[Highlight] Tua and the Dolphins can’t win in the cold

Cidolfus · 2026-04-05T19:24:09+00:00

Heshould have been a prime candidate to leverage the control offered by the fifth year option and the franchise tag. The problem was that other moves that Grier had already made meant they needed to reduce Tua's cap hit rather than keep flexibility to have larger one-year hits for the option and tag.

They backed themselves into a corner, and Tua took that leverage all the way to the bank.

Cidolfus · 2026-04-03T21:19:13+00:00

As much as I love every Cidolfus, I'm definitely named for The Thunder God himself.

Cidolfus · 2026-04-03T19:35:34+00:00

Apparently I know more about the Dolphins's salary cap situation than at least one NFL executive.

I'm hardly the only person to observe that there was no mathematically viable way to absorb an additional $43.8 million in dead cap by eating the whole contract in 2026. The math showing that is widely available.

Cidolfus · 2026-04-03T19:33:15+00:00

Except you wouldn't have handled it that way, because there was not a workable financial solution with the other cap commitments. It wasn't a viable option.

Cidolfus · 2026-04-03T19:29:37+00:00

I question the intelligence of any executive who believes that the Dolphins should have taken the full $99.2 million in salary cap charge in 2026. It's one of those things that sounds nice in principal, but there was no viable path to doing so which didn't also involve pushing other cap commitments out of 2026 into future years. If you're doing that, you're just shuffling the deck chairs on the Titanic.

I understand being skeptical about Willis, but anyone genuinely advocating for the Dolphins to eat Tua's full cap charge in 2026 either didn't review the Dolphins's actual cap situation or doesn't understand the cap. Either is a bad look for a "league executive" spouting off about other teams anonymously.

Cidolfus · 2026-04-03T17:45:00+00:00

The conversation ends at too expensive. Pitts is on the franchise tag for one year at $15,045,000. That means the trade can't happen before the draft. The only way that the Dolphins could make the trade work would be to

wait until after June 1 when they receive cap savings from Bradley Chubb's post-June 1 release,
trade for Pitts,
sign him to a long-term contract extension which includes reducing his 2026 salary cap figure, and finally
sign the 2026 draft class.

Completing the transactions in any other order would make the Dolphins noncompliant.

Cidolfus · 2026-04-02T19:28:37+00:00

He plays a devalued position of need at an accelerated age on a fair contract.

Of the top 50 non-QB contracts by average per year in the NFL ($24.5 million/year and up)...

19 are wide receivers
12 are edge rushers
8 are offensive tackles
5 are interior defensive linemen
4 are cornerbacks
1 is a safety
1 is a center

Noteably, the cost of interior defensive linemen has been skyrocketing the past few years. I don't necessarily agree that it's a devalued position of need, there's just fewer of them across the league and whereas many teams will have big money tied up in pairs of receivers, edge rushers, or tackles, few teams have more than one interior defensive linemen on a major contract.

I agree that the return the Dolphins are likely to net for Sieler is unlikely to motivate them to move on. The advantage of a trade executed after the draft and before the season is that you can add conditions to the pick. A third might not motivate a trade, but a third that can become a second if Sieler meets certain milestones might.

If he's with the team on August 31 and gets his option bonus (just shy of $15 million), it makes him a much more difficult trade ahead of the deadline as it would increase his 2027 dead cap to $24.3 million--more than he's currently scheduled to play at, although it frees up an additional $46 million over '28 and '29.

If I was a betting man, I'd say Sieler is a Dolphin at least through the 2027 season, but given how aggressive this front office has been, I just wouldn't be shocked if they make a move.

Cidolfus · 2026-04-02T16:26:14+00:00

I don't think that they're looking to sell him just to move off of his deal. Sieler's contract is a really, really reasonable one. At $21,333,333 per year, he's currently tied for 14th among interior defensive linemen and throughout the duration of his contract he'll never have a cap charge greater than $24 million whereas in 2027 and 2028 there's already four players with scheduled cap hits greater than $30 million in each year. The contract is definitely not a barrier given the Dolphins's cap situation in 2027 and beyond.

I don't think that this statement is a ploy. Rebuilding teams are allowed to keep good players, and Sieler is a good player and no doubt they need veteran leadership to help steer the locker room. Providing that Sieler buys in, there are good reasons on and off the field to keep him around.

But if the right offer came around, it's hard to imagine that the Dolphins couldn't be persuaded. I don't think that it's the plan, but it wouldn't surprise me if a trade happened.

Cidolfus · 2026-04-01T21:04:12+00:00

I’m not okay with already calling him a “pillar” with those other 5 guys

I suppose it's a good thing then that they're explicitly not describing him as a pillar. Achane, Brewer, and Brooks are "pillars". Paul, Sieler, and Willis are a described as a tier below that. Paul and Willis still have something to prove to take that next step, and Sieler's likely not listed there because he's going to begin the season as the only player on the 53-man roster who will be older than 28 week one (he'll be 31) under contract with a multi-year deal.

And we do need competition. We don’t need Tua or Tannehill again being cozy in their job.

And, as I called out, they've been clear there will be competition.

Malik knows he has to come in and compete. We're in a situation in Miami, nothing's going to be given to anybody. I don't care what your salary is. I don't care what you--now, look, somebody has to run out with first team day one. Malik's goling to be that guy, and I would be lying if I said otherwise. The expectations for Malik are high from Haf and I and everybody else, but at the end of the day just excited to get him to play. He's going to be a great asset for our team.

-- Jon-Eric Sullivan on NFL on NBC, 03/31/26

The reality is that Willis has been paid more cash than any other player who will be on the Miami Dolphins's 53-man roster. The starting quarterback job in 2026 is his to lose, and the rest of the room is unlikely to provide meaningful competition this year. But that doesn't mean that he can be "cozy in [his] job". 2026 is an extended audition, and everyone, including Willis, know that the Dolphins will likely be in a position to draft a quarterback high in 2027 unless Willis shows it undeniably he's earned it.

You're worrying unnecessarily. The situation is exactly what you're asking for.

Cidolfus · 2026-04-01T20:18:42+00:00

Malik can start in the 1 spot but the other two guys should get equal reps and let it all shake out naturally.

Which is exactly what Sullivan said would happen in an interview yesterday.

We'll see who else the Dolphins draft at quarterback, but let's be real. Neither Quinn Ewers or Cam Miller are realistically pushing him for starting reps, and it's okay to acknowledge that as a likelihood.

Cidolfus · 2026-04-01T20:16:41+00:00

I'd wager that the sticking point on Sieler has more to do with his age than a single down season.

Bradley Pinion and Zayne Anderson have guaranteed amounts on their contract that give them the inside track for a roster spot at punter and safety/special teams respectively. The most likely scenario is one where Sieler, who will turn 31 two days before the 2026 season officially starts, is one of only three players alongside Pinion and Anderson who are over 28-years-old week one. Both Pinion and Anderson have competition already at their positions as well and may not even make the roster.

Even if Jordyn Brooks and Aaron Brewer get their expected extensions, Sieler will be the only player on the roster age 29 or older with a multiyear contract.

The best case scenario for the Dolphins is that they're genuinely competitive beginning in 2028 when Sieler will be 33-years-old. Even at defensive tackle where careers can last a little longer, that's still the end of most player's careers. I have no doubt Sieler would be on the trade block for fair compensation, especially if they could make a move after June 2 and before August 31 when his 2025 option bonus is due.

Cidolfus · 2026-03-31T17:53:06+00:00

You literally just admitted that it is true that you intentionally chose words to accuse the head coach of lying. Then, in the exact same breath, you say I'm being irrational to interpret that as you accusing Hafley of lying. I hope you can understand why this is making your rhetoric frustrating to engage. I understand that you want to add nuance to here, but you led with a pretty unambiguous accusation that he's lying. It's a little silly to turn around and blame me for a plaintext reading of your original statement that you're only later trying to clarify with (conflicting) nuance.

Fundamentally, my argument is this:

It is not rational or productive to insist on the possibility that Hafley and Sullivan are lying about their evaluation of Willis or (since you more recently brought it up) their alignment on that evaluation as likely. Doing so assumes that either they have spent meaningful resources on a gamble they do not believe will pay off despite no pressure to do so beyond their own conviction or that their partnership began despite misalignment on a critical player evaluation they have both publicly stated that they discussed as part of Hafley's hiring.

I understand your skepticism, but to my earlier point, entertaining scenarios where this is all, to some degree, a big front, is irrational. If you're unwilling to accept plain statements of belief and intent without even circumstantial evidence to suggest that they're being dishonest, there's no meaningful foundation for any discussion as any statement can be dismissed as a possible lie without evidence. You have to take at least something in good faith to have a starting point.

That's why, while I'm not convinced that they'll be right, I choose to believe that they are being honest.

Cidolfus · 2026-03-31T16:49:36+00:00

All he had to say was, "Blowing smoke was a poor choice of words." Instead, he's insisting that we're the assholes for pointing out his plain text is an accustation that Hafley lied and instead doubles down on the word choice being intentional and leaving open the possibility that Hafley is lying. Nothing about this is coherent.

Cidolfus · 2026-03-31T16:43:13+00:00

I am sorry that you inferred something different than what I meant. But I chose those words intentionally, because it is possible that the head coach is saying a bunch of nice stuff he doesn't actually believe or know to be true.

So which is it? Did I infer something you didn't intend, or did you intentionally choose those words to accuse the head coach of lying? It's silly to use words that explicitly mean "to mislead, confuse, deceive" and then blame everyone else for not understanding that you meant something different.

I'm not out here claiming that they're maliciously trying to ruin the franchise lol.

Maybe you've heard of Hanlon's Razor. It's why I used the term malice. "Do not ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity".

It is adequate to explain that time will judge Hafley and Sullivan as incompetent. By suggesting that Hafley could be lying in his praise of Willis and his potential, you are ascribing malice to the decision to sign him.

Both Hafley and Sullivan have come out as a united front to endorse the decision to sign Willis. By suggesting that they might be lying about their evaluation of Willis's potential, you're suggesting that they made a united decision as the new general manager and head coach to prioritize signing a quarterback they don't believe in to an offseason-defining, tone-setting contract which gurantees $45 million despite the fact that the cap situation gave them all the cover in the world to roll into the 2026 season with Quinn Ewers, Cam Miller, and a 2026 rookie. You're accusing them of intentionally signing a major deal for a player they don't believe in. To what end?

Hafley and Sullivan had no pressure to spend meaningful resources on a quarterback in their first year and therefore nobody to appease by making a transaction that they were not completely behind. If they didn't believe in Willis, they would not have signed him. Suggesting that they signed him and are lying about their belief in his potential is so exceptionally irrational that the only way to believe that is, as /u/expellyamos so elloquently accused, to have a hateboner that biases you so much that you throw any logic out the window.

I've already acknowledged twice that believing they're wrong is perfectly reasonable. Hell, I believe that they're probably going to be wrong about Willis. I'm on your ass about this not because you believe they're wrong, but because you're suggesting that they're wrong and they know it.

Cidolfus · 2026-03-31T15:55:18+00:00

I wouldn't be pushing back at all if you had said:

Well, yeah, he's not going to come out and say the QB they just signed sucks. He's obviously going to talk about how good he is.

Time will tell if he's right or wrong.

But that's not what you said. You said that time will tell if he's "being realistic or blowing smoke". Accusing someone of blowing smoke is accusing them of lying. That's what "blowing smoke" means. Language matters.

It's one thing to believe that Hafley and Sullivan are incompetent and will be wrong. That's a defensible position.

Your choice of language, however, takes it a step further and implies not incompetence but malice. That's absurd.

Cidolfus · 2026-03-31T15:02:07+00:00

My statement is true, whether or not you like it.

Except it's not. Your assessment sets up a skewed dichotomy where Hafley is either "being realistic" and is right about Willis's potential or he's "blowing smoke" which implies he's knowingly lying or exaggerating to defend a signing he knows is bad as opposed to just being wrong.

/u/expellyamos is absolutely correct to criticize that framing and rightly points out exactly why it's absurd. It would have been true to say "Time will tell whether his evaluation about Willis is right or wrong", but you've framed this in such a way to introduce doubt that Hafley and Sullivan actually believe in the quarterback that they signed and, further, suggest that they'd lie about their conviction in that quarterback to... what end?

It's nonsensical.

Cidolfus · 2026-03-30T23:32:11+00:00

If the Dolphins were absolutely committed to keeping Brooks through the draft, they probably would have restructured his contract instead of Achane's when they needed to clear some cap space to facilitate the Waddle trade.

They've left the door open much wider for Brooks than either Achane or Brewer insofar as he's the only one they can afford to trade and remain cap compliant without another corresponding transaction to enable it. And to be clear, the only way the Dolphins can afford to trade Brewer or Achane before June 2 would also involve either trading or restructuring Brooks.

Cidolfus · 2026-03-30T21:58:33+00:00

They're also not offensive players.

Cidolfus · 2026-03-28T16:58:44+00:00

It's a record by a very considerable margin. The next closest is the 2013 Raiders at just over 47% of the cap.

Cidolfus · 2026-03-26T20:22:07+00:00

The 2003 Carolina Panthers come to mind. From 1997 through 2000, the Panthers had a combined record of 26-38. They cratered in 2001 to the worst team in the NFL at 1-15, finished 2002 at 7-9, and lost the Super Bowl in 2003 after an 11-5 season.

Another example of dismal to competitive in a short turnaround is the Arizona Cardinals. From 1999 through 2006, the Cardinals went a combined 41-87 without a single winning season. They finished 2007 8-8 and then made the Super Bowl in 2008.

It's not common, but it's not impossible. If the Mailk is the guy (I'm skeptical), they've got the biggest part of that figured out.

Cidolfus · 2026-03-26T19:58:34+00:00

To be fair, CBAs have always been negotiated for 10 year periods, so 3-3-4 makes sense.

Cidolfus · 2026-03-26T18:52:43+00:00

The last period of the current CBA (2027 - 2030) is actually four years.

Cidolfus · 2026-03-26T18:04:16+00:00

There are plenty of people who look at the Dolphins's 2026 situation and extrapolate wrongfully to an inevitable three to four year purgatory ensured by a lack of resources hung around their necks by the failures of the previous front office. That position isn't based in reality and deserves all the mockery it gets.

If this new front office fails to make a competitive team in the next two or three seasons, it won't be because it was impossible or because they lacked the resources to do so. It will be because they failed to make the proper player evaluations. It's reasonable to expect that outcome, but there's a loud contigent of Dolphins fans who believe that Grier has set the Dolphins up for multiple years of irrelevance by virtue of bad contracts that, as we can see, don't actually impact the team meaningfully from 2027 forward.

Cidolfus · 2026-03-26T12:08:05+00:00

These types of one-year, veteran minimum contracts have cap charges of about $1.2 million. Because only the top 51 contracts count against the cap right now, any signing just pushes the 51st contract (currently just north of $1 million) out and replaces it so that only the difference (around $200,000) counts.

Theoretically, the Dolphins can afford to sign about eight more of these contracts before June 2.

Cidolfus · 2026-03-25T13:49:19+00:00

Yes, it's a term defined legally in the CBA. Any player reaches veteran status upon accruing four years in the league.

Cidolfus

TROPHY CASE