Poll

Which is of greater importance in the success of a young QB?

Only registered users are allowed to vote for this poll.
11 votes were received.

The talent	4		36%
the coaching and development of the player	7		64%

---

I am trying to wrap my head around the possibilty we draft Tannehill. In that process, the question of development is huge. Do you think proper development of our past QB's could have changed their success. I think Henne was developed piss poor.. WHile they did the right thing by letting him sit, I think the way they taught him to be a QB, was bunk and Henning/David Lee failed him
Ultimately, how important is the talent, vs how important is the coaches properly developing the player vs how coachable is the player... WHo fails when the players doesnt react to the coaching. The player or the coaching?
Is Matt Moore to old to be further developed by good coaches? DO you have faith in Tannehills talent at QB, or do you have faith in the coaches developing him properly.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Nietzsche

Its like anything in life...you need talent, and you need to develop that talent to be successful.

Its rare that a guy is a superstar in any field on talent alone. You have to learn your trade from people that have been there before.

And on the other end of the spectrum, you can polish a turd forever...its still a turd.

Talent is #1. You can't polish a turd.

Ok then..........How many Qb's that didnt succeed over the last ten years on all teams, do you think could have been successful with better development and the right situation? ANd how many QB's do you think succeeded that would have failed without proper development, coaching, and system?

-----------------------------------------------------------------
All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Nietzsche

You have to have the talent, that's a given. Without that you won't be sucessful. That said however, that talent must be developed, fostered, molded, and improved over time. EVERY single player that gets drafted has talent, some more, some less, but talent none the less.

I hold many certifications, and do many types of training for my employer, and if a trainee isn't progressing it is the responsibility and the fault of the trainer. That said though, the trainee does bear his/her share of the responsibility. But, the trainer has the obligation to find what makes the light bulb come on for the trainee so they progress, learn, and grow into a sucessful employee. The NFL is no different.

The chief problem I see with the guys we've drafted (Beck and Henne) is that we've had entirely too many system, coaching, and key personnel changes, over the past decade...its very hard for players to flourish in such an unsettled, and uncertain enviornment. The teaching strategy, and relationship, suffers greatly because of this.

We need to have talent, teaching, development, and stability...once we get those things improvement will happen, just wait for it and you'll see.

I think talent but I DON'T THINK TANNEHILL HAS ANY. At least enough to justify a top ten first round pick.

That is simply laughable, Chyren.

I have been straight down the middle on this topic.


But that comment you just made proves that you are unquestionably and blatantly hating on this player. You have not seen 1 throw Ryan Tannehill has ever made other than a YouTube clip and you say he has no talent?

Actually Chyren, his talent has never EVER been in question. It's experience.

But again, you don't care to find out about this player, you just simply refuse to even sort of like the guy.

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

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

Henne should have been pulled earlier. He needed competition. The guy was thrown into a wildcat program and never really given the chance to develop. I think he will do well elsewhere.

White was just too lightweight for the NFL. He's a turnip anywhere he goes.

Tannehill needs at least a season , maybe Two before he's effective.

> Tannehill needs at least a season , maybe Two
> before he's effective.

Does that bother you?

1. I think Henne was not only not developed but actually had his raw talent diminished by the fear Sparano had that he might turn the ball over.

His first game he came out awesome, after a mistake or so in later games Sparano clamped down on him so much it runined his instincts.

2. The only QB recently after Marino that peformed well was a veteran that didn't really need the coaching. Then he got hurt.

3. I am actually fairly positve about what the new offense will do for any QB in Miami.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/16/2012 11:07AM by Phinjim.

Matt Stafford will play the entire 2012 season as a 24 year old, Brandon Wheedon will turn 29 in October.

Age is a factor.

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

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

dolphaholic Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> THE Truth Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > > Tannehill needs at least a season , maybe Two
> > > before he's effective.>
> > Does that bother you?
>
>
> ^You can thank Cam Newton and Andy Dalton for this
> mentallity^

I actually agree with the notion that Tannehill needs at least one year on the bench and maybe two before he'll be ready. Most qb's do.

The question is whether or not that alone is reason to pass on him.

I think it's insane for a franchise without a franchise QB to consider drafting any other position over a qb they believe will be a franchise guy in his 3rd year simply because the player T that other position will contribute sooner.

I was just wondering if anybody felt that way and if so, why?

What we can't measure (just like Zach Thomas) is determination, heart, character, mental toughness.

Tannehill comes from a football family. His dad is a legendary High School Coach in Texas.

But, I guess we will see how he turns out whether for us or someone else.

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

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

THE Truth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > Tannehill needs at least a season , maybe Two
> > before he's effective.
>
> Does that bother you?

Not as long as he is given a chance to learn. Aron Rogers was drafted by us , I think its a good chance he does not have a Superbowl career.

THE Truth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> dolphaholic Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > THE Truth Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > > Tannehill needs at least a season , maybe
> Two
> > > > before he's effective.>
> > > Does that bother you?
> >
> >
> > ^You can thank Cam Newton and Andy Dalton for
> this
> > mentallity^
>
> I actually agree with the notion that Tannehill
> needs at least one year on the bench and maybe two
> before he'll be ready. Most qb's do.
>
> The question is whether or not that alone is
> reason to pass on him.
>
> I think it's insane for a franchise without a
> franchise QB to consider drafting any other
> position over a qb they believe will be a
> franchise guy in his 3rd year simply because the
> player T that other position will contribute
> sooner.
>
> I was just wondering if anybody felt that way and
> if so, why?


I agree, that's why I said Newton/Dalton kind of spoiled everyone by playing well their first year. Having Moore and Garrard on board, we're actually in a good position to let Tannehill sit for a year or two.

Aqua&Orange Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What we can't measure (just like Zach Thomas) is
> determination, heart, character, mental
> toughness.
>
>

This is why I think its laughable when people get all worked up over the possibility of drafting or not drafting a player at a certain spot in the draft.

I mean how can a fan sitting at his computer in his boxer shorts watching YouTube clips seriously argue that player "x" isnt a top 15 pick, he's a second or 3rd rounder.

I'm not suggesting it's crazy to have an opinion like that, only that it's nuts to get into arguments over an opinion that was formed without access to the information most critical to a players success: His iq, desire and ability to process information quickly and accurately under pressure.

Especially at qb where EVERY Qb discussed in the 1st round or two has the physical attributes to be successful on some level in the nfl. To get into an argument about the voracity of ones opinion on a qb prospect without knowing what he has between the ears seems incredibly silly to me.

For example, last year I was a big fan of Ryan Mallett. I said his physical tools were worthy of the top pick, but that if his off the field stuff was as bad as rumored I'd have no issues with not drafting him in any round.

That's where, as a fan, you have to trust your front office, their process, and their talent evaluators and Let them make the call.

TreasurecoastPhinsfan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> THE Truth Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > > Tannehill needs at least a season , maybe Two
> > > before he's effective.
> >
> > Does that bother you?
>
> Not as long as he is given a chance to learn. Aron
> Rogers was drafted by us , I think its a good
> chance he does not have a Superbowl career.

It's possible. I don't think Sparano would have developed him but I think Saban or Cameron would have done a good job.

Don't know if he'd have won a super bowl here but I think he'd have been a top shelf qb in the philip rivers mold.

Aaron Rodgers is the most accurate passer in the NFL. And his accuracy is coming from tough, NFL passes. Not dink-and-dunk passes to midgets like Tom Brady.

With that being said, I think Rodgers would be who he is no matter where he went. Was he developed? Well of course, a bit I would say.

But the kind of pin point accuracy that Aaron Rodgers has is not taught or developed, you either have it or you don't.

Kind of like Greg Maddux back in the day.

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

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

Aqua&Orange Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Aaron Rodgers is the most accurate passer in the
> NFL. And his accuracy is coming from tough, NFL
> passes. Not dink-and-dunk passes to midgets like
> Tom Brady.
>
> With that being said, I think Rodgers would be who
> he is no matter where he went. Was he developed?
> Well of course, a bit I would say.

What was developed with Rodgers was his ability to know the offense and read the defense. While I don't deny Rodgers is a great QB, I think GB's ability to build a system around his skills plays a HUGE part to his success. Just look at how good Flynn looked in that offense!!

This is what separates Rodgers from Peyton Manning. Rodgers plays in a great system that's suited for him. Peyton WAS the system in Indy. Talent does play a HUGE part.

I'm not a Hater, A & O.

I have seen tapes of him playing in games. I like RGIII, who you were also fighting on the board for and was willing to give up the farm for him.

However, I don't think Tannehill has NEAR the talent level of RGIII.

Chill.

I have never said give up anything for Tannehill.

But you are right, I would give up the farm for RG3.

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

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

Well, at least you would not trade up for Tannehill.

THE Truth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Aqua&Orange Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > What we can't measure (just like Zach Thomas)
> is
> > determination, heart, character, mental
> > toughness.
> >
> >
>
> This is why I think its laughable when people get
> all worked up over the possibility of drafting or
> not drafting a player at a certain spot in the
> draft.
>
> I mean how can a fan sitting at his computer in
> his boxer shorts watching YouTube clips seriously
> argue that player "x" isnt a top 15 pick, he's a
> second or 3rd rounder.
>


I think it is entirely possible for some die hard fans who have seen alot of lives games or tape and college development of a player, in his boxers, be able to predict success or failure... I can not predict all players, of course not, but I can tell certain ones... Sometimes you just see it, sometimes you dont... No one, including scouts, coaches, fans nail them all...
I have been wrong about Qb's I didnt think would be successful, and I have guaranteed success of some who have thrived...
If you ask me about SEC football or the Gators, I can give you some pretty good reliable information that I would put up against any scout...
SOme other players, conferences and teams, I would not be as reliable... I liked Cam newton more then most scouts and guaranteed his success early... I just saw it in the guy, and he met every question/ criteria about him I could ask...
Alot of guys are not that easy.....
On a guy I didnt know about his success was, Matt Ryan... While he has been a regular season stud, he is a post season bust... But I was admittedly nervous about us drafting him...
Not many scouts or fans predicted the success Aaron Rodgers has risen too...
Tannehill is one of those guys, I see some greatness, and I see some signs of failure... Those are the toughest to predict.... WHich is why the more questions or development needed to see a players success or fialure, the farther they should fall down the draft list or board... The greater the risk, the lower they should go IMO... Tannehill is the boom or bust guy this draft.... I wouldnt want to bet on his success nor his failure... He can be the greatest athlete in the wolrd, if he doesnt improve his reading the defense, ball placement, and mental errors... He will fail... How do you know he will do this properly or fall short like so many others with talent and potential.... That is what makes me nervous... Joey Harrington was an athlete and amazing passer but he could never get past the parts Tannehill also has to get past...What makes a guy like Harrington fall short of maturing and a guy like Tannehill a lock to do it.... I just dont know, and I dont think anyone really does, scout, coach or fan alike... The variable I am going to fall back on, is who develops him, if we draft him... And I will put my faith in philbin's development process, although I could be wrong...

-----------------------------------------------------------------
All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Nietzsche



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/16/2012 11:07AM by Crowder52.

ChyrenB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well, at least you would not trade up for
> Tannehill.


&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
I never said that either. You have been making stuff up terribly lately, Chyren.

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

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

Oh, I'm sorry. I thought you said that. I was probably thinking of berk but nonetheless..

On my list on the other thread you now go!



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/16/2012 03:15PM by ChyrenB.

I never said either way.

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

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

Crowder52 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> THE Truth Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Aqua&Orange Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > What we can't measure (just like Zach Thomas)
> > is
> > > determination, heart, character, mental
> > > toughness.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > This is why I think its laughable when people
> get
> > all worked up over the possibility of drafting
> or
> > not drafting a player at a certain spot in the
> > draft.
> >
> > I mean how can a fan sitting at his computer in
> > his boxer shorts watching YouTube clips
> seriously
> > argue that player "x" isnt a top 15 pick, he's
> a
> > second or 3rd rounder.
> >
>
>
> I think it is entirely possible for some die hard
> fans who have seen alot of lives games or tape and
> college development of a player, in his boxers, be
> able to predict success or failure... I can not
> predict all players, of course not, but I can tell
> certain ones... Sometimes you just see it,
> sometimes you dont... No one, including scouts,
> coaches, fans nail them all...



Very true. Some guys jump out at you. Some guys have physical traits or track records that predict success.

That's why it's more than fair to have an opinion and even debate it.

But my point was that with qb's, especially ones predicted to go early in the draft (let's say 1st two rounds), they all have physical tools that would allow them to succeed in the NFL. However the things that actually determine their success or failure are the things we as fans can't reasonably assess...brain power and heart.

This is why I find it silly for people to get emotional, angry or talk in absolutes aboute these players.

Take tannehill for example... He has all the physical tools of an elite nfl qb. Yet there are some who will argue with their dying breath that he's not worthy of the 8th pick or the 6th pick or the 3rd pick or even a first round pick. They do this without knowledge of the most critical information required to even have a chance to make an educated guess predicting his nfl future.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion based on what they see, but only a fool talks in absolutes about qb's when they only have half the information.

I readily admit that I don't have enough information to judge tannehill worthy or unworthy of our pick at number 8. And short of talking with him for an hour or two I never will. It's why I have no opinion on whether I'd take him or trade up for him. All I can say is if I had that info and I believed he was the goods, I wouldn't be afraid to trade up for him so I won't have a problem if Ireland does.

At the end of the day, I'd rather pay a premium for a qb I believe in than waste a pick settling for one I don't believe in.

Aqua&Orange Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I never said either way.


As if that matters...

Aqua&Orange Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What we can't measure (just like Zach Thomas) is
> determination, heart, character, mental
> toughness.
>
> Tannehill comes from a football family. His dad is
> a legendary High School Coach in Texas.

A few thoughts:

* One thing I am looking for as a best predictor of pro career success is production during the college years. Zach Thomas was an absolute stud and "a rolling ball of butcher knives" at Texas Tech. He was an all-American, a Butkus award finalist, and all-around chunk of plutonium-grade awesomeness. The fact that he was drafted so late was due to the fact that NFL scouts and staff IGNORED Zach's incredible productivity and balked at his relatively small size.

Looking at Tannehill's history of prouctivity, he has the makings of a perennial third string benchwarmer. Maybe his size, armstrength, girlfriend cuteness factor, etc. will break through and allow him to become a perennial Pro Bowler. Hey, he could not cut the mustard consistently at a high level against college opponents; why don't we drop him in to face NFL defenses, he will really succeed then... NOT

* on the other hand, he comes from a football family. I actually think that that is very interesting. I do not know the stats for this in the NFL, but one of the best predictors of success in pro baseball is if your father or other close family members have played major league ball. In these situations the kids' chances of becoming successful goes up massively.

If this holds in football, then I would definitely mark that in the plus column.