PDA

View Full Version : Alan Faneca 'must' be a offseason priority



MrEd
02-11-2008, 12:46 PM
If you look at all the teams that improved their OL dramatically last offseason...it was teams like CLE, who signed Eric Steinbach at "LG", DAL, who signed Leonard Davis at "LG", SD re-signed Kris Dielman a "LG", and don't forget that Adrian Peterson ran behind Steve Hutchinson at "LG", and one of the reasons I believe that Trent Edwards impressed was because they signed Derek Dockery at "LG".

I am one who thinks that LG is the most underrated position on the OL. If we sign Alan Faneca watch our OL look completely different. And even though I want MIA to "also" sign Flozell Adams if not draft Jake Long(Matt Ryan is my #1 choice)...Faneca would even make Vernon Carey look better and/or push him into a Pro Bowler.

Let's not forget that Richmond Webb had Keith Sims(a pro bowler) right next to him at "LG".

VT Dolphan
02-11-2008, 12:51 PM
It would be a waste of money. This team is terrible right now and we need to build through the draft, not spend big money on veterans.

emocomputerjock
02-11-2008, 12:57 PM
The price tag for Faneca will be astronomical though - that will limit our ability to sign other free agents (and you know there will be a lot of cuts on this team before the start of the season) and also our salary cap negotiations with the #1 overall pick. I like Faneca, and I'd love to have him on the team, but he's gonna want more than we can give, and someone else will give it to him.

MrEd
02-11-2008, 12:59 PM
Dude, you make no sense whatsoever? You mention that this team is "terrible" and needs to build through the draft....then you say it would be a waste of money to attempt to improve the OL of, as you mentioned, a "terrible" team? Hello?

Dude, the reason you clear up $35mil of salary cap space is for SIGNING players that will IMPROVE your "terrible" team. Don't get your reasoning.

satz
02-11-2008, 01:05 PM
Isn`t he like 35 ?

Vendigo
02-11-2008, 01:10 PM
Dude, the reason you clear up $35mil of salary cap space is for SIGNING players that will IMPROVE your "terrible" team. Don't get your reasoning.


His reasoning - and he's got a very valid point - is that this team lacks way too much talent to become a contender in one or two years. Alan Faneca's 31 and he'll probably be on the brink of calling it a career when this team is making a serious playoff push. I can't argue with your premise of improving the offensive line - I agree - but don't do it with players who probably won't be there when the rebuilding pays off.

Steinbach was 26 when the Browns signed him. He's going to be a cornerstone of a young and hungry team for years to come. That's the guys we need right now. Signing Faneca would indeed waste money that could be spend more effectively elsewhere (or for a younger lineman).

MrEd
02-11-2008, 01:11 PM
The price tag for Faneca will be astronomical though - that will limit our ability to sign other free agents (and you know there will be a lot of cuts on this team before the start of the season) and also our salary cap negotiations with the #1 overall pick. I like Faneca, and I'd love to have him on the team, but he's gonna want more than we can give, and someone else will give it to him.

No it wont. We are "3rd" in most salary cap space. How do you figure that "he will want more than we can give"? We can give him more than 30 other teams in the league can, so how do you figure that?

We have enough space to sign "multiple" Faneca's "and" sign ALL of our rookies, including the #1 overall.

The #1 overall pick will count no more than $1-2mil his first season even though he gets the $30mil guaranteed. See what Russell counted against the Raiders cap this season. Not much.

What people confuse are the "signing" bonuses which are prorated throughout the years of the contract and the space that we have.

Faneca would cost us as much as Steinbach, Davis, Dielman, and Dockery costed the clubs that signed them. But what people fail to see is that the signing bonuses are broken up throughout the years as well as into "roster bonuses". See Joey Porter.

Trust u me. BP would not have took this job and then opened it up with remarks like "Jason Taylor isn't going anywhere, we are BUILDING this 2008 team around him"...if Wayne Huizenga didn't give him the green light to SPEND ALL THE MONEY HE WANTS/NEEDS to make this team a contender "overnight".

You don't take a team with Jason Taylor, Vonnie Holiday, and Joey Porter as the main players that you are building around without the intentions in making this team up for a "quick" turnaround. You just don't.

BP "can", he has the cap space, and "WILL" spend the right amount of BIG BUCKS on the needed players as well as draft the right ones to make this team contenders overnight. Watch and believe.

Faneca and Adams are all but "LOCKS" to be players that BP will target with fury this offseason. You don't call Jason Taylor and promise to build a team around the soon to be 35 year old without promising him to go SPEND THE BUCKS needed to make this team into a contender.

If they were not planning on spending the big bucks and not planning on contending next season...BP wouldn't have told JT that he was "keeping" him, for one. Nor the media that he was "building around Taylor" if he wasn't planning on signing BIG timers and contending next season. You see? So, :hi5:

MrEd
02-11-2008, 01:12 PM
Isn`t he like 35 ?

No, he's 29. And a pro bowler. :up:

VT Dolphan
02-11-2008, 01:13 PM
Dude, you make no sense whatsoever? You mention that this team is "terrible" and needs to build through the draft....then you say it would be a waste of money to attempt to improve the OL of, as you mentioned, a "terrible" team? Hello?

Dude, the reason you clear up $35mil of salary cap space is for SIGNING players that will IMPROVE your "terrible" team. Don't get your reasoning.

What I'm trying to say is this.

I'm sure you remember when Saban took over the team. It was a bad football team, 4-12 I believe. Not only was it bad, but it was old. Saban then brought in a number of talented, old veteran players such as Traylor, Holliday, and K. Carter. Those moves immediately made us a respectable team, but still very old. Predictably, this team aged very quickly and disintegrated into the current mess of a roster we currently have.

The team we have now is probably even less talented than the one Saban inherited. Adding these high priced veterans such as Faneca would surely make us a better football team, but until we stop trading draft picks on washed up veterans, or wasting them due to poor talent evalution, this team will never be anything more than mediocre.

Adding high priced free agents should be used to add the final piece or two to an already very good team (ala New England), not be used as a band aid by crappy teams trying to avoid being laughingstocks (Redskins a few years ago).

Vendigo
02-11-2008, 01:13 PM
No, he's 29


No, he's 31. By the way, where did you get your cap numbers from? No list I've seen has us at #3 in cap space available.

MrEd
02-11-2008, 01:17 PM
No, he's 31. By the way, where did you get your cap numbers from? No list I've seen has us at #3 in cap space available.

ask the commish dot com

MrEd
02-11-2008, 01:24 PM
What I'm trying to say is this.

I'm sure you remember when Saban took over the team. It was a bad football team, 4-12 I believe. Not only was it bad, but it was old. Saban then brought in a number of talented, old veteran players such as Traylor, Holliday, and K. Carter. Those moves immediately made us a respectable team, but still very old. Predictably, this team aged very quickly and disintegrated into the current mess of a roster we currently have.

The team we have now is probably even less talented than the one Saban inherited. Adding these high priced veterans such as Faneca would surely make us a better football team, but until we stop trading draft picks on washed up veterans, or wasting them due to poor talent evalution, this team will never be anything more than mediocre.

Adding high priced free agents should be used to add the final piece or two to an already very good team (ala New England), not be used as a band aid by crappy teams trying to avoid being laughingstocks (Redskins a few years ago).

Thing is that Saban "did" draft to get younger. He drafted Jason Allen and Travis Daniels, re-signed Yeremiah Bell, and signed Will Allen and Andre Goodman to groom behind the aging Sam Madison led secondary. Saban also drafted Fred Evans, Matt Roth, Manny Wright, Kevin Vickerson, and Rod Wright to groom behind Traylor and Holiday. Saban also drafted Channing Crowder to groom and eventually replace Zach Thomas.

Then, Cameron drafted Abe Wright and picked up Quentin Moses to groom behind Jason Taylor and Joey Porter. He also drafted Kelvin Smith to groom behind Zach. Plus, Paul Soliai to groom behind Traylor as well.

No way can anyone say that Saban or Cameron ignored our aging defense and kept on adding "aging" vets. No. Not at all true.

You need vets and young guys grooming behind them. See the NE Pats.

Don't believe the hype. One more draft or so and we are right there. We just need the "right free agents" signed! :up:

Vendigo
02-11-2008, 01:24 PM
ask the commish dot com


These numbers are rather old and probably don't include most of the perfomance based bonuses. The Cleveland Browns, for instance, had their longsnapper counting for a whoppin 8 million bucks against the cap for the season which they will "get back" - add 8 million there. And that's just one example. The newest estimates I've seen have us somewhere in the middle which is still good enough to spend some serious bucks but there's about six to twelve teams in better condition right now. Which, by the way, is still one great feat as we were amonst the bottom feeders for the last ten years or so.

VT Dolphan
02-11-2008, 01:32 PM
Thing is that Saban "did" draft to get younger. He drafted Jason Allen and Travis Daniels, re-signed Yeremiah Bell, and signed Will Allen and Andre Goodman to groom behind the aging Sam Madison led secondary. Saban also drafted Fred Evans, Matt Roth, Manny Wright, and Rod Wright to groom behind Traylor and Holiday. Saban also drafted Channing Crowder to groom and eventually replace Zach Thomas.

Then, Cameron drafted Abe Wright and picked up Quentin Moses to groom behind Jason Taylor and Joey Porter. He also drafted Kelvin Smith to groom behind Zach. Plus, Paul Soliai to groom behind Traylor as well.

No way can anyone say that Saban or Cameron ignored our aging defense and kept on adding "aging" vets. No. Not at all true.

You need vets and young guys grooming behind them. See the NE Pats.

Don't believe the hype. One more draft or so and we are right there. We just need the "right free agents" signed! :up:

And how many of those guys did anything worth a damn? Jason Allen may be starting to turn the corner, but I still consider him a bust. Daniels is nothing more than an average number two corner. Andre Goodman will never be anything more than a nickel or dime back. Fred Evans and Manny Wright are already off the team. Matt Roth has dissapointed. We're still waiting on Rod Wright.

None of this past years defensive draftees did a single thing. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that Kelvin Smith was the only one out of four defensive players drafted to register a single tackle. And that is exactly what he did...register one, and only one tackle the entire year. And its not exactly like these were buried on the depth chart behind star players, if you can't crack the lineup of a 1-15 team, you better try the CFL.

MrEd
02-11-2008, 01:32 PM
These numbers are rather old and probably don't include most of the perfomance based bonuses. The Cleveland Browns, for instance, had their longsnapper counting for a whoppin 8 million bucks against the cap for the season which they will "get back" - add 8 million there. And that's just one example. The newest estimates I've seen have us somewhere in the middle which is still good enough to spend some serious bucks but there's about six to twelve teams in better condition right now. Which, by the way, is still one great feat as we were amonst the bottom feeders for the last ten years or so.

Well, you aren't wrong about the performance based or roster bonuses. We are $35mil "right now". Yes, we will go back to $27mil once Joey Porter's $8mil "guaranteed" roster bonus kicks in. And can go to $25mil "if" we don't restructure Trent Green's contract...which we will.

But we will then go "back" to $30-32mil once we cut Marty Booker's $5mil. He's a guaranteed cut too.

Also, we will climb back to over that once we either cut or restructure Zach Thomas' $8mil as well. And you know that Ireland/Sparano have been uncommittal with Zach's future.

Not to mention it isn't a given that we keep Renaldo Hill or LJ Shelton. And both or one can at least restructure as well.

So in the end, we will still be back to "at least" $35mil of salary cap space to "keep our promise of KEEPING JT and building this year's team around him".

Vendigo
02-11-2008, 01:36 PM
But we will then go "back" to $30-32mil once we cut Marty Booker's $5mil. He's a guaranteed cut too.


And other teams have their Marty Booker's too. Fact remains that we are right in the middle of the pack salary cap wise and probably will stay right there. Nothing bad about it, just putting your optimism into perspective a wee bit.



So in the end, we will still be back to "at least" $35mil of salary cap space to "keep our promise of KEEPING JT and building this year's team around him".


How come I've never heard of that promise of ours until now? When and where did Parcells say "we will build around Jason Taylor"? Got a link?

MrEd
02-11-2008, 01:36 PM
And how many of those guys did anything worth a damn? Jason Allen may be starting to turn the corner, but I still consider him a bust. Daniels is nothing more than an average number two corner. Andre Goodman will never be anything more than a nickel or dime back. Fred Evans and Manny Wright are already off the team. Matt Roth has dissapointed. We're still waiting on Rod Wright.

None of this past years defensive draftees did a single thing. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that Kelvin Smith was the only one out of four defensive players drafted to register a single tackle. And that is exactly what he did...register one, and only one tackle the entire year. And its not exactly like these were buried on the depth chart behind star players, if you can't crack the lineup of a 1-15 team, you better try the CFL.

Dude, you are in a completely different subject. The statement was that "MIA has NOT done anything about drafting to get younger on defense". That was just not a true statement.

Whether, they become stellar players or not is besides the point or it takes 3 years to determine that. The fact that we "have" drafted to get our defense younger is the facts.

We've been drafting correctly...now we must "sign" FA's correctly. Face the reality.

MrEd
02-11-2008, 01:42 PM
And other teams have their Marty Booker's too. Fact remains that we are right in the middle of the pack salary cap wise and probably will stay right there. Nothing bad about it, just putting your optimism into perspective a wee bit.





How come I've never heard of that promise of ours until now? When and where did Parcells say "we will build around Jason Taylor"? Got a link?

Dude, you need to keep up with the Joneses kid. It was in BP's opening PC. He was asked about JT. He said that they are "NOT" trading JT and that they are actually going to "build" the team around him. Exact words.

Also, other teams have their Joey Porters, Trent Greens, and Zach Thomases as well. we will be among the top of pack in the end as well as now.

Geforce
02-11-2008, 01:46 PM
If you look at all the teams that improved their OL dramatically last offseason...it was teams like CLE, who signed Eric Steinbach at "LG", DAL, who signed Leonard Davis at "LG", SD re-signed Kris Dielman a "LG", and don't forget that Adrian Peterson ran behind Steve Hutchinson at "LG", and one of the reasons I believe that Trent Edwards impressed was because they signed Derek Dockery at "LG".

I am one who thinks that LG is the most underrated position on the OL. If we sign Alan Faneca watch our OL look completely different. And even though I want MIA to "also" sign Flozell Adams if not draft Jake Long(Matt Ryan is my #1 choice)...Faneca would even make Vernon Carey look better and/or push him into a Pro Bowler.

Let's not forget that Richmond Webb had Keith Sims(a pro bowler) right next to him at "LG".

Just to clarify something you said. Leonard Davis played RG for Dallas, not LG. Kyle Kosier played LG next to Flozell Adams.

With that said, I understand what you are trying to say and would love to have Faneca for the right price.

Vendigo
02-11-2008, 01:48 PM
Dude, you need to keep up with the Joneses kid. It was in BP's opening PC. He was asked about JT. He said that they are "NOT" trading JT and that they are actually going to "build" the team around him. Exact words.


Dude, I have seriously no idea what you're talking about. There's positively no mention of Jason Taylor in Parcell's opening PC as transcribed on the official website.

MrEd
02-11-2008, 01:55 PM
Dude, I have seriously no idea what you're talking about. There's positively no mention of Jason Taylor in Parcell's opening PC as transcribed on the official website.

You are probably on the wrong PC. And if it wasn't the "opening PC", it was the next one. But it was common knowledge what BP stated. It was on all the different newspapers for like 2 weeks afterwards.

Vendigo
02-11-2008, 02:04 PM
You are probably on the wrong PC. And if it wasn't the "opening PC", it was the next one.


Uhm ... Bill Parcells only gave the one PC.



But it was common knowledge what BP stated


Apparently it wasn't. I've just asked a couple of friends who also regularly follow the Dolphins and not one of them remembers Parcells saying such a thing. I'm starting to think you're pulling a prank here. It's either that or I seriously wonder if ...



Face the reality.


... we're talking about the same reality. But since it ran in all newspapers for weeks, you shouldn't have any trouble providing us with a link. I'd really appreciate that before I start whistling the X-Files theme ...

MrEd
02-11-2008, 02:09 PM
Wow. Ur friends dont know the MIA dolphins. Ask around on this forum even. I'm sure that they will confirm what BP stated. And yes, there was more than one PC. The opening PC was "not" the one where he mentioned not wanting "hoodlums" remember?

Vendigo
02-11-2008, 02:29 PM
So you can't even provide us people who don't know the Miami Dolphins with a simple link where it says that Parcells called Jason Taylor and promised him to build a team around him?

I'm not going to ask around the forum. I'm asking you specifically to prove your claim. That should be easy enough if it's such common knowledge. If you can't do that, however, I have to arrive at the conclusion that you're simply making this stuff up. I just can't imagine why someone would invent press conferences though.

In fact, the only direct reference Parcells has publicly made about Jason Taylor was before he even took his office in Miami. In his last appearance on ESPN he said: "My idea would be to keep the good players we have and try to collect some more. And I think Jason Taylor has been a pretty good player in Miami."

Note that this neither constitutes a "promise" (especially not to Jason Taylor personally), doesn't say he called Jason or wants to build his team around Jason. Note the subjunctive form. Note that what you're claiming were his exact words weren't his exact words at all. All he's saying is that Taylor has been a good player and his idea would be to keep him.



And yes, there was more than one PC


No, there was not. The thugs and hoodlums comment is from his introductory press conference.

MrEd
02-11-2008, 02:39 PM
Uhm ... Bill Parcells only gave the one PC.





Apparently it wasn't. I've just asked a couple of friends who also regularly follow the Dolphins and not one of them remembers Parcells saying such a thing. I'm starting to think you're pulling a prank here. It's either that or I seriously wonder if ...





... we're talking about the same reality. But since it ran in all newspapers for weeks, you shouldn't have any trouble providing us with a link. I'd really appreciate that before I start whistling the X-Files theme ...

It was on ESPN, my bad. The call was Jeff Ireland and a few articles that are too old to open up on palmbeachpost.

Then, the point is proven. That BP is looking to "add" pieces to JT to compete. Which was the point of the argument.

My idea would be to keep the good players we have and try to collect some more (http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports/football/pro/dolphins/sfl-flspdolphins25sbdec25,0,5913558.story)," Parcells said. "And I think Jason Taylor has been a pretty good player in Miami."



http://sports.aol.com/fanhouse/2007/12/25/bill-parcells-commits-to-jason-taylor-not-cam-cameron-or-randy/

Vendigo
02-11-2008, 03:00 PM
Then, the point is proven


Not really. There still remains the issue that a lot of stuff you have disguised as quotes in your earlier posts aren't quotes at all. Nobody ever said that he wanted to build his team around JT. In fact, Bill's sole comment on Taylor could just as easily be a way to attract potential buyers. After all, you aren't a clever salesman if you're looking like you're desperate to get rid of your product. Claiming that Taylor is an important piece might as well be a means to get his price up.

As for the call, Ireland also called Beck. If calling Taylor means that he wants to build his team around him, why doesn't calling Beck mean the same? In other threads you're claiming that Miami will draft Ryan. That doesn't make a lot sense, if you see what I mean.

Anyway, of course you're free to interpret the stuff as you see fit. I'm not interpreting it the same way, but that's just as fine. It is, however, somewhat problematic if you disguise your interpretation as a statement of fact. I don't know what Parcells is going to do in regard to Jason. Neither do you. We can draw conclusions from what he said or didn't say, sure, but that's just that: our conclusions. As long as Parcells doesn't go on the mic as the VP of Football Operations of the Miami Dolphins saying "We will keep Jason Taylor and build a team around him" everything's speculation.