PDA

View Full Version : To Much of a Reach?



insom187
03-07-2012, 03:05 AM
As I've read more and more about Ryan Tannehill I really like the idea of him as the future QB in Miami but I'm worried taking him at 8 is just too high to take him. Draft 'experts' around the internets seem to think he's currently got 2nd round talent but will be taken early simply because need of a franchise QB is so great some teams won't/can't wait. I honestly think Miami could trade back if the right players drop to us at #8, picking up more picks to help fill needs on the team and still legitimately draft Tannehill later in the first, but Seattle might just take him at #12 and we're again hoping a 2nd/3rd round QB will be our savior. In the end I guess my question is whether we should draft him at #8 because we're that serious about getting a franchise QB so it's worth the risk or take someone that still fills a need (pass rush for example) but is spotted nicely around our #8 pick?

Buff
03-07-2012, 07:54 AM
If he is there at our pick, which I dont think he will be, then he has to be considered, especially if we land Manning.

However.....

Will he be the bpa? Probably not. He will fill a huge need no doubt, but if Blackmon, Claiborne, Ingram, Richardson are available, do we take Tannehill?
I would prefer of those 5 either Claiborne or Ingram, and I think only Ingram or Richardson will be available when we pick. In that case I would take Ingram.

The big thing is is that he is the 3rd ranked qb in the draft where as Blackmon, Claiborne, ingram & Richardson are generally regarded as the best players at there spots in the draft.

But I can see Miami taking Tannehill if he is available.

Zounds
03-07-2012, 09:08 AM
Tannehill at 8 is a reach imo, but if the Fins drafted him at pick 8, I would give them a free pass because our offensive coordinator has coached him in college and knows what kind of player he is.

If Washington doesnt sign Manning or Flynn, I believe they will pick Tannehill at 6 in fear that Seattle might draft him at 12.

Fintastic2124
03-07-2012, 09:48 AM
I'm all about taking Ingram, but if Tannehill is what thy wanna do, then trade back. I'll support these guys regardless.

Kdawg954
03-07-2012, 10:31 AM
In today's NFL, there really is no such thing as "too much of a reach" when talking about drafting a potential future franchise QB (or the guy you perceive to be one). Last year's draft should have illustrated that. If Miami wants Tannehill, they need to A. Hope he gets by the Skins and Jags and B. Hope Seattle or any other sleeper team doesn't trade up to take him from us.

You can't dislike a QB pick that early because you feel you could have traded back a few spots, pick up a 3rd or 4th round pick and still get him . . . the risk of losing him isn't worth that extra pick.

And any expert saying he has 2nd round talent is a bit off, the dude is a first round talent all the way, he is just extremely raw, I believe 2 years playing QB but ideal for our situation and can sit behind Peyton Manning (if he comes here) and learn while remaining in the system he is comfortable with in Mike Sherman's offense. Hell I am starting to see mocks that push Osweller, Cousins and Weeden all in the top 40 . . . that is the importance of making sure you have a franchise QB on your roster or a guy who has the tools to become one or a guy who think can efficiently run your offense.

And next year, when Matt Moore probably moves on, Tannehill can take that #2 role and we can draft a late round guy to develop as well or maybe Devlin sticks somehow . . . investing a pick in a late round QB is such a smart investment right now, I can't understand why more teams don't do it.

All of it is speculation right now, maybe we get Manning and feel comfortable not addressing the future this year and wanna put the marbles on making a big push for the Super Bowl this season while we have Marshall, Bush, Wake, Long and guys with 2 years or less on their contracts. I dunno, either way lets just do something different this year, because what we have been doing the last decade plus hasn't worked.

TedSlimmJr
03-07-2012, 10:43 AM
He's not 2nd round talent, but he deserves a 2nd round grade due to other factors when you total everything up. If you reach for him in the top 10... you better be ready to pass up some better players when you do it.

All of these QB's have been getting pushed up draft boards recently when the reality is most of this particular bunch will be lucky to have much more than a cup of coffee in the NFL.


I like Tannehill, but I thought Mark Schlabach put it best when he quipped... "Whoever drafts Ryan Tannehill might want to think about drafting another quarterback to play the 2nd half".... :lol:

Austin Tatious
03-07-2012, 02:28 PM
Tannehill is a confusing prospect. Here is what I see.

Pros:

Good size and athletic ability.
Very bright guy.
Competitor.
Solid but not outstanding arm.
Great footwork in the pocket.
Hangs in there against the pass rush.

Cons:
Limited experience.
Stares down receivers.
Bad decisions.
Throws a ton of picks.
Trouble closing out and winning games.
Did not do his best work against better competition.
Weird throwing motion, sometimes reminiscent of Blaine Gabbert
Can throw with a 3/4 delivery, meaning he gets balls batted down

Bottom line:

I see a boom or bust guy. He is a project, and will need development. He didn't have much talent around him, frankly, on either side of the ball. With a better defense, he may have won more games. With better weapons around him, maybe he would have performed better. But he has tools and could develop nicely. Look at how many picks Matt Ryan threw in college.

uscalum
03-07-2012, 03:01 PM
Tannehill in the first 6 rounds is a reach

j-off-her-doll
03-07-2012, 04:29 PM
He's not 2nd round talent, but he deserves a 2nd round grade due to other factors when you total everything up. If you reach for him in the top 10... you better be ready to pass up some better players when you do it.

All of these QB's have been getting pushed up draft boards recently when the reality is most of this particular bunch will be lucky to have much more than a cup of coffee in the NFL.


I like Tannehill, but I thought Mark Schlabach put it best when he quipped... "Whoever drafts Ryan Tannehill might want to think about drafting another quarterback to play the 2nd half".... :lol:

I think you make some great points here, and I know you've been making them for months now - with specific regard to Tannehill.

There are a few aspects, though, that make me OK with Tannehill, and I'd like your take on them:

1. We have a coaching staff now that has proven success with developing QB's.
2. If we sign Manning, Tannehill will have the luxury of sitting and learning without a ton of pressure.
3. M. Moore played OK last year. I mean, he wasn't a supernova or anything, but I think he's probably better than Alex Smith. If we don't sign Manning, Tannehill could still have some time to develop.
4. Tannehill has shown to be a pretty quick study, and he has all the physical tools you'd want. I think you mentioned that there are some small things to tweak in his delivery - and that any half-decent coach could iron them out in a couple weeks.
5. The above listed factors - to me - create a kind of perfect storm, where I would be OK drafting a player I otherwise would not be OK drafting at that position. In fact, I'd be happy to draft him and let him sit an learn under some coaches who really know how to develop the QB position.

. . .

Passing up a T. Richardson or a Kuechly would be hard for me to stomach, but I think the potential return is worth the risk - given the staff, player, and situation we're talking about.