Dolphins GM Jeff Ireland: "We violated principle" to draft QB Ryan Tannehill

[Jeep]

Wouldnt have been so cool if he just said this...

"Ryan isnt quite there yet... he is progressing and we have high hopes for him this next year. Normally, we like to see a QB with 30 starts so we can evaluate him as a player and a leader, but we had to throw that out the window this last draft, because if I didnt draft him, I'd be out of a job and the Miami Fans would have lynched me.. "

[CalDolFan10x14]

It's going to be fun when he "violates principle" (whatever that is) and brings in some quality receivers to help out Tannehill this year.

[z926538]

The principle he was talking about was that Tannehill didn't have at least 30 college starts, he wasn't talking about drafting playmakers or not.

Let's take a moment and analyze what this axiom means in the real world. If you apply the axiom it essentially means that you will only select a quarterback if he has been a college starter for somewhere between 2.5 and 3 years. Now there are some very successful major college football programs where the coaching philosophy is to bring in a couple of highly talented QBs every year with the intention of sitting them until they have a couple of years to learn the offense. They develop a pipeline where the recruits have the understanding that they probably won't get to start until year 4 or year 5 of their college career. The blind application of the Parcells/Ireland axiom means that QBs from these schools are never considered to be drafted by Parcells/Ireland, even if they show the talent level of a Dan Marino or Andrew Luck when they finally get to start in year 4 or year 5.

Channing Crowder said on his radio show a couple of weeks ago that Ireland's draft philosophy was to always take the safe good player over a more risky player with the potential to be great. He also said that this was the reason the Dolphins are still mediocre -- they won't take a risk to draft players who could be great. Playmakers always tend to fall into the higher risk category. The QB axiom is another example of why we remain mediocre -- in general we won't take the risks required to be great.

[dlockz]

He seemed to skip principle when he drafted an undersized qb in Pat white also

[CalDolFan10x14]

He seemed to skip principle when he drafted an undersized qb in Pat white also

Care to join us in THIS decade?
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[spiketex]

Axiom, matrix and acorns it's the new trifecta

With the trifecta you just know that he's swinging for the fences... Let's say a prayer of thanks for delivering das wunderkind, JI, to the Dolphins.

[spiketex]

He seemed to skip principle when he drafted an undersized qb in Pat white also

Pat came to take the Wildcat to the next level (and he is not undersized where it counted)

[Digital]

I certainly understand the principle of experience and learning curve. But, while that improves a prospect, you end up only getting truly talented QB's with the top couple of picks when you wait until they have everything. And, if you don't ever have the top couple picks, you end up sacrificing something more meaningful to even get a starting QB.

It's clear that Tannehill is accurate, smart, hard working, determined, and has the physical attributes you want (good size, speed, arm strength, quick release), so it was a pretty solid gamble. All he needs is experience, and given our roster, we could afford to give it to him. The kid has talent, and we're seeing it develop nicely. He's already thrown for the 3rd most yards in a game in Rookie History (only 2 yards behind Luck's record), he threw for the second most yards by a rookie last season--more than RGIII and Russell Wilson, although had RGIII not been a running QB which led to him getting injured, I suspect RGII would have thrown for more. With poor WR's and no deep threat he really did extremely well. Without speed or deep threats its hard to get those long TD's, and it showed. Without big physical WR's it's hard to get those red zone fades and jump balls. Without scheme it's hard to get those confusion quick slants. When your tallest TE is only 6'4 and can't jump or box out, it's hard to get too many of those kinds of TD's. When your running game can't open the holes to run for TD's, it's hard to throw in the red zone. Yeah, he had poor TD numbers, but I can't really blame that all on him.

Looking at the interceptions, I've been more impressed with Tannehill than any other rookie QB. I know it sounds odd when he has 13 INT's, but very few of those were inaccurate throws. He had blocks, WR's quitting on routes, balls bouncing off TE's chests and WR's hands, and I can only recall once all season that a defender dropped an INT. We dropped 3 of Luck's in one game, LOL. Tannehill made some bad decisions, but I can't recall him making the same bad decision twice. I'm sure if it hasn't happened it will, but that's pretty amazing for a guy coming in with 19 collegiate starts at QB. I can see why Ireland was willing to violate his rule against drafting QB's until they had 30 games under their belts.

[dlockz]

Care to join us in THIS decade?
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Yea because the 2009 draft was so far away. Pat white did not fit any of Parcells or Ireland's principles but they took him

---------- Post added at 09:36 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:35 PM ----------

I certainly understand the principle of experience and learning curve. But, while that improves a prospect, you end up only getting truly talented QB's with the top couple of picks when you wait until they have everything. And, if you don't ever have the top couple picks, you end up sacrificing something more meaningful to even get a starting QB.

It's clear that Tannehill is accurate, smart, hard working, determined, and has the physical attributes you want (good size, speed, arm strength, quick release), so it was a pretty solid gamble. All he needs is experience, and given our roster, we could afford to give it to him. The kid has talent, and we're seeing it develop nicely. He's already thrown for the 3rd most yards in a game in Rookie History (only 2 yards behind Luck's record), he threw for the second most yards by a rookie last season--more than RGIII and Russell Wilson, although had RGIII not been a running QB which led to him getting injured, I suspect RGII would have thrown for more. With poor WR's and no deep threat he really did extremely well. Without speed or deep threats its hard to get those long TD's, and it showed. Without big physical WR's it's hard to get those red zone fades and jump balls. Without scheme it's hard to get those confusion quick slants. When your tallest TE is only 6'4 and can't jump or box out, it's hard to get too many of those kinds of TD's. When your running game can't open the holes to run for TD's, it's hard to throw in the red zone. Yeah, he had poor TD numbers, but I can't really blame that all on him.

Looking at the interceptions, I've been more impressed with Tannehill than any other rookie QB. I know it sounds odd when he has 13 INT's, but very few of those were inaccurate throws. He had blocks, WR's quitting on routes, balls bouncing off TE's chests and WR's hands, and I can only recall once all season that a defender dropped an INT. We dropped 3 of Luck's in one game, LOL. Tannehill made some bad decisions, but I can't recall him making the same bad decision twice. I'm sure if it hasn't happened it will, but that's pretty amazing for a guy coming in with 19 collegiate starts at QB. I can see why Ireland was willing to violate his rule against drafting QB's until they had 30 games under their belts.

Pretty simple to break that rule when u hired an OC that coached him for 4 years at Texas A and M and knew him better than any gm or scout would