On Sunday, Weeden and Tannehill will square off in their openers at FirstEnergy Stadium, with both teams hoping their man will evolve into a franchise quarterback worthy of a first-round pick. Question is, did the Browns make the right move by passing on Tannehill? (Of course, they would've had to draft running back Doug Martin at No. 22 to replace Richardson). Or will the current regime someday be cursing Mike Holmgren, Heckert and Shurmur for letting Tannehill out of their grasp? "It's a big year for both quarterbacks,'' said one league personnel man. "Typically the biggest jump for a quarterback is from year one to year two. By the end of the second season, you generally know what you have in a player. Will they take it to the next level, or will they flatten out.'' http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2013/09/cleveland_browns_opted_for_qb.html
If they had both been the same age, I think Weedon would have probably been the higher pick last year, because it was thought at the time that Tannehill would take a few years to become the starter in Miami because of his limited experience at QB in college. At this point in their development, they are probably about even. Unfortunately for Cleveland, Weedon will soon turn 30, while Tannehill just turned 25. So I think the Browns probably made an error in not selecting Tannehill and instead going with Richardson and then taking Weedon later in the first round. Personally I think Tannehill has a bigger upside going forward and I believe he will end up having a very productive career. I'm a Dolphin fan, so I'm glad the Browns took Richardson instead of Tannehill. At least we will be able to better judge these two QB's when their teams play against each other tomorrow.
Obviously the article is discussing Tannehill vs. Weeden because they play against one another Sunday. But the debate itself is more entertainment than relevant because of Russell Wilson. While neither team was in position for Luck and RGIII, both Cleveland and Miami could of had Wilson by/in the 3rd round. Because they both had opportunities to draft them, their 3 careers are more intertwined with him than each other.
Richardson and Weeden dominated college. Tannehill (starts) and Martin (scheme) had question marks. A front office in turmoil had to go that way.
I think that it's very relevant to Cleveland and Miami. As to Russell Wilson, his stats and his film in college were phenomenal. Height aside, to me he looked better than all of them, Luck and RGIII included. At the same time, I was wrong like most others in terms of overestimating the height issue. What doesn't Wilson have? Arm strength, accuracy, tremendous mobility, a great head for the game including game management, reading defenses, scanning the field- you name it, he has it. The Miami/Seattle game last year- Tannehill played well and both QBs had very good stats/QBR if I recall correctly. But to me, in terms of game management and a feel for the game, being in control, whatever you want to call it- Wilson was the better Quarterback. Whatever "it' is, Wilson's got it. But I can't be a historical revisionist- although I loved Wilson as a player I projected him dropping in the draft quite a bit due to height issues- 6 feet is bad enough, this guy is 5-10. I was wrong, should have stuck to my gut and guns- I would have wanted to draft him in rds 3-4 if we didn't already draft Tannehill. The only one who I can recall who stuck to his guns about Wilson being worthy of a top ten pick was Boomer. Btw the Jets screwed the pooch twice, should have drafted Wilson in rd 2, maybe they would have taken him in rd 3 if he didn't go 2 spots before them. They should have drafted Barkley this year imo rds 2-3 instead of Geno Smith in rd 2- I am not a big Barkley fan, but he is talented and a much better game manager and all around QB than Sanchez. The Jaguars drafted a PUNTER ahead of Russell Wilson- that move speaks for itself.
I was a big Martin fan in the draft and not a fan of taking RBs high. I also had RT rated slightly above Weedon, not just b/c of the age but also b/c of the mobility factor. I have been saying for years that it is a valuable asset for a QB/team to have as NFL offenses evolve along the same path as college offenses did. So if I were Cleveland I would have taken RT and Martin over Weedon and Richardson. I also loved Wilson, but don't see as high of a ceiling on him as RT. I had a second round grade on Wilson (maybe late 1st due to the QB premium). Back to RT and Weedon, after seeing them in the NFL for one season, I still am higher on RT than Weedon. I do like Weedon and the fit between him and Turner, but I do see Weedon occasionally float that deep out that is so critical in Turner's system. Not all the time or even most of the time, but every once in a while. In addition to the age and mobility things, I just think that RT has more consistent arm strength and throws fewer risky passes. Although Weedon showed a little better pocket feel last season. I do expect that RT's pocket feel will improve as his experience increases.
It was a mistake to take a RB that high in the draft the way the league is these days. Rules favor the offense and passing. RB's take hits and get hurt.
Not if your main objective is to curse at Ireland any imaginable way you can dream up. Some will never have a half full glass they live on almost empty.
the exception is if he's an elite back. Not sold on Richardson being a stud yet. so, he's on the fence whether he was worth it or not. If he has a big day tomorrow against our run defense, then I'll start believing in him more. Right now I see him as good, but not great.
Disagreed. Even an elite RB doesn't really influence the outcome of a football game. Racks up big personal stats and makes an impact in fantasy football, but if you're picking a player high, they need to make an impact on the outcome. That means a quarterback, a pass rusher, a defensive back, or maybe a linebacker depending on his pass coverage skills.
They made the right move, adding two impact offensive players, that were as close to sure things as they could land, made strategic sense at the time. Of course, it always boils down to play on the field, Richardson and Weeden both become pro bowlers and the Browns turn into a winning franchise, and THill leads us back to prominence, then both teams will have made the right moves. That is a possibility.
Look at AP for example, BUT to be successful in today's NFL the pass sets up the run, w/o good Qb play Richardson will never live up to his potential.
Not necessarily. Wile yes it is very important to have a top qb, the run game sets up the pass game. Top 3 teams in passing ypg (Detroit, Dallas, New Orleans) last year failed to make the playoffs but the top 4 rush ypg teams (Washington, Seattle, Minnesota, and San Francisco) made the playoffs.
That's a misleading stat. Usually winning teams are ahead late so they run more. That raises their ypg number but has nothing to do with the run setting up the pass.
Richardson is a beast, top 5 RB'S are hard to find! Good thing we have an awesome front 7 to stop him.
With a top notch CB in Joe Haden covering Mike Wallace I'll be interested of course in that battle, but also in how Brian Hartline does against the lesser Brown CBs, to see if he's actually worth $6 million a year.
