The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

Thank God for Youtube!  I realize that they can slice youtube videos all kinds of ways, but it still helped me get a better view of Tannehill.

I can see why they would want him.  I can see why he is #3 behind Luck and Griffin.  He has awesome potential and it wouldn't take long to get him NFL ready. 

Positives I saw...

Good enough arm strength.
Excellent evasiveness, running and bootleg ability.  Can buy time.
Good accuracy.
Good footwork.
Holds to ball high with a fairly quick release.
Awesome shovel passes (sounds weird I know but he is really good at it).
Very versitile but very poised in the pocket (running is mostly last resort unless designed).
Able to make adjustments at the line.
Experience in a wide variety of formations.

Negatives...

Certain games he didn't get rid of the ball fast enough.
A little thin to be running the ball in the NFL.
Turned the ball over a bit more than you would like (by forcing it).
Doesn't go through receiver progressions much.
Tends to key in on one guy.
(on a positive, a lot of turnovers were definately receiver induced)

I don't think it is a stretch taking him at #8.  I see him as a guy that could start year one but there would be some growing pains with turnovers.  IMO, it would be better to sit him for a year or most of the year and allow him to develop his pre and post snap reads as well as his ability to look off a defender.

I really think that Griffin and Luck have gotten so much praise that this guy looks like a guy you settle for.  In comparison to Luck, I agree we would be settling but not so much with Griffin.  I would be happy to have him be a QB would could grow with over the next few years. 

I think the signing of Garrard clearly signifies Miami is going to wait another year to draft a QB.  Additionally, I think the trading of Marshall indicates the Mgmnt wouldn't mind a four or five win season in order to have a high draft pick.  Next year there are quite a few potential QB's that will be in the draft.  This year's draft will be for an offensive tackle, a defensive back, and a decent WR.

There's a lot of talk about Tannehill not being 1st round talent... but isn't he exactly the type of player it would be worth taking a flyer on? I'm asking seriously here. If you have a quarterback coming out with a whole bunch of starts, you KNOW what you're getting. On the other hand, with a guy like Tannehill, he has so few starts, you just don't KNOW.

Put another way, I'd rather reach for someone who MIGHT be really good.

On the other hand, he could be Quincy Carter ;)

I don't see Miami taking him.

I have watched more of him lately and heard what the experts think and I think he is the next Phillip Rivers in a few years with some seasoning, but I don't see Miami taking him.

DE or WR will probably be the pick. Two huge voids that need to be filled. QB is too but Ireland clearly puts no emphasis on the QB position and I doubt that will change in a month.

You might be right about them going a different route than QB in the first round, but I'm now convinced that Miami will add a QB in the draft after what Ross has said lately, it might just be with a later pick like maybe the extra 3rd they got. They are not going to fix the QB problem this year, Moore is the guy, but I still think they would like to pick a QB and hope he turns into something much better than they bargained for. If not, then yeah there's always next year.

I agree. But if the plan is to get a QB somewhere in the first 3 rounds, then me, I would take Tannehill at 8. Because why settle for a lesser QB later, might as well get the 3rd best QB in the draft. The position is too damn important to just settle on a guy.

Taking a QB in rounds 2 and 3 hasn't worked for Miami (Beck, Henne, White...etc) and twice under Ireland's watch!  I mean to go that route again is foolish. It's a position you have to invest in fully.

-Do I expect Ireland to take Tannehill at 8, as of today no. But Tannehill's Pro Day is Thursday and things might change if he shines
-If I were in charge would I take Tannehill at 8, yeah probably when push comes to shove.

It's not a crime to take a QB and let him sit. Rivers sat behind Brees in SD, Eli sat for a while behind Warner and it wouldn't kill Miami to have Tannehill sit behind Moore for this year. They have their QB, "IF" the season stinks they are picking Top the draft next and can trade out for a team that wants Barkley or Jones and get a boatload of picks in return. And Miami has their QB on the roster already with a year under his belt of being on a NFL roster. That's not a terrible situation!

Remember that time we drafted Beck and were going to let him sit a year? That worked out pretty well!  ;)

I'm just messing around. If we do draft I seriously hope they can just be a clipboard holder for a while without the pressure of having to perform miracles.  There is no way that experience didn't help to destroy whatever confidence Beck would have had.

The nice thing about Tannehill is he comes with a built in excuse for sitting him.  He hasn't played QB all that long.  It is pretty amazing what he was able to do against some pretty tough opponents when he started the year expecting to be a wide receiver.  Lots of potential in this guy.

Throw on top of that the fact that Sherman is our OC and you have a decent (not perfect) receipe for success in year two or three (maybe 4 if there is a classic sophmore slump). 

Well, Tannehill did play QB in High School and was a highly rated recruit who was wanted by many colleges as a QB. It isn't like he just picked up the position. He was just behind Stephen Mcgee on the depth chart early on and wanted to play so he learned WR. Then when some QB's ahead of him in class left, Tannehill went back to QB. Tannehill has more college starts and playing time at QB than Mark Sanchez did and Sanchez went 5th overall.

I am definitely not on the Tannehill bandwagon.  Seems to me that, in the total absence of any football games being played, Tannehill has somehow jumped from a second-round talent to an early first-rounder.

To be honest, I think it's the total lack of suspense with the #1 and #2 picks.  Luck was obviously going #1, so there was no top-end QB controversy to argue over.  And since the talking heads HAVE TO discuss QBs (over and over and over), it then became all RG3, all the time.  But then WSH traded for the #2 pick, which removes all the suspense there... so now everyone has to discuss Tannehill.  And if someone (say, CLE) decided to trade up with MIN for Tannehill, you'd then hear everyone talking about Weeden and Cousins.

Think about this:  when was the last time you heard the talking heads pontificating about Andrew Luck (outside of a Peyton Manning story)?  No one seems to care about him at all; it's almost like he's not even being drafted.  And the last time I heard anyone talking about RG3 was shortly after the Redskin trade... now all I am hearing about is Tannehill.

I'm not going to obsess over a mediocre QB just because he's the best one remaining.

I don't ever remember seeing he was a second round talent. Everything I read said mid first-founder, so he hasn't moved up that much. -EK

I wasn't on the bandwagon either Spider, but I have changed in recent weeks. Tannehill's jump from a 2nd round talent to a mid to early 1st round pick has to do with the success Ponder and Locker had last year in limited time. Those teams reached last year on 2nd round talent QB's and bit the bullet, took them early in Round 1 and it sort of panned out for them. Teams have realized if there is one position where you can do an extreme reach on its QB. The position is too important now. 

That has a lot to do with Tannehill's jump to being a Round 1 guy now. The other thing is his measurable's are off the chart. Top flight overall athlete. Big-time arm. Some scouts say he has the best pocket presence out of RGIII and Luck. He has a big arm where he can make the difficult throws outside the numbers.  And his 2 major flaws are totally coach-able and can be fixed easily in time. He stares down WR's and he waits for WR's to get open before throwing it. Those are 2 things most QB's have trouble with coming out of college and can be fixed in time. The other thing that helps Tannehll is he is just a really good guy according to all reports. Open to being coached, willing to do anything to help the team (ie move to WR for a some time), and a good leader. And last year at Texas AM his WR's dropped over 60 catch-able balls. Easy ones. He never threw them under the bus.

Charlie Casserly says he likes Tannehill much more than Flaco when Flaco came out. Greg Cossell of NFL Films who breaks down the QB's for the draft said the gap between Luck/RGIII and Tannehill isn't as big as you would think. And Tannehill does a few things better than those 2.

I wasn't sold on the kid one bit, but in the last week or two I have watched a bunch of plays by him on Youtube and read up on him and what the experts think. I wouldn't be pissed if Miami took him #8. Now its a project, he ain't gonna play this year. And if he starts in 2013 he might struggle some. In some ways you are expecting the next two seasons to be mediocre at best. 8-8 type seasons.But the payoff long-term might be really really big!

To me he is a year or two away from being the next Philip Rivers. His game reminds me of him alot. Problem is, the GM's and coaches drafting a guy might not be around in 2 years to see the payoff. That's why some teams will avoid team.

+1

No "project" QB's plz

There is a real ringing endorsement. Looks guys, I would bet money that in three years none of you will look back and say, we sure should have taken Tannehill. The guy is an NFL turnover machine waiting to happen.

I'm not so sure that's true.. unlike a lot of other QB's he comes from a pro style offense.  His two flaws "He stares down WR's and he waits for WR's to get open before throwing it."  Are expected for a QB that played only 19 games.   If we believe what Ross says then Philbin was not convinced a QB he spent 4 seasons with was worth taking a risk on.  If they make a move for Tannehill... that tells me he saw something in him or Sherman convinced him Tannehill is worth it!

They were also the two main complaints everyone had against Henne.

Point taken... the difference here is we have a coach/oc here in Sherman that has actually worked with Tannehill!

not sure how much that helps.. LOL

Two easy, high-profile examples:

- In Mel Kiper's first two mock drafts (on 1/18/12 and 2/15/12), Tannehill was not in the first round.  On the third one (3/7/12), he's going 12th.
- For ESPN.com's other draft specialist, Todd McShay, he did not have Tannehill in the first round on his first mock (12/21/11).  On his second mock (2/2/12), Tannehill went late in the first: 25th to DEN.  In his latest mock, Tannehill is going 8th to Miami.

That's a hell of an offseason improvement.

But Henne doesn't have and never had the upside this kid has

I agree Tannehill is gonna get over drafted,by us,or Cleveland,whom ever...(so Sorry for hijacking the thread...)

Where was RG3 in the same span? I mean he's now going second behind Luck (I don't have "espn insider" and am unable to see)....Thank you...

The reason why ask, ( I don't watch college football!) I remember hearing about Lucks potential greatness for awhile,and the "If's" of Barkley,or Landry come out in this years draft...Prior to last years season I don't remember hearing a lot about RG3...(or Tannehill for that matter)

A couple things about RG3:

He absolutely floored everyone at the combine. And I'm not talking about on the field stuff. His presence, his knowledge... extremely rare. The experts were raving about how much he knew about NFL offenses.

RG3 didn't play much in 2009 after tearing his ACL in the 3rd game. That injury made his 2011 season more important than it would have been for other, comparable players. Baylor weren't expected to do particularly well last season, but they really surprised a lot of people and RG3 was the main reason.

Look at his college stats and, just by the numbers, there are a lot of things that scream "top tier talent". The progression in completion percentage is exactly what you want to see for a top pick (from just under 60% in his first year to 72.4% in 2011, with increases every year). His touchdown-to-interception ratio also improved every season (disregarding 2009).

The point is, there were a lot more unknowns with Griffin before the 2011 season (than the other top quarterback prospects), so it's only logical that he would climb the draft boards -- not only during the season, but also after the combine and his pro day.

Contrast that with Tannehill... very inexperienced, completion percentage dropped in 2011 (his first full year as a starter, having started half the games in 2010). He couldn't beat out Jerrod Johnson (who went undrafted last year).

Tannehill is pure *potential*. He's not worth a crap right now.

Can he become a top NFL quarterback... maybe, but COACHING is going to be paramount and I have zero confidence that Miami can perform in that department.

It's getting worse too... George Seifert of NFLN said that Minnesota was looking to deal the #3 overall pick, and according to Seifert, teams may look to move up to #3 to draft Tannehill.

Surely, it doth boggle the mind.

On a "short" note: Two undersized QBs who will likely go in the middle rounds that I'd have no problem seeing on SF or Miami's roster: Russell Wilson from Wisconsin and Kellen Moore from Boise State. I think both have great minds for the position and are highly accurate passers.

This Tannehill crap is getting ridiculous. Dude sucks.

+1

Kiper had RG3 at 4th, 4th, 2nd.
McShay had him at 7th, 4th, 4th (this was before the Redskin trade).

Thank you FYO,and Spider for the info...

No value in taking Tannehill at No. 8.

I say Miami trades up to the No. 4 spot and takes Blackmon.

From all reports Tannehill won't be there at 8. Won't be an issue.

His stock is rising fast. Report out today Browns might trade down to 6 and take Tannehill. Pick up even more picks to go along with the #22 pick they already have which will let them take RB's and WR's they want to build around him.

I agree a turnover machine waiting to happen. Tannehill is not even close to being ready to play QB in the nfl we would be smart not to take him. There are other QBs that should go before Tannehill size and a strong arm mean nothing when you throw interceptions. I won't be looking back and saving my money.

^^Everyone knows he's raw, but he's an exceptionally talented player. You don't often find the kind of size, strength, arm strength, mobility, versatility, intangibles etc in one package that Tannehill has. That's why he's being considered in the first round, because of his potential. He's only been playing QB in college for a year and half and before that he was one of the best WR's on the team which he took on because he wanted to play. I like that about him. Seems like he would be someone a team could rally around and in fact I think he's shown that to some degree. There's a certain amount of risk in taking him in the first round there's no question, but that's true with anyone.

Anyone that believes that Luck and RGIII are sure things are fooling themself, there's no guarantee that any of them will end up being starters in the NFL much less franchise QB's, but one thing is clear, to BECOME a franchise QB, you have to be given a CHANCE. We aren't going to solve our QB problem without bringing in a QB to compete and see what he's got. A QB is NOT just gonna fall into our laps. There's nothing preventing Miami from taking Tannehill this year and see how he works out and if he doesn't, taking a run at another one of the top QB's again next year.

That's just my opinion, I could be wrong.

To be perfectly honest, he's being considered for the first round only because Barkley & Jones went back to school.

That's true of EVERY single player in the draft.  If you took all the greatest athletes that ever came out of college and put them in the draft this year, pretty much every last one of the players being considered in the first round would move out of the first round. What exactly does that prove?

Everyone's draft potential is based upon the others in the draft. That's a given for every player in the draft, not just Tannehill.

If we move on Tannehill ... that means Sherman has seen enough to tell Philbin to pull the trigger!   I know the consensus here is against it but, Sherman being a NFL coach should know if he's worth the pick.   I think the one thing we have is Philbin and his staff have a lot of experience in the NFL... that doesn't always prove good though.

I guess the biggest reason why I want to take a chance on Tannehill is that he has all the physical tools you want in a franchise QB. If your coaching staff is any good they should be able to teach him the rest of what he needs to know. You can't teach a kid how to be taller, faster, more agile etc, but you can teach him how to read a defense, look off players etc. Maybe I'm putting too much faith in Philbin and Sherman, but the alternative is to make another "safe" pick. I'm tired of "safe". We've been doing that for years now. Yes, I know the last gamble that we took was on Ginn Jr and it didn't work out, but that doesn't mean we should quit trying to find a diamond in the rough.

Um, based on their rating at the time they were drafted, 2012 Andrew Luck would be going in the top 3 in any draft you can name.

Furthermore, no one is comparing Tannehill to "the greatest athletes that ever came out of college"; they are comparing him to other college athletes that were playing at the same time as he was.  Barkley and Jones are hardly the Mount Rushmore of college football, but had they declared, they would have been slotted ahead of Tannehill.

True about Jones and Barkley being ahead of him, but on the other hand if Tannehill was in LAST years draft he would have been the 2nd QB taken LAST year according to the experts.

And if the Yugo was being made in 1914 it would have outsold the Model T.

I just thought of something that no one here has mentioned I don't believe and I hadn't really seen anyone else mention is that Thomas played some QB in college, if you were to put him in the wildcat and split Tannehill out wide, he would be a threat to go downfield. Not just catch a pass, but perhaps make a big gain out of it. You could also put him in motion and get him the ball for a pass. Just a couple more wrinkles to keep the defense off balance? I wonder if A&M did that at all? I know the wildcat is a probably a dirty word around here now, but just throwing that out there.

No. Please. No more wildcat. Haven't we already run that into the ground? -EK

Thomas sucks and will probably be cut soon.  I wouldn't expect anything good out of him.

If Tannehill is our guy moving forward, I don't know how I'd feel about the potential of him getting demolished as a WR.

If we're lucky, CLE will bite on Tannehill and Blackmon will fall to us.  Then I can sort of justify this debacle of an offseason by imagining that we traded Marshall and our 1st for two 3rds and the #2 overall (which is where Blackmon was slotted if STL had kept their pick).

That would have been an awesome deal.

Tannehill is going to be the lucky recipient of the cash cow known as supply and demand.  A guy with 2nd or 3rd round talent has been elevated to what will probably be a top 6 overall pick simply because so many teams need a QB.  Taking a "desperation" pick or a "panic" pick hardly ever works out.  I know that the Fins are in a really bad way at the QB position, but the market price for Tannehill far exceeds his abilities.  Not saying he can't be a decent QB, but he is not a top 6 pick and it would even be a bit of a stretch to take him in the first round at all.

I'm not convinced that Miami is "in a really bad way" at QB. The guy under center right now finished 6-3 last year and is entering a system that doesn't need Brady's arm to win. I'd rather have Blackmon in a heartbeat than any QB we've chased or looked at in the offseason, including Manning and Flynn. Off field or personal issues aside, Brandon Marshall's 1200+ yards and 75 receptions- plus the double coverage he demanded- is more important to replace than a serviceable Matt Moore in my opinion. -EK

I read this entire thread and it looks like the posters are pretty much split on Tannehill. All of you made good points. Here is how I see it.

Tannehill has been climbing the charts due to supply and demand. It has nothing to do with his skills. Like someone said, if Barkley & Jones would have come out, we would hear nothing of Tannehill.

Tannehill is inexperienced. No one knows what his ceiling is.

RT has prototype size and very athletic.

Ryan is smart, something that cannot be underestimated.

Bottom line is the Fins have been searching for Dan's replacement and have not drafted a QB in rd. 1 since 83. Sherman is a good OC and RT's former HC. No one knows him better. If Sherman likes him and can convince JI to take the risk, we will draft him, but NO WAY DO THEY MOVE UP. It just is not in JI's DNA.

On the flip side it worked out great for Cincy last year in my opinion who "reached" for Andy Dalton at the top of round 2 and it payed off big time for them. Tannehill is a far better prospect than Dalton was considered last year, so why is it so hard to envision Miami taking Tannehill in the first round? Tannehill is also rated higher than Jake Locker was last year by Scout's inc who ended up being taken 8th last year. Locker did pretty well in his couple of appearances last year for Tennessee. I think some of you are exaggerating just how much of a "reach" Tannehill is. He's raw, but he has all the tools you want in a franchise QB, he'll probably just need time to develop a few of the finer points to be a QB in the NFL, like looking off DB's, throwing the ball before the receiver makes his cut, throwing the ball low over the middle so either your WR gets it or no one does, etc. He doesn't have 2nd round physical tools, he has 1st round physical ability, the question is his limited playing experience, but that can be fixed.

(IMO) The argument that worries me a bit is Sherman knows him better than anyone.(It seems to get brought up when the Dolphins, and Tannehill are mentioned). A lot of the expert draftniks,all say he's not a step in from day 1,for your football team type guy...

I don't see Sherman being around as our offensive coordinator for more than say 2-3 years? If he does well for us,I think he could go for a head coaching jobs in college,or the NFL...If he fails he'll get fired....I want Philbin to be the guy that loves Tannehill,not as much,or necessarily Sherman...

Sorry for the random thought there....

(edited to fix typo,random thought,not random that there...my redneck coming through)

The problem is that's not the choice, Blackmon or Tannehill. No way that Blackmon falls to #8. No way. Tannehill might. If Blackmon was there at #8, I wouldn't have a problem taking Blackmon, but it's NOT going to happen.

That's why Philbin and not Sherman was at Tannehill's Pro Day, to see Tannehill for himself. Sherman has already made up his mind on the kid I would assume. But you have to remember that Sherman and Philbin are practically joined at the hip when it comes to offensive philosophy. I'm pretty sure that if Sherman broke down tape on Tannehill, he would see mostly the same things that Philbin would see. Sherman would have a little "insider" knowledge, like what he's like in the huddle, what he's like in the locker room etc, but Philbin is probably gonna take Sherman's word for most of that anyway. I think it's VERY unlikely that Philbin and Sherman would be "split" on how they think of Tannehill. One might be "all-in" and the other might be a bit skeptical, but I doubt one would be "all-in" and the other be "all-out". Sherman and Philbin are too much alike for that to happen.

Solid points there.  Sometimes a "reach" does work out.  Just like sometimes a highly touted "sure thing" doesn't work out.  I guess that is part of the fun of fans like us playing the "conjecture" game.  I agree that the raw ability is there.  With such a limited body of work, it is just really tough to have a very good bead on the guy.  I wouldn't have a problem with taking a guy like him in the 2nd round.  I just fear that any team that takes him in the top 10 picks is going to be overpaying.  Unless he turns out to be the next Dan Marino, then the Fins will have underpaid for him.   ;D   Like I said, we are all just making educated guesses on anyone until they get on the field and show what they have against an NFL defense. 

True enough.  I probably overstated the QB situation by labeling them as "in a really bad way" at QB.  Unfortunately, I think that the team has enough other holes on offense, that they are more than a QB away from "getting there".

Philbin worked with both Rodgers and Flynn, both guys who didn't play right away and sat on the bench. Rodgers is now the best in the game and Flynn is getting his big break. Eli didn't start from Day 1. Locker last year looked good at the end of the season, he didn't start from Day 1. Lots of QB's don't play from Day 1. That isn't a huge deal. Some guys need a little more time.

Miami can let Tannehill never walk on the field this year and it won't be an issue. What's the rush now? We have waited since Marino retired, whats 1 more year at this point!! Let Moore and Garrard get beat up and lose (which is what they do, Moore more so than Gararrd), then a year from now Miami can start adding more pieces to build around Tannehill with a year under his belt will be ready to play.David Garrard is old and injured, Matt Moore stinks and isn't leading us to the promise land...go all-in on the guy (IF THEY BELIEVE IN HIM) and move on from there.

If they DON'T believe in him, then don't take a QB at all for the sake of taking a QB, and build up the rest of the team and start over next year with the QB position.With Moore and Garrard gone as free agents they can just blow up the position and start over.

Either way, go all in for Tannehill or just ignore the position. Dont' reach on a guy in Rd 2 or 3 like Osweiler or whoever who will most likely suck and you just wasted a pick that could have gotten us someone to help us elsewhere. And the only reason you are taking him is because well we gotta take a QB for the sake of taking a QB

I started to mention this in "Who do you want @ 8,if you don't want Tannehill thread",I think it might be more appropriate here though....

Any chance Tannehill (not talent wise!,just the way the draft rolls,shakes out) is a Brady Quinn (maybe even Arron Rodgers) type draft,everyone says he wont get past these teams...He flies up the draft boards (according to the media),yet in reality the Teams drafting him saw him differently.He actually wasn't moving up draft boards...

Brady Quinn there was a chance Cleveland could take them with in the top 10,then Washington,Arizona,or Tampa Bay...No way he get's by Miami @9...He got drafted @22
I remember Rodgers,they kind of said he'd fall if he didn't get picked in the top couple...

Save me the woulda,coulda,shoulda.....It's just a random thought

^^^ It has crossed my mind as well B.

That's my fear. That he's there at #8 and Miami passes on him and he falls to the Bills at 10 and they take him. Now if he doesn't pan out, won't be an issue, but if he kicks our butts every year, I'm gonna be flipping pissed.

All of you need to think back a few years when Miami went the safe route and chose Jake Long instead of taking a chance on a QB that wasn't a sure thing but was pretty highly rated. We have been harping on whether or not we made the right choice ever since. Can we really afford to do that again?

Don't think so. The league has become totally a QB's league. Even more so since Quinn's draft. You saw last year teams fighting over guys like Locker and Ponder near the Top 10-15. Between Cleveland, Miami, Philly, KC, Seattle, and probably a sleeper team or two there is no shot Tannehill falls to the bottom of Rd 1.

It's so much a QB's league there is talk of Weeden and Osweiler (who is terrible) going late in Rd 1. QB's are the hottest properties nowadays. You can't afford to wait and for a guy to fall.

Perfect world, Miami takes Tannehill at #8. Then trades their 2013 1st round pick to get BACK into Rd 1 late or middle of the round to get a WR or OLB. Best of both worlds. Have your QB to build around who can sit this year. Have a guy who can play and help out this year.

I actually like this idea of trading next yr's 1st to move back into the 1st round this yr and get someone along with a QB.

Why not just draft a WR or OLB at a higher position next year?

I'd rather draft a guy at 2013 #11 than 2012 #27.  There's no need to win now on a team that was 6-10 and is rebuilding.

Because we could possibly draft someone this year that fill a hole and get some experience/use out of them this yr... then next yr fill other holes!  We're not going to fill all our needs in this yr's draft.. so get what we can that helps us get closer to having all holes filled.  Now I don't mean just trade away the pick this yr to grab anyone!

If someone they graded high is around then pull the trigger!

Bottom line is until we solve the QB issue, and by solving I mean draft one in Rd 1 and tag him "the guy" and build around him, we aren't winning anything. We will forever be fighting for 3rd place at best. We will continue to be a joke.

Once we take a QB, everything else will fall into place. The elephant in the room is Miami has no QB. Remove the elephant and filling the rest of the holes (WR, OLB, TE...etc)  becomes so much friggin easier! Finding OLB, WR, RT, TE....that's easy! Very easy. Finding a quality QB to draft  and pulling the trigger on it is tough work!

Now maybe that QB fails in time and turns out not to be "the guy".....but that is the blueprint to success in this league for the majority of teams (N.O. being the exception) and that is the blueprint to follow. I would rather possibly lose following that path than doing the same ole crap we have been doing. Settleing for QB's in Rd 2 or trading 2nd round picks for career back-ups!

Who are the teams that have won big or gone far in the playoffs and had lots of regular season success in recent years.....Giants, Pitt, GB, Baltimore, SD, SF, Indy, Atlanta, ...hell throw in the Jets if ya want. What is the 1 trait they have in common? They drafted a QB someplace in Rd 1. Whether the 1st pick or the 22nd and everywhere inbetween the bit the bullet and took a young QB. It makes life so much easier and it lets you build a team so much easier.


We don't need Tannehill to be the next Peyton Manning (would be nice, but unrealistic expectations for anyone). If he is the next Flacco or Ryan I can live with that. It will give the team a punchers chance of being a  contender and competitive!

...except that next year, we will have one less pick (more likely, two less) to fill holes if we trade up.

Again, why trade up to pick a late-first-round talent this year when we can just keep our picks and pick an early/mid-first-round talent next year?  The Dolphins are far from "one player away" at this point.

http://www.bing.com/videos/watch/video/schein-tannehill-not-top-10-material/123fdtfx?from=gallery_en-us

Adam Schein is on the anti-Tannehill bandwagon. Calls Cleveland and Miami "armature hour" for even considering taking him Top 10.

I don't agree with him but I know many of you do and thought you might like to see this..lol

I have to agree with this.  It seems the fan base is growing ever impatient with the lack of a franchise quarterback and most fans are ready to jump off the edge if Miami doesn’t select Tannehill or trade up to get him.   The question is should the Dolphins pull the trigger on Tannehill who is by most experts opinions a project that will have little to no impact this year?    My feeling is that Philbin and company are not going to pull the trigger on Tannehill just to satisfy the masses.   Especially when this team has plenty of other holes where a better player could be taken. Tannehill might be the third best quarterback prospect in the draft but he would be a major reach being drafted 8th overall.

Personally, I’d like to see the Dolphins grab one of the talented pass rushing defensive ends at the 8th spot to go opposite Cameron Wake and keep the double teams off him.  My pick would be Melvin Ingram from South Carolina. A high motor guy who doesn't take plays off like Quentin Coples and can wreak havoc in the offensive backfield.   He’d be a perfect bookend to Cameron Wake for years to come.

Back to Tannehill, if the powers that be in the Dolphins front office decide he’s worth the 8th pick, then I hope its for the reason that Mike Sherman believes in him as the heir apparent at quarterback and not just to pacify the fan base.

Two things,

1) Wake probably won't be here after next year. He is going to want Mario Williams money when he is a Free Agent. Even if Miami franchise tags him, Mario just raised this franchise tag price with his $50 mill guaranteed salary. We would be drafting a DE/pass rusher to replace Wake more than play with him most likely long-term.

2) Tannehill isn't a reach at 8. That is his range where everyone seems him going. In that Top 7-12 range. You can't keep putting off the QB position. Miami might be in a WORSE position next year. Moore and Gararrd will be Free Agents. And the way Ireland drives people away they could leave and never look back. Moore is a California kid who might want to play closer to home out west if he has options. Who knows! What if Miami is picking lower than 8 next year and is unable to trade up to get someone. What if a bunch of teams ahead of Miami next year need QB's and aren't trading down and Miami can't trade up into the mix. And the FA pool next year at QB isn't great and lord knows Miami can't land free agents anyway. At some point you have to take a QB early! Not in round 2 or 3 and settle on a guy, but you have to take a guy. I'm not saying Tannehill is the 2nd coming of anything, but if he is there at 8 and they pass on him it becomes silly at some point.

And to say pass on QB to fill other holes. Every team has holes, no team is perfect. But without a QB you can plug every other hole you want, you will still suck! Yes, Tannehill is a project who won't play 1 min this year probably. And I am fine with that too! We have waited this long, what's 1 more year!

Most teams don't draft a rookie qb to come in and start right away (1st yr) anyway!  Most start because they are usually forced into action by injuries or the starter is not performing..

I think he is a reach and not everyone sees him going in that position. Some of the talking heads are saying it so some people believe it is gospel. Remember when everyone was saying how early Quinn would be going? I expect on draft day to see Tannehill being that last guy sitting in the green room just waiting to hear his name.

Also we're talking semantics here. If a Lays potato chip that looks like Hitler sells on ebay for $100 then it is worth $100 (market forces) except of course for the fact that it isn't.

I have to agree that pass rush is a better way to go. #8 for a QB that Spider pointed out to me was not even being talked about until the second round until a few months ago is nuts. The argument that Wake may leave at the end of the year for money only strengthens the argument that a good DE should be taken. In two years I'd rather have Wake's replacement and a serviceable QB (ie, Moore) than neither because we banked on Tannehill, potentially let Moore walk and passed altogether on DE. Tannehill at 8, after reading more about him, seems like taking the last ugly girl at the bar home, just to have someone there. -EK

Interesting article by a guy named Matt Waldman (from FootballGuys.com) where he breaks down some plays from the A&M vs Oklahoma game where Tannehill didn't have great stats, and his team was totally outmatched, but he saw some good things when he broke Tannehill's performance technique, vision, etc...

http://mattwaldmanrsp.com/2012/03/12/why-ryan-tannehill-is-a-first-round-prospect/ (http://mattwaldmanrsp.com/2012/03/12/why-ryan-tannehill-is-a-first-round-prospect/)

One man's opinion. I was at that game. I stopped reading when he compared a bad, high pass to Joe Montana. LOL

^^^ You need to set your media hyperbole filter to "active," otherwise you can discount 99% of all analysis out there.

Picking a franchise QB is no easy task... that's obvious!    But, at the same time you have to pull the trigger sometime!  Looking back now... a lot of teams look silly letting Tom Brady slip to NE!  If anyone had picked him in the 1st,2nd or 3rd people would be saying it was a huge reach! 

I doubt people would say that about Brady now seeing how he turned out!   The Patriots look like geniuses for taking a chance on Brady...  I'm not saying Tannehill is a Brady in waiting but, you just never know!  If we take him then Sherman has seen enough and feels he can develop him..if we don't take him?  Then he's seen enough to feel Tannehill is not that guy!

Simple as that!

I agree! When the best QB on your roster is GOD AWFUL Matt Moore, QB is an issue. It's the ONLY issue!  Matt Moore sucks. He isn't a care-taker QB, he isn't a game-manager,  he isn't serviceable, he is downright bad. Miami can trot him out there for 1 more year because they have no choice, but you can't have him be "the future" and you can't give him a multi-year deal after this year (which is what he will want as a FA) and ignore the QB position and think Miami can "get by" with Matt firggin Moore!

There is "risk" involved with every pick at every position, why people are so afraid to take a QB is beyond me. There is the same amount of "risk" taking Coples, Ingram, or Floyd. They might suck too. Floyd has a bunch of off the field issues. Coples is lazy. And Ingram only really had 1 good year in college he was a career back-up in college till his final year. Career back-up on a lesser level. Those aren't knocks those are facts and pointing out there is risk with everyone drafted. RGIII wasn't even thought of as an NFL QB last year this time, he was a nice college player with no big NFL prospects. Hell even as late as middle of last season nobody thought RGIII would be a high pick, some "experts" even said he was a fluke! Some guys are late bloomers at the QB position. You can't get caught up in what people "thought" of Tannehill entering into the year or a few months back. IT changes fast at that position at that age.

I will be happy to take Tannehill in the sixth round (the same "risk" NE took on Brady).

First round... not so much.

You really need it spelled out for you? There's only ONE Qb on the field at at time, for starters. If Coples can't get off the line, you have an other DE rushing from the other side. Same thing with Ingram- 2 outside linebackers, not one (and hardly just "one good year"- he led SC in sacks two years ago and was an All-American this year). With Floyd, you have two or three other guys at his position on the field. There is significantly less "risK" taking one of these positions than QB. How you can even mention other players having only "one good year" when Tannehill played a whopping season and a half at his position? That's a bigger red flag to me than a guy who was a "career backup" but led his team in sacks coming off the bench. -EK

^^Less risk, less reward.

No, I think you do!

Thank you Captain Obvious!

So by your logic, since there is only one QB on the field at a time, just ignore the position? Is that the stance you are really taking? Since other positions have multiple players on the field at once (ie WR, LB, o-line...etc) they are more important than a QB? WOW! You are clueless!



You are the same Popcorn Fart who thinks Tim Tebow is a "one in a million QB" and a "Top 10 NFL QB" and that Mark Sanchez had a "great year last year." When it comes to analyzing the QB position your credibility is at less than Zero! You are about as correct as Merril Hodge was back in the day when he said Brian Brohm was better coming into the NFL than Aaron Rodgers.. (watch for yourself  2:15 mark) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=he0BIKmoq0s


P.S...Little stat for ya, only 1 QB drafted in rounds 2-7 since 2003 has won a playoff game! But you keep trying to fit that square peg in the circle opening and doing things the way which has damn near a 100% track record of failure! 

Yep!

And No QB=a Consistently crappy franchise that will go nowhere anytime soon

But let's keep hitching our wagon to the Career Back-up's like Matt Moore and the old and broken down David Gararrd's of the world. That's a blueprint to success that really has worked for the Packers, Giants, Steelers, Patriots, Indy and other elite to very good teams of the world in recent years!

When did I say ignore the position? Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't make them wrong; contrarily it seems to usually make them right, actually. You don't pass on a top ten DE or WR talent to draft a QB just to have another warm body there. While you continue to slam Moore, you also overlook the fact that he finished the season 6-3 and Tannehill- in ONE full year as a starter- One, that's it- hasn't done anything to show he's better than what we have. Don't use the career back-up excuse when you're advocating drafting a guy in the top 10 who only started himself one full season. -EK

Oh like you mean Mark Sanchez going #5 in the draft coming out of USC only starting 1 year and with 16 total college starts ... ::)  The man you have your MAN-CRUSH on! lol The man coming off a "great season" who is a "great NFL QB" in your eyes! lol

Sanchez can only play 1 year in college and its ok for him to get drafted Top 5, he can be a great NFL QB (in your opinion). But Tannehill with MORE COLLEGE STARTS than Sanchez can't?

Hmmm, interesting logic.

I never said Sanchez should have gone when he did. I never even said Sanchez was good. What I said was that through 10 games last year he was having his best year. You continue to fixate on that to fuel whatever your current argument is, but it has nothing to do with this thread.

FYI- you can stop sending me PMs. I delete them without reading, so save your obsession for someone else. -EK

You have a huge Mark Sanchez man-crush and stated such last year numerous times as you think he is a great QB. He only had 16 college starts. Yet you throw Tannehill under the bus for only having 19 college starts. More than Sanchez!

Don't re-write history! It has everything to do with this. You speak out of both sides of your mouth on this issue. Because you aren't a Tannehill fan you are finding reasons not take him (only 19 starts). Yet you are the biggest Mark Sanchez fan on this board and want to drink his bath water yet he only had 16 college starts and you defended where he was drafted  and defended him all of last season.

Little hypocritical!

Does anyone remember that Tom Brady sat behind Brian Griese or that Aaron Rodgers started his college career at  Butte Community College?   Tom Brady started something like 25 games at Michigan.  Again, I'm not saying Tannehill is Brady or Rodgers but, harping on his 19 starts really doesn't mean anything!  How many starts did Ryan Leaf, Heath Shuler , Jamarcus Russell or David Klinger have... and how did they turn out?

Are you aware that FSU turned down Rodgers and the only D-1 school to recruit him was Illinois as a walk on?

This, Mike, is exactly what I mean. Rewrite history? Show me where I've said Sanchez is great. I said he was having his best year through ten weeks. Go back and look at the threads if you want to debate it. You talk about being a hypocrite- you tell me I'm obsessed with you but you keep PMing me you little freak. Again, if you don't like what I say, ignore it- don stir up shit and bring up past threads and then act like your hands are clean of anything here. That's the ultimate hypocrisy. -EK

I totally agree with you. I also am not saying Tannehill will be great. He might suck and be a total bust. But the reasoning behind NOT taking him some use is flawed and silly.

If Ireland/Philbin/Sherman all think he can't cut it, then I in no way want Miami to take him. Don't do it. Avoid at all costs!  If they feel he is the guy though, I would have no problem with Miami trading UP to get him if need be!Get him at all costs!

--------------------------------

No way do I move up to get a guy who started 19 games and has not proved himself. I think taking him at 8 is a reach in itself. Don't you? Had Jones and Barkley came out, no one would even be talking about him. If Cleveland wants him at 4 (they won't), SALUTE! 

I'm sorry, but I take issue with this statement and disagree.  What guy in the draft has "proved himself" in the NFL? There is risk with everyone. Yes, less risk with Luck than anyone else. But Luck is a once in a generation type player you don't see often. Once again, a year ago RGII wasn't even on the radar of NFL scouts. Now he is "cant miss." There is risk involved with everyone and nobody is proven.

Also, Tannehill would have gone ahead of Jones if Jones came out.  Not Barkley, but Jones, yes.

Again, how many missed on Brady or Kurt Warner?

Warner was playing in the Arena league at one point and stocking grocery shelves for goodness sake!

If we pass on Tannehill or someone takes him before us and he pans out.... what would you be saying then?

Like I've said before and Mike O just said "If Ireland/Philbin/Sherman all think he can't cut it, then I in no way want Miami to take him. Don't do it. Avoid at all costs!  If they feel he is the guy though, I would have no problem with Miami trading UP to get him if need be!Get him at all costs!"

This I have no problem with... even if he doesn't pan out!   Not every player pans out no matter how sure they look in college!

I have only been here a short time, but have already learned, "just what do you not take issue with?" That is a pretty strong statement as a response to someone's opinion.   

When I say proven, I meant proven as a college QB. That should have been a given. There is risk in every one f the guys coming out, including Luck. No way do I give up picks to get Tannehill at 4 and Ireland won't either. JMO. We will see in about a month. 

Would you trade up to get Luck.. if we had the chance?

It doesn't look like it but, Luck could very well be the next Jeff George?

Look at all the people that down talked Drew Brees coming out of college... you'd pretty much kill to have gotten Brees when we had the chance now!

I got ya, thanks for clearing that up! And I don't think Cleveland is trading with us so I don't see Miami moving up to 4.

And that is what the NFL Draft is right there. You worded it perfectly.

IF you are in love with a guy that high in the draft, you go get him! Especially when talking about the quarterback position. I don't care how many college starts he had, that has nothing to do with anything.

How does that work? You specifically stated that Miami should pass on Ingram because he only started one year, but then say, "I don't care how many college starts he had, that has nothing to do with anything." THIS is why I have issue with the stuff you post- you hop from one foot to the other back and forth changing your argument about shit just to argue. Have some consistency- either you ignore how many starts a guy has or you don't. -EK

I never said Miami should pass on Ingram at all if they feel he is the best player. I have my opinions but I never said Ingram would be a bad pick.  ::)  Once again, EK putting words in someones mouth to get outraged about!

For the record........I simply said if Miami thinks Tannehill is "the guy" and "their future" take the QB. Considering after this season the ONLY QB under contract is Pat Devlin. And with Ireland having little success signing free agents, you might want to address the QB position now when you have a chance. Now, If they (Ireland/Philbin/Sherman) don't think he is the long-term answer at QB pass on him. I have NO PROBLEM WITH THAT!!! I trust their judgment on Tannehill!  I also stated I (as in ME) would prefer they draft an offensive player since our offense totally sucks and our defense is good (not great but good).  If Tannehill isn't the long-term answer I have no problem with them drafting Floyd, Coples, or Ingram. I pointed out the "negatives" with Ingram (as well with Floyd and Coples) to simply make the point that any player we take will have negatives, its not just Tannehill that has some drawbacks/negatives. The fact that Ingram is only 6' 1" and doesn't have the size to be a 3 down player in a 4-3 scheme is also a negative to go along with he was a career back-up in college till his final year. Doesn't mean I will be upset if we take him. Just means the coaches have to use him right and in the right circumstances.

You may have meant that, and it's fine to add some other things in NOW, but what you said was:

You specifically cited that as the "risk" that might deter someone from drafting him. Then you turn around and say

I didn't put words in your mouth- those were your quotes. Why would this risk apply to one guy but not the other- especially when Tannehill was still being discussed as a second round prospect only a few months ago, not someone who should be a top ten pick. Where's the logic? -EK

EXACTLY! Thanks for proving my point! I did say it, never said I didn't. And put that sentence you quoted in "context" and I was pointing out negatives of everyone. Coples (lazy work ethic, takes plays off)...Floyd (off the field issues)...Ingram (only 1 year starter at SC, not a 3 down player on NFL level in 4-3)

That's right, the RISK might deter someone from drafting ANYONE OF THESE PEOPLE! Throw in Tannehill with his 19 career starts and you have the risk with all 4 of these players we are talking about! That's my entire point! To blow off Tannehil because he was a 2nd round grade at one point and only has 19 starts is silly because there is red flags and risk with everyone! THAT'S THE LOGIC! And by using my own quotes you just proved my points! THANK YOU!

How does that prove yout point? It proves you're logic is circular and hypocritical. You keep saying how Miami HAS to take him, but that's just a warm body filling in a spot because you want change. Why would you draft a player ranked lower at his position with the same risks that you point out for other people who you'd pass on? How does that make ANY sense at all?? Stick with Moore, draft Blackmon, move on. -EK

Because the QB position is far more important than the OLB/DE position. That's my entire point which I (and many others) have stated numerous times!  YES, I want change at the QB position at some point (our current situation sucks), drafting Tannehill does that, not this year but down the road he would be "the guy". My opinion! Nobody said you have to agree. Obviously you don't, you are entitled! And I never said Miami "HAS" to take him. For the 10,000,000th time, I said IF Ireland/Philbin/Sherman believe he is the guy then they should take him. If they don't, then avoid him at all costs. I have put my faith in our staff. NEVER have I once said Miami has to take him. I have even said NUMEROUS times if Miami doesn't like a QB in this draft or doesn't get the opportunity to draft the guy they want, DON'T take a QB for the sake of taking a QB. I have posted that numerous times. A far cry from you claiming" I want change for the sake of change so take whatever QB."

Draft Blackmon? He isn't going to be there at 8. Nice pipe dream! He won't be there.

Ridiculous- why keep posting in this thread at all, if you don't believe they should go after him? You've spent multiple posts touting his strenghts, but you think just because you add a disclaimer, "if that's what they want to do," that that somehow means people won't read into your posts that they should draft him? This post pretty clearly states that you think he should be drafted:

As far as Blackmon, your own words:

So if you can say take Tannehill at 8, even though you think he won't be there, I can say take Blackmon at 8. -EK

I said TRADE UP if need be to get him if they believe in him.  ::)  You love taking things totally out of contex to help you make up a point to come out against.

You have also said draft a DE to book-end with Wake and dont take Floyd because you believe our defense stinks. But now are saying take Blackmon. Hello, you are doing the same thing you are "accusing" me of doing! 

Nothing was taken out of context. Your post about him not being there had nothing about trading up. The entire entire context was just that- he'd be gone. When did I say our defense stinks? Again twisting my words to fit your argument. I've said numerous times that they're not as good as you think they are and they should get some blame for not being able to keep people out of the end zone in the fourth quarter. I've never actually even said what my opinion of them as a whole is- only that they're not the dominant squad you believe them to be. Apparently management agreed with me because practically EVERY move that was made this season, with the exception of the Marshall trade was on the defensive side of the ball. If it was such a dominant unit to start with, that wouldn't have been the case. -EK

LOL....adding Richard Marshall and Tyrell Johnson two back-ups is "every move" they have made in free agency according to you.  Oh wait, Art Hicks backup RT and back-up QB David Gararrd were added too.  2 moves on defense. 2 moves on offense. ALL BACK-UP PLAYERS. Yep, they really revamped the defense with those 2 moves and have totally focused on the Defense and ignored the offense!  ::) Do you undestand how foolish that sounds? Seriously!

You have taken everything I said out of context or just flat out make stuff up. Like me saying the defense is dominate. I never claimed that, never said that. You MAKE IT UP and then come out against it. I say the defense is good (which they are 6th best in the NFL in scoring defense) and you take it totally out of context.  I said they are a good unit (not great) and I always put not great after that statement every time I make it because I know YOU will take it out of context. And you do all the time.