Phinjim Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> At the risk of ruining another great back and
> forth bruhaha about whether DK is a bad guy for
> saying Tannehill needs to sit ... let's first put
> this issue of Wheeden being named a starter to
> rest.
>
> 1. The 1 and 2 picks were head and shoulders
> ahead, and too expensive for Miami to go get EOS.
>
> 2. Wheeden who was a later pick was attractive
> not because of his superior talent than but
> absolutely he had more experience (age and playing
> time) than Tannehill.- He was likely selected
> because of that, and because of the disatisfaction
> with Colt McCoy.
> - He was perhaps even more fitting for their
> current need than Tannehill from an experience
> evaluation.
>
> 3. Tannehill was right for Miami for a lot of
> reasons already beaten to ad nauseum, but I'll
> choose to disagree with DK about him having to sit
> a year until I see just how he and the other Miami
> QBs react to real game play.
> - It is appears however that the Fins have a bit
> window to bring RT along that may benefit his
> development.
> - I do however believe that if he outshines the
> competition, that he may play sooner than later.
>
> 4. I never thought Colt McCoy was that great in
> college or pro, so I'm not so surprised. Wheeden
> looked pretty solid in college.



I think Tannehill should play when he's ready and not before. If they don't play him at all this year I won't have any problems with it.


As for the other three first round QB's...None of them has a former Pro Bowl QB with a career 85.8 QB rating blocking their path to the starting job.

Anyone comparing the situations Luck, RG3 and Wheedon are in to Tannehill is missing the boat.

RT is the only one going to a team that features his college coach and playbook.

They all have to get used to the NFL speed.

While RG and AL are learning a new offense. RT is learning how to read defenses. That may be oversimplifying but it is still valid.

That should close the gap a bit as far as less starts in college.

Like stated above, I don't mind if he sits for awhile or whatever. We are in a good situation.

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

I'm actually curious how many times this has happened before (which I'm sure it has) where a college QB is drafted by the coach he used to play for. I'm curious what the success was of those previous QBs. Does anyone have any sense of that?

didn't jimmy johnson draft steve walsh (but he may have traded him ASAP since they had Aikman).
I think I recall in the run up to the draft hearing that it never happened before

________________________________________________________
The beatings will continue until morale improves.

berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> didn't jimmy johnson draft steve walsh (but he may
> have traded him ASAP since they had Aikman).
> I think I recall in the run up to the draft
> hearing that it never happened before

I don't recall Walsh playing for Johnson. He was on the team, but he didn't play in a game. Johnson's QB was Testaverde.

eesti Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> RT is the only one going to a team that features
> his college coach and playbook.
>
> They all have to get used to the NFL speed.
>
> While RG and AL are learning a new offense. RT is
> learning how to read defenses. That may be
> oversimplifying but it is still valid.
>


Only marginally so.

But its still apples to oranges.

Those guys aren't starting because they are more advanced than RT (even if some of them are)...they are starting because they are the only options on those teams.

If Peyton Manning had had his option picked up by the colts and they had taken Luck as many had suggested, Luck wouldn't start no matter how much further along he is than Tannehill.

marginal shmarginal. The other two had to learn a completely new offense.

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

eesti Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> marginal shmarginal. The other two had to learn a
> completely new offense.


Do you think Tannehill would beat out Colt McCoy, Drew Stanton and/or Rex Grossman?

You are indeed an internet badass Truth

I have a question, which I think is fair... If Wheeden comes out, plays very well, and the Browns play well, while at the same time Tannehill is on the bench or doesnt have the same type of success out of the gate.. If this happens which is a big "if" Did we draft the wrong player and would passing on Wheeden be considered a mistake?

-----------------------------------------------------------------
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 08/09/2012 11:25AM by Crowder52.

Crowder52 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have a question, which I think is fair... If
> Wheeden comes out, plays very well, and the Browns
> play well, while at the same time Tannehill is on
> the bench or doesnt have the same type of success
> out of the gate.. If this happens which is a big
> "if" Did we draft the wrong player and would
> passing on Wheeden be considered a mistake?


If Wheedon plays well and Tannehill doesn't, or doesn't even play, then those discussions will be inevitable.

Even so...its a question that most likely won't be answered for years and whose answer could change many times over the course of their careers if they both turn out to be any good.

Of course, none of that will stop us from arguing over it from the get go.

Hokie- Whats up man? Are you having a bad day? we all have them sometimes, shake it off... no big deal.... You think Wheeden is gonna be a good player for the Browns?

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

Just pull his string and watch him go...

Crowder I think Wheeden will be decent for the Browns and probably would have been a safer pick for us. However, I think Tannehill has more upside. Brandon Wheeden is a more polished passer, but I see Tannehill as someone with much more athletic ability and a higher ceiling.

Crowder52 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hokie- Whats up man? Are you having a bad day? we
> all have them sometimes, shake it off... no big
> deal.... You think Wheeden is gonna be a good
> player for the Browns?


Ha. Most of his days are bad days Crowder. Somethings never change.

Hokie Phin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Just pull his string and watch him go...


aqua pulled your strings Hokie?

samsam3738 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hokie Phin Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Just pull his string and watch him go...
>
>
> aqua pulled your strings Hokie?


He's talking about me Sam.

berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> the probem with Beck is he SUCKED


Judge bangs the gavel. Case closed.

Some things never change. Even when someone takes a "break" from the chat board and returns with a new name.

Truth- I've never had any issues with Hokie, normally pretty interesing football opinions IMO... we all get into scuffles from time to time...

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

THE Truth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> samsam3738 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Hokie Phin Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Just pull his string and watch him go...
> >
> >
> > aqua pulled your strings Hokie?
>
>
> He's talking about me Sam.


I know....I meant he is critisizing you and saying to watch you go...

And i watch him go when he said what he said about aquas efforts.

Thats why i asked if aqua pulled his strings.

Im in the newtral corner here.....Just thought it was wrong to critisize aqua....For what he did......over a miami dolphin internet feud.

___________________________________________________________________


You and chren do not see eye to eye over some things and chren said he would praise you and say good job.........if you did the same thing as aqua.

Hokie Phin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Some things never change. Even when someone takes
> a "break" from the chat board and returns with a
> new name.


C'mon...you can do better than that, can't you?

I know that your day was ruined when A&O didn't take the bait but man if that's the best you've got then your game really has gone downhill... pathetic.

Hokie Phin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Crowder I think Wheeden will be decent for the
> Browns and probably would have been a safer pick
> for us. However, I think Tannehill has more
> upside. Brandon Wheeden is a more polished passer,
> but I see Tannehill as someone with much more
> athletic ability and a higher ceiling.


Makes sense, I agree. I wouldnt have had a problem if we drafted Weeden..

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

Hokie Phin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Some things never change. Even when someone takes
> a "break" from the chat board and returns with a
> new name.


In my book its called civil discussions.

Lighten up man.

I think it was wrong to critisize aqua for what he did. Its just a message board.

Be back tommorrow im closing work now.

Crowder52 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Truth- I've never had any issues with Hokie,
> normally pretty interesing football opinions
> IMO... we all get into scuffles from time to
> time...


True enough. He's pretty knowledgeable and you've never had any issues with him. Doesn't mean that other people haven't, nor does it make him a good guy.

If you know the history between him and A&O and you read his nonsense today then that is readily apparent.

Takes all types to make a village I guess.

THE Truth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Crowder52 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Truth- I've never had any issues with Hokie,
> > normally pretty interesing football opinions
> > IMO... we all get into scuffles from time to
> > time...
>
>
> True enough. He's pretty knowledgeable and
> you've never had any issues with him. Doesn't
> mean that other people haven't, nor does it make
> him a good guy.
>
> If you know the history between him and A&O and
> you read his nonsense today then that is readily
> apparent.
>

I can't imagine how A&O would upset anyone.

Seriously - you give this guy a hard time because he an A&O don't get along?

My take is this - I never responded to an A&O post, or even noticed who the guy was, until after several times he called me "stupid", a Jet fan, some other poster, whatever.

The next thing I know Truth is in my grill about the same bogus stuff.

What is it between Truth and A&O? You two "buddies"? Its cool, I ain't here to judge. Its just curious why you should care about his A&O - its not like he doesn't bring this crap onto himself to begin with.

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

Miami Dolphins. Always Perfect.

Hokie seems to have some good football takes. I don't care that he doesn't get along with the boards resident flamer.

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

Miami Dolphins. Always Perfect.

THE Truth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> eesti Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > marginal shmarginal. The other two had to learn
> a
> > completely new offense.
>
>
> Do you think Tannehill would beat out Colt McCoy,
> Drew Stanton and/or Rex Grossman?


Of the three you mention i truly hope he could beat out rex grossman..