Yet Another QB Rumors Thread (Volume 9)

[Bubba305-ST21-]

Originally Posted by Dirtbag59

Better arm strength, better accuracy, more experience at QB, and even better athleticism. The only real advantage Tannehill has is height and a slightly less risky style of play as well as recent experience in a pro style offense.

People have to realize there is a huge difference in both raw talent and intangibles between Luck/Griffin and the rest of the class. This isn't like last year where Gabbert, Ponder, Locker, and Dalton were all similar in terms of talent and intangibles.

I agree completely. Theres a reason a team will be able to get Tannehill much later than RG3. I dont want to settle on him, he would have to sit and develop im really hoping we pull the trigger and to move up to get RG3

[Mahons21]

Originally Posted by Bubba305-ST21-

I agree completely. Theres a reason a team will be able to get Tannehill much later than RG3. I dont want to settle on him, he would have to sit and develop im really hoping we pull the trigger and to move up to get RG3

I would give Tannehill the nod in overall pocket presence, and footwork as well. Furthermore his experience in an NFL style offense have given him more practice in going through progressions.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by Bubba305-ST21-

How is the gap between RG3 and Tannehil not that big like some people are saying if RG3 is a day 1 starter and Tennehil needs to sit a year or 2? that is quite a difference to me

IMHO there is a gap between RGIII and Tannehill but it is not as large as some make it to be.

Ideally Tannehill would sit and learn for awhile. But, if need be, he could start year one. Not only does he have experience in a pro style offense, the offense that he has been running at A&M is pretty similar to ours. In this sense, his learning curve will be smaller than RGIII's. RGIII's offense was dissimilar to ours and did not require him to make advanced reads to boot.

I think Tannehill will be a very good NFL QB. Not with the skillset of RGIII of course but a good one nonetheless.

In these ways the gap between the two exists but is not huge.

[NC_Skins]

2012 NFL draft -- St. Louis Rams will trade No. 2 overall pick, sources say - ESPN


Notice the change of the word to "might trade" to "will trade". Somebody is getting a new toy this year. Wonder who that might be.

[Mahons21]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

2012 NFL draft -- St. Louis Rams will trade No. 2 overall pick, sources say - ESPN


Notice the change of the word to "might trade" to "will trade". Somebody is getting a new toy this year. Wonder who that might be.

INDY! and the Skins get the #1 overall.

Everything going on right now is a smokescreen, to coax Indy into trading back and acquiring RG3 paving the way for us to Andrew mo fuggin Luck

[30gut]

Originally Posted by Dirtbag59

Tannehill and Weeden, who ironically beat Baylor, have some of those characteristics but not all of them. Virtually anything they can do RGIII can do and he'll likely do it better.

I'm gonna respond in broad strokes here but...Tannehill's physical skillset is very close to Griffin.
Tannehill more then anyone else was hurt by his inability to run around in shorts at the combine because it would give context to how close his physical skillset really is to Griffin.
He doesn't match Griffin's deep ball accuracy or his speed but everything else is close.
Tannehill has a sturdier build, there in the same ball park in velocity, personally I think Tannehill throws with more velocity.
Both are playmakers that can extend plays and pick up yards running.
Tannehill has the benefit of playing under Mike Sherman in a variant of the Houston offense.
Tannehill will undoubtedly had a large advantage over Griffin when it comes to running Kyle's offense specifically.
There a certain rhythm in the drop backs and footwork that Griffin would have to learn that Tannehill would already know not to mention the concepts and verbiage of the offense.
With Griffin you're making a projection into this offense where with Tannehill its more of a transition.
The main difference between Tannehill and Griffin for me is deep ball accuracy and experience everything else is close or unimportant.

(I feel like a broken record)

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

But in both cases, there were better options out there. I don't think either team regrets the trade they did make, but they also didn't make the very best possible move.

.

Explain,becuase this makes no sense.

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I'm with SmootSmack on this. Corner isn't the need those offensive positions are, but Claiborne is a better player than everyone in the draft except Luck and Richardson.

Yeah I just list IMO what our biggest needs are: QB, T, WR, CB, S(obviously not the talent at safety for a 6th consideration). I think if you get a chance to grab the top guy at anyone of those positions at 6 you do it. I think Claiborne is 10x a better pick at 6 than Tanny. Blackmon or Floyd I think are better picks at 6 than Tanny.

[Mechanix544]

[QUOTE=Lotus;889549]I think that the gap between RGIII and Tannehill is not as big as you make it out to be.[/QUOTE

Was that a joke????? If not, I laughed my ass off anyway!!!!!

[Mechanix544]

Originally Posted by 30gut

I'm gonna respond in broad strokes here but...Tannehill's physical skillset is very close to Griffin.
Tannehill more then anyone else was hurt by his inability to run around in shorts at the combine because it would give context to how close his physical skillset really is to Griffin.
He doesn't match Griffin's deep ball accuracy or his speed but everything else is close.
Tannehill has a sturdier build, there in the same ball park in velocity, personally I think Tannehill throws with more velocity.
Both are playmakers that can extend plays and pick up yards running.
Tannehill has the benefit of playing under Mike Sherman in a variant of the Houston offense.
Tannehill will undoubtedly had a large advantage over Griffin when it comes to running Kyle's offense specifically.
There a certain rhythm in the drop backs and footwork that Griffin would have to learn that Tannehill would already know not to mention the concepts and verbiage of the offense.
With Griffin you're making a projection into this offense where with Tannehill its more of a transition.
The main difference between Tannehill and Griffin for me is deep ball accuracy and experience everything else is close or unimportant.

(I feel like a broken record)

From what I have seen from both of the guys, arm strength wise and velocity wise, Griffin has the stronger arm. Not by 30 periods or anything, but I definitely would say 10 periods, 12 periods at best.

[GTripp0012]

Tannehill's bust potential is really high for me not because I don't think he can play, but because the comparisons being thrown out with Luck and Griffin are pointless. No one with the first overall pick in any draft would ever consider Ryan Tannehill with it.

I don't disagree with a coach who watches every snap Tannehill took at Texas A&M, sees a few advanced skills and things "I can certainly work with this." But you look at who NFL teams are trying so hard to replace at quarterback these days: Ryan Tannehill clones. It's so bizarre that teams are so desperate for quarterback upgrades that they'll consider quarterbacks who will inevitably need to be upgraded down the road.

The book on Tannehill is that you just need to sit in a cover two shell or something similar where you can defend the edges of the field. That's why I prefer guys like Foles and Cousins who can make more difficult bucket throws and can get the ball down the field. Foles and Cousins are far from sure things (though I think Foles is pretty safe if you buy into him being your guy...and there's no guarantee anyone will love him enough to start him) but I feel you can easily scheme out their weaknesses.

I suppose that you could do the same with Tannehill and try to give him open looks down the field, but his inability to throw at the Senior Bowl or Combine has simply left him unable to answer key questions about his downfield throwing, which was never impressive on tape, certainly not as impressive as his intermediate throwing.

The largest difference between Griffin and Tannehill is that when a defense starts to speed up RG3's clock and get a lot of pressure on him, he rises to the occasion. Tannehill just looks sped up.

[44Deezel]

[quote=Mechanix544;889601]

Originally Posted by Lotus

I think that the gap between RGIII and Tannehill is not as big as you make it out to be.[/QUOTE

Was that a joke????? If not, I laughed my ass off anyway!!!!!

I don't think it's that crazy. The fact is no one knows for sure, not even the so called experts who do this for a living. Who cares how high a guy can jump or how fast he can run. The last 10 Super Bowl winning QBs were Eli, Rodgers, Big Ben, Brees, Manning, Brad Johnson and Brady. Go back 2 more years and you can include Kurt Warner and Trent Dilfer.

Eli and Peyton were the only ones taken first overall. History tells us that it's highly likely that one or more QBs taken AFTER Luck and RGIII will go on to have similar or better careers. Why not Tannehill? Anything you think you know from their college tape or combine workouts could become irrelevant in a few years.

It's like they said in the Brady 6 documentary. No one could crack open his chest and look at his heart. What makes me laugh are the comments about long ball accuracy, arm strength, mobility, etc. it's all mostly BS. No one here knows for sure.

[redskins5044]

It could go either 2 ways as i see it with the QB situation. Mike needs to figure out the QB position to save his job and here are the 2 ways i see it happening.

1. He needs to either move up in the draft and get either Luck or Griffin or sell the owner and fan base on some other QB in this draft. This will buy him 2 more years, to develop and build around a young QB.

or

2. If manning is healthy sign him and hope he can play for 2 to 3 years. He can spend this years and next years draft to get him some help. And also draft a young QB to play behind manning.

If he brings in a Orton, signs a Flynn or trades for Hoyer and they have a less than .500 record he will be done.

[Mechanix544]

[quote=44Deezel;889611]

Originally Posted by Mechanix544

I don't think it's that crazy. The fact is no one knows for sure, not even the so called experts who do this for a living. Who cares how high a guy can jump or how fast he can run. The last 10 Super Bowl winning QBs were Eli, Rodgers, Big Ben, Brees, Manning, Brad Johnson and Brady. Go back 2 more years and you can include Kurt Warner and Trent Dilfer.

Eli and Peyton were the only ones taken first overall. History tells us that it's highly likely that one or more QBs taken AFTER Luck and RGIII will go on to have similar or better careers. Why not Tannehill? Anything you think you know from their college tape or combine workouts could become irrelevant in a few years.

No No No. I didnt mean it like that. I was still thinking of the periods being used as a measurment in some previous post that his post alludes to. I think Tannehill is going to be a top 10 QB in 2 or 3 years.

[RedskinRat]

If it's true then how quickly did our F.O. get on the phone?

This will make things interesting.