Wow, Dave Hyde knocked the house down with that one!

A lot to take in...

it's not hyde. every year hyde outsources this column to some british draft guru named simon clancy, who always has long columns about the phins draft prospects. And each year he's correctly called at least a few of our picks (including later rounds) so I always read what he has to say.

he's got tannehill possibly going in the top 10 which seems crazy but I bet will happen

Don banks at SI.com had Tannehill to the redskins at # 6 a few weeks ago. It's not as far fetched as you might think.

Yeah, I read that this AM and it's very informative.

I was forecasting Miami to grab Tannehill with their first 2nd round pick (once they traded down). But, according to the majority of the new mock drafts, Tannehill be gone by the 6th pick. Wow! Pretty good for a guy who only had one season of college QBing.

months ago I heard Gil Brandt say we might take tannehill in the 1st and gil is eerily accurate when it comes to the draft

Tannehill could very well be that guy who rockets up the draft chart during the pre-draft process. He doesn't have the experience, but he has prototypical size, played in a pro style west coast offense, is a great athlete, and is very, very smart (plans to be an orthpedic surgeon). He is exactly the type of guy that some teams will fall in love with, and his stock could skyrocket in the next two months.

so mark are you on board with taking him at 8-9?

Mark,

The real question is, will he be better than Chad Henne on 3rd and 6 with 2 or more blitzers coming from the right side?

---------------------

"When you suck long enough, you get a Hickey"

He will be on Sundays in October that fall on even numbered days

HAHAHAHA!!



Of course, it's all in good fun, Mark!


Hey Mark, what do you think we should do with our #1 pick?

---------------------

"When you suck long enough, you get a Hickey"

berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> so mark are you on board with taking him at 8-9?


I can't answer for mark but I just don't see it.

The kid has SOME potential but I don't like his mechanics or arm strength.

I think hes a Project Qb. I don't think spending a top 10 pick on a project qb is a very good idea.

If we traded down and added a 2nd round Pick then I could live with it. The extra #2 would off set the risk of reaching for him in my book.

One things for sure. We are in real good shape when it comes to knowing as much about our qb options as possible.

I’m always a big fan of bringing in coaches who have been in college ball because they have invaluable insight into a TON of players – not only on their own team but chunks of college talent they’ve either recruited, scouted, coached against, et cetera.

The window of opportunity for such inside info is around 2-3 years…. After that the database dries up rather quickly. So all things considered, we should have some really good info on a number of kids for a few years…

My opinion. Of course.

BNF.

Here is what I'd do if I was calling the shots.

1. Let Manning walk...his health concerns are just too great for me.

2. Sign Flynn

3. Draft Tannehill at 8 or 9.

4. Failing us getting Tannehill...trade down in the first round and take Wheeden or Foles.

Ken Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Here is what I'd do if I was calling the shots.
>
> 1. Let Manning walk...his health concerns are just
> too great for me.
>
> 2. Sign Flynn
>
> 3. Draft Tannehill at 8 or 9.
>
> 4. Failing us getting Tannehill...trade down in
> the first round and take Wheeden or Foles.


Why would you use a top ten pick OR spend $10 mill a year on a backup QB?

If we go large for Flynn, then Philbin is in with all his chips and that means he’s convinced Flynn ain’t no flam. In that scenario I think we trade down and go OL R1 and R2 (OT and G respectively) with an additional R2 for OLB/DE.

R3 = TE
R4 = S
R5 and balance = best footballer available.

With Flynn and Moore on the roster we have no compelling need to draft a QB. Sure, if a great prospect falls to us later we might take, but we’ve got a lot of work to do in other places as well.

Mark my words. This is my opinion. Of course.

BNF.

THE Truth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ken Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Here is what I'd do if I was calling the shots.
>
> >
> > 1. Let Manning walk...his health concerns are
> just
> > too great for me.
> >
> > 2. Sign Flynn
> >
> > 3. Draft Tannehill at 8 or 9.
> >
> > 4. Failing us getting Tannehill...trade down in
> > the first round and take Wheeden or Foles.
>
>
> Why would you use a top ten pick OR spend $10 mill
> a year on a backup QB?



&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
I am thinking the exact same thing. I almost spit my water out when I read that comment by Ken.

---------------------

"When you suck long enough, you get a Hickey"

if we sign flynn we are not taking a QB in the first. The only way we take a QB in the first not named RG3 is if we get desperate b/c we were unable to sign either manning or flynn or move up for luck or rg3.
tannehill is going to go somewhere in the top 10, however. this happens almost every year, there is some QB people assume we'd be able to get in the 2d or 3d round and he ends up going in the top 10 to 12 picks (gabbert, ponder, etc).

Aqua&Orange Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> THE Truth Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Ken Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Here is what I'd do if I was calling the
> shots.
> >
> > >
> > > 1. Let Manning walk...his health concerns are
> > just
> > > too great for me.
> > >
> > > 2. Sign Flynn
> > >
> > > 3. Draft Tannehill at 8 or 9.
> > >
> > > 4. Failing us getting Tannehill...trade down
> in
> > > the first round and take Wheeden or Foles.
> >
> >
> > Why would you use a top ten pick OR spend $10
> mill
> > a year on a backup QB?
>
>
>
> &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
> I am thinking the exact same thing. I almost spit
> my water out when I read that comment by Ken.


Not to mention option 4...

If we took nick foles in in either of the 1st three rounds I'd puke.

Wheedon late in round 1, after a few trade downs, I'd be in favor of.

Love wheedon's skill set almost as much as I dislike Foles.

berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> so mark are you on board with taking him at 8-9?


I'm not, but I could see it happening. Say Manning lands somewhere else, or he has a setback. Say Flynn gets a crazy, huge offer from Washington, Cleveland, or Seattle that he can't pass up. Where would that leave us? Trading up from where we are to #2 to get RG3 is too cost prohibitive. And going with a rookie QB means rebuilding. And with all of the contracts we have ending after 2012 or 2013, we are not in a position to be rebuilding and trading away picks. We have an OC and an Asst QB Coach who have spent the last 4 years with Tannehill. He has exceptional athletic ability, is very smart, and knows the system. He would take a couple of years to develop, just because he lacks the experience. But, I could see it happening.

Last year, guys like Ponder and Dalton were not projected as high picks. But, because of the scarcity at QB, both guys shot up the charts. The same could happen with Tannehill. Playing in Sherman's offense is a big plus in his favor, not only for us, but for other teams, too. Teams like guys who played for pro offensive coaches.

The last paragraph of the above is true....as a possibility.

THE Truth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ken Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Here is what I'd do if I was calling the shots.
>
> >
> > 1. Let Manning walk...his health concerns are
> just
> > too great for me.
> >
> > 2. Sign Flynn
> >
> > 3. Draft Tannehill at 8 or 9.
> >
> > 4. Failing us getting Tannehill...trade down in
> > the first round and take Wheeden or Foles.
>
>
> Why would you use a top ten pick OR spend $10 mill
> a year on a backup QB?


RE: Because no matter what we do we need options, the more the better IMHO. There is no guarantee that Flynn will be sucessful going forward, even if Philbin thinks he will be great. Tannehill has a great skill set and is worth the risk, I believe he's much more than a backup, even if he would be doing that for a year or two. I don't see anything wrong with having more than one option on the team, I also don't see anything wrong with having three either even if we can only keep two of them past this upcoming season. Money be dammned...we need to solidify the position even if that means going a bit overboard to do it. I'm tired of bringing in free agents or drafting guys that don't perform up to expectations and then having no one behind them waiting in the wings.

Ken Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> THE Truth Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Ken Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Here is what I'd do if I was calling the
> shots.
> >
> > >
> > > 1. Let Manning walk...his health concerns are
> > just
> > > too great for me.
> > >
> > > 2. Sign Flynn
> > >
> > > 3. Draft Tannehill at 8 or 9.
> > >
> > > 4. Failing us getting Tannehill...trade down
> in
> > > the first round and take Wheeden or Foles.
> >
> >
> > Why would you use a top ten pick OR spend $10
> mill
> > a year on a backup QB?
>
>
> RE: Because no matter what we do we need options,
> the more the better IMHO. There is no guarantee
> that Flynn will be sucessful going forward, even
> if Philbin thinks he will be great. Tannehill has
> a great skill set and is worth the risk, I believe
> he's much more than a backup, even if he would be
> doing that for a year or two. I don't see anything
> wrong with having more than one option on the
> team, I also don't see anything wrong with having
> three either even if we can only keep two of them
> past this upcoming season. Money be dammned...we
> need to solidify the position even if that means
> going a bit overboard to do it. I'm tired of
> bringing in free agents or drafting guys that
> don't perform up to expectations and then having
> no one behind them waiting in the wings.

Sorry but that comes across as being commitment phobic.

If you think Flynn is a franchise guy then you commit $10 mill a year to him and give him a shot. You use your other financial and draft resources to put him in the best possible position you can to be successful.

You DON'T use a top 10 pick to draft his replacement 6 weeks after you signed him. ESPECIALLY if you are Joe Philbin and you've coached Flynn for the last 4 years.

You want to draft a back up plan in the mid-late rounds...or even a guy like Wheeden in the 2nd....that makes much more sense.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/17/2012 03:39PM by THE Truth.

No, it comes across as hedging your bets...and building depth at a crictical position.

We've been down this road too many times over the past decade and we need to have more than one option available. I never said I would be drafting Fynn's replacement by taking Tannehill, you did...but it sends the message that Flynn had better perform, or else. There is also no guarentee that Tanehill will be available at 8-9. If he's gone by then, and some think he will be. I agree we take Wheeden or Foles lower in the round after a trade down, or in the second...either way though we have to get more than one body in a Phins uniform at QB this off season. And I'm not at all afraid to commit. Flynn has been my favorite option since it became very apparent that Luck was out of reach and Griffin would be too expensive.

I don't want to go into next season with just Moore and a rookie...nor do I want to do it with just Flynn and Moore because that still leaves up with a vacancy on the roster. The only way I do that is if Philbin likes Devlin enough to trust him with the keys to the car.

Ken Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> No, it comes across as hedging your bets...and
> building depth at a crictical position.
>
> We've been down this road too many times over the
> past decade and we need to have more than one
> option available. I never said I would be drafting
> Fynn's replacement by taking Tannehill, you
> did...but it sends the message that Flynn had
> better perform, or else. There is also no
> guarentee that Tanehill will be available at 8-9.
> If he's gone by then, and some think he will be. I
> agree we take Wheeden or Foles lower in the round
> after a trade down, or in the second...either way
> though we have to get more than one body in a
> Phins uniform at QB this off season. And I'm not
> at all afraid to commit. Flynn has been my
> favorite option since it became very apparent that
> Luck was out of reach and Griffin would be too
> expensive.
>
> I don't want to go into next season with just
> Moore and a rookie...nor do I want to do it with
> just Flynn and Moore because that still leaves up
> with a vacancy on the roster. The only way I do
> that is if Philbin likes Devlin enough to trust
> him with the keys to the car.


I get the "we have done an awful job addressing the QB position over the years" argument. And I'm all for making major commitments of whatever resources we have to to find a franchise guy, AND for having depth at that position...but we don't have to do it all in one year.

Even so, we are on different planets when it comes spending those resources.

You basically want to spend a top 10 pick on a guy that would be our THIRD QB behind Flynn and Moore.

Here's the folly in your proposal beyond the obvious waste of money and having a top 10 pick that would be inactive on Sunday's...

If you sign Flynn its becasue his old coach is our new coach and he thinks Flynn is a franchise guy. You are going to give him a 4-6 year deal at about $10 mill a pop. Philbin is going to play his guy because he believed in him enough to suggest we go pay him franchise QB money.

So that means you not only spent a top ten pick on a guy who doesn't get on the field without an injury to Flynn, but his contract will expire before Flynn's so he'll be playing for another team before he ever plays for you.

You hedge your bet on old or injured QB's by investing a high pick on their successor. You hedge your bet on a 25 year old you believe in enough to pay $50 or $60 million with mid-late round QB's...not with top 10 or even first round picks.

This isn't Madden '12. You have limited resources to work with. If you waste them on guys that will never play then you got no shot at building a winner.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/17/2012 03:38PM by THE Truth.

well said truth. that's the answer.