Lets talk Tannehill

[Diehard_Dolfan]

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!

[MikeO]

   

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. 

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.

[MikeO]

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!

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.

[EKnight]

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

[MikeO]

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.

[EKnight]

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

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.

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

I don't care how many college starts he had, that has nothing to do with anything.

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

[MikeO]

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!

[EKnight]

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

[MikeO]

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.

[EKnight]

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:

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!

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!

As far as Blackmon, your own words:

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

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

[MikeO]

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! 

[EKnight]

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

[MikeO]

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.