But Chyren, Sanchez was drafted #5 overall and started 5 or 6 fewer games than Tannehill did.

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

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

I think Akili Smith from Oregon started even fewer games. One year starter in college if I remember. One year starter in the pros too I think.

Some people seem overly concerned that RT was a wide receiver first at TAM. He was a QB in high school and went to TAM to be a QB, but was stuck behind a guy that was supposedly a Heisman candidate. He volunteered to play WR so he could contribute, and ended up being their best WR. To me that says more about his competitive nature and team spirit than about any lack of ability as a QB.

Many people on this board were strongly opposed to drafting Flacco because he supposedly couldn't beat out Tyler Palko at QB and only started 2 seasons at a I-AA school. That worked out real well.

I am cautiously optimistic that RT will be our franchise QB.

Positives....

1 Strong arm/gets great zip on his deep out
2 Accurate
3 ran pro offense
4 Versatile athlete; could stay on the field in a wildcat at QB or WR
5 can relate to WR's like few other QB's bc he played 26 games at WR
6 was very successful at WR even tho he practiced at QB all week.
7 smart/mature
8 knows our offense already
9 prototype size
10 quick release
11 can gain critical years with feet
12 good long ball accuracy
13 hard worker
14 natural leader
15 passion for game
16 good teammate no ego
17 Opens up mismatches for teammates with dual-threat nature
18 High-character
19 Gets great rotation on his throws, throws a very nice, tight spiral.
20 Throws well on the run
21 4.6 40 speed
22 good mechanics
23 natural running ability
24 unlimited upside
25 hot ass wife

Negatives:
1 lack of experience at QB
2 ball security/needs to improve decision making/threw critical interceptions
3 small hands

I listed accuracy as a positive. Some say he had accuracy issues but he still sits at 62.5 for his career. Career % dropped dramatically by virtue of one horrendous game vs Texas. Take out that game and career % is something like 64%. Much higher if you calculate the 70 dropped passes.

All of the negatives with the exception of small hands can be fixed by coaching.

I can't wait until preseason to get a look at him. I am planning on being in Davie to check it out.

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

dolfans1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think Akili Smith from Oregon started even fewer
> games. One year starter in college if I remember.
> One year starter in the pros too I think.
>
Akili Smith? Hardly someone I'd like to compare to RT. How about looking for someone who was actually successful in the NFL, rather than one of the biggest busts in NFL history?

> Many people on this board were strongly opposed to
> drafting Flacco because he supposedly couldn't
> beat out Tyler Palko at QB and only started 2
> seasons at a I-AA school. That worked out real
> well.
Flacco? REALLY? I'd argue that he hasn't done very well at all. As it seems it's always been, Baltimore has won with their defense and running game in spite of their QB. Flacco has been increasingly inconsistent, and put together some real stinkers last season.

>
> I am cautiously optimistic that RT will be our
> franchise QB.
So am I, but I hesitate to compare him to Smith or Flacco.

ChyrenB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> As the draft approached, RT was mentioned as being
> our number 8 pick as Luck and RGIII were no longer
> an option, but at the same time, there was the
> caution that he was a "project" and would need to
> sit a year.
>
> Then he gets drafted, now people are demanding
> that he start!
>
> When asked how they justify it, they reply, as if
> it is a GIVEN, that Peyton and Elway started and
> Dan Marino SHOULD HAVE started.
>
> And they don't stop, take a deep breath, and
> realize that, without him having played a single
> pro game and with him having started fewer college
> games at QB than any other QB draftee in history,
> they are now anointing Ryan Tannehill into the
> same atmosphere as Dan Marino, number Thirteen.
>

Amen!

FWIW, this is entirely predictable. You take a QB in the top ten and the expectations are automatic. But Tannehill is a project, and had the Phins FO not backed themselves into a corner with this pick, Tannehill would have likely been a high second round pick - just like Henne. So now we have a second round QB with phenom expectations.

Simply picking a QB in the Top 10 (or 27th) doesn't make him Dan Marino. For whatever reason, fans don't get this. I hope the coaching staff can protect this kid for a season or two so he has the chance he so obviously needs to mature. Unfortunately, the South Florida press is not going to be so accommodating.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/12/2012 07:06PM by DolfanKing.

eesti Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Positives....
>
> 1 Strong arm/gets great zip on his deep out
> 2 Accurate
> 3 ran pro offense
> 4 Versatile athlete; could stay on the field in a
> wildcat at QB or WR
> 5 can relate to WR's like few other QB's bc he
> played 26 games at WR
> 6 was very successful at WR even tho he practiced
> at QB all week.
> 7 smart/mature
> 8 knows our offense already
> 9 prototype size
> 10 quick release
> 11 can gain critical years with feet
> 12 good long ball accuracy
> 13 hard worker
> 14 natural leader
> 15 passion for game
> 16 good teammate no ego
> 17 Opens up mismatches for teammates with
> dual-threat nature
> 18 High-character
> 19 Gets great rotation on his throws, throws a
> very nice, tight spiral.
> 20 Throws well on the run
> 21 4.6 40 speed
> 22 good mechanics
> 23 natural running ability
> 24 unlimited upside
> 25 hot ass wife
>

I think you are over-estimating RTT's arm and passing. Arm-wise, he will not be the same league as guys like Stafford, Brees, Peyton, etc. Certainly better than Fiedler or Pennington, but if you are expecting a significant improvement over Henne's arm strength and accuracy, you will likely be disappointed. More importantly, I think the jury is out on being able to win in clutch situations. As for his knowledge of the offense, I seriously doubt that he will be playing this year, so I'm not sure how much that makes a difference. And "unlimited upside"? What does that mean?

Agree mobility and size are good. He's a smart guy. He will be a very good teammate and hard worker. Wife is certainly hot.

But it will be a while before we see him actually do anything useful in a Dolphins uni.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/12/2012 07:22PM by DolfanKing.

Greg Cosell and Gil Brandt are two guys I tend to give more credence to, so it's really, really nice to see that they were both optimistic about Tannehill.

Gil Brandt in particular is a guy who really knows what he's talking about. He revolutionized the way NFL players are scouted and he's not a guy who just throws crap out there without doing any research on the subject, at least not usually.

So again, very optimistic after seeing these comments. That Charlie Casserly dislikes Ryan Tannehill does not bother me in the slightest.

Quote:

"but if you are expecting a significant improvement over Henne's arm strength and accuracy, you will likely be disappointed."


&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
That statement alone proves you have never seen 1 single game of Tannehill.

I watched the A&M vs. Texas game, and he was absolutely terrible, almost scary as a Dolphins fan watching him play because he played so poorly. Probably could have had like 6 INT's in that game.

But his arm and accuracy, were AND are never the issue. Those things were obvious in that game. His decision making is the issue.

Again, you have never watched a single game, your opinion is about as important as a monkey's ass, you basically just proved it.

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

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

I never made the comparison to Henne or anyone else. I also never predicted he will be Brees or Manning so not sure why you think I am overestimating him. I just listed the pros and cons of his scouting report. The good definitely outweighs the bad. Strong arm was one of the pros. Brees has never been know for a strong arm. Actually quite the opposite. He is just accurate as hell.

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

Aqua&Orange Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
> That statement alone proves you have never seen 1
> single game of Tannehill.
>

It PROVES it. Really? Where does it prove it? In the court of "Nobody can point out any possible flaw in Aqua&Orange's favorite player"?

This is a laugh - and just another case of you making assertions when you have zero idea of what you are talking about.


Yes I have watched quite a few A&M games. And I watch quite a few Michigan games when we drafted Henne. And I know what we have in Tannehill. And I know he isn't far from what we had in Henne.

You may not agree, but if the best you can do is say I "have never seen 1 single game", then you obviously don't really have much argument because:

1. I have seen way more than my fair share of A&M games with Tannehill. You really are just talking out of your rear here.

2. I have also seen several games where Henne played for Michigan, and Henne was actually pretty good in college.

If you've even seen Henne play for Michigan (which I must wonder if you have) then you probably wouldn't be taking so much offense to my statements. Either way, you obviously just don't get it.



> I watched the A&M vs. Texas game, and he was
> absolutely terrible, almost scary as a Dolphins
> fan watching him play because he played so poorly.
> Probably could have had like 6 INT's in that
> game.
>
> But his arm and accuracy, were AND are never the
> issue. Those things were obvious in that game. His
> decision making is the issue.
>


Were Henne's arm and accuracy a big issues? No. His decision making and leadership was a problem, but it was widely acknowledged that Henne had a fairly strong arm and was quite accurate inside 15 yards. I think the same could be said for Tannehill's arm. Not a cannon, but good enough for the WCO in the NFL.



> Again, you have never watched a single game, your
> opinion is about as important as a monkey's ass,
> you basically just proved it.

That is about as typical a response for you. Obviously you are hurt that I'm comparing your favorite new player to another starting NFL QB.

You are so emotional and defensive about this, its almost laughable. If I put Tannehill and Henne in the same sentence, you act as if you are getting a visit from your Aunt Flo.

eesti Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Brees has never been know for a strong arm.



AYFKM?

Aqua&Orange Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> But Chyren, Sanchez was drafted #5 overall and
> started 5 or 6 fewer games than Tannehill did.


and Sanchez sucks and was a reach... bad example IMO....
I am rooting for Tannehill since we drafted him and he wears aqua and orange, but I have some serious concerns about his game, and some serious excitemen about certain parts of his game as well.... This guy is gonna be a stud or a huge disaster... and i am glad we dont have Mark Sanches as our starting QB... let alone if we traded up to pick him 5....

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

Tannehill has also been praised for his long ball so it isn't just 15 yard accuracy and being "good enough" for the WCO.

Henne may have played well at times but he was the same player in college that he was in the pros....inconsistent. He wasn't able to improve in the pros even after sitting for a year and being coached by one of the smartest QB's ever in Pennington.

I certainly hope the expectations are not to just be better than Henne. God help us if that's the case.

RT may never end up being anything more than David Carr or Tim Couch but I am just not going to sit here and constantly complain that we didn't get Luck...and that we reached for RT at 8....and pretend to know that he was only worth a high second round pick. No one knows where he would have been picked if we had not taken him. No one knows where other teams had him ranked.

I am glad that the FO finally had the balls to make the move instead of going for "leftovers" in the 2nd round.

We had big time inside info on RT. We have his former HC and QB coach and thought he was worth #8. Doesn't that tell you anything? or give you any hope? It certainly does for me.

Like you said. Being drafted in the 1st doesn't guarantee anything. Luck and RG3 included.

Luck wasn't able to win the "big game" either. He was overshadowed by Brandon Weedon who most said would go in the 2nd round. He also couldn't find a way to beat Oregon in two years.

Texas A&M lost to Oklahoma State by ONE point. Tannehill had a 65 yard rushing TD right up the middle and two passing TD's. He threw 3 picks but one was bc the WR fell down, another on a ricochet off the WR and the other was just a bad decision into triple coverage. He also lost out on a TD when the receiver fell down by the goal line.

RGIII lost to OK ST by 35 points.

RGIII and Baylor lost to Tannehill and A&M two years in a row and also got beat by Weedon two years in a row.

RT had won 6 straight regular season games since he got the start before going into the OKST game. The one loss was to LSU in the Cotton Bowl. In total he lost to....

OK ST by 1 point
Ark by 4 points
Missouri 7 point in OT
K State by 3 points in OT
Texas by 2 points

The biggest loss was to Oklahoma by 16 points where he threw 3 picks.

Yes RT has some work to do but he's got just as much of a shot to be successful as Andrew Luck and RG3.

Luck is going to struggle on a bad Colt team. No defense, no running game and a 34 yr old #1 WR.

RGIII has no WR's and no running game.

Miami is a better team than either Indy or Washington but RT will most likely not even play until mid season or next year...depending on several factors.

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

eesti Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Henne may have played well at times but he was the
> same player in college that he was in the
> pros....inconsistent.

And Tannehill was consistent? I don't think anyone can legitimately say he was consistent.

I think the comparison is apt. They came out of college as projects with some upside. The only difference is that people were banging the drums to pick a QB in the first round this year, and so the FO picked a guy that would have normally gone in the second.

We'll see if Tannehill can make it, but right now he is a bigger risk than the two QBs picked ahead of him. I'm not going to anoint him the next long term franchise QB based on simply potential when he had a short and, at times, spotty college career.

eesti Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> I happen to be a Dolphin fan and I like the kid
> more than I do Luck or RGIII.
>

You seriously think that Tannehill is a better prospect than Andrew Luck or RGIII? Now I know who I'm dealing with...

You're obviously either a big A&M fan, or have lost all perspective on our QB situation. Most people would trade Tannehill for Luck or RG3 in a heartbeat.



>> Lets get a little reality perspective: RT is a
>> project QB. He will sit on the bench for this
>> entire seasons. Next season he will compete for
>> the starting job, but he may not win it out of the
>> gate. The only reason he was picked in the top 10
>> is because the FO was desperate.
>
> ALL speculation. Perspective? Let me know when you
> get some.
>

The FO has all but said he will be sitting this season.



>
> Doesn't seem very obvious to you. All you wanna do
> is run him down and bash anyone that tries to see
> the upside.

Oh, give me a freaking break with this act. I'm not bashing anyone - quite the opposite. If I point out any potential flaw in RT I'm accused of all sorts of things - from lying to being a troll.... You act as though I'm calling the kid an axe murdered or child molester, when I'm just pointing out what many people have already written.

I'm just saying what 95% of the rest of the NFL has acknowledge, that RT is not ready to start in the NFL this year, he was a reach at #8, and that he is a project QB.

For some reason, some fans are very defensive about this. Ironically, they would probably be a LOT better off if they embraced this and adjusted the expectations accordingly. That way the kid has time to make some big-league mistakes and learn from them.

DolfanKing Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ChyrenB Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> >
> > As the draft approached, RT was mentioned as
> being
> > our number 8 pick as Luck and RGIII were no
> longer
> > an option, but at the same time, there was the
> > caution that he was a "project" and would need
> to
> > sit a year.
> >
> > Then he gets drafted, now people are demanding
> > that he start!
> >
> > When asked how they justify it, they reply, as
> if
> > it is a GIVEN, that Peyton and Elway started
> and
> > Dan Marino SHOULD HAVE started.
> >
> > And they don't stop, take a deep breath, and
> > realize that, without him having played a
> single
> > pro game and with him having started fewer
> college
> > games at QB than any other QB draftee in
> history,
> > they are now anointing Ryan Tannehill into the
> > same atmosphere as Dan Marino, number Thirteen.
> >
>
> Amen!
>
> FWIW, this is entirely predictable. You take a QB
> in the top ten and the expectations are automatic.
> But Tannehill is a project, and had the Phins FO
> not backed themselves into a corner with this
> pick, Tannehill would have likely been a high
> second round pick - just like Henne. So now we
> have a second round QB with phenom expectations.
>
> Simply picking a QB in the Top 10 (or 27th)
> doesn't make him Dan Marino. For whatever reason,
> fans don't get this. I hope the coaching staff
> can protect this kid for a season or two so he has
> the chance he so obviously needs to mature.
> Unfortunately, the South Florida press is not
> going to be so accommodating.

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

Backed themselves into a corner? RT was Ireland's pick all along; how did he back himself into a corner (unless I am somehow misreading you)?

High second round pick? He wouldn't have made it past Seattle. They already had their eyes on him, and (supposedly) were thinking of moving up to grab him. Yes, I know they already signed Flynn, but evidently they aren't 100% in his camp, yet. I guess they wanted RT in the event Flynn didn't work out.

When the top two QBs are taken in the first two picks, anyone needing a QB is going to grab the next best as quickly as possible. RT has everything teams are looking for in a QB, except game experience at the position.

I do agree, however, that RT would have been a second rounder in any "normal" year, however, this was not a normal year. Think about it; if Barkley and Jones had come out this year, there is a strong possibility that RT would have dropped to the second round. There just wasn't enough top talent at the position this year.

If, as you say, fans just can't fully understand that drafting a QB in the top 10 will not make the guy Dan Marino, it would be hard to attempt to explain the philosophy to them, but I really think that the majority of fans understand this concept, so I'm not really concerned about trying to explain that to the other fans.

I highly doubt the coaches will try to protect RT for "a season or two." He is talented enough that he will probably be starting sometime during his first season. But then again, that would depend on how well or poorly Miami is doing, and how well or poorly the QBs are playing.

BTW, I highly doubt the coaching staff nor Ireland, are concerned about the press and what they have to say, In fact, they probably could care less what the fan base has to say.

DolfanKing Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> eesti Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> >
> > Henne may have played well at times but he was
> the
> > same player in college that he was in the
> > pros....inconsistent.
>
> And Tannehill was consistent? I don't think
> anyone can legitimately say he was consistent.
>
> I think the comparison is apt. They came out of
> college as projects with some upside. The only
> difference is that people were banging the drums
> to pick a QB in the first round this year, and so
> the FO picked a guy that would have normally gone
> in the second.
>
> We'll see if Tannehill can make it, but right now
> he is a bigger risk than the two QBs picked ahead
> of him. I'm not going to anoint him the next long
> term franchise QB based on simply potential when
> he had a short and, at times, spotty college
> career.

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

RT wasn't consistent, but don't you think that could be expected given his lack of college QB experience? That "should" improve with help from the coaching staff.

True, people were banging the drum to "finally" get a QB. Hell, how many years do the fans have to wait for that "franchise" guy to get drafted? A first rounder is no guarantee, but Miami hasn't had much luck drafting second-tier QBs. This guy has a lot of positives, and the negatives can be improved with good coaching, so why not? BTW, drafting OL, LB, DEs, etc hasn't gotten Miami to the playoffs.

Uhh...normally gone in the second round -- true, but not this year.

Yes, we will have to wait to see if RT makes it or not, but in the meantime, I am pulling extremely hard for him to do so. He is a Dolphin, right? Then he's MY GUY!

He may be the bigger risk of the two drafted before him, but being on the worst team in the NFL (and still is) won't be any picnic for Luck, and RG III has had no NFL experience that I know of. No guarantees there, either.

captkoi Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> He is a Dolphin, right? Then he's MY GUY!


You are implying that since I've pointed out a few flaws, that he's not my guy.

I'm pulling for him. But I'm not going to act as though he solves the QB problem. He doesn't until he proves it on the field. And I don't see how he will be able to do that this year.


>
> He may be the bigger risk of the two drafted
> before him, but being on the worst team in the NFL
> (and still is) won't be any picnic for Luck, and
> RG III has had no NFL experience that I know of.
> No guarantees there, either.

Luck is a very good QB and has a solid head on his shoulders. I expect him to have a very rough first season, but I also expect him to be an elite QB within the next two-three seasons.

RG3 is a freak of nature. He has speed and an amazing arm and is a very sharp guy. We'll see if he can handle the NFL, but all indications are that he will have no problem there either. My only concern with RG3 would be injury because it looks at times if he's trying to play a bit too above his game when he starts running.

Still, it is very hard to argue that either of these two should have been picked where they were. Not only do they have the physical gifts, but they have won big games against big teams. It is clear that they were the two elite QBs of the draft.

DK,

I think the problem some people are having with you is the way you are going about making your point.

I agree that nothing is settled with Tannehill. He will either succeed on the field or fail and that will define Ireland's tenure as GM here.

But you are "cherry picking" some phrases and data to make your argument which really isn't necessary since your basic point is obviously correct: that Tannehill isn't a finished product, and isn't guaranteed to turn out to be a good pick.


First off, his completion % in relationship to other QB's in other offenses is irrelevant. You can write off the inordinate amount of "drops" that pundits have assigned to his receiving corps, which clearly would impact his completion %, if you like. But that doesn't change the fact that they dropped a TON of passes. If you really want to be fair about it, you are going to have to watch all the games and come up with your own number of drops based on how you define "drop". While you are at it, you can do that for Luck and RG3 as well. Then you'll have a better, albeit invalid, comparison.

At the end of the day there's no way to use completion % as a true comparison. There's just too much difference between the offenses those three QB's ran. RG3 played in the shotgun his whole career in a spread offense that inflates completion %. Tannehill spent half his time under center. That is a MAJOR transitional advantage for RT and a contributing factor in the difference in completion % along with drops, talent, and system.

But if you are going to use that stat and that stat alone to compare RT and RG3 or even Luck then at least compare apples to apples. We are talking about the development of QB prospects and judging their progress based upon college production. This is a flawed exercise from the start, but if we are going to go through it, lets look at their development. Tannehills stats for his first 19 starts in college are comparable, actually better, than RG3's and Luck's. Now I know that people will argue that he started as a Junior and Senior and its not fair to compare his stats to a freshman and sophomore. That isn't an unfair argument, but the flip side is that it isn't fair to compare a guy's senior year after 6 previous career starts to that of guys who were 3 or 4 year starters in their systems.

At the end of the day, judging one QB prospect versus another based on their college stats seems to be a fools errand.


Secondly, the notion that Tannehill is a reach is well...a stretch.
You've said he was a second round pick and that our front office "backed itself into a corner" and had to "reach" for him. That's just not the case.

YOU may consider him a 2nd round pick, but the VAST majority of pundits, writers and talking heads who muck about in the draft process for a living had him safely in their top 20 or at worst top 25 picks and some as high as 4th best prospect overall. At best, your contention that he is a 2nd round pick is merely your opinion. At worst its hyperbole. Either way, its just not accurate.

Now as for the term "reach". Many people bristle at that comment because it has negative connotations. Many of us don't believe in the term "reach" when it comes to the draft. We subscribe to the Bill Walsh philosophy that you either hit on a player or you don't. That's the ultimate judge of things. Being right about the player you pick, or being wrong. The general consensus in this draft is that there were 6 impact players in this draft, maybe 7. Its almost a given that you won't find 2 teams that ranked the next 20 players in the same order. So calling someone a "reach" at #8 who virtually everyone ranked in that 4-20 range seems silly.

As for the notion that Ireland "backed himself into a corner" and "panicked" in selecting Tannehill, you are certainly entitled to that opinion but the facts don't back you up. He certainly went "all in" on Tannehill when he passed on Flynn and didn't get into a bidding war on RG3 but that supports his story that RT's been his guy since August. If Ireland was "panicked" about this situation he'd have overpaid for Flynn or made some insane offer for RG3. He didn't. He made his choice on RT and correctly judged where he needed to be to get him. that's the opposite of a panicked move. It's a calculated decision.

Only time will tell if its a correct decision.

Lastly, your use of the term "project QB"...
If you want to compare him to the guys taken ahead of him and say that he's an unfinished product with less experience than Luck and RG3, then yes, he is a project. But that term hasn't been used in that fashion all that much in the past. A "project QB" has historically been the guy taken in the late rounds who you see a little something in, and you HOPE (not expect) will someday develop into a player. RT clearly doesn't fit that definition of "project QB". He's EXPECTED to be a NFL starter sooner rather than later.

I agree with you that Tannehill is an unfinished product. Every QB coming out of college is...even Luck. And that is not to say they are equally prepared at this point. They aren't. But I find it stupefying that some people view this as a negative when it only means Tannehill has room to develop. Most QB's will get better the more they play. That he has room to grow/develop merely by attaining the experience level of the QB's taken ahead of him should be viewed as a positive at this point, not a negative.


Does anyone know how his career will pan out? Of course not.

But for most of us, we understand that in today's NFL you have to shop for your QB's in the 1st round, so its going to be difficult to be upset at the team for actually doing this for the first time in 30 years.

There's a lot to like about Tannehill. He's got the arm, the size, the brains, the athleticism of an elite NFL QB. There are a few things worthy of criticism as well (made a handful of poor decisions last year, needs more experience). But at the end of the day, there are two things that are absolutely true: First, only time will tell if he's a big time player or not...and second, he's the best young QB we've had on this team since Marino.

Wow. Very Well said! I guess I didn't take the time to elaborate on my statements but I couldn't have said it better myself.

Chyren....The saying "I couldn't care less" makes sense if you take it as...there is no possible way I could care any less because I am at the lowest amount possible of caring.

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

Eesti said, "I couldn't care less" makes sense if you take it as...there is no possible way I could care any less because I am at the lowest amount possible of caring.

That's precisely why "couldn't care less" is proper and "could care less" is incorrect. Wikipedia it.

Do Law Schools allow Wikipedia as proper reference material?

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

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

The proper way of saying something is not a legal issue.

Oh I read your initial post wrong...so I guess I was agreeing with you.

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



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/14/2012 10:28AM by eesti.

THE Truth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> DK,
>
> I think the problem some people are having with
> you is the way you are going about making your
> point.

Not people. Only one person. And it not how I am making my point, it is what I'm writing.

I'm certainly not going to change because a someone starts disrespecting me and then calling me a liar and troll because I see things differently than their narrow view. If I set one person I've never met into a 3 year old internet tantrum, you will be hard presses to convince me its the way I go about "making my point".


> I agree that nothing is settled with Tannehill.
> He will either succeed on the field or fail and
> that will define Ireland's tenure as GM here.
>
> But you are "cherry picking" some phrases and data
> to make your argument which really isn't necessary
> since your basic point is obviously correct: that
> Tannehill isn't a finished product, and isn't
> guaranteed to turn out to be a good pick.
>

Hmmmm. You are agreeing with me yet claiming I'm "cherry picking". That is rather nonsensical. I disagree I'm cherry picking. When I say "most legit scouts" are calling RT a project QB that probably won't start this year, that indeed means "most legit scouts" not 1 or 2 catch phrases that enforce a skewed vision of reality.

You say you agree, so what is your point... aside from ripping me because you take offense to the phrase "cherry picked". Sorry, but I think I used it appropriately.



>
> First off, his completion % in relationship to
> other QB's in other offenses is irrelevant. You
> can write off the inordinate amount of "drops"
> that pundits have assigned to his receiving corps,
> which clearly would impact his completion %, if
> you like. But that doesn't change the fact that
> they dropped a TON of passes. If you really want
> to be fair about it, you are going to have to
> watch all the games and come up with your own
> number of drops based on how you define "drop".
> While you are at it, you can do that for Luck and
> RG3 as well. Then you'll have a better, albeit
> invalid, comparison.
>
> At the end of the day there's no way to use
> completion % as a true comparison. There's just
> too much difference between the offenses those
> three QB's ran. RG3 played in the shotgun his
> whole career in a spread offense that inflates
> completion %. Tannehill spent half his time
> under center. That is a MAJOR transitional
> advantage for RT and a contributing factor in the
> difference in completion % along with drops,
> talent, and system.
>

My problem isn't completion percentage. Simply saying I don't agree with completion percentage and then throwing bizarre Marino comparisons is ridiculous and a complete misrepresentation of my concern - which is a very concerning trend with this QB.

I'm concerned specifically with the stat Peter King spoke of - the percentage dropping in the second half of games where A&M lead at the half and then lost. King states they lost several games, and that should be noted by all Dolphin fans. This is a Henne like stat. Its not the only Henneness that I've see, and the Henne parallels are so troubling.




> But if you are going to use that stat and that
> stat alone to compare RT and RG3 or even Luck then
> at least compare apples to apples. We are
> talking about the development of QB prospects and
> judging their progress based upon college
> production. This is a flawed exercise from the
> start, but if we are going to go through it, lets
> look at their development. Tannehills stats for
> his first 19 starts in college are comparable,
> actually better, than RG3's and Luck's. Now I
> know that people will argue that he started as a
> Junior and Senior and its not fair to compare his
> stats to a freshman and sophomore. That isn't an
> unfair argument, but the flip side is that it
> isn't fair to compare a guy's senior year after 6
> previous career starts to that of guys who were 3
> or 4 year starters in their systems.
>
> At the end of the day, judging one QB prospect
> versus another based on their college stats seems
> to be a fools errand.
>
>

This is a nonsensical straw man argument. I neither agree nor disagree - it simply isn't applicable in the context of my concerns.

I will say this - both Luck and RG3 were 1 and 2 picks for very good reasons.



> Secondly, the notion that Tannehill is a reach is
> well...a stretch.
> You've said he was a second round pick and that
> our front office "backed itself into a corner" and
> had to "reach" for him. That's just not the
> case.
>
> YOU may consider him a 2nd round pick, but the
> VAST majority of pundits, writers and talking
> heads who muck about in the draft process for a
> living had him safely in their top 20 or at worst
> top 25 picks and some as high as 4th best prospect
> overall. At best, your contention that he is a
> 2nd round pick is merely your opinion. At worst
> its hyperbole. Either way, its just not
> accurate.
>

What I've asserted is that he's not a top ten talent. Most mock had him late first/early second, which, BTW, is where they has Henne.

We didn't have a late first pick, so second round is what we had. If we traded down to late first, that would have been fine by me. But top 10 is where you look for blue chip, and I don't see blue chip with RT.


> Now as for the term "reach". Many people bristle
> at that comment because it has negative
> connotations. Many of us don't believe in the
> term "reach" when it comes to the draft. We
> subscribe to the Bill Walsh philosophy that you
> either hit on a player or you don't. That's the
> ultimate judge of things. Being right about the
> player you pick, or being wrong. The general
> consensus in this draft is that there were 6
> impact players in this draft, maybe 7. Its
> almost a given that you won't find 2 teams that
> ranked the next 20 players in the same order. So
> calling someone a "reach" at #8 who virtually
> everyone ranked in that 4-20 range seems silly.
>
> As for the notion that Ireland "backed himself
> into a corner" and "panicked" in selecting
> Tannehill, you are certainly entitled to that
> opinion but the facts don't back you up. He
> certainly went "all in" on Tannehill when he
> passed on Flynn and didn't get into a bidding war
> on RG3 but that supports his story that RT's been
> his guy since August. If Ireland was "panicked"
> about this situation he'd have overpaid for Flynn
> or made some insane offer for RG3. He didn't.
> He made his choice on RT and correctly judged
> where he needed to be to get him. that's the
> opposite of a panicked move. It's a calculated
> decision.
>

When did I use the word panic?

I think Ireland made the decision based on pressure from the fan base, not on objective metrics. If he had, then this would not have been our pick. But if Ireland didn't pick a QB, he would have been fired, if for no other reason than to boost ticket sales. So our less than stellar GM made a popular rather than sound pick to save his job. I'm not sure this will be the best outcome for Dolphins fans.



> Only time will tell if its a correct decision.
>
> Lastly, your use of the term "project QB"...
> If you want to compare him to the guys taken ahead
> of him and say that he's an unfinished product
> with less experience than Luck and RG3, then yes,
> he is a project. But that term hasn't been used
> in that fashion all that much in the past. A
> "project QB" has historically been the guy taken
> in the late rounds who you see a little something
> in, and you HOPE (not expect) will someday develop
> into a player. RT clearly doesn't fit that
> definition of "project QB". He's EXPECTED to be
> a NFL starter sooner rather than later.
>


If you think he will see the field much this season, then you clearly haven't been paying attention.


> I agree with you that Tannehill is an unfinished
> product. Every QB coming out of college
> is...even Luck. And that is not to say they are
> equally prepared at this point. They aren't.
> But I find it stupefying that some people view
> this as a negative when it only means Tannehill
> has room to develop. Most QB's will get better
> the more they play. That he has room to
> grow/develop merely by attaining the experience
> level of the QB's taken ahead of him should be
> viewed as a positive at this point, not a
> negative.
>
>
> Does anyone know how his career will pan out? Of
> course not.
>
> But for most of us, we understand that in today's
> NFL you have to shop for your QB's in the 1st
> round, so its going to be difficult to be upset at
> the team for actually doing this for the first
> time in 30 years.
>
> There's a lot to like about Tannehill. He's got
> the arm, the size, the brains, the athleticism of
> an elite NFL QB. There are a few things worthy of
> criticism as well (made a handful of poor
> decisions last year, needs more experience). But
> at the end of the day, there are two things that
> are absolutely true: First, only time will tell
> if he's a big time player or not...and second,
> he's the best young QB we've had on this team
> since Marino.

People also said that about Henne. In hindsight, its easy to discount Henne as a prospect. Let's hope, in three years from now, we aren't discounting RT in the same way.