Ryan Tannehill, QB, Texas A&M

mightytitan9 · 02-07-2012, 11:40 AM

With all the talk of the Redskins trading up, what if the price is just too steep or Shanahan doens't like RG3 as speculated.

Do you think he could take a guy like Tannehill with the 6th overall pick?

I think this could be one of the more interesting points in the draft. Most of us didn't think that many QB's would go that early last season, with the new CBA rookie pay scale, will this be routine or was it a one time thing?

If Tannehill goes #6 overall, does Weeden/Osweiler get moved up to a late first early 2nd?

DraftSavant · 02-07-2012, 11:42 AM

Better than Locker (who Shanny ******* loved), so yeah, I'd take him 6th and I think there's a good chance they will, too.

He's still my favorite QB prospect in this class.

vidae · 02-07-2012, 11:43 AM

DS and I love Tannehill more than most. He's going to go top 15. There are a lot of QB needy teams and he has all the tools.

DraftSavant · 02-07-2012, 11:47 AM

He's played two positions at a pretty high level, despite being coached/developed by a fucknut like Mike Sherman.

Raw as a QB, but you'll see him make coverage reads and go through pretty difficult progressions at times. He's just maddeningly inconsistent at it and was prone to locking in on Fuller as a crutch (which you'd expect from a guy who only played QB for a year and a half).

onejayhawk · 02-07-2012, 11:48 AM

I can see Tannehill going anywhere from #6 - #12. I dont think he gets past the Reskins, Dolphins, Seahawks and Chiefs, not to mention any less obvious teams and trade ups. It is still very early, but he will interview well at the Combine, and there is plenty of tape on him.

J

mightytitan9 · 02-07-2012, 11:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DraftSavant

Better than Locker (who Shanny ******* loved), so yeah, I'd take him 6th and I think there's a good chance they will, too.

He's still my favorite QB prospect in this class.

I don't see him as a better prospect than Locker at all. I see him as a lot rawer prospect than Locker

DraftSavant · 02-07-2012, 11:51 AM

The buzz on Twitter all year is that the NFL guys all love his tape, too. They're a lot higher on him than the general internet draft community.

I'm telling you guys, I see him asked to make more "NFL" type throws than any prospect I've seen since Cutler.

DraftSavant · 02-07-2012, 11:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mightytitan9

I don't see him as a better prospect than Locker at all. I see him as a lot rawer prospect than Locker

ATLDirtyBirds · 02-07-2012, 11:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DraftSavant

The buzz on Twitter all year is that the NFL guys all love his tape, too. They're a lot higher on him than the general internet draft community.

Not surprising at all. Haven't hoped off the Tannehill train. He'd be a stud in Washington.

DiG · 02-07-2012, 11:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ATLDirtyBirds

Not surprising at all. Haven't hoped off the Tannehill train. He'd be a stud in Washington.

I don't doubt this but the biggest problem I see is that if you draft him at 6 the expectation is to start him right away and honestly I think Tannehill has a ton of potential but I see him falling on his face if he gets thrown into starting day 1.

mightytitan9 · 02-07-2012, 12:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DraftSavant

http://flipthatbird.com/wp-content/u...pping-bird.jpg

mightytitan9 · 02-07-2012, 12:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dirty Thirty

I don't doubt this but the biggest problem I see is that if you draft him at 6 the expectation is to start him right away and honestly I think Tannehill has a ton of potential but I see him falling on his face if he gets thrown into starting day 1.

They'd have to sit him at least the majority of the season like the Titans did with Locker, The bad news for the Skins is their isn't really a decent veteran QB that can be had on a short-term deal like Hasselbeck last year

ATLDirtyBirds · 02-07-2012, 12:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mightytitan9

They'd have to sit him at least the majority of the season like the Titans did with Locker, The bad news for the Skins is their isn't really a decent veteran QB that can be had on a short-term deal like Hasselbeck last year

Yeah, you'd like to handle it like Locker. I think you can even pick up Orton or even Garrard and hope to be mediocre. However, I still think the Skins as usual, want the splash, be it Peyton or Flynn.

mightytitan9 · 02-07-2012, 12:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ATLDirtyBirds

Yeah, you'd like to handle it like Locker. I think you can even pick up Orton or even Garrard and hope to be mediocre. However, I still think the Skins as usual, want the splash, be it Peyton or Flynn.

Orton might be a fit there, I don't think Shanahans is going to want Garrard though. If KC commits to Orton (some KC fans prefer to keep Orton and let Cassel go), I could see KC trading or cutting Cassel and him ending up in Washington. Also, if the Skins could attain Brian Hoyer for a decent pick, I could see him fitting in Shanahans offense

FUNBUNCHER · 02-07-2012, 12:28 PM

I hope he falls. As a Skins fan, on my home board we've been discussing the option of trading out of the 6th pick into the teens and high twenties and picking Tannehill later.

If the Skins don't take Tannehill at 6, what are the odds that he falls??

6 is high for him IMO. I love his upside, but at 6 Tannehill is going to be overdrafted.
I know it's the nature of the position, but jeez!!

If Shanny has targeted Tannehill and thinks he won't be available much later in the first, I think he stands pat and takes him with the 6th pick.

Ugh.

DraftSavant · 02-07-2012, 12:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mightytitan9

Fixed it for you.

After beating the worst USC team in a decade, Jake Locker's entire stock was based off projection/development THAT NEVER HAPPENED.

He can throw rollouts and bootlegs with the best of 'em, but he's about as raw in the pocket as any QB prospect there's been. Makes sense, considering he was a Wing-T QB in high school and shuffled all over the place in Washington until Sark got there.

Dude was, and still is, an incredibly raw QB prospect. You're sensitive because he's the QB of your team. I get it.

Babylon · 02-07-2012, 12:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DraftSavant

Fixed it for you.

After beating the worst USC team in a decade, Jake Locker's entire stock was based off projection/development THAT NEVER HAPPENED.

He can throw rollouts and bootlegs with the best of 'em, but he's about as raw in the pocket as any QB prospect there's been. Makes sense, considering he was a Wing-T QB in high school and shuffled all over the place in Washington until Sark got there.

Dude was, and still is, an incredibly raw QB prospect. You're sensitive because he's the QB of your team. I get it.

Locker isnt the QB of my team and i'll take him over Tannehill any day of the week. (actually he was the QB of my college team). Locker is stronger, faster and has a better arm than Tannehill. Locker, as you have stated, is great throwing on the run and this year i think has made great strides navigating the pocket. He also has a huge advantage as far as games played at the college level.

Not to turn this into a Jake Locker thread i think going 6th is seriously high for Ryan Tannehill. He just doesnt have the resume of success and experience to warrant that high of a pick. If he were to go to Seattle at #12 i think that would make more sense and even then might be seen as a reach.

DraftSavant · 02-07-2012, 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Babylon

Locker isnt the QB of my team and i'll take him over Tannehill any day of the week. (actually he was the QB of my college team). Locker is stronger, faster and has a better arm than Tannehill. Locker, as you have stated, is great throwing on the run and this year i think has made great strides navigating the pocket. He also has a huge advantage as far as games played at the college level.

Not to turn this into a Jake Locker thread i think going 6th is seriously high for Ryan Tannehill. He just doesnt have the resume of success and experience to warrant that high of a pick. If he were to go to Seattle at #12 i think that would make more sense and even then might be seen as a reach.

I think it's appropriate because they're incredibly similar prospects.

My feelings for Tannehill at 6 is basically: if Locker and Gabbert can go top 10, why can't Tannehill? Locker's got the edge in terms of pure arm strength and top-line speed (it's pretty close, though), but I feel Tannehill is further along as a passer in terms of progression and coverage reading as well as ball placement/accuracy than Locker was, even without the starts. No doubt he's highly erratic/inconsistent, though.

Gabbert was insanely overvalued/overdrafted so we can actually just leave him out. But I think Locker and Tannehill are the same level prospect (I like Tannehill more, but that's just personal preference) and will be drafted around the same area.

If we're talking about Tannehill and Locker's stock in a vacuum I'd feel the best about selecting them in the late teens-early twenties. The position is just so overvalued in the draft, though, that guys with those types of tools get pumped up into the top 10.

ATLDirtyBirds · 02-07-2012, 12:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DraftSavant

I
My feelings for Tannehill at 6 is basically: if Locker and Gabbert can go top 10, why can't Tannehill? I think he's superior to both, and way further along as a passer in terms of progression and coverage reading than Locker was, even without the starts.

Gabbert was insanely overvalued/overdrafted so we can actually just leave him out. But I think Locker and Tannehill are the same level prospect (I like Tannehill more, but that's just personal preference) and will be drafted around the same area.

/thread on why Tannehill is a top 10 pick.

DraftSavant · 02-07-2012, 01:02 PM

(I'm not trying to crap on Locker in this thread, I swear)

mightytitan9 · 02-07-2012, 01:34 PM

I'm not here to argue about Locker, but I think Locker is a better prospect than Tannehill hands down. Tannehill still has a lot of trouble reading coverages and making some of the NFL throws.

FUNBUNCHER · 02-07-2012, 01:55 PM

I like Jake, but I don't know how anyone can look at Locker's college game film and come away thinking Locker is the better pro prospect.

Yes Tannehill has been inconsistent at A&M. But if that's true, what would you call Locker who was even more inconsistent his last two years at U Dub??

People talk as if Locker threw for 35 TD/5 Ints, 68% completions and 4000 yards in 2010.

Tannehill's main problem is he's late sometimes throwing on out routes and allows the ball to get jumped.

And I don't buy that overall Locker has better tools. Except for height, these guys are physically very similar with roughly the same toolbox.

Locker was a 4 year starter, but he sure didn't play like it his last season at U Dub.
Just as a pure passer, I'd say Tannehill is more advanced at this stage than Locker was entering the draft.

DraftSavant · 02-07-2012, 01:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mightytitan9

I'm not here to argue about Locker, but I think Locker is a better prospect than Tannehill hands down. Tannehill still has a lot of trouble reading coverages and making some of the NFL throws.

/throws hands in the air
I give up.

SolidGold · 02-07-2012, 02:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DraftSavant

I think it's appropriate because they're incredibly similar prospects.

My feelings for Tannehill at 6 is basically: if Locker and Gabbert can go top 10, why can't Tannehill? Locker's got the edge in terms of pure arm strength and top-line speed (it's pretty close, though), but I feel Tannehill is further along as a passer in terms of progression and coverage reading as well as ball placement/accuracy than Locker was, even without the starts. No doubt he's highly erratic/inconsistent, though.

Gabbert was insanely overvalued/overdrafted so we can actually just leave him out. But I think Locker and Tannehill are the same level prospect (I like Tannehill more, but that's just personal preference) and will be drafted around the same area.

If we're talking about Tannehill and Locker's stock in a vacuum I'd feel the best about selecting them in the late teens-early twenties. The position is just so overvalued in the draft, though, that guys with those types of tools get pumped up into the top 10.

I agree 100% with this. I have been a Tannehill supporter to and have said that his season left me a little disappointed but I do not place the blame on him as much as I do Mike Sherman and the poor head coaching job he did (which is ironic since Tannehill did get pro style experience in his offense).

I would grade Locker a bit higher than Tannehill as in Locker is 1a and Tannehill 1b. As others have said the Skins loved Locker last year and would of drafted him if the Titans did not scoop him up. Tannehill is a very similar player to Locker and we all know how Shanahan surprised many by taking Cutler.

Tannehill has all the attributes that the Shanahans seem to want in a QB. Big, strong arm and athletic. I do not think he is worthy of the number 6 overall pick but like others have said the QB position is overvalued and if Gabbert, Locker and Ponder were drafted top 12 last year than drafting Tannehill at 6 would not be considered such a big stretch.

If Manning or Flynn come to Washington than a first round QB is out of the picture for the Redskins but they probably would spend a 2nd or 3rd round pick on a QB to develop.

Brown Leader · 02-07-2012, 04:13 PM

mightytitan9 - http://draftcountdown.com/forum/showthread.php?t=48775

Locker is a much better runner and scrambler than Tannehill. He also wasn't prone to making critical mistakes at crucial moments. Arm strength is even-might even give an inch up to Tannehill-but not when he's on the move. Tannehill has much better accuracy. The tape is the tape but you'd have to imagine post season evaluation counts for something-#6 without being able to work him out seems unrealistic.