Yet Another QB Rumors Thread (Volume 9)

[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.

[30gut]

Originally Posted by 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.

Eh? You think Tannehill's bust potential is high because you don't see the comparison to Luck and Griffin? Scratches head.
Its a skillset comparison not draft position comparison.
Anyone that has watched enough of Tannehill to have a valid assessment of his skillset and denies the obvious comparison of physical skillset to Griffin and Luck specifically is imo practicing football dishonesty.

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."

Usually when a team/staff drafts a QB the decision is driven by a coach that thinks the bolded underlined portion above.

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

Huh? Ryan Tannehill clones from a skillset standpoint? If so who?

A lot of your thoughts on Tannehill appears to be based in your opinion that Foles and Cousins can make throws that Tannehill, which is a difficult opinion to support.

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.

If you're gonna be consistent then of course you have to accept that through scheme you can protect a prospect from his weakness just like with Foles or Cousins.
Despite Tannehill's inability to throw at the Senior Bowl and at the combine no other prospect has been able to distinguish themselves in the eyes of the sports media and enter the conversation as the 3rd QB.
(I say sports media because the actual scouting/FO evaluations are well guarded and the media opinion is shaped more by agent/scout/FO agenda double talk then it is the truth. So when the sports media are 'shocked' or 'surprised' when a player gets drafted higher then they expect its much less a 'reach' then the realization that the sports media opinion doesn't always match scout/FO evaluations.
But I digress...)
If teams have Tannehill rated as the 3rd QB its likely that they have already found the answers to the questions that you have and likely don't share your negative opinions about his downfield throwing that you harbor.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by 30gut

Eh? You think Tannehill's bust potential is high because you don't see the comparison to Luck and Griffin? Scratches head.
Its a skillset comparison not draft position comparison.
Anyone that has watched enough of Tannehill to have a valid assessment of his skillset and denies the obvious comparison of physical skillset to Griffin and Luck specifically is imo practicing football dishonesty.

Usually when a team/staff drafts a QB the decision is driven by a coach that thinks the bolded underlined portion above.

Huh? Ryan Tannehill clones from a skillset standpoint? If so who?

A lot of your thoughts on Tannehill appears to be based in your opinion that Foles and Cousins can make throws that Tannehill, which is a difficult opinion to support.
If you're gonna be consistent then of course you have to accept that through scheme you can protect a prospect from his weakness just like with Foles or Cousins.
Despite Tannehill's inability to throw at the Senior Bowl and at the combine no other prospect has been able to distinguish themselves in the eyes of the sports media and enter the conversation as the 3rd QB.
(I say sports media because the actual scouting/FO evaluations are well guarded and the media opinion is shaped more by agent/scout/FO agenda double talk then it is the truth. So when the sports media are 'shocked' or 'surprised' when a player gets drafted higher then they expect its much less a 'reach' then the realization that the sports media opinion doesn't always match scout/FO evaluations.
But I digress...)
If teams have Tannehill rated as the 3rd QB its likely that they have already found the answers to the questions that you have and likely don't share your negative opinions about his downfield throwing that you harbor.

No, you have it wrong. It's dishonest and unproductive to make the comparison between Tannehill and Luck/Griffin. Physically, it's not close. Tannehill is a good athlete for a quarterback. He can make plays with his legs, and can outrun some linebackers. But Luck and Griffin are two of the better athletes at the position that have come out in years.

The issue is whether Tannehill is in a class by himself - a first round skill set that puts him in a class above Cousins/Foles/etc, or just part of that group of talented seniors who might make some noise in the NFL if they can find the right system. If you have all second/third/fourth round grades on those prospects, then rolling the dice on Tannehill makes some sense. He is, in terms of athleticism, superior to Cousins, Foles, Moore, etc. However, I don't think the limitations Tannehill has shown within pocket shouldn't just be shrugged off.

I think Tannehill throws the ball to some area of the field really well, and not as well to others. I am interested to see what he can become, but know what I'm getting in the prospects who are more accomplished from the pocket.

I'm open to the argument that his skill set and strong foundation in the short passing game makes him the most desirable of the rest of the QB prospects, but the Luck-Griffin comparisons aren't useful.

[warriorzpath]

I don't know... watching Tannehill run as a qb- he looks very impressive. He would give defenses fits with his running ability. He's not in the same category as RGIII, but I think he's close- maybe better in some areas because of his experience and skill at wideout. I think he beats Luck in terms of running skills and athleticism - hands down. Once Tannehill gets his passing skills and decision-making caught up to his running ability, he will be dangerous.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by warriorzpath

I don't know... watching Tannehill run as a qb- he looks very impressive. He would give defenses fits with his running ability. He's not in the same category as RGIII, but I think he's close- maybe better in some areas because of his experience and skill at wideout. I think he beats Luck in terms of running skills and athleticism - hands down. Once Tannehill gets his passing skills and decision-making caught up to his running ability, he will be dangerous.

He just doesn't though. Luck routinely breaks off runs that have him outrunning college corners. Tannehill has his fair share of breakaway TD runs as well, but we're not talking about two guys in the same class.

Luck is going to be a great threat with his legs in the pros regardless of system. Tannehill is more than capable of running the ball within the context of the system, with designed boots and rollouts and draws and such, but he's not Andrew Luck or Cam Newton or Robert Griffin physically. He's just not the same guy.

I think a better comp, athletically, would be Stafford.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

He just doesn't though. Luck routinely breaks off runs that have him outrunning college corners. Tannehill has his fair share of breakaway TD runs as well, but we're not talking about two guys in the same class.

Luck is going to be a great threat with his legs in the pros regardless of system. Tannehill is more than capable of running the ball within the context of the system, with designed boots and rollouts and draws and such, but he's not Andrew Luck or Cam Newton or Robert Griffin physically. He's just not the same guy.

I think a better comp, athletically, would be Stafford.

The best part about the NFL you really don't need to spend all this draft picks and you really don't need those types of QB's to get to and or win the SB. Curt Warner was no Luck, RGIII, or Cam Newton. Eli is a slow runner and Big Ben can't run to save his life. Drew Breese is borderline he sucked in San Diego which is why they got rid of him. And then ther is Andy Dalton. I guess this year we will get to see if he is good or an anomaly.

Folks you don't need an RGIII to win the SB just a half decent OL to protect him, a QB who can make all the throws, and some decent WR's who can catch a ball which we don't have other then Moss and Gaffney.

[SFREDSKIN]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

The best part about the NFL you really don't need to spend all this draft picks and you really don't need those types of QB's to get to and or win the SB. Curt Warner was no Luck, RGIII, or Cam Newton. Eli is a slow runner and Big Ben can't run to save his life. Drew Breese is borderline he sucked in San Diego which is why they got rid of him. And then ther is Andy Dalton. I guess this year we will get to see if he is good or an anomaly.

Folks you don't need an RGIII to win the SB just a half decent OL to protect him, a QB who can make all the throws, and some decent WR's who can catch a ball which we don't have other then Moss and Gaffney.

And let's not forget Tom Brady the 6th rounder.

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

The best part about the NFL you really don't need to spend all this draft picks and you really don't need those types of QB's to get to and or win the SB. Curt Warner was no Luck, RGIII, or Cam Newton. Eli is a slow runner and Big Ben can't run to save his life. Drew Breese is borderline he sucked in San Diego which is why they got rid of him. And then ther is Andy Dalton. I guess this year we will get to see if he is good or an anomaly.

Folks you don't need an RGIII to win the SB just a half decent OL to protect him, a QB who can make all the throws, and some decent WR's who can catch a ball which we don't have other then Moss and Gaffney.

Perhaps you're forgetting that Warner played at an elite level for awhile... Eli played elite in the clutch at the very least.. and Brees is borderline what? Amazing?

So you're content with a hot year or two.. only to wonder what we have a couple of years later... if we will consider the next guy being worth giving up on our guy for? Like the Browns this year? Maybe the only team that had a hot decade without the same QB or equal next guy would be well, us... and people will always bring up the shortened seasons that brought us two trophies... and sure Rypien was good for the third.. but today he is best known for having a daughter in the lingerie football league...

[Dirtbag59]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

The best part about the NFL you really don't need to spend all this draft picks and you really don't need those types of QB's to get to and or win the SB. Curt Warner was no Luck, RGIII, or Cam Newton. Eli is a slow runner and Big Ben can't run to save his life. Drew Breese is borderline he sucked in San Diego which is why they got rid of him. And then ther is Andy Dalton. I guess this year we will get to see if he is good or an anomaly.

Folks you don't need an RGIII to win the SB just a half decent OL to protect him, a QB who can make all the throws, and some decent WR's who can catch a ball which we don't have other then Moss and Gaffney.

Big Ben is actually considered a mobile QB. In fact his mobility is a big part of the reason he had so much success early on.

Ben Roethlisberger Scouting Report - Scouts, Inc.
Grade: 93 | Key

Comment: Roethlisberger is a big, strong-armed quarterback with above average athleticism. He has quick feet for his size and can slide and improvise to make effective throws downfield. He is the toughest quarterback in the league to get on the ground with great instincts to avoid pressure and natural body strength to break tackles. He has great vision and patience to find his second and third options but can be a bit of a gambler.

As for Drew Bees.

Grade: 94 | Key

Comment: Brees is one of the most consistent passers in the league. He can make plays from the pocket and has the foot quickness and speed to extend the pocket to make plays from the perimeter. He has a great working knowledge of the passing game and excels when it comes to reading coverages and adjusting on the move. He knows how to game plan and sees possibilities as they develop. He brings a great combination of a physical skill set and intelligence to the table.

The one thing that most Super Bowl winning QB's share in this day and age is the ability to extend the play.

And while you may not need an RGIII to win a Super Bowl you still need an elite QB to compete year in and year out.

[30gut]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

No, you have it wrong. It's dishonest and unproductive to make the comparison between Tannehill and Luck/Griffin. Physically, it's not close. Tannehill is a good athlete for a quarterback. He can make plays with his legs, and can outrun some linebackers.
But Luck and Griffin are two of the better athletes at the position that have come out in years.

Just last year you have Newton, Locker, Kaepernick, Tyrod Taylor and Josh Portis all great athletes and you kinda have to throw Terrelle Pryor in there too.

Mayock and other people like to pull out Luck's one handed catch on a wide open QB throwback pass as evidence of his athleticism.
It seems silly to profess that the guy that lead his team in receiving for 2 years (2008 and 2009) isn't at least equally as athletic.

If you wanna say that Griffin is in another class then sure I can understand that, he's a near Olympic caliber athlete.
But its beyond me how anyone can deny that Tannehill, who was the both the best WR and the best QB on the Aggies, doesn't at least have an equal level (if not is flat out superior) of athleticism then Luck.
To me, and I could be way off base, but your opinions of Tannehill kinda smacks of someone that really hasn't watched very much of Tannehill at all really.

However, I don't think the limitations Tannehill has shown within pocket shouldn't just be shrugged off.

Don't worry about shrugging them off because you're probably the only one that thinks he has them, especially in comparison to Foles and Cousins.

I think Tannehill throws the ball to some area of the field really well, and not as well to others.

This is a generic criticism that could be levied against any QB prospect.

The irony is that I'm not even a Tannehill 'guy' , at first I begrudgingly watched him after he took the top spot from Jerrod Johnson.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by 30gut

Mayock and other people like to pull out Luck's one handed catch on a wide open QB throwback pass as evidence of his athleticism.
It seems silly to profess that the guy that lead his team in receiving for 2 years (2008 and 2009) isn't at least equally as athletic.

If you wanna say that Griffin is in another class then sure I can understand that, he's a near Olympic caliber athlete.
But its beyond me how anyone can deny that Tannehill, who was the both the best WR and the best QB on the Aggies, doesn't at least have an equal level (if not is flat out superior) of athleticism then Luck.
To me, and I could be way off base, but your opinions of Tannehill kinda smacks of someone that really hasn't watched very much of Tannehill at all really.

Don't worry about shrugging them off because you're probably the only one that thinks he has them, especially in comparison to Foles and Cousins.

This is a generic criticism that could be levied against any QB prospect.

The irony is that I'm not even a Tannehill 'guy' , at first I begrudgingly watched him after he took the top spot from Jerrod Johnson.

Yeah, I'm with you. I don't get the criticism that Tannehill suffers from greater pocket limitations than Foles or Cousins at all. To me Tannehill has an obvious advantage there. I've seen Cousins panic too many times and Foles is terrible in his footwork.