Tannehill on Gruden QB Camp

[NIUhuskies]

Tannehill on Gruden QB Camp...pretty interesting to watch. Kid seems to have NFL schemes down and looks ready. Seems like Gruden likes him a lot

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=espn:7821387

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/kOWNjphb7M0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[Johnny Vegas]

everyone liked Jamracus Russell too

[NIUhuskies]

everyone liked Jamracus Russell too

pretty sure Jamarcus Russel couldnt go up on the white board and do an addition problem let along draw route progressions...Al Davis was just an idiot

[Sofa King]

everyone liked Jamracus Russell too

LMAO

No. No they didn't. Everyone just knew Al Davis was a dumbass.

[RealSNR]

Does ANYBODY have the full 30 minute show they did on Tannehill?

[beach tribe]

I like how the monitor in the background says "checkdown" in the video before you play it.

[Brock]

everyone liked Jamracus Russell too

You don't really pay much attention to things do you?

[nychief]

I like these segments, but its funny Gruden does these young QB segments considering he was most successful with old dicks Gannon and Johnson.

[Johnny Vegas]

LMAO

No. No they didn't. Everyone just knew Al Davis was a dumbass.

let me be more specific. The MEDIA loved Jamarcus Russell, too.

[tmw4h5]

I could really see Tannehill falling to us at 11 and then us trading with Cleveland to move back to 22 and grab next year's first.

Anybody else, or am I just crazy?

[beach tribe]

He looks really good. Been watching LOTS of QB vids. He's just on a different level than Weeden IMO.

[BossChief]

Does ANYBODY have the full 30 minute show they did on Tannehill?

It's weird.

It's not supposed to air till 8am the day of the draft.

[BryanBusby]

let me be more specific. The MEDIA loved Jamarcus Russell, too.
Who gives a fuck what the media thought of Russel? Then again, what the fuck does Jamarcus Russel have to do with shit?

[Johnny Vegas]

Who gives a fuck what the media thought of Russel? Then again, what the fuck does Jamarcus Russel have to do with shit?

hype

[Crush]

Who gives a fuck what the media thought of Russel? Then again, what the fuck does Jamarcus Russel have to do with shit?

Because drafting a QB is too scary. We need to draft a guard. /dumbass truefan

[BryanBusby]

jfc :facepalm:

[Johnny Vegas]

you guys are too fuckin easy. take a break from CP. Its long over due.

[BryanBusby]

We're mocking the hell out of you because you're never going to get it.

[Johnny Vegas]

We're mocking the hell out of you because you're never going to get it.

it only works if I get pissed. I'm not exactly pissed off over here. In fact I'm having fun trolling like a motherfucker here.

[BryanBusby]

ITT: I play off my dumbass train of thought as trolling.

[saphojunkie]

I could really see Tannehill falling to us at 11 and then us trading with Cleveland to move back to 22 and grab next year's first.

Anybody else, or am I just crazy?

I can see that, yeah. No idea who we pick there, though.

[Johnny Vegas]

ITT: I play off my dumbass train of thought as trolling.

you're all a bunch of dumbasses then. What team has 4 fucking QBs? Trade the fuck down. Thats how I see it. Tannehill will go to Miami. Then what? Draft Weeden with the 11th? fuckin stupid.

[tk13]

He looks really good. Been watching LOTS of QB vids. He's just on a different level than Weeden IMO.

When they went head to head:

Tannehill: 28-47 309 yds, 2 TD/3 INT
Weeden: 47-60 438 yds, 3 TD/0 INT

Tannehill did have a 65 yard rushing TD though.

[tmw4h5]

At 22, we could have a few options. I honestly think Poe will fall that far and he might be worth it at 22. Brockers out of LSU possibly. I doubt Kuechly falls that far. Dont'a Hightower might be a good option at ILB there. Jerel Worthy, DT out of MSU.

We could always trade back even more.

[Titty Meat]

When they went head to head it was #7 vs #8:

Tannehill: 28-47 309 yds, 2 TD/3 INT
Weeden: 47-60 438 yds, 3 TD/0 INT

Tannehill did have a 65 yard rushing TD though.

Tannehill was throwing to a top 5 pick?

[BryanBusby]

you're all a bunch of dumbasses then. What team has 4 fucking QBs? Trade the fuck down. Thats how I see it. Tannehill will go to Miami. Then what? Draft Weeden with the 11th? fuckin stupid.

"troll" on bro, "troll" on

[BossChief]

Comparing purple drank Barney to Ryan coaches son Tannehill is just dumb.



****They just said they are gonna play the Tannehill interview tomorrow at 4pm on espnu

It's not in the guide, but dvr that timeslot.


Edit***the guide now displays it.

Ch 208 (on dtv) 4/24 4pm ct

[Johnny Vegas]

"troll" on bro, "troll" on

forgot I was talking to an expert. :rolleyes:

[Bewbies]

Do not want: Tannehill.

He's a 6th round prospect propped up by a basic lack of understanding in the NFL about the presnap importance of an elite communicator at LG like DeCastro. I like DeCastro. If by some miracle the football gods smile down on us and he is still there at 11 we need to take him.

[RealSNR]

Do not want: Tannehill.

He's a 6th round prospect propped up by a basic lack of understanding in the NFL about the presnap importance of an elite communicator at LG like DeCastro. I like DeCastro. If by some miracle the football gods smile down on us and he is still there at 11 we need to take him.I prefer not to think of DeCastro as a LG. He only plays that position on the football field.

He IS a god

[Tombstone RJ]

Gruden is an idiot. If he's such a great coach, how come no team is offering him a job? IMO, he's milking the chucky image and getting by on a few decent years of coaching where he took over a talented team built by another coach and won a SB.

[qabbaan]

Is there anyone Gruden doesn't love?

[Coogs]

Does ANYBODY have the full 30 minute show they did on Tannehill?

11:00PM Central tomorrow (Tuesday) night.

[saphojunkie]

Is there anyone Gruden doesn't love?

I dare you people to watch the Andrew Luck episode and count how many times Gruden says "banana."

It's...infuriating.

[BryanBusby]

Do not want: Tannehill.

He's a 6th round prospect propped up by a basic lack of understanding in the NFL about the presnap importance of an elite communicator at LG like DeCastro. I like DeCastro. If by some miracle the football gods smile down on us and he is still there at 11 we need to take him.

Well yeah man DeCastro will give Cassel more time and more time will definitely lead to awesome throws ^_^

[kcxiv]

Gruden is an idiot. If he's such a great coach, how come no team is offering him a job? IMO, he's milking the chucky image and getting by on a few decent years of coaching where he took over a talented team built by another coach and won a SB.

im sure he's had job offers, but you dont just take any job. Plus, im sure he makes good money doing what he's doing without the stress.

[Pasta Little Brioni]

I dare you people to watch the Andrew Luck episode and count how many times Gruden says "banana."

It's...infuriating.

Haha, that was annoying as fuck.

[BigMeatballDave]

This entire segment is on ESPNU right now.

[Deberg_1990]

Question,


Has Gruden ever had any QB on this show where he determined that the kid was complete crap? I'm guessing not. ESPNs job is to help push and promote prospects, so I question the legitimacy of this show.

[Sorter]

Question,


Has Gruden ever had any QB on this show where he determined that the kid was complete crap? I'm guessing not. ESPNs job is to help push and promote prospects, so I question the legitimacy of this show.

I guess you could say when he had Cousins throw.

[Pitt Gorilla]

everyone liked Jamracus Russell tooNOBODY liked Russell. That pick was clowned by just about everyone.

[In58men]

I fucking live Tannehill. We better move up to the 3rd spot or this kid is gone.


Cassel fucking sucks and he doesn't deserve the starting job. Why can't he just go away. QB is our biggest fucking hole and we have to fill not, can't win if we keep ignoring the biggest problem on our team. Makes zero sense to start Cassel this season. He sucks. Okay I'm done.

[BryanBusby]

This entire segment is on ESPNU right now.

Shit ended up missing it :(

[CHENZ A!]

I would love to see Chucky's QB rankings.


Also, I HATE your avatar, Busby. :cuss:

[BryanBusby]

Blame the ones who complained about the pinwheel of fuck starring Todd Haley!

[BigMeatballDave]

I fucking live Tannehill. We better move up to the 3rd spot or this kid is gone.


Cassel fucking sucks and he doesn't deserve the starting job. Why can't he just go away. QB is our biggest fucking hole and we have to fill not, can't win if we keep ignoring the biggest problem on our team. Makes zero sense to start Cassel this season. He sucks. Okay I'm done.

No need to move up to 3. Miami is the only team interested ahead of us.

[Mecca]

Do not want: Tannehill.

He's a 6th round prospect propped up by a basic lack of understanding in the NFL about the presnap importance of an elite communicator at LG like DeCastro. I like DeCastro. If by some miracle the football gods smile down on us and he is still there at 11 we need to take him.

He's more like a high 2nd round prospect, 6th is pretty harsh.

[CHENZ A!]

Blame the ones who complained about the pinwheel of **** starring Todd Haley!

Oh, I remember that one. I guess I didn't put avatar to name or whatever. That one was WAY better, man.

[Mecca]

The only thing I learned from all of these QB camp things is Kirk Cousins arm is fucking horrible.

[BigMeatballDave]

The only thing I learned from all of these QB camp things is Kirk Cousins arm is fucking horrible.

He's Pioli's guy!

[BryanBusby]

but Kirk Cousins is so smart and gritty

/wrists

[Mecca]

He's Pioli's guy!

I'd put the odds of us taking a QB at less than 10%.

[BossChief]

Coaches son.
Quick learner.
Everybody raves about his arm ever since Weinke worked with him.
His mobility and ability to throw on the run is impressive.
He only has 19 starts, bit being a coaches son and the fact that he has been coached by Mike Sherman probably makes that number less of a factor.
He used a fuckton of formations and sub packages while running no huddle
He is a pre-med student that had a fantastic wonderlic score. He is smart enough to understand complex schemes.
Goes though 4 and 5 read progressions

We should draft this kid...even if we have to move up to do so.

[Mecca]

And if he somehow is there at 11, this team will do all it can to move out and try to rape a team of a bunch of picks, now that is the Patriot way.

[evolve27]

The only thing I learned from all of these QB camp things is Kirk Cousins arm is fucking horrible.

How about Weeden in the 2nd?

[BigMeatballDave]

How about Weeden in the 2nd?

Absolutely not.

[evolve27]

Absolutely not.

3rd?

[Mecca]

How about Weeden in the 2nd?

I'd rather not draft a guy that old, what are you gonna do groom him to start at 34 so he has 1 year or something?

[BossChief]

Another thing that stuck out to me was how he genuinely loves the game.

I really like this kid. If he had another 10 starts, he would probably be the third overall pick.

There is slim to no chance we move up to take him, but we probably should.

[BryanBusby]

Maybe in the 4th, maybe

[evolve27]

I'd rather not draft a guy that old, what are you gonna do groom him to start at 34 so he has 1 year or something?

Damon Huard did it

[BigMeatballDave]

Damon Huard did it

LOL

[BossChief]

And if he somehow is there at 11, this team will do all it can to move out and try to rape a team of a bunch of picks, now that is the Patriot way.

Do you about the 5th year option and how different it is for the 10th pick and ours?

If Tannehill is still there at 11 (and he could be)...teams will be calling.

If he goes at 10, his fifth year costs Franchise tag type money...at 11, it's less than half that.

That's why Gabbert and Ponder went 11 and 12 last year.

There is basically no financial risk, starting at pick 11.

Tannehill at 11 would be a valuable commodity that we shouldn't trade if he is there.

I bet we could get a good first and third this year and a first next year for a movedown.

[Mecca]

Do you about the 5th year option and how different it is for the 10th pick and ours?

If Tannehill is still there at 11 (and he could be)...teams will be calling.

If he goes at 10, his fifth year costs Franchise tag type money...at 11, it's less than half that.

That's why Gabbert and Ponder went 11 and 12 last year.

There is basically no financial risk, starting at pick 11.

Tannehill at 11 would be a valuable commodity that we shouldn't trade if he is there.

If we get offered 2 firsts that pick is gone.

[Pitt Gorilla]

After watching a few of these, I like Weeden and Osweiler. Of course, I really don't know much about drafting QBs.

[ForeverChiefs58]

Here is Gruden on Weeden the NY Yankee

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/6jFGjqRawAs" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[BossChief]

If we get offered 2 firsts that pick is gone.

Depends on the team.

[SPchief]

Depends on the team.

No it doesn't

[BryanBusby]

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/YO6UgIg1AU4" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Here's the whole video. God damn do I want Tannehill.

[jspchief]

Here's a stat to mull over:

Out of the top 6 QBs taken in 2011, only Cam Newton had more TDs in a college season than Tannehill.

[Chiefnj2]

Every QB looks good on Gruden's show (except Clausen).

[eazyb81]

He's Chad Henne or any other random big college QB with pro measurables. Not an elite NFL QB though.

[Coogs]

Coaches son.
Quick learner.
Everybody raves about his arm ever since Weinke worked with him.
His mobility and ability to throw on the run is impressive.
He only has 19 starts, bit being a coaches son and the fact that he has been coached by Mike Sherman probably makes that number less of a factor.
He used a fuckton of formations and sub packages while running no huddle
He is a pre-med student that had a fantastic wonderlic score. He is smart enough to understand complex schemes.
Goes though 4 and 5 read progressions

We should draft this kid...even if we have to move up to do so.

I concur! 36 or 37 out of 50 for over 400 yards and 4 TD's in his very first game as a starter! :eek:

They went on-and-on about his ability to make all of the tough out patterns riqured in the NFL too.

[notorious]

Big 12 defenses.


Cassel could rape against that.

[Coogs]

Big 12 defenses.


Cassel could rape against that.

He could probably go for a buck-twenty on any given Saturday afternoon.

[notorious]

He could probably go for a buck-twenty on any given Saturday afternoon.

Let's not get too carried away.

[Coogs]

Let's not get too carried away.

:LOL: OK!

[ArrowheadMagic]

Big 12 defenses.


Cassel could rape against that.


Tannehill is also 0-6 on comeback wins against those defenses.

[Coogs]

Tannehill is also 0-6 on comeback wins against those defenses.


Some show I was watching the other night siad in two of those losses that Tannehill put his team in front in one, and the defense let the opponents drive the field and score right at the end... and in the other one Tannehill had A&M in positon to win, and a WR dropped a TD for the win.

[notorious]

, and a WR dropped a TD for the win.

That was against K-State. He hit the WR between the numbers.

[ArrowheadMagic]

Wouldnt hate the pick, wouldnt hate DeCastro either, but rather have a Corner or pass rusher. Prefer to trade down and pick up a 1st next year to have ammo to move up, but that probably wont happen either. Hate spending a top 11 pick on situational guys.

In a division with Manning and Rivers, better be able to cover and rush the passer if you want to win. Helps to have your own elite QB also.

[BossChief]

Some show I was watching the other night siad in two of those losses that Tannehill put his team in front in one, and the defense let the opponents drive the field and score right at the end... and in the other one Tannehill had A&M in positon to win, and a WR dropped a TD for the win.

This.

Also, the A&M receivers lead all of college football in dropped passes.

I wouldn't spend the picks to move to 3, but would have no problem moving to 6 or 7

[Coogs]

Tannehill at 11 would be a valuable commodity that we shouldn't trade if he is there.

I liked the part where Gruden was talking about the read-option with Tannehill, and Gruden talking about how the read-option is comming to the NFL due to the fact that it can negate the pass rush.

IMO, it would be nice to be ahead of the curve once in the NFL, instead of always being one of the last teams to follow the trend.

Tannehill is my first choice tomorrow night.

If that is not possible I am just about split down the middle on Brockers/Barron.

Lagging behind those three would be Poe/DeCastro... and only those two because I can understand why we might pick them.

[Lzen]

Gruden is an idiot. If he's such a great coach, how come no team is offering him a job? IMO, he's milking the chucky image and getting by on a few decent years of coaching where he took over a talented team built by another coach and won a SB.

Disagree. Sure, maybe that's true about his head coaching abilities. But that guy earned his stripes as a QB coach and OC.

[suds79]

Gruden is an idiot. If he's such a great coach, how come no team is offering him a job? IMO, he's milking the chucky image and getting by on a few decent years of coaching where he took over a talented team built by another coach and won a SB.

You don't think he couldn't have another HC gig if he wanted it?

Honestly I don't blame the guy. Would you rather work 24/7, never see your family, hi pressure job where you'll likely be fired in 4 years (depends if you have a QB or not)? Or... Have a cushy TV job talking football were I'm sure you're well compensated.

[Lzen]

I'd rather not draft a guy that old, what are you gonna do groom him to start at 34 so he has 1 year or something?

WTF decade are you living in? QBs don't get groomed for 3-5 years any more. If they are any good they should be starting and playing well by their 2nd year. I really don't see his age as that much of a problem. Not to mention it should help avoid immaturity.

[BossChief]

Since 2005, 70% of first round quarterbacks have panned out...per Colin Cowherd.

[philfree]

Disagree. Sure, maybe that's true about his head coaching abilities. But that guy earned his stripes as a QB coach and OC.

I thinhk he was a great HC. If Davis wasn't the fool that fired Gruden the Raiders would have won the SB not the Bucs.

[suds79]

Since 2005, 70% of first round quarterbacks have panned out...per Colin Cowherd.

Yeah it's crazy. I don't know if the criteria for evaluating them has gotten better or if it's mainly because of the rules. Never been an easier time to play QB.

Which is why watching Matt Cassel struggle is all the more maddening.

[Lzen]

Wouldnt hate the pick, wouldnt hate DeCastro either, but rather have a Corner or pass rusher. Prefer to trade down and pick up a 1st next year to have ammo to move up, but that probably wont happen either. Hate spending a top 11 pick on situational guys.

In a division with Manning and Rivers, better be able to cover and rush the passer if you want to win. Helps to have your own elite QB also.

I don't think coverage and rushing the passer will be that big an issue. Defense is solid. Sure, we could use an upgrade at DT, ILB, and backup Ss. But those aren't that bad as it is now, IMO. In order to compete with Rivers or Manning we need a good QB of our own. Still waiting on that.

[BigChiefFan]

He's probably going to end up being a pretty good QB. Anybody that can throw accurate on the move should be able to drill it from the pocket, but his 2 TDs to 1 INTs ratio is a major concern in my book. He's also a little lean and needs to put on some muscle, add to that, limited starts and he's a high-risk, high-reward type in this year's draft.

[BossChief]

Yeah it's crazy. I don't know if the criteria for evaluating them has gotten better or if it's mainly because of the rules. Never been an easier time to play QB.

Which is why watching Matt Cassel struggle is all the more maddening.

The rules make things a lot easier for quarterbacks.

[BigChiefFan]

Since 2005, 70% of first round quarterbacks have panned out...per Colin Cowherd.

3 QBs in the first this year...Luck, RG3, and Tannehill. The odds say one of those three busts.

Two out of three is 66%, pretty close to the 70%.

Just an observation.

[BossChief]

I'd be almost willing to bet another quarterback (maybe 2) go in the first after Tannehill.

[philfree]

Experience aside is Tannehill more ready for the NFL game then RG3.

I think Tannehill fits perfectly into The Rats offense and the Redskins totally screwed up by trading up for RG3. RG3 may be a better prospect but the Skins could have drafted Tannehill who fits their O without having to trade the farm.

[TRR]

I have moved on to the Tannehill bus and have taken a seat for no other reason that players like Brockers, Decastro, Kuechly, Barron, etc do not excite me. KC has some holes but they are minimal right now if everyone comes back healthy.

Take a chance...big chance...on Tannehill at 11 if he falls.
Posted via Mobile Device

[suds79]

I have moved on to the Tannehill bus and have taken a seat for no other reason that players like Brockers, Decastro, Kuechly, Barron, etc do not excite me. KC has some holes but they are minimal right now if everyone comes back healthy.

Take a chance...big chance...on Tannehill at 11 if he falls.
Posted via Mobile Device

I'm pretty much in the same boat. I'm not afraid one bit of a bust at QB. Have to try at some point.

Won't be heartbroken if it doesn't happen, but will be excited by the opportunity of the Chiefs actually taking the plunge.

On a side note:

After watching that full episode with Tannehill with Gruden, I think Ryan has had to make more NFL reads & NFL type throws than several other QBs running that spread system full of bubble screens.

[BossChief]

Before watching Grudens show, I thought Tannehill might have to sit more than a year.

That's no longer the case, this kid could play by the end of his rookie year.

[Dave Lane]

Tannehill was throwing to a top 5 pick?

Was OK States CB a top 5 pick?

I mean he did throw 3 picks

[Dave Lane]

I have moved on to the Tannehill bus and have taken a seat for no other reason that players like Brockers, Decastro, Kuechly, Barron, etc do not excite me. KC has some holes but they are minimal right now if everyone comes back healthy.

Take a chance...big chance...on Tannehill at 11 if he falls.
Posted via Mobile Device

Thats no chance at all. I think most Tannehill slurpers are wanting to trade up to 3-4 to make sure we get him. If he falls to us pull the trigger otherwise get Weeden in the 2nd who's a better and ready QB just with a 4 year smaller window.

[Titty Meat]

Experience aside is Tannehill more ready for the NFL game then RG3.

I think Tannehill fits perfectly into The Rats offense and the Redskins totally screwed up by trading up for RG3. RG3 may be a better prospect but the Skins could have drafted Tannehill who fits their O without having to trade the farm.

No he's not JFC.

[Bowser]

Experience aside is Tannehill more ready for the NFL game then RG3.

I think Tannehill fits perfectly into The Rats offense and the Redskins totally screwed up by trading up for RG3. RG3 may be a better prospect but the Skins could have drafted Tannehill who fits their O without having to trade the farm.

What the hell does Tannehill do better than RGIII?

[Frankie]

He's probably going to end up being a pretty good QB. Anybody that can throw accurate on the move should be able to drill it from the pocket, but his 2 TDs to 1 INTs ratio is a major concern in my book. He's also a little lean and needs to put on some muscle, add to that, limited starts and he's a high-risk, high-reward type in this year's draft.

Here are the list of concerns so far mentioned and my 2 cents about them:

1- "He has little experience at the QB position, having played WR before."

My 2 cents: (A), He's had great development in a season and a half, demonstrating that he has a very good capability to learn and develop. (B), His experience as a good WR is quite valuable in establishing anticipation with his QBs.

2- "TDs to 1 INT ratio"

My 2 cents:Has that improved as he has developed? Could that be a stat that was hurt by INTs earlier in his development? I don't know. Something to research. But a lot of QBs LOVE to have only half as much INTs as TDs.

3- "He's too lean."

My 2 cents: He's not Croyle-lean. He seems to have the frame to carry another 10 lbs.

4- "He has small hands."

My 2 cents: Well he has big enough hands to be a good WR. That's good enough for me. He seems to grip the ball a little closer to the tail end, and shows no problem with the grip. Can anyone tell me how many snaps he has fumbled in his 1.5 years?

5- "His 4th quarter performance is suspect."

My 2 cents: Basically that's the only thing that keeps me on the fence about him, instead of fully pimping for him. Hopefully that is more about his inexperience and not his attitude.

Did I miss any other concerns?

[philfree]

No he's not JFC.

JFC...grunt..spit..JFC LMAO

I was just posing a question and as Suds said

"After watching that full episode with Tannehill with Gruden, I think Ryan has had to make more NFL reads & NFL type throws than several other QBs running that spread system full of bubble screens."

I think Tannehill might have made more NFL type of throws then RG3. He may not have the experience but he may have more knowledge of a pro offense at thyis point in time.

[philfree]

What the hell does Tannehill do better than RGIII?

Understands an NFL offense.

[Chiefnj2]

Since 2005, 70% of first round quarterbacks have panned out...per Colin Cowherd.

I guess it depends on how you define "pan out".

2005
Smith - No.
Rodgers - Yes
Campbell - No.

2006
Young - No.
Leinart - No.
Cutler - Yes.

2007
Russell - No
Quinn - No

2008
Ryan - Yes (although some on CP would argue no.)
Flacco - Yes (although some on CP would argue no.)

2009
Stafford - Yes
Sanchez - arguable.
Freeman - arguable.

2010
Bradford - Inc.
Tebow - No.

2011 Inc.

[Bowser]

Understands an NFL offense.

Cassel is pretty good at undersatnding NFL offenses, too. Give me a guy that has some ability to go with the mental aspect.

RGIII has all the tools you could want in a QB - smarts, athletic, speed, and a cannon for an arm. If Washington can't figure out a way to maximize his potential, then that's on the Washington coaches.

And I won't for a second believe Tannehill is more ready for the NFL than any other QB potentially drafted in the entire draft. People forget he's only been a QB for a season and a half.

[Titty Meat]

Tannehill is a few years from being a starter RGIII is a day 1 starter. Some of you let TV influence you way too much.

[suds79]

Cassel is pretty good at undersatnding NFL offenses, too. Give me a guy that has some ability to go with the mental aspect.

RGIII has all the tools you could want in a QB - smarts, athletic, speed, and a cannon for an arm. If Washington can't figure out a way to maximize his potential, then that's on the Washington coaches.

And I won't for a second believe Tannehill is more ready for the NFL than any other QB potentially drafted in the entire draft. People forget he's only been a QB for a season and a half.

I don't know how the ole Tannehill vs RG3 topic got started. RG3 is going to be the 2nd pick in the draft so lets not get carried away here.

But to point out your bold section:
Tannehill is one of the best tools QBs in this draft? You look at physical skills and he has about everything you'd ever want. Just sayin.

He seems like a bright guy but if you want to argue he doesn't have the mental makeup to do the job, that's your argument. But I don't think you can say he doesn't have the tools.

[Bowser]

I don't know how the ole Tannehill vs RG3 topic got started. RG3 is going to be the 2nd pick in the draft so lets not get carried away here.

But to point out your bold section:
Tannehill is one of the best tools QBs in this draft? You look at physical skills and he has about everything you'd ever want. Just sayin.

He seems like a bright guy but if you want to argue he doesn't have the mental makeup to do the job, that's your argument. But I don't think you can say he doesn't have the tools.

Not exactly what I meant. My biggest issue with the guy is that he's been a quarterback for literally a season and a half. That doesn't mean he won't get it, or won't be "The Next Rich Gannon". I think it's going to take time. A couple of years watching and learning will help him tremendously. He may bust, he may be a two time Super Bowl MVP, who knows? But for my money, give me Griffin, especially for right now.

And Billay is right. ESPN has fluffed this kid up for weeks, and in a QB weak draft class, he gets the reward of being "that guy".

[Chiefnj2]

Sanchez, Clausen and now Tannehill. The CP can't miss QBOTF.

[Valiant]

Wouldnt hate the pick, wouldnt hate DeCastro either, but rather have a Corner or pass rusher. Prefer to trade down and pick up a 1st next year to have ammo to move up, but that probably wont happen either. Hate spending a top 11 pick on situational guys.

In a division with Manning and Rivers, better be able to cover and rush the passer if you want to win. Helps to have your own elite QB also.

What qbs are next year? How do they compare to tann?

[philfree]

Cassel is pretty good at undersatnding NFL offenses, too. Give me a guy that has some ability to go with the mental aspect.

RGIII has all the tools you could want in a QB - smarts, athletic, speed, and a cannon for an arm. If Washington can't figure out a way to maximize his potential, then that's on the Washington coaches.

And I won't for a second believe Tannehill is more ready for the NFL than any other QB potentially drafted in the entire draft. People forget he's only been a QB for a season and a half.

I'm not sure I can agree with that.

[Lzen]

I'm not sure I can agree with that.

I can agree with that. The problem with Cassel is his lack of understanding NFL DEFENSES.

[whoman69]

I guess it depends on how you define "pan out".

2005
Smith - No.
Rodgers - Yes
Campbell - No.

2006
Young - No.
Leinart - No.
Cutler - Yes.

2007
Russell - No
Quinn - No

2008
Ryan - Yes (although some on CP would argue no.)
Flacco - Yes (although some on CP would argue no.)

2009
Stafford - Yes
Sanchez - arguable.
Freeman - arguable.

2010
Bradford - Inc.
Tebow - No.

2011 Inc.

Only 50% of QBs drafted are with their original team. 33% have been to a Pro Bowl. Matt Cassell has been to a Pro Bowl.

[philfree]

I can agree with that. The problem with Cassel is his lack of understanding NFL DEFENSES.

LOL I guess those two things go hand in hand.

[milkman]

I could really see Tannehill falling to us at 11 and then us trading with Cleveland to move back to 22 and grab next year's first.

Anybody else, or am I just crazy?

That would be a really stupid draft strategy by the Browns.

[-King-]

Since 2005, 70% of first round quarterbacks have panned out...per Colin Cowherd.

Was he high when he said that?
Posted via Mobile Device

[-King-]

Understands an NFL offense.

And how exactly doesn't RGIII understand NFL offenses?
Posted via Mobile Device

[Whosurdaddy]

There are like 3 QBs that declined to go pro this year that are better quarterbacks than Tannehill. I don't understand why you would settle for the third best quarterback in this draft by default. Wait a year and take a shot at a FA, Barkley/Tyler Wilson, or who knows..Cassle might improve. 11th pick is too important for a 3 year project QB.

[BossChief]

Bill Polian is on ESPN and they are running through trade scenarios to move up to 3.

He said our 1 and 2 would be a done deal.

I'd say DO IT.

[chiefsflow]

I really really hope we don't draft him!

[philfree]

And how exactly doesn't RGIII understand NFL offenses?
Posted via Mobile Device

Perhaps I should say that Tannehill understands them better. And then still I could be wrong. Hey RG3 is a great prospect I was just really impressed with Tannehill discussing the offenses and well everthing really.

[Nightfyre]

Bill Polian is on ESPN and they are running through trade scenarios to move up to 3.

He said our 1 and 2 would be a done deal.

I'd say DO IT.
If Pioli thinks Tannehill is the guy, then do it. But we are picking at a pretty sweet spot in round two. I'd say there is a legitimate chance we could wind up with first round talent at that spot.

[keg in kc]

Bill Polian is on ESPN and they are running through trade scenarios to move up to 3.

He said our 1 and 2 would be a done deal.

I'd say DO IT.Thank god you're not in the war room.

[RealSNR]

11th pick is too important for a 3 year project QB.Not this year it isn't.

The elite talent available is a 4-3 MLB, a fucking guard, and possible a WR and some secondary talent.

You know, the kind of players that win you Super Bowls, right?

[BossChief]

Strong arm
LOVES THE GAME
Very mobile and fast enough to use his mobility to keep teams honest
Good mechanics
Fast learner
Built like a Qb
Very smart...a premed student that had a 36 wonderlic score
Doesn't look at the rush
Experienced in a pro set
Good accuracy
Throws very well on the move
Uses his mobility to buy time FOR THE PASS, not as a crutch
NFL quality coaching
Coaches son that is a film rat...born football player.

If it werent for his perceived lacking experience, this guy is probably the unquestioned #3 pick.

[Chief Roundup]

There are like 3 QBs that declined to go pro this year that are better quarterbacks than Tannehill. I don't understand why you would settle for the third best quarterback in this draft by default. Wait a year and take a shot at a FA, Barkley/Tyler Wilson, or who knows..Cassle might improve. 11th pick is too important for a 3 year project QB.

Oh boy another "next year" type.

[-King-]

Strong arm
LOVES THE GAME
Very mobile and fast enough to use his mobility to keep teams honest
Good mechanics
Fast learner
Built like a Qb
Very smart...a premed student that had a 36 wonderlic score
Doesn't look at the rush
Experienced in a pro set
Good accuracy
Throws very well on the move
Uses his mobility to buy time FOR THE PASS, not as a crutch
NFL quality coaching
Coaches son that is a film rat...born football player.

If it werent for his perceived lacking experience, this guy is probably the unquestioned #3 pick.

You just described Jimmy Clausen...

[BossChief]

Thank god you're not in the war room.
You must really like Landry Jones.

I'm tired of the "next year we get our quarterback, take the linemen...that's the smart choice" thought pattern.

Our roster is good enough that whoever we pick as a quarterback is gonna have question marks.

It just so happens that I see Tannehill as a guy with less question marks than most guys that will be options for us and that he has NFL quality tools to work with to pair with borderline elite intelligence and is a coaches son to boot.

[BossChief]

You just described Jimmy Clausen...

:facepalm:

[-King-]

:facepalm:

Am I wrong? All those things you said could be attributed to Clausen.

Like I said in another thread, I wouldn't mind drafting Tannehill, but people have to realize that the only reason he's a first round QB is because 3 QBs dropped out. That's what it took for him to be a 1st rounder.

[Frosty]

Very smart...a premed student that had a 36 wonderlic score

I was pretty impressed with that. Kellen "just like Drew Brees" Moore got a 25 and he is supposed to be extremely smart.

[BryanBusby]

Am I wrong? All those things you said could be attributed to Clausen.

Like I said in another thread, I wouldn't mind drafting Tannehill, but people have to realize that the only reason he's a first round QB is because 3 QBs dropped out. That's what it took for him to be a 1st rounder.
You are wrong. Clausen and Tannehill don't compare at all.

As for your second part, that's strictly bullshit. More QB's declaring just means more QB's get taken in the first round. Does nobody remember what happened a single fucking year ago?

[-King-]

You are wrong. Clausen and Tannehill don't compare at all.

As for your second part, that's strictly bullshit. More QB's declaring just means more QB's get taken in the first round. Does nobody remember what happened a single fucking year ago?

If Barkley, Jones, and Wilson would have declared, Tannehill would not have been drafted in the first round.

[BryanBusby]

If Barkley, Jones, and Wilson would have declared, Tannehill would not have been drafted in the first round.

Okay so you have literally no fucking memory, at all.

Jones wouldn't go higher than Tannehill because he sucks and is a statue.
Wilson would have tough sledding to go higher because lack of experience, and his limited experience was in a gimmicky Petrino system.

If Barkley declared, you'd have 4 QB's going in the top 10 and 5 to 6 in the first round.

[Frankie]

Bill Polian is on ESPN and they are running through trade scenarios to move up to 3.

He said our 1 and 2 would be a done deal.

I'd say DO IT.

I like Tannehill. But not that much. Reservations also exist. So, no.

[BossChief]

Am I wrong? All those things you said could be attributed to Clausen.

Like I said in another thread, I wouldn't mind drafting Tannehill, but people have to realize that the only reason he's a first round QB is because 3 QBs dropped out. That's what it took for him to be a 1st rounder.

Tannehill would have be picked before Jones.

McShay said he would take him over Barkley, too.

Tannehill is a top 20 talent in this draft on every single board ever posted on any draft site.

How the fuck do you see that as a guy that's not a first rounder?

If you want to say he is a guy that should be a 15-25 pick and is being propped up a few picks due to lacking depth at the position...that would be valid, but to say he isn't a first rounder at all is full blown retard.

If you are gonna continue to be my little puppy dog and quote all of my posts, at least make valid arguments...otherwise, you continue to paint yourself into a corner.

[-King-]

Okay so you have literally no fucking memory, at all.

Show me one mock draft at the end of the season that had Tannehill going in the 1st? It took till those 3 dropping out of the draft for him to come up.

[RealSNR]

It's very likely Tannehill is the best it gets, guys. For awhile, anyway.

I, too, would love to stockpile 1st round picks for next year, but you need a team dumb enough to part with those picks. And you need a GM who values the kind of plan we all have as mere peasant fans.

If we make a trade for a 1st next year, then perfect. Fucking fantastic. I'll take that over Tannehill, sure.

Odds are, that's not going to happen. And following history's trend, odds are we won't be in a position to draft a QB next year, either. Very likely only two QBs are deemed franchise-caliber talents. Guess when they're gonna get drafted. Not in the mid-teens/early 20s, that's for fucking sure.

[BryanBusby]

Show me one mock draft at the end of the season that had Tannehill going in the 1st? It took till those 3 dropping out of the draft for him to come up.

Who gives a literal fuck what some basement dweller mocked 5 months ago? Vontaze Burfict was a sure top 15 pick 5 months ago.

[BossChief]

If Barkley, Jones, and Wilson would have declared, Tannehill would not have been drafted in the first round.

If you truly believe that, you are a bigger idiot than I thought.

[Frankie]

Very smart...a premed student that had a 36 wonderlic score.

Really? Are those scores public?

[-King-]

Tannehill would have be picked before Jones.

McShay said he would take him over Barkley, too.

Tannehill is a top 20 talent in this draft on every single board ever posted on any draft site.

How the fuck do you see that as a guy that's not a first rounder?

If you want to say he is a guy that should be a 15-25 pick and is being propped up a few picks due to lacking depth at the position...that would be valid, but to say he isn't a first rounder at all is full blown retard.

If you are gonna continue to be my little puppy dog and quote all of my posts, at least make valid arguments...otherwise, you continue to paint yourself into a corner.

This is a guy that you thought so little of, that you didn't even watch his games. Shit, during the season you didn't even mention him. All a sudden in the off season he's a top 20 talent guy? I don't buy that. If he was a top talent QB, then you would have been talking about him during the regular season. It wouldn't have taken you until the end of the season to even realize he existed.

[ModSocks]

You are wrong. Clausen and Tannehill don't compare at all.

As for your second part, that's strictly bullshit. More QB's declaring just means more QB's get taken in the first round. Does nobody remember what happened a single ****ing year ago?

Exactly. It's as if people forgot. This "wait till next year" bullshit is just that; Bullshit.

It's Tannehill this year or Landry Jones next year.

And when it's Landry Jones, we'll see the same exact fucking argument made yet again.

[keg in kc]

If it werent for his perceived lacking experience, this guy is probably the unquestioned #3 pick.Yeah, he doesn't really only have 19 starts at QB. That's just a misperception. LMAO


I could and would stomach him at 11, as much of a mistake as I believe that would be, but trading up for this guy? To 3?? Jesus fucking Christ.

[BossChief]

It's very likely Tannehill is the best it gets, guys. For awhile, anyway.

I, too, would love to stockpile 1st round picks for next year, but you need a team dumb enough to part with those picks. And you need a GM who values the kind of plan we all have as mere peasant fans.

If we make a trade for a 1st next year, then perfect. Fucking fantastic. I'll take that over Tannehill, sure.

Odds are, that's not going to happen. And following history's trend, odds are we won't be in a position to draft a QB next year, either. Very likely only two QBs are deemed franchise-caliber talents. Guess when they're gonna get drafted. Not in the mid-teens/early 20s, that's for fucking sure.

Bravo, my friend.

Bravo.

This fanbase is so brainwashed by the mentality of "take the linemen and get our quarterback next year" that they are literally scared to take any chances because of being so used to the "high floor/low ceiling" guys this franchise typically drafts year in and year out.

I swear, this fanbase wouldn't want us to draft Cutler at 11.

[keg in kc]

Yeah, it's either that, or we just don't think Tannehill's any good.

Just like we didn't think Stanzi was any good last year.

[BryanBusby]

Bravo, my friend.

Bravo.

This fanbase is so brainwashed by the mentality of "take the linemen and get our quarterback next year" that they are literally scared to take any chances because of being so used to the "high floor/low ceiling" guys this franchise typically drafts year in and year out.

I swear, this fanbase wouldn't want us to draft Cutler at 11.

They wouldn't. "Dude like woah, Matty Ice gonna be in the next draft fuck Cutler"

[Jerm]

I wonder how much it'd cost us to move up to #7 and take Tannehill at that spot ahead of Miami...I'd def. be ok with that if it didn't cost us a king's ransom.

[BryanBusby]

I wonder how much it'd cost us to move up to #7 and take Tannehill at that spot ahead of Miami...I'd def. be ok with that if it didn't cost us a king's ransom.

A 3rd and maybe a late pick. The Jaguars have already said they'd be willing to move down for a Day 2 selection.

The Chiefs have few needs and a lot of flexibility to move down in the 2nd to scoop back a late 3rd or another early 4th to grab a player if they feel it's necessary.

[Jerm]

A 3rd and maybe a late pick. The Jaguars have already said they'd be willing to move down for a Day 2 selection.

The Chiefs have few needs and a lot of flexibility to move down in the 2nd to scoop back a late 3rd or another early 4th to grab a player if they feel it's necessary.

If that's all it'd take I'd do that in a heartbeat.

[ModSocks]

I wonder how much it'd cost us to move up to #7 and take Tannehill at that spot ahead of Miami...I'd def. be ok with that if it didn't cost us a king's ransom.

Probably a 2nd rounder. We might be able to low ball Jville considering how bad they want out of that spot and give them a 3rd. They'd look like complete idiots taking Gilmore @ 7 (what else is new) but that's the guy they want.

[htismaqe]

I swear, this fanbase wouldn't want us to draft Cutler at 11.

Because Cutler's been such an unmitigated success. :rolleyes:

[BossChief]

Really? Are those scores public?That's his wonderlic. It was posted some time ago.

He is also a pre-med student at a&m and if you just watch his Gruden qb camp show, you will see without a shadow of a doubt that the kid is very smart.

Yeah, he doesn't really only have 19 starts at QB. That's just a misperception. LMAO


I could and would stomach him at 11, as much of a mistake as I believe that would be, but trading up for this guy? To 3?? Jesus fucking Christ.
Flacco
Brady
Rogers
Newton

All of these quarterbacks had the same "inexperienced" knock on them and have done just fine.

If all it takes is a second rounder to "roll the dice" on a guy with franchise quarterback upside with the tools to get there....sign me up asap.

[-King-]

I'm sorry, but if Tannehill was this can't miss prospect, then you guys would have been talking about him DURING the season. It doesn't take till the end of a season to realize that a QB is good, much less elite.

[BossChief]

I wonder how much it'd cost us to move up to #7 and take Tannehill at that spot ahead of Miami...I'd def. be ok with that if it didn't cost us a king's ransom.
Bill Polian was on ESPN today and they had a 15 minute segment about teams moving up to 3.

Tampa
KC
Miami

Those were the three teams he thought would be in the market for the pick.

He flat out said that if KC offered their 11 and 44, it would be a done deal.

It would probably cost a little more than a third to move up to 7.

Because Cutler's been such an unmitigated success. :rolleyes:
Straight up...would you take Cutler at 11?

I'd give that 11 pick AND our 2nd to move up for him and wouldn't even blink before making that call.

[BossChief]

I'm sorry, but if Tannehill was this can't miss prospect, then you guys would have been talking about him DURING the season. It doesn't take till the end of a season to realize that a QB is good, much less elite.

JFC

There is a 2000 post thread taking about Tannehill as a first round quarterback that started towards the beginning of the college football season.

[whoman69]

Flacco
Brady
Rogers
Newton

All of these quarterbacks had the same "inexperienced" knock on them and have done just fine.

If all it takes is a second rounder to "roll the dice" on a guy with franchise quarterback upside with the tools to get there....sign me up asap.

All of those QBs more experience coming out of college than Tannehill. Newton had the least experience and he also won a JUCO national championship. You also act like that is his only problem. He tends to throw INTs, especially in bigger games.

[keg in kc]

The mentality that seems to have developed among certain of the fanbase is that they're so desperate to see anybody other than Cassel behind center they'll support any move, good, bad or otherwise. Start Stanzi! Start Orton! Draft Tannehill! Who cares if it's the right move or the wrong move.

"Not Cassel" does not mean it will work. "Not Cassel" does not mean it's a move you should make. There isn't a whole lot of satisfaction in going from "holy shit, that guy's awful" to "holy shit, that guy's awful, but, well, at least it's not Cassel".

Stop being so desperate. Stop trying to fix the position with wishful thinking.

This coming from a guy who's wanted to draft a QB for literally years and has never, ever been in favor of drafting an offensive lineman of any kind in the first. I wanted Ryan in '08, I wanted Clausen in '10, I wanted Gabbert, Ponder or Dalton last year. I do not want Tannehill this year, and it's not because I'm a true fan, it's not because I want a guard or a LB or some other same pick, it's because I do not want Tannehill. Period. I'm not a believer. It doesn't have anything to do with anybody else but him. And while I'm probably even more desperate than most to see this team get an actual starting-calibre QB, I'm not so desperate that I'm okay with the idea of throwing shit at the wall and hoping something sticks. Because that's what "taking a shot" with Tannehill amounts to. He's not a top-tier quarterback, he's not markedly better than any of the names behind him on the draft chart (Foles, Cousins, Weeden, Osweiler), and he did absolutely nothing in his short career as a college quarterback to even warrant discussion as the #11 pick, much less to warrant a trade up to #3.

[OnTheWarpath15]

The mentality that seems to have developed among certain of the fanbase is that they're so desperate to see anybody other than Cassel behind center they'll support any move, good, bad or otherwise. Start Stanzi! Start Orton! Draft Tannehill! Who cares if it's the right move or the wrong move.

"Not Cassel" does not mean it will work. "Not Cassel" does not mean it's a move you should make. There isn't a whole lot of satisfaction in going from "holy shit, that guy's awful" to "holy shit, that guy's awful, but, well, at least it's not Cassel".

Stop being so desperate. Stop trying to fix the position with wishful thinking.

This coming from a guy who's wanted to draft a QB for literally years and has never, ever been in favor of drafting an offensive lineman of any kind in the first. I wanted Ryan in '08, I wanted Clausen in '10, I wanted Gabbert, Ponder or Dalton last year. I do not want Tannehill this year, and it's not because I'm a true fan, it's not because I want a guard or a LB or some other same pick, it's because I do not want Tannehill. Period. I'm not a believer. It doesn't have anything to do with anybody else but him. And while I'm probably even more desperate than most to see this team get an actual starting-calibre QB, I'm not so desperate that I'm okay with the idea of throwing shit at the wall and hoping something sticks. Because that's what "taking a shot" with Tannehill amounts to. He's not a top-tier quarterback, he's not markedly better than any of the names behind him on the draft chart (Foles, Cousins, Weeden, Osweiler), and he did absolutely nothing in his short career as a college quarterback to even warrant discussion as the #11 pick, much less to warrant a trade up to #3.

Rep.

[BryanBusby]

The mentality that seems to have developed among certain of the fanbase is that they're so desperate to see anybody other than Cassel behind center they'll support any move, good, bad or otherwise. Start Stanzi! Start Orton! Draft Tannehill! Who cares if it's the right move or the wrong move.


If this were the case, people would be championing allover for Weeden/Cousins/Osweiller too. I know I'm definitely not.

[-King-]

JFC

There is a 2000 post thread taking about Tannehill as a first round quarterback that started towards the beginning of the college football season.

Yeah a thread that had 19 posts during the season.

[keg in kc]

If this were the case, people would be championing allover for Weeden/Cousins/Osweiller too. I know I'm definitely not.Each one of those guys has a pretty dedicated little following. Cousins' likely being the smallest at this point, judging by what I remember reading the last few weeks. There's been more than one thread pushing Weeden in the second round, and Osweiler's name shows up periodically in a number of threads. It all reeks of desperation to me.

[RealSNR]

The mentality that seems to have developed among certain of the fanbase is that they're so desperate to see anybody other than Cassel behind center they'll support any move, good, bad or otherwise. Start Stanzi! Start Orton! Draft Tannehill! Who cares if it's the right move or the wrong move.

"Not Cassel" does not mean it will work. "Not Cassel" does not mean it's a move you should make. There isn't a whole lot of satisfaction in going from "holy shit, that guy's awful" to "holy shit, that guy's awful, but, well, at least it's not Cassel".

Stop being so desperate. Stop trying to fix the position with wishful thinking.
Again, you're really over-exaggerating the debate. You act like fans who want to draft Tannehill are comfortable with Hitler coming to power in order to bring the team back to its former glory.

Tannehill has a lot going for him. GOBS of draft experts think so. The majority of them believe he's worth a first round pick. Top 10, maybe not. But a first round QB is a first round QB.

And I'm not advocating "start Stanzi" just because I hate Cassel. I'm advocating starting the best QB on the roster. I think that's Stanzi. I've talked about it a hundred thousand times on this forum. The only argument I get against starting him is FIFTH ROUND PICK DERP

Desperation is Brandon Weeden- a soon-to-be 29 year old rookie. Desperation is Kirk Cousins- a needle-dicked noodle-armed QB inferior to all three QBs currently on our roster. Desperation is Brock Osweiler- a giant fetid rotten turd.

Tannehill isn't that level of desperation. He's a risk with potential big-time payoff. None of those guys i mentioned have what he has.

That is ABSOLUTELY worth a first round pick if you've got the team we have without a real QB.

[BossChief]

You guys have fun playing penny slots.

I'll be in the poker room.

[BossChief]

Rep.

Would you gamble on him slipping and take Culter at 11, or would you trade up for him?

[BryanBusby]

Each one of those guys has a pretty dedicated little following. Cousins' likely being the smallest at this point, judging by what I remember reading the last few weeks. There's been more than one thread pushing Weeden in the second round, and Osweiler's name shows up periodically in a number of threads. It all reeks of desperation to me.

and we've bashed them.

I can't speak for everyone, but I'll explain my reasoning for wanting Tannehill. There's no mistake, he has the arm and the ability to make any throw that will be asked from him in the NFL. He has great knowledge of a pro-style offense, can be a dynamic player not with just his arm but also his legs. He did a good job going from running routes (which he was actually pretty good at, too) to taking over as the leader of the offense on the fly.

I made the mistake of focusing on the blah tape before in the past and said, "there's no fucking way I'd ever take Josh Freeman." The Bucs didn't focus on what Freeman did at K-State; the focus was on what he could do in the NFL. I can guarantee you they don't regret making that move. Side note: people saw Freeman as a round 2-3 QB.

Could Tannehill bust? Sure. The Chiefs have a good situation to actually develop him properly and he brings dynamics to the offense that they've never had. The Chiefs will always end up busting if they always puss out.

If you're holding out for a QB that has a lot of potential and the polish like Luck has, you're going to be waiting for a very long time. This team is never going to be bad enough to make that a reality.

[jspchief]

Next year a sure thing QB will be available at #15.

[keg in kc]

Again, you're really over-exaggerating the debate. You act like fans who want to draft Tannehill are comfortable with Hitler coming to power in order to bring the team back to its former glory.Maybe I went too far, but it's hard to have any kind of "debate" when every single point brought up against Tannehill is disregarded with the same "there will be better qb's next year/where've I seen that before/the true fans are out in full force" reaction.

The reality is that there are more than a few people who are big fans of drafting QBs in general who are simply not big fans of Tannehill. It's really as simple as that. It's not some kind of philosophical opposition or desire to take a safe pick, it's just that they don't think Tannehill has much to offer.

And Tannehill to me - maybe not at 11, but definitely if we're giving up a 1st and 2nd to move up - is actually just as desperate as talking Weeden in the second, or Cousins...basically anywhere. Or Osweiler for that matter. None of these guys really have anything going for them in my opinion. The QB position in this draft basically ends after Luck and Griffin. None of them are worth taking in the area of the draft they're being discussed. Tannehill in the late 1st or 2nd is another story - but some desperate team will take him before that. And, honestly, I don't believe Tannehill has more to offer than Foles or any of the other guys talked about in the 2nd. Guys are in love with his potential, but the reality is his actual performance, particularly in big games, was not impressive. And I have always/will always be a guy that values a prospect's play over his measurables. I think years worth of on-field performance is a much better indicator than a week at the senior bowl or performance at the combine or pro days.

I just don't see it with Tannehill. I'll support the guy if he's selected, as in I won't be here bitching about the pick if it happens, but at the same time I won't have a good feeling about it.

(I don't expect us to draft him....)

[keg in kc]

You guys have fun playing penny slots.

I'll be in the poker room.Judging by what I've read, you'd be better off playing go fish.

[OnTheWarpath15]

Would you gamble on him slipping and take Culter at 11, or would you trade up for him?

Cutler was a much better prospect, so I would have had no reservations taking him.

[Frankie]

I wonder how much it'd cost us to move up to #7 and take Tannehill at that spot ahead of Miami...I'd def. be ok with that if it didn't cost us a king's ransom.
Miami has a lot of other needs for which potentially elite players will be available to them at 8. I think the chances of they getting Tanny at 8 is 50% at best. We are sitting in a nice spot.

If Tanny is gone at 11, Osweiler in the 2nd round is an intriguing prospect for us.

[BryanBusby]

Cutler was a much better prospect, so I would have had no reservations taking him.

revisionist history ITT

[OnTheWarpath15]

revisionist history ITT

Cutler was a 4-year starter (IIRC) facing SEC defenses with little talent around him.

Tannehill is a 16 game starter facing some of the worst defenses in CFB with little talent around him.

Cutler was a legit early pick. Tannehill isn't, IMO.

Hell, someone who's been pimping him in this thread called him a reach back in January.

[Frankie]

Straight up...would you take Cutler at 11?

I'd give that 11 pick AND our 2nd to move up for him and wouldn't even blink before making that call.

I'm not sure I would. Cutler is somewhat like Rivers. A lot of talent and not a lot of poise. I like my QB to be poised.

BTW, Tannehill strikes me as cool.

[BossChief]

Tannehill won more games in a year and a half than Cutler did as a 4 year starter.

In his junior year, he only threw 10 touchdown passes.

Yeah, he was absolutely a superior prospect.

Or not.

[Frankie]

Again, you're really over-exaggerating the debate. You act like fans who want to draft Tannehill are comfortable with Hitler coming to power in order to bring the team back to its former glory.

Tannehill has a lot going for him. GOBS of draft experts think so. The majority of them believe he's worth a first round pick. Top 10, maybe not. But a first round QB is a first round QB.

And I'm not advocating "start Stanzi" just because I hate Cassel. I'm advocating starting the best QB on the roster. I think that's Stanzi. I've talked about it a hundred thousand times on this forum. The only argument I get against starting him is FIFTH ROUND PICK DERP

Desperation is Brandon Weeden- a soon-to-be 29 year old rookie. Desperation is Kirk Cousins- a needle-dicked noodle-armed QB inferior to all three QBs currently on our roster. Desperation is Brock Osweiler- a giant fetid rotten turd.

Tannehill isn't that level of desperation. He's a risk with potential big-time payoff. None of those guys i mentioned have what he has.

That is ABSOLUTELY worth a first round pick if you've got the team we have without a real QB.

I think Osweiller has very good potential subject to development. Other than that this post is TOTALLY on the money. :thumb:

[keg in kc]

Cutler was a 4-year starter (IIRC) facing SEC defenses with little talent around him.

Tannehill is a 16 game starter facing some of the worst defenses in CFB with little talent around him.

Cutler was a legit early pick. Tannehill isn't, IMO.

Hell, someone who's been pimping him in this thread called him a reach back in January.Tannehill may not have had the kind of pieces at his disposal that, say, Tyler Wilson did, but that offense had magnitudes more talent than any Vanderbilt offense Cutler ever had to work with.

[Frankie]

You guys have fun playing penny slots.

I'll be in the poker room.

:clap: I'll be there too.

[Nightfyre]

One thing about Tannehill - if you watch his game against LSU, he absolutely carried his team. I counted something like 7 drops, including several critical ones, which prevented them from winning that game.

[htismaqe]

Bill Polian was on ESPN today and they had a 15 minute segment about teams moving up to 3.

Tampa
KC
Miami

Those were the three teams he thought would be in the market for the pick.

He flat out said that if KC offered their 11 and 44, it would be a done deal.

It would probably cost a little more than a third to move up to 7.


Straight up...would you take Cutler at 11?

I'd give that 11 pick AND our 2nd to move up for him and wouldn't even blink before making that call.

You're gonna have to do better than Cutler. TEBOW did more with less in Denver.

I said when he was drafted that Cutler wasn't worth the pick and he still isn't. Some people have a skewed idea of what it REALLY means to be an elite QB.

[Frankie]

and we've bashed them.

I can't speak for everyone, but I'll explain my reasoning for wanting Tannehill. There's no mistake, he has the arm and the ability to make any throw that will be asked from him in the NFL. He has great knowledge of a pro-style offense, can be a dynamic player not with just his arm but also his legs. He did a good job going from running routes (which he was actually pretty good at, too) to taking over as the leader of the offense on the fly.

I made the mistake of focusing on the blah tape before in the past and said, "there's no ****ing way I'd ever take Josh Freeman." The Bucs didn't focus on what Freeman did at K-State; the focus was on what he could do in the NFL. I can guarantee you they don't regret making that move. Side note: people saw Freeman as a round 2-3 QB.

Could Tannehill bust? Sure. The Chiefs have a good situation to actually develop him properly and he brings dynamics to the offense that they've never had. The Chiefs will always end up busting if they always puss out.

If you're holding out for a QB that has a lot of potential and the polish like Luck has, you're going to be waiting for a very long time. This team is never going to be bad enough to make that a reality.Totally.

[htismaqe]

The reality is that there are more than a few people who are big fans of drafting QBs in general who are simply not big fans of Tannehill. It's really as simple as that. It's not some kind of philosophical opposition or desire to take a safe pick, it's just that they don't think Tannehill has much to offer.

:bravo::bravo::bravo:

[BossChief]

You're gonna have to do better than Cutler. TEBOW did more with less in Denver.

I said when he was drafted that Cutler wasn't worth the pick and he still isn't. Some people have a skewed idea of what it REALLY means to be an elite QB.

Stop the presses!!!

Are you saying you would rather have Tebow over Cutler?

Is that what you're saying?

[OnTheWarpath15]

Tannehill may not have had the kind of pieces at his disposal that, say, Tyler Wilson did, but that offense had magnitudes more talent than any Vanderbilt offense Cutler ever had to work with.

Oh, I agree completely. Humorous to me that people think they are similar prospects.

[kcxiv]

He's not even going to be there at 11. All this shit is for nothing.

[-King-]

Oh, I agree completely. Humorous to me that people think they are similar prospects.

I don't even understand in what ways they are similar.


Why does Tannehill compare to Cutler BossChief?

[htismaqe]

Stop the presses!!!

Are you saying you would rather have Tebow over Cutler?

Is that what you're saying?

ROFL

How could you POSSIBLY extrapolate that from what I said? Tebow is a shit QB - hell, he's not even really a QB - yet he did more (with less) than Cutler. What does that tell you about Cutler?

I'm saying that Cutler is NOT, NEVER HAS BEEN, and likely NEVER WILL BE, a franchise QB. He's got a cannon arm and all the measurable yet all he does is LOSE.

That's not a coincidence.

[BossChief]

Oh, I agree completely. Humorous to me that people think they are similar prospects.

They are compared quite a bit, actually.

I threw it out because I also see them as somewhat comparable.

Also, Cutler went at pick 11...so it's not just a comparison of players...it's also a comparison of value.

Have you read about the financial difference between pick 10 and 11 yet?

It's exactly why Gabbert went at 11 and Ponder at 12.

11 is a very very valuable pick to have because of the contract escalators.

[BossChief]

ROFL

How could you POSSIBLY extrapolate that from what I said? Tebow is a shit QB - hell, he's not even really a QB - yet he did more (with less) than Cutler. What does that tell you about Cutler?

I'm saying that Cutler is NOT, NEVER HAS BEEN, and likely NEVER WILL BE, a franchise QB. He's got a cannon arm and all the measurable yet all he does is LOSE.

That's not a coincidence.

LOLWUT?

Cutler got hurt in the NFC Championship game and got there with NO RECEIVERS.

I simply asked if you would take Cutler at 11 and you responded by saying I would have to do better than that and immediately brought up Baby Jesus.

I didn't have to extrapolate anything.

[htismaqe]

What do Aaron Rodgers, Cam Newton, Eli Manning, Tom Brady, and Ben Roethlisberger all have in common?

Aaron Rodgers' Cal Bears went 10-1 with him as a starter - one of the most successful seasons in school history.

Cam Newton's team went undefeated and won a national championship.

Eli Manning took his team to 10-3 and a Cotton Bowl in his final season - again, one of the best seasons in Ole Miss history.

Tom Brady was 20-5 at Michigan, winning a conference title and an Orange Bowl.

Even Ben Roethlisberger, who played at Miami of Ohio, led his team to an undefeated season in the MAC and a top 10 ranking (the highest they've ever been ranked IIRC).

Great QBs elevate their teams. They win. Period.

[Bewbies]

Cutler was in the NFC Championship game, and last year the Bears were killing it until he got hurt. He's a lot better QB than you're giving him credit for...

[htismaqe]

LOLWUT?

Cutler got hurt in the NFC Championship game and got there with NO RECEIVERS.

I simply asked if you would take Cutler at 11 and you responded by saying I would have to do better than that and immediately brought up Baby Jesus.

I didn't have to extrapolate anything.

Dude, you've turned into the most obtuse egotistical asshole here.

It's pretty obvious to anybody with half a brain that I wouldn't take Cutler with the 21st pick, the 11th pick, or any other pick. NFL history is littered with guys just like him - overvalued because they have a big arm and ideal size.

He's a fucking loser.

[BryanBusby]

Cutler was in the NFC Championship game, and last year the Bears were killing it until he got hurt. He's a lot better QB than you're giving him credit for...
After watching him carry that offense last season, I think it's safe to say he's pretty damn good.

[BossChief]

Dude, you've turned into the most obtuse egotistical asshole here.

It's pretty obvious to anybody with half a brain that I wouldn't take Cutler with the 21st pick, the 11th pick, or any other pick. NFL history is littered with guys just like him - overvalued because they have a big arm and ideal size.

He's a fucking loser.

I'm sorry that you don't like it when people disagree with you.

The bold part here is crazy talk.

Sorry.

[Titty Meat]

Lots of delusion on here about Tannehill. Someone in another thread called him a 6th round pick.

If he improves his deep ball the guy is a top 10 QB.

[Bewbies]

Lots of delusion on here about Tannehill. Someone in another thread called him a 6th round pick.

If he improves his deep ball the guy is a top 10 QB.

I called him a 6th round pick while singing the virtues of DeCastro. My sarcasm was so thick nobody saw through it.... :evil:

[Titty Meat]

I called him a 6th round pick while singing the virtues of DeCastro. My sarcasm was so thick nobody saw through it.... :evil:

LMAO

[BigMeatballDave]

Dude, you've turned into the most obtuse egotistical asshole here.

It's pretty obvious to anybody with half a brain that I wouldn't take Cutler with the 21st pick, the 11th pick, or any other pick. NFL history is littered with guys just like him - overvalued because they have a big arm and ideal size.

He's a fucking loser.

Would you keep Cassel over Cutler?

[beach tribe]

im sure he's had job offers, but you dont just take any job. Plus, im sure he makes good money doing what he's doing without the stress.

Sapp was making 45,000 a MONTH. Gruden probably makes more, and I'm sure will return to coaching when the right gig comes along.

[Coogs]

He flat out said that if KC offered their 11 and 44, it would be a done deal.

I'd give that 11 pick AND our 2nd to move up for him and wouldn't even blink before making that call.

I'm in. We really don't have that many other holes that need addressed in the draft. If the scouts do their homework, we could pick up depth at the positons we need depth at on Friday and Saturday. Tannehill would have one year of experience in the NFL next draft, and would be a leg up on any QB available at that point in time. Plus, the draft next year could be used to fill positions that are needed at that time. There are still also a few quality free agents out there that could be pursued if need be for this season.

O-line: Albert, Lilja, Hudson, Asamoah, Winston (couple of draft picks)
QB: Cassel (short leash), Tannehill/Stanzi or Stanzi/Tannehill. Sorry Quinn.
RB's: Charles, Hillis, McCluster
WR's: Bowe, Breaston, Baldwin, Copper
TE's: Moeaki, Boss

That's a pretty fair offense with a couple of late round o-line additions, and maybe a free agent or two. Same thing on defense, but I don't have the time right at this moment to run through it.

[RealSNR]

Maybe I went too far, but it's hard to have any kind of "debate" when every single point brought up against Tannehill is disregarded with the same "there will be better qb's next year/where've I seen that before/the true fans are out in full force" reaction.

The reality is that there are more than a few people who are big fans of drafting QBs in general who are simply not big fans of Tannehill. It's really as simple as that. It's not some kind of philosophical opposition or desire to take a safe pick, it's just that they don't think Tannehill has much to offer.

And Tannehill to me - maybe not at 11, but definitely if we're giving up a 1st and 2nd to move up - is actually just as desperate as talking Weeden in the second, or Cousins...basically anywhere. Or Osweiler for that matter. None of these guys really have anything going for them in my opinion. The QB position in this draft basically ends after Luck and Griffin. None of them are worth taking in the area of the draft they're being discussed. Tannehill in the late 1st or 2nd is another story - but some desperate team will take him before that. And, honestly, I don't believe Tannehill has more to offer than Foles or any of the other guys talked about in the 2nd. Guys are in love with his potential, but the reality is his actual performance, particularly in big games, was not impressive. And I have always/will always be a guy that values a prospect's play over his measurables. I think years worth of on-field performance is a much better indicator than a week at the senior bowl or performance at the combine or pro days.

I just don't see it with Tannehill. I'll support the guy if he's selected, as in I won't be here bitching about the pick if it happens, but at the same time I won't have a good feeling about it.

(I don't expect us to draft him....)I've never taken a psychology class, so I have no idea if this is a real behavioral symptom that has a name or not. But there's a common pattern in some humans of self-denial and postponment of fulfillment. You see it it all the time with 20-something year old guys who are still virgins and desperately want to have sex. You can take them to bars, be the wingman, set them up on dates, try out online dating, but no matter how many women you suggest and throw in front of them, there's always something wrong with them. "Too short." "Not my type." "A fat chick?" "Cold bitch." "Annoying." "Weird laugh." You can ask them, "Are you sure you really want to have sex?" and they adamantly say yes.

This isn't due to false expectations of the fulfillment, or inexperience of handling oneself when the moment arrives. There's a deep-seeded subconscious refusal to achieve a desire due to a fear of change that goes on. The fear is, "What if I'm bad in the sack? What if I fall in love with her? What if I get AIDS" or whatever irrational question pops in as an attempt to dissuade the body from leaving the comfort zone.

I'm not at all saying this is the case with you or anybody else in this thread when it comes to drafting QBs, but I notice this trend all the time in the general Chiefs fanbase. I remember when the idea of drafting Matt Ryan was a possibility in 2008. The interception thing was what scared people off. Same thing with Sanchez. "He sucks." "He's a good-looking California egotistical asshole who's full of himself and probably has a bigger dick than me." 2010 with Clausen. 2011 with EVERY QB- even fucking Cam Newton.

Kansas City asked out two super models this year and they both said no. Now, there's another woman who's maybe a little weird and quirky, but not too annoying. She's average-looking but has a nice ass. Great personality. And she's probably very caring and understanding about Kansas City's virginity problem. She'd make a great first fuck. What's this fanbase collectively doing?

"Inexperienced."

"Not enough wins."

"I'd much rather trade down" (could be equated to, "let's go back to eHarmony.com, I just heard back from a chick in Canada that shares my taste in pizza toppings")

ONE of these days we're going to have to settle on a woman. And guess what- Kansas City is in purgatory with a young talented team. We're not going to 1-15 to get the top guy, and we have a GM who refuses to invest picks for a future QB. We're not going to have a shot at a super model for a long long time.

I think our friend needs to just fuck the average chick with the nice ass. Lose your virginity. Get some confidence. If it doesn't work out, what's the worst that's going to happen? Forever alone?

[Bewbies]

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/YO6UgIg1AU4" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Here's the whole video. God damn do I want Tannehill.

If he would have the same impact as DeCastro I'd probably have wood right now.

[keg in kc]

The problem with your analogy (and it works with Sanchez too) is that he (they) are not the average looking chick with the great ass. They're the fat chick who might be a 'butherface' if she lost 50 pounds. The girl who somehow looks great after a dozen beers, but makes you want to puke worse than your hangover when you see her the next morning.

They're guys who should be early 2nd rounders, at the best. You try so hard to rationalize to yourself that they're more than that, you go "see, I told you so!" when some desperate team makes an idiotic move to get to them, and then you spend the next few years going "oh, so that's what they were talking about".

I get that you're okay with being the idiotic team that takes Mark Sanchez or Ryan Tannehill, instead of the idiotic team that trades for Elvis Grbac or Matt Cassel. I really get that. But you're still an idiotic team either way you go.

[kcxiv]

Strong arm and accurate hmmm..... i dont know what that is like on my team.

[Bewbies]

The problem with your analogy (and it works with Sanchez too) is that he (they) are not the average looking chick with the great ass. They're the fat chick who might be a 'butherface' if she lost 50 pounds. The girl who somehow looks great after a dozen beers, but makes you want to puke worse than your hangover when you see her the next morning.

They're guys who should be early 2nd rounders, at the best. You try so hard to rationalize to yourself that they're more than that, you go "see, I told you so!" when some desperate team makes an idiotic move to get to them, and then you spend the next few years going "oh, so that's what they were talking about".

I get that you're okay with being the idiotic team that takes Mark Sanchez or Ryan Tannehill, instead of the idiotic team that trades for Elvis Grbac or Matt Cassel. I really get that. But you're still an idiotic team either way you go.

Tannehill and Sanchez are both clearly 2nd round picks. That's why both will end up top 10 picks. Because NFL GM's use top 10 picks on second round talent.

If you don't like Tannehill that's fine. If you didn't like Sanchez, that's fine. But stop using "second round talent" as the reason you don't like them. It's retarded.

FTR, the best argument I've seen against Tannehill was HTIS pointing out how Rodgers, Big Ben etc raised their teams level of play in college. That's a very good and fair criticism.

[Mecca]

I dislike Cassel as much as anyone, I don't think drafting Tannehill solves anything other than sticking us with another Qb we'll be looking to replace and 4-5 more years of bad QB play.

[Rausch]

I dislike Cassel as much as anyone, I don't think drafting Tannehill solves anything other than sticking us with another Qb we'll be looking to replace and 4-5 more years of bad QB play.

He's another QB that 2 years later we'll be saying "needs more time."

[beach tribe]

The mentality that seems to have developed among certain of the fanbase is that they're so desperate to see anybody other than Cassel behind center they'll support any move, good, bad or otherwise. Start Stanzi! Start Orton! Draft Tannehill! Who cares if it's the right move or the wrong move.

"Not Cassel" does not mean it will work. "Not Cassel" does not mean it's a move you should make. There isn't a whole lot of satisfaction in going from "holy shit, that guy's awful" to "holy shit, that guy's awful, but, well, at least it's not Cassel".

Stop being so desperate. Stop trying to fix the position with wishful thinking.

This coming from a guy who's wanted to draft a QB for literally years and has never, ever been in favor of drafting an offensive lineman of any kind in the first. I wanted Ryan in '08, I wanted Clausen in '10, I wanted Gabbert, Ponder or Dalton last year. I do not want Tannehill this year, and it's not because I'm a true fan, it's not because I want a guard or a LB or some other same pick, it's because I do not want Tannehill. Period. I'm not a believer. It doesn't have anything to do with anybody else but him. And while I'm probably even more desperate than most to see this team get an actual starting-calibre QB, I'm not so desperate that I'm okay with the idea of throwing shit at the wall and hoping something sticks. Because that's what "taking a shot" with Tannehill amounts to. He's not a top-tier quarterback, he's not markedly better than any of the names behind him on the draft chart (Foles, Cousins, Weeden, Osweiler), and he did absolutely nothing in his short career as a college quarterback to even warrant discussion as the #11 pick, much less to warrant a trade up to #3.

I've always been the same way. I've never wanted a QB just to pick a QB.
Always thought the people who want to take a QB just to take a shot were silly. I do think Pioli wants a QB too, but don't think he's really seen the QB that he wants at the spots that he wants them at. When people pull the "at least they tried" BS like when someone brings up Sanchez I jst roll my eyes. I didn't want Sanchez even with a 2nd.
But I do want Oz, and I do think Tannehill is worth taking a shot on. Sorry about how this reads. Kind of in a hurry on this post

[Mecca]

I'm really not sure what Tannehill has that makes him a top 15 player other than the position he plays.

[milkman]

The problem with your analogy (and it works with Sanchez too) is that he (they) are not the average looking chick with the great ass. They're the fat chick who might be a 'butherface' if she lost 50 pounds. The girl who somehow looks great after a dozen beers, but makes you want to puke worse than your hangover when you see her the next morning.

They're guys who should be early 2nd rounders, at the best. You try so hard to rationalize to yourself that they're more than that, you go "see, I told you so!" when some desperate team makes an idiotic move to get to them, and then you spend the next few years going "oh, so that's what they were talking about".

I get that you're okay with being the idiotic team that takes Mark Sanchez or Ryan Tannehill, instead of the idiotic team that trades for Elvis Grbac or Matt Cassel. I really get that. But you're still an idiotic team either way you go.

I think his analogy is spot on for the majority of this fan base.

It doesn't apply to each individual.

I never wanted Jimmy Clausen, and don't see how you think he was a better prospect than Tannehill.

Clausen was garbage.

Tannehill has a much higher ceiling.

[Coogs]

I dislike Cassel as much as anyone, I don't think drafting Tannehill solves anything other than sticking us with another Qb we'll be looking to replace and 4-5 more years of bad QB play.

He has the arm to make the throws. His dad is a coach, so you know he has to have a very good handle on the game. And, it is not like Cassel is asked to do anything above and beyond what a rookie QB could do. To me, it is not a high risk to gamble on those 4-5 years. At worst, you might have to look to someone elses roster to bring in their backup if he fails... which is probably where we are at if we don't draft him. We have built the team. He is our option. It's time to roll the dice.

[beach tribe]

I'm really not sure what Tannehill has that makes him a top 15 player other than the position he plays.

I don't either, but QBs are going to go higher than in years past. It's just the nature of the beast now.

[milkman]

I'm really not sure what Tannehill has that makes him a top 15 player other than the position he plays.

Athleticism, stronger arm than given credit for, intelligenge, and easily coachable mechanical flaws.

[notorious]

Exactly. It's as if people forgot. This "wait till next year" bullshit is just that; Bullshit.

It's Tannehill this year or Landry Jones next year.

And when it's Landry Jones, we'll see the same exact ****ing argument made yet again.

I believe that Landry Jones is steaming pile of shit for a QB.

[keg in kc]

Tannehill and Sanchez are both clearly 2nd round picks. That's why both will end up top 10 picks. Because NFL GM's use top 10 picks on second round talent.

If you don't like Tannehill that's fine. If you didn't like Sanchez, that's fine. But stop using "second round talent" as the reason you don't like them. It's retarded.Sorry if it offends you or if you have trouble dealing with the fact that other people may have an opinion that's different from yours. That's not retarded, that's just the real world; not everybody marches to the beat of the same drum.

And yes, it was my opinion that Sanchez was a second round caliber talent. I would have considered taking him in the bottom of the round, but that's basically what I thought. The fact that the Jets made a move on him earlier than that doesn't change my opinion on him. My opinion on Tannehill is almost exactly the same. And that opinion won't change if and when somebody takes him earlier than I would. Because that's their opinion.

My opinion is not fact. I didn't like Drew Brees. Didn't think he'd translate to the NFL. Oops. Wrong on that one.

But don't expect me to stop expressing my opinion just because you don't agree with it. And don't expect me to stoop to the level of insults, either.

[Rausch]

I think his analogy is spot on for the majority of this fan base.

It doesn't apply to each individual.

I never wanted Jimmy Clausen, and don't see how you think he was a better prospect than Tannehill.

Clausen was garbage.

Tannehill has a much higher ceiling.

I think fucking Brady Quinn has more upside than either one of them.

And FTR I'm not saying I want us to depend on Quinn as the QBOTF...

[BigMeatballDave]

Osweiler is gonna be on ESPNU @11e and Foles right after.

[beach tribe]

Sorry if it offends you or if you have trouble dealing with the fact that other people may have an opinion that's different from yours. That's not retarded, that's just the real world; not everybody marches to the beat of the same drum.

And yes, it was my opinion that Sanchez was a second round caliber talent. I would have considered taking him in the bottom of the round, but that's basically what I thought. The fact that the Jets made a move on him earlier than that doesn't change my opinion on him. My opinion on Tannehill is almost exactly the same. And that opinion won't change if and when somebody takes him earlier than I would. Because that's their opinion.

My opinion is not fact. I didn't like Drew Brees. Didn't think he'd translate to the NFL. Oops. Wrong on that one.

But don't expect me to stop expressing my opinion just because you don't agree with it. And don't expect me to stoop to the level of insults, either.

I also think it's silly when people argue with someone about what kind of talent someone has. If you look at the guy and see 2nd round talent who's to say you're wrong? it's your opinion. I see Weeden as a 3rd round talent regardless of his age. If you see Tannehill as a 2nd round talent. Then to you, that's what he is. When all is said, and done you could have very well been more right than anyone.

[Mecca]

Does anyone see Ryan Tannehill as a guy to lead a team to a championship? We're talking about a guy who really didn't make his team better, hurt a lot of the offensive players draft stocks he played with, and couldn't win games in crunch time.

I think Ryan Tannehill is overvalued for his position but even if he does develop what is his upside? I'm not sure even if he pans out he's good enough.

[BigMeatballDave]

Case Keenum @9:30e

[Rausch]

And yes, it was my opinion that Sanchez was a second round caliber talent. I would have considered taking him in the bottom of the round, but that's basically what I thought. The fact that the Jets made a move on him earlier than that doesn't change my opinion on him. My opinion on Tannehill is almost exactly the same.

Agree.

[keg in kc]

I think his analogy is spot on for the majority of this fan base.

It doesn't apply to each individual.

I never wanted Jimmy Clausen, and don't see how you think he was a better prospect than Tannehill.

Clausen was garbage.

Tannehill has a much higher ceiling.I don't even remember why it was that I liked Clausen. I think it may actually have been the same reason that I believe so many people like Tannehill this year: there was literally nobody else.

Tannehill to me is a long term project. I don't take a project at 11. And I certainly don't trade up to 3 for one. It's the same reason I was not in favor of taking Sanchez. Other people disagree with that, and that's fine, but I've been pretty consistent about that for years. I'm too old to change now.

"Ceiling" and "floor" talk doesn't mean a whole lot to me, to be honest.

[Bewbies]

Sorry if it offends you or if you have trouble dealing with the fact that other people may have an opinion that's different from yours. That's not retarded, that's just the real world; not everybody marches to the beat of the same drum.

And yes, it was my opinion that Sanchez was a second round caliber talent. I would have considered taking him in the bottom of the round, but that's basically what I thought. The fact that the Jets made a move on him earlier than that doesn't change my opinion on him. My opinion on Tannehill is almost exactly the same. And that opinion won't change if and when somebody takes him earlier than I would. Because that's their opinion.

My opinion is not fact. I didn't like Drew Brees. Didn't think he'd translate to the NFL. Oops. Wrong on that one.

But don't expect me to stop expressing my opinion just because you don't agree with it. And don't expect me to stoop to the level of insults, either.

I wasn't meaning all of that directly at you, but I do think "second round talent" is a weak argument. If you don't like him, just say you don't like him.

Shit, outside of a couple players none of us around here really know who the folks in the NFL consider talent for each round. Their lists are far different than the crap we read online. And no, I don't think people on here know more about evaluation and scouting than do the folks that get paid millions in the NFL....

[beach tribe]

Does anyone see Ryan Tannehill as a guy to lead a team to a championship? We're talking about a guy who really didn't make his team better, hurt a lot of the offensive players draft stocks he played with, and couldn't win games in crunch time.

I think Ryan Tannehill is overvalued for his position but even if he does develop what is his upside? I'm not sure even if he pans out he's good enough.

I think his ceiling is high enough, but as is? No, right now.

[Mecca]

If I was going to take a guy to develop, I'd take Osweiler, I think he has tools to work with.

[milkman]

Does anyone see Ryan Tannehill as a guy to lead a team to a championship? We're talking about a guy who really didn't make his team better, hurt a lot of the offensive players draft stocks he played with, and couldn't win games in crunch time.

I think Ryan Tannehill is overvalued for his position but even if he does develop what is his upside? I'm not sure even if he pans out he's good enough.

I wouldn't be supporting the idea of drafting Tannehill if I didn't believe he had the tools to be a guy to lead a team to a championship.

[Mecca]

I think his ceiling is high enough, but as is? No, right now.

The question is, what is his ceiling? Top 5? Top 10? Top15 in the league?

[Bewbies]

Does anyone see Ryan Tannehill as a guy to lead a team to a championship? We're talking about a guy who really didn't make his team better, hurt a lot of the offensive players draft stocks he played with, and couldn't win games in crunch time.

I think Ryan Tannehill is overvalued for his position but even if he does develop what is his upside? I'm not sure even if he pans out he's good enough.

With Sherman getting fired does he bear any of that blame? Anyone that watched the title game would put the loss on Miles more than any player...

Would an elite QB save a suckass coach from sucking ass? Honest question, I don't know the answer to that.

I suppose it could be argued that Tannehill could have saved his job, or that Sherman hurt his players stock, including the QB?

[Bewbies]

If I was going to take a guy to develop, I'd take Osweiler, I think he has tools to work with.

The only 2 QB's I like this year (that we could draft) are Tannehill and Osweiler. We brought both those guys in, so hopefully if we grab one Pioli makes the right choice...

[BryanBusby]

Would an elite QB save a suckass coach from sucking ass? Honest question, I don't know the answer to that.

Peyton Manning did save the jobs of Tony Dungy and the cardboard cut out that took over for years and years.

At the same time, not even Brett Favre could save Shermans job in Green Bay.

[milkman]

I don't even remember why it was that I liked Clausen. I think it may actually have been the same reason that I believe so many people like Tannehill this year: there was literally nobody else.

Tannehill to me is a long term project. I don't take a project at 11. And I certainly don't trade up to 3 for one. It's the same reason I was not in favor of taking Sanchez. Other people disagree with that, and that's fine, but I've been pretty consistent about that for years. I'm too old to change now.

"Ceiling" and "floor" talk doesn't mean a whole lot to me, to be honest.

I see him as something of a project, but long term?

Don't believe so.

However, this is where we disagree, I believe if you think a kid has the tools, but needs development, you still take him high in the draft.

I also believe that whether you pick a guy that you believe can start day one, or a guy that you believe needs some time, you'll know by year 3 if he's the right guy, either way.

[beach tribe]

The question is, what is his ceiling? Top 5? Top 10? Top15 in the league?

Basically impossible to say really. I think it's pretty high though.

[beach tribe]

I see him as something of a project, but long term?

Don't believe so.

However, this is where we disagree, I believe if you think a kid has the tools, but needs development, you still take him high in the draft.

I also believe that whether you pick a guy that you believe can start day one, or a guy that you believe needs some time, you'll know by year 3 if he's the right guy, either way.

Totally agree. Except that he doesn't have what it takes to panout long term if that's what you're saying.

[RealSNR]

I dislike Cassel as much as anyone, I don't think drafting Tannehill solves anything other than sticking us with another Qb we'll be looking to replace and 4-5 more years of bad QB play.I apologize for being an ornery annoying bitch tonight, but you do realize that's True Fan talk, right?

I'm not saying you can't hate on Tannehill. You can. The argument has been made. Wins, decision-making, Cassel-style checkdowns. Those last two can be fixed, and you hope that if they do, that item #1 gets fixed as well. Lots of people say the odds are so stacked against somebody suddenly picking up those QB characteristics in the pros (Jay Cutlers are a rarity) that a Tannehill project is almost doomed from the very beginning to fail. And I can appreciate that argument.

What's NOT a legit argument is, "We'll just have to flush him down the toilet and try again in 4-5 years."

GOOD. I hope we do. I hope Tannehill fails, our QB situation is in ruins, and it forces us to try again with another 1st round QB. If that's the way to get the cycle started, then I'm totally fine with that. I embrace the colossal failure that is Ryan Tannehill.

That's been the anti-True Fan argument for years. It was what you and Hamas talked about endlessly with Mark Sanchez in 2009. The dream of having a franchise just TRY to go to the well that will produce Super Bowl QBs.

Now it works the same way with Tannehill. It's logically consistent.

[keg in kc]

I wasn't meaning all of that directly at you, but I do think "second round talent" is a weak argument. If you don't like him, just say you don't like himI'm not sure what other people mean by it, but when I say second round talent, I'm just saying that's the range I'd draft the guy. Although in my own brain that actually means late-first through mid-second round. I'm not actually saying "this guy sucks"; that's just the range I value him based on what I envision as his risk/reward ratio.

If I really hated the guy, trust me, I'd let everybody know.

To me, Tannehill falls into the huge glut of guys who fall between about 20 and 50. I think his overall value is inflated by two things: 1) lack of qbs in the draft, and 2) people falling in love with measurables and potential. This time of years, people always get hot over workout warriors, and guys who were not all that impressive on the field, like Tannehill, shoot up the boards because of stats and interviews.



I think in the end this is probably all a moot point with the Chiefs anyway. They are not the kind of team who's likely to draft a QB in the first round at all. They're definitely not the kind of team who's going to trade up for one. I think we're all arguing mostly because we like the sound of our voice

[RealSNR]

Not me. I'm arguing to procrastinate on my work.

[keg in kc]

Not me. I'm arguing to procrastinate on my work.Me, too. I'm at work right now, and I just took an hour break to ride my bike. LMAO

[Bewbies]

Not me. I'm arguing to procrastinate on my work.

My wife has been watching American Idol, Survivor and America's Next Top Model at the same time. I'm trying to not blow my fucking brains out. :evil:

[RealSNR]

My wife has been watching American Idol, Survivor and America's Next Top Model at the same time. I'm trying to not blow my fucking brains out. :evil:DO YOU GUYS SEE WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU FALL IN LOVE WITH RYAN TANNEHILL?

YOU GET MARRIED, AND THEN YOU GET RAPED WITH AMERICAN IDOL.

IS THAT WHAT YOU WANT, GUYS? AMERICAN IDOL?

[BossChief]

What tools does Tannehill NOT have?

[BryanBusby]

What tools does Tannehill NOT have?

Well you see he's just not clutch ^_^

*ESPN likes this.

[keg in kc]

What tools does Tannehill NOT have?He has it all. He farted last week, and by the time it got to China it had turned into a hurricane. The sheer power of it caused an earthquake which knocked a landmass into the pacific, developing a tsunami. California was in danger, but Tannehill ran there from Texas, and used his penis as a levee to stop the surge. While it was out stopping that apocalyptic wave, he got bored and decided to tattoed a sequel to Homer's Odyssey on his own glans with a sea shell and some ink from a squid. Then Mike Peterson stopped by for some awesomeness lessons.

[Chief3188]

And if he somehow is there at 11, this team will do all it can to move out and try to rape a team of a bunch of picks, now that is the Patriot way.

That's the Patriot way when the Patriots have a QB. Their way might be a bit different if they had our QB situation.

[BossChief]

His arm strength isn't a question
Neither is his accuracy
Mechanics
He is pre med with a 36 wonderlic
He runs a 4.6 and uses his mobility to extend the pass play

I guess I don't see where the guy can't develop into a franchise guy.

[BossChief]

He has it all. He farted last week, and by the time it got to China it had turned into a hurricane. The sheer power of it caused an earthquake which knocked a landmass into the pacific, developing a tsunami. California was in danger, but Tannehill ran there from Texas, and used his penis as a levee to stop the surge. While it was out stopping that apocalyptic wave, he got bored and decided to tattoed a sequel to Homer's Odyssey on his own glans with a sea shell and some ink from a squid. Then Mike Peterson stopped by for some awesomeness lessons.

I know the discussion probably needed some comic relief, but I was asking a real question and was actually interested in hearing your response.

[Mr_Tomahawk]

He only started for a season and a half as a QB in college....that is why he will not be a good QB.

/CP

[keg in kc]

I know the discussion probably needed some comic relief, but I was asking a real question and was actually interested in hearing your response.You could probably look up my response from anytime in the last three months and use it.

His mechanics/footwork are a question.
He's shown limited to no ability to read defenses, which was in part due to the offensive system, but he often made questionable decisions with the ball. (This is one area where I believe experience, or his lack thereof is absolutely key)
He did not perform in the biggest games, or late in games.

Quarterback is about a lot more than natural ability. And wonderlic scores do not generally reflect intelligence where it matters most, on the field. 19 starts is simply not enough time for him to develop the skills I believe every quarterback needs to succeed in the NFL, which puts him on an extended development timeframe, which in turn lowers his value in my mind.


I should clarify, I'm mostly against the idea of trading up for him. I could stomach him at 11. It's not what I'd want in a perfect world, but it's not necessarily the worst to way to go, either. Nobody really turns me on all that much in this draft. But I would not even for a moment consider the idea of giving up multiple picks for the guy. And I would not even blink if he was on the board at 11 and somebody offered us some serious value for him. I'd do it in less than a heartbeat.

But I don't think we're taking him, and I don't expect that we'll be making any moves in the first round involving him in any way. Nice to talk about, but doesn't seem all that realistic to me.

[BryanBusby]

You know who would be a good QB? David DeCastro.