PDA

View Full Version : Tannehill looks bad


stingray
08-24-2012, 09:24 PM
Looks like he will have a lot of growing pains. No reason why the Texans shouldn't stomp all over him in the opener.

TheDrifter
08-24-2012, 09:33 PM
Dolphins look pretty bad in alot of places.

Dont really get why the coaches are so intent on throwing their rookie QB to the wolves. Might be the worst WR corp in the league, and the pass blocking is nothing special. Long is good, but he cant block everyone.

stingray
08-24-2012, 09:37 PM
Dolphins look pretty bad in alot of places.

Dont really get why the coaches are so intent on throwing their rookie QB to the wolves. Might be the worst WR corp in the league, and the pass blocking is nothing special. Long is good, but he cant block everyone.

I agree. Especially him. He was just an above averag QB in college. He is going to need a lot of time to develop. He shouldn't even see the field until december in my opinion.

drs23
08-24-2012, 11:02 PM
I agree. Especially him. He was just an above averag QB in college. He is going to need a lot of time to develop. He shouldn't even see the field until december in my opinion.

Yeah, like THREE Decembers from now!

GP
08-24-2012, 11:33 PM
Yeah, like THREE Decembers from now!

LMAO.

ha ha ha ha....

Awesome.

TexansBull
08-26-2012, 12:56 AM
Dolphins look pretty bad in alot of places.

Dont really get why the coaches are so intent on throwing their rookie QB to the wolves. Might be the worst WR corp in the league, and the pass blocking is nothing special. Long is good, but he cant block everyone.

Mike Sherman should know better too since he spent time here and probably heard a David Carr story or two. Also, look at Sam Bradford. For a rookie to start he better be NFL ready, have tools, and most importantly decent protection. Bradford is barely making it alive even though he tools, was NFL ready, but has suspect protection.

htowntexans1985
08-26-2012, 04:57 AM
It should have been Matt Moore's job to lose. Their coach is in over his head with letting Tannehill start.

Honoring Earl 34
08-26-2012, 02:25 PM
I think in todays NFL there's pressure from the top to play young QBS for PR reasons .

BullNation4Life
08-26-2012, 03:19 PM
Dolphins are gonna do to Tannahill what the Texans did to Carr, not sit him for a year and get his ass handed to him because of a crappy offensive line...

The Pencil Neck
08-29-2012, 12:55 PM
The Dolphins made their decision to start him when they drafted him. There's no way he should have been taken that high.

I'm not a GM but if that had been my team, I would have gone with Moore as the starter, drafted someone like a DeCastro (possibly after a trade back, if I could wrangle it), and then tried to get Tannehill in the second to groom for the future. If somebody took Tannehill, I would have set my sights on one of the other good QBs out there in the later rounds like Wilson or Foles.

The1ApplePie
08-29-2012, 01:17 PM
Their coach is in over his head with letting Tannehill start.

You can't tell if its how they edit it, but Hard Knocks certainly gives the impression that Philbin is over his head.

HoustonFrog
08-29-2012, 01:30 PM
I have to be honest, I'm not sure how this is a debate. Tannehill has outplayed Moore in most games and in practices from what I was seeing on Twitter.. Moore didn't do anything to show he was the QB. I'm not saying Tannehill is great or anything, just that the Dolphins aren't too strong right now and if they are going to go young, why not go Tannehill.

Goldensilence
08-31-2012, 08:02 PM
I agree. Especially him. He was just an above averag QB in college. He is going to need a lot of time to develop. He shouldn't even see the field until december in my opinion.

Tannehill was above average? I thought he was an average QB with great physical measureables. He had tendencies last year to throw very untimely picks for A&M and looked like he was still relearning to play QB at the college level after spending time at WR.

Philbin took Tannehill because he's got great tools and I wonder what part Sherman and his familiarity with him is what really pressed them into taking him early. I thought half the appeal of fixing the top end of the draft salaries was to allow some guys who weren't ready to not have the pressure of being thrown right into the fire because of rookie salaries.

What really lost me was a weak WR and trading away your best WR to the bears. That didn't strike me as smart.

To me I am not sure if it's a matter of whether Moore was outplayed or not, but more why send a rookie supposed franchise QB behind a swiss cheese OL?

stingray
08-31-2012, 08:19 PM
Tannehill was above average? I thought he was an average QB with great physical measureables. He had tendencies last year to throw very untimely picks for A&M and looked like he was still relearning to play QB at the college level after spending time at WR.

Philbin took Tannehill because he's got great tools and I wonder what part Sherman and his familiarity with him is what really pressed them into taking him early. I thought half the appeal of fixing the top end of the draft salaries was to allow some guys who weren't ready to not have the pressure of being thrown right into the fire because of rookie salaries.

What really lost me was a weak WR and trading away your best WR to the bears. That didn't strike me as smart.

To me I am not sure if it's a matter of whether Moore was outplayed or not, but more why send a rookie supposed franchise QB behind a swiss cheese OL?

Average/above average. I think you are splitting hairs here. I'm just saying that the kid didn't set the world on fire and like you said, was drafted on measurables. I just think they can let him sit for a while because the kids confidence can be shattered if he has a horrible season. They are going to be bad with either QB, so I would just let him sit for most of the season.

Vinny
08-31-2012, 09:48 PM
I think in todays NFL there's pressure from the top to play young QBS for PR reasons .

The Dolphins made their decision to start him when they drafted him. There's no way he should have been taken that high.

I'm not a GM but if that had been my team, I would have gone with Moore as the starter, drafted someone like a DeCastro (possibly after a trade back, if I could wrangle it), and then tried to get Tannehill in the second to groom for the future. If somebody took Tannehill, I would have set my sights on one of the other good QBs out there in the later rounds like Wilson or Foles.

Most teams won't think like that because they want the best prospect, not the third best prospect, so they reach. I think the QB is such a commodity that teams that don't have one have to reach because someone else will reach. There is always one or two guys that teams reach for because they won't be there when their "hypothetical worth" draft slot comes around....so you either take him or let someone else take a shot at developing a guy that may or may not pan out. As long as you don't Ryan Leaf yourself, you do what you gotta do when you don't have what you need to win.

Its pretty rare when the reach or the Dalton (on his way to proving himself) or the Montana (Done proved it) is out there. Most of the time you just draft a guy like Beck or Brian Brohm or Dave Ragone.