I haven't heard anything about this so I thought I'd float it out there given there's so much stale stuff on the QB selections in play.

Does the prospect of having the almost never used option of using tannehill as a viable receiver & passer option in the wildcat increase his value to the fins.

It could be a hard to predict wrinkle for defenses to have to prepare for if they split him out, possibly even with another QB in the lineup. A lot of options & scenarios could make life ugly for defenses.

- As a receiver
- As a behind the QB double pass option
- As a motion back and pass option
- As QB, handoff then pass back for a downfield second pass

Might be just the Miami version of Tebow to give teams something to prepare for.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/24/2012 06:07AM by Phinjim.

Really? The wildcat??

Please stop. Just stop.

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

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

The wildcat left town with sporano.

Philbin doesn't use it. I'm pretty sure Sherman doesn't either.

Could we use him In a trick play or two? Maybe.

But the wildcats days in Miami are done.

WCO stands for "West Coast Offense"......NOT "Wild Cat Offense"

I seriously doubt we'll be running the Wildcat anymore. That formation is on its way out in the NFL.

The Wildcat, Ted Ginn, Drew Brees, and Wes Welker just won't stop visiting this board.

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

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

Okay, let's not get our panties in a bunch here ... the question is not so much on wildcat but more so on tannehill's potential as a dual threat passer and receiver.

There is by the way if you think about it, an entirely different dynamic when you have the same guy in there with an option to pass / receive or do both.

When we ran the wildcat, we were mostly run first option, the passing dynamics were rarely used.

Try to focus on that aspect ... Tannehill as a passer and receiver and don't lose you mind about history with the wildcat, where we usually destroyed the offensive rythm when we employed it.

If Tannehill was selected, but not starting QB (yr1) he could be inserted along with the starting QB for a 1/2 back pass, pitch and pass, or a receiver ... sorry but I don't think its so crazy.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/24/2012 06:01AM by Phinjim.

if we ever spend another draft pick because of that player's supposed ability in the wildcat offense, I will scream

________________________________________________________
The beatings will continue until morale improves.

berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> if we ever spend another draft pick because of
> that player's supposed ability in the wildcat
> offense, I will scream


&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
Right.

Phinjim just made me lose serious interest in Tannehill just because he mentioned Tannehill and Wildcat in the same sentence.

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

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

Get a grip dude ... always a plus to have a multi dimensional skill set.

BTW did you guys hear that the Jets are planning to have Tebow be the punt protection blocker, with the obvious wrinkle for a reverse option?

If we pick Tannehill #8 he better NOT be a utility player (ala Jim Jensen). He BETTER be a full-time WCO franchise QB. Otherwise he's a waste of a pick. I don't want my franchise QB running patterns and catching passes on a regular basis. David Woodley was drafted in the 8th round. Dan Marino never ran a WR route to catch a pass.

Yes I'd be for that too ... do you see a Dan Marino available at 8 this year? If so let's go get him.

For all ... didn't suggest using the guy as a full time or even often used gimmick, just that if you have the dual skill set, the change of pace opens doors.

My guess is we won't see Tannehill in a fins uniform anyway, just thought we could discuss the fact that the highest consideration for a dolphin QB pick also had a decent stint as a wide receiver too.

montequi Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If we pick Tannehill #8 he better NOT be a utility
> player (ala Jim Jensen). He BETTER be a full-time
> WCO franchise QB. Otherwise he's a waste of a
> pick. I don't want my franchise QB running
> patterns and catching passes on a regular basis.
> David Woodley was drafted in the 8th round. Dan
> Marino never ran a WR route to catch a pass.


^ This^

there is buzz that RT could slide far down the draft if we pass at #8.
would you guys be good with taking Floyd or D at 8, then trading our #2 and 2 3s to get back in the 1st for RT?

________________________________________________________
The beatings will continue until morale improves.

berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> there is buzz that RT could slide far down the
> draft if we pass at #8.
> would you guys be good with taking Floyd or D at
> 8, then trading our #2 and 2 3s to get back in the
> 1st for RT?


No. For the same reason I didn't want to trade back up for Weedon, the strength of this draft (in our area of needs, WR/pass rushers) is the 2nd/3rd rnds. And if they pass on him at 8, it really tells me all I need to know about Tanny.

but holic you'd be OK with trading down and getting Tanehill later in the first ,with an extra pick in the 2d or 3d? I think that would be the best outcome, but way risky if we want the qb

________________________________________________________
The beatings will continue until morale improves.

If he lines up at Reciever who will throw the ball to him? Reggie Bush?

berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> but holic you'd be OK with trading down and
> getting Tanehill later in the first ,with an extra
> pick in the 2d or 3d? I think that would be the
> best outcome, but way risky if we want the qb


Eh.....i'm not sure. I just think if they pass on him at 8, that tells you everything you need to know about him. I guess I wouldn't complain too much taking Tanny in a trade down scenario, but I wouldn't have that warm fuzzy feeling about him either. History kind of bears out, Henne was our 2nd pick in the 2nd rnd, if he was really thought of as a top QB, he would of been taken with our 1st pick in the 2nd.

berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> there is buzz that RT could slide far down the
> draft if we pass at #8.
> would you guys be good with taking Floyd or D at
> 8, then trading our #2 and 2 3s to get back in the
> 1st for RT?

No thanks on Floyd.

I'd rater have decastro.

If #8 isn't used on Tannehill it needs to be a pass rusher. Doesn't matter which one but coples and perry are the best fits.

If Tannehill slides to the mid 20's the way Aaron rodgers did I'd have zero issues with packaging our 2nd and next years #1 to move up for him.

That would leave us a pair of 3rds, a 4th and 5th to address WR and ot.

under no circumstances would i be favor of trading next year's #1. This is just as likely to be in the top 10 as anything else. that would be a disaster for this franchise.

________________________________________________________
The beatings will continue until morale improves.

berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> there is buzz that RT could slide far down the
> draft if we pass at #8.
> would you guys be good with taking Floyd or D at
> 8, then trading our #2 and 2 3s to get back in the
> 1st for RT?

I'm ok with this, but we're taking a risk. If I recall correctly, didn't we try to do the same thing several years ago to take Flacco, but we couldn't find a trade partner and had to settle for Henne?

Someone finally came close enough to the BEST reason for drafting Tannehill at 8.

LOL. LOL. LOL.

All this time I've been fighting us drafting Tannehill at 8 and I knew there was a good argument AGAINST my position but I was hoping and dreading that someone would bring it up.

Still you only came close and did not hit the mark.

No, you can't justify it from the standpoint of the Wildcat!

But you can justify it this way,


"Look. The guy was a helluva receiver! He can be a receiver IN THE PRO SET! We got rid of Brandon Marshall. We need a receiver. At the same time, we need a good plan for a future QB. Draft Tannehill and you have the option of using him as a receiver and working him in as a QB. You don't have to sit him on the bench for a year."


I'm disappointed that smart minds like Dolphaholic and THE Truth never thought to come back with this argument which I would have had a hard time arguing against.

berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> under no circumstances would i be favor of trading
> next year's #1. This is just as likely to be in
> the top 10 as anything else. that would be a
> disaster for this franchise.


So he's worthy in your eyes of he 8th pick this year but you wouldn't use next years #1 to get him this year?

I think he would be great in the Wildcat and be able to make a more immediate contribution but if, as GM and HC, you value him as a future franchise Qb then you don't abuse him like that and take a chance he gets hurt.

Would be nice to unleash it on the Jets and Sparano though since they are planning on Tebow doing the same thing most likely.

.....................................................................................
“I'm here" You're welcome!" - Kenny Powers

eesti Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think he would be great in the Wildcat and be
> able to make a more immediate contribution but if,
> as GM and HC, you value him as a future franchise
> Qb then you don't abuse him like that and take a
> chance he gets hurt.

Agreed. Hate to see our #8 pick get clocked ala Pat White.

Phinjim Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Okay, let's not get our panties in a bunch here
> ... the question is not so much on wildcat but
> more so on tannehill's potential as a dual threat
> passer and receiver.
>
> There is by the way if you think about it, an
> entirely different dynamic when you have the same
> guy in there with an option to pass / receive or
> do both.
>
> When we ran the wildcat, we were mostly run first
> option, the passing dynamics were rarely used.
>
> Try to focus on that aspect ... Tannehill as a
> passer and receiver and don't lose you mind about
> history with the wildcat, where we usually
> destroyed the offensive rythm when we employed
> it.
>
> If Tannehill was selected, but not starting QB
> (yr1) he could be inserted along with the starting
> QB for a 1/2 back pass, pitch and pass, or a
> receiver ... sorry but I don't think its so crazy.

********************************************************

Tanney won't be used in the wildcat nor on the field as a receiver.

He is probably going to be the 3rd QB, so he may not even be active on game days.

If Miami does get him at 8, I don't see him doing anything but learning the playbook as a QB.

THE Truth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> berkeley223 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > there is buzz that RT could slide far down the
> > draft if we pass at #8.
> > would you guys be good with taking Floyd or D
> at
> > 8, then trading our #2 and 2 3s to get back in
> the
> > 1st for RT?
>
> No thanks on Floyd.
>
> I'd rater have decastro.
>
> If #8 isn't used on Tannehill it needs to be a
> pass rusher. Doesn't matter which one but coples
> and perry are the best fits.
>
> If Tannehill slides to the mid 20's the way Aaron
> rodgers did I'd have zero issues with packaging
> our 2nd and next years #1 to move up for him.
>
> That would leave us a pair of 3rds, a 4th and 5th
> to address WR and ot.

**********************************************************

I'm almost positive that pass rusher will be the pick if Miami passes on Tanney. However, there have been rumblings out there for some time about Coples and his work ethic, i.e., not going all out all the time; takes too many plays off. Just today, I read where there are about 20 GMs that don't look at Coples very highly. As interesting a prospect he seems to be, I don't think I would draft him at 8.

If Tanney slid to the 20s, I WOULD have a problem packaging this year's #2 and next year's #1. If he did fall like that, he could be this year's version of Brady Quinn. If he drops to the 20s, there is a reason for it.

However, if Miami does pass on him and decides to trade back to no lower than 15, and he is still there, then I would grab him immediately. That extra 2nd would come in handy to try to fill the many holes on this Dolphins squad.

If he slides into the twenties he could be another Brady Quinn OR he could be another Aaron Rodgers.

If Tannehill dopes end up in Miami and succeeeds, be it now or later, his time as a receiver will help him realte to his receivers and get on the same page quicker.

Having the dual skill set is only a plus ... noit sure we'll see it happen with all the other talent we will see at # 8

I think it gonna be a fun draft !!!