Rosenthal / NFL.com - Top 10 QBs 25 or under: Ryan Tannehill

That actually isn't how it works at all. By that logic (Hartline being very mediocre and Tannehill forcing it to him) he should have thrown about thirty interceptions and a handful more TD's. He threw the ball to Hartline when Hartline was open mainly. A lot of times it was busted coverage, it was never in the endzone and more often than not it wasn't very far downfield.

Also it isn't kool-aid, some human beings actually aren't AFRAID to use the facts in front of them to project a possible future. Of course it could be wrong, but what you are doing is basically being an afraid pessimist.

 

Look, you said good QBs make their WRs better, then say that the only reason Hartline and Bess were having the best years they ever had nothing to do with the Tannehill. You're contradicting yourself and doing so you can justify your perpetual pessimism. if you had ever been anything but pessimistic in any of your posts then these seem more like legitimate concerns. Instead they are a par for the grumpy course.

Your "logic" is indeed flawed because there is actually no logic involved in your stances. Either good QBs improve the play of their WRs OR Tannehill's play had nothing to do with Hartline playing the best he ever had, you cannot have it both ways.

 

I agree with your opinions here.

 

What ever happened to individual assessment, you can evaluate a player at his position without taking into account other factors.

For me personally, I have no doubt that his game will improve across the board, he has personal tools that are hi level stuff, and he has the work ethic to sharpen them, his projection to take the next level is solid as hell imo, and like Alex said, there are people who can take information and project, that's the name of the game, I'm only trying to see where his ceiling is relative to the four guys that I think are already great.

 

IMO Luck, RG3 and Wilson had teams further along in their development than RT had. They all had more weapons than RT at their disposal. I thought it was obvious that Miami felt they had to remake the roster to fit what Philbin's system needed. It was so different from Sparano's offense that it would take multiple seasons. In essence, Miami was starting from year 1 to build a roster that fit Philbin's system. I think it was clear that Ireland/Philbin made a conscience decision make due with limited weapons for RT in year one and use more of a hybrid run based offense from the Sparano era before using the multiple draft picks and salary cap space in year two to round out the passing weapons. It was obvious that RT made Hartline and Bess better despite Hartline missing all of TC and Bess being hurt late. I think the arguments that RT did not make the receivers around him better are off base. I also disagree that RT did not show as much or more potential than the other QBs in this draft class. Statistically he was a good as Luck over the last quarter of the season when his leg healed. RG3 was injured by that point. RG3 could have the highest ceiling if he could avoid injury, but I think injury will always be an elevated risk for RG3 compared to the others. He just has less awareness and seems more fragile. Wilson is limited physically compared to the other three. He has the best natural instincts, but will need better players around him than the other three will need. Even CKap, whom I loved coming out has never shown a great ability to read defenses. He tends to wait for the receivers to be open and then use his cannon to get the pass in their. I don't see anything in RT's (or Luck's) game that is a weakness that can't be developed. I would take those two above the others if I were building a team. I'd take any of the five b/c I think they can all be great QBs (top 5), but IMO Luck and RT have the highest ceiling and fewest negatives of the bunch.

 

That's good stuff, not sure I agree with all of it, but I can see evidence that would lead you to that thought process..

 

Spot on, old man. And rather eloquently written.

Among these guys, Wilson should have been the most prepared. He switched colleges several times and had to learn new offenses and systems as he kept switching. The guy had more college snaps than probably anyone who has came out in years. He reminded me of the Tommy boy line "Lots of people go to college for six years, they're called Doctors". In any event, Going to Seattle was the perfect place for him.

I think the reason most of those who are down on Tannehill and playing arm chair GM, or are being overly negative, are looking at nothing more from his rookie season but wins, losses, TD passes, and QB ratings.

There is more even keeled group who realizes all of those stats are also impacted by the other 10 players on the field around Tannehill, and there is the other group who feels that the other rookie QBs would have magically gotten more production from Hartline and Bess, turning them into TD machines and brought the team to the playoffs. They continue to ignore his progress and barely acknowledge that Hartline and Bess just weren't good enough, or on par with the WR corp of Tannehill's QB peers. So when an article comes out, or someone posts something positive - like all season long when the QB experts were praising Tannehill for his pre-snap reads and his decision making, it falls on deaf ears...

As far as Kaepernick, I have no idea why he is in the conversation. He wasn't a rookie and he didn't play as one. He sat for a year, then was brought into a complete team where even Alex Smith was excelling. That is not to take anything away from what Kaep accomplished in keeping the team moving and making the SB, but just to point out that these sort of comparisons are not apples to apples.