Welcome to FinHeaven Fans Forums! We're glad to have you here. Please feel free to browse the forum. We'd like to invite you to join our community; doing so will enable you to view additional forums and post with our other members.



VIP Members don't see these ads. Join VIP Now
Page 6 of 9 FirstFirst ... 23456789 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 86

Thread: Tannehill's full potential is mvp 02' gannon, if not he will be jake plummer

  1. -51
    nyjunc's Avatar
    Hall Of Famer

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Mar 2004
    Posts:
    27,482
    vCash:
    17006
    Loc:
    New York
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Blog Entries:
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by LDaniel7 View Post
    Care to wager some bucks on what I just said, junc?

    LD
    Rodgers won a SB by year 3 as a starter, this is year 2 so it would have to happen this year and even if it does it's not long before Rodgers at the same stage.

    No, I don't gamble on the boards.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fins_of_Fury View Post
    Junc, how do you feel about Geno's 2013 playoff guarantee? Pretty confident?

    ---------- Post added at 02:21 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:19 PM ----------

    Thank god Sparano completely disemboweled the Jet's offense, I will always love him for that!
    It's silly, I doubt he is even starting so he was just excited and pissed(for falling to rd 2) and start babbling.
    Quote Quote  

  2. -52
    goonies's Avatar
    Seasoned Veteran

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Jul 2010
    Posts:
    709
    vCash:
    3215
    Loc:
    Miami,Fl
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Everyone is underestimating tAnnehill, man didn't he throw for over 3k without legitimate weapons, and first yr starter. I think this kid is going to succeed. Is he the next Marino of course not. There will never be another Marino. But tannehill will be damn good. Sit back and enjoy this kid growing right be4 your eyes.
    Quote Quote  

  3. -53
    Rookie

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Apr 2007
    Posts:
    85
    vCash:
    1000
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Curiosity, did anyone see Gannon doing what he did in 02 after 15 years in the league?
    Contending is for people who are ok with losing. I do not want to contend, I want to dominate.


    "Because they wouldn't let me go for 3".
    Woody Hayes describing why he went for 2, late in a game with Michigan while up 40 points.
    Quote Quote  

  4. -54
    FinHeaven VIP

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Mar 2006
    Posts:
    1,664
    vCash:
    2511
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by nyjunc View Post
    Rodgers won a SB by year 3 as a starter, this is year 2 so it would have to happen this year and even if it does it's not long before Rodgers at the same stage... No, I don't gamble on the boards.
    Moving the goal posts and ignoring what I said -- you're better than that, junc. Rodgers bench time was part of the argument.

    I said that it was unfair comparing Rodgers to Tanny b.c Rodgers SAT on the bench for 3 years and took 2 years to become great. AND that Tanny started right out of the box with little college experience. And that he would probably have a Super Bowl at a point in his career before Rodgers did, in other words, INCLUDING those three years sitting on the bench -- they were part of the argument from the beginning -- undeniable part of Rodgers CAREER. It took Rogers 6 years to get a SB. And this with all the college experience he had...

    Ipso facto: Tanny ain't Rodgers. Right now, at this point in both of their respective careers, he's BETTER. And chances are he will have a SB SOONER than Rodgers did.

    End of argument. It's no wonder you don't bet on boards IF what you throw out there is not worth backing up, lol.

    LD
    Quote Quote  

  5. -55
    nyjunc's Avatar
    Hall Of Famer

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Mar 2004
    Posts:
    27,482
    vCash:
    17006
    Loc:
    New York
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Blog Entries:
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by LDaniel7 View Post
    Moving the goal posts and ignoring what I said -- you're better than that, junc. Rodgers bench time was part of the argument.

    I said that it was unfair comparing Rodgers to Tanny b.c Rodgers SAT on the bench for 3 years and took 2 years to become great. AND that Tanny started right out of the box with little college experience. And that he would probably have a Super Bowl at a point in his career before Rodgers did, in other words, INCLUDING those three years sitting on the bench -- they were part of the argument from the beginning -- undeniable part of Rodgers CAREER. It took Rogers 6 years to get a SB. And this with all the college experience he had...

    Ipso facto: Tanny ain't Rodgers. Right now, at this point in both of their respective careers, he's BETTER. And chances are he will have a SB SOONER than Rodgers did.

    End of argument. It's no wonder you don't bet on boards IF what you throw out there is not worth backing up, lol.

    LD
    at the same point in their careers Rodgers won in year 3 as a starter but anyway so that gives Tannehill 5 seasons but "long before" Rodgers would be by year 3 or 4? so by '14 or '15 you think he's winning as SB? I understand your excitement but you may want to get in the playoff race before you start planning SB parades.

    Again, I am NOT taking a shot at Tannehill. I think he can be a good QB but by comparing him to Gannon at his peak, to Rodgers in any way just isn't fair.

    How is he better than Rodgers? b/c Rodgers didn't play? so this means you think he will be better? I guess he was better than tom Brady through 1 year too, will he now win 4 SBs or more? Imagine what you guys will think when he throws more TDs than INts and gets you in a playoff race?

    I am saving you money, you should be thanking me.
    Quote Quote  

  6. -56
    dolfan91's Avatar
    Starter

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Feb 2004
    Posts:
    2,553
    vCash:
    2184
    Loc:
    NJ
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Junc, I wouldn't get my hopes up TOO HIGH with Geno Smith, the guy has a serious accuracy problem. buttfumble could never read defenses or protect the ball and now your team drafts a guy in a BAD QB Draft you misses all to often down field. He's not in Tannehill's class even with starting most of his college career. Tannehill started only 19 games at QB in College and is still better than buttfumble or Smith at this point of his young career and the main reason is, he can read a defense.
    Quote Quote  

  7. -57
    DolfanISS's Avatar
    Perennial All-Pro

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Aug 2002
    Posts:
    7,730
    vCash:
    6596
    Loc:
    Bellingham, MA
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by Vaark View Post
    I have high hopes for Geno if the jest could find good YAC receivers who can catch the ball behind the LOS









    Charts, Explanations and Breakdowns

    Oh, and by most accounts, Tannehill was already "good" last season, even without factoring in what he had to work with. The question is whether he:
    a)continues to be good
    b) evolves into "great"



    The QB Potential Guru:
    On your Sig, heard yesterday that Rivers has the same amount of turnovers over the last 2 seasons as buttfumble. Not saying buttfumble is better but Rivers has been just about as bad and as bad as his supporting cast was it was at least as good, if not better, then what buttfumble was throwing to. Not sticking up for buttfumble, I would never want him to be my QB, but I wouldn't want Rivers either. Rivers always sort of got a pass on here because many posters liked him when he came out but over the last 2 seasons he's been just as big a TO machine as the QB most Dolphins fans think is the worst or all time.

    Maybe I take Rivers over buttfumble but I wouldn't use him as some example who's obviously much better. Turnovers lose games and both buttfumble and Rivers have been equally as good at committing turnovers lately.
    Quote Quote  

  8. -58
    nyjunc's Avatar
    Hall Of Famer

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Mar 2004
    Posts:
    27,482
    vCash:
    17006
    Loc:
    New York
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Blog Entries:
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by dolfan91 View Post
    Junc, I wouldn't get my hopes up TOO HIGH with Geno Smith, the guy has a serious accuracy problem. buttfumble could never read defenses or protect the ball and now your team drafts a guy in a BAD QB Draft you misses all to often down field. He's not in Tannehill's class even with starting most of his college career. Tannehill Started 19 only games at QB in College and is still better than buttfumble or Smith at this point of his young career and the main reason is he can read a defense.
    I wouldn't say I am high on Smith, I am hopeful. I really didn't see enough of him to evaluate so I don't want to be unfair.

    I'm not sold on tannehill either, I think he has potential to be a good QB but he has a lot of work to do and buttfumble as a rookie is comparable to Tannehill as a rookie w/ the exception that buttfumble playe din and played well in big games. The good news is Miami is surrounding Ryan w/ talent, the Jets did that early then it eroded as did his play. Hopefully for you guys you keep him surrounded w/ talent.

    Quote Originally Posted by DolfanISS View Post
    On your Sig, heard yesterday that Rivers has the same amount of turnovers over the last 2 seasons as buttfumble. Not saying buttfumble is better but Rivers has been just about as bad and as bad as his supporting cast was it was at least as good, if not better, then what buttfumble was throwing to. Not sticking up for buttfumble, I would never want him to be my QB, but I wouldn't want Rivers either. Rivers always sort of got a pass on here because many posters liked him when he came out but over the last 2 seasons he's been just as big a TO machine as the QB most Dolphins fans think is the worst or all time.

    Maybe I take Rivers over buttfumble but I wouldn't use him as some example who's obviously much better. Turnovers lose games and both buttfumble and Rivers have been equally as good at committing turnovers lately.
    I haven't looked it up, I don't know if Rivers had as many but he had a ton and as you said w/ more talent around him. I am not absolving buttfumble of his mistakes but he is still young and developing. The "great" Eli Manning has ONE less TO than Mark since Mark entered the league and he has had much more talent around him. last year was Mark's first BAD year and while he gets blame he didn't have talent to work w/ that was healthy for the most part.

    I have never said he would be great but I know you can win with him w/ the right talent so that is where my frustration is w/ the Jets.


    By the way, my quotes from that post were after the 2010 season. He was 2 years in, had a really good 2010 and helped us get to 2 title games. Obviously things have changed the last 2 years.


    Thank you for a fair post.
    Quote Quote  

  9. -59
    FinHeaven VIP

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Mar 2006
    Posts:
    1,664
    vCash:
    2511
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by nyjunc View Post
    at the same point in their careers Rodgers won in year 3 as a starter but anyway so that gives Tannehill 5 seasons but "long before" Rodgers would be by year 3 or 4? so by '14 or '15 you think he's winning as SB? I understand your excitement but you may want to get in the playoff race before you start planning SB parades.

    Again, I am NOT taking a shot at Tannehill. I think he can be a good QB but by comparing him to Gannon at his peak, to Rodgers in any way just isn't fair.

    How is he better than Rodgers? b/c Rodgers didn't play? so this means you think he will be better? I guess he was better than tom Brady through 1 year too, will he now win 4 SBs or more? Imagine what you guys will think when he throws more TDs than INts and gets you in a playoff race?

    I am saving you money, you should be thanking me.
    lol, you are funny, junc! Let's just pretend your view of reality is the right one for now, just to save the argument.

    You're ok though, for a Jets fan. I'd buy you a beer just to shut you up, lol.

    LD
    Quote Quote  

  10. -60
    tay0365's Avatar
    Hall Of Famer

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    May 2004
    Posts:
    7,720
    vCash:
    6221
    Loc:
    NJ
    Thanks / No Thanks
    [QUOTE=nyjunc;1064682659]I don't think you realize hos good Gannon was from about '99-'02. I am not knocking Tannehill but I don't see that ceiling for him. gannon was a 2 time all pro(not pro bowl, all pro). He was as good as anyone in the NFL for a few year stretch. I see Ryan;s ceiling as a bottom of the top 10 type of guy which is a guy you can win big with but I don't see him as an elite QB.[COLOR="Silver"]

    Are you really serious? A few years ago, you thought buttfumble who had/has a career 70 rating was ELITE, yet you can not see Tannehill ever being Elite.....even though his 1st year was better then any buttfumble had, and with less receiving talent then buttfumble had at his disposal.
    My personal Draft:

    1st Round: Taylor Lewan(T)

    2nd Round: Gabe Jackson(G)

    3rd Round: C. J. Fiedorowicz(TE)

    4th Round: Christian Jones (ILB)

    5th Round: Daniel McCullers(DT)

    6th Round: Marqueston Huff(S/CB)

    7th Round:
    Jay Prosch(FB)


    Quote Quote  

Similar Threads

  1. Omar strikes again! "Tannehill is this generation's Jake Plummer."
    By WVDolphan in forum Miami Dolphins Forum
    Replies: 118
    Last Post: 08-11-2013, 05:28 PM
  2. What about Jake Plummer?
    By Trowa in forum General NFL Forum
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 04-12-2007, 11:26 PM
  3. Jake Plummer?
    By Motion in forum Miami Dolphins Forum
    Replies: 71
    Last Post: 01-28-2007, 10:35 AM
  4. Jake Plummer
    By Jt0323 in forum Graphics Talk and Requests
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 10-13-2006, 10:32 PM
  5. Jake Plummer??
    By steveincolorado in forum Miami Dolphins Forum
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 12-21-2004, 04:10 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •