All times are UTC-05:00


Phinfever Home Page

Phinfever Chatroom

Phinfever FAQ




Reply to topic  [ 38 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2012 8:37 am 
Offline
Phinfever Draft Guru
Phinfever Draft Guru

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 5:10 pm
Posts: 10146
Location: MA
http://blogs.sun-sentinel.com/sports_fo ... is-in.html

I haven't seen the whole draft so I don't know who is on the board, but my assumption is that it followed the ususal Luck-Griffin-Kalil-Richardson-Claiborne-Blackmon-Ingram top 7.

I personally think there will be some unexpected wheeling and dealing so again these mocks, while a lot of fun, tend to be pointless when you can't factor in trades.

I posted this because I like Kelly's description of why Miami can't pass on Tannehill. Have to say I'm becoming more of a fan of his the more I read (used to really not like him). He is also very tough on QBs (an original Henne "hater") so I'm somewhat intrigued when I see him speak positively of Tannehill. Anyway, its a good discussion and worth a read.


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2012 8:43 am 
Offline
Phinfever Global Moderator
Phinfever Global Moderator

Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 8:24 am
Posts: 4111
I'll just post here what I posted there lol

Quote:
Really happy it’s not Coples. The guy took plays off in college, what do you think he’s going to do in the NFL? He rose up the draft boards because of what he did in shorts… ala Vernon Gholston a few years back.

If Ingram doesn’t fall, Tannehill is the right choice. He has amazing accuracy on the run and is an incredibly gifted all around athlete.

I agree with Omar, with a little patience and tweaking of the scheme to fit Tannehills strengths he could be a great playmaker.

Remember, Philbin was involved in the development of Aaron Rodgers in Green Bay, a guy who fell into the 20’s because of “poor arm strength”. If anyone can make Tannehill a star, it’s Philbin and company.


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2012 10:52 am 
Offline
User avatar
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 11:14 pm
Posts: 5516
Location: Columbia, SC
He has changed his tune on the pick, as he and Ben Volin of the Palm Beach Post had Miami taking Coples at #8.

Sure, a team could trade up in the draft and take Tannehill or Cleveland could take him at #4. That being said, for all the bluster that is going on, I think Ryan will be there at #8.

_________________
Image


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2012 11:25 am 
Offline
Phinfever Draft Guru
Phinfever Draft Guru

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 5:10 pm
Posts: 10146
Location: MA
phinsfansc wrote:
He has changed his tune on the pick, as he and Ben Volin of the Palm Beach Post had Miami taking Coples at #8.

Sure, a team could trade up in the draft and take Tannehill or Cleveland could take him at #4. That being said, for all the bluster that is going on, I think Ryan will be there at #8.


I sure hope so Tony. When I say wheeling and dealing I don't necessarily mean for Tannehill. I meant like maybe Tampa Bay jumping to the three spot to secure Richardson, someone maybe jumping up to get Blackmon if he slips by St Louis, or a team trying to jump ahead of Jacksonville and Carolina to get their favorite d-lineman (Ingram, Coples, maybe Cox).

I think Miami will go Tannehill if he is there at 8 or if they only have to jump up to the 6th pick.


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2012 2:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Phinfever Veteran
Phinfever Veteran

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 6:44 pm
Posts: 659
I'd much rather see us take Reiff, Claiborne, Kirkpatrick and DeCastro. Heck I'd take anyone else with a first round grade over Tannehill.

_________________
Image
Image


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2012 3:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 12:30 am
Posts: 2980
Man, Tannehill is a risky pick at #8. I can see the physical tools and potential, but I have also read blistering articles citing how poorly he did against top defenses in college. Mike Sherman gives the team an edge though, since he coached the guy in college. However, Tannehill won't be ready to start for a year or two though and that also hurts a franchise with a huge number of holes to fill. There is so much talent that will be on the board at #8, and we are talking blue chip talent that will give you a player that is very likely to contribute on day 1, that it makes Tannehill a very tough choice to make.

_________________
Image
Philbin's countenance exudes confidence!
1984 was so long ago...Will there ever be another rainbow?


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2012 4:02 pm 
Offline
Phinfever Draft Guru
Phinfever Draft Guru

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 5:10 pm
Posts: 10146
Location: MA
FrustratedFinFan wrote:
Man, Tannehill is a risky pick at #8. I can see the physical tools and potential, but I have also read blistering articles citing how poorly he did against top defenses in college. Mike Sherman gives the team an edge though, since he coached the guy in college. However, Tannehill won't be ready to start for a year or two though and that also hurts a franchise with a huge number of holes to fill. There is so much talent that will be on the board at #8, and we are talking blue chip talent that will give you a player that is very likely to contribute on day 1, that it makes Tannehill a very tough choice to make.


Tannehill had something like 64 dropped passes by his receivers last year and wasn't exactly surrounded by draft worthy talent. I'd like to see him get a chance to throw to some NFL level guys.

Can he raise his game, show the IT factor and make the guys around better? I don't know but I'd certainly like to find out.


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2012 4:34 pm 
Offline
Phinfever Global Moderator
Phinfever Global Moderator

Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 8:24 am
Posts: 4111
I don't know about all the "blue chip" talent available this year. To be honest I see this as a really weak 1st round of talent...


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2012 4:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Phinfever All Pro
Phinfever All Pro

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 10:36 am
Posts: 325
Location: Scarborough, Maine
Personally I am going to trust Ireland on this pick. If Tannehill is selected then I am fine with it. I really think Philbin/Sherman/Ireland will make the right choice. If they are sold on him then they need to take him. Don't move up though because he will be there at #8.


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2012 7:54 pm 
Offline
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 2:05 pm
Posts: 2576
Location: NSW, Australia
FrustratedFinFan wrote:
Man, Tannehill is a risky pick at #8. I can see the physical tools and potential, but I have also read blistering articles citing how poorly he did against top defenses in college. Mike Sherman gives the team an edge though, since he coached the guy in college. However, Tannehill won't be ready to start for a year or two though and that also hurts a franchise with a huge number of holes to fill. There is so much talent that will be on the board at #8, and we are talking blue chip talent that will give you a player that is very likely to contribute on day 1, that it makes Tannehill a very tough choice to make.


How many QBs, even those taken in the top 10, are ready to start day 1?
Why is this such an issue singled out with Tannehill?


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2012 8:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 12:30 am
Posts: 2980
Ready or not, teams usually play their first round QB's in year one.....Tannehill is so raw that to do so would probably be a disaster.

_________________
Image
Philbin's countenance exudes confidence!
1984 was so long ago...Will there ever be another rainbow?


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2012 8:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 12:48 pm
Posts: 6186
Dolfanrar wrote:
If they are sold on him then they need to take him. Don't move up though because he will be there at #8.


I will be gravely disappointed if they waste quality picks trying to move up to get him. We have major holes we need to fill.

_________________
Image


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2012 11:12 pm 
Offline
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 5:59 pm
Posts: 5117
Dolfanrar wrote:
Personally I am going to trust Ireland on this pick. If Tannehill is selected then I am fine with it. I really think Philbin/Sherman/Ireland will make the right choice. If they are sold on him then they need to take him. Don't move up though because he will be there at #8.


You're right, we have more information about Tannehill than every other team in the NFL. Our offensive coordinator was a former NFL head coach, he knows whether or not Tannehill has the stuff. If he doesn't have what it takes, we'll pass on him, it's as simple as that. But if Ireland, Philbin, and Sherman all agree like you said, and they all think Tannehill is a future franchise quarterback, then he give us plenty of value at 8th overall.


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 1:41 am 
Offline
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 2:05 pm
Posts: 2576
Location: NSW, Australia
FrustratedFinFan wrote:
Ready or not, teams usually play their first round QB's in year one.....Tannehill is so raw that to do so would probably be a disaster.


My gut told me you were wrong, so I looked up the numbers. Here is every 1st round pick since 2004 and how much they played.

Philip Rivers - 0 starts, 8 attempts
Eli Manning - 7 starts, 197 attempts
JP Losman - 0 starts, 5 attempts
Alex Smith - 7 starts, 165 attempts
Vince Young - 13 starts, 357 attempts
Matt Leinart - 11 starts, 377 attempts
JaMarcus Russell - 1 start, 66 attempts
Brady Quinn - 0 starts, 8 attempts
Matt Ryan - 16 starts, 434 attempts
Joe Flacco - 16 starts, 428 attempts
Matthew Stafford - 10 starts, 377 attempts
Mark Sanchez - 15 starts, 354 attempts
Josh Freeman - 9 starts, 290 attempts
Sam Bradford - 16 starts, 590 attempts
Tim Tebow - 3 starts, 82 attempts
Cam Newton - 16 starts, 517 attempts
Jake Locker - 0 starts, 66 attempts
Blaine Gabbert - 14 starts, 413 attempts
Christian Ponder - 10 starts, 291 attempts

Of 19 QB's picked in the 1st round since 2004, 13 of them started at least 7 games and 5 of them started 0 or 1 game.

I retract what I said before. I hadn't realized how much the first round QB's actually do play. I knew there were a few, but I hadn't realized it. Though these numbers do not look at how many were good or a disaster.

Guess I haven't paid much attention to 1st round QB's because it's been so long since we've actually drafted one.


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 9:10 am 
Offline
Phinfever Global Moderator
Phinfever Global Moderator

Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 8:24 am
Posts: 4111
I think it's sort of a new thing to start 1st round QB's. Look at the 2004 drafted QB's like Rivers, Eli and Losman... only 7 starts between the 3 of them. As the years have gone by teams have thrown their first rounders in there much sooner.


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 9:19 am 
Offline
User avatar
Phinfever Blog Writer - Post Game
Phinfever Blog Writer - Post Game

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:59 am
Posts: 26223
Location: Miami, FL
Rock Sexton wrote:
Dolfanrar wrote:
If they are sold on him then they need to take him. Don't move up though because he will be there at #8.


I will be gravely disappointed if they waste quality picks trying to move up to get him. We have major holes we need to fill.


The most major being franchise QB...

_________________
Image


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 9:24 am 
Offline
Phinfever Draft Guru
Phinfever Draft Guru

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 5:10 pm
Posts: 10146
Location: MA
degs wrote:
FrustratedFinFan wrote:
Ready or not, teams usually play their first round QB's in year one.....Tannehill is so raw that to do so would probably be a disaster.


My gut told me you were wrong, so I looked up the numbers. Here is every 1st round pick since 2004 and how much they played.

Philip Rivers - 0 starts, 8 attempts
Eli Manning - 7 starts, 197 attempts
JP Losman - 0 starts, 5 attempts
Alex Smith - 7 starts, 165 attempts
Vince Young - 13 starts, 357 attempts
Matt Leinart - 11 starts, 377 attempts
JaMarcus Russell - 1 start, 66 attempts
Brady Quinn - 0 starts, 8 attempts
Matt Ryan - 16 starts, 434 attempts
Joe Flacco - 16 starts, 428 attempts
Matthew Stafford - 10 starts, 377 attempts
Mark Sanchez - 15 starts, 354 attempts
Josh Freeman - 9 starts, 290 attempts
Sam Bradford - 16 starts, 590 attempts
Tim Tebow - 3 starts, 82 attempts
Cam Newton - 16 starts, 517 attempts
Jake Locker - 0 starts, 66 attempts
Blaine Gabbert - 14 starts, 413 attempts
Christian Ponder - 10 starts, 291 attempts

Of 19 QB's picked in the 1st round since 2004, 13 of them started at least 7 games and 5 of them started 0 or 1 game.

I retract what I said before. I hadn't realized how much the first round QB's actually do play. I knew there were a few, but I hadn't realized it. Though these numbers do not look at how many were good or a disaster.

Guess I haven't paid much attention to 1st round QB's because it's been so long since we've actually drafted one.


You forgot Aaron Rodgers and Jay Cutler.


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 9:36 am 
Offline
Phinfever Draft Guru
Phinfever Draft Guru

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 5:10 pm
Posts: 10146
Location: MA
FrustratedFinFan wrote:
Ready or not, teams usually play their first round QB's in year one.....Tannehill is so raw that to do so would probably be a disaster.


I need to chime in on this description of Tannehill as raw which I think is completely inaccurate. Consider some facts:

While only starting 19 games, he went to every QB meeting and continued to study the position for 4 years. He worked in a pro style offense and was not constantly operating out of the shotgun. His footwork is very clean and his pocket presence very steady, something you don't find in a "raw" QB. His receivers dropped 64 passes last year which would lead you to believe that if you even cut that in half his accuracy numbers would be up there with the likes of RG III, Luck and Weeden aka the ready to start now guys. His speed and athleticism, coupled with his great accuracy outside of the pocket allows him to buy more time to throw and is a huge asset for any rookie who needs time to learn to read a defense.

With all of that said, and watching any videos of his college game, why would anyone conclude he couldn't start as a rookie? The benchmarks of rookie success are Big Ben, Ryan and Flacco. None of them were truly ready but were aided by a strong defense and good ground game. Miami will probably have both to start this season. Flacco started against inferior talent in college so why should he be considered more ready than Tannehill?

The only thing holding Tannehill back is that both Moore and Garrard are respected leaders who already have roster spots. Moore proved it somewhat last year. The other rooks I mentioned had what, the likes of Tommy Maddox and Chris Redman to compete with? Its not even close.

As for the whole Blaine Gabbert type /not ready for prime time comparison it was noted before the draft that he had sloppy mechanics, tough footwork and came from a shotgun offense that required 1 or 2 reads. Huge difference from that learning curve to someone who will be coming into a similar system and was asked to do a lot more to prop up his team.


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 11:49 am 
Offline
User avatar
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 12:48 pm
Posts: 6186
jammer wrote:
I need to chime in on this description of Tannehill as raw which I think is completely inaccurate.


I think you're misunderstanding how they're applying the term "raw" .... they're not referring to him in the same way as they would a raw 3rd rounder ..... however there is a lot of consensus out there that he needs to time .....

Quote:
Former Colts president Bill Polian, who was preparing for the 2012 draft before the Colts fired him in January, said he had Tannehill rated in the 20s on his draft board and called him a “developmental guy.”

“He needs one year, maybe two, behind an experienced guy,” Polian, now an ESPN analyst, said this week.

NFL Network’s Mike Mayock called Tannehill “very raw” and said “he gets eaten alive this year by NFL defenses.”

Mel Kiper: “If he plays this year, he will be a bust.”

Todd McShay: “You better be prepared to sit him for at least the majority of the season.”
http://blogs.palmbeachpost.com/thedaily ... g-in-2012/

_________________
Image


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 11:59 am 
Offline
User avatar
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 12:48 pm
Posts: 6186
Personally, I like to actually hear these guys speak ..... adds a different dimension to watching the games or looking at the stats. Here's a one-on-one with Tannehill for those who've never seen an interview before .....


Click here to learn how to add YouTube Videos to your phpBB forum

_________________
Image


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 12:21 pm 
Offline
Phinfever Draft Guru
Phinfever Draft Guru

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 5:10 pm
Posts: 10146
Location: MA
Rock Sexton wrote:
jammer wrote:
I need to chime in on this description of Tannehill as raw which I think is completely inaccurate.


I think you're misunderstanding how they're applying the term "raw" .... they're not referring to him in the same way as they would a raw 3rd rounder ..... however there is a lot of consensus out there that he needs to time .....


Its not that I'm misunderstanding it, I think its a poor word choice. Raw applies to Osweiler - simply a talented individual who needs his entire game reshaped to fit the NFL (mechanics, footwork, film study, etc). He's going from shotgun screen passes to multiple receiver reads. That is not Tannehill at all. Inexperienced or overwhelmed might be better fits, but that is every rookie QB.

A raw recruit, in any business, is someone who needs to be taught the basics and then begins working on the fine details. Heck, RG III could be considered more raw based on the offense he ran. And like Tannehill, I see RG III's athleticism masking his early deficiencies in a pro style offense (see Cam Newton's improvisation).

My concern with Tannehill is the IT factor. I don't think anyone can say he has it or doesn't have it.


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 12:22 pm 
Offline
Phinfever Draft Guru
Phinfever Draft Guru

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 5:10 pm
Posts: 10146
Location: MA
Rock Sexton wrote:
Personally, I like to actually hear these guys speak ..... adds a different dimension to watching the games or looking at the stats. Here's a one-on-one with Tannehill for those who've never seen an interview before .....


Click here to learn how to add YouTube Videos to your phpBB forum


The guy who really impresses me in interviews is Kirk Cousins.


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 12:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 12:48 pm
Posts: 6186
jammer wrote:
The guy who really impresses me in interviews is Kirk Cousins.


Haven't watched his yet .... got a link? Nevermind, I'll prolly just YouTube it. Russell Wilson's was on ESPN yesterday when I was in the gym ..... but they had the sound turned off so I couldn't hear it.

_________________
Image


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 1:10 pm 
Offline
Phinfever Global Moderator
Phinfever Global Moderator

Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 8:24 am
Posts: 4111
Rock Sexton wrote:
jammer wrote:
The guy who really impresses me in interviews is Kirk Cousins.


Haven't watched his yet .... got a link? Nevermind, I'll prolly just YouTube it. Russell Wilson's was on ESPN yesterday when I was in the gym ..... but they had the sound turned off so I couldn't hear it.


Russell Wilson does some really good interviewing as well.


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 1:57 pm 
Offline
Phinfever Draft Guru
Phinfever Draft Guru

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 5:10 pm
Posts: 10146
Location: MA
Rock Sexton wrote:
jammer wrote:
The guy who really impresses me in interviews is Kirk Cousins.


Haven't watched his yet .... got a link? Nevermind, I'll prolly just YouTube it. Russell Wilson's was on ESPN yesterday when I was in the gym ..... but they had the sound turned off so I couldn't hear it.


If you have ESPN Insider you should be able to see him on the Gruden QB Camp. Or maybe just search for it on the site.

I wish I knew more about Cousins and that he was more highly regarded. Seems to be a higher pedigree version of Matt Moore (limited skill set but serious moxie and a good leader). O Kelly claims Cousins has the IT factor based on his research. I just haven't seen enough of him outside a few highlight reels and interviews.


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 5:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 12:48 pm
Posts: 6186
jammer wrote:
If you have ESPN Insider you should be able to see him on the Gruden QB Camp. Or maybe just search for it on the site.


Found it on YouTube ....

Wilson

Click here to learn how to add YouTube Videos to your phpBB forum

Cousins

Click here to learn how to add YouTube Videos to your phpBB forum

_________________
Image


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 5:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar
2017 VIP Donor!
2017 VIP Donor!

Joined: Sun May 02, 2010 3:56 pm
Posts: 6641
Rock Sexton wrote:
jammer wrote:
I need to chime in on this description of Tannehill as raw which I think is completely inaccurate.


I think you're misunderstanding how they're applying the term "raw" .... they're not referring to him in the same way as they would a raw 3rd rounder ..... however there is a lot of consensus out there that he needs to time .....

Quote:
Former Colts president Bill Polian, who was preparing for the 2012 draft before the Colts fired him in January, said he had Tannehill rated in the 20s on his draft board and called him a “developmental guy.”

“He needs one year, maybe two, behind an experienced guy,” Polian, now an ESPN analyst, said this week.

NFL Network’s Mike Mayock called Tannehill “very raw” and said “he gets eaten alive this year by NFL defenses.”

Mel Kiper: “If he plays this year, he will be a bust.”

Todd McShay: “You better be prepared to sit him for at least the majority of the season.”
http://blogs.palmbeachpost.com/thedaily ... g-in-2012/


I don't really care what those guys say..
Our coaching staff knows him as much as anyone and certainly better than any of those tv guys....If they pick him, you have to believe they know what they are getting.

I watched Matt Ryan and knew he was going to be good..I haven't seen much of Tennehill so i have to trust the staff on this one


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 6:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 12:48 pm
Posts: 6186
Kev1321 wrote:
\
I don't really care what those guys say..
Our coaching staff knows him as much as anyone and certainly better than any of those tv guys....If they pick him, you have to believe they know what they are getting.

I watched Matt Ryan and knew he was going to be good..I haven't seen much of Tennehill so i have to trust the staff on this one


It's like you're merging two separate arguments here. I said nothing about them not knowing what they are getting if they pick him. That's pretty freakin' obvious since Sherman coached him.

Picking him and weather he'll be ready to play immediately are two distinctly different discussions so I don't understand why the hostility towards the opinions I posted.

_________________
Image


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 6:54 pm 
With the rookie salary cap, we should see a change in drafting philosophy around the league and I'm hoping Ireland not only changes the way he values players but does rely on his usual habit of doubling down on players.

If I was the GM of Miami for this draft--knowing I need a franchise QB--because this is a passhappy league and my owner needs a franchise marquee player to fill the stands--then I double down on the QB position this year.

I would swoop in grab Tannehill at #8 then with one my third picks I take a chance on Russell. One of those two guys will solve my QB problems for the next 10 years if they are developed right.


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 8:34 pm 
Offline
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 2:05 pm
Posts: 2576
Location: NSW, Australia
apatos13 wrote:
With the rookie salary cap, we should see a change in drafting philosophy around the league and I'm hoping Ireland not only changes the way he values players but does rely on his usual habit of doubling down on players.

If I was the GM of Miami for this draft--knowing I need a franchise QB--because this is a passhappy league and my owner needs a franchise marquee player to fill the stands--then I double down on the QB position this year.

I would swoop in grab Tannehill at #8 then with one my third picks I take a chance on Russell. One of those two guys will solve my QB problems for the next 10 years if they are developed right.


I have a different philosophy. To me, you don't draft Tannehill unless you truly believe he is "THE" guy. And in that case, I would rather use the other pick to draft someone to help the team in other areas.

I'm not against drafting a development guy, but I wouldn't do that until about the 5th round or later and I wouldn't do it in the coaches 1st year or maybe even 2nd year, as there will be significant roster turnover and those draft picks are needed very badly to shape the team right now.


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 8:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 12:30 am
Posts: 2980
This team has way too many holes to double down on any position in the early rounds. Maybe take a late round shot at a QB....but I suspect the late round picks are going O-line, receiver and maybe a running back.

I see the first 4 rounds being QB, WR, pass rusher, O-line.

_________________
Image
Philbin's countenance exudes confidence!
1984 was so long ago...Will there ever be another rainbow?


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 9:11 pm 
degs wrote:
apatos13 wrote:
With the rookie salary cap, we should see a change in drafting philosophy around the league and I'm hoping Ireland not only changes the way he values players but does rely on his usual habit of doubling down on players.

If I was the GM of Miami for this draft--knowing I need a franchise QB--because this is a passhappy league and my owner needs a franchise marquee player to fill the stands--then I double down on the QB position this year.

I would swoop in grab Tannehill at #8 then with one my third picks I take a chance on Russell. One of those two guys will solve my QB problems for the next 10 years if they are developed right.


I have a different philosophy. To me, you don't draft Tannehill unless you truly believe he is "THE" guy. And in that case, I would rather use the other pick to draft someone to help the team in other areas.

I'm not against drafting a development guy, but I wouldn't do that until about the 5th round or later and I wouldn't do it in the coaches 1st year or maybe even 2nd year, as there will be significant roster turnover and those draft picks are needed very badly to shape the team right now.


Yeah but remember, One draft is not going to make this a superbowl team overnight. If we have a good year, you could expect that your 1st rounder becomes a solid starter and your 2nd after some serious development becomes a starter. After those rounds you're basically hoping for a few guys that can fill the bottom of your roster. If you're really lucky, maybe you find a diamond in the rough.

I'm just saying don't put all your eggs in one basket. If we are convinced Tannehill is the guy, great but why not draft another and develop both? Just incase RT is a bust.


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 11:30 pm 
Offline
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 2:05 pm
Posts: 2576
Location: NSW, Australia
apatos13 wrote:
degs wrote:
apatos13 wrote:
With the rookie salary cap, we should see a change in drafting philosophy around the league and I'm hoping Ireland not only changes the way he values players but does rely on his usual habit of doubling down on players.

If I was the GM of Miami for this draft--knowing I need a franchise QB--because this is a passhappy league and my owner needs a franchise marquee player to fill the stands--then I double down on the QB position this year.

I would swoop in grab Tannehill at #8 then with one my third picks I take a chance on Russell. One of those two guys will solve my QB problems for the next 10 years if they are developed right.


I have a different philosophy. To me, you don't draft Tannehill unless you truly believe he is "THE" guy. And in that case, I would rather use the other pick to draft someone to help the team in other areas.

I'm not against drafting a development guy, but I wouldn't do that until about the 5th round or later and I wouldn't do it in the coaches 1st year or maybe even 2nd year, as there will be significant roster turnover and those draft picks are needed very badly to shape the team right now.


Yeah but remember, One draft is not going to make this a superbowl team overnight. If we have a good year, you could expect that your 1st rounder becomes a solid starter and your 2nd after some serious development becomes a starter. After those rounds you're basically hoping for a few guys that can fill the bottom of your roster. If you're really lucky, maybe you find a diamond in the rough.

I'm just saying don't put all your eggs in one basket. If we are convinced Tannehill is the guy, great but why not draft another and develop both? Just incase RT is a bust.


Those are some low expectations. I expect the 1st and 2nd round picks to be star players within 2 years (QBs might take longer) and a solid starter out of the 3rd round pick and one other. If you don't have success out of those later round picks you aren't winning much. Look at guys like Mike Wallace, Wes Welker, Tom Brady, Cam Wake and dozens of others who were drafted later or undrafted as what you want to find at least one of every year.

Again I'm not against getting a developmental guy but in Philbins first year there are a lot of holes to fill what the system needs. Fill those before you reach for a dream.

As for a dream draft, look at the Giants in 2007. Every single pick contributed significantly their rookie year and the team won the Super Bowl. I have little hope of a Super Bowl this year, but that is the standard to aspire to.


Top
   
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 2:41 am 
Offline
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 5:59 pm
Posts: 5117
If our staff likes Tannehill, and they believe that he is cut from the same cloth as guys like Brett Favre and Aaron Rodgers, then I hope we get this kid. Quarterbacks with his skill set wind up having long careers, usually ones with Super Bowl rings involved. The Green Bay Packers have been pretty fortunate when it comes to quarterbacking over the past 20 or so years. They have a system for making great West Coast quarterbacks. If we can take that system and use it on a guy like Tannehill in Miami, then we might finally solve our team's biggest problem.

I truly hope our search is coming to an end soon. Being without a franchise quarterback all these years has been tough. Landing a franchise quarterback and bringing this team back to the top of the AFC East would be a great thing. Brady probably won't play but two or three more years, so by the time our prospect is ready it will be the Dolphins time to shine. Sanchez, Fitzpatrick, and whoever comes off the Patriots bench will get left in the dust. Man I can't wait for that day!


Top
   
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 6:57 am 
Offline
Phinfever Blog Writer - Wednesdays
Phinfever Blog Writer - Wednesdays

Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2010 11:34 am
Posts: 2753
wkloiber13 wrote:
Brady probably won't play but two or three more years, so by the time our prospect is ready it will be the Dolphins time to shine


Brady turns 35 in August. He very well may end up playing longer than that, but hopefully his play will be declining by then. The Pats have a great QB that allows their offense to perform at a high level, but they are shaky at DB, pass rusher and WR (after Welker). They are a flawed team that can be surpassed IMO.


Top
   
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 5:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar
2017 VIP Donor!
2017 VIP Donor!

Joined: Sun May 02, 2010 3:56 pm
Posts: 6641
Rock Sexton wrote:
Kev1321 wrote:
\
I don't really care what those guys say..
Our coaching staff knows him as much as anyone and certainly better than any of those tv guys....If they pick him, you have to believe they know what they are getting.

I watched Matt Ryan and knew he was going to be good..I haven't seen much of Tennehill so i have to trust the staff on this one


It's like you're merging two separate arguments here. I said nothing about them not knowing what they are getting if they pick him. That's pretty freakin' obvious since Sherman coached him.

Picking him and weather he'll be ready to play immediately are two distinctly different discussions so I don't understand why the hostility towards the opinions I posted.



I just think the whole, raw or he's not ready thing is being way over played by the same media that says we lost out on all the free agents(It's just another example of Dolphin busting)...I just don't trust what they have to say about the guy as much as our staff who knows him very good.

I wasn't being hostile, Didn't mean for it to come off that way....I just think the media is blackballing and highlighting this guy with drama because he is our target .

I don't want to fall into the Aaron Rodgers draft day hype again. He should have been taken much sooner


Top
   
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 8:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 12:48 pm
Posts: 6186
Kev1321 wrote:
I don't want to fall into the Aaron Rodgers draft day hype again. He should have been taken much sooner


Easy to say that in hindsight.

_________________
Image


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Apr 23, 2012 8:36 pm 
Offline
Phinfever Starter
Phinfever Starter

Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2010 12:46 pm
Posts: 226
Omar Kelly might take Tannehill if he ran the Dolphins, but I just saw him on ESPN and he predicts
that Miami will take the best player available at #8 ( which isn't Tannehill ) or trade down.


Top
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic  [ 38 posts ] 

All times are UTC-05:00


Phinfever Home Page

Phinfever Chatroom

Phinfever FAQ


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Google [Bot] and 19 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited | Chopped and modified by Coots | Original design by Prosk8r