...Matt Barkley would have come out last year.

Luck and RG3 gone 1-2. Both Barkley and Tannehill are still there at #8.

Who would you have wanted to draft knowing what you do now about T-hill?

Back then I would have wanted Barkley. But now, I'm not so sure. Especially with Sherman as the OC.

Thank you lord he didnt plus he isnt looking too good this year.

socalphin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ...Matt Barkley would have come out last year.
>
> Luck and RG3 gone 1-2. Both Barkley and Tannehill
> are still there at #8.
>
> Who would you have wanted to draft knowing what
> you do now about T-hill?
>
> Back then I would have wanted Barkley. But now,
> I'm not so sure. Especially with Sherman as the
> OC.

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

No offense, socalphin, but that is an impossible scenario.

Naturally, knowing what we know now about Tanney and watching Barkley be an average QB, we will all go with Tanney.

However, if you asked if Barkley came out last year and knowing what we did about he and Tanney "last year" then I would venture to guess that the majority, if not all here, would have gone for Barkley.

I agree everyone would had liked barkley if he goes out last year. Ill go further and say he might had been taken second. Just my 2 cents.


the big buzz on barkley that was last year is over now.

I'm not sold on the pedigree of Southern Cal quarterbacks.

Most of these SoCal QB's are dominating behind a stellar O-Line and since college ball is slower and elementary in every way compared to the NFL. Once they get to the NFL, I guarantee it is a wide eye opening experience.

RT...because I actually liked him better at the time. Now Luck, RGIII or RT all available at #8...thats a different question all together.

I wouldn't under-estimate the in-house scouting report we got from Sherman, I still think T-Hill would of been the pick.....but, maybe someone would of offered us something for Barkley and we could of moved down a few spots and still grabbed Ryan?

I agree, I think even if we had signed peyton manning we would have drafted Tannehill and developed him behind Peyton. It seems to me that Sherman, Tannehill were a plan all along for Ireland.. Possibly even a reason we hired Philbin.... I think the moves were premeditated more then people realize... I dont think the plan was hire Philbin and see what he comes up with for coaches and see what happens in the draft with best player available...

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

Crowder52 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I agree, I think even if we had signed peyton
> manning we would have drafted Tannehill and
> developed him behind Peyton. It seems to me that
> Sherman, Tannehill were a plan all along for
> Ireland.. Possibly even a reason we hired
> Philbin.... I think the moves were premeditated
> more then people realize... I dont think the plan
> was hire Philbin and see what he comes up with for
> coaches and see what happens in the draft with
> best player available...

Exactly! More than people will ADMIT more like it.

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

No doubt Iwould have taken Barkley. He was the better looking of the two. Tanny had some bad habits and was known for his 'intangibles' at TX A&M. Fortunately the intangibles were true.

I said from the beginning that I like Tannehill a whole lot. I would have taken him over a USC quarterback.

SCPhinsFan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm not sold on the pedigree of Southern Cal
> quarterbacks.

Just interest and only if you want to tell. Does the "SC" in your name stand for Southern California or South Carolina?