A different mind set now maybe?

[bsfins]

I started to type this in the Ricky thread,but I thought it deserved it's own topic.

Do you think that now Ricky has failed his drug tests,do you think our interest has changed in T.Owens?

I think that some people thought,Look what Nick Saban did with Ricky,he can do the same with T.O.

[Brian Fein]

No - Not in the least...



I thought going after T.O. was a mistake before, and I still think its a mistake.

[Philly Fin Fan]

TO was not what this team needs to get to the next level. Getting TO in here would've been the type of thing I would've expected from Wanny (we only need one more player).

[bsfins]

I didn't want him before,and still don't.I'm hoping that Nick,will see this as a big enough of a non football media distraction,and not want to bring T.O. in.

[YoFuggedaboutit]

I think it changes our mindset in the following manner:

Upgrading the QB position is now even more important than before. 
Also, finding a solid backup for Ronnie would be an important thing... because Travis Minor aint it. 

[Predatory_Fins]

I'd be crazy if I said it wouldn't be interesting to see TO in aqua and orange for a SEASON.  I don't see the harm in a one year deal.  Trade for or draft a gunslinger, and TO is happy.  Imagine that TO on one side, Chambers on the other, Booker lined up as flanker, and brown becomes rushing champion.  If the price is right for one year, I say go for it.

[jtex316]

I don't see the harm in a one year deal.

Heh.  T.O. basically destroyed the Eagles in one full NFL season.  That's all he needs - one year.

[TonyB0D]

^^^^^

he did it in MUCH less than a year...only a few games!!

[Thundergod]

Heh.  T.O. basically destroyed the Eagles in one full NFL season.  That's all he needs - one year.

Yup,  beacause he was the defense, qb who went down injured and the guy who called all the plays.   

You people need to quit with this one player makes a huge difference crap, there are 50 + players on an NFL team,  one guy can't win it all.   

[JVides]

I view it this way:

The Miami Dolphins are not going to win the Super Bowl next year without some major improvements.  Major improvements tend to cost money.  T.O. may be an exception to that rule, since most teams don't seem to want him.  He's been cowed by this experience, and may be controllable.  He's an upgrade over Marty Booker (even though I actually like Booker, he's not one of the 3 best WR in the NFL, like Owens is). 

You bring him in if you can get him cheap, and you cut him at the first sign of trouble.  Like Ricky last year, he'd be low risk, high reward.  He's not going to cut a swath through the Dolphins training room, destroying everyone's confidence, in one year.  I have to trust that Saban would cut Owens' balls off if he tried.

The team can't win a Super Bowl without him as presently constituted, but his added firepower (and some improvements on the defensive secondary and O-Line) could make the difference. 

[fyo]

The team can't win a Super Bowl without him as presently constituted, but his added firepower (and some improvements on the defensive secondary and O-Line) could make the difference. 

So now we're one player away from the Super Bowl again? (from WINNING the Super Bowl, even)

[JVides]

So now we're one player away from the Super Bowl again? (from WINNING the Super Bowl, even)

No, man!  I stated that getting a player of his caliber cheap would allow the team to spend in other areas of need (like O-line and secondary).  Let's say the team gets a guy like Steve Hutchinson to lock up one side of the line,  finds depth at defensive tackle, and is able to sign T.O. to an incentive-heavy deal.  The team drafts a nice safety / corner in the first round and...what?  You're telling me they're going 8-8?

Owens is low risk / high reward.  He's not gonna get suspended for drugs.  He's not gonna beat up his girlfriend.  He's not gonna get into bar fights.  He may even shut his yap long enough to have a good year.  He's looking for one last pay day, so he needs to be on his best behavior.  He acts up, you cut him.  What's the problem?

[fyo]

No, man!  I stated that getting a player of his caliber cheap would allow the team to spend in other areas of need (like O-line and secondary).  Let's say the team gets a guy like Steve Hutchinson to lock up one side of the line,  finds depth at defensive tackle, and is able to sign T.O. to an incentive-heavy deal.  The team drafts a nice safety / corner in the first round and...what?  You're telling me they're going 8-8?

So one player (gotten CHEAPLY) away from winning the Super Bowl?

-fyo

[JVides]

So one player (gotten CHEAPLY) away from winning the Super Bowl?

I will use small words, since you obviously cannot read. 
One player gotten cheaply allows the team to get other players it might not be able to afford under the salary cap had the first player (T.O.) come at "market value".  Instead of having as $8 million cap hit on a game breaking wide receiver, maybe the team gets him for a $3 million cap hit and has another $ 5 million to spend on another contributor (like Hutchinson).  (that's 2 players already...I keep going, too).  Defensive tackle is one of the cheapest positions in the NFL, and run stoppers are a dime a dozen.  You pick up some depth there with the savings you got from Owens.

Then you draft your 7 rookies and hope you get 3 or 4 starters there.  So now I'm up to 5 or 6 palyers.  Is it sinking in yet, or must I use crayons?  NEVER did I say the team was one player away.  I said Owens may be obtained cheaply, and the amount saved in obtaining him (compared to his "usual" price) could be allocated to filling other needs.

You may hate that he speaks out about whatever's on his mind, but you cannot deny he's a better receiver than anyone on the Dolphins' roster, and if he's obtained cheaply and his head's on straight, he'll be an excellent asset.

For the record (AGAIN) not one player:  The team needs a QB, a LT, an OG / C, a DT, a CB, and a S.  The QB issues are mitigated somewhat if you're throwing to one of the top receivers of the last 10 years and your other receicer is Chris Cambers.   Your savings in obtaining a guy like TO could be used on getting 2 or 3 of the OTHER needs I just listed.  Got it, dude?

[fyo]

Jvides, I'm not looking to get into an argument here, simply trying to point out that the "one player away" movement is (again) going strong in southern Florida. Let me quote just one sentence from you, and I believe I do understand what you mean (!!). I am, however, not even remotely of the same opinion. Let's get to that quote:

The team can't win a Super Bowl without him as presently constituted, but his added firepower (and some improvements on the defensive secondary and O-Line) could make the difference.

Ok, I take this, in conjunction with your other statements, to mean that with TO attained cheaply, we could address "some improvements on the defensive secondary and O-Line", and at that point be in a position to win the Super Bowl.

While not stricktly "one player away", it certainly whiffs of it and I vehemently disagree ;-)

We were 8-8 last year and while we lost some games we should have won, we also won some we should have lost. The Patsies also wouldn't have given us the final win, if we had been in a better position, so in terms of ability, I think the 8-8 is probably a bit of an overachievement. Not much, perhaps, but if we stayed at the same level, 7-9 would probably be a more realistic expectation.

There's a heck of a difference between that and winning the big one. Much more than just one player "and some improvements on the defensive secondary and O-Line".

To make a serious run at the Super Bowl, we'd need to upgrade numerous positions, most notably quarterback, a position that isn't even mentioned by you. Yeah, the Bucs won with (in spite of?) Brad Johnson, but we'd need a complete defensive overhaul to match the offensive capabilities of that Bucs defense. It might make for an interesting thread in itself, "What would we need to win the Super Bowl?", but suffice it to say that I cannot agree with your position.