No doubt Dolphins going after Ryan Tannehill

I thought crap it was in his sig, how the hell did I miss that. What a stupid question.
(i think cousins will be a huge bust also, I love Wilson, if only he was taller)

 

I think they'll miss out on him if they do. QBs of that talent level are simply too valuable. I expect that much like what we saw here, there are some teams who feel the age thing is a big deal and some who don't. I think some team will come out of nowhere and take him in the first.

 

Again, not picking on you. Totally understandable from your perspective if you don't know what I think, I'm not vain enough to think you're hanging on every word I say and automatically remember, etc. But also from my perspective, of no fault of yours mind you, I get asked that question so much that there's always this knee-jerk sense of "don't you people know this by now?!?" It's the inner-Omar in all of us.

 

I've got enough experience with props to know that you usually do not see a +120/-120 split. Sorry. It's just the truth.

It appears the bets came rolling in on Tannehill. I thought it was weird that they were even yesterday. I don't have an account with sportsbook but if I did I would have been tempted to throw a bunch on the "yes".

 

I didn't want to start a new thread on this, but do you guys see Janoris Jenkins as a possibility in the second round for Miami? I'm not asking b/c I want him nor b/c I don't, I'm just not sure where I see his value. Many have him as the best cover guy in the draft and I think Ireland values CBs more than I do so I figure he has to be a possibility. On the other hand, the character issues may have moved him down or off their board.

 

I definitely think it's possible that he's off Ireland's board due to character issues. From strictly a football standpoint I'd be happy if we drafted him though. I personally wouldn't draft him before rd 3 I think though do to the character issues.

 

Think about this, though.

The only teams that are going to be interested in him are teams that have weakness at the position right NOW. You're not taking on a 28 year old that will turn 29 at mid-season in order to develop him. If you have a Joe Flacco, Phil Rivers, Jay Cutler, Matt Schaub, Josh Freeman, Tom Brady or Drew Brees, you're not taking Brandon Weeden. Ryan Mallett had sort of a floor built into his stock in that he's young enough that a team like the Patriots could take him at the top of the 3rd round because they had him as their #1 rated QB in the entire Draft and the value was just too much to pass up. But if Mallett were 28 years old, that wouldn't be the case IMO.

So you've got a big chunk of teams that aren't really going to be interested in him until he falls into Day 3.

The teams that have CURRENT weakness at the QB position include the Colts (who will take Luck and then will have zero interest in Weeden), the Redskins (who will take RG3 and then will have zero interest in Weeden), the Browns, the Dolphins, the Bills, the Chiefs, the Cardinals, the Jets and the Rams. There are two more special cases in the Broncos and the Eagles where I imagine that even though on the outset their QB positions look fine, they actually are in line for a QB. On the other hand, the Jets and Rams are in positions where even though they are NOT fine at the QB positions (as of yet, Bradford could obviously turn it around), they won't be in the market for a Brandon Weeden until very late.

So until we get into Day 3, the market for Weeden is SET at the Browns, Dolphins, Bills, Chiefs, Cardinals, Eagles and Broncos. Ryan Tannehill is going to go to one of these guys, taking that team off the market. I have Matt Elder who follows the Bills religiously and swears to me that Buddy Nix is actually, contrary to popular belief, very transparent, telling me that the Bills have no interest in Weeden and that there's another QB they've been eyeballing.

The Browns pick #4, #22 and#37
The Dolphins pick #8 and #42
The Chiefs pick #11 and #44
The Cardinals pick #13 and #80
The Eagles pick #15, #46 and #51
The Broncos pick #25 and #57

Let's assume the Dolphins are the ones that grab Tannehill in the 1st round at #8 overall. You have the Browns, Chiefs, Cardinals, Eagles and Broncos all possibly wanting Weeden. But the Cardinals and Eagles pick too early to want him at #11 or #15. If the Eagles have a hard-on for him they could trade down as Andy Reid is famous for doing. They could also trade up. But how likely is it that Weeden is their guy given they still have Michael Vick? How likely for that matter is it that the Broncos are for Weeden when ideally they'd like to get 3 more years out of Peyton Manning, if not more? With Matt Cassel, Ricky Stanzi and Brady Quinn on roster, are the Chiefs even serious about the position at all?

I think Peter King had a solid prediction in that the Browns would pass at #22 overall but potentially use one of the arsenal of extra picks they have to move up from #37 to the late 20's to get just out of reach of guys like the Eagles and Chiefs, who could look to trade ahead of that #37 pick.

 

Jeff Ireland has done a lot of work on Janoris Jenkins. Yes, I believe he's a possibility if he falls far enough.

 

If hes there with our 2nd we absolutely have to take him. Character flaws and all. He has to much potential to let slide by in the 2nd round.

 

Crap..did you have that sig when I asked the same question?

 

It's possible that Weeden makes it to the 2nd round, but I'd be more surprised to see that happen than if he were taken in the top half of the first round. I guess there's really two schools of thought. The first school of thought is, when a player has a red flag sometimes he falls much further than he should. We've seen this happen before and most recently with Mallett last year. In Weeden's case that red flag is obviously his age. With his age being what it is, you pretty much have to be a team with an immediate need at QB where he can come in and compete quickly for a starting job. He's not a guy you take and hope he develops after sitting behind a vet.

The second school of thought is, good QB prospects go higher than most people think they will. Last year not many people thought Ponder was a 1st round pick, let alone a top 15 pick. Most people were saying Locker could fall out of the 1st round too and he was a top 10 pick. I think Brandon Weeden is a better QB than Ponder and maybe Locker too. If he's a better QB, I don't see why age should factor in so much that it will knock him down a whole round. I get that if you want a franchise QB and when looking at two guys with similar ceilings, you're going to take the one who can play longer, but I don't understand passing on what can be a franchise QB for the next 6-8 years or more because he can't be a franchise QB for 10-12 years. I think there are teams out there that see how good he is and are hiding their interest in him. I could see a team like the Cheifs or Cardinals taking him in the 1st round and letting him compete with Cassell or Kolb right away.

 

No, just the Bleedin for Weeden part.

 

Oh, OK. I think I only noticed the youtube link before. haha...I knew, from the reading I've done of yours that you liked them both, but I have yet to see/read from you who you liked better. Until now of course.

 

I have not seen enough to make a call however every year people say how this QB will be a bust and that one will be. I thought that several would be good that others did not believe that were. I thought Cam Newton would be good and did he ever have a heck of a year. And he sort of runs a wild cat type of offense but they limit the number of runs and man does it ever put added pressure on a D. I watched the Bucs game in Tampa this year and he controled them with a couple of key carries here and there in the first half of that game and it made a huge difference and really put them away early. Soon you will need a QB that can hold on the ball occasionally unless you have a Payton or Brady and I even think a guy like Newton or RG3 will step in at some point and do both of those well and really push the envelop even further.

 

He absolutely sucked against good defenses which is a clear indicator that he would need a lot of work to blossom in the NFL. So is he a late 2nd round prospect? sure .....maybe...., but not in a million years is he a 1st round pick in most any other year except this one.

Versus Top 25 Defenses in passing efficiency:
Record: 0-4
Completion %: 54% (terrible for a college level QB, even for one drafted in the 7th round much less the 1st )
TD's: 6
INT's: 10

Versus Top 50 Defenses in passing efficiency:
Record: 1-4
Completion %: 54% (terrible for a college level QB, even for one drafted in the 7th round much less the 1st )
TD's: 8
INT's: 10

Tannehill was very ineffective vs good pass defenses. Not only did he have a terrible record; but he also had a very poor completion percentage; and threw more INT's than TD's etc​

 

Why didn't you just show top 50 defenses?

 

Too bad we couldn't be sure that the Giants and Patriots had this nugget so that it would've stopped them from drafting their QBs. Or the Colts from taking Peyton Manning. Or the Chargers from taking Drew Brees. Or the Lions from taking Stafford. Or the Falcons from taking Ryan.

 

Were those guys also 0-4 against top 25 and only 19 college starts ? Or are you just cherry picking " nuggets" ? And for every one you show I can show 20 that didn't make it , so are those good odds with a # 8 pick?

 

Can you show a correlation between record against top 25 defenses and success in the NFL?

 

is it just me or can you name a receiver for Texas A & M?

 

I don't see Miami taking Weeden as much as it pains me to type. I believe they view Moore/Garrard as the place holders for a young, franchise type QB like Tannehill. I think Jason Cole, as much as it pains me to type, is spot on.

 

Yes of course because I have unlimited spare time .....


He started only 19 games as a QB
He sucked donkey balls against good defenses

Based on that alone he is not a top ten pick .

 

I'm not cherry picking any nuggets. I'm showing that a piece of your opinion (a piece that you felt needed to be emphasized many times) is simply not a tell-all at projecting NFL success.

And big ****ing deal if you can show 20 guys that didn't make it. Most every college QB DOESN'T make it regardless of college completion %, so I'd hope you could find 20.

 

A team's record has very little to do with NFL success. What did Pat White's record look like? He won every bowl game he played. How about Ken Dorsey? Now look at the flip side. How many top 25 teams did Jay Cutler beat? Big Ben? Drew Brees? Aaron Rodgers?

Win/Loss record tells you very little about a player, and stats alone do not tell the whole story. You need to look at the player and see what he does well and what he struggles with and then make a determination.

 

Most people probably couldn't, but that's true for most all college teams. Very few college WRs (in the grand scheme of things) are household names.

He had Jeff Fuller at least who has as the talent to play in the NFL.

 

Fuller has talent and the kid Swopes can play on the next level I believe

 

If there's one thing that sticks in the back of my mind about Ryan Tannehill it is exactly this issue: lack of efficiency against better defenses. No doubt about it.

But you have to actually watch the games themselves if you want an idea of what happened. Better defenses didn't just mean more pressure on him, and therefore more chance that he would perform less than he is capable of performing, it meant the same for a group of receivers that already even in the easy games were dropping tons of passes, falling down on routes, not making their breaks urgently, etc.

Let's put it this way, if Mike Sherman had tried to bring his WRs Coach with him to Miami instead of Iowa's WRs Coach, I'd not have been very happy.

 

No matter how you slice it, Tannehill had about a 65 to 75 passer rating against good defenses in 2010 and 2011 combined.

If you want to isolate the 8 defenses he faced that generally allowed < 80 passer ratings, then we're talking a 65 passer rating. If you want to isolate the 8 defenses that allowed < 25 points per game, we're talking a 70 passer rating. If you want to isolate the 11 defenses that allowed 85 passer ratings or worse, we're talking a 72 passer rating.

There's no point nitpicking that, it's right there for all to say. I think there's a fair question to ask whether that has historically meant something as far as projecting quarterbacks for the NFL is concerned, and that's why it's important to have watched the games and seen what Tannehill did versus what his receivers did.

 

So if wins and losses and stats don't matter then your basing the reason to draft him so high in the fact that he looks good throwing in shorts...,ok got it...makes sense ...

Ok let's look at other big negatives , he is a terrible decision maker . Tannehill is the perfect storm of a reach pick.

Yes he has a lot of potential but he is NOT top 10 material

 

How do you go from A to B? He could look good on the field and still not have great stats or win/loss record.

 

Where did I say anything about throwing in shorts? I watched him throw in games, which I'm wondering how much exactly you did because he isn't a "terrible decision maker." It's an area he can improve in, but so can most QBs coming out of college.

He does have a lot of potential. Big time potential. The kind of potential the Dolphins haven't seen in over a decade at the most important position in sports. The Dolphins also have his college HC on their staff and have done as much homework as anyone can on the guy. So if they feel good about him, then why shouldn't they take him at 8?

 

Did you miss the Longhorn game? He looked rattled all game. How about Oklahoma and Oklahoma state? I know its just 19 games but because it is such a small sample size big games stand out. He played poorly in practically every game against good competition (good defenses).

Again I am not saying he is not a good prospect, a 2nd rounder..ok maybe but a top 10? c'mon....that is a reach pick if there ever was one.

We just do not agree on this and if the Dolphins do draft him I hope he is the next Marino, I will root for him to be great but its a tremendous gamble. It just is.

Weeden is better, flat out better. I could care less about age, he can be a great QB for a decade. I would draft Weeden over Tannehill at whatever pick you are taking Tannehill.

 

The Texas game was bad. I don't think he was as bad in the other two games as you make it seem. His numbers weren't great, but you have to take into account the talent he had around him and what his defense was doing in those games. I believe him to be a legit 1st round prospect. I'd probably rank him in the top 20 based on his skill set. And to me, a top 20 player at QB with big upside is worth taking at 8. I believe he's a better prospect than Ponder was last year and I would have been fine if the Dolphins took him with their pick. It is a gamble, every pick is, but I believe the Dolphins are in position to minimize the gamble based off of the knowledge they have on him.

As for Weeden, I'd be all for getting him. I agree he's a fantastic prospect and his age is overblown. I think I even said in this threat earlier that I think Weeden will go a lot higher than most people think. To me though, you have two guys with big upside. One of them has the potential to be an elite QB for a longer period of time. That's what makes me favor Tannehill. If the Dolphins evaluate Weeden as the better QB, I'm fine with that. What will bother me is if they don't take either. I would probably eventually get on board with Wilson or Osweiler, but I think both come with significantly more risk that the other two.

 

Will his body last a decade? That is the question

 

I don't agree that your initial premise is a given. QB talent is valuable. Chicago would have loved to have a player like Weeden last season even though they were apparently set at QB. Short of a suck for Luck scenario, Indy would have wanted a guy like Weeden as well. Basically I believe that any team that thinks highly enough of Weeden's talent is a potential team. The new CBA makes that even more feasible. Now there some teams that draft primarily on need. Your need based analysis makes sense in terms of them. But there also teams that are much more BPA based. A team like the Ravens could look at Weeden as just say that Weeden is too good to pass up. It comes down to the evaluation. If enough teams have Weeden rated as highly as you or I have him, then there's no telling where he will go.

 

If a QB had a 140 QBR with 5TD's, 0 INT's, 500yds passing...but they lose...would you still say that the QB played badly?

 

Agreed. I don't think the model that people are using to decipher what teams are going to do is accurate anymore. I think over the next few drafts we're going to see an evolution in the way the draft is tackled by teams. That's good it needed to happen, but that also makes it especially dangerous to play games right now and gamble for a player you want and hope they are there later.

I just don't see how a major factor in the draft can change like CBA did and it not completely change the way the draft is played.

 

We agree on way more than we disagree to be honest.

I know no one wants to hear this but I would trade down and get Weeden if I am dead set on a first round QB pick, I prefer an extra pick and Weeden over reaching early for Tannehill.

 

Of course not. Tannehill had a decent game against Missouri in a loss (317 yards , 3 Tds 1 int) but that's about the only example that even comes close to what you are suggesting.

Tannehill is a good prospect. Tannehill is not a top 10 pick .

 

What if the same QB was credited with two picks even though he made the right decision and threw a good pass, but the WRs fell on one and popped up a pass on another?