|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,528 Likes: 6
Hall of Famer
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,528 Likes: 6 |
Scouts are taught to look for special qualities in every prospect that will help them become successful at the next level. These traits are often dubbed "blue qualities," and top-10 picks typically possess two or three elite characteristics. Andrew Luck (accuracy, pocket presence and awareness, football IQ) and Robert Griffin III (athleticism, arm strength, leadership ability) have these blue qualities. Tannehill, in my opinion, only has one.
His accuracy is down because his receivers dropped way to many passes. We are talking Northcutt and Morgan type drops. He does need to refine his accuracy especially over the middle, but that looked like a timing issue more than anything else.
The guy has a great arm and can make any NFL throw.
No one is going to question his athleticism and he can throw accurately to either side rolling out.
Hell I dont know what he is looking for in pocket presence because, Tannehill's pocket presence is elite level. He moves very well inside the pocket and he trusts his OL and he is looking for a target downfield while he is moving.
Negatives
3/4 throwing motion and he dips his shoulder on occasion. Patting the ball before he throws is annoying. He takes some chances you wish he would not make but at that same time you want a QB that will take a shot. His accuracy and timing over the middle needs some work but he is great throwing to the edges. He needs work in reading defenses and that will only come with experience.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,519
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,519 |
"Why would the Browns offer 3 1st rounders for RG3 if they think they can get another franchise QB in Tannehill at 4? " Offering to pay thru the nose for a "sure thing" and then giving up less to get something most consider less than a sure thing makes perfect sense to me.
I'd offer a TON to have a date with certain women and slightly less for others but I would STILL be thrilled to land either one 
"Just gotta Coach em up" , "I thought they Battled" , " I need to watch the tape"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,667 Likes: 613
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,667 Likes: 613 |
Just thought I'd ping you and Mourg in this thread - what do you two think of Osweiler compared to Tannehil?
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,459 Likes: 59
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,459 Likes: 59 |
Quote:
Just thought I'd ping you and Mourg in this thread - what do you two think of Osweiler compared to Tannehil?
You didn't ask me -- but (as a slight Osweiler fan) -- I think that they have relatively similar strengths/weaknesses, although Osweiler is even more raw than Tannehill.
First thing to note is that the run two very different offenses. Tannehill runs a pro-style WCO. Osweiler runs something similar to a spread, with a lot of screen passes out to RBs/WRs in the flat, along with the occasional deep ball to keep defenses honest.
They both have good size and are athletic -- though Osweiler is huge for a QB, he plays a bit smaller (both in the positive that he has pretty good footwork and is not a Derek Anderson clone, but also the negative that he uses a 3/4 arm angle, so he doesn't use the height advantage as well as he could -- this is supposedly something he is working on over the offseason.) Tannehill, for his part, has a negative where he shot puts balls in the short routes, which he is also working on.
They both are above average athletes and can tuck and run for good yardage. Tannehill is a bit faster (4.6 vs. 4.8 40s), but Osweiler can run through arm tackles.
They both have plus arms, and throw an above average deep ball. I think Tannehill's strength is his great timing on the 10-15yd out routes, that's my favorite throw of his. Osweiler doesn't throw that much (due to scheme). Osweiler's best pass in my opinion is his deep ball on the outside. He does a really great job of putting the ball in a position where his receiver has the advantage (he almost always gets the ball to the correct shoulder - and he does a good job of throwing passes that the WR can go back and get).
I think Osweiler has better short accuracy - and you see a lot of these dump off passes. They aren't particularly hard passes, but they area always right in the breadbasket - and I'm surprised how good the timing is on these, given Osweiler's large frame (his athleticism shows in these quick, 1-step drop, turn and release passes). ASU likes to let the DE go completely free on these bootlegs to the outside - and Osweiler does a great job of beating them with the throw by a tenth of a second. Tannehill's short accuracy isn't bad, and would be better if he made some small mechanical fixes.
Tannehill has better pocket presence. One of my knocks on Osweiler is that he tends to drop his head under pressure. Every QB does this to some extent, and ASU offensive line was pretty terrible. Tannehill is a bit ahead of him in this regard, his footwork inside the pocket is supurb for where he should be at developmentally.
Tannehill also has better timing in the intermediate passing game. Osweiler is actually above average in this respect - but Tannehill is supurb. That being said, Osweiler has all the tools to develop a great intermediate passing game - his footwork is very good for his size, his delivery is extremely quick - he just hasn't been asked to do it as much.
The biggest negative I see for both Osweiler and Tannehill is the ability to move throw progressions at the NFL level. Tannehill was asked to do this more (in the WCO), and struggled. Osweiler also locks onto receivers. This caused the majority of interceptions for each player. It's the primary reason both prospects are seen as "developmental" - and could be corrected with good coaching.
Overall, I think both prospects have a really high upside, but need a year on the bench (or even two) to learn the NFL offense. I have a high 2nd round grade on Tannehill, and a high 3rd round grade on Osweiler.
Last edited by Lyuokdea; 04/02/12 12:32 AM.
~Lyuokdea
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,667 Likes: 613
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,667 Likes: 613 |
Is your name Mourg or Django!?!?!?  I was just asking those two since it seems they had really been watching QB's closely. That was very in-depth and a thorough analysis thought so I really appreciate it, bud!
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 747 Likes: 2
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 747 Likes: 2 |
Quote:
They both have good size and are athletic -- though Tannehill is huge for a QB, he plays a bit smaller (both in the positive that he has pretty good footwork and is not a Derek Anderson clone, but also the negative that he uses a 3/4 arm angle, so he doesn't use the height advantage as well as he could -- this is supposedly something he is working on over the offseason.) Tannehill, for his part, has a negative where he shot puts balls in the short routes, which he is also working on.
Do you mean Osweiler? Because this seems like a pretty accurate description of Osweiler to me. Because if you watch him, he definitely does not take advantage of his height, and it looks like he is shot putting the ball.
[color:"white"]I've always been crazy, but it's kept me from going insane -Waylon Jennings
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,459 Likes: 59
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,459 Likes: 59 |
Thanks - it's fixed now in the original, the shot-putting comment applied to Tannehill, but the 3/4 arm angle was supposed to apply to Osweiler.
~Lyuokdea
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
Negatives
3/4 throwing motion and he dips his shoulder on occasion. Patting the ball before he throws is annoying. He takes some chances you wish he would not make but at that same time you want a QB that will take a shot. His accuracy and timing over the middle needs some work but he is great throwing to the edges. He needs work in reading defenses and that will only come with experience.
Gotta talk about his experience and less-than-stellar results against real teams if you're gonna paint the big picture.
The questions...are between his ears...
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761 |
Quote:
Just thought I'd ping you and Mourg in this thread - what do you two think of Osweiler compared to Tannehil?
You're catching me with my pants down regarding Osweiler....have seen very little of him playing and just have some film reports on him, but I've read a few tims what Lyo wrote, that he drops his head in the pocket when pressured...that's a big NO GO for me as it's one of the biggest reasons why I see no hope for Colt ...that's something you just can't learn, it's instinctual...you either keep the eyes downfield or get scared and go into fetal position...that's why I have a problem with lableing Colt as "tough"...pocket presence, feel etc should be no1 when scouting QBs...RG3's is elite, Luck is good, Tannehill is above AVG to good from what I saw, Weeden keeps his eyes downfield but is stiff moving around, but he senses pressure well, so he gets an AVG grade
It also should be noted that Osweiler has even less starts than Tannehill with just 15
#gmstrong
"Players come along at different points in time" - Ray Farmer
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 100
Practice Squad
|
|
Practice Squad
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 100 |
Quote:
This is a list of the 3rd quarterbacks taken in their drafts since the Browns return. I found 2 Pro Bowlers (Roethlisburger and Cutler) in the last 13 drafts. Twice, the 3rd QB taken was the best of the three. Cutler was better than Vince Young and Matt Leinhart. Kolb is better than Brady Quinn and J. Russell. The 2004 draft with Roethlisburger produced 3 franchise QBs with P. Rivers and E. Manning.
1999 Akili Smith
2000 Chris Redman
2001 Quincy Carter
2002 Patrick Ramsey
2003 Kyle Boller
2004 Ben Roethlisburger
2005 Jason Campbell
2006 Jay Cutler
2007 Kevin Kolb
2008 Brian Brohm
2009 Josh Freeman
2010 Jimmy Clausen
2011 Blaine Gabbert
2012 Ryan Tannehill
I'm ok with rolling the dice on Tannehill, even at 4 IF and that is a big IF the Browns love him. I don't want to pick him just because we need a QB. We will be doing this again in 3 years if he doesn't work out.
Nice job with the list. When you really think about it - the only time the Browns ever aced the 1st round of the NFL draft with the QB position was with former Northwestern RB Otto Graham.
Bernie Kosar was actually a supplemental pick where that type of system put him on our doorstep asking do you want him? Heck yaaa!
I don't think Couch, Quinn or Phipps ever got the consensus in their corner whether it was fair or not.
As fans, we count on the front office to be competant with the QB position. In 99, we got to choose between Couch and McNabb as well as in the expansion draft between Kurt Warner and Scott Milanovich (who had gambling issues in college).
A year or two later, we had a late round option of Spergon Wynn or Tom Brady.
Not for nothing, but didn't we have a chance to Aaron Rodgers instead of Braylon Edwards? How much study do you think went into Aaron Rodgers at the time? I realize a lot of teams whiffed or didn't forsee his true value. Having said that, if QB is as important as it has become - the guy at the top has to have a better understanding of who a guy like that is or projects to be.
Another year we traded up to snag KWII; and the kid landed on injured reserve in 2 of his first 3 years. Pittsburgh drafted Roethlisberger in the 11th slot of that same draft.
It's not always the QB choices we've made that messed up our compass. It's also been the ones we've never made that keep us contemplating "what if?"
Today I have a difficult time sifting through the supply and demands of first round QBs. I feel like we're seeing more 2nd and 3rd round prospects sneaking up into slots they don't belong in. The expectations tend to change accordingly. The problem is a JP Losman wasn't ever a first round QB so what followed was never going to be fair. This is what worries me about reaching on a QB at #4 overall if there are plenty of better players available. On the other hand, I pointed out someone needed to know what Aaron Rodgers projected. I think the difference with Rodgers was he led a less talented Cal team over a much more talented USC team so there was evidence he could elevate everyone's game above an opponent they weren't supposed to beat. I didn't see this from Tannehill. The good news there if you like Tannehill is my calling in life isn't to peg first round QBs. In fact, I'm terrible at it.
David doesn't beat Goliath without an accurate slingshot...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,528 Likes: 6
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,528 Likes: 6 |
Gotta talk about his experience and less-than-stellar results against real teams if you're gonna paint the big picture. The questions...are between his ears...
Absolutely, they get answered with more experience.
The flaws in tannehill's game can be fixed with coaching and experience. You can't teach his physical skill set and when you throw in the fact he is highly intelligent and tremendously competitive, the recipe for success is there.
Tannehill with a year of studying and learning at the pro level vs Barkley and Jones with another year under their belts at the college level. I guess we can bring in another washed up vet to make the masses all giddy until game 7.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,528 Likes: 6
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,528 Likes: 6 |
I have Osweiller as a 3rd rounder with Weeden and Cousins. He is really, really raw. He is however a big guy with a quirky motion that will push the ball and doesnt take advantage of his height. He has better than expected mobility, actually pretty good mobility for a kid his size.
Tannehill to osweiller is really a one sided comparison. Osweiller is a 3 or 4 year down the road grooming project. Tannehill has a better arm, mobility, accuracy, decision making, anticipation, pocket presence. It is really really one sided at this point in his career.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,647 Likes: 5
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,647 Likes: 5 |
Quote:
Bernie Kosar was actually a supplemental pick where that type of system put him on our doorstep asking do you want him? Heck yaaa!
Yes, he was from the supplemental draft, but he wasn't just placed on our doorstep. The Browns traded their 1st round picks in both 1985 and 1986 plus a 3rd in '85 and a 6th in '86 to get him. He was hardly dropped on our doorstep.
http://ohiocardsblog.wordpress.com/2009/10/23/bernie-kosar-weird-journey-to-cleveland-1986-topps/
and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernie_Kosar
There may be people who have more talent than you, but there's no excuse for anyone to work harder than you do.
-Derek Jeter
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Not much of a comparison between the two guys. While I put Tannehill in the 2nd tier of QB's in this draft, he's the last of the guys who figure to have a solid shot of being a 10-year starter. All the rest are projects/long-shots/backups.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums The Archives 2013 NFL Season NFL Draft (2013) Tannehill v.2
|
|
