|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,528 Likes: 6
Hall of Famer
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,528 Likes: 6 |
Team that takes Tannehill in top 12 is really rolling the dice By Rob Rang | The Sports Xchange/CBSSports.com Before I attempt to argue why a quarterback I like shouldn't be drafted in the top half of the first round, let me point out that I gave Texas A&M's Ryan Tannehill, a first-round grade prior to the 2011 season, a first-round grade halfway through the season and a first-round grade now. Frankly, there isn't a player in the country I've watched more tape on than Tannehill in the past calendar year, which is why my grade hasn't fluctuated on him like it has for others. The simple fact is Tannehill boasts all of the physical characteristics that every team is looking for at quarterback. He's big, athletic, strong-armed and shows the ability to make every NFL throw. I've watched him fire the deep out from the opposite hash, show beautiful touch to lay the ball over the linebacker and under the safety and give the pump fake to force the safety to bite before driving the ball downfield ondeep combo routes. He can roll to either direction and throw accurately on the move. He has the guts and speed to be a threat scrambling. Having started 19 games at quarterback in former Green Bay head coach (and current Miami Dolphins' offensive coordinator) Mike Sherman's version of the West Coast Offense, Tannehill has been trained in a pro-style attack. And yet, because he has only started 19 games I have serious reservations about Tannehill's ability to come in andcontribute immediately. Much like how former Washington Husky quarterback Jake Locker didn't progress in his second season under highly regarded offensive guru Steve Sarkisian, Tannehill didn't take the next step in terms of anticipation in; Year Two under Sherman. For as maddeningly inconsistent as Locker was at UW, I believe the Tennessee Titans drafted him No. 8 overall last year primarily due tothe improvementsin technique the former Husky made during the final months of the pre-draft process and the ability he showed to win some tight ball games over his career. And, of course, Tannehill (due to the broken foot that has kept him sidelined since January) wasn't able to make the gradual steps of improvement that Locker did in competing at the Senior Bowl, 2011 Combine and his Pro Day. Frankly, I saw Tannehill play with more poise late in games as a junior than I did during his senior season. Sure, Tannehill was plagued by drops and defensive collapses in the Aggies losing four games last year in which they led by at least a touchdown at halftime, but I never saw the command of the huddle and ability to stop the bleeding once it started that I believe is critical to be a successful field general in the NFL. This isn't to suggest that Tannehill won't develop better anticipation and poise as he gains more experience at the position, only that he did not prove the ability to do so in 2011. And because of that simple fact, I cannot support the argument that Tannehill should be selected in thetop half of thefirst round of the 2012 draft -- though I wouldn't be surprised at all to see the Cleveland Browns (No. 4), Miami Dolphins (No. 8) or Seattle Seahawks (No. 12) do precisely that. web page
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 16,744 Likes: 396
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 16,744 Likes: 396 |
Cool that you prevent both arguments for a guy you like and believe the Browns will draft as well.
I'm so torn on the Browns picking him. I'm wondering how much better that will be than just drafting WR, RB, RT (in no particular order) with the first three picks and seeing if McCoy will grow. Because if we go Tannehill, the likelihood we get a talent at those positions of need that can start day 1 really goes down.
Ugh. I can't wait until the QB position on this team is settled.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 8,767
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 8,767 |
Right or wrong I've looked at him as kind of Joe Montana(ish). Great tools but had to grow into them. Don't know if that's his upside as that's a tall order!
I'd love to see Hasselback here with Tannehill for two seasons!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Eh? I thought Montana was the poster-boy for being a success in spite of not having great tools.
Any team that takes Tannehill better follow the Steve McNair blueprint or they'll be throwing away time and money...
***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: 8,528 Likes: 6
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,528 Likes: 6 |
Tannehill is a great investment even at 4. You just don't find guys with that kind of upside falling into the Browns lap very often. with the cost of draft picks plummeting, the price of drafting these QBs are only going to rise.
Think about it we back into the playoffs at 8-8. Colt has played like garbage but the defense has kept us in games and we pulled a rabbit out of our hat in a couple games with big Cribbs returns. Now we are sitting in the 20's still in need with of a QB. Only jones and Barkley stepped it up to show they are worthy of going in the first. Damn better take one of the other guys and develp him. Might only take a couple more years.
We have picks 4, 22, 37, 68 plus 2 4th round picks, that is enough picks to get what we need.
#4 Tannehill and you still have a boatload of picks to load the offense. You coach him up allow him to compete. If he isn't ready to go this year, you have him ready for next year. A year coached up with all these QB guru;s should be ahead of a Jones or Barkley next year.
Take Reiff or Glenn if they fall to 22, much better chance than what most think. If not trade back with the eagles and their two 2nd round picks or go ahead and pull the trigger on Lamar Miller/ David Wilson if you believe they are as good as advertised.
37 I like Jeffery and Sanu as they really fit Heckert's desired receivers. Big guys that can gain separation by using their strength and size.
68. Bobbie Massie or Mitchell Swartz. Whichever is available if you didnt get your RT, if you did then you have Lamichael James or Robert Turbin.
We have Qb, RT, WR, RB and you have more picks to play with and add a couple injured prospects that fall on draft day. Boykin, Broyles, Datko
gotta draft smart. last year I thought Heckert drafted Brilliantly. We are positioned to have another good draft.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,459 Likes: 59
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,459 Likes: 59 |
Quote:
with the cost of draft picks plummeting, the price of drafting these QBs are only going to rise.
Please explain? I think the opposite should be true. If picks are more expensive, you are pushed towards picking high value positions = more QBs (a $60M OG isn't worth it no matter how good they are).
~Lyuokdea
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 Likes: 87
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 Likes: 87 |
Quote:
Eh? I thought Montana was the poster-boy for being a success in spite of not having great tools.
Any team that takes Tannehill better follow the Steve McNair blueprint or they'll be throwing away time and money...
True, Montana was, but he had a coach who knew how to manage him to the best of his limited abilities.
Aaron Rodgers probably needed to sit behind Brett Farve as he did, but then he wasn't drafted until the 24th pick either.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,528 Likes: 6
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,528 Likes: 6 |
RG3 will make a little over 20 mil over the next 5 years. Brees will make a little over 20 mil next year.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,459 Likes: 59
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,459 Likes: 59 |
Quote:
RG3 will make a little over 20 mil over the next 5 years. Brees will make a little over 20 mil next year.
I perfectly understand that -- but it's true regardless of what position you draft. I don't understand why this makes it more likely that you get a QB rather than another position?
If QBs became cheaper but everybody else was expensive, then it would make sense - that's not happening here?
~Lyuokdea
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 15,979 Likes: 83
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 15,979 Likes: 83 |
starting to hope he'll be available at 22.
Of Course, a month ago it was looking like he might be there at 22. We can only speculate.
Can Deshaun Watson play better for the Browns, than Baker Mayfield would have? ... Now the Games count.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 49,976 Likes: 356
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 49,976 Likes: 356 |
I wouldn't touch him before 37, if then.
I know that some people here love him, but the fact is that inexperienced QBs so rarely succeed in the NFL that I can't see spending a 1st round pick on him. Him having only19 starts is terrifying to me. I don't see a lot of special attributes when I watch him. He looks competent, but he doesn't really do anything that makes me say "wow". He folds big time under pressure. He basically needs built as a QB. The NFL is not an ideal place to build a QB. If it was, there would be all kinds of guys with incredible measurables drafted late and "built" over time. However, this simply does not happen.
It certainly would not happen here.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,528 Likes: 6
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,528 Likes: 6 |
Most of these QBs coming out have zero reps in any type of pro system. Tannehill has 20 starts under his belt but all in the WCO. That is a big difference. There was a really good honest review on tannehill from Charlie Casserly a week or two ago. He was raving about how good the kid was in going through his progressions and he showed improvement in anticipations. He is a bit raw and rough around the edges but that is what coaching is for.
He also made the comment of he would need a year of absorbing the qb position. Bottom line, Kid has some skills, I think a year of being groomed will have him ahead of Barkley and next years class.
Qbs used to be groomed all the time. When they started handing out those 60 million dollar deals, everyone rushed their QB onto the field and that trend continued last year. I would rather see a kid play if you can pass protect for him but Holmgren still believes in sitting a year as he did with Colt. If you are gonna sit a guy why not sit the guy with all the upside in the world that needs the refinement.
When I see Weeden I see the Brian robiskie of QBs. He is pretty close to a finished product. When forced to move at all, he is awful. I do see some things I like (fantastic arm, accuracy when he sets his feet and he will take shots downfield) and like Colt, I think he is worth a 3rd round risk but I wouldnt take him before there.
Anyway we will know a lot more after his workout next week.
BTW WE would be the only team in the NFL whose best RB is their #1 receiver and their best receiver is their QB lol.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227 |
Quote:
Tannehill is a great investment even at 4. You just don't find guys with that kind of upside falling into the Browns lap very often.
Fortunately I believe the FO disagrees with your assessment. Tannehill should be pretty easy to get just sitting at #4. I highly doubt we tried to trade two extra #1s and a #2 because Tannehill has "that kind of upside". Selling the farm for RGIII when Tannehill is right in our wheelhouse says as much about our view of Tannehill as it does McCoy.
I wouldn't mind if we got Tannehill at #22 or #37. At that value point, we're afforded the luxury of being able to miss on Tannehill because the price wasn't exorbitant (and there is a legitimate chance he busts given that he's played more games at WR than QB and didn't improve much in his senior year). I personally would refuse to be one of those desperation teams that pushes a guy way too high on the draft board simply because he's the best of what's left. Teams that draft those guys almost always get busts.
It sucks that we missed out on the elite QBs but to me, that means waiting for the elite guys next year (and actually being willing to do what it takes next year to get one) and making due with what we have now. If we force Tannehill just because we need new blood in here, I'll seriously begin to question this front office.
We're... we're good?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,528 Likes: 6
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,528 Likes: 6 |
If you believe the kid is gonna be a franchise QB then he is worth the risk and not a reach. If you dont believe he is the guy, then you dont take him. Wishy washy as in well maybe if the stars align properly never works even if the kid is good. We have all these supposed offensive guru's if they think the kid has it, it says he has it. If they don't it also says a lot.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 8,767
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 8,767 |
Not sure RG3 can be classified elite. He's just like a shiney new toy that's unknown as to whether it's REALLY fun or not and how long it holds interest.
I figure his bust potential is nearly as high as Tannehills.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,643
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,643 |
Quote:
Not sure RG3 can be classified elite. He's just like a shiney new toy that's unknown as to whether it's REALLY fun or not and how long it holds interest.
I figure his bust potential is nearly as high as Tannehills.
NFL Elite, nobody know. You cant really say he hasnt been elite (by definition) at the college level.
I would say his potential is higher then Tannehill.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 8,767
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 8,767 |
Eh...Tannehill is mostly potential where RG3 may have been playing at his highest level. Who knows. I liked the kid but he's still a risk.
Everyone seems to like Tannehills tools and thinks time behind center is the missing ingredient. Love to get him at 22 but it aint gonna happen.
Doesnt bother me he hasnt played alot of years at QB. In fact, I think I'm more impressed he's done what he's done with little playing time at the position.
4 isnt a reach if you want him and do not think you can move back and get him.
I just wish we had a vet in place to school him.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
Quote:
If you believe the kid is gonna be a franchise QB then he is worth the risk and not a reach. If you dont believe he is the guy, then you dont take him. Wishy washy as in well maybe if the stars align properly never works even if the kid is good. We have all these supposed offensive guru's if they think the kid has it, it says he has it. If they don't it also says a lot.
I completely disagree.
If a guy like Tannehill has the physical skills but needs a year to learn and we have to figure out how to fix his reading of defense and penchant for making mistakes in the big moments, then his risk could very well outweigh the idea of taking him at #4 (and that includes passing on an elite talent of Blackmon, Claiborne, etc.).
But, if our staff thinks he has a chance if given time, then maybe that risk is considered worth it compared to the players we would be passing on at the #22 slot.
The entire draft is a measure/balance of risk/reward. You don't take a QB just because you think he has a chance (if given time, etc.) when you think there are better talents on the board. You take a QB in a cold-hearted calculation value based approach. If his value is good for the slot, then you take him. If not, then you pass. Simple as that.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 989
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 989 |
Quote:
You just don't find guys with that kind of upside falling into the Browns lap very often.
You don't draft someone at #4 because of his upside. You draft someone at #4 because he is a stud and instant starter. All these guys have upside. I don't want the browns drafting because of upside, I want them drafting because of proven talent. If Tannehill is drafted at 4 then our future for the browns will never get better. I wouldn't select him at 22 or even in the 2nd rd. He is onehelluva athlete that played qb for a pass happy offense in a very poor defensive conference, from a school whose previous biggest/greatest QB (with much better numbers and more experience) couldn't even make a team in the NFL.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,124 Likes: 222
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,124 Likes: 222 |
Quote:
Quote:
You just don't find guys with that kind of upside falling into the Browns lap very often.
You don't draft someone at #4 because of his upside. You draft someone at #4 because he is a stud and instant starter. All these guys have upside. I don't want the browns drafting because of upside, I want them drafting because of proven talent. If Tannehill is drafted at 4 then our future for the browns will never get better. I wouldn't select him at 22 or even in the 2nd rd. He is onehelluva athlete that played qb for a pass happy offense in a very poor defensive conference, from a school whose previous biggest/greatest QB (with much better numbers and more experience) couldn't even make a team in the NFL.
That is so good it should end the thread. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761 |
Quote:
If you believe the kid is gonna be a franchise QB then he is worth the risk and not a reach. If you dont believe he is the guy, then you dont take him. Wishy washy as in well maybe if the stars align properly never works even if the kid is good. We have all these supposed offensive guru's if they think the kid has it, it says he has it. If they don't it also says a lot.
This is what I don't get in all those QB discussion...IF you think a QB has franchise QB potential, you take him ANYWHERE in the 1st...if you think he has only AVG starter potential and is a good backup then you take them in the 3rd+...I've never understood picking QB's in the 2nd (there are rare excpetions like Weeden this draft, but I'd be ok with him at 22 too)...and most of them have busted recently...
#gmstrong
"Players come along at different points in time" - Ray Farmer
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358 |
Favre/Brees?
I get what you're saying, though. If you're looking for a starter, why would you wait until the 2nd. If you're looking for a backup, why would you use such a valuable pick on one?
Like, what's the difference b/w a 3rd round QB and a 5th round QB?
Last edited by CleveSteve; 03/20/12 02:43 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
Like, what's the difference b/w a 3rd round QB and a 5th round QB?
The difference between wasting a couple of seasons trying to make the 3rd rounder into a starter while not wasting any time trying to convince yourself that the 5th rounder is.
***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: 27,946 Likes: 763
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,946 Likes: 763 |
Quote:
Like, what's the difference b/w a 3rd round QB and a 5th round QB?
When speaking in general terms, it'll be one thing... but overall, it really depends upon a lot. The person himself, the situation he moves into, etc...
In the end, you draft a player at the lowest possible slot that you feel he will be available, period.
You might be gambling that nobody else is looking at the guy in the 3rd and so he should be there in the 4th. It isn't saying that he is that bad, it is just saying that there were a lot of other guys with higher value at that point. Draft position dictates absolutely nothing in regard to a player's ability, or ceiling.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,227 |
Quote:
If you believe the kid is gonna be a franchise QB then he is worth the risk and not a reach. If you dont believe he is the guy, then you dont take him. Wishy washy as in well maybe if the stars align properly never works even if the kid is good. We have all these supposed offensive guru's if they think the kid has it, it says he has it. If they don't it also says a lot.
I don't think anyone is ever a sure fire franchise QB coming out but there is a certain likelihood to it. Those odds usually determine where a guy gets drafted. Luck is going #1 because he seems very likely to be a franchise QB. To take a guy at #4 means you think his odds of being a stud are pretty darn high. I just don't see a near "lock" in Tannehill.
He absolutely has the ability and potential but he doesn't have nearly enough experience to make a solid determination one way or the other. That potential is definitely enough to make him a high pick (mid 1st-early 2nd) but not #4 overall. I'd feel much more comfortable taking a different guy like Claiborne or Richardson who are near locks to be a stud and waiting to find a QB next year who is worth that pick.
We have to stop asking if a QB is a possible upgrade over Colt and start asking if they're a significant enough upgrade to justify the cost. The answer was yes on both Luck and RGIII. Tannehill, unless we can get him later, is where I draw the line.
We're... we're good?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 15,979 Likes: 83
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 15,979 Likes: 83 |
Quote:
We have to stop asking if a QB is a possible upgrade over Colt and start asking if they're a significant enough upgrade to justify the cost. The answer was yes on both Luck and RGIII. Tannehill, unless we can get him later, is where I draw the line.
I think they have to ask, would they trade a 1st round pick for a Jake Locker clone?
I'd be happy enough if they took him at 4 and moved on to the rest of the draft knowing they've done something more than absolutly nothing to address the problem of the poor quarterback play.
But then I was in love with the Hardesty pick. Still think it was the right pick. I just wasn't a fan of the trade up, I rarely am.
Can Deshaun Watson play better for the Browns, than Baker Mayfield would have? ... Now the Games count.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,528 Likes: 6
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,528 Likes: 6 |
Tannehill is a much better prospect than Locker, Ponder, Flacco, Freeman and they all went from the 8 to 18 area. Right now the only QB considered 1st round in next year's class that would be ranked higher is Barkley and he is going #1 and even he lacks the upside of Tannehill.
The QB position is always one of great debate, and I do get why opinions vary so much on this kid but I gotta say, I like the kid better than Barkley and believe he is more of a Matt Flynn with great mobility and accuracy throwing on the run.
I take him at 4 and never look back. His proday will be huge next week.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,212
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,212 |
What about the kid from Arkansas- i think he looks better then Barkley.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,528 Likes: 6
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,528 Likes: 6 |
I like him but that system down there has produced a lot of false advertising at the QB position.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358 |
Well, in fairness we won't know how good Ryan Mallett actually is for quite a while. I've mostly heard that it is considered a "pro-style" system. Does that not agree with what you know of it?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,528 Likes: 6
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,528 Likes: 6 |
Think about all those QBs from Louisville that put up just huge numbers in college and really never showed anything at all at the pro level.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 49,976 Likes: 356
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 49,976 Likes: 356 |
I'm not a big fan of Barkley. AT this point I am hopeful that some kid puts it all together next year like Griffin did this year, and that we can get into position to take him. Barring that ...... maybe I just hope that we get lucky with a QB. I have this sinking feeling that this was our year ....... and that we'll be looking, and stretching, for a QB in years to come, and settling for bums like Brady Quinn ..... 
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,528 Likes: 6
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,528 Likes: 6 |
Barkley was the best QB in college this year. That says a lot, especially in this elite draft class, but at the same time I dont know what it is about him but he scares the hell out of me as well. Sad part is even with those doubts, if I had the #1 pick next year, he is my guy for better or worse lol. Well that is true unless someone offers me 3 #1s and a #2 lol
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358 |
Could i be Sanchez and Leinart that scare you? I must admit they color my perception of him.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,528 Likes: 6
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,528 Likes: 6 |
Maybe that's it but I thought both were absolute busts coming out.
Hell he does play behind the best OL in college football and in a conference where no one plays much defense. If I saw him face more pressure, I would be more sold on him.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 38,564 Likes: 814
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 38,564 Likes: 814 |
We need to just draft the guy. We can't head in to the season riding Colt with no other option.
People don't want to see thing blown up. We go in without a option to put in at QB.
BOOM!
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong ![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/small-gator-chomp.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 Likes: 87
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 Likes: 87 |
Quote:
We need to just draft the guy. We can't head in to the season riding Colt with no other option.
People don't want to see thing blown up. We go in without a option to put in at QB.
BOOM!
I think that we will Draft a QB to compete with McCoy.
I also think it will be either Tannehill or Weeden.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,528 Likes: 6
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,528 Likes: 6 |
Our Luck, the dolphins will trade ahead of us lol.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 38,564 Likes: 814
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 38,564 Likes: 814 |
Quote:
Our Luck, the dolphins will trade ahead of us lol.
I was thinking the same thing. Might be why there have been rumblings out of Minny about trading the pick since they know we want a QB in a bad way and know Miami is in the same boat...
I think they would love to pick up another pick to move down 1 slot to get the guy they want in the first place.
I think it's going to happen. Miami is going to look at jumping up.
Man, those goofs have this so balled up it isn't all that upsetting anymore, it almost funny.
At least that's what I tell myself every time I start to think about it and feel the blood start to boil. 
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums The Archives 2013 NFL Season NFL Draft (2013) Tannehill v.2
|
|
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/FL_Dawg/Logo5_1.gif){kind=logo}
