PDA

View Full Version : Ryan Tannehill: Final Word



TedSlimmJr
04-03-2012, 09:19 AM
I figured I'd make this thread here in the main forum to begin with, and then the mods can move it in the draft forum whenever they're ready.

A lot of people ask the question about Tannehill's leadership and command of the huddle. I'll say this... if you're looking for the type of quarterback who plays on the edge, barks at receivers, and displays leadership skills visibly, he's not that type of player.

He's very intelligent, respected by teammates and coaches, extremely disciplined, and has impeccable character. There are no red flags here whatsoever.



Mechanically, he needs some tweaking with his throwing arm. He has to get that throwing elbow up to where it's consistently at shoulder level. He gets a significant amout of passes batted down at the LOS because of it. More than you want to see. The other half of that is not staring down his intended target once he has to come off his initial progression. Defensive lineman are coached to get their hands up when they see you lock on, especially if they know they can't get to you. Manipulating passing lanes is one of the finer details of playing the position that comes with experience, which Tannehill doesn't have much of.

This throwing elbow drops even lower when he throws on the run, although it's obviously not as detrimental when there's green grass in front of you as opposed to 3 or 4 defensive linemen in your face. He throws well on the run despite this because he always makes sure his shoulders are square to the target before he turns it loose. This is a fundamental key for WCO quarterbacks who execute numerous sprint outs, bootlegs, and waggles.

He has the footwork of the various drops required of him ingrained. The 3 and 5 quick, 3 and 5 with a hitch, Drift Drop, etc.... he executes them all with efficient footwork. Keeps his head level and spine angle neutral during his drops from under center. This is probably his biggest plus in my opinion, and the reason he developed into a legitimate quarterback prospect as soon as he did after playing wide receiver.

The only issue I see with his footwork is when he has to come off his initial progression and move to #2 or #3. He doesn't always reset his feet, and this is where his accuracy suffers most.

Pocket presence. He has it. If he didn't, he wouldn't even be on my draft board. Period. Does a good job of keeping his eye level up while looking to extend plays with his feet. However, he doesn't really show the ability to squirt out of danger. If a defender gets a hand on him, he goes down easily. This is his game manager mentality that he developed as a Senior that he didn't have as a Junior, which I'll touch on later.


His worst tendancy in the pocket is to always drift straight backwards and throw off his back foot when pressure is in his face. Just looks completely unprepared for it most of the time.


Tannehill throws with good anticipation when he's required to get the ball out to his initial read the instant his back foot hits on a quick read when he knows he has single coverage on the outside. Most quarterbacks can anticipate these types of throws. Where he gets into trouble is when his initial progression isn't there and he has to come off of it, which I mentioned earlier. His anticipation drops in quality here because he's still not comfortable reading a defender's intent yet. It causes him to be late on a LOT of throws, and it's usually where he makes his biggest mistakes.


I've mentioned before several times that I thought he played better as a Junior than he did this year. He was much more impressive leading that Aggie team last year which is why I felt like he had 1st round potential. However, he looked more tentative as a Senior. He mentioned at his pro day that this was one of the the primary things he and Chris Weinke were working on - changing his tendancy to overthink and just trust his trigger. Let it go.

Rather than take over games like he did as a Junior, he seemed content as a Senior to just be a piece of the puzzle. There's a significant difference between his Junior tape and Senior tape. He was putting the team on his back last year, not just managing like he did this year. He made more mistakes, but he made them being aggressive and decisive. This year he made those mistakes being hesitant and undecisive. He wasn't as comfortable taking the game on his shoulders, and plenty of mental mistakes show up in his situational understanding of game. The drive to close the first half against Oklahoma that I pointed out a while back is one of the best examples of this.

The bottom line is, if he plays in the NFL like he did as a Senior, I have a hard time seeing him as anything more than a game manager... who folds up in crunch time, like he did this year.

There's plenty to like about him, but not in the top 10. He's not a franchise quarterback.

If it's me, I'm taking an elite player with that pick and not apologizing for doing it.

buffal0s0uljah
04-03-2012, 09:33 AM
Interesting assessment, and I especially agree with your last sentence. A big part of me is hoping that the Browns reach for him at 4, or somebody jumps ahead and snatches him so we can just do what is right and take the best player currently on the board.

outlawd2u
04-03-2012, 09:36 AM
I don't think Tannehill is worthy of a top 10 pick by any means and if there wasn't a rookie salary cap I don't think there's any way a team would even think about taking him that high. Not having to pay out the wazoo for a top pick in the NFL now is making teams think it's ok to reach for QB's in hopes that they pan out because the financial investment isn't so scary if it doesn't work out.

ROADRUNNER
04-03-2012, 09:44 AM
That's a great post, i will leave it here for a while to get a few good responses....before i move it.......lol

HybridPHIN 23
04-03-2012, 09:46 AM
He can be a very good starting qb..... I think your nitpicking, and ignoring alot of the positives....especially the oozing talent. No one said he was a finished product that will be ready day 1. You could make a very similar argument about Griffin.

I don't see the elite player of which you speak. Who is it ? If we view Tannehill as a very good starting QB in the future.... who is there that we just cant pass up for him ? Let's look at the big picture, the situation in its entirety. Blackmon, Richardson, and Claiborne wont be there.

Your proposing we pass on him for a sure thing at a far less valuable postion. You say BPA, i say its reaching for another need. This is the exact mentality that folks have been bitching about. Playing it safe, not showing any stones. You should know the draft is about Value. We're not settled at QB. Sure Decastro and Keuchly will be studs... Rieff will be good... but @ #8 you dont take a Guard or MLB, or RT, no matter how good they are. Floyd is Marshall all over again, doesnt fit the offensive philoshiphy. If they like Tannehill, theres not going to be a player there to make them re-consider.

LikeUntoGod
04-03-2012, 09:59 AM
The problem for me is not that he needs work, IMO only A Luck can start from day one. The problem is if we take a QB at #10, we will have to start him in game one.

Zounds
04-03-2012, 10:10 AM
I agree with the final word for the most part, but the only thing that makes me comfortable with Tannehill at #8 is that our OC was his college coach. If we didnt have that direct connection to Tannehill on our staff, I would be worried about drafting him at #8. If Miami takes him at #8, I'll be fine with it becauuse I trust that Sherman knows what we are getting more than anyone else.

Also, I think its strange that Tannehill's value has gone up because he's played less. People equate less playing time to more room for improvement and a higher ceiling. It seems backwards to me. We all know what happens to QB's who declare for the draft their junior year - they have a much higher rate of failure than QB's who stay in college for their senior year. Although Tannehill played his senior year, he's had about as much playing time as most junior QB's.

phinatic1399
04-03-2012, 10:14 AM
if we let him sit for a year he will be a franchise qb

SammySmif
04-03-2012, 10:16 AM
I agree with the OP...sadly. I don't see him as a top 10 pick and it looks as if the fins are in a situation where they may take him.

What I am assuming is that the dolphins are scouting for some sleepers deeper in the draft so they will be prepared for the chance that a Blackmon or Richardson falls to them if Cleveland reaches bigtime.

I'm still crushed that we are not getting RGIII. LOVED his interview with Gruden last night. He would be such a great talent to have in Miami.

Zounds
04-03-2012, 10:16 AM
if we let him sit for a year he will be a franchise qb

I thinks its possible, but he may need to sit for more than a year.

MarshallFin1
04-03-2012, 10:23 AM
Great post slim, heres one thing that stands out to me about your post "
He gets a significant amout of passes batted down at the LOS because of it." , i keep saying tannehill reminds me of chad henne and its starting to become more clearer with assessments like you just gave. Im with you, i think miami should take a claiborne/richardson/blackmon in the first and take there chances with weedin in the 2nd.

rent this space
04-03-2012, 10:23 AM
I agree with the final word for the most part, but the only thing that makes me comfortable with Tannehill at #8 is that our OC was his college coach. If we didnt have that direct connection to Tannehill on our staff, I would be worried about drafting him at #8. If Miami takes him at #8, I'll be fine with it becauuse I trust that Sherman knows what we are getting more than anyone else.

Also, I think its strange that Tannehill's value has gone up because he's played less. People equate less playing time to more room for improvement and a higher ceiling. It seems backwards to me. We all know what happens to QB's who declare for the draft their junior year - they have a much higher rate of failure than QB's who stay in college for their senior year. Although Tannehill played his senior year, he's had about as much playing time as most junior QB's.I agree. Much like Flynn whether they take him or not, they will do it with more knowledge than anyone else

MarshallFin1
04-03-2012, 10:27 AM
I agree with the final word for the most part, but the only thing that makes me comfortable with Tannehill at #8 is that our OC was his college coach. If we didnt have that direct connection to Tannehill on our staff, I would be worried about drafting him at #8. If Miami takes him at #8, I'll be fine with it becauuse I trust that Sherman knows what we are getting more than anyone else.

Also, I think its strange that Tannehill's value has gone up because he's played less. People equate less playing time to more room for improvement and a higher ceiling. It seems backwards to me. We all know what happens to QB's who declare for the draft their junior year - they have a much higher rate of failure than QB's who stay in college for their senior year. Although Tannehill played his senior year, he's had about as much playing time as most junior QB's.

Look at the players talent, forget about what is on the sidelines. That is a great way to makes biased picks. Look at flynn and philbin situation, everyone thought flynn would pick miami to join his old coach, its a business, it means nothing.

Zounds
04-03-2012, 10:35 AM
Look at the players talent, forget about what is on the sidelines. That is a great way to makes biased picks. Look at flynn and philbin situation, everyone thought flynn would pick miami to join his old coach, its a business, it means nothing.

Having a coach with a connectin to a prospect is a great way to NOT make bias picks. It allows you to choose based on direct knowlege and evidence of a specific player, rather than bias.

Phinatic8u
04-03-2012, 10:38 AM
He's better than RG3.

J Tes
04-03-2012, 10:40 AM
Great post slim, heres one thing that stands out to me about your post " , i keep saying tannehill reminds me of chad henne and its starting to become more clearer with assessments like you just gave. Im with you, i think miami should take a claiborne/richardson/blackmon in the first and take there chances with weedin in the 2nd.

Yesterday you said Tannehill reminded you of Moore. Which one is it? It's clear you've never seen him play and are just making uneducated comparisons

Phinatic8u
04-03-2012, 10:42 AM
Yesterday you said Tannehill reminded you of Moore. Which one is it? It's clear you've never seen him play and are just making uneducated comparisons



He watches Youtube videos

:lol:

MarshallFin1
04-03-2012, 10:47 AM
Yesterday you said Tannehill reminded you of Moore. Which one is it? It's clear you've never seen him play and are just making uneducated comparisons

I said he was no better than moore, never compared him to moore. Chad henne is the better comparison. Bad decision making, scared to get rid of the ball alot, looks more like a running back than a qb, innaccurate throws, interceptions gallore. Dont get madd at me, im just pointing out what i saw on game tape.

j-off-her-doll
04-03-2012, 11:01 AM
Yesterday you said Tannehill reminded you of Moore. Which one is it? It's clear you've never seen him play and are just making uneducated comparisons

Also, Michael Floyd reminds him of Steve Smith (Carolina).

datruth55
04-03-2012, 11:08 AM
The problem for me is not that he needs work, IMO only A Luck can start from day one. The problem is if we take a QB at #10, we will have to start him in game one.
No we do not. Wasn't Carson Palmer the #1 overall pick for the Bengals? Did he not sit for a year? Wasn't Philip Rivers the #5 overall pick? Did he not sit for a year? Wasn't Eli Manning the #1 overall pick? Did he not sit for half a season?

Coach Philbin isn't obligated to start him day one and he knows first hand the value of sitting a QB and coaching him up since he did it with Rodgers and Flynn. Neither of which are the same QBs today that they were the day they were drafted or started a game.

TedSlimmJr
04-03-2012, 11:18 AM
He can be a very good starting qb..... I think your nitpicking, and ignoring alot of the positives....especially the oozing talent. No one said he was a finished product that will be ready day 1. You could make a very similar argument about Griffin.

I don't see the elite player of which you speak. Who is it ? If we view Tannehill as a very good starting QB in the future.... who is there that we just cant pass up for him ? Let's look at the big picture, the situation in its entirety. Blackmon, Richardson, and Claiborne wont be there.

Your proposing we pass on him for a sure thing at a far less valuable postion. You say BPA, i say its reaching for another need. This is the exact mentality that folks have been bitching about. Playing it safe, not showing any stones. You should know the draft is about Value. We're not settled at QB. Sure Decastro and Keuchly will be studs... Rieff will be good... but @ #8 you dont take a Guard or MLB, or RT, no matter how good they are. Floyd is Marshall all over again, doesnt fit the offensive philoshiphy. If they like Tannehill, theres not going to be a player there to make them re-consider.


Not entirely sure where to start here as a lot went haywire in your post.

We'll start off with Griffin. I've never insinuated that Griffin was an elite player. Ever. Not since he's been at Baylor.

As a matter of fact, I've always viewed Tannehill as the better NFL quarterback prospect. Griffin is the better college player - Tannehill projects better to the NFL. But that don't make him a franchise quarterback. Hell, I knew Chad Henne projected better to the NFL than Pat White did, but that didn't mean I viewed Henne as a franchise quarterback. It's a matter of taking the prospect's floor into account based on fundamentals rather than ceiling based in upside.

There's 5 elite talents in this draft. Luck, Richardson, Claiborne, DeCastro, and Kuechly. There's another tier of prospects just below this that fall into a borderline elite category.

One or more of those 5 elite talents will be available for Miami at #8. Riley Reiff doesn't belong in either of those categories so I'm not sure where you're going with that one.

Nor am I nitpicking Ryan Tannehill, I'm evaluating him... and I do based on a set of fundamentals both within the system he played in, and a seperate set of fundamentals that validate his potential. There's nothing being ignored, that I'll guarantee you.

BPA is not reaching for need, it's acquiring talent. If I feel like a player is a franchise quarterback, I won't pass him up. I don't consider every college kid that the talking heads hype up as franchise material as being precisely that. Most of it is driven by marketing groups and sports agents.... that's how you end up with Blaine Gabberts coming off the board early, when I know damn well better than to subscribe to that.

The draft isn't about value, it's about acquiring TALENT, particularly in the top 10 of the draft. A quarterback is only as valuable as his skillset makes him. An average quarterback prospect isn't worth more than an elite talent at less valuable position.

The problem is a lot of people go from one extreme to the other among "playing it safe" and "showing some stones". They miss all of the space in between.

Michael Floyd isn't Brandon Marshall all over again. One of the biggest components of running a WCO is having a receiver who can immediately defeat the jam at the LOS in order to get the 3-step passing game going. There's no receiver in this draft better at that than Michael Floyd. If they want him at #8, it's a better pick than reaching for Tannehill.

The people making the decisions should absolutely take Ryan Tannehill in the top 10 if they're convinced for some reason that he's a franchise quarterback. Hell, they better take Barrett Trotter or a one-legged rodeo clown in the top 10 if they're convinced he's a franchise quarterback.

My point is, I'm not conviced he's a franchise quarterback. Therefore I'd pass and feel pretty good about this one. It has nothing to do with what they're subject to do.

Jeff Ireland and myself don't necessarily seem to see eye-to-eye when it comes to personnel, never have. I'm not expecting it to start a few weeks from now.

hooshoops
04-03-2012, 11:29 AM
No we do not. Wasn't Carson Palmer the #1 overall pick for the Bengals? Did he not sit for a year? Wasn't Philip Rivers the #5 overall pick? Did he not sit for a year? Wasn't Eli Manning the #1 overall pick? Did he not sit for half a season?

Coach Philbin isn't obligated to start him day one and he knows first hand the value of sitting a QB and coaching him up since he did it with Rodgers and Flynn. Neither of which are the same QBs today that they were the day they were drafted or started a game.


thats true he doesn't have to play in 2012 but lets be honest after garrard or matt moore lead us to yet another season where we're out of it before thanksgiving i sure would like to see at least a 6 game look at the kid with the starting job so i have a better idea of if he's something to build around for the near future or if i need to use my likely top 12 pick on another qb in 2013...and if he sits all year we won't know squat

i'm with slimm...he's too risky in the top 10 for my taste but i i'm fully prepared for his name to be called with pick #7 or #8 and likely in either scenario to us

J Tes
04-03-2012, 11:34 AM
I said he was no better than moore, never compared him to moore. Chad henne is the better comparison. Bad decision making, scared to get rid of the ball alot, looks more like a running back than a qb, innaccurate throws, interceptions gallore. Dont get madd at me, im just pointing out what i saw on game tape.

your exact quote from yesterday "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"

After you watch some more youtube....I mean game tape, you'll change it to how he reminds you of Pat Devlin.

hooshoops
04-03-2012, 11:35 AM
b/t that marshallfin1 guy is all over the place...

BlueFin
04-03-2012, 11:39 AM
Good post, but I respectfully disagree.......this franchise has to roll the dice on a QB and I really like Tannehill's potential. Obviously he has limited experience which more than explains some of the negatives you detailed. This franchise has got to stop passing on quarterbacks...it is the major cause of the failure of the last 12 years of franchise history.

Harry_Bagpipe
04-03-2012, 11:40 AM
I think Tannehill will be the pick but, for me, I would feel more comfortable taking Keuchly and Weeden with our first two picks and than double up later in the draft and take Ryan Lindley. Maybe grab a Michael Egnew in round 3.

That would make me feel better than Tanny at 8 and than lets say a Mike Adams in round 2.

oasis
04-03-2012, 11:43 AM
How does Tannehill compare to Henne (as a prospect)? My biggest fear is spending the #8 on Henne 2.0. Henne was obviously missing something that was needed to become a franchise QB. Does Tannehill have what Henne didn't, or is he a more mobile Henne with less arm strength and less starting experience?

TedSlimmJr
04-03-2012, 12:05 PM
This franchise has got to stop passing on quarterbacks...it is the major cause of the failure of the last 12 years of franchise history.


The major cause of the failure isn't passing up on quarterbacks... it's passing up on franchise caliber quarterbacks. There's a difference.

For example, when they passed on Matt Ryan, they took Jake Long and ended up with a helluva player (when healthy). They made a safe decision, but not the best one to make Miami a competitive team year in and year out.

When they passed on Brady Quinn, they made a wise decision. But they un-did that wise decision with a completely incompetent pick, when the best defensive player in the draft was sitting right there.

They made a bad decision passing on Drew Brees, but compounded that by trading a draft pick for a quarterback who was already washed up even before he was injured. The injury just exacerbated his demise. They should've traded up for Jay Cutler instead when they knew they couldn't land Brees. It could've been done because that's exactly what Denver did....traded up to #11 to take him.

Wannstedt didn't try hard enough to get Matt Hasselbeck in free agency. He went to Seattle and led them to the superbowl instead.


Here's my point, nobody is a stronger proponent of building around the quarterback position than I have been for a long time. But quarterbacks often boil down to gut feeling. It's what's in your gut that you're eventually going to go with. Taking blind stabs just to take them in an attempt to make up for all your past mistakes will get you nowhere just as fast.

Tannehill just isn't the quarterback that you want to pass up elite talent for in the top 10 of the draft. You're reaching for something that isn't there right now. Which is always acceptable as long as you're not passing up a truly elite player at another position.

There's a quarterback who's better than Tannehill right now who Miami might be able to get at the top of the 2nd round. There's 3 or 4 other quarterbacks in this draft that Miami could get even later than that who are no more developmental than Tannehill is, and have just as much upside.

It makes no sense to take the same caliber of player with the 8th overall pick that you can get with the 73rd overall pick.

KTOWNFINFAN
04-03-2012, 12:05 PM
I agree with the final word for the most part, but the only thing that makes me comfortable with Tannehill at #8 is that our OC was his college coach. If we didnt have that direct connection to Tannehill on our staff, I would be worried about drafting him at #8. If Miami takes him at #8, I'll be fine with it becauuse I trust that Sherman knows what we are getting more than anyone else.

Also, I think its strange that Tannehill's value has gone up because he's played less. People equate less playing time to more room for improvement and a higher ceiling. It seems backwards to me. We all know what happens to QB's who declare for the draft their junior year - they have a much higher rate of failure than QB's who stay in college for their senior year. Although Tannehill played his senior year, he's had about as much playing time as most junior QB's.

VERY sound logic. I totally agree. If you believe the reason Flynn isn't a dolphin is because the staff knew enough about him to know he wasn't starter material, then you have to trust the same staff if they like or dislike Tannehill. If they think he is worth the 8th overall pick then they have more information than we do, having a coach in Sherman that used to coach him.

I also TOTALLY agree with your comparrison of Tannehill to a Jr QB coming out early. Draft experts in the NFL and especially in the NBA, seem to lump all unknown attributes into the positive catagory and call it potential. That has never made sense to me. QBs evolve different ways and different speeds, and most of the problems they have can be worked out or worked around with the right coaching staff. But the problem comes from problems that CAN'T be worked out, and there are always a few of those as well. Sanchez is a prime example, there was much to like about him coming out of college, but there was much unknown about him as well. Once the league started figuring his strengths and weaknesses he begin to turn into what we have today, which is a very average or below QB, with a very low ceiling. The lack of experience in college is NEVER a good thing in my opinion. The fact that Tannehill was better last year than this year bothers me even more.

Bottom line is I am going to trust the staff we have in place to make the decision. If we take him I am going to assume it is because they see the future in him more than the presesnt. Moore is a very servicable QB until we can get a more talented player ready. It's not like anyone short of Manning was taking us to the playoffs any way. So if they draft him great, if not that is fine too. He has his warts like a lot of others. I think taking him at 8 is reaching, but if he's your guy then sometimes you have to reach.

Blake the great
04-03-2012, 12:19 PM
I guess it depends on your definition of franchise QB. If he has a career similar to Matt Hasselback or Joe Flacco then id be happy taking him at 8

rev kev
04-03-2012, 12:26 PM
How does he compare to J Clausen and M Sanchez who you stand behind??

fishbanger
04-03-2012, 12:33 PM
If none of the top six players drop then you have to compare Tannehill to the value thats left.Coples > Effort issueReiff > RT reach and not your prototypical LT eitherIngram > Great player but a tweener and lots of pass rushers in this draftDecastro > Guard is a reachKuechly > Limted to MLB is a reachAny WR other then Blackmon is not required for WCO and would also be a reachTannehill is the pick unless Claiborne, Richardson, or Blackmon falls to us. He may be a reach but so will everyone else. QB is our biggest need too.If not there, trade down for more second and third round picks.

MarshallFin1
04-03-2012, 12:33 PM
your exact quote from yesterday "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"

After you watch some more youtube....I mean game tape, you'll change it to how he reminds you of Pat Devlin.

well i must be saying something right if you are literally saving my posts from a week ago lmao. Matt moore , chad henne, whatever, does it matter? hes not worth a 1st, all that really matters in the end.

TedSlimmJr
04-03-2012, 12:35 PM
How does he compare to J Clausen and M Sanchez who you stand behind??


Not as good as Mark Sanchez, about even with Clausen....




...not as good as Chad Henne, who's obviously better than Matt Ryan according to you.


About even with Sam Bradford, who looks a lot like Clausen.

DolfanDuBbZ~
04-03-2012, 12:35 PM
Good post, but I respectfully disagree.......this franchise has to roll the dice on a QB and I really like Tannehill's potential. Obviously he has limited experience which more than explains some of the negatives you detailed. This franchise has got to stop passing on quarterbacks...it is the major cause of the failure of the last 12 years of franchise history.



So reach and hope for the best, just to say you drafted a QB? :ponder:


The OP in better detail explained things better than I have. I being in BIG 12 country seen this kid alot. I seen him meltdown in certain games, just throwing **** up in the 2nd half causing his team problems. People need to get off YOUTUBE and actually know what he does when things get tight and when things matter. Slim put it there for ya.

But that doesn't matter to you and others like you. You want this FO to reach for a prospect that will get people fired. It already cost one coach on this NEW MIA staff their job. If Tannhill is taken at #8, this FO and Coaching staff will get booed out of town within 3 years.

J Tes
04-03-2012, 12:50 PM
well i must be saying something right if you are literally saving my posts from a week ago lmao. Matt moore , chad henne, whatever, does it matter? hes not worth a 1st, all that really matters in the end.

You've said nothing that I agree with and i've saved none of your extremely uneducated gibberish posts. You made your awful Moore comparison yesterday. Wasn't hard to find either. It was still on the first page. I felt as if I needed to call you out on it because it seems that your wealth (being used very loosely) of football knowledge goes no further than the Dolphins seeing that you've compared Tannehill to both Moore and Henne, two very different QB's. Nice try though

Penthos
04-03-2012, 01:11 PM
So reach and hope for the best, just to say you drafted a QB? :ponder:...

"I seen him meltdown in certain games, just throwing **** up in the 2nd half causing his team problems.". I understand what you are saying, but let's remember, he only started 19 games. Experience and coaching MIGHT fix those kinds of issues.

But to me it doesn't matter, Miami needs a franchise QB. It's abundantly clear we aren't going to get one through free agency, ever. Therefore, our only alternative is to draft the best available QB, EVERY YEAR, until we find our franchise QB. It's really that simple to me.

Phinatic8u
04-03-2012, 01:23 PM
:lol:

Man Marshallfin1 just.stop.already.

But Slimm always, I agree with you 100%, but I kinda got a feeling this was to get a boost in voting for your MM matchup, eh?

:lol::lol:

Roman529
04-03-2012, 01:23 PM
I think QB's can show leadership skills without being vocal and screaming at receivers and lineman when they mess up. Take the Manning Brothers. Peyton is more of a vocal leader, and I have seen where he is miked up and yelling at his lineman and receivers for screwing up their blocking patterns and routes.

Eli Manning isn't like this, but he has more of a quiet confidence, and he seems to be able to shake off a bad INT, and just keep playing at a high level. I loved Dan Marino, but I think at times he maybe let his emotions get the better of him by screaming at his receivers. Dan demanded perfection out there, but sometimes you have to let things go and focus on the next play. Tannehill isn't a rah-rah, get-in-your-face QB, but he is a smart guy, and I think he has a lot of upside as he hasn't played QB that long. I think him having been a wide receiver is helpful in knowing how to get the ball to guys in their routes.

TedSlimmJr
04-03-2012, 02:08 PM
:lol:

Man Marshallfin1 just.stop.already.

But Slimm always, I agree with you 100%, but I kinda got a feeling this was to get a boost in voting for your MM matchup, eh?

:lol::lol:




Tylerdolphin needs to win something. He gets hosed out of that Most Comedic award every year. If the voting was close I was giving him my vote to put him ahead... don't look like he'll need it.

Vaark
04-03-2012, 02:18 PM
Tylerdolphin needs to win something. He gets hosed out of that Most Comedic award every year. If the voting was close I was giving him my vote to put him ahead... don't look like he'll need it.

To the contrary.. it's less about the 3rd world terrorist getting "hosed" and more about him being the equivalent to Kansas last night :up:

MadDog 88
04-03-2012, 02:25 PM
If I am making the pick at 8 I am taking Kuechly then following up with Weeden who is ready to face NFL competition. Tannehill is benefiting from the lack of QB talent in the draft and moving up only because of the amount of teams looking for that franchise guy. I am not sold on him and would actually rather wait a year if they don't want/can't get Weeden. There is a much better class next year giving the Dolphins the possibility of having options with their first pick, or put themselves into position to move up.

j-off-her-doll
04-03-2012, 02:26 PM
I'm really back and forth on this one. If we had the old coaching staff, and we were looking at drafting Tannehill, I'd be pretty set against it. I don't see him as a player who will succeed regardless of destination. Of QB's in recent years, Newton and Luck are the only two who make me say: 'This guy will find a way to get it done - wherever.' I know you still have reservations about Newton, but that's another discussion. But when I factor in his intelligence, his skill set, and our coaching staff, I see a guy who could definitely be a bigger, faster A. Rodgers (speaking only of his ceiling). He definitely needs development, but if our staff decides that he's the best guy to develop, I can really get behind that.

On the other side of that coin:

He does need to be developed. If the staff thinks they can just as well develop R. Lindley (for example) and get him in the 3rd, then, yeah, by all means, draft Kuechly, Floyd, or someone else. Looking back, could J. Campbell have turned out like A. Rodgers if the situations were reversed? Decent chance. But I think the staff has to be comfortable with who they're developing. If they believe in him, and he has the tools, I think they'll get it done.

ChambersWI
04-03-2012, 02:38 PM
I've been saying this for the last 2 years and I will continue to say this; if the head coach and GM of the Miami Dolphins see a QB and they feel they can build an offense around him and win games with him, you take him no matter what. You don't take a QB just to take a QB, and honestly with how the offseason has gone I think we are preparing to either A)Draft Tannehill or B)Draft a guy in round 3 to develop like Ryan Lindley (who has 3 years of WCO experience) or Brock Osweiler. IMO I think Weeden is more of an option for Cleveland than us.

As of right now, it's Tannehill as choice one, Kuechley as choice 2, and Melvin Ingram as choice 3. If Blackmon falls, I think you take him no question, if Richardson somehow falls to us, I'm trying to coax the Bengals to giving up their 2 first rounders.

j-off-her-doll
04-03-2012, 02:42 PM
I've been saying this for the last 2 years and I will continue to say this; if the head coach and GM of the Miami Dolphins see a QB and they feel they can build an offense around him and win games with him, you take him no matter what. You don't take a QB just to take a QB, and honestly with how the offseason has gone I think we are preparing to either A)Draft Tannehill or B)Draft a guy in round 3 to develop like Ryan Lindley (who has 3 years of WCO experience) or Brock Osweiler. IMO I think Weeden is more of an option for Cleveland than us.

As of right now, it's Tannehill as choice one, Kuechley as choice 2, and Melvin Ingram as choice 3. If Blackmon falls, I think you take him no question, if Richardson somehow falls to us, I'm trying to coax the Bengals to giving up their 2 first rounders.

Unless you're really turned off by Floyd as a person, I don't think there's much of a gap at all between he and Blackmon. If anything, I like Floyd a little better as a player. For what we're going to be doing, though, I think Kueckley will be more valuable than Blackmon or Floyd.

ChambersWI
04-03-2012, 03:15 PM
I think Blackmon fits the offense a bit better, and while I'm not totally against Floyd he's just not choice numero uno

DolfanDuBbZ~
04-03-2012, 03:21 PM
"I seen him meltdown in certain games, just throwing **** up in the 2nd half causing his team problems.". I understand what you are saying, but let's remember, he only started 19 games. Experience and coaching MIGHT fix those kinds of issues.

But to me it doesn't matter, Miami needs a franchise QB. It's abundantly clear we aren't going to get one through free agency, ever. Therefore, our only alternative is to draft the best available QB, EVERY YEAR, until we find our franchise QB. It's really that simple to me.

So you would draft the Brady Quinn's until you hit a Matt Ryan? All the while not taking a P. Willis? Makes NO ****ING SENSE!

BlueFin
04-03-2012, 06:16 PM
The major cause of the failure isn't passing up on quarterbacks... it's passing up on franchise caliber quarterbacks. There's a difference.

For example, when they passed on Matt Ryan, they took Jake Long and ended up with a helluva player (when healthy). They made a safe decision, but not the best one to make Miami a competitive team year in and year out.

When they passed on Brady Quinn, they made a wise decision. But they un-did that wise decision with a completely incompetent pick, when the best defensive player in the draft was sitting right there.

They made a bad decision passing on Drew Brees, but compounded that by trading a draft pick for a quarterback who was already washed up even before he was injured. The injury just exacerbated his demise. They should've traded up for Jay Cutler instead when they knew they couldn't land Brees. It could've been done because that's exactly what Denver did....traded up to #11 to take him.

Wannstedt didn't try hard enough to get Matt Hasselbeck in free agency. He went to Seattle and led them to the superbowl instead.


Here's my point, nobody is a stronger proponent of building around the quarterback position than I have been for a long time. But quarterbacks often boil down to gut feeling. It's what's in your gut that you're eventually going to go with. Taking blind stabs just to take them in an attempt to make up for all your past mistakes will get you nowhere just as fast.

Tannehill just isn't the quarterback that you want to pass up elite talent for in the top 10 of the draft. You're reaching for something that isn't there right now. Which is always acceptable as long as you're not passing up a truly elite player at another position.

There's a quarterback who's better than Tannehill right now who Miami might be able to get at the top of the 2nd round. There's 3 or 4 other quarterbacks in this draft that Miami could get even later than that who are no more developmental than Tannehill is, and have just as much upside.

It makes no sense to take the same caliber of player with the 8th overall pick that you can get with the 73rd overall pick.

Your post makes the assumption that ..............No.1) Your perception is reality and perfect!

I remember being angry when this franchise passed on Drew Brees for Jamar Fletcher....at the time many "draft experts" weren't so sure.

I remember wanting Aaron Rogers with the No. 2 overall in 2006....the draft experts on THIS board didn't think much of Rogers....I did. Boy wasn't Ronnie Brown great?

To paraphrase George Young...Former Dolphins and Giants executive..."If you don't have a franchise QB, you keep drafting until you get one"

Nothing else matters................................................................................................................................................................................................. ........

The Confessor
04-03-2012, 06:37 PM
Glad somebody agrees with me on this one.

I watched MOST of his games this year, and have watched another 3 of them over and over.

This kid has forever to go before he is a good QB, and I honestly saw way way too many mistakes for me to think he ever will be.

He has a really really bad habit of predetermining his target before he even receives the ball from the center...and he doesn't look off of that very often.

The kid can indeed run, but that alone won't do it at the next level.

I saw him make LOTS of really bad throws against very mediocre defenses all season long. I kept wondering "Where the heck was he throwing that", and the cameras repeatedly showed that he indeed was not throwing it near anybody.

Even at an elite position, that we might or might not be needing, this kid is NOT worthy of a top 10 pick. Not even close!

BlueFin
04-03-2012, 08:22 PM
My final word will be this....if Mike Sherman ( who knows this kid better than any fan or amatuer)...believes in this kid as having it...its good enough for me.

We'll see what happens, obviously philbin did not believe in Flynn...Sherman's opinion of Tannehill will weigh heavily.

I watched the kid and liked what I saw.

2413fanphins
04-03-2012, 11:22 PM
We'll.never take.this dude... everyone expects us to take him. Hell be there at 8the and we wont. Take him. This a looks and feels like a brady quinn scenarjo all over again. Man my fingers are too fat for this phone... sorry for the ****ty spelling.

hooshoops
04-03-2012, 11:34 PM
well i know one thing...if tannehill is there at #8 and they don't take him they pulled the blanket completely over my head...cause i think this suckers locked up if he's on the board

CANDolphan
04-04-2012, 12:19 AM
well i must be saying something right if you are literally saving my posts from a week ago lmao. Matt moore , chad henne, whatever, does it matter? hes not worth a 1st, all that really matters in the end.

So you admit you're basically making **** up at this point? Stop posting and educate yourself, then come back.

BlueFin
08-11-2012, 11:20 AM
I have to say your final assessment of Ryan Tannehill was dead wrong, he clearly displays franchise QB talent.

Wildbill3
08-11-2012, 11:48 AM
I have to say your final assessment of Ryan Tannehill was dead wrong, he clearly displays franchise QB talent.viewing the edvidence last night, I don't know if I'd personally call him franchise yet... but I would call him the starter for game 2 of the preseason.

TedSlimmJr
08-11-2012, 11:53 AM
I have to say your final assessment of Ryan Tannehill was dead wrong, he clearly displays franchise QB talent.


Be more specific...

BlueFin
08-11-2012, 12:21 PM
There's plenty to like about him, but not in the top 10. He's not a franchise quarterback.

If it's me, I'm taking an elite player with that pick and not apologizing for doing it.

This is what I was referring to, a quarterback with the size, arm, athletic ability, to include running 4.5's.....is an elite player.

I think we saw the type of throws in a just a little over a quarter of play that you look for in a franchise QB, to include two nice touchdown throws.

I was referring to your statement, "he is not a franchise QB"...I think your wrong.

BlueFin
08-11-2012, 12:23 PM
viewing the edvidence last night, I don't know if I'd personally call him franchise yet... but I would call him the starter for game 2 of the preseason.

Bill, you have to be impressed with this kids talent, he clearly is the best quarterback talent we've seen in a Dolphin uniform since Danny.

I see him clearly as the starter for this team in 2012.

TedSlimmJr
08-11-2012, 12:34 PM
This is what I was referring to, a quarterback with the size, arm, athletic ability, to include running 4.5's.....is an elite player.

I think we saw the type of throws in a just a little over a quarter of play that you look for in a franchise QB, to include two nice touchdown throws.

I was referring to your statement, "he is not a franchise QB"...I think your wrong.



There's a lot more to it than that I'm afraid. I'm not convinced he'll be a franchise quarterback, but more of an effective game manager. Being a franchise quarterback has nothing to do with the type of throws you make in a pre-season game against backups.

The most impressive thing about Tannehill last night was that he knew exactly where to go with the football because of his familiarity with the structure of the offense and it's concepts. He was decisive and accurate.

However, he didn't face any pressure, and didn't have to win a game in the 4th quarter.

I know a lot of you are excited and feel a little bit like toddlers with a new toy, I understand. But you're actually being a bit unfair to him at the moment. He'd tell you the same.

BlueFin
08-11-2012, 04:47 PM
There's a lot more to it than that I'm afraid. I'm not convinced he'll be a franchise quarterback, but more of an effective game manager. Being a franchise quarterback has nothing to do with the type of throws you make in a pre-season game against backups.

The most impressive thing about Tannehill last night was that he knew exactly where to go with the football because of his familiarity with the structure of the offense and it's concepts. He was decisive and accurate.

However, he didn't face any pressure, and didn't have to win a game in the 4th quarter.

I know a lot of you are excited and feel a little bit like toddlers with a new toy, I understand. But you're actually being a bit unfair to him at the moment. He'd tell you the same.

I didn't start watching football yesterday...I know a franchise quarterback when I see one and I'll guarantee you this kid is it.

You can play with semantics all you want, but if Andrew Luck and RG3 are considered franchise QB's, this kid is one as well.

I know you consider yourself some sort of expert, well, I've been watching football for 42 years and my track record has been pretty strong when it comes to anaylizing quarterbacks.

My response to you was based on your assessment that this kid was not as good as the aformentioned prospects, not worthy of a top ten pick...and finally not someone that will ever be a franchise QB...just a game manager.

I'm sorry, Jay Fiedler was a game manager...Ryan Tannehill's skill level is far above that.

I suppose he'll have to win a Superbowl before you'll admit you were wrong about him?

I'm certainly glad you are not the one making the call on Dolphin drafts...or this team would still be looking for the future at quarterback, but we'd have a nice safety or CB.

TedSlimmJr
08-11-2012, 05:10 PM
I didn't start watching football yesterday...I know a franchise quarterback when I see one and I'll guarantee you this kid is it.

You can play with semantics all you want, but if Andrew Luck and RG3 are considered franchise QB's, this kid is one as well.

I know you consider yourself some sort of expert, well, I've been watching football for 42 years and my track record has been pretty strong when it comes to anaylizing quarterbacks.

My response to you was based on your assessment that this kid was not as good as the aformentioned prospects, not worthy of a top ten pick...and finally not someone that will ever be a franchise QB...just a game manager.

I'm sorry, Jay Fiedler was a game manager...Ryan Tannehill's skill level is far above that.

I suppose he'll have to win a Superbowl before you'll admit you were wrong about him?

I'm certainly glad you are not the one making the call on Dolphin drafts...or this team would still be looking for the future at quarterback, but we'd have a nice safety or CB.


I don't consider Robert Griffin a franchise quarterback prospect. Nor do I consider him a better prospect than Ryan Tannehill. This couldn't possibly have been made any clearer than I made it.

You 42 year fanboys annoint players left and right from game to game... even snap to snap.


Jay Fiedler was not a game manager. He was inept as a starter. I think you mistake a game manager for a quarterback without physical skills or requisite talent. That's not the intent of being a game manager. Game management has virtually nothing to do with skill level. You can be a game manager and be a pro-bowl caliber quarterback. Andrew Luck will be a game manager. He'll get the offense out of bad plays and into the best play possible.

I'm not wrong about him. You're attempting to draw lines in the sand here that aren't there. If he wins a superbowl it still doesn't mean he wasn't a game manager. I didn't say he couldn't win a superbowl....

TedSlimmJr
08-11-2012, 05:25 PM
For example, Jim Kelly and Troy Aikman were both game managers. Neither are what I would consider a franchise quarterback. They managed the talent that was at their disposal within the confines of the offense.

A franchise quarterback is a quarterback who's team lives and dies by what he does.

Prospects like Cam Newton and Robert Griffin will never be game managers. They'll either be the best in the league or bust out because of their style, not skillset. Game managers survive the ups and downs of an NFL career through attention to detail and managing the pocket.

Tannehill won't be the type of QB who carries a team on his shoulders. He's better being a piece of the puzzle than the one guy defenses are forced to stop. Same as a lot of good quarterbacks have been.

BlueFin
08-12-2012, 11:33 AM
I don't consider Robert Griffin a franchise quarterback prospect. Nor do I consider him a better prospect than Ryan Tannehill. This couldn't possibly have been made any clearer than I made it.

You 42 year fanboys annoint players left and right from game to game... even snap to snap.


Jay Fiedler was not a game manager. He was inept as a starter. I think you mistake a game manager for a quarterback without physical skills or requisite talent. That's not the intent of being a game manager. Game management has virtually nothing to do with skill level. You can be a game manager and be a pro-bowl caliber quarterback. Andrew Luck will be a game manager. He'll get the offense out of bad plays and into the best play possible.

I'm not wrong about him. You're attempting to draw lines in the sand here that aren't there. If he wins a superbowl it still doesn't mean he wasn't a game manager. I didn't say he couldn't win a superbowl....

Fanboy? Yes I am a lifelong Dolphin fan...but I do not have aqua and orange colored glasses on.

I have criticized this organization for over a decade, pushing for the drafting of high level quarterback, as they wasted time with journeyman after journeyman. I even openly criticized Shula back in the day for many of his drafts, that in my opinion kept Marino from winning a championship.

Regarding Tannehill, I was pimping for him long before it was even being discussed that the Dolphins might take him. I had seen him at Texas A & M and loved his potential.

He will be far more than game manager, he has the skills to be a playmaker and I believe he will be.

I think its funny that you think you can be so condecending as to dismiss anybody as a "fanboy" who disagrees with you because of your self appointed "level of expertise". Get over yourself man!

It must kill your ego that You may very well have been completely wrong about drafting Tannehill at #8 overall? Do you secretly hope he fails just so you can be right??

TedSlimmJr
08-12-2012, 12:03 PM
Fanboy? Yes I am a lifelong Dolphin fan...but I do not have aqua and orange colored glasses on.

I have criticized this organization for over a decade, pushing for the drafting of high level quarterback, as they wasted time with journeyman after journeyman. I even openly criticized Shula back in the day for many of his drafts, that in my opinion kept Marino from winning a championship.

Regarding Tannehill, I was pimping for him long before it was even being discussed that the Dolphins might take him. I had seen him at Texas A & M and loved his potential.

He will be far more than game manager, he has the skills to be a playmaker and I believe he will be.

I think its funny that you think you can be so condecending as to dismiss anybody as a "fanboy" who disagrees with you because of your self appointed "level of expertise". Get over yourself man!

It must kill your ego that You may very well have been completely wrong about drafting Tannehill at #8 overall? Do you secretly hope he fails just so you can be right??


BlueFin -

You're not even able to point specifically at anything about Ryan Tannehill that I'm wrong about because you're not qualified. This is how I evaluated Tannehill at Texas A&M. There's threads in here where I specifically mentioned Ryan Tannehill as having 1st round ability going back to his Junior year when he took over for Jerrod Johnson after playing receiver.

The only thing you're qualified to do is cheer due to a lifetime of experience doing it by your own account.

All you have to do is step back for a second to realize how ridiculous it is what you're doing. You're annointing a kid based on a handfull of throws in one pre-season game. You fail to mention him skipping passes and almost throwing a pick due to staring down the receiver on a short out. All this against backups on a 4-12 team who's top 10 pick in the secondary didn't even play.

He's actually made improvements in his throwing mechanics since he played for aTm. His elbow is higher now.

Contrary to whatever your belief is, I don't need Tannehill to fail to prove me right or wrong. I already know that my assessment of him as a prospect was accurate. Rarely do I predict success or failure for prospects because that aspect often comes down to other factors that have nothing to do with scouting, or a kid's talent. Furthermore, I don't have time to bump every single statement on every single prospect everytime I'm right based on what he did the previous snap or previous series.

Ego has nothing to do with this. I'd pull for Ryan Tannehill no matter where he went, which I also made clear. Although when he goes out and struggles, I'll make damn sure you're aware of it now.

BlueFin
08-12-2012, 12:17 PM
BlueFin -

You're not even able to point specifically at anything about Ryan Tannehill that I'm wrong about because you're not qualified. This is how I evaluated Tannehill at Texas A&M. There's threads in here where I specifically mentioned Ryan Tannehill as having 1st round ability going back to his Junior year when he took over for Jerrod Johnson after playing receiver.

The only thing you're qualified to do is cheer due to a lifetime of experience doing it by your own account.

All you have to do is step back for a second to realize how ridiculous it is what you're doing. You're annointing a kid based on a handfull of throws in one pre-season game. You fail to mention him skipping passes and almost throwing a pick due to staring down the receiver on a short out. All this against backups on a 4-12 team who's top 10 pick in the secondary didn't even play.

He's actually made improvements in his throwing mechanics since he played for aTm. His elbow is higher now.

Contrary to whatever your belief is, I don't need Tannehill to fail to prove me right or wrong. I already know that my assessment of him as a prospect was accurate. Rarely do I predict success or failure for prospects because that aspect often comes down to other factors that have nothing to do with scouting, or a kid's talent. Furthermore, I don't have time to bump every single statement on every single prospect everytime I'm right based on what he did the previous snap or previous series.

Ego has nothing to do with this. I'd pull for Ryan Tannehill no matter where he went, which I also made clear. Although when he goes out and struggles, I'll make damn sure you're aware of it now.

Who are you to say what I'm qualified for?

Bottomline, you said you would pass on him at number 8 overall...if he ends up being a great player YOU were WRONG!

I enjoy reading opinions on this board, and what you need to realize is all you have to offer is your opinions.

They are no more relevent than anyone elses.

And no, for about the thrid or fourth time, I am not annointing this kid based one qwuarter of play. I actually watched his play at Texas A&M and was a proponent of drafting him long before it was popular here.

I saw a kid with the physical skills, intelligence and poise to become great. Just look at his first game as a quarterback in college.

I saw a kid who is only going to get better and better, a prospect that this franchise would probably never get a shot at if he had played all 4 years at quarterback.

So specifically, you were wrong about passing on him at #8 in my opinion....and time will prove that.

TedSlimmJr
08-12-2012, 12:34 PM
...if he ends up being a great player YOU were WRONG!.


Obviously this applies to any player that ends up being a great player if I didn't think he would be. Let the kid become a great player first.

I'm pretty good though, BlueFin.

If there's any other current rookies you pegged for greatness we can talk about those too.

Wildbill3
08-12-2012, 01:29 PM
I'm not sure what the problem is here, I do know that ryan is just starting his nfl career and right now, nobody is right or wrong about him. it'll take a couple seasons to really say " I told you so... one way or the other."

spiketex
08-12-2012, 08:40 PM
I'm excited that we finally have a young QB with very high potential. What are his obvious weaknesses? I can't see any. He will get better at reading the defense with more experience.

ckparrothead
08-13-2012, 03:47 AM
A little premature to start bumping old threads and trying to serve people crow.

finsfanjay13
08-13-2012, 11:46 AM
Meh, I'll take a game manager any day of the week if it results in wins. Also, as Slimm is saying, being a game manager isn't necessarily a *bad* thing.

Wildbill3
08-13-2012, 12:18 PM
Meh, I'll take a game manager any day of the week if it results in wins. Also, as Slimm is saying, being a game manager isn't necessarily a *bad* thing.I guess I need to get my terms down. Can a game manager be a franchise QB? is a gunslinger a franchise QB? Do we really want a gunslinger? sure they are exciting to watch, but they tend to be interception machines.

finsfanjay13
08-13-2012, 12:21 PM
I guess I need to get my terms down. Can a game manager be a franchise QB? is a gunslinger a franchise QB? Do we really want a gunslinger? sure they are exciting to watch, but they tend to be interception machines.

Don't give a damn as long as the words "Dolphins" and "playoffs" are used in a non-comedic manner. :)

tazthenomad
08-13-2012, 07:04 PM
The problem for me is not that he needs work, IMO only A Luck can start from day one. The problem is if we take a QB at #10, we will have to start him in game one.
I don't understand your logic. We HAD to get better at QB and we don't always get what is ideal or what we want.

Taking the best we could get at #8 and developing as fast as we can was better than sitting in limbo for another year hoping for an "ideal" situation.

mtldolphins23
08-13-2012, 08:44 PM
Love the kid!

tylerdolphin
08-13-2012, 09:26 PM
Tylerdolphin needs to win something. He gets hosed out of that Most Comedic award every year. If the voting was close I was giving him my vote to put him ahead... don't look like he'll need it.

Just reading this thread. Missed this gem of a post until now. Quite possibly your best analysis in years.

ali.bryan
08-22-2012, 06:30 AM
I like tannehill too, imma always get the first

smokster
08-23-2012, 12:44 PM
i think tannerhill is the answer, he is going to go through a learning curve and need better receivers and much better blocking up front.

Sirspud
09-10-2012, 10:24 PM
This is a good examination of how Tannehill played in college, and how most people felt about him before they started salivating over him in a Dolphins uniform.

Tannenballs
09-07-2014, 05:57 AM
Hindsight is 20/20.. however:

Luke Kuechly at #8 and Russell Wilson at #42 look a lot better than having Ryan Tannehill and Jonathan Martin.

I was not on this board at the time, but I wanted Miami to take Kuechly and Wilson.

I don't think anyone would disagree with having Luke Kuechly and Russell Wilson over Ryan Tannehill and Jonathan Martin.. or actually just Tannehill cus that's all that's left.

WVDolphan
09-07-2014, 07:37 AM
Hindsight is 20/20.. however:

Luke Kuechly at #8 and Russell Wilson at #42 look a lot better than having Ryan Tannehill and Jonathan Martin.

I was not on this board at the time, but I wanted Miami to take Kuechly and Wilson.

I don't think anyone would disagree with having Luke Kuechly and Russell Wilson over Ryan Tannehill and Jonathan Martin.. or actually just Tannehill cus that's all that's left.

Kuechly and another QB over Tannehill OR......

Matty Ice and whoever at LT over Jake Wrong?

That is the real question.

Tannenballs
09-07-2014, 09:01 PM
Kuechly and another QB over Tannehill OR......

Matty Ice and whoever at LT over Jake Wrong?

That is the real question.

Kuechly + Wilson. But the worst one was Ronnie Brown over Aaron Rodgers.

MP-Omnis
09-07-2014, 09:35 PM
Kuechly and another QB over Tannehill OR......

Matty Ice and whoever at LT over Jake Wrong?

That is the real question.

When Boston College produces a blue chip, must-have, can't-miss player, you have to take them. Even if Wilson/Foles was a failure, you would have had Kuechly, Wilson, the opportunity for Manziel/Bortles/Bridgewater. Hell, I would be cool with Garrofolo.

Shoulda drafted Kuechly and Lavonte David in 2012 and went with Foles or Wilson in round 3. The following year, don't trade up for Dion Jordan. Get Kenny Vaccaro and Kiko Alonso. Boom-- all-decade defense, linebackers for the next 15 years.

Amateur draftniks on this board would have been better GMs than Jeff Ireland. This is not hindsight at work, this is what people actually were clamoring for.

Tannenballs
09-07-2014, 10:58 PM
When Boston College produces a blue chip, must-have, can't-miss player, you have to take them. Even if Wilson/Foles was a failure, you would have had Kuechly, Wilson, the opportunity for Manziel/Bortles/Bridgewater. Hell, I would be cool with Garrofolo.

Shoulda drafted Kuechly and Lavonte David in 2012 and went with Foles or Wilson in round 3. The following year, don't trade up for Dion Jordan. Get Kenny Vaccaro and Kiko Alonso. Boom-- all-decade defense, linebackers for the next 15 years.

Amateur draftniks on this board would have been better GMs than Jeff Ireland. This is not hindsight at work, this is what people actually were clamoring for.

I was big on taking Keenan Allen at #12 (even though he fell to #76) and Eddie Lacy at #42. I think everybody would take those two over Dion Jordan. But that isn't hindsight, it's foresight. Something Ireland lacked so badly.

Tannenballs
09-07-2014, 11:01 PM
Kiko was gone before Miami's 2nd round pick, and Vaccaro is better at Strong Safety where he plays now, and RJ is solid. But Vaccaro is that good to where he could be a very good Free Safety.

MadDog 88
09-08-2014, 06:56 AM
Shoulda, woulda, coulda...........

Didn't. End of story!

WVDolphan
09-14-2014, 06:48 PM
Final word - Tannehill blows.

Tannenballs
09-14-2014, 07:57 PM
Final word - Tannehill blows.

who are you gonna replace him with? Jake Locker? Connor Cook? Brett Hundley? I've said multiple times I think Tannehill is an average starting qb. And will never be more than that. Miami won't be in position to draft Jameis or Mariota. And Connor Cook and Brett Hundley are just as inconsistent as Tannehill and won't be upgrades. Actually that would be down grading.

phinfan13
09-14-2014, 09:17 PM
who are you gonna replace him with? Jake Locker? Connor Cook? Brett Hundley? I've said multiple times I think Tannehill is an average starting qb. And will never be more than that. Miami won't be in position to draft Jameis or Mariota. And Connor Cook and Brett Hundley are just as inconsistent as Tannehill and won't be upgrades. Actually that would be down grading.

Kirk Cousins, maybe? I'm curious to see what happens in DC between Cousins and Bob Griffin; either way there is a very good chance one of the two of them will be on the market next year. Cousins played well today and in 2012, but was awful last year, I'd be interested to see if he develops this year. RGIII is more fragile than glass, but if he came available for cheap, I could see us being tempted, especially Hickey since his contract is only two years and he's not going to tie himself to a guy that he didn't pick in Tannehill.

Tannenballs
09-14-2014, 09:24 PM
What longtime NFL scout Dan Shonka said about Ryan Tannehill:

2012 Guide: What Ourlads' NFL Scouting Services said about RYAN TANNEHILL: Texas A&M, 6037 221 4.65. Started 19 games at quarterback in his career and ran an NFL scripted offense installed by former Packer head coach Mike Sherman. He caught 11 passes for 143 yards before moving over to quarterback at mid-season in 2010. Played under center and also in the shotgun. A right-handed passer with good arm strength and athletic ability. Athletically Tannehill has certain critical factors and position specifics that are holding him back. Book smart but does he process football information quickly at the line of scrimmage or on the run? There were several cases where he could have easily run for a first down and he threw a poor pass or threw the ball away. Consistency was best against weaker opponents. Against Arkansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Kansas State, Texas, and Oklahoma State his record was 0-6 and he had a 12/12 TD/INT ratio. He averaged 5.7 yards per attempt in three games completing 57% of his passes. His decision making and field vision are in question because of throwing into double coverage and forcing the ball into coverage. He doesn’t seem comfortable in the pocket. Throws best on roll out and sprint out type action. Ball placement has been inconsistent, struggling to put the ball where the receiver doesn’t have to adjust before running. Despite his tall stature his delivery point is low and gets several tipped passes. Must develop quarterback sixth sense in the pocket. He has the athletic tools to play quarterback, but lacks the game time experience of several quarterbacks coming out. He needs to improve on his accuracy, “feel” for the position, decision making, game management, and consistency. As a wide receiver, Tannehill caught 112 passes good for 4th in school history and gained 1596 yards which ranked him 5th on the Aggie all-time list. He also scored 10 receiving touchdowns. He is the only FBS player with 3000 passing yards and 1500 receiving yards to his credit. He also has a 400-yard passing game and a 200-yard receiving game. Grades out as a good backup who may be an eventual starter with developmental time. 2011 stats: 327/531, 3744 passing yds, 61.6%, 29 TDs, 15 INTs. Did not work out at the Combine. Second/third round. (A-32 5/8, H-9, SS-DNP, VJ-DNP).

TedSlimmJr
09-14-2014, 11:43 PM
Final word - Tannehill blows.

I have a difficult time believing that. He's going to be a superstar and carry the AFC similar to Brady and Peyton Manning.

tylerdolphin
09-14-2014, 11:49 PM
I have a difficult time believing that. He's going to be a superstar and carry the AFC similar to Brady and Peyton Manning.

You just wait until every person surrounding him does everything perfect every week. Then you'll see what a special talent we have in Tannehill.

TedSlimmJr
09-15-2014, 12:03 AM
You just wait until every person surrounding him does everything perfect every week. Then you'll see what a special talent we have in Tannehill.

He already has Lamar Miller. Have you seen how fast he runs when he drops passes or goes down with a stiff breeze? Kid's a special talent.

He's gotta be running 4.4 when he does it.

tylerdolphin
09-15-2014, 12:26 AM
He already has Lamar Miller. Have you seen how fast he runs when he drops passes or goes down with a stiff breeze? Kid's a special talent.

He's gotta be running 4.4 when he does it.

A true asset if ever there was one.

Elite talents like Miller and Tannehill are whats gonna pull this franchise out of mediocrity just as soon as we get more 1st round cornfed in here.

NorFlaFin
09-15-2014, 02:18 PM
Serious question; is Tannehill's ceiling Matt Schaub?

TedSlimmJr
09-15-2014, 02:54 PM
I think what needs to be understood about "ceilings" in terms of quarterbacks is this.....

...an evaluator or coaching staff must first establish how likely it is that a player reaches whatever his ceiling may be based on mental capacity, instincts, speed at which he processes information, and feel for the game.

An example would be a kid like Ryan Tannehill that may have a ceiling of 9.5 on a scale from 1-10. However, based on intangibles from the neck up, most likely only reaches 70% of his physical ceiling. He'll never be a 9 in other words. He's only going to reach 70% of that. He's going to be a 6.5 or a 7 most of the time because of inconsistency. It's who he is.

On the other hand, a kid like Andy Dalton may only have a ceiling of 8 on a scale from 1-10. Based on intangibles from the neck up and ability to process information quickly, he's likely to reach 90-100% of his physical ceiling. He's going to be a steady 7.5 or 8 because of his consistency.

That's why evaluating QB's is so complex. Once you establish what you think a player's ceiling is, you then have to determine how likely it is that he ever reaches it using the determining factors.

Kirk Cousins' ceiling isn't at high as Robert Griffin's, but Cousins is going to play to his ceiling (potential) more consistently. Even though it may be a lower celing.

ckparrothead
09-15-2014, 03:15 PM
For all intents and purposes I've just changed my way of thinking with respect to "ceiling" on a quarterback to be somewhere around 80% mental. The best quarterbacks in football are Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, Drew Brees and Aaron Rodgers. That tells you that the position is mental/technical in nature and not all that physical.

Whether you still view ceiling to be physical-based but then you add on a likelihood of reaching it modifier, or whether you just skip straight to the point and make a quarterback's ceiling fully mental/technical in nature and very little physical...you're basically doing the same thing.

Tannenballs
09-15-2014, 07:43 PM
I think what needs to be understood about "ceilings" in terms of quarterbacks is this.....

...an evaluator or coaching staff must first establish how likely it is that a player reaches whatever his ceiling may be based on mental capacity, instincts, speed at which he processes information, and feel for the game.

An example would be a kid like Ryan Tannehill that may have a ceiling of 9.5 on a scale from 1-10. However, based on intangibles from the neck up, most likely only reaches 70% of his physical ceiling. He'll never be a 9 in other words. He's only going to reach 70% of that. He's going to be a 6.5 or a 7 most of the time because of inconsistency. It's who he is.

On the other hand, a kid like Andy Dalton may only have a ceiling of 8 on a scale from 1-10. Based on intangibles from the neck up and ability to process information quickly, he's likely to reach 90-100% of his physical ceiling. He's going to be a steady 7.5 or 8 because of his consistency.

That's why evaluating QB's is so complex. Once you establish what you think a player's ceiling is, you then have to determine how likely it is that he ever reaches it using the determining factors.

Kirk Cousins' ceiling isn't at high as Robert Griffin's, but Cousins is going to play to his ceiling (potential) more consistently. Even though it may be a lower celing.

Outstanding post

Awsi Dooger
09-16-2014, 04:19 PM
My opinion, as always, is that if a guy is screwing around playing baseball or wide receiver or whatever when his peers are using the normal timetable to progress at their craft, then the upside of the guy with the oddball resume is not as high as it appears to be, and the likelihood he gets there is not as great as normal.

I learned it the hard way. I could throw out tons of names from decades ago that nobody would recognize. But I still remember them. Guys who were out of football then returned. I wanted to believe in the cute story, the unusual route. Never worked, at least not at quarterback. Also, does anybody realize how many pro style quarterbacks were stuck behind wishbone or veer types in the '60s through '80s? It was an annual obsession in scouting circles to evaluate those guys. Some of them were adjusted to the moon. I was fooled several times. Only Troy Aikman fully panned out but he escaped the wishbone when Jerome Brown broke his leg in 1985, prompting transfer to a passing offense at UCLA.

Tannenballs
09-16-2014, 04:27 PM
My opinion, as always, is that if a guy is screwing around playing baseball or wide receiver or whatever when his peers are using the normal timetable to progress at their craft, then the upside of the guy with the oddball resume is not as high as it appears to be, and the likelihood he gets there is not as great as normal.

I learned it the hard way. I could throw out tons of names from decades ago that nobody would recognize. But I still remember them. Guys who were out of football then returned. I wanted to believe in the cute story, the unusual route. Never worked, at least not at quarterback. Also, does anybody realize how many pro style quarterbacks were stuck behind wishbone or veer types in the '60s through '80s? It was an annual obsession in scouting circles to evaluate those guys. Some of them were adjusted to the moon. I was fooled several times. Only Troy Aikman fully panned out but he escaped the wishbone when Jerome Brown broke his leg in 1985, prompting transfer to a passing offense at UCLA.

Didn't John Elway and Russell Wilson play a little baseball? If that's a shot at Winston it's not a valid one.

TedSlimmJr
09-16-2014, 05:29 PM
Marino, Kaepernick, Elway, Russell Wilson....there's numerous QB's who played baseball. Its hard to be as good as Winston is at QB while pitching. It affects your throwing motion and will need to be shortened up a tad. Although that's the case with 80% of QB's who don't play baseball.

I like the point about pocket passers being stuck in wishbone type offenses. Rich Gannon was a Wing-T quarterback until he got to the NFL.

WVDolphan
09-16-2014, 07:51 PM
My opinion, as always, is that if a guy is screwing around playing baseball or wide receiver or whatever when his peers are using the normal timetable to progress at their craft, then the upside of the guy with the oddball resume is not as high as it appears to be, and the likelihood he gets there is not as great as normal.

I learned it the hard way. I could throw out tons of names from decades ago that nobody would recognize. But I still remember them. Guys who were out of football then returned. I wanted to believe in the cute story, the unusual route. Never worked, at least not at quarterback. Also, does anybody realize how many pro style quarterbacks were stuck behind wishbone or veer types in the '60s through '80s? It was an annual obsession in scouting circles to evaluate those guys. Some of them were adjusted to the moon. I was fooled several times. Only Troy Aikman fully panned out but he escaped the wishbone when Jerome Brown broke his leg in 1985, prompting transfer to a passing offense at UCLA.

What was that kid's name who played for the Yankees organization and everyone thought he would be a blue chip QB if he wanted to be? Drew Hensen? Some QB from Michigan if I am not mistaken.

Ilovemyfins4eva
09-16-2014, 08:44 PM
What was that kid's name who played for the Yankees organization and everyone thought he would be a blue chip QB if he wanted to be? Drew Hensen? Some QB from Michigan if I am not mistaken.

correct, i believe he played 3rd base in the yankees system for the short time he was there.

Tannenballs
09-16-2014, 09:07 PM
Marino, Kaepernick, Elway, Russell Wilson....there's numerous QB's who played baseball. Its hard to be as good as Winston is at QB while pitching. It affects your throwing motion and will need to be shortened up a tad. Although that's the case with 80% of QB's who don't play baseball.

I like the point about pocket passers being stuck in wishbone type offenses. Rich Gannon was a Wing-T quarterback until he got to the NFL.

This might be a "what came first the chicken or the egg" kind of question, but since you have been following his career since HS, do you think Winston's throwing motion would have been like this if he had never played baseball in HS or at FSU? Or do you think playing baseball caused it? I think once he's in the NFL it will improve some. I just don't know how much you can change it after you've thrown I don't know 20,000+ passes, probably much more than that, the same way. That's a lot of muscle memory to reprogram. So like I said it I think there will be a tad of improvement once he reaches the NFL. But I'm not qualified to say how much. What's your thoughts on this?

Also, what do you think Winston's ceiling is as a Quarterback? You and CK have mentioned that the ability to reach your ceiling as QB comes down to your understanding of the mental part of the game, which is by far Winston's strength. Now, the biggest detractor for him reaching his ceiling will be if there are any off the field endeavors that will hinder his development.