PDA

View Full Version : NFL Draft Ryan Tannehill


Pages : 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8

Mr_Tomahawk
03-28-2012, 09:05 AM
Cleveland needs someone who can improve the team now. That isn't Tannehill. They will give McCoy some weapons this year and if he doesn't make a dramatic improvement they will grab a QB who can start day 1 in 2013.

Taking a 2 year project at #4 doesn't make any sense for them.

Who said the starting QB on this team is suppose to "make sense"?

Who have you been watching the past decade?

Mr. Laz
03-28-2012, 09:15 AM
If he goes #4 overall to Cleveland I wonder if people will still say he's not a first round talent?
He's not, normally a guy like him would go in rd 2 or 3 because he's a project.

That's not saying he doesn't have talent and that he can't play. Seems to me the Tannehill's upside is tremendous but a 1st round guy should be ready to play.

It looks like Tannehill will end up going in the 1st round but only because the rookie salary cap lowered the cost, making it worth taking a gamble on project type QB draftees.

JMO

btw i wouldn't be pissed if the Chiefs grabbed him at 11 ... take a shot. :shrug:

philfree
03-28-2012, 09:21 AM
I would argue that Tannehill exhibited the best pocket command and mobility of any quarterback in this draft class. To take it a step further, Tannehill was very good when improvising within structure. When the pressure forced him to abandon the boxing ring, he did, but the objective was again to find a quieter area to deliver the ball rather than to run. While the threat of the run was present, Tannehill remained a passer first, allowing the defense to dictate his reaction. We always talk about extending plays. Tannehill did that well, preserving his downfield focus and making accurate throws at the intermediate and deeper levels of the defense.


Sounds like Aaron Rogers.

Will he make it past Miami? NO probably not.

htismaqe
03-28-2012, 09:29 AM
Sounds like Aaron Rogers.

Will he make it past Miami? NO probably not.

Rodgers was a JUCO QB and started like 20 games in college. Not NEARLY as raw as Tannehill.

Pestilence
03-28-2012, 09:35 AM
Who the fuck knows what Miami will do.

FFS....it was a foregone conclusion on draft day that if Quinn fell to Miami....that they would pick him. And then they picked Ted Ginn and drafted John Beck in the 2nd round. They may try to grab a DE or a WR and then trade back into the 1st round for Brandon Weeden.

Micjones
03-28-2012, 09:53 AM
Sounds like Aaron Rogers.

Will he make it past Miami? NO probably not.

I certainly hope he does. Would love to have the kid.

Frankie
03-28-2012, 10:24 AM
The Browns aren't taking him at 4.

This. Don't they have the 22nd pick or something like that as well? There sits the QB they will take, named Weeden. IMO that will still be a reach too, but not nearly as bad a reach as Tannehill at 4.

Epic Fail 007
03-28-2012, 10:29 AM
This is all great but he won`t get past miami or cleveland.

Mr. Laz
03-28-2012, 10:33 AM
This is all great but he won`t get past miami or cleveland.

and Dorsey won't make it to 5
Derrick Johnson won't make it to 15(or whatever)
etc,etc

someone falls every year

Chiefnj2
03-28-2012, 10:53 AM
and Dorsey won't make it to 5
Derrick Johnson won't make it to 15(or whatever)
etc,etc

someone falls every year

Clausen will go in the top 10. Miami will take Quinn....

Bowser
03-28-2012, 10:55 AM
Just to repeat -

I want no part of this guy. Wait for next year when the QB class is much stronger than it is this year.

AndChiefs
03-28-2012, 10:57 AM
Just to repeat -

I want no part of this guy. Wait for next year when the QB class is much stronger than it is this year.

I seem to remember posts saying the exact same thing last year.

Frosty
03-28-2012, 10:59 AM
I seem to remember posts saying the exact same thing every year.

FYP

Bowser
03-28-2012, 11:01 AM
I seem to remember posts saying the exact same thing last year.

True. It's kind of the mantra of Chiefs fans in general - "There's always next year!"


Besides, who do we eject if we draft Tannehill? Quinn or Stanzi? Because we all know Cassel isn't going anywhere.

Detoxing
03-28-2012, 11:05 AM
Just to repeat -

I want no part of this guy. Wait for next year when the QB class is much stronger than it is this year.

Fuck that. I'd take him. At some point you have to try.

Detoxing
03-28-2012, 11:05 AM
True. It's kind of the mantra of Chiefs fans in general - "There's always next year!"


Besides, who do we eject if we draft Tannehill? Quinn or Stanzi? Because we all know Cassel isn't going anywhere.

It'd be Quinn.

Chiefnj2
03-28-2012, 11:07 AM
Does anyone really think Daboll can develop a QB?

Bowser
03-28-2012, 11:08 AM
Fuck that. I'd take him. At some point you have to try.

Agreed. But give me a guy that actually has more snaps at QB than receiver in his college career.

Hell, this kid may be the next Kurt Warner for all I know. There's just something about him I don't find appealing in a QB. I've gotten flamed for it, but if we are seriously looking QB in this draft, I'd take Kellen Moore over Tannehill. Maybe I'm crazy, but I have no problems with a QB that won over 50 games as a starter in D1.

Bowser
03-28-2012, 11:09 AM
It'd be Quinn.

Even though he "knows Daboll's system"? Not that it appears to be a rocket science system, based on where his offenses have ranked over the years.....

AndChiefs
03-28-2012, 11:10 AM
Agreed. But give me a guy that actually has more snaps at QB than receiver in his college career.

Hell, this kid may be the next Kurt Warner for all I know. There's just something about him I don't find appealing in a QB. I've gotten flamed for it, but if we are seriously looking QB in this draft, I'd take Kellen Moore over Tannehill. Maybe I'm crazy, but I have no problems with a QB that won over 50 games as a starter in D1.

I love Kellen Moore. I don't think he has enough arm strength though.

Frosty
03-28-2012, 11:12 AM
I love Kellen Moore. I don't think he has enough arm strength though.

Kellen Moore will have a great career


... in Canada.

Bowser
03-28-2012, 11:12 AM
Does anyone really think Daboll can develop a QB?

I'd be happy if he could devise an offense that ended up in the top half of NFL offenses, much less develop anyone.

Bowser
03-28-2012, 11:19 AM
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/ZgB07NoeZm0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Of course those are "highlights", but after watching them, I feel like his arm strength is more than adequate. His true strength is that he appears to be very smart with the ball, and is athletic enough to get out of trouble and make plays.

Bowser
03-28-2012, 11:25 AM
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/ClxFYIThbAE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Just for the sake of comparison. Tannehill shows he can really gun it if he's given a chance to step up, nad is a much more mobile QB. If the Redskins hadn't sold out on RGIII, I think they'd be all over this guy, especially considering how Shanny loves the boot game.

The one difference I noticed in quick views of both vids is that Tannehill seems to struggle a bit more with his accuracy than Moore does.

Frosty
03-28-2012, 11:27 AM
Of course those are "highlights", but after watching them, I feel like his arm strength is more than adequate. His true strength is that he appears to be very smart with the ball, and is athletic enough to get out of trouble and make plays.

His lack of arm strength was very evident in the Senior Bowl practices and nearly everyone commented on it. He makes up for it somewhat with excellent anticipation but I just don't think that will translate well in the NFL.

Fat Elvis
03-28-2012, 11:57 AM
I'd be happy if he could devise an offense that ended up in the top half three quarters of NFL offenses, much less develop anyone.

FYP; top 7/8 historically has been a stretch for Daboll.

Pestilence
03-28-2012, 12:30 PM
Everyone at the Senior Bowl compared Kellen Moore to Tyler Palko. Yeah....he's THAT good.

Chocolate Hog
03-28-2012, 12:39 PM
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/ClxFYIThbAE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Just for the sake of comparison. Tannehill shows he can really gun it if he's given a chance to step up, nad is a much more mobile QB. If the Redskins hadn't sold out on RGIII, I think they'd be all over this guy, especially considering how Shanny loves the boot game.

The one difference I noticed in quick views of both vids is that Tannehill seems to struggle a bit more with his accuracy than Moore does.

There's def some skill there. Gotta take him if he's there at 11.

58-4ever
03-28-2012, 12:50 PM
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/ZgB07NoeZm0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Of course those are "highlights", but after watching them, I feel like his arm strength is more than adequate. His true strength is that he appears to be very smart with the ball, and is athletic enough to get out of trouble and make plays.

The other major problem appears to be that he is a midget.

SNR
03-28-2012, 12:51 PM
Does anyone really think Daboll can develop a QB?Probably not, but is that even his job? What the hell are we paying Zorn to do?

SNR
03-28-2012, 12:52 PM
His pro day was/is today. Anybody get any reports from that?

Chiefnj2
03-28-2012, 12:53 PM
What the hell are we paying Zorn to do?

Apparently Zorn was paid to make Cassel look uncomfortable, make sure Palko's arm speed and strength didn't increase and not prepare Ricky Stanzi for the 2011 season.

SNR
03-28-2012, 12:55 PM
Apparently Zorn was paid to make Cassel look uncomfortable, make sure Palko's arm speed and strength didn't increase and not prepare Ricky Stanzi for the 2011 season.Sweet.

Is Dick Curl available? We could use an upgrade at QB coach.

Mr. Laz
03-28-2012, 01:02 PM
Does anyone really think Daboll can develop a QB?
we have no idea either way

I don't think he's ever ran a successful offense overall, so it's not encouraging.

Mr. Laz
03-28-2012, 01:04 PM
<iframe>

Just for the sake of comparison. Tannehill shows he can really gun it if he's given a chance to step up, nad is a much more mobile QB. If the Redskins hadn't sold out on RGIII, I think they'd be all over this guy, especially considering how Shanny loves the boot game.

The one difference I noticed in quick views of both vids is that Tannehill seems to struggle a bit more with his accuracy than Moore does.
moore is crazy accurate and does such a good job of anticipating the throw that it covers up for his so-so arm. I think the first good hit on Moore in the NFL might break him in half as well.

Mr. Laz
03-28-2012, 01:05 PM
<ifrYIThbAE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Just for the sake of comparison. Tannehill shows he can really gun it if he's given a chance to step up, nad is a much more mobile QB. If the Redskins hadn't sold out on RGIII, I think they'd be all over this guy, especially considering how Shanny loves the boot game.

The one difference I noticed in quick views of both vids is that Tannehill seems to struggle a bit more with his accuracy than Moore does.
moore is crazy accurate and does such a good job of anticipating the throw that it covers up for his so-so arm. I think the first good NFL hit on Moore might break him in half though.

evolve27
03-28-2012, 09:39 PM
Texas A&M Ryan Tannehill will hold his personal Pro Day on Thursday, as scheduled, and will run a forty-yard dash.
The facts that Tannehill can run a forty and perform a full Pro Day quarterback workout confirm he's been medically cleared after January foot surgery. While opinions are mixed on Tannehill in the draftnik community, he is highly regarded by the NFL. We fully expect Tannehill to be a top-12 draft pick.

Source: Dane Brugler on Twitter Mar 28 - 3:34 PM

jspchief
03-28-2012, 10:12 PM
People are calling him a project, but he's going to be on the field as a rookie most likely.

He's not that raw. He was recruited to play QB in a major division 1 conference.

morphius
03-28-2012, 10:25 PM
People are calling him a project, but he's going to be on the field as a rookie most likely.

He's not that raw. He was recruited to play QB in a major division 1 conference.
That's not exactly high standards. Lots of kids are recruited to be qb's in div one that don't even end up good in div one, much less the number that fail at the pro level.

jspchief
03-28-2012, 10:29 PM
I realize that, but too many people consider him a WR converted to QB. The reality is he's a QB that played WR when asked due to the team having a starting QB. Then he took that QB's starting spot.

Fruit Ninja
03-28-2012, 10:52 PM
Pull the fucking trigger if he's there at 11. WE have to do it eventually. Nows the time. not next year, not the year after. NOW!

Im ready for them to at least try.

BossChief
03-28-2012, 11:57 PM
The Steelers took a small school project at 11 that had a live arm and the propensity to extend plays... the rest is history...whats the difference when this kid is a big school guy but has lacking experience?

Im not trying to get smart here, it is a legit question because I havent seen a lot of Tanehill in real games.

We have to take a shot sometime....I wonder how we felt about him after we interviewed him at the combine.

Remember, we interviewed RG3, Luck and Tanehill.

Seriously though, at one point they need to take a shot....even if he busts, show us that QB means something to you.

Raiderhader
03-29-2012, 12:01 AM
I wouldn't be upset if we took a chance on him in the 1st round. I'm not completely sold on him, but at this point I would see it as recognition that the Chiefs are trying to address the position. And he has as much, if not more, potential as he has down side. To hell with it, take him if he's there.

Chief_For_Life58
03-29-2012, 12:05 AM
were not taking him. cassel, stanzi, quinn. end of thread

ChiefAshhole20
03-29-2012, 12:06 AM
He falls apart whenever the game comes down to it towards the end. Watch the OK St and the Texas game this last season, he plays well enough for part of the game but if he gets rattled in later quarters, he falls apart and he doesn't bounce back. Yes he has solid physical skills, but I promise if he is taken at #11, fans will be calling for his head within 2 1/2 years.

Frankie
03-29-2012, 12:08 AM
Hell, this kid may be the next Kurt Warner for all I know. There's just something about him I don't find appealing in a QB.It's funny, but there's just something about him that screams QB to me. My advocacy of him is admittedly based on watching him in two games, but I just have a positive gut feeling about him that I can't shake.
Kellen Moore will have a great career


... in Canada.:clap:

Everyone at the Senior Bowl compared Kellen Moore to Tyler Palko. Yeah....he's THAT good.ROFL

We have to take a shot sometime....I wonder how we felt about him after we interviewed him at the combine.

Remember, we interviewed RG3, Luck and Tanehill.

Seriously though, at one point they need to take a shot....even if he busts, show us that QB means something to you.I have come to feel this way as well. We now have a team with much less holes than we've had in almost a decade. Almost a complete team that lacks a QB. Maybe we should go QB in the 1st every year starting this year until one is the guy.

were not taking him. cassel, stanzi, quinn. end of thread

I'm afraid the order is Cassel, Quinn, Stanzi now. :(

BossChief
03-29-2012, 12:20 AM
If we wait till next year, who are we hoping will drop to 20 or later?

Cause that's where we will be picking.

Truth is, if Tanehill is still on the board around 7...we should probably make a move and throw in a 3rd and change to move up and take the kid if they ever had any intention of getting any real competition for Cassel.

If that means we have to cut Stanzi or Quinn, so be it...but keeping 4 quarterbacks wouldn't be out of the question, either.

The guys upside seems to be something like Big Ben or Aaron Rogers in that he is mobile enough to extend plays and has the arm and instincts to get the ball to the open guy and if nobody is open he is smart enough to use his speed to gain some yards and smart enough to avoid taking shots in those situations.

I really wish somebody had asked Romeo about Tanehill at the combine.

Id also like to add to the conversation that interview with Jack Harry and Scott Pioli, Scott said he would be ok with trading up from 11 for a quarterback...but that he wouldnt trade multiple first round picks to do so...well, moving from 11 to 7 would cost us 250 draft value points (according to the chart) and that's basically a third (215 points) and fifth round (36.5 points) pick package.

DO IT.

It sure would be exciting.

It woulds be a statement that Cassels time would be coming to an end.

Thats nice to think about, even if its a pipe dream.

Simply Red
03-29-2012, 12:34 AM
DO IT.

It sure would be exciting.

It woulds be a statement that Cassels time would be coming to an end.

Thats nice to think about, even if its a pipe dream.

we can always dream, champ.

Mr_Tomahawk
03-29-2012, 07:05 AM
NFL Draft 2012: The Chiefs And The Possibility Of Ryan Tannehill

http://kansascity.sbnation.com/kansas-city-chiefs/2012/3/27/2906869/nfl-draft-2012-chiefs-ryan-tannehill

Mar 27, 2012 - The Kansas City Chiefs have echoed the sentiments of the many of their fans and the sportswriter who also covered them this offseason with public statements about the state of the quarterback position. During the 2011 season, Matt Cassel's third at the helm for the Chiefs, many were calling for this year to be his last, and wondered if the Chiefs would make a move in the upcoming offseason to address the level of competition and perhaps bring in a new starter.

When Cassel was injured halfway through the season, the Chiefs saw a glimpse of both how bad things could get and the possibility of something more with his replacements. The decision to start Tyler Palko for four consecutive games single-handedly cost the Chiefs the division title and ultimately cost Todd Haley his job (among many other factors). In that stretch, Matt Cassel looked like a godsend compared to Palko on the field, and a quick return from injury would have been welcomed with open arms.

Then came Kyle Orton. After the Chiefs claimed the former Denver Broncos quarterback on waivers, beating out other teams like the Chicago Bears, the team began to find a new rhythm on offense. While visions of Priest Holmes and offensive shootouts never appeared, the team moved the chains with greater frequency and carried a greater confidence about them with a new man in the huddle. At least that's the way it seemed from the outside looking in.

Whether that was due to Palko serving as the precursor or not, Orton gave Chiefs fans a sign of things to come. It was the first fresh option at quarterback in a few seasons, so it was heartening to hear the Chiefs brass believed the same thing.

The Chiefs surprised everyone this offseason with the level of candor with the press. Statements were made publicly about the plan to bring in competition at the quarterback position. Romeo Crennel went so far as to say he would be "crazy" not to want Peyton Manning as his quarterback, and Clark Hunt even made a statement saying the Chiefs were interested. Whether or not they were going to get Manning, the Chiefs were going to make a move between the Super Bowl and the kickoff of the 2012 season to change things at quarterback.

Thus far, the Chiefs have made some very impressive moves to shape their team. While they lost Brandon Carr to the Dallas Cowboys, the team replaced him with Stanford Routt preemptively and then buoyed their offense with another tight end in Kevin Boss, a tandem back for Jamaal Charles in Peyton Hillis and a replacement at right tackle in Eric Winston. Each of those adds not only some much needed security and depth on offense, but also represent a significant upgrade on the depth chart. The Chiefs, in short, are already much better on offense than any point in 2011.

Then there's Brady Quinn. He's the other free-agent signing the Chiefs made, and there's reason to like the move if we were discussing the back-up quarterback position. Given the difference between Tyler Palko and Brady Quinn, it's a nice move to strengthen the roster like the other ones made already this offseason. But when Scott Pioli, Romeo Crennel and Clark Hunt were making statements about the quarterback position in one way or another, I believe it's safe to say that no one believed signing Quinn was the change they were talking about.

As of now, the major dominoes at quarterback have fallen. Some are left empty-handed and the quarterback situations in Cleveland and Miami are laughable. The Chiefs, in other words, have a better situation than others in the NFL. However, that doesn't negate the fact that change was expected and, thus far, not quite delivered. Given the dearth of free agent quarterbacks left on the market, it's likely that the NFL Draft is only place left for change (unless a trade magically opens up somehow).

Andrew Luck is spoken for. Robert Griffin III has been claimed as well. The top two picks in the draft have been cemented for some time ever since the Washington Redskins traded the future for the dynamic present in the form of this year's Heisman winner. And the draft class boasts only two surefire prospects. Luck and Griffin are both regarded as franchise quarterbacks. Everyone else, while promising, comes with a question mark or another.

Ryan Tannehill stands as the top of the "rest." Brandon Weeden is intriguing. Russell Wilson is celebrated despite his short height. Various scouts like Nick Foles, Brock Osewiler, Kirk Cousins and B.J. Coleman. However, Texas A&M's Tannehill is almost always listed as the third-best available quarterback and it's likely that someone moves up to take him in the top ten. Whether or not he is a top-ten talent is not the concern. It's all about the scarcity of hope at the most important position on the field.

The Chiefs have already addressed some of their biggest needs this offseason so far and they are likely to continue to do so. Defensive line needs to be addressed. Inside linebacker will likely garner help as well. Depth all around the secondary will also earn some draft nods. But the Chiefs have made enough moves that a move for quarterback could, at the very least, be considered.

While I am not interested in proposing specific trades to move up to Tannehill using the depth chart, my primary concern is with the interest of Tannehill in the first place. With only 19 career starts, his ceiling is actually unknown. Some scouts may love him, while others remain uncertain, but at the very least he is intriguing and the potential is there for greatness.

At 6-2, 222 lbs, Tannehill has the prototypical size of a pro quarterback, and his stats look good as well. This last year at A&M, Tannehill completed 327 of 531 throws for a 61.6 completion percentage. In total he threw for over 3,700 yards with 29 touchdowns to 15 interceptions. In a win over Robert Griffin and the Baylor Bears, Tannehill upstaged the Heisman winner in a 55-28 win with 6 touchdowns.

Wes Bunting of the National Football Post believes in him and writes, "With such limited experience at the quarterback position it's not a case of where this guy is right now, but where he can be in 2/3 years. I love the talent and the overall production from a guy who doesn't have much experience playing from under center as he plays way beyond his years. A potential franchise quarterback in my mind."

Matt Waldman also praises him and writes, "Counting on any rookie quarterback to play like Cam Newton or Andy Dalton is asking too much from an NFL rookie. However, Tannehill belongs in the top half of this draft and hes not the project some people think."

Not everyone agrees with this synopsis, of course, which is why Tannehill is not being taken at No. 3 in mock drafts. Sideline Scouts compares him to Blaine Gabbert despite some positives they really like, which is a death knell given the Jags starter's performance last season. Drafttek looks and sees Alex Smith as a comparable player -- again, hardly a vote of confidence given the poor-to-middling results over Smith's first several seasons for the 49ers. At this rate, Cassel is the better choice.

If the Chiefs believe that Tannehill's upside is level with those comparisons, then they are likely to stay where they are at in the draft order and go with a Dontari Poe or Luke Kuechly addition. That would also be the correct move if Tannehill's future is no better than Alex Smith. However, some believe he can be the third franchise quarterback from this draft, and if the Chiefs agree with that through their own scouting observations, then a move needs to be made. After all, fans aren't the only ones calling for this. The Chiefs themselves have said they want to take action. If they like Tannehill enough, this is their chance.

jspchief
03-29-2012, 07:32 AM
Q

Mr_Tomahawk
03-29-2012, 07:33 AM
Q

My bad.

htismaqe
03-29-2012, 07:34 AM
People are calling him a project, but he's going to be on the field as a rookie most likely.

He's not that raw. He was recruited to play QB in a major division 1 conference.

If he's drafted by the Chiefs, he won't even dress as a rookie, let alone play.

And he was recruited to play QB in a BCS conference that features a host of 1-read and read-option offenses. Nothing about a Big 12 QB screams "NFL".

htismaqe
03-29-2012, 07:35 AM
The Steelers took a small school project at 11 that had a live arm and the propensity to extend plays... the rest is history...whats the difference when this kid is a big school guy but has lacking experience?

Im not trying to get smart here, it is a legit question because I havent seen a lot of Tanehill in real games.

We have to take a shot sometime....I wonder how we felt about him after we interviewed him at the combine.

Remember, we interviewed RG3, Luck and Tanehill.

Seriously though, at one point they need to take a shot....even if he busts, show us that QB means something to you.

Roethlisberger was a 3-year starter at Miami of Ohio - he had DOUBLE the number of starts that Tannehill had.

Mr_Tomahawk
03-29-2012, 07:38 AM
Roethlisberger was a 3-year starter at Miami of Ohio - he had DOUBLE the number of starts that Tannehill had.

Some people act like Tannehill had never thrown a football prior to college...

jspchief
03-29-2012, 07:42 AM
Htis is starting to sound like he may be ok with passing on tannehill.

Chiefnj2
03-29-2012, 07:50 AM
If he's drafted by the Chiefs, he won't even dress as a rookie, let alone play.

And he was recruited to play QB in a BCS conference that features a host of 1-read and read-option offenses. Nothing about a Big 12 QB screams "NFL".

That's the thing, in the Big 12 Tannehill was average.

James Franklin, Jordan Webb and Seth Doege all had better completion %'s than Tannehill, not to mention Griffin, Weeden and Jones.

Franklin and Jones had better ypa and everybody knows how much Jones checks down at OK.

Tannehill was tied for the most INTs in the conference.

Compared to his peers he didn't play like a first round draft pick, especially when you consider his performance in big games.

durtyrute
03-29-2012, 07:52 AM
That's the thing, in the Big 12 Tannehill was average.

James Franklin, Jordan Webb and Seth Doege all had better completion %'s than Tannehill, not to mention Griffin, Weeden and Jones.

Franklin and Jones had better ypa and everybody knows how much Jones checks down at OK.

Tannehill was tied for the most INTs in the conference.

Compared to his peers he didn't play like a first round draft pick, especially when you consider his performance in big games.

But but, if we don't take a WR for our QB, we will never get one./cp

Mr_Tomahawk
03-29-2012, 07:53 AM
That's the thing, in the Big 12 Tannehill was average.

James Franklin, Jordan Webb and Seth Doege all had better completion %'s than Tannehill, not to mention Griffin, Weeden and Jones.

Franklin and Jones had better ypa and everybody knows how much Jones checks down at OK.

Tannehill was tied for the most INTs in the conference.

Compared to his peers he didn't play like a first round draft pick, especially when you consider his performance in big games.

We should draft Kellen Moore!

Coogs
03-29-2012, 07:57 AM
My bad.

I'm glad you "Q'ed" it! I had not read that before.:thumb:

htismaqe
03-29-2012, 08:14 AM
Some people act like Tannehill had never thrown a football prior to college...

So now he's an NFL prospect because he played QB in HIGH SCHOOL?

ROFL

htismaqe
03-29-2012, 08:15 AM
Htis is starting to sound like he may be ok with passing on tannehill.

I'm not gonna get all heartbroken over a guy who has more of a chance of never seeing the field than he does developing into a playoff-caliber QB.

Mr_Tomahawk
03-29-2012, 08:17 AM
I'm not gonna get all heartbroken over a guy who has more of a chance of never seeing the field than he does developing into a playoff-caliber QB.

ROFL

This is ridiculous...

Setsuna
03-29-2012, 08:27 AM
ROFL

This is ridiculous...

What's ridiculous is having an avatar of Brady Quinn. Leave. Now.

Mr_Tomahawk
03-29-2012, 08:28 AM
What's ridiculous is having an avatar of Brady Quinn. Leave. Now.

http://www.wrapupp.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/2012-final-four.jpg


Still here...

suds79
03-29-2012, 08:40 AM
I'm not gonna get all heartbroken over a guy who has more of a chance of never seeing the field than he does developing into a playoff-caliber QB.

I can understand that comment. You wouldn't be heartbroken. Neither will I. But would you be mad if they took a shot? I get the impression you might.

I've said for a while now that I will never fault the Chiefs for taking a shot on a QB in the first. I honestly don't know what Tannehill will be in a year or two. I don't think anybody does. But it's the Chiefs job to try to find out.

I get the impression that part of why people are holding off on the thought of Tannehill is two fold.

- One, he's going higher than expected because QBs are always overvalued. I get that and that's valid.

- Two, because next year's class is said to be better. But after what we have coming back, I assume we'll be drafting with pick next year even less likely to nab a top rated QB. Plus like I said, QBs are always overvalued. It's always wait until next year around here.

At some point they have to nut up and pull the trigger if they ever want to try to achieve something meaningful.

I'm not saying I'm full on board with Tannehill. I'll gladly welcome a Kuechly if he were the pick. But I also realize that from a big picture prospective, ultimately all these non QB picks don't matter because Cassel is our QB. We'll always be drafting around the same spot. Mid 1st round.

We'd be better off simply taking some shots to try to get one. Look at the Chargers. Whiffed on Ryan Leaf. Paid for that. But came back and tried again. Hit on Rivers. In the meantime between then, what's the real difference between them & us during that time? (where they were paying for the Leaf mistake) Not that much IMO. Furthermore, I think we would all agree that their strategy has worked out better.

I'm more concerned about the Chiefs never trying at QB than I am they picking one and he busts.

Chiefnj2
03-29-2012, 08:44 AM
I've said for a while now that I will never fault the Chiefs for taking a shot on a QB in the first. I honestly don't know what Tannehill will be in a year or two. I don't think anybody does. But it's the Chiefs job to try to find out.



I don't think Romeo and Daboll have the luxury of playing Cassel/Quinn this year (likely not making playoffs) and then go through the growing pains of an inexperienced QB in 2013. 2 years of poor offensive production and Daboll might be gone, leaving a new OC who would presumably want his own players.

htismaqe
03-29-2012, 09:25 AM
ROFL

This is ridiculous...

Ridiculous? Hardly. History suggests it's 100% accurate.

Pestilence
03-29-2012, 09:27 AM
What's ridiculous is having an avatar of Brady Quinn. Leave. Now.

Not as ridiculous as a Jags fan hanging out on a Chiefs message board. Feel free to leave.

htismaqe
03-29-2012, 09:27 AM
I can understand that comment. You wouldn't be heartbroken. Neither will I. But would you be mad if they took a shot? I get the impression you might.

Then I've given the wrong impression. More than anything, I've ceased to care all that much.

They're going into the season with Cassel at QB - everything else they do is meaningless. They can take pretty much anybody and I'd be fine with it.

Mr_Tomahawk
03-29-2012, 09:28 AM
Ridiculous? Hardly. History suggests it's 100% accurate.

How many quarterbacks drafted in the 1st rnd have never started an NFL game in the history of this league?

:spock:

htismaqe
03-29-2012, 09:30 AM
How many quarterbacks drafted in the 1st rnd have never started an NFL game in the history of this league?

:spock:

Not very many. That tells you all you need to know about his chances of being a playoff-caliber QB.

Mr_Tomahawk
03-29-2012, 09:32 AM
Not very many. That tells you all you need to know about his chances of being a playoff-caliber QB.

Name one.

I honestly can't think of a QB drafted in the first round who never started an NFL game.

SNR
03-29-2012, 09:34 AM
Name one.

I honestly can't think of a QB drafted in the first round who never started an NFL game.If there is one, he probably played for the Chiefs

htismaqe
03-29-2012, 09:38 AM
If there is one, he probably played for the Chiefs

This.

I'm looking at this in the context of him being drafted by the Chiefs. There is absolutely nothing about this franchise, its history, the coaching staff, or anything else that suggest the picking Ryan Tannehill would accomplish anything.

He's gonna be inactive for a year and then he's going to "lose" a position battle with Cassel the next. The coaching staff will retire/be fired and the new coaching staff will bring in someone else.

It's fools gold. That being said, this conversation has inspired me to change my sig.

Mr. Laz
03-29-2012, 09:38 AM
If he's drafted by the Chiefs, he won't even dress as a rookie, let alone play.
pout much?

htismaqe
03-29-2012, 09:40 AM
pout much?

Not pouting at all. Simply acknowledging reality.

SNR
03-29-2012, 09:40 AM
pout much?
http://peculiarpilgrim.files.wordpress.com/2007/10/95-theses.jpg

Pout much, Herr Luther?

Chiefnj2
03-29-2012, 09:41 AM
pout much?

He's pouting a little, but if the team didn't activate Stanzi (who started for several years under a coach that Pioli and scouts respect), isn't there a chance that a QB who has very, very limited experience doesn't sniff the field year 1?

Mr_Tomahawk
03-29-2012, 09:47 AM
He's pouting a little, but if the team didn't activate Stanzi (who started for several years under a coach that Pioli and scouts respect), isn't there a chance that a QB who has very, very limited experience doesn't sniff the field year 1?

Stanzi was a 5th round pick.

I am sure there are plenty of 5th round picks who have never started an NFL game..."seen the field."


There is a difference between a 1st round pick and a 5th round pick.

Chiefnj2
03-29-2012, 09:50 AM
Stanzi was a 5th round pick.

I am sure there are plenty of 5th round picks who have never started an NFL game..."seen the field."


There is a difference between a 1st round pick and a 5th round pick.

If Stanzi was in this years draft class, you think he's a 5th round pick?

htismaqe
03-29-2012, 09:50 AM
Stanzi was a 5th round pick.

I am sure there are plenty of 5th round picks who have never started an NFL game..."seen the field."


There is a difference between a 1st round pick and a 5th round pick.

I don't know why we're arguing this.

Even though there's little reason to believe the Chiefs would play Tannehill in his rookie season, there's ZERO reason to believe they'd draft him in the first place.

Chiefnj2
03-29-2012, 09:51 AM
there's ZERO reason to believe they'd draft him in the first place.

That's how I see it. Pioli has his guy in Cassel, and Romeo and Daboll have their guy in Quinn.

Mr_Tomahawk
03-29-2012, 09:51 AM
If Stanzi was in this years draft class, you think he's a 5th round pick?

I don't think he makes a jump to the 1st round.

I don't think there is a 4-round difference in terms of the QB class between this years class and last years...

He may go jump to a 2nd or 3rd.

Kirk Cousins...

suds79
03-29-2012, 09:54 AM
Matt Cassel in all his time here has never started all 16 games.

History would suggest that we'll see more than just him this year. Lets hope at least.

htismaqe
03-29-2012, 09:55 AM
Matt Cassel in all his time here has never started all 16 games.

History would suggest that we'll see more than just him this year. Lets hope at least.

That's why they brought in Quinn.

htismaqe
03-29-2012, 09:55 AM
I don't think he makes a jump to the 1st round.

I don't think there is a 4-round difference in terms of the QB class between this years class and last years...

He may go jump to a 2nd or 3rd.

Kirk Cousins...

I agree pretty much.

htismaqe
03-29-2012, 09:58 AM
FYI, Petro is going to be talking about Tannehill and the Chiefs QB situation next...

http://espn.go.com/espnradio/affPopup?s=whb-am

Mr. Laz
03-29-2012, 10:02 AM
Not pouting at all. Simply acknowledging reality.
ROFL

have you checked your posts lately? You been 'acknowledging' the same reality over and over and over again.

htismaqe
03-29-2012, 10:16 AM
ROFL

have you checked your posts lately? You been 'acknowledging' the same reality over and over and over again.

That's my right. Don't like it, don't read them.

SNR
03-29-2012, 10:17 AM
ROFL

have you checked your posts lately? You been 'acknowledging' the same reality over and over and over again.With about 10 minutes using the search function, I'll bet I could find you lodging this very complaint towards at least 20 different posters.

It appears htismaqe isn't the only one who needs to change up the way he acknowledges reality.

SNR
03-29-2012, 10:18 AM
Matt Cassel in all his time here has never started all 16 games.

History would suggest that we'll see more than just him this year. Lets hope at least.STOP COMPLAINING ABOUT MATT CASSEL WE GET IT ALREADY YOU POUTER /Laz

Coogs
03-29-2012, 10:35 AM
They are saying Tannehill ran a 4.61 at his pro day.

Foot must be healed? :shrug:

AndChiefs
03-29-2012, 10:37 AM
Tannehill 40-41, w/one dropped pass by the receiver.


20 teams there to watch his workout...including Browns Brad Childress and Seahawks Pete Carroll

AndChiefs
03-29-2012, 10:38 AM
Three Dolphins reps, including GM Jeff Ireland. No Sherman. I'm guessing Sherm knows what Tannehill can do .

Browns QB coach also there.

Chris Weinke was running the workout.

Finished 65-68. People saying his foot showed no signs of hindering him. Ran well and moved very good in the pocket. Throws very well on the run.

Mr_Tomahawk
03-29-2012, 10:42 AM
So we had no scouts there...?

Pestilence
03-29-2012, 10:56 AM
It's hard to believe that only 3 teams showed up.

AndChiefs
03-29-2012, 10:57 AM
Tannehill 40-41, w/one dropped pass by the receiver.


20 teams there to watch his workout...including Browns Brad Childress and Seahawks Pete Carroll

20 teams

Pestilence
03-29-2012, 10:57 AM
Holy crap....I can't believe I missed that.

:facepalm:

AndChiefs
03-29-2012, 10:58 AM
So we had no scouts there...?

We probably had a scout there just wasn't mentioned. I believe we're not viewed as likely a landing spot.

Pestilence
03-29-2012, 10:58 AM
He also ran a 40 time of 4.61.

Dave Lane
03-29-2012, 11:11 AM
They are saying Tannehill ran a 4.61 at his pro day.

Foot must be healed? :shrug:

Tough day for Pest

Pestilence
03-29-2012, 11:17 AM
I'm totally not paying attention to this thread.



HEY! Have you guys heard about this Ryan Tannehill guy? I heard he's a pretty good QB!

Pestilence
03-29-2012, 11:29 AM
So, since I'm 0-2.....this has probably already been posted. But I don't give a fuck.

http://www.arrowheadpride.com/2012/3/29/2911165/ryan-tannehill-chiefs-nfl-draft-2012

Not only are the Kansas City Chiefs represented at Ryan Tannehill's pro day at Texas A&M, they have a private workout scheduled with him as well. NFL Draft Scout reports from College Station that Tannehill will work out for the Chiefs, Cleveland Browns and Philadelphia Eagles.

The Chiefs can have 30 pre-draft visits, one of which is Michigan State QB Kirk Cousins. Tannehill appears to just be a workout on his college campus, though he could end up visiting Kansas City, too.

At his pro day today, Tannehill completed 65-of-68 passes with two drops. "Not flawless but a very good day," NFL Draft Scout tweeted.

Tannehill broke his foot in January so this is the first opportunity for teams to see him following the college football season. He missed the Senior Bowl and NFL Combine due to the injury.

The Chiefs are picking 11th. Tannehill could be picked up by the Cleveland Browns at No. 4 or the Miami Dolphins at No. 8.

Bowser
03-29-2012, 11:32 AM
So, since I'm 0-2.....this has probably already been posted. But I don't give a fuck.

http://www.arrowheadpride.com/2012/3/29/2911165/ryan-tannehill-chiefs-nfl-draft-2012

Repost.



And watch us draft like three QB's. Pioli's way of telling us to shut the hell up.

L.A. Chieffan
03-29-2012, 11:33 AM
No way the Chiefs draft this guy. NO WAY IN HELL.

Von Dumbass
03-29-2012, 11:35 AM
Crowd for Tannehill's pro day includes Pete Carroll, Joe Philbin, Brad Childress & reps for t/ Broncos, Bills, Browns, Chiefs, & t/ Saints.

https://twitter.com/#!/JosinaAnderson/status/185394608342171649

jspchief
03-29-2012, 11:45 AM
So we had no scouts there...?

Yeah, but they were checking out Weinke.

The Bad Guy
03-29-2012, 12:03 PM
No way the Chiefs draft this guy. NO WAY IN HELL.

Why? Because Cassel is top 10?

ChiefGator
03-29-2012, 12:05 PM
Why? Because Cassel is top 10?

Because, despite so many people in this thread saying he would be a huge reach at 11, he will be gone before we get a chance to draft.

Von Dumbass
03-29-2012, 12:08 PM
Tannehill said he has private workouts set up in college station with #Eagles #Chiefs and #Browns

https://twitter.com/#!/dpbrugler/status/185407318299643904

BossChief
03-29-2012, 12:12 PM
People need to stop calling guys like Tanehill a reach.

With the new CBA, the financial risk of taking guys like him is gone and if you have potential to be a franchise quarterback you are now a cemented top 15 pick.

Just look at last year.

Chocolate Hog
03-29-2012, 12:13 PM
People need to stop calling guys like Tanehill a reach.

With the new CBA, the financial risk of taking guys like him is gone and if you have potential to be a franchise quarterback you are now a cemented top 15 pick.

Just look at last year.

It's the whole fear of drafting a QB.

ChiefGator
03-29-2012, 12:19 PM
And with the new CBA, missing on a 1st round QB is no more painful than missing on a 1st round WR. And the GAIN for hitting a franchise QB is much greater, since their initial rookie contract will be much less than signing one through free agency.

O.city
03-29-2012, 12:20 PM
I think if he makes it to 11, we will actually take him.

BossChief
03-29-2012, 12:21 PM
Tannehill said he has private workouts set up in college station with #Eagles #Chiefs and #Browns

https://twitter.com/#!/dpbrugler/status/185407318299643904

FTR that would be our second part of the process to drafting him.

We had a private interview with him at the combine.

L.A. Chieffan
03-29-2012, 12:21 PM
Why? Because Cassel is top 10?

Exactly.

But I need to be careful about saying positive things about Chiefs players or I might get banned.

Chiefnj2
03-29-2012, 12:24 PM
People need to stop calling guys like Tanehill a reach.

With the new CBA, the financial risk of taking guys like him is gone and if you have potential to be a franchise quarterback you are now a cemented top 15 pick.

Just look at last year.

Look at last year when teams reached for Ponder and Gabbert?

Coogs
03-29-2012, 12:24 PM
Probably time to repost this link...

http://thebiglead.com/index.php/2011/11/25/ryan-tannehills-fiancee-is-lauren-ufer-a-budding-model/


Tannehill's gal Lauren Ufer!

ChiefGator
03-29-2012, 12:25 PM
Exactly.

But I need to be careful about saying positive things about Chiefs players or I might get banned.

http://files.sharenator.com/custom_1256950366573_banhammer15gq9_This_is_Madness_No_this_is_Sharenator-s340x324-219693-580.jpg

http://files.sharenator.com/custom_1256950366573_banhammer15gq9_This_is_Madness_No_this_is_Sharenator-s340x324-219693-580.jpg

Bewbies
03-29-2012, 12:32 PM
It's the whole fear of drafting a QB.

The hypothetical QB we could take next year has none of the flaws that we know are in the one we might could draft now.

Wash. Rinse. Repeat.

whoman69
03-29-2012, 12:44 PM
People need to stop calling guys like Tanehill a reach.

With the new CBA, the financial risk of taking guys like him is gone and if you have potential to be a franchise quarterback you are now a cemented top 15 pick.

Just look at last year.

It doesn't have anything to do with the financial end. You should have a reasonable right to expect that your first round pick should play. Tannehill is a guy that after 2 years we might be able to see if he can play. He's not a first round talent and is definitely not worth moving up to get.

Nightfyre
03-29-2012, 12:45 PM
It doesn't have anything to do with the financial end. You should have a reasonable right to expect that your first round pick should play. Tannehill is a guy that after 2 years we might be able to see if he can play. He's not a first round talent and is definitely not worth moving up to get.

I definitely disagree with this.

Chocolate Hog
03-29-2012, 12:46 PM
It doesn't have anything to do with the financial end. You should have a reasonable right to expect that your first round pick should play. Tannehill is a guy that after 2 years we might be able to see if he can play. He's not a first round talent and is definitely not worth moving up to get.

Aaron Rodgers says hello.

Bewbies
03-29-2012, 12:47 PM
Aaron Rodgers says hello.

Only on Chiefsplanet do people think you draft a QB because they can start their rookie year. :shake:

DeezNutz
03-29-2012, 12:47 PM
It's the whole fear of drafting a QB.

I think that a first-round QB should be a player who has a long history of playing QB, but that's just me.

However, I would support the decision to draft Tannehill; it's just something that I probably wouldn't do, though we're well positioned to take this chance right now.

Nightfyre
03-29-2012, 12:47 PM
Aaron Rodgers says hello.

Quit procrastinating the mock draft dude! ROFL

Nightfyre
03-29-2012, 12:48 PM
I think that a first-round QB should be a player who has a long history of playing QB, but that's just me.

However, I would support the decision to draft Tannehill; it's just something that I probably wouldn't do, though we're well positioned to take this chance right now.

Oh man.... I agree with the contents of this post!

Bewbies
03-29-2012, 12:50 PM
I think that a first-round QB should be a player who has a long history of playing QB, but that's just me.

However, I would support the decision to draft Tannehill; it's just something that I probably wouldn't do, though we're well positioned to take this chance right now.

Tannehill doesn't fit the Parcells mold of QB that we discussed so much last year--as the reason we would end up drafting Stanzi.

However, there aren't going to be many 4 year starting QB's that have graduated in the future. Andrew Luck is the exception today...

Maybe Pioli is changing that up a bit...?

Either way here in CP none of us knows how the guy interviews, how well he understands the game or any of that. We can only watch highlight film, which is not nearly enough to draft anyone.

Chocolate Hog
03-29-2012, 12:51 PM
Quit procrastinating the mock draft dude! ROFL

I already made my pick lol

DeezNutz
03-29-2012, 12:53 PM
Tannehill doesn't fit the Parcells mold of QB that we discussed so much last year--as the reason we would end up drafting Stanzi.

However, there aren't going to be many 4 year starting QB's that have graduated in the future. Andrew Luck is the exception today...

Maybe Pioli is changing that up a bit...?

Either way here in CP none of us knows how the guy interviews, how well he understands the game or any of that. We can only watch highlight film, which is not nearly enough to draft anyone.

What's the major reason that Cassel sucks shit? He lacks game instincts. Why? He played TE in college.

Tannehill obviously has more collegiate experience at QB, but not by leaps and bounds...

Teams are now smarter about the dire need to get a franchise QB, and this is why players like Tannehill are locks to go in the first and damn near a lock to go in the top 15. The reward demands the risk, but damn there's a lot of risk with this particular player.

Chiefnj2
03-29-2012, 12:56 PM
Drafting Tannehill at 11 isn't any worse than taking Poe, Brockers, Keuchly or even DeCastro.

But he's still a reach and huge gamble.

Mr. Laz
03-29-2012, 12:58 PM
I think if he makes it to 11, we will actually take him.
maybe but only if Pioli really thinks he's the guy ... also depends on Stanzi.

Is Stanzi riding the bench to develop or because they think he sucks?

DeezNutz
03-29-2012, 01:00 PM
Drafting Tannehill at 11 isn't any worse than taking Poe, Brockers, Keuchly or even DeCastro.

But he's still a reach and huge gamble.

Kuechly is on that list only because of our current personnel; he's legit top-15 talent.

BossChief
03-29-2012, 01:02 PM
Look at last year when teams reached for Ponder and Gabbert?

I'm sorry you don't understand that when variables change, so do results.

Guys like Ponder, Gabbert and Tanehill would be reaches if the teams that draft them have to give them 50+ million bucks, but that's not the case any more.

The rules favoring the passing games in today's NFL also make qbs that much more important and worth the minimal risk.

Given how Dalton did last year as a second round n00b, that even pushes guys like that up even further.

SNR
03-29-2012, 01:02 PM
Quit procrastinating the mock draft dude! ROFLI chose a guy who was already picked (through no fault of my own... the name was misspelled on the draft board thus fucking with my page search function). Before I could get his replacement, billay had already made his selection.

Whoever comes after Pest is holding up the works

htismaqe
03-29-2012, 01:04 PM
Aaron Rodgers says hello.

Aaron Rodgers wasn't the 11th overall pick.

He was also sitting behind Brett Favre.

vailpass
03-29-2012, 01:05 PM
I'd like to see Denver get Tannehill.

htismaqe
03-29-2012, 01:07 PM
It's the whole fear of drafting a QB.

It's not fear, it's reason. It's funny to see people compare him to Christian Ponder, who started 3 years in a pro system at FSU.

Nightfyre
03-29-2012, 01:08 PM
Tannehill is in a pro system.

SNR
03-29-2012, 01:08 PM
I'd like to see Denver get Tannehill.They'd need some major stones to make the trade up but they could do it.

Who's your backup right now? Did you guys sign Volek or some guy like that?

SNR
03-29-2012, 01:09 PM
Tannehill is in a pro system.He's a pro system QB as much as Sam Bradford is a pro system QB.

As in, he comes from a pro system yet has no experience doing the things that pro system QBs do.

htismaqe
03-29-2012, 01:09 PM
I think that a first-round QB should be a player who has a long history of playing QB, but that's just me.

However, I would support the decision to draft Tannehill; it's just something that I probably wouldn't do, though we're well positioned to take this chance right now.

I agree with this 100%.

vailpass
03-29-2012, 01:09 PM
They'd need some major stones to make the trade up but they could do it.

Who's your backup right now? Did you guys sign Volek or some guy like that?

Caleb ****ing Hanie. They were talking to Dennis "I carry Big Ben's jock" Dixon a couple days ago but I don't know if anything came of it.

I'd like to see Denver draft a QB to sit and learn behind Manning for the next year or two. Tannehill or some other QB.

htismaqe
03-29-2012, 01:10 PM
Tannehill is in a pro system.

Taking snaps under center <> pro offense.

They used pro sets but it was majority a 1-read offense.

Chiefnj2
03-29-2012, 01:11 PM
I'm sorry you don't understand that when variables change, so do results.

Guys like Ponder, Gabbert and Tanehill would be reaches if the teams that draft them have to give them 50+ million bucks, but that's not the case any more.

The rules favoring the passing games in today's NFL also make qbs that much more important and worth the minimal risk.

Given how Dalton did last year as a second round n00b, that even pushes guys like that up even further.

A reach is a reach. It doesn't matter how much money they get. McCluster was a reach in the 2nd round.

Why are you comparing Tannehill to Dalton, a four year QB?

Chocolate Hog
03-29-2012, 01:11 PM
It's not fear, it's reason. It's funny to see people compare him to Christian Ponder, who started 3 years in a pro system at FSU.

Dude Mike Sherman who was an NFL coach now the OC for the Dolphins was Tannehills coach.

The Bad Guy
03-29-2012, 01:12 PM
Exactly.

But I need to be careful about saying positive things about Chiefs players or I might get banned.

If you really think he's top 10, you should be banned.

SNR
03-29-2012, 01:13 PM
Caleb fucking Hanie.

I'd like to see Denver draft a QB to sit and learn behind Manning for the next year or two. Tannehill or some other QB.I don't know if you've been keeping track of the Kirk Cousins thread, but Cousins is the perfect QB for you guys to draft as long as he's taken at the appropriate spot (no earlier than the 3rd round). He would fill out your roster as either the backup or the 3rd string perfectly.

He even has a Tyler Palko-quality QB in front of him! If Manning gets injured, you can be just like the 2011 Chiefs! Wouldn't that be nice?

vailpass
03-29-2012, 01:14 PM
I don't know if you've been keeping track of the Kirk Cousins thread, but Cousins is the perfect QB for you guys to draft as long as he's taken at the appropriate spot (no earlier than the 3rd round). He would fill out your roster as either the backup or the 3rd string perfectly.

He even has a Tyler Palko-quality QB in front of him! If Manning gets injured, you can be just like the 2011 Chiefs! Wouldn't that be nice?

That is just plain hurtful.
I like Cousins as a late-round pick though.

Chocolate Hog
03-29-2012, 01:14 PM
If we're going on experience then Cam Newton shouldn't have been the #1 overall pick last year.

DeezNutz
03-29-2012, 01:19 PM
If we're going on experience then Cam Newton shouldn't have been the #1 overall pick last year.

Newton was always a QB.

htismaqe
03-29-2012, 01:19 PM
Dude Mike Sherman who was an NFL coach now the OC for the Dolphins was Tannehills coach.

Mike Sherman was also in Green Bay. They didn't run Green Bay's offense at A&M. :shake:

htismaqe
03-29-2012, 01:20 PM
If we're going on experience then Cam Newton shouldn't have been the #1 overall pick last year.

Please. Let's not even begin to compare Newton's measurables to Tannehill's.

Chocolate Hog
03-29-2012, 01:20 PM
Mike Sherman was also in Green Bay. They didn't run Green Bay's offense at A&M. :shake:

How many more excuses are you going to come up with? Jesus Christ.

BossChief
03-29-2012, 01:21 PM
A reach is a reach. It doesn't matter how much money they get. McCluster was a reach in the 2nd round.

Why are you comparing Tannehill to Dalton, a four year QB?

This isn't 2010, guys like Tanehill are gonna be normal picks in the top 15 for now on.

What's so hard to understand about that?

SNR
03-29-2012, 01:22 PM
This isn't 2010, guys like Tanehill are gonna be normal picks in the top 15 for now on.

What's so hard to understand about that?Dunno. Ask chiefzilla. He's the one who thinks this is false.

Chocolate Hog
03-29-2012, 01:23 PM
Newton was always a QB.

Tannehill was a QB all of his life with the exception of 2 years in college. Tannehill has played more games as a QB in division 1 than Cam Newton.

htismaqe
03-29-2012, 01:25 PM
How many more excuses are you going to come up with? Jesus Christ.

ROFL

Chocolate Hog
03-29-2012, 01:25 PM
Please. Let's not even begin to compare Newton's measurables to Tannehill's.

Where did I mention anything of the sort? I'm just pointing out experience isn't the end all be all of drafting a QB.

htismaqe
03-29-2012, 01:25 PM
This isn't 2010, guys like Tanehill are gonna be normal picks in the top 15 for now on.

What's so hard to understand about that?

As more and more of them start their careers the way Blaine Gabbert did, your trend will start to swing the other way...

vailpass
03-29-2012, 01:25 PM
Paralysis of analysis

htismaqe
03-29-2012, 01:26 PM
Where did I mention anything of the sort? I'm just pointing out experience isn't the end all be all of drafting a QB.

Cam Newton had elite - hell, once in a generation - athletic ability. He only had 1 season as a starter and all he did was win the whole thing.

Tannehill isn't even in the same time zone.

DeezNutz
03-29-2012, 01:26 PM
Tannehill was a QB all of his life with the exception of 2 years in college. Tannehill has played more games as a QB in division 1 than Cam Newton.

Most of the posters on CP probably played HS football, so I'm concerned almost exclusively with what he did in college, where he should have been developing and refining his skills.

I simply think that fundamental development at the highest level is tough if not impossible.

Like I said, I would respect, support, and defend Tannehill if we were to draft him. Eventually, we'll have to take a risk.

Chocolate Hog
03-29-2012, 01:27 PM
Cam Newton had elite - hell, once in a generation - athletic ability. He only had 1 season as a starter and all he did was win the whole thing.

Tannehill isn't even in the same time zone.

Hey dumbass where was I comparing ability?

htismaqe
03-29-2012, 01:27 PM
Like I said, I would respect, support, and defend Tannehill if we were to draft him. Eventually, we'll have to take a risk.

This.

htismaqe
03-29-2012, 01:29 PM
Hey dumbass where was I comparing ability?

JFC. We're not stupid.

When the discussion is about Ryan Tannehill's lack of experience as a starter and your comment is "If we're going on experience then Cam Newton shouldn't have been the #1 overall pick last year" the comparison is INFERRED.

Chocolate Hog
03-29-2012, 01:32 PM
JFC. We're not stupid.

When the discussion is about Ryan Tannehill's lack of experience as a starter and your comment is "If we're going on experience then Cam Newton shouldn't have been the #1 overall pick last year" the comparison is INFERRED.

Apparently you are.

I never once said Tannehill has the measurables of Cam Newton. He does however have the measurables for a mid first round pick.


Experience does not disqualify picking a quarterback in the first round.

Mr. Laz
03-29-2012, 01:38 PM
Experience does not disqualify picking a quarterback in the first round.

i think alot of people would disagree.

BossChief
03-29-2012, 01:55 PM
Realistically, it's Tanehill this year or Landry Jones next year.

BossChief
03-29-2012, 02:00 PM
As more and more of them start their careers the way Blaine Gabbert did, your trend will start to swing the other way...

Dalton

philfree
03-29-2012, 02:01 PM
Realistically, it's Tanehill this year or Landry Jones next year.

I've seen them both and Tannehill has alot better pocket presence then Jones. I don't think it's even close.

SNR
03-29-2012, 02:03 PM
Realistically, it's Tanehill this year or Landry Jones next year.That reminds me of this joke:

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/itl44eSdebg" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Pitt Gorilla
03-29-2012, 02:05 PM
Do we have a shot at Tennehill at 11?

qabbaan
03-29-2012, 02:05 PM
Why are chiefs fans so scared of picking a QB? QBs are so important that it's hard to overpay for one. It's either boom or bust. If someone is a franchise QB he is worth #1 overall. If he is not a franchise QB he is a bust no matter if you pick him in the 2nd or the 5th.

Even if Tannehill isn't your favorite, QBs are so important it's worth a shot if he is there.

The Giants won the super bowl last year while last in rushing, did someone say?

Unless you are more than a whole round of draft value off you pick one in our situation, with a dead end QB

RUSH
03-29-2012, 02:11 PM
I don't get how Sanchez got so much love around here but Tannehill gets killed. Has Sanchez showing in the NFL so far scared people off?

He has more starts and experience than Sanchez coming out and mostly everyone here was raving about him in '09, myself included.

What's the difference? One sat on the bench and the other was out there playing. Is there that much value watching the college game from the sideline? NFL I can see but college?

Tannehill was always treated like a qb. He was recruited as a qb, went to all the meetings with the qbs and I'm pretty sure he took reps at practice as a qb but I'm not positive on that last one. I'll look into it. He just happened to play wr on gameday.

He was stuck behind Stephen McGee and J. Johnson (when he was good) his first few years and the coaches wanted to get their best players on the field so they put him at wr since he's a great athlete.

It's one thing to not like him as a prospect because people don't think he's any good but the wr and lack of experience stuff is kinda weak if exceptions are made for others and not him.

Chiefnj2
03-29-2012, 02:11 PM
Dalton

4 year starter who was able to win some big games.

qabbaan
03-29-2012, 02:18 PM
I don't get how Sanchez got so much love around here but Tannehill gets killed. Has Sanchez showing in the NFL so far scared people off?


Sanchez is the Mercury version of Cassel. Priced higher but 99% the same.

SNR
03-29-2012, 02:21 PM
Sanchez is the Mercury version of Cassel. Priced higher but 99% the same.I wish Cassel would go out of business, too

htismaqe
03-29-2012, 02:26 PM
Dalton

He was a 4-year starter.

htismaqe
03-29-2012, 02:28 PM
Why are chiefs fans so scared of picking a QB? QBs are so important that it's hard to overpay for one. It's either boom or bust. If someone is a franchise QB he is worth #1 overall. If he is not a franchise QB he is a bust no matter if you pick him in the 2nd or the 5th.

Even if Tannehill isn't your favorite, QBs are so important it's worth a shot if he is there.

The Giants won the super bowl last year while last in rushing, did someone say?

Unless you are more than a whole round of draft value off you pick one in our situation, with a dead end QB

I'm not scared of picking a QB at all.

If they take Tannehill, I'll support the move and hope he does well. The need at QB is EXTREME and is going to require some level of risk.

That being said, I think Tannehill's bust potential is EXTREMELY high and don't see him being a success in KC under nearly any circumstance. So I personally wouldn't draft him if I were the GM.

L.A. Chieffan
03-29-2012, 02:29 PM
If you really think he's top 10, you should be banned.

If your not a Chiefs fan you should be banned

DaWolf
03-29-2012, 02:31 PM
If only this were 2004, and Roethlisberger were sitting there for us at 11...

O.city
03-29-2012, 02:47 PM
IMO, the good thing about Tannehill is that he doesn't seem to need any mechanical changes.

Some footwork maybe, which damn near all college qb's need footwork changes.

He has a good throwing motion, seemed to be accurate.

If he is there at 11, take him.

I'm not comparing them at all, but what has Rothlisbergers scout sheet coming out?

Bewbies
03-29-2012, 02:49 PM
If only this were 2004, and Roethlisberger were sitting there for us at 11...

I just hope we don't look back in 2020 and say "If only this was 2012 and Ryan Tannehill was sitting there at 11."

Hell, pick a year. If only Aaron Rodgers were there, or Drew Brees....We've passed on all of em not named Manning at some point it seems like.

O.city
03-29-2012, 02:50 PM
Guys, I just don't think he makes it to 11. The run on qbs is pretty insane right now.

Bewbies
03-29-2012, 02:54 PM
Guys, I just don't think he makes it to 11. The run on qbs is pretty insane right now.

Not for us. We don't need no stinking QB's.

O.city
03-29-2012, 02:56 PM
The Chiefs talked to him at the combine and are at his proday. I think they are even bringing him in for a visit.


I think we are interested. Just gotta wait and see.

whoman69
03-29-2012, 02:59 PM
Cam Newton had elite - hell, once in a generation - athletic ability. He only had 1 season as a starter and all he did was win the whole thing.

Tannehill isn't even in the same time zone.

Plus he won a national championship as a juco.

Chocolate Hog
03-29-2012, 03:11 PM
Tannehill being a bust wouldn't set this franchise back 10 years.

Detoxing
03-29-2012, 03:12 PM
The Chiefs talked to him at the combine and are at his proday. I think they are even bringing him in for a visit.


I think we are interested. Just gotta wait and see.

Well he's not gonna fall to us, and I doubt the chiefs will give up what it takes to move up to #4. However, if he falls to #7, I can see the Chiefs POSSIBLY jumping Miami for him. I think if he falls past Miami, then the Seahags will likely jump us to get him.

mnchiefsguy
03-29-2012, 03:22 PM
Well he's not gonna fall to us, and I doubt the chiefs will give up what it takes to move up to #4. However, if he falls to #7, I can see the Chiefs POSSIBLY jumping Miami for him. I think if he falls past Miami, then the Seahags will likely jump us to get him.

Seahawks signed Matt Flynn though, so I think they would pass given that they now have a qb. They might take him if he fell into their lap, but I don't see Seattle sacrificing draft picks to move up and get him.

Chiefaholic
03-29-2012, 04:26 PM
Browns | Considering Ryan Tannehill with first pick
Thu, 29 Mar 2012 13:32:43 -0700

The Cleveland Browns are considering the possibility of selecting Texas A&M QB Ryan Tannehill with the fourth overall pick in the 2012 NFL Draft.



Read more: http://www.kffl.com/hotw/nfl#ixzz1qXzi12cm

BossChief
03-29-2012, 04:35 PM
4 year starter who was able to win some big games.

He was a 4-year starter.
He was a second round pick that played like an early first.

My point was for every Ponder or Gabbert...there is a Dalton to weigh things back in the favor of taking qbs higher than before the financial and cap ramifications of missing on a qb high were so much greater.

They are having a big special on his pro day on nfln right now.

Mayock is sucking him off right now in a 1 on 1 interview

Chocolate Hog
03-29-2012, 04:39 PM
That would be bullshit if Cleveland drafted him at 4.

BossChief
03-29-2012, 04:48 PM
I don't think there is a chance Holmgren takes Tanehill at 4.

vailpass
03-29-2012, 04:50 PM
I don't think there is a chance Holmgren takes Tanehill at 4.

They can't throw, catch, or run. Why wouldn't they start with a QB?

DeezNutz
03-29-2012, 04:54 PM
If the landscape has changed so drastically that a player like Tannehill is going #4 overall--and it's really not a terrible plan in a lot of ways--the Chiefs are in a really tough situation.

Barring an aggressive trade based on exceptional scouting of another team's young back-up, we'll have to luck into a franchise QB, plain and simple.

SB plan in KC? Standing around, holding a lightning rod, praying for rain.

Chocolate Hog
03-29-2012, 04:59 PM
Scheftner was saying the Rams are taking offers for the 6th pick if you think Tannehill is a franchise QB and the Dolphins want him you make the trade.

BossChief
03-29-2012, 05:22 PM
Moving to 6 would cost a second rounder.

According to the draft value chart, we could move to 4 with a second rounder, but qbs always cost more and the new value is different due to lacking financial risk so with those factors, I'd think a second is close to what it would take.

To me, that's a move that has to be made.

If we don't, how are we supposed to make a jump from the 20s to the top ten next year?

If we don't draft Tanehill, we will be talking this time next year about how disapointing it would be to draft Landry Jones.

htismaqe
03-29-2012, 05:25 PM
He was a second round pick that played like an early first.

My point was for every Ponder or Gabbert...there is a Dalton to weigh things back in the favor of taking qbs higher than before the financial and cap ramifications of missing on a qb high were so much greater.

They are having a big special on his pro day on nfln right now.

Mayock is sucking him off right now in a 1 on 1 interview

Actually Ponder completed nearly 70% of his passes as a junior and hurt his draft stock his senior year.

htismaqe
03-29-2012, 05:27 PM
Moving to 6 would cost a second rounder.

According to the draft value chart, we could move to 4 with a second rounder, but qbs always cost more and the new value is different due to lacking financial risk so with those factors, I'd think a second is close to what it would take.

To me, that's a move that has to be made.

If we don't, how are we supposed to make a jump from the 20s to the top ten next year?

If we don't draft Tanehill, we will be talking this time next year about how disapointing it would be to draft Landry Jones.

It's going to be disappointing regardless. Scott Pioli isn't going to trade his 2nd round pick like that. It's contrary to his nature.

Fruit Ninja
03-29-2012, 05:29 PM
If Tann is there at 11 and you dont get some crazy trade offer, then you take him. Dont trade up for him. I think he will be there at 11.

BossChief
03-29-2012, 05:33 PM
Mayock said that he went back and watched every throw Tanehill made and loved all of them except his deep in routes.
Big arm
Great decisions
Smart
Accurate

Said those are common place to have difficulty with for young passage.

He also said he endorses him as a top five pick.

BossChief
03-29-2012, 05:38 PM
For those that DON'T want him at 11...

Without saying inexperience, why don't you think he would be worth the pick?

Mr. Laz
03-29-2012, 05:50 PM
For those that DON'T want him at 11...

Without saying inexperience, why don't you think he would be worth the pick?
you can't just eliminate inexperience, you have to take into account everything.

I'm ok if they take Tannehill at 11 but i will also understand why someone wouldn't take him.

The mental part of the game is HUGE at the NFL level.

Tannehill's upside is huge as well.

bricks
03-29-2012, 05:54 PM
For those that DON'T want him at 11...

Without saying inexperience, why don't you think he would be worth the pick?

No coaching.

We don't have a coach who specializes in QBs or can take Tannehill under his wing and develop his game to another level. He's raw and he needs that at this point forward. KC doesn't give Tannehill what he needs and he isn't exactly a polished QB prospect which is what the Chiefs need due to their lack of coaching.

It's not that I don't like Tannehill, I just don't think he and KC are a right mix.

Mr. Laz
03-29-2012, 05:56 PM
No coaching.

We don't have a coach who specializes in QBs or can take Tannehill under his wing and develop his game to another level. He's raw and he needs that at this point forward. KC doesn't give Tannehill what he needs and he isn't exactly a polished QB prospect which is what the Chiefs need due to their lack of coaching.

It's not that I don't like Tannehill, I just don't think he and KC are a right mix.
Jim Zorn?

unless you're saying that any team with a defensive HC should ever draft a QB. :spock:

BossChief
03-29-2012, 06:02 PM
How would Jim Zorn NOT be considered a good fit as a coach of a player exactly like Tanehill?

He has a long history of playing in a west coast short to intermediate passing game and the quarterbacks he has coached have loved him and played their best with him as their position coach. Obviously, I don't count Cassel.

Bewbies
03-29-2012, 06:05 PM
What's the difference in the franchise if you take DeCastro and he becomes a HOF'er or you take Tannehill and he is an epic bust.

I'd say in terms on w/l none.

Bewbies
03-29-2012, 06:06 PM
Mayock said that he went back and watched every throw Tanehill made and loved all of them except his deep in routes.
Big arm
Great decisions
Smart
Accurate

Said those are common place to have difficulty with for young passage.

He also said he endorses him as a top five pick.

Mayock is retarded. The guy is 2nd or 3rd round talent. /CP

BossChief
03-29-2012, 06:06 PM
you can't just eliminate inexperience, you have to take into account everything.

I'm ok if they take Tannehill at 11 but i will also understand why someone wouldn't take him.

The mental part of the game is HUGE at the NFL level.

Tannehill's upside is huge as well.

I'm not trying to throw out inexperience...I'm trying to see the reasons other than that of why he isn't a top ten pick quarterback and why people don't think he is worth that high of a pick.

That's all.

Frosty
03-29-2012, 06:11 PM
SB plan in KC? Standing around, holding a lightning rod, praying for rain.

It's the Patriots Way!

Chiefnj2
03-29-2012, 06:17 PM
I'm not trying to throw out inexperience...I'm trying to see the reasons other than that of why he isn't a top ten pick quarterback and why people don't think he is worth that high of a pick.

That's all.

You want legitimate reasons?

1. He choked in big games.
2. His accuracy dropped considerably when playing 1-7 points down. (For comparison Tannehill was 53% and Weeden 75%).
3. 3rd and long accuracy (7 yards+) was around 49% (Weeden 63%).
4. Not that good at reading D's.
5. Compared to other Big 12 QB's all of his stats were middle of the pack. When compared to his peers against the most similar competition, he didn't stand out.
6. His long ball accuracy is poor.

whoman69
03-29-2012, 06:43 PM
For those that DON'T want him at 11...

Without saying inexperience, why don't you think he would be worth the pick?

small hand, trouble with fumbles
blew big leads
threw multiple interceptions against best opponents
needs to to learn the mental necessities of the position
will need a lot of grooming
lacks anticipation and poise
ball tends to sail
sometimes throws off back foot when rushed
inconsistent release
does not throw over the top
does not recognize coverages
needs to do better picking up blitzes and pressure
stares down receivers
needs to learn to slide
slight build, durability
lacks touch on shorter routes
doesn't always put the ball where receivers can make a play

All that to me sounds like Matt Cassel with a better arm. I'm also not convinced the Big 12 has a good rep for playing defense.

Chocolate Hog
03-29-2012, 06:47 PM
What's the difference in the franchise if you take DeCastro and he becomes a HOF'er or you take Tannehill and he is an epic bust.

I'd say in terms on w/l none.

You can run the ball more with decastro / True fans

philfree
03-29-2012, 06:58 PM
Oh fuck it! If he actually makes it to our pick we should just pass and draft a gaurd. This team has been so fucking good with out a franchise QB the last several decades why would we want to take a risk to try and find one now? What for? We have Matt Cassel and Brady Quinn and Quinn was a 1st round pick too so we should be set. Dynasty here we come!

Mr_Tomahawk
03-29-2012, 10:13 PM
Evan Silva ‏ @evansilva Close
Knocking Tannehill's "19 starts" = trying too hard. Cam started 14. Sanchez 16. Flacco, Rodgers 22. Weeden is so "NFL ready" but started 26.

:)

JoeyChuckles
03-29-2012, 10:18 PM
I'm told that this team has less holes then any year previously, and that instead of drafting out of priority, we will be drafting to develop. Maybe this is the best year to take a risk on a quarterback in the first?

Dave Lane
03-29-2012, 10:24 PM
Mayock is retarded. The guy is 2nd or 3rd round talent. /CP

The eyeball test in watching his games is hard to ignore. I'm fine if they think he is legit and draft him, my opinion is he's very likely to bust.

Bewbies
03-29-2012, 10:27 PM
The eyeball test in watching his games is hard to ignore. I'm fine if they think he is legit and draft him, my opinion is he's very likely to bust.

GM's hope to hit on 1/3 of picks. All players you draft are likely to bust...

bricks
03-29-2012, 10:27 PM
Jim Zorn?

unless you're saying that any team with a defensive HC should ever draft a QB. :spock:

I'd rather it be the head coach that heavily emphasizes on the position more than anything else and whose team simply revolves around offense ONLY because it simply means there is more involvement with the player. That's how I look at it.

We don't have that situation here. Crennel is a defensive specialist and he will be more involved with the defense more than anything. It's not a good fit. I don't think Tannehill will flourish and grow to full potential that way. But, I could be wrong.

chiefzilla1501
03-29-2012, 10:31 PM
I'm not trying to throw out inexperience...I'm trying to see the reasons other than that of why he isn't a top ten pick quarterback and why people don't think he is worth that high of a pick.

That's all.

As I've said before, if you don't have the experience or the track record, you better have elite athleticism or arm strength.

Tannehill has neither. He has a good attitude, and above average arm strength and athleticism. He's not going to stretch defenses out with his mobility like Cam would. He's not going to grow into his arm as Stafford did.

The reason people are scared of him is that in most draft classes, he's barely a first round pick. Because apart from the #1 and #2 pick, it falls to complete shit, he's being talked about as a top 5 pick.

BIG K
03-29-2012, 10:55 PM
GM's hope to hit on 1/3 of picks. All players you draft are likely to bust...

How many first round picks have the Chiefs had in the last ten or forty years that were considered busts? I admit outright, that I have not done any homework on the QB's avail in next years draft. There are alot of people here who have stated next year they should try to draft a QB.

With the 'hopeful' healthy return of some pretty good players, and the additions the Chiefs have made thus far in FA, I find it remote that the Chiefs will have a better pick next year (better than the 11th pick) at grabbing a good QB.

Not saying Tan should be the pick but, I would have absolutely no problem if they picked QB at #11. It would at least be an attempt to find a solution long term at QB. It would make more sense than drafting a guard as some here has stated....

I really do not care where Tan or any other prospect for QB sits on people's draft boards. Just saying, if they took QB, I would be okay with it. Why not? It's a gamble either way....

chiefzilla1501
03-29-2012, 11:12 PM
How many first round picks have the Chiefs had in the last ten or forty years that were considered busts? I admit outright, that I have not done any homework on the QB's avail in next years draft. There are alot of people here who have stated next year they should try to draft a QB.

With the 'hopeful' healthy return of some pretty good players, and the additions the Chiefs have made thus far in FA, I find it remote that the Chiefs will have a better pick next year (better than the 11th pick) at grabbing a good QB.

Not saying Tan should be the pick but, I would have absolutely no problem if they picked QB at #11. It would at least be an attempt to find a solution long term at QB. It would make more sense than drafting a guard as some here has stated....

I really do not care where Tan or any other prospect for QB sits on people's draft boards. Just saying, if they took QB, I would be okay with it. Why not? It's a gamble either way....

If you had any confidence that if the Chiefs tried him out and, if he performed poorly in practice in 2012, the Chiefs wouldn't mind gambling on another QB in the next 2-3 years in the first round... then yes.

But the fact is that there is a really, really small history of QBs who were drafted in the first round and had first round QB competition in the 3 years that followed. If the Chiefs draft Tannehill, they're making at least a 3-year commitment to him. I'd rather trade a lot to get the right QB than trade nothing to get a QB I thought was a longshot.

aturnis
03-29-2012, 11:27 PM
You want legitimate reasons?

1. He choked in big games.
2. His accuracy dropped considerably when playing 1-7 points down. (For comparison Tannehill was 53% and Weeden 75%).
3. 3rd and long accuracy (7 yards+) was around 49% (Weeden 63%).
4. Not that good at reading D's.
5. Compared to other Big 12 QB's all of his stats were middle of the pack. When compared to his peers against the most similar competition, he didn't stand out.
6. His long ball accuracy is poor.

7. He loves throwing into double coverage.

8. How many games did he win against teams with winning records this year.

Chiefnj2
03-30-2012, 05:36 AM
Evan Silva ‏ @evansilva Close
Knocking Tannehill's "19 starts" = trying too hard. Cam started 14. Sanchez 16. Flacco, Rodgers 22. Weeden is so "NFL ready" but started 26.

:)

Why are junior college starts never counted? I'm not sure Sanchez should be the poster boy for "Less than 20 starts is Okay".

Fruit Ninja
03-30-2012, 05:41 AM
Why are junior college starts never counted? I'm not sure Sanchez should be the poster boy for "Less than 20 starts is Okay".

Probably, but with him QB'ing in the NFL, he's won more play off games then the Chiefs have in like 30 years. lol

Id love nothing more then the Chiefs to win a SB, but right now, i just want to know what it feels like to win a play off game. Im not asking for that much. lol

Dave Lane
03-30-2012, 06:51 AM
GM's hope to hit on 1/3 of picks. All players you draft are likely to bust...

I think Tannehill is more like 90% bust.

Mr_Tomahawk
03-30-2012, 06:53 AM
I hope we pick him so people bitch about reaching for him in the 1st...

Dave Lane
03-30-2012, 06:58 AM
There's 2-3 other QBs I'd rather have and personally I think Stanzi > Tannehill.

htismaqe
03-30-2012, 07:20 AM
you can't just eliminate inexperience, you have to take into account everything.

I'm ok if they take Tannehill at 11 but i will also understand why someone wouldn't take him.

The mental part of the game is HUGE at the NFL level.

Tannehill's upside is huge as well.

Laz, the voice of reason.

And yes, I'm absolutely sincere. :)

htismaqe
03-30-2012, 07:20 AM
I hope we pick him so people bitch about reaching for him in the 1st...

:shake:

htismaqe
03-30-2012, 07:21 AM
How would Jim Zorn NOT be considered a good fit as a coach of a player exactly like Tanehill?

He has a long history of playing in a west coast short to intermediate passing game and the quarterbacks he has coached have loved him and played their best with him as their position coach. Obviously, I don't count Cassel.

You can't just throw out Cassel. It's a flaming pile of dog poo on Zorn's resume. He didn't exactly "fix" Jason Campbell either and one could argue Campbell's BEST games were in Oakland, while Zorn was in Kansas City.

htismaqe
03-30-2012, 07:24 AM
What's the difference in the franchise if you take DeCastro and he becomes a HOF'er or you take Tannehill and he is an epic bust.

I'd say in terms on w/l none.

In terms of regular season wins, a HoF DeCastro wins you a BUNCH more games by default. By definition, an "epic bust" Tannehill is going to be a train wreck that loses and loses a lot.

Now if you want to talk playoffs, I absolutely agree. Even a mediocre Tannehill has a better chance of winning a playoff game than a HoF DeCastro if someone like Cassel or Quinn is the QB...

durtyrute
03-30-2012, 07:25 AM
We already have a qb that will have sat for two years before he gets a shot, why draft another one without giving the first one a chance?

htismaqe
03-30-2012, 07:26 AM
Evan Silva ‏ @evansilva Close
Knocking Tannehill's "19 starts" = trying too hard. Cam started 14. Sanchez 16. Flacco, Rodgers 22. Weeden is so "NFL ready" but started 26.

:)

Again, there is ZERO comparison between Tannehill and Cam Newton.

If you REALLY want to count Sanchez, that's perfect. Because he's the poster child for not having enough college experience.

Chiefnj2
03-30-2012, 07:35 AM
IMO, there are only 5 blue chip prospects in this years draft - Griffin, Luck, Kalil, Claiborne and Richardson. After that, you have clear + and - for every other prospect. You have guys who you would prefer if they stayed another year (Tannehill and Brockers). Players who are really good at their position, but the position isn't traditionally viewed as having great value (Keuchly and DeCastro) and your classic workout warrior (Poe).

On the day of the draft unless KC trades back and gets fantastic value 80% of the fan base will question the first round pick. After 24 hours 60% of the 80% will have rationalized the pick because hope springs eternal every April in Arrowhead.

philfree
03-30-2012, 07:39 AM
IMO, there are only 5 blue chip prospects in this years draft - Griffin, Luck, Kalil, Claiborne and Richardson. After that, you have clear + and - for every other prospect. You have guys who you would prefer if they stayed another year (Tannehill and Brockers). Players who are really good at their position, but the position isn't traditionally viewed as having great value (Keuchly and DeCastro) and your classic workout warrior (Poe).

On the day of the draft unless KC trades back and gets fantastic value 80% of the fan base will question the first round pick. After 24 hours 60% of the 80% will have rationalized the pick because hope springs eternal every April in Arrowhead.

Six if you add in Blackmon.

Chiefnj2
03-30-2012, 07:45 AM
Six if you add in Blackmon.

I'm on the fence with Blackmon. Great college receiver but he doesn't have the size and speed of a megatron and he is known for dropping some balls.

jspchief
03-30-2012, 07:52 AM
Chiefs fans want a sure thing. Which means probably drafting in the top 5. We just had 3 chances to do that, and Chiefs fans were pitching a fit over how bad the team was.

It's this ridiculous circular logic. They want to get a QB to be great, but they don't want to be bad enough to get a great QB, and they don't want to taking a chance on a QB taken in spot anywhere other than when they're terrible.

Where the fuck are we going to get a QB?

Outside of being one of the worst few teams in the league, the Chiefs are going to have to draft a guy that has a few blemishes.

Chiefnj2
03-30-2012, 07:58 AM
Chiefs fans want a sure thing. Which means probably drafting in the top 5. We just had 3 chances to do that, and Chiefs fans were pitching a fit over how bad the team was.

It's this ridiculous circular logic. They want to get a QB to be great, but they don't want to be bad enough to get a great QB, and they don't want to taking a chance on a QB taken in spot anywhere other than when they're terrible.

Where the **** are we going to get a QB?

Outside of being one of the worst few teams in the league, the Chiefs are going to have to draft a guy that has a few blemishes.

IMHO, Tannehill has more blemishes than most 1st round prospects, and some major ones at that. Playing poorly in crunch time is big to me.

Deberg_1990
03-30-2012, 08:00 AM
Since the Chiefs dont really have any or very few major holes, maybe they do take a chance on Tannehill if hes there? They are essentially drafting for depth this year.

Shag
03-30-2012, 08:03 AM
If you had any confidence that if the Chiefs tried him out and, if he performed poorly in practice in 2012, the Chiefs wouldn't mind gambling on another QB in the next 2-3 years in the first round... then yes.

But the fact is that there is a really, really small history of QBs who were drafted in the first round and had first round QB competition in the 3 years that followed. If the Chiefs draft Tannehill, they're making at least a 3-year commitment to him. I'd rather trade a lot to get the right QB than trade nothing to get a QB I thought was a longshot.

I think most people would prefer that, but it's not an option this year. Next year, there's a very good chance our draft position will be worse, and Pioli has never given any indication he's willing to make the big, risky trade. The Chiefs are in a shitty spot here - a solid, improving team, and no real option to get a viable QB. If they don't draft Tannehill, the future of QB on this team is likely Cassel, a later-round QB, or some other team's castoff.

That doesn't mean you have to draft Tannehill, but it does exemplify how the Cassel experiment has fucked this team...

jspchief
03-30-2012, 08:09 AM
IMHO, Tannehill has more blemishes than most 1st round prospects, and some major ones at that. Playing poorly in crunch time is big to me.

So do you take a risk on a guy with a higher ceiling, or do you play it safe and get Joe Flacco, Brady Quinn, Kyle Boller, Josh Freeman?

Because that's what we're looking at. It's going to be a risk, or you're going to get a middle of the road QB, historically.

Chiefnj2
03-30-2012, 08:10 AM
So do you take a risk on a guy with a higher ceiling, or do you play it safe and get Joe Flacco, Brady Quinn, Kyle Boller, Josh Freeman?

Because that's what we're looking at. It's going to be a risk, or you're going to get a middle of the road QB, historically.

Why does Tannehill have a higher ceiling than Flacco or Freeman?

jspchief
03-30-2012, 08:15 AM
Why does Tannehill have a higher ceiling than Flacco or Freeman?

Ask the GM that's going to select him 10+ picks higher.

This isn't the first year the QB class has been shallow. Vanilla QB prospects aren't going in the top 10. There's a reason Tannehill is getting top 10 consideration beyond just "its a weak QB year".

philfree
03-30-2012, 08:17 AM
More fuel to the fire.

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=espn:7751018

The pro day workout of Texas A&M QB Ryan Tannehill -- which took place Thursday in College Station, Texas -- was one of the most anticipated of the predraft process, given that Tannehill has continued to move up the board despite a stress fracture in his right foot that required surgery in January and prevented him from participating in the Senior Bowl, the NFL combine and the Aggies' regularly scheduled pro day earlier this month.



There were 22 NFL teams represented in the crowd of onlookers, including Seattle Seahawks coach Pete Carroll and general manager John Schneider, Miami Dolphins coach Joe Philbin and general manager Jeff Ireland, Minnesota Vikings coach Brad Childress and several personnel staffers from the Cleveland Browns. Everyone saw a workout that answered plenty of questions.




[+] Enlarge
Thomas Campbell/US PresswireThe talent in Ryan Tannehill's arm is impressive, and he's only just scratching the surface of his potential.

Tannehill's 40-yard dash was the warmup act before his throwing session, and I clocked him at 4.61 seconds on my stopwatch. About a dozen other scouts I surveyed had him anywhere between 4.59 and 4.63, and upon seeing his time Tannehill decided one attempt was enough.



While it doesn't mean much in the long run and is the first and last time he'll run for scouts, the time is at least a good indication that Tannehill has recovered fully from the foot surgery and is back at full strength. And for some perspective, that 4.61 bests the 4.67 posted by Stanford QB Andrew Luck at the combine (although Tannehill is an inch shorter and 13 pounds lighter).



Then it was on to the main attraction, and Tannehill's passing session included 65 scripted throws. I counted only three passes hat hit the ground, one that was flat-out dropped, a deep ball that Aggies WR Jeff Fuller should have tracked down but did not, and a third that Tannehill simply missed. That's pretty much what we saw in the workouts of Luck and Baylor's Robert Griffin III, who missed only one and two throws, respectively.



Tannehill's mechanics are much-improved, and I was impressed with his overall motion. His upper and lower body were aligned, he was much more confident and deliberate with his footwork than what I saw on tape during the season, and he did a nice job transferring his weight from front to back.



Where that's concerned, quarterback Chris Weinke -- who has been working with Tannehill since the end of the season -- said something interesting when I caught up with him following the workout. Weinke contends that there was a silver lining to Tannehill's injury, because coming back slowly allowed them to work on his motion in stages rather than trying to tweak everything at once.



Tannehill was able to concentrate only on his footwork for a time, getting his feet in sync with his upper body, then being efficient at the top of his drop, and then transferring his weight before releasing the ball. When you talk about quarterback mechanics the fewer moving parts you have -- the more aligned and in unison everything is -- the less chance there is for error. Some coaches talk about having a compact motion and being able to throw in a phone booth, and Tannehill showed that.



He has a strong arm and a strong base, and he's learning to maximize those tools. His back foot remained on the ground until he was releasing the ball, which allowed his talented arm to shine through, and Tannehill is special in that regard. The effortlessness of his motion was impressive, yet the ball exploded off his hand with velocity and plenty of RPMs, which is what allows it to cut through the wind and drive downfield.



Tannehill did a good job on speed outs, comebacks and deep outs, showing anticipation, sideline awareness and confidence in the spot he was throwing to, all of which translates to good timing on those routes. He also seemed more confident throwing over the middle during his workout than on film, albeit against air with no defenders on the field.



Finally, while Tannehill's tape shows some inconsistency on the deep ball with a tendency to misjudge the trajectory at times and put too much air under it at times and drive it too much on a line at others, he seemed to find a rhythm and comfort level in that area of the workout as well. Again, it's not even a simulated game situation, but Tannehill was accurate with the deep ball and uncorked some very impressive throws.



Add all that to the athletic ability the former wide receiver showed during his workout and on tape, and the intangibles everyone who has spent even a minute with Tannehill raves about, and it's easy to see why he's rocketing up the board. There are those who wonder how a quarterback whose team squandered four double-digit second-half leads, and whose completion percentage fell off from 65.0 as a junior to 61.6 as a senior, could rise so quickly, but the tape tells the story.



I charted every throw Tannehill made in 2011, and his decision-making was better than many give him credit for. By my count, he was victimized by 64 drops during the season, which averages out to about five per game, and that helped account for the drop in his completion percentage. The bottom line is that Tannehill is just scratching the surface of his talent, showing improvement in his mechanics and giving NFL teams plenty to be excited about.



The big picture
Tannehill has worked his way into the top 10 on my overall board, and there is plenty of intrigue surrounding the teams that could potentially select him.



The Browns, at No. 4 overall, are more or less the swing point in the first round, and what they do with their pick will play a huge role in how things trickle down the board. Cleveland is being tight-lipped about its intentions, but with Tannehill likely to be available the Browns will face a tough decision. They could be forced to choose between a potential franchise quarterback and three elite players -- Oklahoma State WR Justin Blackmon, LSU CB Morris Claiborne, Alabama RB Trent Richardson -- who all fit positions of need.



All are realistic possibilities, but the real question becomes whether Cleveland wants to find help for current QB Colt McCoy or bring in Tannehill and allow him a year to develop. In the end, the answer could have less to do with Tannehill and how the Browns feel about some of the second-tier quarterbacks on the board.



Cleveland also picks 22nd overall, and at that point will likely have its choice from a group that includes Oklahoma State's Brandon Weeden, Michigan State's Kirk Cousins and Arizona's Nick Foles, all of whom belong in the top 40 picks. Should the Browns get comfortable with one of those players, they could pass on Tannehill in favor of an elite prospect and target their favorite from the second tier at No. 22, even if it is 10 or 12 picks higher than he's expected to go.



And with the Dolphins being the next logical fit for Tannehill at No. 8, another possibility -- which is more speculation than anything -- is the Browns passing on him with the fourth pick, then using that 22nd pick to make a deal with the Jacksonville Jaguars to move to No. 7 and get Tannehill there. A move like that would probably mean Cleveland offering up something in the ballpark of the No. 22 pick this year paired with next year's first-rounder, or No. 22 and a combination of second-rounders from this year and next.



Finally, let's throw a little more craziness into the mix and consider the possibility that the Seahawks are also interested. After all, both the team's coach and GM were in attendance. Perhaps they were simply taking care of their due diligence in case Tannehill should fall to them at No. 12 and they have a decision to make, but they have made it known they think highly of Tannehill, and Schneider did spend eight years in Green Bay learning that you can never have enough good quarterbacks.



Yes, the Seahawks signed Matt Flynn, but he has only two career starts to his credit. Perhaps the Seahawks could move into the top seven ahead of Miami, bring in Tannehill and let him develop behind Flynn, then assess the situation. They could choose the quarterback who turns out better, and the worst-case scenario could be ending up with two good quarterbacks, one of whom could be traded for additional draft picks.



Given how quickly Tannehill is rising and his impressive potential, you have to consider all the possibilities.

Chiefnj2
03-30-2012, 08:17 AM
Ask the GM that's going to select him 10+ picks higher.



That remains to be seen. It also doesn't mean it is the correct decision.

Coogs
03-30-2012, 08:17 AM
Why does Tannehill have a higher ceiling than Flacco or Freeman?

Charlie Casserly:
In fact, I like Tannehill more than some first-round quarterbacks taken during this period. I think he displays better decision-making and accuracy than Josh Freeman, more experience at a high level than Joe Flacco, a stronger arm than Christian Ponder and more precision than Jake Locker.


I don't have a link to this, but quoted it from the Cleveland Browns DraftBrew forum.

philfree
03-30-2012, 08:19 AM
I don't have a link to this, but quoted it from the Cleveland Browns DraftBrew forum.

I heard him say pretty much all that on the NFL Network after Tannehill's workout yesterday.