PDA

View Full Version : so you still think ryan tannehills not the top target in the draft...



hooshoops
04-02-2012, 07:50 AM
check out what peter king has to say here...

http://www.cnnsi.com/2012/writers/peter_king/04/01/bounty/1.html

ROADRUNNER
04-02-2012, 07:56 AM
We shall find out on 26th april.............

ryanosaur2000
04-02-2012, 07:57 AM
I don't think that many Miami fans are in any doubt that we will take Tannehill if he is still there at 8. The question is - will he be there at 8?

SuperMarksBros.
04-02-2012, 08:18 AM
I remember all the talk in 2007 about how much effort we were putting into Brady Quinn. Our QB coach at the time was working heavily with Quinn leading up to the draft.

Buff
04-02-2012, 08:28 AM
I think he will be gone. If the browns don't take him, someone will trade up with the jags or rams. My bet will be Philly or the cards.

datruth55
04-02-2012, 08:49 AM
I don't think that many Miami fans are in any doubt that we will take Tannehill if he is still there at 8. The question is - will he be there at 8?
If he's not there at #8 and Cleveland does take him I'm trying to figure out how we get Trent Richardson...kid is an elite player and I would love to get him but I have a hard time seeing him get past Tampa Bay unless the Bucs go with another elite player that also fills a need in Claiborne. Either way if Richardson makes it to Jacksonville's spot I see a few teams trading up for him there.

Batroc
04-02-2012, 09:01 AM
Tannehill is the target. This FO has taken so much heat for not taking Ryan and missing out on Manning and Flynn ( who they rightfully passed on IMO) that they are willing to take a chance on Tannehill. Now Tannehill may not be a sharpened qb prospect like Ryan was and he's obviously no Manning, but I think if he sits for a year this might be a solid choice because of Sherman. I say pull the trigger because what we've done so far hasn't worked.

MarshallFin1
04-02-2012, 09:03 AM
yea hes a possible target but not in the 1st round.

Batroc
04-02-2012, 09:24 AM
yea hes a possible target but not in the 1st round.

Unfortunately his draft stock has risen dramatically. If they want him they'll have to pull the trigger at #8.

ryanosaur2000
04-02-2012, 09:25 AM
yea hes a possible target but not in the 1st round.

I don't think you are right on this one mate. Even if you feel he is not worth a first rounder, 99% of people feel that he will not make it beyond the top ten at this stage. For a few months now the majority of analysts have had him going in the first round and his pro-day has elevated his draft stock. I am not saying that he is worth a first rounder, rather that it is almost a certainty that he will go in the first and that if he is there at 8 the Phins will take him.

ryanosaur2000
04-02-2012, 09:29 AM
If he's not there at #8 and Cleveland does take him I'm trying to figure out how we get Trent Richardson...kid is an elite player and I would love to get him but I have a hard time seeing him get past Tampa Bay unless the Bucs go with another elite player that also fills a need in Claiborne. Either way if Richardson makes it to Jacksonville's spot I see a few teams trading up for him there.

If Tannehill is gone at 8, I can see us trying to trade down for more picks. You are right, Richardson is elite, but is running back a position of need? I don't think so - we have Bush, Thomas and Slaton currently on the roster. I can see us picking up the best OL or pass rusher available if we cannot get Tannehill or trade out of the 8th spot.

MarshallFin1
04-02-2012, 09:57 AM
Unfortunately his draft stock has risen dramatically. If they want him they'll have to pull the trigger at #8.

lol, because some draft guru says we should take him in the first to get him we have to listen to them, remember ryan leaf and jamarcus russell what the draft gurus said about them?? I looked at plenty of hightlights and hes a good prospect but to be honest i compare him alot to matt moore, only thing is he is much younger so he can get better but hes arm strength just isnt worth a 1st round pick. I just dont believe he is worth a top 10 pick, i rather us go with matt moore this season and pick a top 10 talent richardson/clainborne/floyd and take our chances with gettin weeden/tannenhill with a 2nd.

hooshoops
04-02-2012, 10:13 AM
good lord are some of you guys naive...this isn't about if YOU think tannehills worth a top 10 pick...this is jeff ieland and sherman...and maybe philbin also...anyways...if he's on the board i'd prepare for tannehill to be the pick and don't sleep on a move to #7 to make sure it happens

this top pick if he's there is locked up...

J Tes
04-02-2012, 10:19 AM
lol, because some draft guru says we should take him in the first to get him we have to listen to them, remember ryan leaf and jamarcus russell what the draft gurus said about them?? I looked at plenty of hightlights and hes a good prospect but to be honest i compare him alot to matt moore, only thing is he is much younger so he can get better but hes arm strength just isnt worth a 1st round pick. I just dont believe he is worth a top 10 pick, i rather us go with matt moore this season and pick a top 10 talent richardson/clainborne/floyd and take our chances with gettin weeden/tannenhill with a 2nd.

So you're basing your not so brilliant Tannehill and Matt Moore comparison on youtube videos? LOL

Tannehill is even more highly respected by the NFL than supposed "draftniks" or "guru's

insomnia411
04-02-2012, 10:22 AM
I doubt we pass on him if he's there at 8, but I won't be happy about it. Tannehill is by far the most raw "top 10" QB prospect I have seen come out in a long time. Not once in his collegiate career did Tannehill do anything special to go out and win a game against good competition. Point blank, he played very poorly in the 2nd half of basically every close game he has ever played against a decent team.
He put up good numbers, but in college (particularly the big 12) that doesn't really mean that much. Any impetus we have to draft him would purely be based on physical ability alone, and that's no reason to pick the guy 8th overall. He's going to be wildly overdrafted because of a QB needy league that sees a 6'4 230 lb kid that can move and throw the ball with velocity, but it takes a hell of a lot more than that to make it in the NFL.
We have SO many needs, I'd much rather trade down and try to get Weeden and fill some of the massive holes on this roster.

datruth55
04-02-2012, 10:35 AM
good lord are some of you guys naive...this isn't about if YOU think tannehills worth a top 10 pick...this is jeff ieland and sherman...and maybe philbin also...anyways...if he's on the board i'd prepare for tannehill to be the pick and don't sleep on a move to #7 to make sure it happens

this top pick if he's there is locked up...
I'm on board if he's there at #8. He's clearly worked on a lot of things from the end of the season to his pro day. Still more work to be done but the potential is there. I hope we take him but if not I'm all over Trent Richardson...do we need a RB? No, but I'm not passing up a talent like that and I think he's a safer pick than Blackmon.

datruth55
04-02-2012, 10:48 AM
I doubt we pass on him if he's there at 8, but I won't be happy about it. Tannehill is by far the most raw "top 10" QB prospect I have seen come out in a long time. Not once in his collegiate career did Tannehill do anything special to go out and win a game against good competition. Point blank, he played very poorly in the 2nd half of basically every close game he has ever played against a decent team.
He put up good numbers, but in college (particularly the big 12) that doesn't really mean that much. Any impetus we have to draft him would purely be based on physical ability alone, and that's no reason to pick the guy 8th overall. He's going to be wildly overdrafted because of a QB needy league that sees a 6'4 230 lb kid that can move and throw the ball with velocity, but it takes a hell of a lot more than that to make it in the NFL.
We have SO many needs, I'd much rather trade down and try to get Weeden and fill some of the massive holes on this roster.
So beating Oklahoma, Nebraska and Texas in his junior year doesn't count? Beating Baylor this year 55-28...that doesn't count either. The fact that his 6 losses this year were by a combined 33 points with the worst being 41-25 loss to Oklahoma (meaning the other 5 losses were a combined 17 points) means nothing.

It would seem to me that if you lose 30-29 to Oklahoma State, 42-38 to Arkansas, 38-31 to Missouri, 53-50 to Kansas State and 27-25 to Texas the problems aren't entirely on the offense or the QB...you've got some defensive issues. 34.6 ppg in those 5 losses by the offense....38 ppg given up by the defense. Were there things he could have done better? Sure and I believe a lot of those things can be coached into him and will improve with experience. I like him better than I like RGIII...a lot better.

Pinkboy
04-02-2012, 10:52 AM
everything in that article is what we already knew. Nothing enlightening or new there

MarshallFin1
04-02-2012, 10:52 AM
I doubt we pass on him if he's there at 8, but I won't be happy about it. Tannehill is by far the most raw "top 10" QB prospect I have seen come out in a long time. Not once in his collegiate career did Tannehill do anything special to go out and win a game against good competition. Point blank, he played very poorly in the 2nd half of basically every close game he has ever played against a decent team.
He put up good numbers, but in college (particularly the big 12) that doesn't really mean that much. Any impetus we have to draft him would purely be based on physical ability alone, and that's no reason to pick the guy 8th overall. He's going to be wildly overdrafted because of a QB needy league that sees a 6'4 230 lb kid that can move and throw the ball with velocity, but it takes a hell of a lot more than that to make it in the NFL.
We have SO many needs, I'd much rather trade down and try to get Weeden and fill some of the massive holes on this roster.

and whos that remind you of? chad henne all over again. Lets not forget, matt moore >> chad henne.

hooshoops
04-02-2012, 11:38 AM
everything in that article is what we already knew. Nothing enlightening or new there

i disagree with that...

---------- Post added at 11:24 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:23 AM ----------


So beating Oklahoma, Nebraska and Texas in his junior year doesn't count? Beating Baylor this year 55-28...that doesn't count either. The fact that his 6 losses this year were by a combined 33 points with the worst being 41-25 loss to Oklahoma (meaning the other 5 losses were a combined 17 points) means nothing.

It would seem to me that if you lose 30-29 to Oklahoma State, 42-38 to Arkansas, 38-31 to Missouri, 53-50 to Kansas State and 27-25 to Texas the problems aren't entirely on the offense or the QB...you've got some defensive issues. 34.6 ppg in those 5 losses by the offense....38 ppg given up by the defense. Were there things he could have done better? Sure and I believe a lot of those things can be coached into him and will improve with experience. I like him better than I like RGIII...a lot better.

i think you could beat baylors defense...

---------- Post added at 11:38 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:24 AM ----------

i see tannehill as a 2nd round worthy pick on tape who has first round physical tools and upside and athleticism and as such is getting bumped up into the top half of round 1

ckparrothead
04-02-2012, 11:40 AM
The "winner" stuff on Ryan Tannehill is so stupid. How quickly he goes from being a guy that "just wins" in 2010 (6-1 record) to being a guy that "chokes" in 2011. D55 put it best, we're talking 38 points per game given up by the defense in those losses.

Oklahoma State is touted as a shining example of Tannehill choking but I only really found 2 or 3 bad throws in there that resulted in drives that ended prematurely in the second half. One he was just wide on a crossing route on 3rd down, so they couldn't keep going for the TD. Another was a bad interception. Texas A&M had called a certain play one too many times, giving the Cowboys defense enough of a look at it to change the way they defended it, Tannehill didn't anticipate the blitz and made a panicked decision. Picked off by a DB that cheated on his coverage responsibility because he'd seen the play three times already and knew Ryan would quickly check off the flat route. Third iffy throw was toward the end, catchable but not great ball placement and Jeff Fuller pops it up for an interception.

Other than that you've got an entire team letdown. Dropped balls. Fuller falls down on an anticipation route, resulting in an interception. Another guy catches the ball then fumbles it during his run after the catch. Penalties. Meanwhile Brandon Weeden gets going and starts coming on the defense like a freight train, which he did pretty often in 2010 and 2011.

I keep hearing that Tannehill is so "raw". I don't see it. That's not what I see when I watch him on tape. Jake Locker was "raw". In many ways, Robert Griffin is "raw". Ryan Tannehill looks pretty polished if you ask me. I just see a pretty good player playing pretty good football and every now and then forcing a ball he shouldn't.

fishfanmiami
04-02-2012, 11:41 AM
I think we are in a good position. Sherman and Philbin should KNOW if he's the guy they want to bet thier future on. If so do whatever it takes to get him including moving up.
If not this is a great smoke screen and the guy they REALLY want might fall to us or be available in a trade down senerio if someone else moves up to get him.

Vaark
04-02-2012, 11:44 AM
Unlike Flynn where it was obvious going in that our interest and relative offer or non-offer would likely reflect what the guy who knows him best thinks of him, unfortunately IMO it won't be the same with Sherman and Tanny after all. That's unless Sherman is so sold on him that he and Philbin can convince Ireland to throw everything at Rick Spielman to get to #3. IMO the deal Rick strikes will be predicated on how much he wants Kalil or Blackmon and the likelihood of losing either or both. There are just too many players including KC and now the possibly the Eagles coupled with Cleveland maybe even trading up a slot themselves with their ammunition to preempt everyone else or taking him at 4 in addition to the Rams willingness to take offers at Washington's old #6 slot and Jacksonville one notch before us. If we don't end up with Tanny, it might be less a reflection on Sherman's opinion and more on the marketplace but sadly we'll not know for sure.

Interestingly - and relatedly, everything I read continues to include Pete Carroll as a potential trade up partner for someone despite signing Flynn. To me, that further confirms Philbin's opinion.

If these guys want him that badly, I'm in favor of doing whatever is required to be in a position to get him; however, philosophically, like losing out on Coach Mediocre and ending up with Philbin, maybe some things are mean NOT to happen for a good reason and we trade down, pick up an additional high pick and draft Weeden. I'd be fine with that too. :idk:

Pinkboy
04-02-2012, 11:52 AM
Blackmon is so overrated. He's no AJ Green or Julio Jones.

Blackmon will be a good receiver like alot of NFL receivers already. But he won't be great and that total blue chip guy. It's funny because just now some draft guys are saying he could slip down to the teens with Floyd going ahead of him.

Finally we're seeing a shade of common sense being bandied about. If he's drafted in the Top 5 or whatever there's a team that will be disappointed when comparing player to draft slot

ckparrothead
04-02-2012, 11:55 AM
With this article, it seemed to me like Peter King was trying to paint the Dolphins into a corner.

The way he put it, if the Dolphins don't draft Ryan Tannehill, then they are exactly what everyone says they are. But if they do draft him, then the criticisms are overdone.

---------- Post added at 11:55 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:53 AM ----------


Blackmon is so overrated. He's no AJ Green or Julio Jones.

Blackmon will be a good receiver like alot of NFL receivers. But he won't be great. It's funny because just now some draft guys are saying he could slip down to the teens with Floyd going ahead of him.

Finally we're seeing a shade of common sense being bandied about. If he's drafted in the Top 5 or whatever there's a team that will be disappointed when comparing player to draft slot

Does Justin Blackmon really have to be the next Larry Fitzgerald or Calvin Johnson to be worthy of a top 5 pick? If Hakeem Nicks were re-drafted today, would he not go in the top 5?

hooshoops
04-02-2012, 12:10 PM
i agree that blackmons not the level of some of those other guys listed...but bottom line is he's not getting past #6...he's way too clean a prospect off the field and way too productive in college and he passed all the tests about his speed etc for him to get past #6...

---------- Post added at 12:10 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:06 PM ----------


With this article, it seemed to me like Peter King was trying to paint the Dolphins into a corner.

The way he put it, if the Dolphins don't draft Ryan Tannehill, then they are exactly what everyone says they are. But if they do draft him, then the criticisms are overdone.

---------- Post added at 11:55 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:53 AM ----------



Does Justin Blackmon really have to be the next Larry Fitzgerald or Calvin Johnson to be worthy of a top 5 pick? If Hakeem Nicks were re-drafted today, would he not go in the top 5?

if you ask me miami already painted itself into a corner with the offseason handling of the position...to me this pick could not be more freaking obvious...problem is everyone else knows it

Predaphin
04-02-2012, 12:13 PM
If he's not there at #8 and Cleveland does take him I'm trying to figure out how we get Trent Richardson...kid is an elite player and I would love to get him but I have a hard time seeing him get past Tampa Bay unless the Bucs go with another elite player that also fills a need in Claiborne. Either way if Richardson makes it to Jacksonville's spot I see a few teams trading up for him there.

Forget about a WR or RB in the draft, Who would we be replacing with Richardson? Reggie Bush? I seriously doubt that. As for WR, Philbin has said we dont need an elite #1 WR in the WCO.

Personally, Im not all that high on Tannehill, but we do need a QB.

Look for the phins to draft either a DE, QB, LB, OL with their first pick, not necessarily in that order

sn9ke.eyes
04-02-2012, 12:27 PM
So are the same people against drafting Tannehill the same people that say that we need to take risks to get a franchise QB and that we wont' get anywhere by playing it safe ? Cause I smell some hypocrisy..

Also in that same Peter King article, I was shocked by this Eli vs. Moore chart for the last 9 weeks of the season. Maybe someone else already knew this.




Matt Moore vs. Eli Manning






W-L
Comp%
Yards
TD-Int
Rating




Moore, Miami
6-3
.612
1,791
15-5
97.8




E. Manning, NY
4-5
.583
2,806
16-11
86.4





Last nine weeks of the 2011 regular season

TedSlimmJr
04-02-2012, 12:29 PM
Being raw isn't necessarily what the defining factor is. Aaron Rodgers, Donavan McNabb, Steve McNair, Troy Aikman, and several others were all unpolished quarterbacks when they were drafted.

David Carr, Sam Bradford, Carson Palmer, and Peyton Manning were about as polished as it gets coming out of college. Only Peyton won a playoff game and it took him 6 years to do that.


Locker was more raw with his footwork, but had a special set of football intangibles and knack for making the players around him better. He was a clutch player who was comfortable with taking the game on his shoulders when he had to. He elevated a team that was 0-12 without him to a 6-6 record. Locker wasn't even supposed to be playing after the Oregon St. game towards the end of the season after he suffered broken ribs, but kept playing because he wanted his TEAM and his SENIORS to finally feel what it's like to be bowl eligible. He led those outmatched scrubs to a bowl victory over a supremely talented Nebraska team.

Tannehill is only more polished in terms of tying his footwork into his throws, but his arm isn't as quite as strong as Locker's, release isn't as fast, and doesn't elevate his teammates the way Locker did. He didn't have any mechanical flaws in his throwing motion, only lack of polish in his progressions and footwork, which is why he was a top 10 pick. During his limited playing time as a rookie, he led all rookie quarterbacks in QB rating.


Like I've said from the beginning, if a team is comfortable taking Tannehill in the top 10 with the understanding that they're passing up elite players in order to do it... go for it. As a football team, you're the one that has to look yourself in the mirror afterwards.

The Omen
04-02-2012, 12:30 PM
if you ask me miami already painted itself into a corner with the offseason handling of the position...to me this pick could not be more freaking obvious...problem is everyone else knows it

It was also thought that we'de take Mallet last year and Quinn a few years back. The Fins are interested, yes that's obvious, but if we you havent noticed yet, this new regime isn't going to over pay for something that they don't think is worth it.

Not saying your wrong, just saying it may not be as obvious as you think or as obvious they may want you to think.

Jersey DolFan
04-02-2012, 12:30 PM
i've always said - drafting a guy in the first round does not necessarily make him a first round talent. but, with the new contracts for first rounders and the fact that we have a decent starter (or 2) already on the roster so he can sit for a while, it may not be a bad move. the problem is for Ireland. if he pulls the trigger on this kid, and he doesnt pan out, he'll be gone in about 2 years. if he doesnt see it with this kid, then its best to pass. i am not sold on tannehill, and i think that once again teh starved dolphin fan base is calling for a first rounder just for the sake of a first rounder - even if he may not be worth that. our pick may be better spent on a pass rusher, but we will soon find out.

Anvil35
04-02-2012, 12:35 PM
Honestly, I found the little chart at the bottom of the Tannehill article more interesting than the article itself. If Manning is a "franchise" qb, what doesnt make Moore potentially the same if given the reps and confidence in the system?

hooshoops
04-02-2012, 12:36 PM
It was also thought that we'de take Mallet last year and Quinn a few years back. The Fins are interested, yes that's obvious, but if we you havent noticed yet, this new regime isn't going to over pay for something that they don't think is worth it.

Not saying your wrong, just saying it may not be as obvious as you think or as obvious they may want you to think.

not to my knowledge it wasn't...

TedSlimmJr
04-02-2012, 12:40 PM
So are the same people against drafting Tannehill the same people that say that we need to take risks to get a franchise QB and that we wont' get anywhere by playing it safe ? Cause I smell some hypocrisy..

Also in that same Peter King article, I was shocked by this Eli vs. Moore chart for the last 9 weeks of the season. Maybe someone else already knew this.



There's different levels of risk.

The problem with Miami is they tend to avoid low risk QB's at spots in the draft where they provide excellent value (Matt Ryan #1 overall, Ryan Mallett in the 3rd round, Drew Brees in the 2nd round, T.J. Yates in the late rounds, etc.) and take silly gambles when they shouldn't (Pat White at #44 overall, John Beck in the 2nd round, etc.)

In my opinion drafting Ryan Tannehill in the top 10 is closer to the latter than the former, and I like Tannehill.

The only good decision that I felt like Miami made at the time they made it, and that clearly went against the pressure of what the fanbase and media were trying to push, is when they passed up Brady Quinn at #9. I knew that one was right.

The problem was instead of taking the best defensive player in the draft, they took a 140 pound kick returner who didn't like contact.

DolfanDuBbZ~
04-02-2012, 12:41 PM
So beating Oklahoma, Nebraska and Texas in his junior year doesn't count? Beating Baylor this year 55-28...that doesn't count either. The fact that his 6 losses this year were by a combined 33 points with the worst being 41-25 loss to Oklahoma (meaning the other 5 losses were a combined 17 points) means nothing.

It would seem to me that if you lose 30-29 to Oklahoma State, 42-38 to Arkansas, 38-31 to Missouri, 53-50 to Kansas State and 27-25 to Texas the problems aren't entirely on the offense or the QB...you've got some defensive issues. 34.6 ppg in those 5 losses by the offense....38 ppg given up by the defense. Were there things he could have done better? Sure and I believe a lot of those things can be coached into him and will improve with experience. I like him better than I like RGIII...a lot better.

TAM was winning at half with 5 of the losses this year. Tannehill in the 2nd half against OKST and OK **** the bed, its that simple. How you can sit here and look past the fact he looked terrible in some of those losses is beyond me.

While you and others want to put forth what he did his JR year, you look past his SR campaign. He took a step backwards, eyeing down his WR's in close games. Throwing 2nd half INTS that put his DEF in a bind, even though they had leads going into half for 5 of those games he lost.

The guru's believe MIA needs a QB. This draft class is thin and need another 'story' to pimp. And what gives them all this, Tannehill and super reach into the TOP10. This will be Philbins and your Ginn. Philbin will lose his job and you will apart of the cause to get him fired.

hooshoops
04-02-2012, 12:43 PM
that chart is worthless...eli manning was more stone cold assassin in the clutch than any qb in the league at the end of the 2011 season and postseason...clutch and matt moore don't belong in the same zip code

a clutch fumble or bad sack...matt moore's your guy

MadDog 88
04-02-2012, 12:50 PM
They need to stay at 8 because I am not convinced Cleveland will draft him at 4. If they do, Weeden, who I think is more pro ready, should be the fall back in the second round.

LouPhinFan
04-02-2012, 12:50 PM
Why in the world did our defense have to go and get in shape midway last season and win us some games? This #8 pick really sucks. Especially this year when there is only a handful of elite talents.

hooshoops
04-02-2012, 12:51 PM
Why in the world did our defense have to go and get in shape midway last season and win us some games? This #8 pick really sucks. Especially this year when there is only a handful of elite talents.

you got that right...

TedSlimmJr
04-02-2012, 12:56 PM
Forget about a WR or RB in the draft, Who would we be replacing with Richardson? Reggie Bush? I seriously doubt that.


That was the same logic that everyone had for not pushing Patrick Willis on Miami's front office prior to the 2007 draft.

"Who would we be replacing with Willis? Zach Thomas? Channing Crowder? I seriously doubt that".


You don't pass up a truly elite talent of this caliber because of risky propositions such as relying on Reggie Bush to be your featured back, slow 2nd round rookies who can't stay healthy and have ball security issues, old-slow-concussed linebackers who are at the end of the line, or average run-of-the-mill young players you took in the 3rd round.

When you're picking in the 8-12 range, you better take elite talent when it falls to you. That's your only chance of getting it. Acquiring the best TALENT you can get your hands on is the entire principle behind the draft. It's unfathomable that people still haven't figured this out.

Dave Wannstedt and Rick Spielman drafted for 'need' as good as anybody.

The Omen
04-02-2012, 12:58 PM
not to my knowledge it wasn't...

it wasn't an "Obviose" pick, but A LOT of people speculated that Mallet might be our pick... If you say other wise then you didn't watch the draft or really look at many articles/mock drafts.

After he slipped past the first round and most of the second, when we saw we traded up in the 2nd I'm sure a lot of us (Including the draft commintaries) thought it was for sure it was for Mallet. It was D. Thomas.

hooshoops
04-02-2012, 01:01 PM
unless cleveland takes tannehill at #4 there's no way t rich gets to #8...and even if they did take tanny at #4 i bet money if t rich got to #7 jax would find a very willing trade up partner...

state06
04-02-2012, 01:05 PM
the kid was a 1st round prospect and carried a late 1st round grade throughout much of the college season. The only reason he may have dipped into rd 2 would be because the teams late in rd 1 have their QB spot secure. His stock has risen from late 1 to early 1st. If miami's FO want him and think in a year he can lead this franchise, they will pull the trigger .

TedSlimmJr
04-02-2012, 01:07 PM
There's 5 elite talents in this draft at their positions... Luck, Richardson, DeCastro, Claiborne, and Kuechly.

One or more of those are going to be on the board when Miami picks at #8. They'd be wise to take him.


Otherwise, trade down into the teens or early 20's and take Coby Fleener or Mark Barron. They're not elite prospects in the same vein as the other 5, but the gap between them and the next best player at their position is tremendous. Both fill a critical need for Miami going forward.

hooshoops
04-02-2012, 01:12 PM
it wasn't an "Obviose" pick, but A LOT of people speculated that Mallet might be our pick... If you say other wise then you didn't watch the draft or really look at many articles/mock drafts.

After he slipped past the first round and most of the second, when we saw we traded up in the 2nd I'm sure a lot of us (Including the draft commintaries) thought it was for sure it was for Mallet. It was D. Thomas.

i'll agree that when we traded up i and many thought it was for mallett but i don't agree with the first part...as the draft approached all we kept hearing about was how mallett had skeletons in his closet which were hurting his stock...and that sure appears to have been the case cause he was a 1st round physical talent picked in the middle of round 3...

LordPicklewagon
04-02-2012, 01:13 PM
That was the same logic that everyone had for not pushing Patrick Willis on Miami's front office prior to the 2007 draft.

"Who would we be replacing with Willis? Zach Thomas? Channing Crowder? I seriously doubt that".


You don't pass up a truly elite talent of this caliber because of risky propositions such as relying on Reggie Bush to be your featured back, slow 2nd round rookies who can't stay healthy and have ball security issues, old-slow-concussed linebackers who are at the end of the line, or average run-of-the-mill young players you took in the 3rd round.

When you're picking in the 8-12 range, you better take elite talent when it falls to you. That's your only chance of getting it. Acquiring the best TALENT you can get your hands on is the entire principle behind the draft. It's unfathomable that people still haven't figured this out.

Dave Wannstedt and Rick Spielman drafted for 'need' as good as anybody.

100% correct. And thats what really irked me about the Willis situation and the excuse of already having Zach. You have to look at the big picture. I asked back than if people saw Zach as our LB two years from now, you know when Willis would be in his early twenties. You look at this pick as someone whos going to be here the next decade and not to plug a hole. Seattle didnt pass on Shaun Alexander because they already had Rickey Waters, JJ didnt pass on Pat Surtain because he already had T-Buck and looking at another sport Pat Riley didnt pass on Dwayne Wade because he already had Eddie Jones. You dont pass on elite talent because you have someone there already, especially someone who you dont see being there after the next couple of years

If by some miracle Claiborne makes it too 8, you dont pass on him because you have Sean Smith. Im not into taking rbs early unless they are AP type talent but if our FO deems that Richardson is than you dont pass on him simply because of Reggie Bush. This is a long term commitment type pick and should be viewed as such

fishbanger
04-02-2012, 01:25 PM
I am all for long term committment picks and that includes QB too. Tannehill is being evaluated as a potential elite QB.

I will take any of the others mentioned too from the top six players. Otherwise I would trade down and try to find another elite player while picking up another 2nd rounder. Like Fleener is elite.


I dont consider Kuechly elite top 10 pick. Pass rusher is more important since we dont have enough.

zach attach
04-02-2012, 01:34 PM
I think he will be gone. If the browns don't take him, someone will trade up with the jags or rams. My bet will be Philly or the cards.

This is a great fear of mine. IF Sherman convinces Philbin and Ireland that Tannehill is THE guy, I say trade up. For once, let's get our guy, not sit by and watch him go elsewhere to a team with balls to move up.
Look what Atalnta gave up to get Julio Jones. He will produce for years.

Kane337
04-02-2012, 01:37 PM
If he is considered a franchise QB he is damn well is worth a top 10 pick.

datruth55
04-02-2012, 01:39 PM
I think he will be gone. If the browns don't take him, someone will trade up with the jags or rams. My bet will be Philly or the cards.
Won't be the Rams unless Blackmon is gone.

MarshallFin1
04-02-2012, 01:50 PM
i dont know why but i just have a bad feeling about this draft. It just seems like miami is going the safe route again either either trading down, taking tannenhill with a top 10 pick when the guy is a 2nd round prospect at best or taking another offelinse lineman. I just dont see us going for that homerun pick like richardson, claiborne, blackmon. Thats just not in irelands nature. I just hope if we trade down this time we get more picks out of it, when we traded down with san diego 2 years ago i dont think we got our moneys worth at all. Maybe u can argue san diego didnt get too much out of it cause there RB has done too good in the nfl yet but that kid could have turned out to be a stud and could still be one if they commited to him more. I guess we just have to hope for the best. I would be really excited going into a season with richardson/bush combo, or vontae/claiborne combo. We can only dream ireland goes for a homerun and not the safe route this time.

russianbear
04-02-2012, 02:12 PM
i dont know why but i just have a bad feeling about this draft. It just seems like miami is going the safe route again either either trading down, taking tannenhill with a top 10 pick when the guy is a 2nd round prospect at best or taking another offelinse lineman. I just dont see us going for that homerun pick like richardson, claiborne, blackmon. Thats just not in irelands nature. I just hope if we trade down this time we get more picks out of it, when we traded down with san diego 2 years ago i dont think we got our moneys worth at all. Maybe u can argue san diego didnt get too much out of it cause there RB has done too good in the nfl yet but that kid could have turned out to be a stud and could still be one if they commited to him more. I guess we just have to hope for the best. I would be really excited going into a season with richardson/bush combo, or vontae/claiborne combo. We can only dream ireland goes for a homerun and not the safe route this time.

I can't believe you would rather take Trent Richardson than Tannehill just because he's a "second round talent".... and "at best"? Ehhh . I've read he's been a late 1st round prospect since the beginning of offseason. I'm scared to take a reach pick a much as anyone but Sherman knows the kid and if you got any sort of faith in him as a franchise QB, you have to take it.

I'd rather get an O-line pick first round than Trent effin Richardson. Not to bash him but it would honestly be ignoring our biggest needs and IMO far from a homerun pick. BTW how is taking a "second round prospect" at pick 10 a safe route?

Kinzua
04-02-2012, 02:42 PM
Unfortunately his draft stock has risen dramatically. If they want him they'll have to pull the trigger at #8.

What's "risen dramatically" is his hype. Do you really think that NFL GMs are influenced by reports from the media that Team X is trying to move up to get Player A or that Team Y is "very interested" in Player B? None of these reports come from the teams themselves or from anybody even remotely associated with any of the teams. They always come from "sources", probably any number of which are simply shills paid by player agents to inflate their client's publicity.

---------- Post added at 02:42 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:37 PM ----------


I can't believe you would rather take Trent Richardson than Tannehill just because he's a "second round talent".... and "at best"? Ehhh . I've read he's been a late 1st round prospect since the beginning of offseason. I'm scared to take a reach pick a much as anyone but Sherman knows the kid and if you got any sort of faith in him as a franchise QB, you have to take it.

I'd rather get an O-line pick first round than Trent effin Richardson. Not to bash him but it would honestly be ignoring our biggest needs and IMO far from a homerun pick. BTW how is taking a "second round prospect" at pick 10 a safe route?

Tannehill has bust written all over him. He wasn't good enough to even be the backup QB at Texas A&M for his first two years. He's played all of 2 years at QB and only played in 19 games. He's definitely totally unready to be an NFL starter any time soon.

Of course, I'd rather like the Fins to waste the #8 pick on Tannehill and leave a much better prospect available for the Bills at #10. That would be perfect, especially if Cleveland takes Richardson at #4. :lol2:

The Omen
04-02-2012, 02:51 PM
i'll agree that when we traded up i and many thought it was for mallett but i don't agree with the first part...as the draft approached all we kept hearing about was how mallett had skeletons in his closet which were hurting his stock...and that sure appears to have been the case cause he was a 1st round physical talent picked in the middle of round 3...

I won't dispute the fact Mallets off the field issues were a huge concern but a lot still thought he may be the pick. I remember it being split closely between Pouncey and Mallet as the pick if they were both there. With the majority slightly leaning towards Pouncey with Mallet a close second...

again, the topic was "were the Dolphins considering taking Mallet with the 1st pick" much like they were with Quinn (although this was a more forgone conclusion if he droped to 9 then it was with Mallet) and much like they are with Tannehill...

hooshoops
04-02-2012, 03:08 PM
I won't dispute the fact Mallets off the field issues were a huge concern but a lot still thought he may be the pick. I remember it being split closely between Pouncey and Mallet as the pick if they were both there. With the majority slightly leaning towards Pouncey with Mallet a close second...

again, the topic was "were the Dolphins considering taking Mallet with the 1st pick" much like they were with Quinn (although this was a more forgone conclusion if he droped to 9 then it was with Mallet) and much like they are with Tannehill...

frankly i think you're making that mallet was the guy stuff on here up...but i could care less what the consensus on this main forums opinion of who the pick would be was...i did my homework just like i always do and felt mallet was not only not in play with the top pick but not in play in round 1...just like i think brandon weeden is not in play in round 1 this year...but for different reasons obviously

there was too much smoke not for there to be fire with mallet last year...that kids not sitting there in the 3rd round unless some unsavory things were found to be accurate during his evaluation...

i don't see how anyone can put this offseason moves together and shermans own words during the season about tannehill being a 10 year starting qb and the fact that ireland LOVES measurables with top picks and not come away with tannehill is the true target with the top pick...i just don't...and adding david garrard to be a veteran mentor etc sealed it for me...

MarshallFin1
04-02-2012, 03:27 PM
I can't believe you would rather take Trent Richardson than Tannehill just because he's a "second round talent".... and "at best"? Ehhh . I've read he's been a late 1st round prospect since the beginning of offseason. I'm scared to take a reach pick a much as anyone but Sherman knows the kid and if you got any sort of faith in him as a franchise QB, you have to take it.

I'd rather get an O-line pick first round than Trent effin Richardson. Not to bash him but it would honestly be ignoring our biggest needs and IMO far from a homerun pick. BTW how is taking a "second round prospect" at pick 10 a safe route?

let me put it this way, talents like richardson arent in every draft, in the last 2 drafts, the best running back taken you could probably say it was mark ingram and richardson is miles better than ingram and ingram is extremely good just hasnt had too much touches in new orleans yet but when he gets his chance he will win that job easily. Trent richardson is a rare talent my friend, hes got the potential to be our adrian peterson in the nfl. Its a stud u just cannot pass. A qb like tannenhill u always always see a few in every draft, its not a big miss if we dont get him. I think matt flynn was the biggest miss so far this offseason for the dolphins, really dissappoting.

hooshoops
04-02-2012, 03:30 PM
personally i don't think t rich has elite vision...this isn't ap we're talking about here...but he's probably a once every 5 year back...i can agree with that

MarshallFin1
04-02-2012, 03:41 PM
personally i don't think t rich has elite vision...this isn't ap we're talking about here...but he's probably a once every 5 year back...i can agree with that

when ap came to the nfl no one knew he would be that good but everyone knew he had the potential to be that good, thats where i see richardson is going into this draft. If the dolphins dont get him i hope tampa does, keep him in south florida. He is going to light it up in the nfl if he has a good o-line to block for him. Every 5 year back i most def agree with that, cant remember the last top 10 pick that was a running back, its been awhile i believe since a running back got taken top 5 or 10.

hooshoops
04-02-2012, 03:44 PM
when ap came to the nfl no one knew he would be that good but everyone knew he had the potential to be that good, thats where i see richardson is going into this draft. If the dolphins dont get him i hope tampa does, keep him in south florida. He is going to light it up in the nfl if he has a good o-line to block for him. Every 5 year back i most def agree with that, cant remember the last top 10 pick that was a running back, its been awhile i believe since a running back got taken top 5 or 10.

i disagree with no one thought ap would be that good...that dude was a monster at oklahoma the concerns for him was his upright running style and that garbage collar bone that people thought could have him miss his rookie season...no doubt in my mind at least that ap was a better prospect than t rich but t rich is probably the best size speed power back to come along since then...dudes a monster

Dr. Phin
04-02-2012, 03:50 PM
I am all for long term committment picks and that includes QB too. Tannehill is being evaluated as a potential elite QB.I will take any of the others mentioned too from the top six players. Otherwise I would trade down and try to find another elite player while picking up another 2nd rounder. Like Fleener is elite.I dont consider Kuechly elite top 10 pick. Pass rusher is more important since we dont have enough.You might not, but give it a few years and there are probably going to be alot of folks around here saying "We could have Kuechly"....Just like alot say, "We could have had Matthews or Dez"...Kuechly will be well worth a Top 10 pick, and IMO is almost a guaranteed pro-bowler....(barring injury of course....)

nosleep
04-02-2012, 04:03 PM
Tannehill worked with quarterback consultant Chris Weinke on his mechanics after the 2011 season,

Wait...What???

MarshallFin1
04-02-2012, 04:10 PM
i disagree with no one thought ap would be that good...that dude was a monster at oklahoma the concerns for him was his upright running style and that garbage collar bone that people thought could have him miss his rookie season...no doubt in my mind at least that ap was a better prospect than t rich but t rich is probably the best size speed power back to come along since then...dudes a monster

i seriously suggest u check richardson highlights, he has all the traits ap had except ap was a bit faster but apart from that richardson could even be better.

Blake the great
04-02-2012, 04:10 PM
I will be pretty pissed if we give up a lot to move up and draft Tannehill, because why didnt we do that for RG3?

hooshoops
04-02-2012, 04:19 PM
i seriously suggest u check richardson highlights, he has all the traits ap had except ap was a bit faster but apart from that richardson could even be better.

i've watched t rich and bama long enough to be comfortable with my evaluation of him as a player...just as i was comfortable saying early in this eval process that upshaw lacks the length initial burst off the ball and pass rush tools to warrant a top 10 pick when everyone was on here talkin him up as a top 10 worthy pick...

ckparrothead
04-02-2012, 05:02 PM
Where you draft a guy is all about market valuation. Whether you draft a guy is all about whether he's the right player for you.

People get way too carried away with this notion of "I'd draft him at #16...but #8 is a reach..."

That's not a productive way to think about the Draft.

Kane337
04-02-2012, 05:10 PM
Where you draft a guy is all about market valuation. Whether you draft a guy is all about whether he's the right player for you.

People get way too carried away with this notion of "I'd draft him at #16...but #8 is a reach..."

That's not a productive way to think about the Draft.

My feeling is there is no such thing as a reach on a franchise QB. If Philbin, Ireland, and Sherman thinks this guy is a franchise QB for the next 10+ years then you draft him no matter what spot. If he's a bust they all should be fired.

Myles Fynch
04-02-2012, 05:10 PM
Where you draft a guy is all about market valuation. Whether you draft a guy is all about whether he's the right player for you.

People get way too carried away with this notion of "I'd draft him at #16...but #8 is a reach..."

That's not a productive way to think about the Draft.

Unfortunately, I don't think our GM agrees with you. If he plays it straight, we should be good--one way or the other. If he tries to get cute, all bets are off.

Spesh
04-02-2012, 05:11 PM
Where you draft a guy is all about market valuation. Whether you draft a guy is all about whether he's the right player for you.

People get way too carried away with this notion of "I'd draft him at #16...but #8 is a reach..."

That's not a productive way to think about the Draft.

Well said.
Either Tannehill can be a franchise quarterback or not. If he is, then he is worth taking at 16, 8, 3, whatever. If he isnt, why should we draft him at all?

Myles Fynch
04-02-2012, 05:17 PM
Well said.
Either Tannehill can be a franchise quarterback or not. If he is, then he is worth taking at 16, 8, 3, whatever. If he isnt, why should we draft him at all?

Amen. I love what the Redskins did... to them there were two studs at QB in the draft and said 'come hell or high water we're getting one. Enough of the BS.' I hope it works out for them.

Kane337
04-02-2012, 05:24 PM
Amen. I love what the Redskins did... to them there were two studs at QB in the draft and said 'come hell or high water we're getting one. Enough of the BS.' I hope it works out for them.

Except when they play us :)

TheWalrus
04-02-2012, 05:24 PM
Trent Richardson reminds me a lot of Jonathan Stewart. They're both phenomenal size/speed guys who lack somewhat in the vision department but can move piles and shatter people with their power. Richardson I think is overall the stronger and more laterally explosive back, but they're pretty similar. Richardson does not really compare to AP, who is superior in every way with the ball in his hands in my opinion. Richardson is, however, a much better blocker and shows better recognition in blitz pickup than AP, and will probably be a better pass receiver, too. Quarterbacks will love the guy.

To me, though, the most important thing is vision. It leads to more explosive plays and generally I think leads to a longer life span for the player. It's why I would rather have DeAngelo Williams than Stewart if I was Carolina and why I still think Mark Ingram will end up a better player in the long run than Richardson. But to each his own.

As for Tannehill, all the signs are pointed his way but I can't shake the feeling that it's all too obvious. Ireland is a guy who's obsessed with his arbitrary notions of value and strikes me as the kind of guy who would pass up Tannehill in the 1st to take Cousins in the 2nd and declare the position solved. All the interest and visits and the like would be him just riding the waves of connections and needs so he can pick Claiborne (in the unlikely event he falls) or Keuchly in the 1st. I can just see him leaning back in his chair, patting himself on the back for fooling the entire league. Meanwhile we're stuck with Kirk Cousins as our developmental guy until he finally busts out three years from now and then and only then is Ireland exiled to Fireland.

THAT seems much more in character to me than dead eyeing a quarterback who's considered (by some) a reach this far out and then actually pulling the trigger on draft day. I have a hard time swallowing it.

MarshallFin1
04-02-2012, 05:53 PM
Where you draft a guy is all about market valuation. Whether you draft a guy is all about whether he's the right player for you.

People get way too carried away with this notion of "I'd draft him at #16...but #8 is a reach..."

That's not a productive way to think about the Draft.

i disagree, why draft him at #8 when u can draft him in the 2nd round and get something much better in the 1st. If someone else takes him weeden is still there in the 2nd.

ckparrothead
04-02-2012, 05:56 PM
i disagree, why draft him at #8 when u can draft him in the 2nd round and get something much better in the 1st. If someone else takes him weeden is still there in the 2nd.

1. I didn't say anything about Brandon Weeden.

2. You're kind of missing the part about "market valuation". You pay what the market dictates. If you believe the market is dictating 2nd round on Brandon Weeden, and you've decided he's the RIGHT guy for your football team, then you take Weeden right above what the market is willing to give for him.

MarshallFin1
04-02-2012, 05:57 PM
Trent Richardson reminds me a lot of Jonathan Stewart. They're both phenomenal size/speed guys who lack somewhat in the vision department but can move piles and shatter people with their power. Richardson I think is overall the stronger and more laterally explosive back, but they're pretty similar. Richardson does not really compare to AP, who is superior in every way with the ball in his hands in my opinion. Richardson is, however, a much better blocker and shows better recognition in blitz pickup than AP, and will probably be a better pass receiver, too. Quarterbacks will love the guy.

To me, though, the most important thing is vision. It leads to more explosive plays and generally I think leads to a longer life span for the player. It's why I would rather have DeAngelo Williams than Stewart if I was Carolina and why I still think Mark Ingram will end up a better player in the long run than Richardson. But to each his own.

As for Tannehill, all the signs are pointed his way but I can't shake the feeling that it's all too obvious. Ireland is a guy who's obsessed with his arbitrary notions of value and strikes me as the kind of guy who would pass up Tannehill in the 1st to take Cousins in the 2nd and declare the position solved. All the interest and visits and the like would be him just riding the waves of connections and needs so he can pick Claiborne (in the unlikely event he falls) or Keuchly in the 1st. I can just see him leaning back in his chair, patting himself on the back for fooling the entire league. Meanwhile we're stuck with Kirk Cousins as our developmental guy until he finally busts out three years from now and then and only then is Ireland exiled to Fireland.

THAT seems much more in character to me than dead eyeing a quarterback who's considered (by some) a reach this far out and then actually pulling the trigger on draft day. I have a hard time swallowing it.

I dont understand why ppl are questioning richardsons vision, his vision in my opinion is phenominal and his althletism is even better. He is the closest thing to an ap type talent and we should never pass up on a player like this if he falls to us, i can almost guarantee richardson does not pass tampa bay unless they choose to go with claiborne instead.

PyroDOLFAN
04-02-2012, 05:59 PM
Sigh...I'm really bent on Moore :/ If he comes out the gate rocking and gets us to the playoffs...and we draft Tanny at 8, what would you do if you were Philbin?! You can't just give up on a QB you drafted 8 and you can't just throw out a QB that has the teams back?!

Locke
04-02-2012, 06:00 PM
i disagree, why draft him at #8 when u can draft him in the 2nd round and get something much better in the 1st. If someone else takes him weeden is still there in the 2nd.

If teams think he is a franchise QB, what makes you think he will be there in the 2nd? Also, what makes you think Weeden will be there in the second? The Eagles took a 28 year old guard in the first last year, why wouldn't a team take a 28 year old QB...?

MarshallFin1
04-02-2012, 06:02 PM
1. I didn't say anything about Brandon Weeden.

2. You're kind of missing the part about "market valuation". You pay what the market dictates. If you believe the market is dictating 2nd round on Brandon Weeden, and you've decided he's the RIGHT guy for your football team, then you take Weeden right above what the market is willing to give for him.

How often are the dolphins going to get a top 10 pick? not very often, we might go years and years without seeing a top 15 pick again now that this team might get better under philbin. So missing on a talent like richardson/claiborne/blackmon in my opinion we will regret. Tannenhill is not is not 1st round market value, i dont know why people are buying the hype but if he was this great qb people are talking about he would be up there with luck and rg3 which clearly he is not.

DolfanDuBbZ~
04-02-2012, 06:24 PM
Tannehill is gonna be our Markita Sanchita. Watch and see.:err:

ChambersWI
04-02-2012, 06:31 PM
I don't really remember Mallett being the consensus for us. Enduro had been saying for a long time Pouncey would be the pick. Otherwise, as the draft approached the 2 QBs I remember us being linked heavily to were Kapernick and Ponder. Otherwise, I'm pretty sure the general feeling (at least here) was still that Mark Ingram was still the favorite to be our pick (hell, the entire time we were on the clock, they kept the camera on Ingram the whole damn time). Really the only reason people speculated Mallett was because we were constantly checking out DJ Williams (that and CK made his TV debut analyzing Mallett)

Brady Quinn, yeah things pointed to him, but the evidence towards Tannehill is so big.

If Tannehill is there, the only players that make me hesitate taking him are Trent Richardson, Justin Blackmon, Morris Claiborne, and Luke Kuechley. I would be stunned if Richardson, Blackmon, or Claiborne are available.

Exuro
04-02-2012, 06:34 PM
Amen. I love what the Redskins did... to them there were two studs at QB in the draft and said 'come hell or high water we're getting one. Enough of the BS.' I hope it works out for them.

Good for the redskins, but do you think Shanahan will be around long enough to enjoy the fruits of this trade up? It didn't save Spagnuolo's job after he picked up Bradford.

ROADRUNNER
04-02-2012, 06:37 PM
Good for the redskins, but do you think Shanahan will be around long enough to enjoy the fruits of this trade up? It didn't save Spagnuolo's job after he picked up Bradford.


Ye but i think half the board would want Bradford to be our QB..............

Valandui
04-02-2012, 06:38 PM
I doubt we pass on him if he's there at 8, but I won't be happy about it. Tannehill is by far the most raw "top 10" QB prospect I have seen come out in a long time. Not once in his collegiate career did Tannehill do anything special to go out and win a game against good competition. Point blank, he played very poorly in the 2nd half of basically every close game he has ever played against a decent team.
He put up good numbers, but in college (particularly the big 12) that doesn't really mean that much. Any impetus we have to draft him would purely be based on physical ability alone, and that's no reason to pick the guy 8th overall. He's going to be wildly overdrafted because of a QB needy league that sees a 6'4 230 lb kid that can move and throw the ball with velocity, but it takes a hell of a lot more than that to make it in the NFL.
We have SO many needs, I'd much rather trade down and try to get Weeden and fill some of the massive holes on this roster.
Have you watched Robert Griffin play?

ROADRUNNER
04-02-2012, 06:43 PM
Have you watched Robert Griffin play?

LOL...........you still got man love for Tannehill.

Noodleman
04-02-2012, 06:47 PM
Just say no to Tannehill! Seriously....he is NOT a top 10 prospect. Taking him at 8 is reaching enough. If Miami is stupid enough to trade up for him...then the front office is more clueless than most people think. Seriously....you don't trade up for a prospect that is a second round talent at best. As far as their interest...everyone said they wanted FLynn as well. We all saw how that worked out. I don't care how much Miami pays attention to him. Until they take him, then it is nothing more than hypothesis. Teams throw up smoke screens all the time.

---------- Post added at 05:47 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:45 PM ----------


Have you watched Robert Griffin play?
Lol you are comparing RG3 to tannehill? Are you insane? Griffin is by far more polished. There is no comparison between who is the better "prospect"!

insomnia411
04-02-2012, 07:16 PM
Have you watched Robert Griffin play?

I've watched a ton of RG3 and Tanny.
The only justification you can possibly have for calling RG3 "raw" is the system in which he played, which is unfair to the player himself. RG3 has everything that Ryan Tannehill has but much much more. Tannehill has a fast release while RG3 has lightning quick delivery, Tanny has a GOOD arm while RG3 has a CANNON, Tanny is accurate but forced bad throws in big situations way too often while RG3 is deadly accurate.
Tannehill can move in the pocket well and is athletic, but RG3 has good footwork and is also a track star.

Also, RG3 gets too much flack for being just a running QB, it simply isn't true. If you watch the kid play on passing downs, he stands strong in the face of pressure to deliver passes from the pocket with accuracy.
There really is no comparison between the two prospects, and with respect, you can't find anybody who knows anything about the draft who will tell you that there isn't a large drop off in talent at QB this year after Luck and RG3 go.
I'm not saying that Tannehill can't be good, I think he's very talented, but I'm scared off by his underwhelming and often game losing performances in the second halves of games. OK St. Arkansas, Texas to name a few. Even in the bowl game Tanny played against very sub par competition (Northwestern) he played a great first half, A&M got a comfortable lead, and in the 2nd half he went into the tank and threw a bad pick. IMO RG3 would have smoked Northwestern, lit up the scoreboard, and won by 30. Tannehill put up a boring (at best) performance.

I haven't even mentioned that for RG3 to take that God awful Baylor football program to a 10-3 record is a great accomplishment. I would have liked to see RG3 play in a big bowl game against a better defense, but because of the fact that Baylor's defense gave up 78 ppg, it wasn't going to happen.

At the end of the day, I think that Tannehill is a big project who will need many years to develop if it ever happens. I think that Weeden is a much more ready to go quarterback, and I'd much rather trade down for Weeden than stay at 8 or trade up for Tanny. This team has way too many needs, we need to trade down.

Valandui
04-02-2012, 07:30 PM
Just say no to Tannehill! Seriously....he is NOT a top 10 prospect. Taking him at 8 is reaching enough. If Miami is stupid enough to trade up for him...then the front office is more clueless than most people think. Seriously....you don't trade up for a prospect that is a second round talent at best. As far as their interest...everyone said they wanted FLynn as well. We all saw how that worked out. I don't care how much Miami pays attention to him. Until they take him, then it is nothing more than hypothesis. Teams throw up smoke screens all the time.

---------- Post added at 05:47 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:45 PM ----------


Lol you are comparing RG3 to tannehill? Are you insane? Griffin is by far more polished. There is no comparison between who is the better "prospect"!
In what way, shape, or form is the guy with prototypical QB measureables coming out of a pro style offense a less polished passer than the guy coming out of the ridiculous spread offense that Baylor runs? The only aspect of Griffin's game that doesn't need work is his deep ball. You can't say the same about Tannehill at all.

Noodleman
04-02-2012, 07:48 PM
In what way, shape, or form is the guy with prototypical QB measureables coming out of a pro style offense a less polished passer than the guy coming out of the ridiculous spread offense that Baylor runs? The only aspect of Griffin's game that doesn't need work is his deep ball. You can't say the same about Tannehill at all.
It doesn't matter, the fact that you can't admit that RG3 is a better qb than Tannehill right now tells me that there will be no changing your mind. I could argue that accuracy, leadership, and every other stat favor RG3 but you would probably still think Tannehill is better. I will just say that ask any "expert" (coaches, gms, commentators) whoever else and they will all say RG3 is a better qb. Tannehill has started 19 games at qb...I can't fathom how you can argue who is the most raw prospect.

Phinatic8u
04-02-2012, 07:57 PM
Robert Griffin will blow in the NFL. He'll be a backup by year 3.

fishbanger
04-02-2012, 08:02 PM
RG3 is going to the redskins. What matters is that we acquire a long term solution to our QB position that can play and win. Tannehill has the tools and expereince in WCO pro-style. Our OC was his coach for 4 years and recruited him out of college.

Coaches in this case know the anser as to whether to draft him or not and RG3 has nothing to do with it.

CRAZYDOLFAN305
04-02-2012, 08:26 PM
Alot of spinning there from Peter King. Comparing Matt Moore to Eli Manning, just to make a point. Now that's crazy.

hooshoops
04-02-2012, 08:35 PM
Trent Richardson reminds me a lot of Jonathan Stewart. They're both phenomenal size/speed guys who lack somewhat in the vision department but can move piles and shatter people with their power. Richardson I think is overall the stronger and more laterally explosive back, but they're pretty similar. Richardson does not really compare to AP, who is superior in every way with the ball in his hands in my opinion. Richardson is, however, a much better blocker and shows better recognition in blitz pickup than AP, and will probably be a better pass receiver, too. Quarterbacks will love the guy.

To me, though, the most important thing is vision. It leads to more explosive plays and generally I think leads to a longer life span for the player. It's why I would rather have DeAngelo Williams than Stewart if I was Carolina and why I still think Mark Ingram will end up a better player in the long run than Richardson. But to each his own.

As for Tannehill, all the signs are pointed his way but I can't shake the feeling that it's all too obvious. Ireland is a guy who's obsessed with his arbitrary notions of value and strikes me as the kind of guy who would pass up Tannehill in the 1st to take Cousins in the 2nd and declare the position solved. All the interest and visits and the like would be him just riding the waves of connections and needs so he can pick Claiborne (in the unlikely event he falls) or Keuchly in the 1st. I can just see him leaning back in his chair, patting himself on the back for fooling the entire league. Meanwhile we're stuck with Kirk Cousins as our developmental guy until he finally busts out three years from now and then and only then is Ireland exiled to Fireland.

THAT seems much more in character to me than dead eyeing a quarterback who's considered (by some) a reach this far out and then actually pulling the trigger on draft day. I have a hard time swallowing it.

bingo...imo mark ingram had much better vision at bama than t rich has shown...but what is gonna help t rich in the pros get those 20 plus yard runs etc in addition to his rediculous power is that top end speed he has..which is better than ingrams but not ap level...i see why people think t rich is a superior talent and prospect to ingram who is caught in a system that splits carries 3 ways and runs to pass but ingrams vision was far superior to any prospect in the draft this or last year

TheWalrus
04-02-2012, 09:37 PM
I dont understand why ppl are questioning richardsons vision, his vision in my opinion is phenominal and his althletism is even better. He is the closest thing to an ap type talent and we should never pass up on a player like this if he falls to us, i can almost guarantee richardson does not pass tampa bay unless they choose to go with claiborne instead.

People are questioning his vision because they don't particularly like his vision. You're free to disagree with that evaluation but there's nothing mystifying about it.

Batroc
04-02-2012, 11:53 PM
What's "risen dramatically" is his hype. Do you really think that NFL GMs are influenced by reports from the media that Team X is trying to move up to get Player A or that Team Y is "very interested" in Player B? None of these reports come from the teams themselves or from anybody even remotely associated with any of the teams. They always come from "sources", probably any number of which are simply shills paid by player agents to inflate their client's publicity.

---------- Post added at 02:42 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:37 PM ----------


If you think it's just "hype" that Tannehill will be gone in the first round then you obviously weren't watching as Christian Ponder and Blaine Gabbert were selected in the first round last year. This is a quarterback driven league. Every team that doesn't have a franchise qb will do what it takes to get one, whether Armchair GMs on internet forums think it's a reach or not. What you and MarshallFin1 think of Tannehill is irrelevant in relation to my post. I merely stated what I believe to be fact in response to MarshallFin saying that our interest in him was as a Later Round prospect. He's the third ranked qb in this draft after Luck and RGIII. He won't make it to Round 2 so if the Fins really want him they'll have to pull the trigger at #8. I'd love to have Luck too, but it didn't happen that way unfortunately.

fishbanger
04-03-2012, 12:11 AM
One area where richardson beats AP. Richardson only fumbled once in his whole college career. I think both are equivalent.
Both Tough as they come. AP may be better at breakaway runs. Both break tackles. Richardson will be better receiver and blocker.

Uruguayfinfan
04-03-2012, 02:57 AM
From reading in this forum, now i'm not sure if it's Tannyhill, Tannehilllls, Tanthishilll, Trannyhill or Tannehill.
:idk: :loco:



(J/K)

Pinkboy
04-03-2012, 04:46 AM
From reading in this forum, now i'm not sure if it's Tannyhill, Tannehilllls, Tanthishilll, Trannyhill or Tannehill.
:idk: :loco:



(J/K)


yeah. most dolphin fans here are a total joke.

For years most of them named Langford, Lankford. And for years up to this day most of them call Tony McDaniel, McDaniels

I always found it funny that it was always the Sparano nut huggers and the clueless ones about the team (the blind and ignorant pom pom cheerleader types) who made such errors all the time.

syborg
04-03-2012, 07:06 AM
I remember all the talk in 2007 about how much effort we were putting into Brady Quinn. Our QB coach at the time was working heavily with Quinn leading up to the draft.

Yeah and I see now why we did not take him. .

Mr772
04-03-2012, 09:32 AM
No way Richardson falls to #8. No way.

where's th'fish
04-03-2012, 10:59 AM
Well said.
Either Tannehill can be a franchise quarterback or not. If he is, then he is worth taking at 16, 8, 3, whatever. If he isnt, why should we draft him at all?

And you know if he is how? Obviously you pay whatever for a franchise QB and nothing for a bust, but nobody knows which guy will be which. So where you pick him depends on how strongly you feel about his chances. Sure, the market also goes into this: if QBs are overdrafted, you gotta pick them higher if you want them. That doesn't mean you can't try to pick your spot, though. You gotta be smart and not over-overdraft a guy if you can help it.

where's th'fish
04-03-2012, 11:04 AM
yeah. most dolphin fans here are a total joke.

For years most of them named Langford, Lankford. And for years up to this day most of them call Tony McDaniel, McDaniels

I always found it funny that it was always the Sparano nut huggers and the clueless ones about the team (the blind and ignorant pom pom cheerleader types) who made such errors all the time.

...and that's what you call being an arrogant sob, kids.

Arsenal WV
04-03-2012, 01:39 PM
After watching some highlights of him playing for a&m. I really don't want this kid.

MarshallFin1
04-03-2012, 01:43 PM
After watching some highlights of him playing for a&m. I really don't want this kid.

your not alone. When aaron rodgers declared for the draft you knew what you were gettin if u got him, a rare talent that needed to be groomed for years before taking over. With tannenhill i think he is no different than henne-moore-guarard, i just dont see that upgrade that we are looking for in him. I see it in weeden but weeden is very old to be taken in the 1st round. I'd go with richardson/claiborne and take a sure elite talent.

ChambersWI
04-03-2012, 02:27 PM
your not alone. When aaron rodgers declared for the draft you knew what you were gettin if u got him, a rare talent that needed to be groomed for years before taking over. With tannenhill i think he is no different than henne-moore-guarard, i just dont see that upgrade that we are looking for in him. I see it in weeden but weeden is very old to be taken in the 1st round. I'd go with richardson/claiborne and take a sure elite talent.

not entirely true on Rodgers. Yeah he was REALLY good in college, but he had a few weaknesses. The biggest one that he was very mechanical. I'm pretty sure some within the Packers organization have talked about changes they really had to drill into his head.

Martel13
04-03-2012, 08:52 PM
I just wanna go on record as saying I don't want anything to do with Tannehill at #8. We need a stud that can start right away at that pick, not a project who played WR and started 19 games. This guy has GABBERT written all over him IMHO.

Phanatical
04-03-2012, 10:00 PM
The "winner" stuff on Ryan Tannehill is so stupid. How quickly he goes from being a guy that "just wins" in 2010 (6-1 record) to being a guy that "chokes" in 2011. D55 put it best, we're talking 38 points per game given up by the defense in those losses.

Oklahoma State is touted as a shining example of Tannehill choking but I only really found 2 or 3 bad throws in there that resulted in drives that ended prematurely in the second half. One he was just wide on a crossing route on 3rd down, so they couldn't keep going for the TD. Another was a bad interception. Texas A&M had called a certain play one too many times, giving the Cowboys defense enough of a look at it to change the way they defended it, Tannehill didn't anticipate the blitz and made a panicked decision. Picked off by a DB that cheated on his coverage responsibility because he'd seen the play three times already and knew Ryan would quickly check off the flat route. Third iffy throw was toward the end, catchable but not great ball placement and Jeff Fuller pops it up for an interception.

Other than that you've got an entire team letdown. Dropped balls. Fuller falls down on an anticipation route, resulting in an interception. Another guy catches the ball then fumbles it during his run after the catch. Penalties. Meanwhile Brandon Weeden gets going and starts coming on the defense like a freight train, which he did pretty often in 2010 and 2011.

I keep hearing that Tannehill is so "raw". I don't see it. That's not what I see when I watch him on tape. Jake Locker was "raw". In many ways, Robert Griffin is "raw". Ryan Tannehill looks pretty polished if you ask me. I just see a pretty good player playing pretty good football and every now and then forcing a ball he shouldn't.

CK:

I've watched tape of both Weeden and Tannehill. Weeden will be a much better NFL QB, mark my words.

Phanatical
04-03-2012, 10:03 PM
After watching some highlights of him playing for a&m. I really don't want this kid.

I agree with that. He throws a lot of floaters and makes poor decisions. I'm not sold on him at all. I would rather take Weeden, that guy's put up some numbers, monster games, monster throws over multiple seasons. He's the real deal.

HybridPHIN 23
04-03-2012, 10:12 PM
After watching some highlights of him playing for a&m. I really don't want this kid.

some ? the more you watch, the more you like.... i'll assume you watched the LSU game.


your not alone. When aaron rodgers declared for the draft you knew what you were gettin if u got him, a rare talent that needed to be groomed for years before taking over. With tannenhill i think he is no different than henne-moore-guarard, i just dont see that upgrade that we are looking for in him. I see it in weeden but weeden is very old to be taken in the 1st round. I'd go with richardson/claiborne and take a sure elite talent.

1st of all Tannehill's talent is rarer, and he played in a pro-system.... he's been a projected first round pick for a long time now.... if you liked Rodgers than you should like Tannehill. Rodgers was far from a sure thing, like you said. And Claiborne/Richardson wont be there when we pick... dream on ! Besides, drafting a RB that high would be a waste in this offense. Sparano and Daboll are gone, bud. This is the West coast offense we're drafting for now.

fishbanger
04-03-2012, 10:25 PM
Tannehill and Weeden are both good. Take either one whichever comes first. tannehill surely did not look like Moore or Gerrard in the Baylor game against RG3.

MarshallFin1
04-03-2012, 11:42 PM
some ? the more you watch, the more you like.... i'll assume you watched the LSU game.



1st of all Tannehill's talent is rarer, and he played in a pro-system.... he's been a projected first round pick for a long time now.... if you liked Rodgers than you should like Tannehill. Rodgers was far from a sure thing, like you said. And Claiborne/Richardson wont be there when we pick... dream on ! Besides, drafting a RB that high would be a waste in this offense. Sparano and Daboll are gone, bud. This is the West coast offense we're drafting for now.

lol at this WCO everyone seems to be dreaming off, dolphins arent built for it. It could take years before u see anything resemble a WCO in miami, philbin will have to win with what he has now and make it work.Trent richardson a waste? cant believe u'd say that lol, to run a wco offense u need a great accurate passer like aaron rodgers. Matt moore, david garrard, or even the great tannehill arent that qb who could do that for us. I watch the tape on tannehill, hes not your most accurate qb, has decent accuracy but not aaron rodgers type. Take in the fact that we also dont have very athletic wrs like the pack into account and its pretty much a ?? at this point how in the hect the dolphins are going to have this great WCO offense. Lol

Phinatic8u
04-04-2012, 12:18 AM
lol at this WCO everyone seems to be dreaming off, dolphins arent built for it. It could take years before u see anything resemble a WCO in miami, philbin will have to win with what he has now and make it work.Trent richardson a waste? cant believe u'd say that lol, to run a wco offense u need a great accurate passer like aaron rodgers. Matt moore, david garrard, or even the great tannehill arent that qb who could do that for us. I watch the tape on tannehill, hes not your most accurate qb, has decent accuracy but not aaron rodgers type. Take in the fact that we also dont have very athletic wrs like the pack into account and its pretty much a ?? at this point how in the hect the dolphins are going to have this great WCO offense. Lol

You. Don't. ****ing. Watch. Tape.

Stop saying that.

---------- Post added at 12:18 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:17 AM ----------


lol at this WCO everyone seems to be dreaming off, dolphins arent built for it. It could take years before u see anything resemble a WCO in miami, philbin will have to win with what he has now and make it work.Trent richardson a waste? cant believe u'd say that lol, to run a wco offense u need a great accurate passer like aaron rodgers. Matt moore, david garrard, or even the great tannehill arent that qb who could do that for us. I watch the tape on tannehill, hes not your most accurate qb, has decent accuracy but not aaron rodgers type. Take in the fact that we also dont have very athletic wrs like the pack into account and its pretty much a ?? at this point how in the hect the dolphins are going to have this great WCO offense. Lol

It also doesn't take long to implement the WCO. If you bring in the right players and draft the right prospects, then its flawless. And Richardson in the top 10 is a waste, Any RB in the 1st is a waste.

drumzan
04-04-2012, 12:22 AM
You guys gotta stop with the overblown media hype of QB's. Look what happened to Gabbert and Mallett last year. Both dropped significantly compared to their media created draft grade. Media talks up all QB's, it's what sells. And since Luck and RG3 are spoken for, Tannehill gets all the attention. Weeden is the best QB in this draft not named Luck. Period. Yes, I even think he's better than RG3.

Phinatic8u
04-04-2012, 12:25 AM
You guys gotta stop with the overblown media hype of QB's. Look what happened to Gabbert and Mallett last year. Both dropped significantly compared to their media created draft grade. Media talks up all QB's, it's what sells. And since Luck and RG3 are spoken for, Tannehill gets all the attention. Weeden is the best QB in this draft not named Luck. Period. Yes, I even think he's better than RG3.

You do realize he went top 15 right?

rev kev
04-04-2012, 01:22 AM
Good for the redskins, but do you think Shanahan will be around long enough to enjoy the fruits of this trade up? It didn't save Spagnuolo's job after he picked up Bradford.

I don't see RG succeeding there but i like him allot _ i think he gets killed behind that Oline similar to the Houston QB who got hammered game after game prior to Schaub

Arsenal WV
04-04-2012, 07:00 AM
[QUOTE=HybridPHIN 23;1064273445]some ? the more you watch, the more you like.... i'll assume you watched the LSU game.


3 individual game highlights and then some season highlights. So he had a bad game against LSU right? Well imagine what will happen against NFL secondaries.

abNORMal
04-04-2012, 08:53 AM
(sarcasm font on) Look guys...we need a QB and a WR. Tanny can play both positions. No brainer. Gotta draft Tanny. He fills two needs with one pick. I bet he can return kicks and play safety too!!! I think this kid can be special (sarcasm font off)

NY8123
04-04-2012, 09:00 AM
It is what it is.

If Miami likes the guy and they have a shot at him, take him. Period. I'd be nice if they didn't have to trade up to grab him but the one thing the draft has taught us is the fact that no experts ever have all the angles worked out. Every single year people fall who are expected to go top 10 and people get picked several selections ahead of the predictions.

I am just hoping Miami gets a shot to draft the kid.

russianbear
04-04-2012, 11:46 AM
I have a question about the QB sitch,,,does our team hirring Garrad for a 1 year deal imply that we will NOT draft Weeden? From what I understand he is an NFL starter ready QB, which presents the question, Why would we have 2 backups signed to 1 year deals if we are going to draft a potential starting QB in the draft? I guess we could cut Garrard but to me it seems like we are honing in on a Tannehill or project QB draft strategy. IE: Drafting someone who will sit for a year and develop under our coaches....

buzzardmountain
04-06-2012, 01:04 PM
So it sounds like the #8 pick in the draft needs to sit for a year?

Great...

sn9ke.eyes
04-06-2012, 01:21 PM
I have a question about the QB sitch,,,does our team hirring Garrad for a 1 year deal imply that we will NOT draft Weeden? From what I understand he is an NFL starter ready QB, which presents the question, Why would we have 2 backups signed to 1 year deals if we are going to draft a potential starting QB in the draft? I guess we could cut Garrard but to me it seems like we are honing in on a Tannehill or project QB draft strategy. IE: Drafting someone who will sit for a year and develop under our coaches....

I don't think 1 year deals really imply anything. Too easy to get out of those deals or extend them as performance is good or bad.

LarryFinFan
04-06-2012, 04:35 PM
I don't think that many Miami fans are in any doubt that we will take Tannehill if he is still there at 8. The question is - will he be there at 8?

Isn't that the same thing a lot of fans said about some guy named Quinn @ #9 a few years ago????

MarshallFin1
04-06-2012, 05:14 PM
Isn't that the same thing a lot of fans said about some guy named Quinn @ #9 a few years ago????

hect, quinn was a better prospect than tannehill but here we are, about to take a 2nd round prospect with a top 10 pick...

dondokken1965
04-07-2012, 04:25 PM
I couldn't agree more with ya. RG3 Is way Over Rated and Hyped

Irishfinfan1
04-07-2012, 05:20 PM
Isn't that the same thing a lot of fans said about some guy named Quinn @ #9 a few years ago????
Man I hope so, really about time the Fins took a QB in the 1st round. Take a chance on Tannehill, if you fail fair enough but there are many 1st round picks that have failed over the years, if you don't swing you don't hit.

PhinsTD
04-07-2012, 10:53 PM
Find, scout, evaluate guys you like who fit the system you run. Who cares where others have them valued? If you like a guy, and think he's 'the guy' it doesn't matter where the hell you take them.

Get lots of talented players that fit your system and you know what people will say about where you drafted them?

Nothing.

fishbanger
04-07-2012, 11:34 PM
Rodgers was drafted with 25th pick in the first round and analysts were saying he was a reach and potential bust. GB had the last laugh.

ChambersWI
04-07-2012, 11:38 PM
hect, quinn was a better prospect than tannehill but here we are, about to take a 2nd round prospect with a top 10 pick...

it's hard to compare what would have happened had Quinn gone somewhere other than Cleveland. He was a bit overrated because he was a Notre Dame QB, but there were things to like about him. It's not really Cleveland's fault that Quinn ended up being more interested in lifting weights than improving as a player, or that after he hurt his hand that he would be afraid to even look to throw a ball downfield... or that Eric Mangini hated him.

A lot of times a player's development has just as much to do with how the organization is ran. Not saying guys like Tim Couch or David Carr would have become franchise QBs, but a lot of experts point out how they spent their first few years running for their lives and it killed their confidence. I dunno about Couch, but compare how David Carr played his first few years with Houston (full of confidence and playing tough despite getting killed on a weekly basis) to his one year with Carolina (as soon as he even saw a defender, he would just drop to the grown so he wouldn't get hit). Hell, you can argue that Sparano and Henning played a part in Henne not developing since they didn't trust him as their QB. And on the flipside, a guy like Eli Manning was not viewed very favorably his first few years in New York, but Coughlin and Jerry Reese did a nice job building around him and building up his confidence. Same with the Packers with Rodgers, and the Falcons with Ryan.

Not saying that if we get Tannehill and he fails it's not because he sucked, but development is not a one sided affair.

thefranchisedef
04-08-2012, 02:39 AM
If we dont we are stupid.. Unless we trade back into first for him

Irishfinfan1
04-08-2012, 04:25 AM
it's hard to compare what would have happened had Quinn gone somewhere other than Cleveland. He was a bit overrated because he was a Notre Dame QB, but there were things to like about him. It's not really Cleveland's fault that Quinn ended up being more interested in lifting weights than improving as a player, or that after he hurt his hand that he would be afraid to even look to throw a ball downfield... or that Eric Mangini hated him.

A lot of times a player's development has just as much to do with how the organization is ran. Not saying guys like Tim Couch or David Carr would have become franchise QBs, but a lot of experts point out how they spent their first few years running for their lives and it killed their confidence. I dunno about Couch, but compare how David Carr played his first few years with Houston (full of confidence and playing tough despite getting killed on a weekly basis) to his one year with Carolina (as soon as he even saw a defender, he would just drop to the grown so he wouldn't get hit). Hell, you can argue that Sparano and Henning played a part in Henne not developing since they didn't trust him as their QB. And on the flipside, a guy like Eli Manning was not viewed very favorably his first few years in New York, but Coughlin and Jerry Reese did a nice job building around him and building up his confidence. Same with the Packers with Rodgers, and the Falcons with Ryan.

Not saying that if we get Tannehill and he fails it's not because he sucked, but development is not a one sided affair.
Agree 100% with this, this is why I feel having Philbin and Sherman here now makes this the time to invest heavily in a QB, they will develop him the right way.

finfan54
04-08-2012, 07:38 AM
I love how people take college games and just transpose this as how they will be in the pros.

Eli Manning wasnt exactly blowing it up. In fact, I remember lots of people saying he would never come close to peyton. dude has one more ring than his brother in less time in.

BlueFin
04-08-2012, 09:46 AM
You know......what many of you forget is that the Dolphins were in a unique position this year to have more information and knowledge of Flynn and Tannehill than any other team this year.

Our OC, former Green Bay head coach Mike Sherman was Tannehill's head coach in college....if he loves him I'm ok with taking this risk...I'm very high on Tannehill.

39wildman
04-08-2012, 11:20 AM
I would rather draft best player available that can help asap.. there is no other qb after first 2 are gone worth number 1 pick or will beat out mat moore. look at viking and jags they both will be looking for qb in 2013 because they draft two bust...

fishbanger
04-08-2012, 11:51 AM
Leinart was a better prospect then Quinn. It really does not matter other then can he QB start in the NFL. I think Philbin and Sherman both think Tannehill can be a starter regardless of where he gets picked.

Teams are now forced to reach for QB. Everyone knows Ponder was not worth a first round grade. I think Tannehill is better then both Locker and Ponder.

HybridPHIN 23
04-09-2012, 10:51 AM
Leinart was a better prospect then Quinn. It really does not matter other then can he QB start in the NFL. I think Philbin and Sherman both think Tannehill can be a starter regardless of where he gets picked.

Teams are now forced to reach for QB. Everyone knows Ponder was not worth a first round grade. I think Tannehill is better then both Locker and Ponder.

Disagree: Ponder flew up the boards, alot of people around here wanted us to take him and thought if he was there @ #15 we would have taken him.
Agree : Tannehill can be better than both Locker and Ponder, both of whom played pretty well their rookie year, in limited action.

HybridPHIN 23
04-09-2012, 10:54 AM
hect, quinn was a better prospect than tannehill but here we are, about to take a 2nd round prospect with a top 10 pick...


Tannehill was never a 2nd round prospect, people had been saying he'll be playing on sundays since late 2010.... and every draftnik rates him as a 1st rounder, possibly elite talent.... your just chugging that haterade for some reason. I'm already prepared for your **** fit on Apr. 26th.:lol:

hooshoops
04-09-2012, 11:26 AM
Tannehill was never a 2nd round prospect, people had been saying he'll be playing on sundays since late 2010.... and every draftnik rates him as a 1st rounder, possibly elite talent.... your just chugging that haterade for some reason. I'm already prepared for your **** fit on Apr. 26th.:lol:

now you're just spreading bs

Nawledge
04-09-2012, 12:48 PM
I don't see ireland picking him with pick 8, its a huge reach in my opinion. I prefer either a trade down to get more picks or take bpa. I read alot of people say on here about how u need to take a qb in round one cuz second round and later selected qbs are failures. I don't think u take a late first round early second round pick at 8 overall just to take a "first round qb"....we got more holes to fill than just qb.