Why are the Pats paying Wilfork big money? Why are we paying Soliai the money we are at this year?

I get your frustration about tying that amount of money up in Starks but I think it was the only option right now.

Playmaker,

Of course he was drafted as a DE! But being a 3-4 DE is NOT remotely the same as a 4-3 DE! How may DT's do you need in a 3-4? They had Starks & Soliai already!

It seems YOu don't understand what I'm saying! You think a slow College DT can switch up & play DE in a 4-3 in the pro's? At least his strength would help him inside. What's to his favor outside? he doesn't have speed or rush moves. He's a fish out of water there!

Less focus on telling me what I dont understand & more focus on understand what people are saying first.

Think back on this carefully now. Odrick was drafted with the idea having to move Randy Starks fron DE to NT. Because it was predicated on allowing Soliai to walk. Stark was going to be the new NT, so Ireland drafted Odrick to play DE.

Odrick was never drafted to play inside.

Posted by: Yesterday's Gone 4Ever! | March 04, 2013 at 01:59 PM

3-4 vs 4-3

So, talks can "officially" begin March 9, but FA no one can make moves until March 12, right?

Posted by: Craig M | March 04, 2013 at 02:11 PM

Im content to see what Vernon and Shelby brings in 2012. We may already have the answer presently on the team. Especially Vernon.

Vernon is basically a Cam Wake clone. Just needs to develop more pass rush move. Which Im sure was his primary purpose this offseason.

I read a article about Vernon on md.com, where Odrick said he was going to spend the entire offseason working out with Wake and learning pass rush moves from him.

Hell, Wake was cut his rookie season, yet some of you have virtually written Vernon off as a nonfactor 2013 pass rusher already.

have a question for ya, We Need Play Makers... Or anyone else who would care to chime in...

I agree that franchising Long would have hurt. In all honesty, I don't feel long was the type of LT that Philbin and Sherman wanted. Quick and Athletic over prototypical.

What would you do id be some happenstance Chance Warmack fell to #12?

There is no doubt he is a top ten player when speaking from a "Best player available" point of view... But a Guard at #12 may cause looting and anarchy... What would ya do,,,?

Breeze,

I actually like Jonathan Cooper better than Warmack. He's a better athlete, he can pull, & he'd be a perfect fit in the zone blocking scheme. He'd be a HUGE upgrade @ RG & barring some unknown character issues--if he's there @ 12 I'd probably take him.

I know some fans don't understand how the game is really played on Sunday. They think in terms of fantasy points & think that all you need is a QB to chuck the ball down the field to fast WR's but what you REALLY need on offense is a top tier O-line. That's what I want & that's what I care about.

yes dc

Posted by: jackazz | March 04, 2013 at 02:20 PM

Seems by the screen name, you know exactly what you are. LOL...

PERFECT UNITY WAS THE PERFECT ANSWER & STILL IS THE PERFECT ANSWER TO THE PERFECT SEASON. NO DIVISION OF EGOISM BETWEEN THEIR TEAM PLAYERS. THEY HAD A FOOTBALL TEAM OF LATIN, BLACK, AND WHITE PLAYERS IN PERFECT UNITY. YOU CAN TAKE THAT INGREDIENT TO THE BANK JEFF IRELAND AND STEPHEN ROSS. YAHWEH IS THE GREATEST ARCHITECT.

Frank from PA, take a look at the best defenses in the NFL and what they do. Actually look at the best teams period - they control the turnover margin. Top ten teams in the league had a .686 win % last year. The final four teams left in the NFL were top ten in turnover ratio. They win the turnover battle, they sack the qb, spending $8m on Starks doesn't really help with that. Plus if you see that we spend almost $30M on four players on defense that don't create turnovers (Starks, Soliai, Dansby, and Burnett), don't help defend the pass, and don't really sack the qb - then really it is you that doesn't know football.

In fact I would argue they aren't good enough against the run as a group - finished 13th - nothing to write home about. A lot of bread for that kind of ranking.

YG, I would agree with you in the sense that he may not be an "ideal" fit in a 4-3. He does seem to fall into that "tweener" (Hate that word) category a little bit.

However, my main point is that if he is going to fit anywhere in a 4-3, it's more as a DT & not a DE.

No speed & no moves = a shi*ty 4-3 DE.

YG,

'Vernon is a Cam Wake clone'. He is? Based on what?

The guy had what, 3.5 sacks last year? He's inconsistent and disappeared for long stretches at a time.

Wake is one of the most dominant players at this position in the league and now you're saying 'Vernon is his clone'? Come on! That's RIDICULOUS! He's wish and a prayer at this time. He's not even close to the player Wake and there is zero evidence to suggest he ever will be.

Your plan is to roll the dice on Shelby and Vernon. I'm saying that's not enough. And it has nothing to do with 'writing Vernon off'. I need back-up plans.

"Of course he was drafted as a DE! But being a 3-4 DE is NOT remotely the same as a 4-3 DE! How may DT's do you need in a 3-4? They had Starks & Soliai already!

It seems YOu don't understand what I'm saying! You think a slow College DT can switch up & play DE in a 4-3 in the pro's? At least his strength would help him inside. What's to his favor outside? he doesn't have speed or rush moves. He's a fish out of water there!

Less focus on telling me what I dont understand & more focus on understand what people are saying first.

LOL,

Look...He said he's going to lose 20 pounds. Will that help him @ DE??? I hope so BUT I believe Vernon will ultimately beat him out as a starer.

I don't think he's really a 4-3 DE or a DT which is why trading him to a team that runs a 3-4 makes a lot of sense.

vernon was awful last year, showed nothing going one on one with wake taking doubles

WNPs,

All I'd say is that Cooper and Warmack should be part of the conversation at 12 if they are there. I'm not certain the evidence is there to say either of those guys is the clear cut answer over lets say Jordan or Milliner or Rhodes or even Patterson at 12 (who I know you don't want).

I think there's very little there in clear cut evidence to say 'yeah, for sure, he's the standout guy'. Just my opinion.

Vernon? The guy showed very little! 3 sacks & 2 came vs. the Rams in 1 game.

1 he was completely unblocked & the other wake flushed bradford right into thim.

I would hardly consider that A Wake Clone. Right now he & Shelby look like spot players with Vernon showing some ability in the ST game.

207. he had the best coahes/gm 2.

Craig M,

Don't disagree with you one bit. My decision on Patterson is purely value. If we are looking at spending 4.5m and 5.3m next year on this guy then he should be more than just a warm body in the backfield. He has to be much much better than Carrol. I think we bring in two CBs from the draft. I personally don't like spending FA money on CBs for that specific reason of overpaying them. I'd much rather see Marshall, Carrol, 2 rookies and maybe a reasonably priced Vet CB(2m range) on the roster. We need to build the CB ranks from the draft not from FA. Smith and Davis were just mistakes, and I can honestly say I never liked the Davis pick and the Smith pick seemed reasonable at the time, but he was just a poor fit for what we eventually needed.

High price positions, DE, CB, QB, WR, & LT I think should always be built through the draft since you pay such a high premium for them in FA. OG, DT, S, LB, RB, TE are much easier to find in later rds and in FA. Just my take at playing GM.

Because of the offense and the coach we have we need to field at least 5 legit receiving threats including our RB, preferably 3 WR, 1 TE & 1RB. So we need 4 WRs who catch and a legit TE with a Fasano-esqu 2nd TE (I'd resign Fasano). We also need a legit backup for Lamar Miller, cause Thomas ain't it.

Craig, first off Ngata has a cap hit of $11.5M for 2013 vs the quote of $17M you quoted (Wilfork $10.6M) ...

http://www.spotrac.com/top-salaries/nfl/cap-hit/defensive-tackle/

As far as running the football and it's importance .. of the final 8 teams left in the NFL last year, how many were top 10 rushing teams? Two, Seattle and San Francisco.

is this reason enough to bankroll almost 30% of our cap .. to stop the run??? What about what most great teams do .. run enough to balance but depend on the pass. You all want to continue to look pedestrian against them? Fine. Give where we are with allocating resources, I would've been fine paying Starks if we didn't have Soliai, but we do. This is not efficient.

We are not a better team than we were yesterday but we have $8M less, in my opinion. I'm sorry, I've always thought Starks was the most expendable player we had in free agency. not because he isn't good but because of the depth we have there. the beauty of our cap siutation is that it was going to give us a chance to reshape ourselves to become quicker, more athletic, more adept at playing a style of football many here said we are not good enough to play, to get after the ball better.

Furthermore on Ngata, I'm sure Ozzie would love to re-negotiate his contract today, Suggs too. But there's $22.5M in dead money on Ngata's contract. So no leverage.

Suggs, $11.2M of dead money = no leverage = not having the cap money to re-sign the better player in paul Kruger.

they'll draft millner (CB-ALA) if he's there @ 12.

disagree mark, starks and hartline were my key players we need back

zero chance millner is there at 12, u know those meaningless wins u cheered for late lasy year, well they cost us players like him

Mark,

First of all we have to see what the team does with Starks before we automatically assume he'll count $8mil+ against the cap. Secondly, I would have preferred we let him walk and move Odrick inside (yeah I happen to think Odrick could play inside) and add a guy like Abraham or Freeney or draft a kid to play DE. Ireland felt differently.

At the end of the day, with all the bodies hitting FA, it probably makes more sense to hang onto Starks, even if it's for just one year. I'm not quite sure where you are coming up with the '30 per cent' cap number, unless you are counting Dansby, Misi and Burnett in there.

I'm assuming you wouldn't have tagged anyone then?

I know some fans don't understand how the game is really played on Sunday. They think in terms of fantasy points & think that all you need is a QB to chuck the ball down the field to fast WR's but what you REALLY need on offense is a top tier O-line. That's what I want & that's what I care about.

Posted by: We Need Playmakers | March 04, 2013 at 02:21 PM
----------------------------
WNP.... Jonathan Cooper, I will look closer at him. I have not spent much time considering an O-line pick at #12. But with the likely departure of Long.???

This draft is exceedingly deep in Line players, in fact, this draft is pretty deep in everything but QB's... it just lacks flash and star power. I'm a firm believer that the O & D lines are where the games are won and lost.You give even a mediocre QB time to throw the ball with today's rules and he'll shred a secondary.

If Martin is going to move to LT, he will need to eat some beans... he was manhandled several times last year after Long was placed on IR. His technique was solid, he's got the fundamental footwork down... He just needs to get stronger and work on leverage techniques.

I saw a mock draft on Walter Football dot com. NOT Walt's 2013 mock.... But Charlie's 2013 mock.... If Miami had that draft... I would be stoked. If you or anyone else has not seen Charlie's mock on Walter Football.... check it out... Talk about a firepower draft!!!

Another player I have been watching is Vance McDonald, a TE out of Rice who killed it at the combine. He already has great blocking skill (Unlike Egnew) and has been used as both a TE and a WR so his hands are good. Just something about that guy that wreaks or "Big Time"... He may last to the bottom of the 2nd or top of the 3rd. Up from a 4th or 5th pre combine.

"...the beauty of our cap siutation is that it was going to give us a chance to reshape ourselves to become quicker, more athletic, more adept at playing a style of football many here said we are not good enough to play, to get after the ball better."

Mark,

And b/c we franchised Starks we can't do that??? Come on....We still have plenty of cap space & ten draft picks (with the compensatory pick we're going to get for Langford).

« 1 2 3 4 5 6 »

The comments to this entry are closed.