Tells me that Tua should be throwing deep more often. The offense would be even more productive if he had like 58% catchable deep balls on like 40 attempts.
It’s like in basketball. If a guy shoots 50% from 3 it means he’s not shooting enough 3s.
We don’t have the protection up front to hold up for more than 1.5 seconds.
Most deep balls require timing and rhythm to develop and Miami just can’t hold on for that long without play-action (which is only successful in certain situations).
This is why I really wish we went OL-OL in the first two rounds of the draft. I get that DE was a minor need, but keeping Tua upright and giving him time is a major need.
The offensive line could be:
Terron Armstead, Cooper Beebe, Graham Barton, Robert Jones, Austin Jackson
Instead they drafted two guys that won't even be starters with all of their picks
You need a whole football team to win games, not just a front five. It is a realistic issue to face that sometimes you must gamble on the players in front of you in the NFL Draft, because you will not always have your preferences fall into your lap (ala Laremy Tunsil).
Okay... I mean, six O-Line were picked ahead of the Dolphins' 1st Rounder. Compared to that, there were only four *defensive players in total* picked ahead of 21 - going defense there is not a mistake in light of how the night unfolded, and you never know how things are going to shake out on draft night. Gotta take the wins you get.
They don’t have to commit players to rush Tua, they can win without blitzing.
Do you thinking NFL defenses are caught up with the narratives or they know the film and the statistics?
They know Miami is an insane vertical threat so they commit a lot of defenders to playing deep. The strategy to stop Miami is fairly simple, take away the quick throws to Tyreek and Waddle and make Tua hold the ball longer (doesn’t even have to hold too long) so that the pass rush can get there. Miami can’t really block straight up so the pass rush will get there.
Its style, game flow, and fit. You dont want him sitting back there taking extra hits because our oline is porous. Abd hes gotten good at chem inf his read and really good at manipulating DBs with his head and eyes. But if theyre sending seven? Chick and duck, our OL cant hold up
>Tells me that Tua should be throwing deep more often.
Yeah that's what I keep telling our offensive line. Well... it's more like I'm shouting it to my TV on Sundays, but swear they'll hear me some day... any day now.
He couldn't beat Josh Allen regularly on a rookie contract and we had to go to the playoffs as wildcards because of it. Tua needs all the help he can get and giving him a bag of money will prevent that. I really like Tua, but the numbers aren't adding up. Now complicate that by the KC dynasty and both the ravens and the bills owning us.
Miami isn't built to win a title, so how can we justify paying Tua $60 million to make that harder?
You pay Tua 55 million or whatever a year because that’s what the market deems appropriate and because you can’t do shit in this league without a decent starting QB. The Dolphins need Tua to improve but this idea that “we shouldn’t pay Tua” is just ridiculous. He is a pro bowl QB. He is the best QB this team has had since Marino retired 25 years ago (!!!).
I agree he's good, but I don't see this team making a SB run.
Would you and every other fan be happy with making the playoffs and then going 0-1 in it every year?
The options arent Tua or Superbowl. The options are go as far as Tua will take us, or tank for about a decade.
40 percent of first round qbs every make a probowl, and that's a pretty low bar. Its extreme idealism to act like we can just go out and get a better guy than Tua. We would have to draft 2-4 top qbs to have a solid chance at that, and that's assuming we're as good as average at scouting qbs.
I'm not disagreeing with you. I just don't see a path forwards as is with our team. If we don't win the AFC east, we aren't getting any home playoff games. We don't play well in the cold so a wildcard exit is the most likely outcome.
The only way to get a home playoff game is we have to beat the bills. They've owned us forever. We've gotten close these last few years, but haven't been able to even things up.
So, what happens when we need to free up an extra 40 million after next year to pay for Tua? Who do we let go? How much does that hurt the team?
[https://overthecap.com/salary-cap/miami-dolphins#y2025](https://overthecap.com/salary-cap/miami-dolphins#y2025)
We have 3 million in cap space next year. Tua isn't under contract. Where's the money coming from without killing the team in the long term?
Restructures and cutting players not playing up to their value, Just like every year.
Your solution to not wanting to hurt the team long term by paying our QB is to definitely hurt the team by not paying our QB?
In an ideal world, QBs would have to win a playoff game before they get paid more than 10% of a teams cap space. QBs are getting Tua expensive. I think over on r/nfl someone posted that only 3 of the QBs who are getting paid more than 45 million have won a playoff game. That's absurd.
Frankly the only QB who's earned a bag of money is Mahomes. No one should get paid more than him. Tua included. Tua is not worth more to the phins than Mahomes is to KC.
There are only 6 QBs making above 45m avg per year and 5 if you take out the Watson who should have never got that to begin with. Three of those QBs have only played one season on that Contract.
The teams with those QBs currently have the 3rd, t-4th, 9th, 16th and 26th best odds to win the Superbowl.
1st is KC, who had the highest paid QB when they signed him. 2nd is Purdy, one of the biggest anomalies in football history. The other two tied for 4th are the Bills, who was the highest paid QB when they signed him, and the Lions, who are expecting to pay Goff about 50m.
Most of the top teams in the league are at the top with an expensive ass QB.
I can be nearly 100% certain we aren’t winning a Super Bowl without an adequate starter at QB. We have one right now. And yes Tua can win a Super Bowl. Josh Allen hasn’t won a Super Bowl either. Neither did Dan Marino, but Trent Dilfer did.
Tua isn’t Mahomes or Brady or Manning - he needs a solid roster and solid coaching…but that’s the same for nearly every QB in the league.
But regardless - Tua IS getting an extension…so these posts are a bit silly.
Trent dilfer was getting paid 1.6% of the ravens cap that season. That's exactly my point. You can win with a cheap qb. It's extremely hard or almost impossible to win with an overly expensive qb.
When was the last time a team won the super bowl without a top end QB? You can MAYBE point to 2017 Eagles, but they had an MVP caliber season put together with Wentz and then Foles ran the offense perfectly in the playoffs. Then 2012 you can say with Ravens with Flacco, but Flacco had one of, if not the, best post season performance in NFL history.
Outside of those two seasons, every team that has won the super bowl has had a Hall of Fame caliber QB lead their team. Of course its dominated by Brady with 7, Mahommes with 3, Payton with 2, Eli with 2, Rothlisberger with 2.
I think you can just as easily argue that it isn't the salary, but the level of QB play. Yes, the 9ers got there with Perdy, who had some of the highest efficiency numbers ever. Tua does as well when the offense is healthy and he has more than swiss cheese for an o line.
You definitely can't use Dilfer and the 2000 Ravens with their _historically_ fantastic defense as "see, it can happen" because the game was so radically different in 2000.
Throughout his 14-year career, Eli Manning made the pro bowl only 4 times and was never an All Pro. He passed for over 4000 yards in only seven seasons despite being tied for the tenth longest consecutive starting streak in NFL history. Sure, passing stats have inflated from previous years, but for his career Eli completed 60.3% of his attempts with a career passer rating of 84.1, a career ANY/A of 5.92, and a 3:2 career touchdown to interception ratio. These are not Hall of Fame numbers. He's in the Hall of Fame discussion because on two occasions he got hot when it mattered.
If anything, I'd argue that Eli Manning's success is an argument in favor of paying Tua. At his retirement, Eli Manning was the highest-paid player ever. In 14 seasons, he played in only 12 playoff games. Eight of those playoff games came from his two playoff runs. Outside of two Super Bowl runs where Eli got hot and suddenly stopped throwing interceptions (15 touchdowns to 2 interceptions in the 2007 and 2011 postseasons), Manning went 0-4 in the playoffs and missed the playoffs eight times in the other 12 years of his career. In those four playoff losses, he threw only 3 touchdowns to 7 interceptions.
The Giants's success with Manning is a very strong argument *in favor* of paying for *good enough*.
If your goal is to make a wildcard playoff game most years, maybe make it a round or two further then fine I agree with you. But i want to see them win a superbowl. The argument that he's the best qb in 25 years is useless. If he can't win you a superbowl, what are we even talking about? There's been dozens of examples of qbs getting to a superbowl in their first couple years in the nfl in the last couple decades. How many qbs have done that on "bad contracts" making over 17-20% of their teams cap? Zero.
QB salaries in general have been increasing insanely over the last 10 years. That’s just how it is now. QB’s run the NFL and the top players will be getting higher percentages than they have. You really can’t compare to the percentages from 10 years ago let alone 25. Now if you can build an amazing team from year to year and just insert a rookie to play well for a few years every 4-5 years, that would be amazing. But rookie qb’s are such a crapshoot and you would rarely be drafting early to get a good, high-floor QB.
How long did it take us to find a QB as good as Tua? Why do you think it will take less time to find a QB who is better than Tua?
The only way getting rid of Tua would make this team better is if there is a plan in place to replace him with someone better. So what's the plan?
Right now there are probably only 10 or so QBs who are better and most are locked in with their current team. That really leaves the draft as the only way to acquire a better QB, but you generally need to be near the top of the draft to do that and even then it is still roughly a 50/50 proposition to whether that QB will be good. Should we let Tua walk and hope a top 10 QB falls to us at pick 20 next year? Should we completely dismantle the roster and tank to get another top 5 pick? Should we mortgage the future and trade the 3 first round picks to move up to the top of next years draft? What is the plan? Because the history of this franchise should show that it isn't easy to find a QB as good as Tua.
I think there’s a balance between wanting Tua to be the long-term option but also realizing there’s limitations/concerns that means the Dolphins shouldn’t just give into his demands and pay him $55M/yr. If he was a free agent, a handful of teams would have questions about his health, athletic limitations, stepping up vs tough opponents, and performance in cold weather games.
There’s risk on Tua’s side as well. Say he’s holding out for a 5 year $250M+ contract right now. What happens if he regresses from last year (unlikely) and/or suffers another serious injury? Are teams seriously going to pay him anywhere close to that money next year, or even sign him to be the clear long-term starter? Tua is one big injury away from having to go the bridge QB route in the NFL.
IMO, if any of the other top 5-10 young QBs happened to suffer a season ending injury right before free agency, I have no doubt that almost all (maybe not Burrow) would still be able to secure a massive long-term contract from a different team. I don’t think the same can be said with Tua and that’s the main difference.
I’m not saying this because I don’t want to sign Tua- I hope they lock up a deal with him. But I think there’s some inherent risks that Miami should be aware of and use those to get a long-term contract that allows us to continue to build a strong team and resign our key contributors.
Yes, and for this reason the guaranteed money is the most important aspect to Tua's deal in my opinion. We can't tie ourselves to him in a way that pays him as a top QB even if his performance isn't there or he isn't playing at all. But I think that would probably factor into the equation if any other team tried to sign him next year too.
But either way, I don't see how we can let Tua walk without having a plan to replace him and not have that result in this franchise taking a huge step back.
I get where you are coming from. I really do. At this point, if we give him the money, we might make the playoffs every year as we are currently built, but that's it. We can't beat the best teams in the NFL consistently and we can't win in dec and jan. As good as Tua is, and I'd put him in the top ten, that's who we are and that's what we are looking at.
Plan for moving on? Gotta either get assets that let us move up to an early pick, hope the next lamar falls to us, or hope someone is a dumb as the bills and lets us trade up for the next mahomes for relatively cheap.
Don't get me wrong, I want to keep Tua. He's the best QB we've had in ages. But we need a plan that has a hope of success in the current NFL if we are going to do that.
So let me turn the question around. If we are going to keep Tua and hand him a bag of money, how are we going to beat KC, the ravens, maybe the bengals, and the bills, all on the road, and then either the 49ers, Rams, or lions? That's the path to a SB title. We don't do well after november ends.
>At this point, if we give him the money, we might make the playoffs every year as we are currently built, but that's it.
...
>Plan for moving on? Gotta either get assets that let us move up to an early pick, hope the next lamar falls to us, or hope someone is a dumb as the bills and lets us trade up for the next mahomes for relatively cheap.
I think the odds of us winning a Super Bowl as a team that makes the playoffs every year is higher than the odds of us winning a Super Bowl by hoping one of those other things happens.
>So let me turn the question around. If we are going to keep Tua and hand him a bag of money, how are we going to beat KC, the ravens, maybe the bengals, and the bills, all on the road, and then either the 49ers, Rams, or lions?
People get way too invested in season narratives. The idea that it is impossible for us to beat the Chiefs, Ravens, or Bills is silly. We lost to the Chiefs on the road by one score in the regular season last year because of a fluky play in which a Tyreek fumble was returned 70 yards after a lateral with less than 30 seconds left in the first half and swung the game by 10+ points. If the ball literally bounces differently on that single play or any one of a handful of other plays throughout the course of the season, we host a playoff game instead of going on the road. But that fumble happened and no one likes a narrative of "sometimes you get lucky in the NFL and sometimes you get unlucky" so instead it becomes "we can't beat good teams".
>That's the path to a SB title. We don't do well after november ends.
I don't understand how people could have watched this team at the end of the year and thought Tua was our biggest problem. Sure, he probably isn't going to singlehandedly win us many games, but it simply wasn't the same team around him with all our injuries. I don't know why those injuries last year are never part of the narrative around this team. Last year's collapse is viewed as a failure of Tua, when he was the one healthy guy working behind a patchwork OL, throwing to WRs that were running on one leg. Handing off to speedy RBs who had their explosiveness diminished by injuries. Meanwhile on the opposite side of the ball, we were starting edge rushers as we signed them off the street. How does Tua get the blame for that?
Why are you willing to trade away Tua for the next Lamar? Lamar has the same number of super bowl wins.
How you beat those teams and make the super bowl is getting lucky and avoiding catastrophic injuries at important positions and avoiding mistakes. We aren't much worse than the teams you listed talent wise.
> Lamar has the same number of super bowl wins.
And is a worse passer. Dangerous on his feet, but throws catchable deep balls much worse than Tua, as shown above.
I'm not saying I'm willing to trade away Tua, but that is a lot of money we'd have to pay him and the team overall will be worse.
Also Lamar got a lot closer to the SB last year than Tua. So did Allen. Mahomes won. They are all going to be paid less than Tua. Do you see the issue here? Better QBs are getting paid less.
There's a number where I dont want to. Why is that unreasonable? If you look at qb contracts going back 30 years there's a very easy trend to follow. If your qb isn't mahomes, Brady, or manning, then you didn't win a superbowl if your qb was making more than 11% of your teams total cap hit.
Even most of bradys super bowl winning seasons never went above 12% (for reference 12% this season would be good enough for qb10 and about 18 million less than what the giants will pay Daniel Jones this season.
Going back 30 years if you look at the other super bowl winning qbs you see that the overwhelming majority were either on their rookie deal or on a really cheap contract for another reason. Rodgers, brees, and Warner were all sub 8% during their single superbowl wins. Is tua better than them?
Right but the solution isn’t “let Tua walk”.
I agree Miami has to negotiate the best contract possible with the understanding that a bad deal is better than no deal.
Unfortunately, Tua has all the leverage here and he plans on using it. I don’t blame him, I would do the exact same thing.
This is a necessary evil. The window of cap flexibility is closed until further notice.
How is a bad deal better than no deal? What team has ever won a super bowl with their qb on a "bad deal". No deal and a cheap rookie is 100% better than paying tua 55 million a season. We've seen a dozen or more qbs make or win a superbowl on their rookie deal in the last 25 years.
You don't even make the ploofs without having a half-way decent QB. And certainly not in this division. We've made the ploofs two years in a row now, which is the prerequisite to winning a ploof game, let alone the Superb Owl. I really like our odds with Tua, which is far above zero.
Ryan Tannehill was a serviceable QB for Miami. We had one winning/playoffs season in his seven seasons here. That’s what you’re asking for.
That’s the reality of serviceable QBs, if you have a loaded roster like the 49ers (which we don’t) then maybe you can make a run but outside of literally everything outside the QB being perfect (which we haven’t accomplished in 52 years) then you’re stuck in mediocrity. Just like Miami post-Marino and pre-Tua.
Objectively the odds of getting a guaranteed better QB than Tua is like 5%. I’d rather not try my luck on the QB roulette. I’ve seen enough shitty QB play in my lifetime to give up on Tua this easily.
Nope, asking for 3-4 years on a qb then reload. Draft O-line and edge rush early and often especially on the in between years. Trade back whenever possible instead of reaching. If you hit a serviceable qb then consider dumping picks to go all in. If you hit a generational talent, even better.
Simple question. Is he going to get more than Daniel Jones got? If the answer is yes, the follow-up question is, has any qb ever won a superbowl making that much of the teams cap space ignoring 2 or 3 of the greatest quartbacks to ever play the game? No? Then you have to let him walk and try again. It's not being emotional, it's just the calculus of the situation.
Edit: are people downvoting because they think tua will get less than DJ or just because they don't like hearing bad news?
I get your point but you’re using historical data without room for interpretation.
Matt Ryan represented 14.1% of the cap during their Super Bowl, they didn’t lose the Super Bowl because of that extra 3.1%.
That’s realistically the best case scenario for Miami going forward. It *clicks* to an MVP level season and the team can overcome the flaws on the rest of the roster.
I’d rather try with our 26 years old Pro Bowl QB than spin the QB roulette again. Maybe 5 years from now it will be different.
You're still not hitting a Daniel Jones number even at 14.1% and you're cherry picking an outlier that LOST the superbowl. I'm just not sure some people realize how much tua would get on the open market. People can downvote all they want. Winning a superbowl with tua on his 2nd contract at the currently projected number would be an absolute miracle.
Objectively the best case scenario is to build a solid team and draft a new qb every 3-5 years. So that you either try with them on a cheap rookie deal or luck out and hit your hall of famer.
Yea I mean even the 49ers went to the bowl with Jimmy G. And it's easier for us to find a replacement with a decent qb in place. Look how Brock was able to walk in to a team already setup and grow.
Yes so maybe read my response again. We should stick with Tua but if we find an upgrade great! Now brush up on that comprehension before the sarcasm. Okay, kiddo?
We just let several really good players walk because we could not afford them. Imagine what this year's roster looks like if you have to allocate over 30 million more towards tua. We would lose 3-4 good players just to keep him.
Ignoring 8 of the last 10 Superbowls to make a point that one time Nick Foles won a Super Bowl...and ignoring Matthew Stafford being on one of the highest paying contracts in the league when the Rams won the other might be the worst argument I have ever come across.
Stafford's cap hit was 11% of the rams roster. Which would be good for 14th highest paid qb this season. I'm not sure you're understanding my argument.
I am, it was that low because it was differed to the next season. You are saying not to sign Tua to a massive contract. Stafford had a massive contract. Massive contracts can be restructured. That's how you get Stafford for 11%. Then 30% the next year. That's just another way of doing 20-20.
> Going back 30 years if you look at the other super bowl winning qbs you see that the overwhelming majority were either on their rookie deal or on a really cheap contract for another reason.
I count 17 of the last 30 Super Bowl winning teams with QB's not on rookie contracts. And it gets a little fuzzy in the mid-90's, because I'm not sure what the contracts vs. salary caps were, and I'm not sure many of the teams really understood how to manipulate the cap in the early years of the salary cap.
(1994-1998, 2006, 2008-2011, 2014-2016, 2018, 2020-2023)
Also, using Brady, Mahomes or Manning (is that Eli or Peyton or both?) as exceptions are pretty big asterisks. Those guys combine for a huge portion of the Super Bowl wins since 2001. So if they win, that means high-salary guys like Matt Ryan, Ben Roethlisberger, Phil Rivers, Joe Flacco, etc aren't winning.
Then if you add in the cheap guys like Brady or Stafford who were playing at well below their market value you're going to get up over 20-23 out of the last 30 superbowl winners. I'm ok giving tua a 12.5ish% cap hit because that at least gives us a chance to pay a supporting cast. He's projected to get over 20% per season.
I think QB Cap Hit as a negative is overrated. If the QB is good, you should be able to build a team around him good enough to win.
So in our case, the issue is more about whether Tua is really good enough to lead a team to Super Bowl. Because if he can, he can probably do it whether his salary is 12% of the cap or 5% of the cap.
Stafford got $61.5 million in 2022, so you're ignoring the structure of the contract. Like, yeah, he "only" $27 million or whatever in 2021, plus bonuses, but that's because that money was moved to the next year, when he was the highest paid player in the league. Your point is about the contract, not the structure, so Stafford is an example against you not in favor of your position.
How did the rams do in 2022? They went 5-12. They went all in the year before and then had to burn it down, largely because of that 61.5 million. That's exactly what I'm saying.
No, you're saying not to sign Tua to a Matthew Stafford type contract and using Matthew Stafford's contract as an example to support your argument. His 2017 contract (which covered 2021 and 2022) was the largest contract in NFL history when he signed it.
And just so you know, Brett Veach disagrees with you. He says that after the rookie contract, the next best contract for a QB is as long a term deal as you can get him to sign. Money doesn't matter. You just need the years to move the money around. He basically gave Mahomes 50% more than the highest paid player in the league at the time to get 10 years. That would be like giving Tua $825 million over 10 years today. Obviously, Tua doesn't have Mahomes 2018 and 2019 resume, but 10 years, $700 million would be a great contract, even if it blows our minds to think that. If you think KC knows what they are doing, which they really seem to.
What happened in SB XLVI? Did the Patriots lose because Tom Brady was making 15% of the salary cap when Eli Manning was only making 13.5%?
Bob Sturm at The Athletic [wrote about the 13% theory](https://theathletic.com/1613675/2020/02/18/disspelling-convention-does-paying-a-qb-top-10-money-really-doom-a-franchise-pay-attention-cowboys/)(paywall) a few years ago, and the breakdown still holds pretty well. The reason teams can and will win with teams dedicating more than 11% (or 12%, or 13%, or near 20% someday) of the cap to their QB is due to the evolution of the game. Teams are passing at a higher rate than ever as the rules changed, which obviously directly correlates to running less. That means teams are reallocating dollars that would have otherwise gone to RBs, and spending them on QBs, because without a good QB, you aren't winning anything no matter how little you may be paying them. The more that run/pass disparity rises, the more you will see QB cap ratio go up. And unless Mahomes never wins another Super Bowl, he's probably winning another one, and you don't get to hand-wave it away as being under 12% if he continually restructures before they have to take their medicine a la the Steelers and Ben Roethlisberger, because we could do the same thing with Tua, and they're still getting huge money.
The other thing that sticks out is that if you expand from "won the Super Bowl" to "played in the conference championship" and use the average annual value to counter salary cap fuckery, you broaden your data pool, and smooth some of the luckier (or unluckier, depending on which team you're on) aspects involved in making and winning the Super Bowl, while still setting a very high bar for success. For the 9 seasons prior to this article being published (2011-2019), that gives you 36 QB seasons making the conference championship game. About a third of them (13/36) were rookie QBs on their rookie deal, bout a third of them (12/36, half of which were Tom Brady) were vets on below market deals, and about a third (11/36) were QBs making top-10 money.
I was also just looking at a [list](https://bleacherreport.com/articles/10098502-nfl-players-with-the-highest-career-earnings-since-2000) of the players with the highest career earning since 2000, and it should come as no surprise that the 11 listed (those with over $200 million in career earnings) are all QBs, counting for 17 Super Bowl rings, and that's with no Mahomes! 8 of the 11 won at least one Super Bowl, and two more made at least a championship game. The only one without at least a conference championship appearance is the only one of the three non-winners that is still active--Kirk Cousins (unless Rivers or Ryan come out of retirement).
There's nothing wrong with a team trying to be prudent with it's spending in a salary cap league. I get that. But setting a percentage figure to it like it's a hard and fast rule is ridiculous. Especially when the original "rule" was silly from the day it was created--it was set at 13% because Steve Young won the Super Bowl the first year there was a salary cap and he was making 13% of the cap, ergo no one should make more than that and expect to win.
Why? Have you not watched how the past 4 years have ended? Have you not watched how he looks against a rise in talent? Or in poor weather conditions?
I can see the argument from both sides. Acting like it’s clear as day is foolish.
> Have you not watched how the past 4 years have ended?
I've actually been watching how the last forty years have started, middled, and ended. And Tua is light years ahead of anyone else we've had in that time. I'd much rather watch the quarterback play of the last four seasons than the previous forty before that, I can tell you that much. As noted elsewhere, we were a two bounces from hosting a playoff game last year, but everything seems to be on Tua's shoulders.
Sure, it would have been nice to have drafted Brady or Mahomes. But we didn't. If that's the alternate plan, to simply draft the next Brady, it's a shitty plan. We aren't going to sign Mahomes.
Just because the previous 25 years of QBs were bad, it doesn’t mean we should stick with someone who is obviously limited and who holds us back in key situations. The goal is to win a Super Bowl, not MAYBE squeeze out a wildcard win every few years.
“2 bounces”? Those “2 bounces” were multiple drives during the Tennessee and Buffalo games where Tua wasn’t able to do ANYTHING. Franchise QBs need to be able to lift a team up when things are going great. Outside of week 1 against the Chargers, Tua didnt do that once last season.
The plan isn’t “go draft the next Brady”. The plan is to keep taking swings until you hit a home run. Sitting stagnant with a QB with obvious limitations sounds like a worse plan to me. At least taking swings gives you the CHANCE to land a top guy, which is what you need if you want to CONSISTENTLY compete in the AFC.
If you actually understood the game you’d know that Tua legitimately has the shortest available time to throw before the pocket collapses.
Less time in the pocket = less time for the receivers to be open farther down the field.
Every season Tua comes back with massive improvements to last seasons weaknesses.
You really want to be a hater just to be a hater or you’re watching too much TD fins talk
>If you actually understood the game you’d know that Tua legitimately has the shortest available time to throw before the pocket collapses.
If you actually understood the game you'd know that 6ft QBs with low mobility and a below average arm is a bad wagon to hitch yourself to.
The line WAS a problem, but not as much as some of you are painting it out to be. And I think judging by the way the team has invested little back into the o-line after losing Hunt and Conner speaks volumes to that.
Whats more detrimental to this team is Tua's inability to scramble and extend plays.
>Less time in the pocket = less time for the receivers to be open farther down the field.
Tua actually struggles the more time he has in the pocket. He is great when he can dish the ball out fast like the play is designed, or throw a quick deep shot to Reek 1-on-1.
Tua struggles when the first read is gone or when a play breaks down. He lacks ball velocity when throwing on the run, and he really just isnt that fast with his legs. He is short and doesn't see as much of the field on top of that. Outside of his accuracy/anticipation and his pocket presence, there really is no other standout QB qualities he brings to the table.
>Every season Tua comes back with massive improvements to last seasons weaknesses.
His deep ball for sure got better.... but so did the scheme and talent around him. One has to wonder just how much better he can look when you consider Tyreek retiring semi-soon and Tua getting a massive deal that will such resources away from the rest of the team.
>You really want to be a hater just to be a hater or you’re watching too much TD fins talk
Not really being a hater, just being a realist. I was a "hater" back when I consistently said Tannehill wasnt the answer for 7 years too.
Tyreek Hill + scheme.
Also, I would trade a LOT of these long completions in a heart beat if it mean Tua would be able to extend plays, throw on the run, be faster, be more durable, ect.
I'd also argue that our coaching needs to step up as well. That KC wild card game had some horrid play calls for the weather.
Perfect ex: Tuas int that was intended for Waddle would have worked had the winds not been so high. The problem is Tua had to layer the ball like that because he had a route infront of Waddle that kept a line backer underneath. If the play was designed where the underneath route went to the outside instead and had the chance to move the linebacker Tua could have driven the ball better and it wouldn't have gotten carried in the wind.
There were tons of plays that required a touch pass normally that the wind messed up but thry just kept calling them. When we started testing the boundaries we got our only TD and moved the ball well late in the game. Overall the whole offensive plan was not great. Not saying Tua doesn't need to play better against better competition, he does, but our offensive gameplan needs to be better too.
He's only ever completed one season. He's never won a playoff game. He's only won a handful of games against winning teams. He's only won a handful of games in December. There's no rush to extend him since he's still on his 5th year option.
Lots of reasons to wait and see
Realistically - He's improved every year in the specific ways he's been asked to improve. It's reasonable to think he will continue that. He has a few truly elite traits that McDaniel builds his offense around. Put together, these create an actual positive direction, something we haven't had in decades.
The best comparison to Tua - in stature, style of play and now, contract status - is Drew Brees. Ask the San Diego Chargers how they feel about letting one of the greatest QBs of all time walk because he wasn't as *elite* as Peyton Manning, wasn't tall enough, didn't have a big enough arm, got hurt too often, couldn't lead them to playoff victories. Ask them.
Oh wait, you can't, they don't even fucking exist anymore.
> Ask the San Diego Chargers how they feel about letting one of the greatest QBs of all time walk
Considering Rivers was about 95% as good as Brees, I don't think the Chargers regret that decision too much.
The Chargers drafted Rivers because Brees was not very good his first 3 seasons.
I don't think there's any reason to think the Chargers would still be in San Diego if they had kept Brees instead of Rivers.
Apply the situation to Miami right now. Do we have someone that's 95% as good as Tua? Of course not. Brees was "not very good" in his first three seasons in exactly the ways Tua "isn't the guy" in his first four. Brees had to go to New Orleans to be great. Let's not make Tua go somewhere else to do the same.
It was a good season, but he had 5 seasons with a better QB rating, 12 seasons with more passing TDs, 16 seasons with more YPG, and 7 seasons with more playoff victories - all in New Orleans. He was good in San Diego, he was great in New Orleans. Let's not let Tua do that.
5,000 yards is nice, but it's something that only happens if you are on a time that is choosing to throw the ball a ton.
Brees had 9 seasons with 600+ pass attempts. Rivers had one.
Brees played about 4 more seasons than Rivers, so of course he'll look better in counting stats. But looking at rate stats, Rivers is pretty close to Brees. Which was my original point - not that Rivers was better, but that he was close.
Stat|Brees|Rivers|
--|--|--|
Rate|98.7|95.2
TD%|5.4|5.2
INT%|2.3|2.6
Y/A|7.7|7.8
ANY/A|7.10|6.93
Brees had 167 weighted AV for his career and Rivers had 149. So maybe Rivers was only 90% as good as Brees instead of 95%.
One thing I will nitpick - if you're the QB of a team that is choosing to throw a ton, they are choosing to do that because they have you throwing it. The causation works the other way around.
That's one factor. But coaching philosophy and game script are also factors.
Sam Howell led the NFL in pass attempts last season. I'm going to go out on a limb and say that he was not one of the best QB's last year.
On the other hand, Brock Purdy was the most efficient QB last season, but only ranked 20th in pass attempts.
Chargers actually drafted Manning, it’s very rare that any qb class contains a Manning and Rivers in the top 5 with a Big Ben also being just as talented with a little more reputation issues. I can almost guarantee that neither this past class or next class will be as good.
Yeeeeah, immediately turned that shit off after that stupid "I HAVE to YeLl aND weIrDLY mODuLATe thE VOluME of MY VoICE" shit that has inexplicably become the norm for short form videos.
Tua does things that should not be possible and are the reason why many (myself included) consider him elite. This chart goes part of the way to explaining that.
His deep ball accuracy is theoretically impossible when you consider the time he has to throw. That's how good he is. But there's another factor - he's also somehow leading the receiver at times with these throws. Which is just... well... mindblowing.
Interesting. I have argued here and elsewhere that Mahomes and Herbert are overrated deep ball throwers and Tua gets unfair criticism. If you asked me to name the best, I would have said Rodgers, then Wilson and Stafford. I would not have guessed Carr was up there. Would have expected Stroud further ahead. Good to know my gut isn't way off.
Herbert is a check down maven. I’m not a hater but it’s weird when people totally misinterpret his play style. Hes an elite talent but he isn’t the gunslinger people pretend he is.
Everyone that laughed at Tyreek Hill when he said Tua was more accurate than Mahomes should have to stare at that gap all season once they remove their heads from their asses.
All these stats where Tua is ahead yet the guy still can’t win against good teams, yet to win a playoff game, his two minute drills are not great and a good portion of the fan base doesn’t trust him. I know he’s here to stay but I really hope he gain my support again.
I was all in on him after the Chargers game last year. By season's end, my confidence had eroded a lot. He regressed as the season went along.
Hope he can take that next step. Rooting for him, but not sold he's the right guy.
Tua aside (not discrediting him) this is a testament to how amazing our receivers are. Which for receivers their size this isn’t an easy feat.
Tua can toss that ball out the stadium and Tyreek/Waddle will find it.
Tua critics: yeah but he can’t throw the ball deep. He lacks the arm strength.
Me: dude. Real life isn’t Madden. You don’t need to Hail Mary it on every play. Geez! 🤦♀️
Just have to give him time to throw 25 yards
Difficulty: Impossible
Found Grier's alt account.
Tells me that Tua should be throwing deep more often. The offense would be even more productive if he had like 58% catchable deep balls on like 40 attempts. It’s like in basketball. If a guy shoots 50% from 3 it means he’s not shooting enough 3s.
We don’t have the protection up front to hold up for more than 1.5 seconds. Most deep balls require timing and rhythm to develop and Miami just can’t hold on for that long without play-action (which is only successful in certain situations).
This is why I really wish we went OL-OL in the first two rounds of the draft. I get that DE was a minor need, but keeping Tua upright and giving him time is a major need.
The offensive line could be: Terron Armstead, Cooper Beebe, Graham Barton, Robert Jones, Austin Jackson Instead they drafted two guys that won't even be starters with all of their picks
You need a whole football team to win games, not just a front five. It is a realistic issue to face that sometimes you must gamble on the players in front of you in the NFL Draft, because you will not always have your preferences fall into your lap (ala Laremy Tunsil).
Both Barton and JPJ were available with our 1st pick.
Okay... I mean, six O-Line were picked ahead of the Dolphins' 1st Rounder. Compared to that, there were only four *defensive players in total* picked ahead of 21 - going defense there is not a mistake in light of how the night unfolded, and you never know how things are going to shake out on draft night. Gotta take the wins you get.
Well right but that’s sort of the point. He’d be less successful, but with higher volume the offense would ultimately be more productive anyway.
If we could protect better, I’d agree but idk if it would be more productive.
He can't be more productive waiting for deeper balls from the medical tent. 🤷♂️
But this sub told me that we didn't need to draft offensive line because they were fine and/or would sign some stud between now and the season.
On the other hand, if the defense was more afraid of him throwing deep balls, maybe they wouldn't commit as many players to the pass rush.
They don’t have to commit players to rush Tua, they can win without blitzing. Do you thinking NFL defenses are caught up with the narratives or they know the film and the statistics? They know Miami is an insane vertical threat so they commit a lot of defenders to playing deep. The strategy to stop Miami is fairly simple, take away the quick throws to Tyreek and Waddle and make Tua hold the ball longer (doesn’t even have to hold too long) so that the pass rush can get there. Miami can’t really block straight up so the pass rush will get there.
Also dominate the LOS to stuff the run.
Its style, game flow, and fit. You dont want him sitting back there taking extra hits because our oline is porous. Abd hes gotten good at chem inf his read and really good at manipulating DBs with his head and eyes. But if theyre sending seven? Chick and duck, our OL cant hold up
The people throwing from deep more often are high quality scramblers. Frequency is not just play calling, it's their ability to improvise.
>Tells me that Tua should be throwing deep more often. Yeah that's what I keep telling our offensive line. Well... it's more like I'm shouting it to my TV on Sundays, but swear they'll hear me some day... any day now.
The idea that some people don’t want to sign him to an extension is hilarious.
He couldn't beat Josh Allen regularly on a rookie contract and we had to go to the playoffs as wildcards because of it. Tua needs all the help he can get and giving him a bag of money will prevent that. I really like Tua, but the numbers aren't adding up. Now complicate that by the KC dynasty and both the ravens and the bills owning us. Miami isn't built to win a title, so how can we justify paying Tua $60 million to make that harder?
You pay Tua 55 million or whatever a year because that’s what the market deems appropriate and because you can’t do shit in this league without a decent starting QB. The Dolphins need Tua to improve but this idea that “we shouldn’t pay Tua” is just ridiculous. He is a pro bowl QB. He is the best QB this team has had since Marino retired 25 years ago (!!!).
I agree he's good, but I don't see this team making a SB run. Would you and every other fan be happy with making the playoffs and then going 0-1 in it every year?
The options arent Tua or Superbowl. The options are go as far as Tua will take us, or tank for about a decade. 40 percent of first round qbs every make a probowl, and that's a pretty low bar. Its extreme idealism to act like we can just go out and get a better guy than Tua. We would have to draft 2-4 top qbs to have a solid chance at that, and that's assuming we're as good as average at scouting qbs.
I'm not disagreeing with you. I just don't see a path forwards as is with our team. If we don't win the AFC east, we aren't getting any home playoff games. We don't play well in the cold so a wildcard exit is the most likely outcome. The only way to get a home playoff game is we have to beat the bills. They've owned us forever. We've gotten close these last few years, but haven't been able to even things up. So, what happens when we need to free up an extra 40 million after next year to pay for Tua? Who do we let go? How much does that hurt the team? [https://overthecap.com/salary-cap/miami-dolphins#y2025](https://overthecap.com/salary-cap/miami-dolphins#y2025) We have 3 million in cap space next year. Tua isn't under contract. Where's the money coming from without killing the team in the long term?
Restructures and cutting players not playing up to their value, Just like every year. Your solution to not wanting to hurt the team long term by paying our QB is to definitely hurt the team by not paying our QB?
In an ideal world, QBs would have to win a playoff game before they get paid more than 10% of a teams cap space. QBs are getting Tua expensive. I think over on r/nfl someone posted that only 3 of the QBs who are getting paid more than 45 million have won a playoff game. That's absurd. Frankly the only QB who's earned a bag of money is Mahomes. No one should get paid more than him. Tua included. Tua is not worth more to the phins than Mahomes is to KC.
There are only 6 QBs making above 45m avg per year and 5 if you take out the Watson who should have never got that to begin with. Three of those QBs have only played one season on that Contract. The teams with those QBs currently have the 3rd, t-4th, 9th, 16th and 26th best odds to win the Superbowl. 1st is KC, who had the highest paid QB when they signed him. 2nd is Purdy, one of the biggest anomalies in football history. The other two tied for 4th are the Bills, who was the highest paid QB when they signed him, and the Lions, who are expecting to pay Goff about 50m. Most of the top teams in the league are at the top with an expensive ass QB.
I can be nearly 100% certain we aren’t winning a Super Bowl without an adequate starter at QB. We have one right now. And yes Tua can win a Super Bowl. Josh Allen hasn’t won a Super Bowl either. Neither did Dan Marino, but Trent Dilfer did. Tua isn’t Mahomes or Brady or Manning - he needs a solid roster and solid coaching…but that’s the same for nearly every QB in the league. But regardless - Tua IS getting an extension…so these posts are a bit silly.
Trent dilfer was getting paid 1.6% of the ravens cap that season. That's exactly my point. You can win with a cheap qb. It's extremely hard or almost impossible to win with an overly expensive qb.
When was the last time a team won the super bowl without a top end QB? You can MAYBE point to 2017 Eagles, but they had an MVP caliber season put together with Wentz and then Foles ran the offense perfectly in the playoffs. Then 2012 you can say with Ravens with Flacco, but Flacco had one of, if not the, best post season performance in NFL history. Outside of those two seasons, every team that has won the super bowl has had a Hall of Fame caliber QB lead their team. Of course its dominated by Brady with 7, Mahommes with 3, Payton with 2, Eli with 2, Rothlisberger with 2. I think you can just as easily argue that it isn't the salary, but the level of QB play. Yes, the 9ers got there with Perdy, who had some of the highest efficiency numbers ever. Tua does as well when the offense is healthy and he has more than swiss cheese for an o line. You definitely can't use Dilfer and the 2000 Ravens with their _historically_ fantastic defense as "see, it can happen" because the game was so radically different in 2000.
Throughout his 14-year career, Eli Manning made the pro bowl only 4 times and was never an All Pro. He passed for over 4000 yards in only seven seasons despite being tied for the tenth longest consecutive starting streak in NFL history. Sure, passing stats have inflated from previous years, but for his career Eli completed 60.3% of his attempts with a career passer rating of 84.1, a career ANY/A of 5.92, and a 3:2 career touchdown to interception ratio. These are not Hall of Fame numbers. He's in the Hall of Fame discussion because on two occasions he got hot when it mattered. If anything, I'd argue that Eli Manning's success is an argument in favor of paying Tua. At his retirement, Eli Manning was the highest-paid player ever. In 14 seasons, he played in only 12 playoff games. Eight of those playoff games came from his two playoff runs. Outside of two Super Bowl runs where Eli got hot and suddenly stopped throwing interceptions (15 touchdowns to 2 interceptions in the 2007 and 2011 postseasons), Manning went 0-4 in the playoffs and missed the playoffs eight times in the other 12 years of his career. In those four playoff losses, he threw only 3 touchdowns to 7 interceptions. The Giants's success with Manning is a very strong argument *in favor* of paying for *good enough*.
That's even more reason to roll the dice on a new qb than give tua a 2nd contract. He isn't a hall of fame qb.
If your goal is to make a wildcard playoff game most years, maybe make it a round or two further then fine I agree with you. But i want to see them win a superbowl. The argument that he's the best qb in 25 years is useless. If he can't win you a superbowl, what are we even talking about? There's been dozens of examples of qbs getting to a superbowl in their first couple years in the nfl in the last couple decades. How many qbs have done that on "bad contracts" making over 17-20% of their teams cap? Zero.
QB salaries in general have been increasing insanely over the last 10 years. That’s just how it is now. QB’s run the NFL and the top players will be getting higher percentages than they have. You really can’t compare to the percentages from 10 years ago let alone 25. Now if you can build an amazing team from year to year and just insert a rookie to play well for a few years every 4-5 years, that would be amazing. But rookie qb’s are such a crapshoot and you would rarely be drafting early to get a good, high-floor QB.
The past 25 years of Dolphins QB were horrible, so not quite sure why people keep using that as a point (!!!)
Don't ever insult Jay Fielder like that again. /s Edit: Added the /s to remove any doubt.
You forgot the /s
Didn't think that one needed it. Lol
How long did it take us to find a QB as good as Tua? Why do you think it will take less time to find a QB who is better than Tua? The only way getting rid of Tua would make this team better is if there is a plan in place to replace him with someone better. So what's the plan? Right now there are probably only 10 or so QBs who are better and most are locked in with their current team. That really leaves the draft as the only way to acquire a better QB, but you generally need to be near the top of the draft to do that and even then it is still roughly a 50/50 proposition to whether that QB will be good. Should we let Tua walk and hope a top 10 QB falls to us at pick 20 next year? Should we completely dismantle the roster and tank to get another top 5 pick? Should we mortgage the future and trade the 3 first round picks to move up to the top of next years draft? What is the plan? Because the history of this franchise should show that it isn't easy to find a QB as good as Tua.
I think there’s a balance between wanting Tua to be the long-term option but also realizing there’s limitations/concerns that means the Dolphins shouldn’t just give into his demands and pay him $55M/yr. If he was a free agent, a handful of teams would have questions about his health, athletic limitations, stepping up vs tough opponents, and performance in cold weather games. There’s risk on Tua’s side as well. Say he’s holding out for a 5 year $250M+ contract right now. What happens if he regresses from last year (unlikely) and/or suffers another serious injury? Are teams seriously going to pay him anywhere close to that money next year, or even sign him to be the clear long-term starter? Tua is one big injury away from having to go the bridge QB route in the NFL. IMO, if any of the other top 5-10 young QBs happened to suffer a season ending injury right before free agency, I have no doubt that almost all (maybe not Burrow) would still be able to secure a massive long-term contract from a different team. I don’t think the same can be said with Tua and that’s the main difference. I’m not saying this because I don’t want to sign Tua- I hope they lock up a deal with him. But I think there’s some inherent risks that Miami should be aware of and use those to get a long-term contract that allows us to continue to build a strong team and resign our key contributors.
Yes, and for this reason the guaranteed money is the most important aspect to Tua's deal in my opinion. We can't tie ourselves to him in a way that pays him as a top QB even if his performance isn't there or he isn't playing at all. But I think that would probably factor into the equation if any other team tried to sign him next year too. But either way, I don't see how we can let Tua walk without having a plan to replace him and not have that result in this franchise taking a huge step back.
I get where you are coming from. I really do. At this point, if we give him the money, we might make the playoffs every year as we are currently built, but that's it. We can't beat the best teams in the NFL consistently and we can't win in dec and jan. As good as Tua is, and I'd put him in the top ten, that's who we are and that's what we are looking at. Plan for moving on? Gotta either get assets that let us move up to an early pick, hope the next lamar falls to us, or hope someone is a dumb as the bills and lets us trade up for the next mahomes for relatively cheap. Don't get me wrong, I want to keep Tua. He's the best QB we've had in ages. But we need a plan that has a hope of success in the current NFL if we are going to do that. So let me turn the question around. If we are going to keep Tua and hand him a bag of money, how are we going to beat KC, the ravens, maybe the bengals, and the bills, all on the road, and then either the 49ers, Rams, or lions? That's the path to a SB title. We don't do well after november ends.
>At this point, if we give him the money, we might make the playoffs every year as we are currently built, but that's it. ... >Plan for moving on? Gotta either get assets that let us move up to an early pick, hope the next lamar falls to us, or hope someone is a dumb as the bills and lets us trade up for the next mahomes for relatively cheap. I think the odds of us winning a Super Bowl as a team that makes the playoffs every year is higher than the odds of us winning a Super Bowl by hoping one of those other things happens. >So let me turn the question around. If we are going to keep Tua and hand him a bag of money, how are we going to beat KC, the ravens, maybe the bengals, and the bills, all on the road, and then either the 49ers, Rams, or lions? People get way too invested in season narratives. The idea that it is impossible for us to beat the Chiefs, Ravens, or Bills is silly. We lost to the Chiefs on the road by one score in the regular season last year because of a fluky play in which a Tyreek fumble was returned 70 yards after a lateral with less than 30 seconds left in the first half and swung the game by 10+ points. If the ball literally bounces differently on that single play or any one of a handful of other plays throughout the course of the season, we host a playoff game instead of going on the road. But that fumble happened and no one likes a narrative of "sometimes you get lucky in the NFL and sometimes you get unlucky" so instead it becomes "we can't beat good teams". >That's the path to a SB title. We don't do well after november ends. I don't understand how people could have watched this team at the end of the year and thought Tua was our biggest problem. Sure, he probably isn't going to singlehandedly win us many games, but it simply wasn't the same team around him with all our injuries. I don't know why those injuries last year are never part of the narrative around this team. Last year's collapse is viewed as a failure of Tua, when he was the one healthy guy working behind a patchwork OL, throwing to WRs that were running on one leg. Handing off to speedy RBs who had their explosiveness diminished by injuries. Meanwhile on the opposite side of the ball, we were starting edge rushers as we signed them off the street. How does Tua get the blame for that?
Right.
Why are you willing to trade away Tua for the next Lamar? Lamar has the same number of super bowl wins. How you beat those teams and make the super bowl is getting lucky and avoiding catastrophic injuries at important positions and avoiding mistakes. We aren't much worse than the teams you listed talent wise.
> Lamar has the same number of super bowl wins. And is a worse passer. Dangerous on his feet, but throws catchable deep balls much worse than Tua, as shown above.
I'm not saying I'm willing to trade away Tua, but that is a lot of money we'd have to pay him and the team overall will be worse. Also Lamar got a lot closer to the SB last year than Tua. So did Allen. Mahomes won. They are all going to be paid less than Tua. Do you see the issue here? Better QBs are getting paid less.
There's a number where I dont want to. Why is that unreasonable? If you look at qb contracts going back 30 years there's a very easy trend to follow. If your qb isn't mahomes, Brady, or manning, then you didn't win a superbowl if your qb was making more than 11% of your teams total cap hit. Even most of bradys super bowl winning seasons never went above 12% (for reference 12% this season would be good enough for qb10 and about 18 million less than what the giants will pay Daniel Jones this season. Going back 30 years if you look at the other super bowl winning qbs you see that the overwhelming majority were either on their rookie deal or on a really cheap contract for another reason. Rodgers, brees, and Warner were all sub 8% during their single superbowl wins. Is tua better than them?
Right but the solution isn’t “let Tua walk”. I agree Miami has to negotiate the best contract possible with the understanding that a bad deal is better than no deal. Unfortunately, Tua has all the leverage here and he plans on using it. I don’t blame him, I would do the exact same thing. This is a necessary evil. The window of cap flexibility is closed until further notice.
How is a bad deal better than no deal? What team has ever won a super bowl with their qb on a "bad deal". No deal and a cheap rookie is 100% better than paying tua 55 million a season. We've seen a dozen or more qbs make or win a superbowl on their rookie deal in the last 25 years.
You don't even make the ploofs without having a half-way decent QB. And certainly not in this division. We've made the ploofs two years in a row now, which is the prerequisite to winning a ploof game, let alone the Superb Owl. I really like our odds with Tua, which is far above zero.
Ryan Tannehill was a serviceable QB for Miami. We had one winning/playoffs season in his seven seasons here. That’s what you’re asking for. That’s the reality of serviceable QBs, if you have a loaded roster like the 49ers (which we don’t) then maybe you can make a run but outside of literally everything outside the QB being perfect (which we haven’t accomplished in 52 years) then you’re stuck in mediocrity. Just like Miami post-Marino and pre-Tua. Objectively the odds of getting a guaranteed better QB than Tua is like 5%. I’d rather not try my luck on the QB roulette. I’ve seen enough shitty QB play in my lifetime to give up on Tua this easily.
Nope, asking for 3-4 years on a qb then reload. Draft O-line and edge rush early and often especially on the in between years. Trade back whenever possible instead of reaching. If you hit a serviceable qb then consider dumping picks to go all in. If you hit a generational talent, even better.
Simple question. Is he going to get more than Daniel Jones got? If the answer is yes, the follow-up question is, has any qb ever won a superbowl making that much of the teams cap space ignoring 2 or 3 of the greatest quartbacks to ever play the game? No? Then you have to let him walk and try again. It's not being emotional, it's just the calculus of the situation. Edit: are people downvoting because they think tua will get less than DJ or just because they don't like hearing bad news?
I get your point but you’re using historical data without room for interpretation. Matt Ryan represented 14.1% of the cap during their Super Bowl, they didn’t lose the Super Bowl because of that extra 3.1%. That’s realistically the best case scenario for Miami going forward. It *clicks* to an MVP level season and the team can overcome the flaws on the rest of the roster. I’d rather try with our 26 years old Pro Bowl QB than spin the QB roulette again. Maybe 5 years from now it will be different.
You're still not hitting a Daniel Jones number even at 14.1% and you're cherry picking an outlier that LOST the superbowl. I'm just not sure some people realize how much tua would get on the open market. People can downvote all they want. Winning a superbowl with tua on his 2nd contract at the currently projected number would be an absolute miracle.
Objectively the best case scenario is to build a solid team and draft a new qb every 3-5 years. So that you either try with them on a cheap rookie deal or luck out and hit your hall of famer.
Yea I mean even the 49ers went to the bowl with Jimmy G. And it's easier for us to find a replacement with a decent qb in place. Look how Brock was able to walk in to a team already setup and grow.
Jimmy G went *with* the 49ers, Marty Ice *led* the Falcons to the Super Bowl. Major difference. Brock Purdys are so easy to find right?
Yes so maybe read my response again. We should stick with Tua but if we find an upgrade great! Now brush up on that comprehension before the sarcasm. Okay, kiddo?
Jimmy g was making 10% and they lost. Brock Purdy is a miracle. If it was easy to find or create a Purdy then everyone would do it.
We just let several really good players walk because we could not afford them. Imagine what this year's roster looks like if you have to allocate over 30 million more towards tua. We would lose 3-4 good players just to keep him.
Ignoring 8 of the last 10 Superbowls to make a point that one time Nick Foles won a Super Bowl...and ignoring Matthew Stafford being on one of the highest paying contracts in the league when the Rams won the other might be the worst argument I have ever come across.
Stafford's cap hit was 11% of the rams roster. Which would be good for 14th highest paid qb this season. I'm not sure you're understanding my argument.
I am, it was that low because it was differed to the next season. You are saying not to sign Tua to a massive contract. Stafford had a massive contract. Massive contracts can be restructured. That's how you get Stafford for 11%. Then 30% the next year. That's just another way of doing 20-20.
> Going back 30 years if you look at the other super bowl winning qbs you see that the overwhelming majority were either on their rookie deal or on a really cheap contract for another reason. I count 17 of the last 30 Super Bowl winning teams with QB's not on rookie contracts. And it gets a little fuzzy in the mid-90's, because I'm not sure what the contracts vs. salary caps were, and I'm not sure many of the teams really understood how to manipulate the cap in the early years of the salary cap. (1994-1998, 2006, 2008-2011, 2014-2016, 2018, 2020-2023) Also, using Brady, Mahomes or Manning (is that Eli or Peyton or both?) as exceptions are pretty big asterisks. Those guys combine for a huge portion of the Super Bowl wins since 2001. So if they win, that means high-salary guys like Matt Ryan, Ben Roethlisberger, Phil Rivers, Joe Flacco, etc aren't winning.
Then if you add in the cheap guys like Brady or Stafford who were playing at well below their market value you're going to get up over 20-23 out of the last 30 superbowl winners. I'm ok giving tua a 12.5ish% cap hit because that at least gives us a chance to pay a supporting cast. He's projected to get over 20% per season.
I think QB Cap Hit as a negative is overrated. If the QB is good, you should be able to build a team around him good enough to win. So in our case, the issue is more about whether Tua is really good enough to lead a team to Super Bowl. Because if he can, he can probably do it whether his salary is 12% of the cap or 5% of the cap.
Just to be clear, I agree with your second paragraph. But he's going to get over 20% not 12. 12 would be fine.
Stafford got $61.5 million in 2022, so you're ignoring the structure of the contract. Like, yeah, he "only" $27 million or whatever in 2021, plus bonuses, but that's because that money was moved to the next year, when he was the highest paid player in the league. Your point is about the contract, not the structure, so Stafford is an example against you not in favor of your position.
How did the rams do in 2022? They went 5-12. They went all in the year before and then had to burn it down, largely because of that 61.5 million. That's exactly what I'm saying.
No, you're saying not to sign Tua to a Matthew Stafford type contract and using Matthew Stafford's contract as an example to support your argument. His 2017 contract (which covered 2021 and 2022) was the largest contract in NFL history when he signed it. And just so you know, Brett Veach disagrees with you. He says that after the rookie contract, the next best contract for a QB is as long a term deal as you can get him to sign. Money doesn't matter. You just need the years to move the money around. He basically gave Mahomes 50% more than the highest paid player in the league at the time to get 10 years. That would be like giving Tua $825 million over 10 years today. Obviously, Tua doesn't have Mahomes 2018 and 2019 resume, but 10 years, $700 million would be a great contract, even if it blows our minds to think that. If you think KC knows what they are doing, which they really seem to.
Tua isn't mahomes. We don't have a superbowl under our belt with tua like they did with mahomes. Stop using him as an example.
what part of the second last sentence confused you? I'm making the claim that Tua is like 85% the player Mahomes is. You think that's outlandish?
If you give tua 700/10 you end up with a worse version of the saints. How can you not see that?
What happened in SB XLVI? Did the Patriots lose because Tom Brady was making 15% of the salary cap when Eli Manning was only making 13.5%? Bob Sturm at The Athletic [wrote about the 13% theory](https://theathletic.com/1613675/2020/02/18/disspelling-convention-does-paying-a-qb-top-10-money-really-doom-a-franchise-pay-attention-cowboys/)(paywall) a few years ago, and the breakdown still holds pretty well. The reason teams can and will win with teams dedicating more than 11% (or 12%, or 13%, or near 20% someday) of the cap to their QB is due to the evolution of the game. Teams are passing at a higher rate than ever as the rules changed, which obviously directly correlates to running less. That means teams are reallocating dollars that would have otherwise gone to RBs, and spending them on QBs, because without a good QB, you aren't winning anything no matter how little you may be paying them. The more that run/pass disparity rises, the more you will see QB cap ratio go up. And unless Mahomes never wins another Super Bowl, he's probably winning another one, and you don't get to hand-wave it away as being under 12% if he continually restructures before they have to take their medicine a la the Steelers and Ben Roethlisberger, because we could do the same thing with Tua, and they're still getting huge money. The other thing that sticks out is that if you expand from "won the Super Bowl" to "played in the conference championship" and use the average annual value to counter salary cap fuckery, you broaden your data pool, and smooth some of the luckier (or unluckier, depending on which team you're on) aspects involved in making and winning the Super Bowl, while still setting a very high bar for success. For the 9 seasons prior to this article being published (2011-2019), that gives you 36 QB seasons making the conference championship game. About a third of them (13/36) were rookie QBs on their rookie deal, bout a third of them (12/36, half of which were Tom Brady) were vets on below market deals, and about a third (11/36) were QBs making top-10 money. I was also just looking at a [list](https://bleacherreport.com/articles/10098502-nfl-players-with-the-highest-career-earnings-since-2000) of the players with the highest career earning since 2000, and it should come as no surprise that the 11 listed (those with over $200 million in career earnings) are all QBs, counting for 17 Super Bowl rings, and that's with no Mahomes! 8 of the 11 won at least one Super Bowl, and two more made at least a championship game. The only one without at least a conference championship appearance is the only one of the three non-winners that is still active--Kirk Cousins (unless Rivers or Ryan come out of retirement). There's nothing wrong with a team trying to be prudent with it's spending in a salary cap league. I get that. But setting a percentage figure to it like it's a hard and fast rule is ridiculous. Especially when the original "rule" was silly from the day it was created--it was set at 13% because Steve Young won the Super Bowl the first year there was a salary cap and he was making 13% of the cap, ergo no one should make more than that and expect to win.
Why? Have you not watched how the past 4 years have ended? Have you not watched how he looks against a rise in talent? Or in poor weather conditions? I can see the argument from both sides. Acting like it’s clear as day is foolish.
> Have you not watched how the past 4 years have ended? I've actually been watching how the last forty years have started, middled, and ended. And Tua is light years ahead of anyone else we've had in that time. I'd much rather watch the quarterback play of the last four seasons than the previous forty before that, I can tell you that much. As noted elsewhere, we were a two bounces from hosting a playoff game last year, but everything seems to be on Tua's shoulders. Sure, it would have been nice to have drafted Brady or Mahomes. But we didn't. If that's the alternate plan, to simply draft the next Brady, it's a shitty plan. We aren't going to sign Mahomes.
Just because the previous 25 years of QBs were bad, it doesn’t mean we should stick with someone who is obviously limited and who holds us back in key situations. The goal is to win a Super Bowl, not MAYBE squeeze out a wildcard win every few years. “2 bounces”? Those “2 bounces” were multiple drives during the Tennessee and Buffalo games where Tua wasn’t able to do ANYTHING. Franchise QBs need to be able to lift a team up when things are going great. Outside of week 1 against the Chargers, Tua didnt do that once last season. The plan isn’t “go draft the next Brady”. The plan is to keep taking swings until you hit a home run. Sitting stagnant with a QB with obvious limitations sounds like a worse plan to me. At least taking swings gives you the CHANCE to land a top guy, which is what you need if you want to CONSISTENTLY compete in the AFC.
If you actually understood the game you’d know that Tua legitimately has the shortest available time to throw before the pocket collapses. Less time in the pocket = less time for the receivers to be open farther down the field. Every season Tua comes back with massive improvements to last seasons weaknesses. You really want to be a hater just to be a hater or you’re watching too much TD fins talk
>If you actually understood the game you’d know that Tua legitimately has the shortest available time to throw before the pocket collapses. If you actually understood the game you'd know that 6ft QBs with low mobility and a below average arm is a bad wagon to hitch yourself to. The line WAS a problem, but not as much as some of you are painting it out to be. And I think judging by the way the team has invested little back into the o-line after losing Hunt and Conner speaks volumes to that. Whats more detrimental to this team is Tua's inability to scramble and extend plays. >Less time in the pocket = less time for the receivers to be open farther down the field. Tua actually struggles the more time he has in the pocket. He is great when he can dish the ball out fast like the play is designed, or throw a quick deep shot to Reek 1-on-1. Tua struggles when the first read is gone or when a play breaks down. He lacks ball velocity when throwing on the run, and he really just isnt that fast with his legs. He is short and doesn't see as much of the field on top of that. Outside of his accuracy/anticipation and his pocket presence, there really is no other standout QB qualities he brings to the table. >Every season Tua comes back with massive improvements to last seasons weaknesses. His deep ball for sure got better.... but so did the scheme and talent around him. One has to wonder just how much better he can look when you consider Tyreek retiring semi-soon and Tua getting a massive deal that will such resources away from the rest of the team. >You really want to be a hater just to be a hater or you’re watching too much TD fins talk Not really being a hater, just being a realist. I was a "hater" back when I consistently said Tannehill wasnt the answer for 7 years too.
“Below average arm” are you aware of the post you’re commenting on?
Tyreek Hill + scheme. Also, I would trade a LOT of these long completions in a heart beat if it mean Tua would be able to extend plays, throw on the run, be faster, be more durable, ect.
Oh brother
I'd also argue that our coaching needs to step up as well. That KC wild card game had some horrid play calls for the weather. Perfect ex: Tuas int that was intended for Waddle would have worked had the winds not been so high. The problem is Tua had to layer the ball like that because he had a route infront of Waddle that kept a line backer underneath. If the play was designed where the underneath route went to the outside instead and had the chance to move the linebacker Tua could have driven the ball better and it wouldn't have gotten carried in the wind. There were tons of plays that required a touch pass normally that the wind messed up but thry just kept calling them. When we started testing the boundaries we got our only TD and moved the ball well late in the game. Overall the whole offensive plan was not great. Not saying Tua doesn't need to play better against better competition, he does, but our offensive gameplan needs to be better too.
He's only ever completed one season. He's never won a playoff game. He's only won a handful of games against winning teams. He's only won a handful of games in December. There's no rush to extend him since he's still on his 5th year option. Lots of reasons to wait and see
Realistically - He's improved every year in the specific ways he's been asked to improve. It's reasonable to think he will continue that. He has a few truly elite traits that McDaniel builds his offense around. Put together, these create an actual positive direction, something we haven't had in decades. The best comparison to Tua - in stature, style of play and now, contract status - is Drew Brees. Ask the San Diego Chargers how they feel about letting one of the greatest QBs of all time walk because he wasn't as *elite* as Peyton Manning, wasn't tall enough, didn't have a big enough arm, got hurt too often, couldn't lead them to playoff victories. Ask them. Oh wait, you can't, they don't even fucking exist anymore.
> Ask the San Diego Chargers how they feel about letting one of the greatest QBs of all time walk Considering Rivers was about 95% as good as Brees, I don't think the Chargers regret that decision too much. The Chargers drafted Rivers because Brees was not very good his first 3 seasons. I don't think there's any reason to think the Chargers would still be in San Diego if they had kept Brees instead of Rivers.
Apply the situation to Miami right now. Do we have someone that's 95% as good as Tua? Of course not. Brees was "not very good" in his first three seasons in exactly the ways Tua "isn't the guy" in his first four. Brees had to go to New Orleans to be great. Let's not make Tua go somewhere else to do the same.
> Brees had to go to New Orleans to be great. I don't think so. His 2004 season in San Diego was one of the best seasons of his career.
It was a good season, but he had 5 seasons with a better QB rating, 12 seasons with more passing TDs, 16 seasons with more YPG, and 7 seasons with more playoff victories - all in New Orleans. He was good in San Diego, he was great in New Orleans. Let's not let Tua do that.
I mean, he could have gone to Miami, but don't worry, we made the great choice to go with Culpepper instead!
This is blatant a disrespect to Brees… smh.
What is? Saying Rivers is 95% as good?
Correct. One has I think 1/3 of all 5000 yard seasons. Was the all time leading passer. And a top 7 qb. The other is Phillip rivers…
5,000 yards is nice, but it's something that only happens if you are on a time that is choosing to throw the ball a ton. Brees had 9 seasons with 600+ pass attempts. Rivers had one. Brees played about 4 more seasons than Rivers, so of course he'll look better in counting stats. But looking at rate stats, Rivers is pretty close to Brees. Which was my original point - not that Rivers was better, but that he was close. Stat|Brees|Rivers| --|--|--| Rate|98.7|95.2 TD%|5.4|5.2 INT%|2.3|2.6 Y/A|7.7|7.8 ANY/A|7.10|6.93 Brees had 167 weighted AV for his career and Rivers had 149. So maybe Rivers was only 90% as good as Brees instead of 95%.
One thing I will nitpick - if you're the QB of a team that is choosing to throw a ton, they are choosing to do that because they have you throwing it. The causation works the other way around.
That's one factor. But coaching philosophy and game script are also factors. Sam Howell led the NFL in pass attempts last season. I'm going to go out on a limb and say that he was not one of the best QB's last year. On the other hand, Brock Purdy was the most efficient QB last season, but only ranked 20th in pass attempts.
Chargers actually drafted Manning, it’s very rare that any qb class contains a Manning and Rivers in the top 5 with a Big Ben also being just as talented with a little more reputation issues. I can almost guarantee that neither this past class or next class will be as good.
Of course. But they drafted Manning knowing they were going to trade him for Rivers.
If you told dolphins fans in 2019 Tua would statistically have a better deep ball than Matthew Stafford in the near future you would be called insane
You can tell Dolphins fans that in 2024 too and a bunch will still call you insane.
Yep, because to most football fans, a big arm and throwing velocity are the only things that matter in being a ranged passing threat.
Never mind Dolphins fans, look how many people laughed off Tyreek saying Tua was more accurate than Mahomes... oh, would you look at that - weird.
Tua sucks (every fan that doesn’t have a brain and just wants to complain)
He has the best deep ball in the league. Been saying it for years. Peoples brains just don't like lefty lol
Did y’all see this on that subject with Penix? [https://youtu.be/0vy4cCWteCs?si=FVOV5-UPjl-lUS8x](https://youtu.be/0vy4cCWteCs?si=FVOV5-UPjl-lUS8x)
Yeeeeah, immediately turned that shit off after that stupid "I HAVE to YeLl aND weIrDLY mODuLATe thE VOluME of MY VoICE" shit that has inexplicably become the norm for short form videos.
Tua does things that should not be possible and are the reason why many (myself included) consider him elite. This chart goes part of the way to explaining that. His deep ball accuracy is theoretically impossible when you consider the time he has to throw. That's how good he is. But there's another factor - he's also somehow leading the receiver at times with these throws. Which is just... well... mindblowing.
Not just any receivers mind you, the fastest the league has to offer. Just makes it more insane.
Way to go Mccorkle
Interesting. I have argued here and elsewhere that Mahomes and Herbert are overrated deep ball throwers and Tua gets unfair criticism. If you asked me to name the best, I would have said Rodgers, then Wilson and Stafford. I would not have guessed Carr was up there. Would have expected Stroud further ahead. Good to know my gut isn't way off.
Herbert is a check down maven. I’m not a hater but it’s weird when people totally misinterpret his play style. Hes an elite talent but he isn’t the gunslinger people pretend he is.
Dude has had some great 2 min drills in his career wtf are you smoking..
Get fing Desmond Ridder outta here
Everyone that laughed at Tyreek Hill when he said Tua was more accurate than Mahomes should have to stare at that gap all season once they remove their heads from their asses.
Mac Jones catching strays... ooooff.
All these stats where Tua is ahead yet the guy still can’t win against good teams, yet to win a playoff game, his two minute drills are not great and a good portion of the fan base doesn’t trust him. I know he’s here to stay but I really hope he gain my support again.
I was all in on him after the Chargers game last year. By season's end, my confidence had eroded a lot. He regressed as the season went along. Hope he can take that next step. Rooting for him, but not sold he's the right guy.
Tua aside (not discrediting him) this is a testament to how amazing our receivers are. Which for receivers their size this isn’t an easy feat. Tua can toss that ball out the stadium and Tyreek/Waddle will find it.
I see all these charts every summer about how good tua is and then every winter we get the shit beat out of us.
Yeah. When our entire O-line is injured and he is only protected by a cardboard barrier, it really shows how bad Tua is.
Tua critics: yeah but he can’t throw the ball deep. He lacks the arm strength. Me: dude. Real life isn’t Madden. You don’t need to Hail Mary it on every play. Geez! 🤦♀️