Should Ryan Tannehill Start the Regular Season?

To not play a guy for fear of injury is ridiculous, especially in the sport of football.

Ryan Tannehill needs to start. He's the best QB we have right now that is healthy. I thought he had a nice game considering. Fasano dropped a would be early 1st down. He handled pressure, 3rd and longs, penalties, etc. In this offense, Matt Moore isn't 2011 Matt Moore, which wasn't exactly amazing.

If Garrard can get healthy, he should start, IMO. To me, he was the winner in all of this. I think Philbin's waffle on naming a starter in his presser alluded to that, IMO. It's apparent they feel Garrard gives them the best chance now.

 

But "Now" doesn't mean anything, so what exactly does Garrard do except possibly give us a worse draft pick next year?

This continues to be the mentality of this franchise; playing for this year instead of planning for the future.

 

I have to say yes. I was on the fence before but let's get serious, this team probably isn't going anywhere. We might as well get Tannehill that valuable in game experience and let him make his mistakes now while playoffs won't be at stake. I think the fears of him pulling a John Beck and getting shell shocked are unfounded. He's light years better than Beck for starters.

 

I am the opposite conclusion from the same observations. Young QBs get ruined more often than they blossom behind **** O-lines with no receiving help.

Since we won't contend, why trash our prospect?

People seem to think 'sitting' is exactly that. A QB sits around picking his nose for a year, not improving at all. But that's is not the case. The 'sitting' QB still practices, still watches film, still studies. They get better, but without having their body and confidence shattered.

You want a QB with a nervous tic, then I agree, we should start him immediately. But I think we ONLY start him once the OLine can protect.

 

Having to search for a potential franchise QB for ANOTHER twenty years because we destroyed this one is ridiculous.


Know what, **** it, this franchise and the fans deserve exactly what they ask for.

 

Im just curious, how is Garrard, or how should Garrard have been the winner of all of this when we've never seen him play in a phins uni? Or are we just going by the camp reports from the same "writers" that said Tannehill was light years behind?

I say start Tannehill. None of our QB's will make chicken salad with this chicken **** offense... so why not let him get some experience and adapt to NFL game speed.

 

Name me some guys you feel were ruined by starting early? For the most part the guys that started early and failed IMO never had it to begin with.

Jamarcus Russell wouldn't have succeeded sitting for ten seasons learning. Brady Quinn should never have been a first rounder to begin with. David Carr had terrible work ethic apparently and IMO wasn't terribly gifted. Tim Couch also didn't have an NFL skill set.

Just curious who you consider ruined....because I can't think of anyone.

Troy Aikman was TERRIBLE his rookie season and turned out fine. Eli Manning threw like Tim Tebow in his 9 starts (48%) and has won multiple superbowls. Chad Henne (not a first rounder but relevant to us) sat and worked on his flaws to death for a year. Still sucked.

 

If we want to take that route we have to determine it's impossible to say whether it's possible to "ruin" a young QB anyway.

 

Read the Three Reasons To Start Tanny Week 8 thread. It's been covered ad nauseam in there. I just can't get into it again. lol.

 

Well, let's hope we don't have to witness that because enough people are hell bent on starting Tanny, protection or none.

 

Fair enough. I'll go on record as saying I don't believe it's possible to ruin a QB by starting them early if they prove that they are ready. If Tannehill seemed like he had a fragile ego it may be a different story. I believe any early failure will only drive him harder.

 

Know what you say to your kid when he gets an expensive new toy and it breaks because he doesn't take good care of it?
"If you don't take care of your nice things, you don't deserve any."

 

It's not just him overcoming his thoughts about failure with his mind/ego, it's more like getting beaten by someone. It gets into your nervous system so there is body memory there too. Much harder to change patterns that are taught paired with massive physical sensation, especially a combo of pain and adrenaline.

 

Yes and he will.

 

Who was it that was trying to tell me in one thread that the only way Ryan Tannehill plays this year would be if Joe Philbin is another Cam Cameron, or something like that?

 

How do you think the kid did?

 

I had him winning the job after one practice so I'm good for the record.

 

I wonder if we would have made the playoffs with Moore

 

I think so. Moore doesn't have the physical talent (arm or athleticism ) but he made quicker decisions and pushes the ball downfield better as a result.

Matt Moore is highly underrated. Despite his good play, he's never really gotten a legit chance. I don't know what his ceiling is, but its higher than most people give him credit for.

 

For some reason I thought this thread was for the 2013 season (when I just seen the title from the front page) and all I could think was "****ing really, shouright?"

 

Same here, but that is one of the Dolfans conundrums

"We" tell ourselves "well, we did not do great, but look at the young guys who played, they will develop and we will be better next yr!"

And we never are, Koa Misi has not developed, JJerry still is not great, Daniel Thomas just flashes and fades, CClemons never really turned the corner (though he's not awful), Sean Smith does not create turnovers.

Odie is once again "okay".

Etc etc

Only guys who really developed:

-Jones
-Wake
-Soliai
-Hartline

Hard to trust this team tbh, thought it a seminal moment when the guy who coined the phrase:

"Believe in Miami"

Was of course, waived.

So us.

 

dear lord that quote literally made me lol at work.

I was wondering if there was a gem like that in here, but didn't bother looking.

 

I remember when the consensus was that Ryan Tannehill shouldn't even be allowed to start. People were that fearful that he was going to not work out, that they set their expectations so low that they thought it should be impossible for him to start.

I think the turning point in all that was his scrimmage performance and the big touchdown he threw to Fasano on the run.

 

But didnt the offense suck around Tannehill?, isn't that what he was saying?

 

That was the consensus because Philbin said Tannehill wasn't going to start.

 

It sucked because Hartline didn't play all preseason. How do you expect to look good when Hartline isn't playing?

 

Precisely

Fast forward 15 weeks and........well you've been around here

 

and all of this based on what, your feelings?

 

Part of me was hoping he bumped the thread himself

 

When did he say this? I never saw that.

 

Part of me was hopeful this was a completely new thread about 2013.

 

Why is that?

I wonder how many would vote "no"

 

Gotta lose the radio and start watching games on the TV Pads.

Pouncey, Carroll, Clemons, Hartline, Fasano, Odrick, Jones, Jerry, Incognito, Martin, Vernon, Clay, Wilson, Tannehill, SSmith all showed development and improvement to varying degrees last year. I don't see a ton of Pro Bowlers in there but it's a young, talented, relatively cheap nucleus to build on. I'd rather stick with the plan than go all Dan Snyder-Mike Tannenbaum.

 

Sorry. I remembered a quote saying he wasn't in the running, and thought it was Philbin. It wasn't.

 

I actually thought this was a new thread smh