Do we really want Tannehill?

Ireland is going to do what he is going to do.

However, if you hit on a Qb, your team is instantly upgraded, there are few positions that cannot be upgraded without using a #1 pick on them.

Nope

"Cubenels41 wrote:

Dude, I know that Moore is basically untested and came in starting a team that was 0-7 last year. And I know that his past doesn't really prove that he has the skills to lead this team to the playoffs next year, especially without Brandon Marshall, but is Tannehill really the answer? In our and the Browns desperation for a quarterback, he's gone from a top late first round-second round pick to a top ten pick? We could patch up some major holes in our team with the draft this year (especially replacing the first #1 receiver we had in years and huge holes in the line and secondary), let Moore have his turn, which without Flynn or Manning I think he rightfully deserves, and if he crashes and burns we have the next crop of free agents and rookies coming out next year with a team with a ****load fewer holes than this one has.

I hope for the love of the football gods, Browns please draft Tannehill. Trade with the Rams, fall to 6 and take Tannehill. Please be someone else to make the big mistake in the first round for once. If Tanny goes, that leaves us an extra top ten player to choose from. Our pick is now worth more to more teams. Blackmon will not fall. Claiborne or Richardson becomes possibility. I would be fine with Claiborne not Richardson. I think our RB stable is fine. If we traded back and got another 2nd I would be happier.

If we could have gotten a sure fire starting QB in the draft or FA I'd be thrilled. But, to use a first round pick just to have another QB to compete for the spot is not smart IMO with all the holes we need to fill. Start Moorse and draft him some help.

Hell, bleeping yes we want Tannehill.

If philbin does.

"Cubenels41 wrote:

Dude, I know that Moore is basically untested and came in starting a team that was 0-7 last year.

There's more than just one of us on this board. For clarification. Carry on.

"Boik14 wrote:

Hell, bleeping yes we want Tannehill.

No, not in the first. :)

"alen1 wrote:

No, not in the first. :)

I really believe that if we pass on him he might make it to our second pick. Only threat being Cleveland.

I just don't know if Tannehill is enough of a sure thing to spend a top 10 pick on. I know he shows promise but only starting 19 games, is there enough promise there to justify that high of a pick?

"alen1 wrote:

No, not in the first. :)

Like I said in the other thread, I wont completely eliminate the possibility we could trade down a few slots and still get him but KC, Cleveland (at 22 or a move up from there) among a few other teams all worry me. That alone makes me say just take him at 8. However like we discussed previously Coples wouldnt upset me either. :)

"Boik14 wrote:

Like I said in the other thread, I wont completely eliminate the possibility we could trade down a few slots and still get him but KC, Cleveland (at 22 or a move up from there) among a few other teams all worry me. That alone makes me say just take him at 8. However like we discussed previously Coples wouldnt upset me either. :)

The thought of Coples and Wake wreaking havic on opposing QB's has me very giddy. I would love that pick.

I get what you're saying, but if your team believes Tannehill is the long term answer at QB, you simply don't pass on him to fill holes at less significant positions with the thinking that a franchise QB will fall in your lap the following year.

It's not every year we have a top 10 pick, so if we find ourselves with one during a year that also features a franchise talented QB at that pick, you take him b/c there's no guarantee the stars will align that way in the future.

"Boik14 wrote:

Like I said in the other thread, I wont completely eliminate the possibility we could trade down a few slots and still get him but KC, Cleveland (at 22 or a move up from there) among a few other teams all worry me. That alone makes me say just take him at 8. However like we discussed previously Coples wouldnt upset me either. :)

I like Coples versatility, which is Seymour-like as I've stated in past. I don't think he's a 12 sack a year guy, but with his versatility and physical dominance, he's worth the pick to me.

"Onehondo wrote:

I just don't know if Tannehill is enough of a sure thing to spend a top 10 pick on. I know he shows promise but only starting 19 games, is there enough promise there to justify that high of a pick?

If we draft well we don't have to look at our 1st rounder as if it's the only pick we have. Ireland could very well clean it up with a draft that isn't hamstrung with missing picks. I'm actually excited about the type of talent we might bring in having all our picks plus an extra 3rd.

Unless you're at the absolute top of the draft and have a chance at Luck or Griffin III, IMO you're best served moving down and picking up extra picks in the second and third rounds. Those are the rounds where the talent is at. And someone will drop.

"alen1 wrote:

I like Coples versatility, which is Seymour-like as I've stated in past. I don't think he's a 12 sack a year guy, but with his versatility and physical dominance, he's worth the pick to me.

that's how I feel. IMO he doesn't have to be a yearly double digit sack guy to be an impact player who makes your defense better.

"alen1 wrote:

I like Coples versatility, which is Seymour-like as I've stated in past. I don't think he's a 12 sack a year guy, but with his versatility and physical dominance, he's worth the pick to me.

I think he could be with Wake on the other side and Odrick in the middle. His guy isn't going to get a lot of help.

why?

"Boik14 wrote:

Hell, bleeping yes we want Tannehill.

why? give me a good reason?

It is mind boggling to me how Tannehill is rated so high...by anyone....

"Onehondo wrote:

I just don't know if Tannehill is enough of a sure thing to spend a top 10 pick on. I know he shows promise but only starting 19 games, is there enough promise there to justify that high of a pick?

Yeah. Worst comes to worst he can play WR and I hear great things about his family. They put on a great spread for the Fourth of July.

"padre31 wrote:

Ireland is going to do what he is going to do.

However, if you hit on a Qb, your team is instantly upgraded, there are few positions that cannot be upgraded without using a #1 pick on them.

you mean Ireland is gonna do exactly what Sherman tells him to do.

"Mk2 wrote:

It is mind boggling to me how Tannehill is rated so high...by anyone....

that's unfortunate.... for you. Does it happen to make you feel like you're missing something?

"Phyl wrote:

Yeah. Worst comes to worst he can play WR and I hear great things about his family. They put on a great spread for the Fourth of July.

Wow, I'm surprised you know so much about his family but so little about him as a QB.
You'd think they'd at least talk to you about him some while passing the casserole. Modesty. Gotta respect it.