Quote: Marino use to pat the ball. But then it didn't really help the DB's other than getting a better look at the smoke coming off the ball as it wizzed by them
So did Kosar.
You're showing your age, ABF
If he's Marino-like, then no problem. If he's mortal, it's something he'll need to improve upon if he wants to be the best.
Quote: HEL: Hey Tolstoy!
How about keeping your replies under 10,000 words.
Dream on, butterball
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy. Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
Quote: I had no idea about his hand-size. That was a HUGE red flag of mine for old Chuck Frye.
Now I like Tannehill even less. He's a 2nd tier prospect who is going to go 1st tier because of desperation. If we do this, we're reaching badly...
Sorry for cherry picking one "minor" thing from the great stuff you've been posting about Tannehill but hand size is a BIG issue for me too. I have 9" mitts like Tannehill (but I'm barely 6'0", not 6'4") and I'll tell you right now, it's not easy to maintain control of the football if conditions are poor.
At minimum, I'd like a QB prospect to have 9 1/2" hands (which are still on the smallish side) if not 10" because anything less than that and ball security can be a real issue in bad weather. We saw Colt struggle controlling the ball in rain several times last year and his hands are bigger at 9 3/8". Tannehill's 9" hands are the smallest in the draft at QB and are another red flag on a prospect I'm terrified of taking at #4.
OK finally found time to watch Tannehill video. things I saw:
-For one I do not see this kid having an NFL arm whatsoever. it is just mediocre. -His throwing motion is horrible. His release point is below his ear almost shoulder level. Throws almost sidearm and pushes the ball out. His footwork is very slow setting up for the pass. Doesn't keep his feet moving and stands almost still. -Pocket presence is so-so, stands damn near flatfooted in the pocket. -almost every pass looked like his first read. Didn't get too many oppurtunites to see how he does in his progressions. -His throws weren't all that accurate. He had some decent timing throws with curl routes. His throw to the sidelines need some work and more zip. I dont see him making NFL throws. Looks like straightline passes to whomever or whichever route he goes too. Trajectory needs work. The Fly route on the left in the second half was way underthrown and inside. Not sure if he was attempting a backshoulder throw or didnt get enough arm on it to go downfield (receiver had to slow down and come back inside.)
I don't see how anyone is considering him a 1st rounder. He is a developmental project and i would use a 3rd rounder on him no higher. Let him sit for 2 years and then evaluate. He is helluva athlete but QB pos. takes way more then that to be good.
I would much rather take Osweiler, Cousins, or Kellum Moore.
Yeah, like NLR pointed out, he started off really well and then just kind of went to crap. He definitely has some tools but man, he seems inconsistent.
I don't want to hear about "developing" people who have deficiencies in their game or their focus. If people need to be developed o acclamate to a system, that is one thing. But developing physical and mental consistency seems pretty risky to me. At number 4? I'd be pretty bummed.
BTW, here's another video from this year. Great throw to the TE at the end, but throws seemed to lack zip throughout the game, which is not an issue I'd seen from him in other videos. I really like Swope, though.
Browns will bring in Ryan Tannehill for pre-draft visit Posted by Michael David Smith on March 27, 2012, 1:55 PM EDT Texas v Texas A&M Getty Images
Although Browns coach Pat Shurmur says his team is moving forward with Colt McCoy at quarterback, drafting Texas A&M quarterback Ryan Tannehill remains a possibility.
Mary Kay Cabot of the Cleveland Plain Dealer reports that the Browns will bring in Tannehill as one of their 30 pre-draft visits. That doesn’t necessarily mean the Browns view Tannehill as their best bet with the fourth overall pick in the NFL draft, but it’s still a move they’re considering. And NFL Network’s Mike Mayock endorsed Tannehill as the player the Browns should take.
“Franchise quarterback trumps all,” Mayock said on Path to the Draft. “We talk about that all the time, and I don’t believe Colt McCoy is the answer. And I do believe Ryan Tannehill could become the answer. So I believe at No. 4 they ought to pull the trigger on Tannehill.”
The question is whether they’d be passing up on an offensive playmaker they love when they pulled the trigger on Tannehill. Alabama running back Trent Richardson and Oklahoma State receiver Justin Blackmon are other potential targets for the Browns at No. 4. But Mayock said the Browns would be better off drafting Tannehill at No. 4 and then using their second first-round pick, the 22nd overall selection they acquired from the Falcons in last year’s Julio Jones trade, on a running back or receiver.
“Don’t forget, Cleveland’s got No. 22 in the first round,” Mayock said. “So don’t look at this as just No. 4. You’re trying to come out of this draft the best you can. And if you want a tailback because you lost Peyton Hillis, how about Doug Martin? How about David Wilson? At No. 22 you can get one of those tailbacks. If you need a wide receiver at No. 22, what about Kendall Wright? The way I think they have to look at this thing is, go get the franchise quarterback, sit him on the bench for a little bit behind Colt McCoy, get him comfortable, and then at 22 get yourself a playmaker.”
Fourth overall is higher than most people think Tannehill will go. But if the Browns think there’s a chance Tannehill will be their franchise quarterback for years to come, they can’t pass him up. web page
"... could become the answer" is a long way from "... WILL become the answer." If RG3 is a risky top 5 pick (which I think he is - particularly given what Washington paid to get to #2), Tannehill would be a patently stupid risk given the other talent we're going to be able to pick from at #4.
With all the holes we have to plug, we can't go wrong with BPA at #4. We can go horribly wrong taking a project QB at #4, however.
[color:"white"]"Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference."
Due diligence and posturing. I wonder if Miami bites on this? Browns are said to be willing to deal with any team in the top 8. Heckert has a very good possibility of being able to trade down twice within the first 8 if he plays his cards right and the stars align. Can you imagine dropping to 8 and still being able to get Richardson and picking up extra high picks along the way..at 22 they could go with Hill and still have two seconds or a second and three thirds and two fourths to maneuver and address needs. I'm excited!
"Going from 4-12 to 6-10 isn't good enough. I believe we are going to be better than that. We're going to be a lot better than that." - Mike Holmgren (3/15/12)
Quote: Due diligence and posturing. I wonder if Miami bites on this? Browns are said to be willing to deal with any team in the top 8. Heckert has a very good possibility of being able to trade down twice within the first 8 if he plays his cards right and the stars align. Can you imagine dropping to 8 and still being able to get Richardson and picking up extra high picks along the way..at 22 they could go with Hill and still have two seconds or a second and three thirds and two fourths to maneuver and address needs. I'm excited!
I'm so excited i'll be dissapointed if we stay at 4...
Am I the only one that pronounces hyperbole "Hyper-bowl" instead of "hy-per-bo-le"?
Wow..that brought back memories..I am trying to remember who that was calling Quinn his "Boy", and totally forgot about that. He was sure as you know what that Quinn was the answer though.
"Going from 4-12 to 6-10 isn't good enough. I believe we are going to be better than that. We're going to be a lot better than that." - Mike Holmgren (3/15/12)
Wow..that brought back memories..I am trying to remember who that was calling Quinn his "Boy", and totally forgot about that. He was sure as you know what that Quinn was the answer though.
it was Diam and he ran away tail tucked between his legs after that. luckily, Mourg has more scruples than that.
Quote: it was Diam and he ran away tail tucked between his legs after that. luckily, Mourg has more scruples than that.
He called me everything under the sun. Talking loud doesn't make you right. Like me thinking Burfict was a first rounder and I didn't put weight or thought into his Character. Turns out the guy is lazy and will be the downfall of himself if he doesn't start changing his attitude and work ethic. I was wrong and despite being a top ten pick at the beginning of the year in many mocks and my love for his tenacity has proven why some players are not worth it. I have been right more than I have been wrong and as of now I was totally wrong about the guy. I would take him in the fourth round and break him down. He would carry other rookies pads drafted ahead of him just to prove a point and who is boss, because he needs it. I will tuck my tail but not because I am afraid to admit I was wrong but because I am a Man of my word. Anyway, I like Tannehill but not at 4 in where he is in his development but do think he will have a better career than Griffin. It is a crapshoot though and not a pick we can afford to make at this point that early with the holes we have. I would take him in the second round for sure. The good news is every year there is a new crop of can't miss QB's and QB's with great upside. It's like my Dad always told me growing up..Women are like buses if you wait long enough, another one will come around.
Last edited by LOYALDAWG; 03/27/1203:25 PM.
"Going from 4-12 to 6-10 isn't good enough. I believe we are going to be better than that. We're going to be a lot better than that." - Mike Holmgren (3/15/12)
If ...... If ...... If the Browns trade down to #6 or so, and add a 2nd and another mid round pick next year, then I might say just go with Tannehill. What the hell, we have to start drafting QBs if we want to find one .... and going into this season with just McCoy seems like a recipe for disaster to me. I am not convinced that Weeden is going to be the answer, so if we can add another 2nd rounder, then I might be OK with taking Tannehill around 6-7.
I don't known that he will be any better than McCoy, but he would be hard pressed to be worse. Plus,, he was able to learn the offense mid season and was able to be effective.
His late game collapses worry me, as they imply that teams figure him out and how to stop him. The 2nd half has been unimpressive for him, with him throwing 8 TD and 9 INT in the 2nd half of games last year, compared to 19 TD and 6 INT in the 1st half of games. He didn't seem to be as good later in the season as earlier in the season either. I know that they lost a lot of game sin the 2nd half last year.
I am hopeful that the football gods will look down upon us with favor for once, and maybe slide us a miracle QB. Who knows? He can't suck worse than what we've seen here lately. (with a 1 year exception)
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.
Quote: We can just make into a sig bet. Just have to come up with a good sig for u to live with for 2 years lmao.
Can't I just foot the bill to a Brown's game? lol
"Going from 4-12 to 6-10 isn't good enough. I believe we are going to be better than that. We're going to be a lot better than that." - Mike Holmgren (3/15/12)
One concern I do have about Tannehill is his smallish hands. He has the smallest hands of any QB in the draft at 9 inches. I just wonder about gripping that ball on a frozen lakefront. I know it is weird but they measure them for a reason. He is smart and Athletic and looks great in the pocket..Just getting a lake effect snow and a glazed over ball might give him some problems..
"Going from 4-12 to 6-10 isn't good enough. I believe we are going to be better than that. We're going to be a lot better than that." - Mike Holmgren (3/15/12)
Quote: That will work been a few years since i have been to one. Taking care of mom full time and not working doesn't provide many opportunities.
That would be perfect and a privilege than. I took care of my Mom too. We will set it up..If there is a particular game you would like to see let me know and I will see what I can do.
"Going from 4-12 to 6-10 isn't good enough. I believe we are going to be better than that. We're going to be a lot better than that." - Mike Holmgren (3/15/12)
The Packers’ Brett Favre had his hand measured at 10 3/8 inches, from thumb tip to pinkie tip, during the National Football scouting combine in 1991. Favre’s grip on the ball is so enormous that the thumb and little finger of his outstretched right hand probably would cover almost exactly half the circumference of an NFL football.
Daunte Culpepper’s hand size was 9½ inches at the ’99 combine. Culpepper’s hand measurement of 9½ isn’t extremely low by NFL standards, but for someone his size (6-4, 264), it is. Not only the size but also the unusual shape of Culpepper’s hands was a concern not only for the Vikings but other NFL teams before the ’99 draft. Several sources confirmed that Culpepper has what is commonly referred to as a “web hand.” It’s a hereditary condition in which his fingers don’t separate easily because the skin between them is connected upward toward the knuckles more than normal.
Michael Vick, who stands barely 6-0, has merely an 8½-inch hand. However, Drew Brees, who stands just 6-0½, has a hand of 10¼.
In the ballyhooed quarterback class of 1999 that included Culpepper, Tim Couch’s hand was 9 7/8, Donovan McNabb’s hand was 10-0, Akili Smith’s was 9¾ and Cade McNown’s was 9 3/8.
A list of other quarterbacks and their hand sizes includes Brad Johnson (10 1/8), Patrick Ramsey (10-0), David Carr (9¾), Joey Harrington (9¾), Trent Dilfer (9 5/8), Jay Fiedler (9½), J.T. O’Sullivan (9½), Jake Plummer (9¼) and Chris Chandler (9¼).
One of the largest measures of any quarterback drafted in the first round was the 11¼ of Jim Druckenmiller. He was a bust, as was Heath Shuler (10 5/8 ). David Klingler (9¼) had a small hand and flopped.
I actually had read that a few minutes ago. I just had to satisfy my own curiosity.
9" hands are small by NFL standards. That explains why Tannehill pushes the ball somewhat. Same thing with Chuck Frye and the like.
The vast majority of NFL QB's with below-average size hands had fumbling problems. Jason Campbell has small hands for a guy his size, though his hands are just a tick larger than Tannehill's, and Campbell has fumbling issues.
Does that mean Tannehill will fail? No, it doesn't. However, the more I see of him, the more incredible I find it to be that he could go top-10 in the draft.
Good luck to the team that decides to throw the dice on him that early in the draft. I haven't seen a prospect with this kind of inflated value since...well...last year in Christian Ponder and Blaine Gabbert.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy. Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
Cosell: Tannehill throws on the run better than Luck or Griffin
March 28, 2012, 7:13 AM
With talk around the NFL that Texas A&M quarterback Ryan Tannehill could be drafted as high as fourth overall to the Browns, more analysts are talking up Tannehill’s tape. And Greg Cosell of NFL Films has offered up an assessment that gives plenty of reason to like Tannehill’s chances of going very high in next month’s NFL draft.
“One benefit of Tannehill’s three-quarters delivery is it allows him to throw very well on the move, both to his right and impressively, to his left,” Cosell writes. “In fact, he’s a better, more accurate passer on the run than either Andrew Luck or Robert Griffin. Tannehill was very efficient off the boot-action pass game. That will translate very well to the NFL.”
Cosell has some concerns about Tannehill, including missing some throws, a tendency to lock his front leg as he delivers the ball, and poor reads of the defense — especially not seeing the safeties. And Cosell said he didn’t see the improvement over the course of Tannehill’s 19-start college career that he would have liked.
But Cosell says Tannehill compares favorably to last year’s 12th overall pick, Christian Ponder, and that some quarterback-needy team is going to take him high.
“Tannehill is a better prospect than Christian Ponder was a year ago,” Cosell writes. “Tannehill possesses the skill set to be a quality NFL starter. At this point, he would be best in a quick-rhythm, short-to-intermediate passing game that featured play-action and boot-action passes. One thing we know for certain: He likely will be drafted higher than his body of work suggests he should be.”
Quote: I actually had read that a few minutes ago. I just had to satisfy my own curiosity.
9" hands are small by NFL standards. That explains why Tannehill pushes the ball somewhat. Same thing with Chuck Frye and the like.
The vast majority of NFL QB's with below-average size hands had fumbling problems. Jason Campbell has small hands for a guy his size, though his hands are just a tick larger than Tannehill's, and Campbell has fumbling issues.
Does that mean Tannehill will fail? No, it doesn't. However, the more I see of him, the more incredible I find it to be that he could go top-10 in the draft.
Good luck to the team that decides to throw the dice on him that early in the draft. I haven't seen a prospect with this kind of inflated value since...well...last year in Christian Ponder and Blaine Gabbert.
I guess my question still remains that when winter comes and the ice and snow and rain coupled with throwing in the wind, could that be a problem? Is it something they even consider? He would do well in the South with his little hands but most of the teams we play late in the year are up North in Pitt, Balt, Cinci., etc. Just Curious..
"Going from 4-12 to 6-10 isn't good enough. I believe we are going to be better than that. We're going to be a lot better than that." - Mike Holmgren (3/15/12)
Simple physics tell us he'll have more problems in cold weather than the average QB.
On the importance scale of attributes, having small hands isn't a major factor, but it is a factor. It tells us he's going to fumble more than the average NFL QB. So now each person has yet another factor to consider when evaluating Tannehill.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy. Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
I understand the desire to knock a guy you may not want, but is the hand issue really half as significant as the height issue of any of the Qb's that have it.
Just curious, because I don't recall reading of a small hands issue on any player in years.
Edit: I recall Jevon Kearse, defensive lineman being reported as having Huge hands.
Last edited by THROW LONG; 03/28/1201:45 PM.
Can Deshaun Watson play better for the Browns, than Baker Mayfield would have? ... Now the Games count.
I agree and even when he is in the pocket and a defender swipes at his arm his little grip of the ball could be easier to knock out. It definitely will make a difference on accuracy and arm strength in bad conditions if he has to push the ball more in order to not lose control of it during his motion.
"Going from 4-12 to 6-10 isn't good enough. I believe we are going to be better than that. We're going to be a lot better than that." - Mike Holmgren (3/15/12)
Quote: I understand the desire to knock a guy you may not want, but is the hand issue really half as significant as the height issue of any of the Qb's that have it.
Just curious, because I don't recall reading of a small hands issue on any player in years.
Who said I didn't want him? I like him, but not at 4. I would be fine taking him in the second round which is what he is rated as. We can't take a gamble on upside at 4 or what he can project to be. It's as simple as that with where we are at this point. I think it is an issue, why else do they measure their hands?
"Going from 4-12 to 6-10 isn't good enough. I believe we are going to be better than that. We're going to be a lot better than that." - Mike Holmgren (3/15/12)
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/Heldawg/rgiii2.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/FL_Dawg/Logo5_1.gif){kind=logo}
Plus,, he was able to learn the offense mid season and was able to be effective. 
