1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Do we really want Tannehill?

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by Cubenels41, Mar 28, 2012.

  1. 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.
     
    gunn34 likes this.
  2. padre31

    padre31 Premium Member Luxury Box

    99,465
    37,345
    0
    Nov 22, 2007
    inching to 100k posts
    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.
     
    Disnardo, Mr772, the 23rd and 2 others like this.
  3. MikeHoncho

    MikeHoncho -=| Censored |=- Club Member

    52,703
    25,590
    113
    Nov 13, 2009
    Nope
     
  4. JMORGAN6977

    JMORGAN6977 New Member

    476
    193
    0
    Jan 9, 2008
    PHX
    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.
     
    Ludacris and Cubenels41 like this.
  5. jboogie

    jboogie The sky is NOT falling!

    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.
     
  6. Boik14

    Boik14 Admin Club Member Retired Administrator

    71,742
    31,694
    113
    Nov 28, 2007
    New York
    Hell, bleeping yes we want Tannehill.
     
  7. bakedmatt

    bakedmatt Well-Known Member

    2,129
    909
    113
    Mar 29, 2008
    Orlando, FL
    If philbin does.
     
  8. ToddsPhins

    ToddsPhins Banned

    29,159
    7,741
    0
    Mar 15, 2009
    There's more than just one of us on this board. For clarification. Carry on.
     
  9. alen1

    alen1 New Member

    52,829
    20,379
    0
    Dec 16, 2007
    No, not in the first. :)
     
    gunn34 and Alex44 like this.
  10. Alex44

    Alex44 Boshosaurus Rex

    20,812
    8,967
    0
    Jan 7, 2008
    Hollywood, Florida
    I really believe that if we pass on him he might make it to our second pick. Only threat being Cleveland.
     
  11. Onehondo

    Onehondo Senior Member Club Member

    2,668
    877
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    Chesapeake, Virginia
    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?
     
  12. Boik14

    Boik14 Admin Club Member Retired Administrator

    71,742
    31,694
    113
    Nov 28, 2007
    New York
    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. :)
     
  13. Rocky Raccoon

    Rocky Raccoon Greasepaint Ghost Staff Member

    27,777
    27,965
    113
    Dec 2, 2007
    Jersey
    The thought of Coples and Wake wreaking havic on opposing QB's has me very giddy. I would love that pick.
     
  14. ToddsPhins

    ToddsPhins Banned

    29,159
    7,741
    0
    Mar 15, 2009
    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.
     
    Sippi and MAFishFan like this.
  15. alen1

    alen1 New Member

    52,829
    20,379
    0
    Dec 16, 2007
    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.
     
  16. ToddsPhins

    ToddsPhins Banned

    29,159
    7,741
    0
    Mar 15, 2009
    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.
     
  17. alen1

    alen1 New Member

    52,829
    20,379
    0
    Dec 16, 2007
    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.
     
    sws84, first&goal and rando like this.
  18. ToddsPhins

    ToddsPhins Banned

    29,159
    7,741
    0
    Mar 15, 2009
    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.
     
  19. Two Tacos

    Two Tacos Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    10,317
    4,572
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    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.
     
  20. why?

    why? give me a good reason?
     
  21. Mk2

    Mk2 New Member

    192
    71
    0
    Jan 15, 2012
    It is mind boggling to me how Tannehill is rated so high...by anyone....
     
    Rouk likes this.
  22. Phyl

    Phyl New Member

    654
    144
    0
    Dec 26, 2010
    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.
     
  23. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    98,923
    51,855
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    you mean Ireland is gonna do exactly what Sherman tells him to do.
     
  24. ToddsPhins

    ToddsPhins Banned

    29,159
    7,741
    0
    Mar 15, 2009
    that's unfortunate.... for you. Does it happen to make you feel like you're missing something?
     
  25. ToddsPhins

    ToddsPhins Banned

    29,159
    7,741
    0
    Mar 15, 2009
    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.
     
  26. ToddsPhins

    ToddsPhins Banned

    29,159
    7,741
    0
    Mar 15, 2009
    If you're constructing a franchise QB from scratch but have to balance out all the individual traits so that you can't simply give everything a 100 rating, he might be one version you end up with. Franchise caliber brains, leadership, extreme desire, dedication, perseverance; absorbs info quickly and more importantly- quickly applies what he learns; takes well to coaching; teammates will like playing with him.... and for him. Will likely be best friends with the film room and an eventual coach on the field. Once he's more seasoned & experienced at QB to where he can focus more on the roles/jobs of others, I'm guessing his leadership ability and command of an offense will ascend to the level you'd expect from a SB caliber QB.

    Then there's his natural ability which is equally as good. But you only requested "a" reason, so I only listed the mental aspect, except I broke it down into sub reasons.

    IMO he has enough of both to cause you to ignore concerns related to his inexperience and draft him hoping he becomes what his talent suggests.
     
  27. ToddsPhins

    ToddsPhins Banned

    29,159
    7,741
    0
    Mar 15, 2009
    What I'm saying is---- he's talented enough to not pass on just b/c his inexperience leaves a few questions unanswered. In this case, his potential reward is worth the risk of any potential failure.
     
  28. Rouk

    Rouk Well-Known Member

    1,524
    606
    113
    Jul 31, 2011
    Ocala, Florida
    I really don't want any part of tannehill I think hes a great athlete but hes just way to raw atm hes probably 2 years min from even being able to start in the NFL. If we really feel were in full rebuild mode then its not an awful pick but hes going to take a lot of coaching before he can even consider being NFL starter worthy IMO.
     
  29. Da 'Fins

    Da 'Fins Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    24,329
    21,273
    113
    Dec 19, 2007
    Birmingham, AL
    Watch this video and analysis and tell me we don't want Tannehill:

    http://www.nfl.com/draft/story/09000d5d827ed0e7/article/raw-skills-upside-legitimize-ryan-tannehills-top10-value?module=HP11_cp

    Unfortunately, I see almost no way on earth he gets past Cleveland. When you have two first round picks, you have to be willing to gamble and go for a QB talent and at #4 I feel certain they will go for Tannehill. I was not as up on him but with his size, arm strength, and having played under our OC, you know there's strong interest there.

    But, we simply don't have the firepower to move up. It would be a bigger risk factor to trade away picks (since we did zero real upgrading in FA). If we had an extra 2nd rounder, sure. At this point, I would take Tannehill at #8 (they almost have to). But, the odds of him being there at #8 are about 5-1 (20% chance) imo. It's just too much of a no brainer for Cleveland!
     
    eltos_lightfoot likes this.
  30. rafael

    rafael Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    27,368
    31,255
    113
    Apr 6, 2008
    I don't think that Cleveland takes Tannehill. I expect that he'll make it to 8 and IMO he is a far better prospect than the QBs that went at 8,10 and 12 last year. I think he would be best served by sitting a year, but if he does that, I feel he has the potential to be another Rodgers.
     
  31. Da 'Fins

    Da 'Fins Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    24,329
    21,273
    113
    Dec 19, 2007
    Birmingham, AL
    I have no doubt that the way the Dolphins were casual in the FA market that they were figuring they'd have a shot at Tannehill (drafting #8 and with two top calibre QB's going ahead of that, they probably - as Ireland usually does - thought Tannehill would be easy to score at #8). Now, Nearly impossible. They'd either half to go to #3 - in which case it would cost them a king's ransom, or they'd have to pray Cleveland does not want him. After his pro day - his stock will go higher and teams will covet him.

    Every team in the league is now at the point where they realize they have to overspend and gamble on landing a potential franchise QB.

    I actually think, b/c of Sherman and Philbin, that Tannehill's chances to succeed are much higher in Miami than elsewhere. But, unlikely he'll land there. I like Weeden a great deal as well (our draft gurus like him also) but his age knocks him down a notch. We could go after him later.

    But, physically, Tannehill pretty much brings everything to the table: Very good arm; good athlete; good size; good release.
     
    eltos_lightfoot likes this.
  32. Bulldog

    Bulldog New Member

    978
    149
    0
    Mar 13, 2012
    If this FO feels as if Tanny is THEE guy then yes, draft him at 8.

    However, I just don't see him being thee guy. I'm not a pro scout though, so, we'll see.
     
    smahtaz likes this.
  33. gunn34

    gunn34 I miss Don & Dan

    21,763
    3,477
    113
    Jan 5, 2008
    Oviedo FL
    The thing that most worries me most about drafting Tannehill is the fact that ToddsPhins is so high on him. I remember him praising this other guy that didn't work out. :tongue2:

    I do like all the things he said about him being a guy that seems like he has the mental aspect of the game and is coachable. I'm looking forward to seeing what Moore can do with this coaching staff. If we do select Tannehill, please let him ride the pine until he is ready. How ever long that is.
     
  34. syborg

    syborg New Member

    103
    83
    0
    Jan 19, 2009
    Taunton, United Kingdom
    I have to say that although I was not happy and am not happy with the Garrard signing I guess it does go someway to addressing the QB spot making WR a high(er) priority. . Although as Philbin said the OL needs to be better to improve QB play. . now, they have tried to go someway to address the line issue.. so if you read between the chatter there you maybe see that they are comfortable at QB and will address WR early. Blackmon is clearly the best guy in this draft but I dont think we get him so I am guessing it will be possibly Floyd?

    However with all that said. . Garrard is 34 and sat out a year and is in competition with Matt Moore who surprised last season. Both are out of contract after next season and this QB need - will and HAS to be addressed early in order to gain our long term solution to the carousel that is the Miami QB dilemma and finally making us relevent again. . and in that respect im still not overly sold that we dont pick up a QB with our #8 pick regardless of who we have sat on our roster currently . after all the WR depth is better than the QB depth and Philbin has said he does not believe in a #1 WR but wants to spread it about to 'the hot hand' and scheme the WRs according to whom we are playing...and Ireland goes to see Tannehill at the pro day tomorrow. . just sayin'
     
  35. jboogie

    jboogie The sky is NOT falling!

    With Brandon "butter fingers" Marshal and a weak o-line Moore was ranked 12th. You guys really think we should throw away a 1st round pick for a guy that MIGHT be better than Moore?
     
  36. alen1

    alen1 New Member

    52,829
    20,379
    0
    Dec 16, 2007
    If you're sold on him, then yeah. You can say that about every position and every pick. If we thought that way, there'd be no draft.
     
  37. PhinishLine

    PhinishLine Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    4,224
    2,753
    113
    Dec 3, 2007
    Maryland
    All players you draft MIGHT be better than the player they are replacing. Nothing is guaranteed. Not even Andrew Luck.
     
  38. jboogie

    jboogie The sky is NOT falling!

    Of coarse, I just think he's a bigger risk than Coples, Fleener or even Floyd.
     
  39. the 23rd

    the 23rd a.k.a. Rio

    9,175
    2,399
    113
    Apr 20, 2009
    Tampa Area
    :yes:yes, we really want Tannehill!
     
  40. ToddsPhins

    ToddsPhins Banned

    29,159
    7,741
    0
    Mar 15, 2009
    This, thank you. Tannehill at 8 is only a slight reach IMO, one that's palatable, unlike Ponder at 12 & Locker at 8 IMO.
     

Share This Page