Quote:
Originally Posted by GTripp0012
I really wish someone could explain to me why Ryan Tannehill is such a favorite as a third QB in this draft. In terms of his components, he's not in the top three in any one thing (height, perhaps the exception after Osweiler), whether measured statistically or observationally. And it would seem logical, that if you break the quarterback class down into components and Tannehill comes out average or below average in most skills, that the fact that he combines all of those blah skills into one package shouldn't make a better prospect than guys (like Foles or Cousins) that do one or two things exceptionally well, but have obvious flaws in either their footwork or decision making.
It would seem that grading only on skill sets, Tannehill has absolutely nothing on Weeden or Osweiler, who are both more physically gifted quaterbacks. If grading him on the production he flashed in college, he's not Foles, he's not Cousins, and he's not 30% of Kellen Moore. I don't feel I'm being unfair to Tannehill at all by putting him solidly in the second round of a class I've already given five first round grades in. In doing so, I'm ranking him ahead of Weeden and Osweiler, who are two guys who can just do more with their arms.
|
Without sidetracking the thread into a Tannehill discussion and to answer your (rhetorical?) question.
Your assessment of Tannehill is likely very different from the people that see him as 1st round prospect.
For example to my eye Tannehill's arm talent is on the same level as the top arm talents in this class Foles and Osweiler.
His athleticism is near tops in this class behind only Griffin and Russell Wilson.
To my eye Tannehill has more arm talent and is more athletic then Luck.
But Tannehill is raw.
His comparative lack of playing experience makes him a less 'polished' or 'finished' prospect.