Lets talk Tannehill

[EKnight]

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.

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

[Pappy13]

^^Less risk, less reward.

[MikeO]

You really need it spelled out for you?

No, I think you do!

There's only ONE Qb on the field at at time, for starters.

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!

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

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! 

[MikeO]

^^Less risk, less reward.

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!

[EKnight]

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

[MikeO]

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.

[EKnight]

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

[MikeO]

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!

[Diehard_Dolfan]

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?

[EKnight]

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

[MikeO]

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?

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!

[Fins4ever]

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! 

[MikeO]

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

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.

[Diehard_Dolfan]

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! 

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!

[Fins4ever]

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.

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.