Tannenhill the #3 Overall Pick?

RWills · 03-13-2012, 09:35 AM

Can Minnesota trade the #3 pick for a QB hungry team?

I think the Flynn market will help sort out the crazed QB hunting.

There are 3 team looking for a QB (assuming Manning goes to Denver) in Miami, Seattle and Cleveland. Let's assume that Seattle signs Flynn, leaving Miami and Cleveland.

Miami would be thinking that Cleveland can go Tannenhill at #4 (heck, nobody thought Ponder/Locker would go so high) and trade with Minnesota to lock up a franchise QB, Mike Sherman is the key. I don't think they want to wait till round 2 for a Cousins/Weeden. Another option would be is star crazed owner Stephen Ross would want Tebow.

Just trying to get some dialogue

Taber21 · 03-13-2012, 09:40 AM

Unless Minnesota gets an offer way too good to pass up, it would be highly unlikely. Their need of a LT is well known and Kalil seems to be a franchise LT in the making.

Scott Wright · 03-13-2012, 09:54 AM

A lot to be settled via free agency, but Tannehill in the Top 5 is a possibility.

At the very least it's getting harder and harder to imagine Tannehill escaping the Top 10.

FordFairlane · 03-13-2012, 10:03 AM

Good. The more QB's taken ahead of the Steelers means the more players left on the board for them. :) I think Foles and Osweiler should go in the top 20 too.

FlyingElvis · 03-13-2012, 10:35 AM

The current chatter certainly has him going top 12. As the league moves more and more towards flagfootball rules and the resulting aerial attack, it's clear that QB is the most important cog. Teams simply have to push QBs up the board to secure one in the draft and have to keep tossing the darts until they're lucky or right.

The talk is even pushing Weeden into the tail end of round one. It's sounding pretty similar to last year, actually. At this point I won't be surprised to see 4 QBs in round one.

vidae · 03-13-2012, 10:39 AM

Make no mistake about it friends, the Chiefs are every bit as QB needy as the other teams listed. If Tannehill was there at 11 I'd love him in KC.

NGSeiler · 03-13-2012, 10:41 AM

If Blackmon and Claiborne are off the board when the Rams pick @ 6, I'd be intrigued by the idea of the Rams trading down again with a team interested in Tannehill.

SolidGold · 03-13-2012, 11:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FlyingElvis

The current chatter certainly has him going top 12. As the league moves more and more towards flagfootball rules and the resulting arial attack, it's clear that QB is the most important cog. Teams simply have to push QBs up the board to secure one in the draft and have to keep tossing the darts until they're lucky or right.

The talk is even pushing Weeden into the tail end of round one. It's sounding pretty similar to last year, actually. At this point I won't be surprised to see 4 QBs in round one.

I don't think the Vikings can afford to pass up on Kalil. They should sign Winston in FA as well.

I completely agree with you. I really wish they would revert the rules back to stop from having such inflated passing stats and rules that heavily favor the offense.

Steady Lurkin · 03-13-2012, 11:03 AM

I've got a feeling one of the teams tries to trade up in front of MIA.

Taber21 · 03-13-2012, 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SolidGold

I don't think the Vikings can afford to pass up on Kalil. They should sign Winston in FA as well.

I agree having Winston would be great but we have too many holes on the team to pay him the sort of top RT money he is going to get, especially when we have a serviceable option in Loadholt. If our talent level was better, I'd love to see it, but at this point we have too many needs.

SolidGold · 03-13-2012, 11:13 AM

He would be a good fit with the Bills too but I have heard that Buffalo would scoop up Reiff if he was available at 10. Depending on how the Peyton to Denver thing pans out I wouldn't be shocked if Buffalo made a play for Tebow.

I can't wait for the dominoes to start falling - once Peyton and Flynn find their new homes the QB picture will either get clearer or murkier. I love this time of year.

SolidGold · 03-13-2012, 11:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taber21

I agree having Winston would be great but we have too many holes on the team to pay him the sort of top RT money he is going to get, especially when we have a serviceable option in Loadholt. If our talent level was better, I'd love to see it, but at this point we have too many needs.

Dually noted. Do you still think Kalil will be your guys top pick? I think o-line, secondary and primary WR are your biggest needs.

keylime_5 · 03-13-2012, 11:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NGSeiler

If Blackmon and Claiborne are off the board when the Rams pick @ 6, I'd be intrigued by the idea of the Rams trading down again with a team interested in Tannehill.

Or how 'bout you give us #6 and your 3rd rounder and we'll give you the rights to Blackmon at #4? ;D

Taber21 · 03-13-2012, 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SolidGold

Dually noted. Do you still think Kalil will be your guys top pick? I think o-line, secondary and primary WR are your biggest needs.

Those are certainly our top needs, and it would seem Kalil has to be the pick. We cannot fill all our holes this off season alone, but protecting Ponder should be, and seems like it will be, priority #1.

bitonti · 03-13-2012, 11:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott Wright

At the very least it's getting harder and harder to imagine Tannehill escaping the Top 10.

as will farrell said in zoolander I feel like im taking crazy pills

this player has done nothing, all spring, to justify a top 10 selection.

he beat NOrthwestern in the Mainake Car Care Bowl. BFD.

don't get me wrong I like Tannehill... in late 1 or early 2. but he missed SB he missed Indy his stock isn't going up. It's going down.

and let me add a side note the Rams will regret trading away from Kalil and if the Vikings do as well, they will regret it too. I've done the 3 round mock drafts, the only place you're getting a true day 1 starter at LT is in the top 5. all these other guys, be it Reiff, Martin, Adams etc are gambles. If that position is a need (and it is for the Rams and Vikings) it's dumb to trade away from him. i don't think there's a top 3 tackle next year, certainly not one with a pro bowl brother already in the league.

bitonti · 03-13-2012, 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NGSeiler

I'd be intrigued by the idea of the Rams trading down again with a team interested in Tannehill.

ideally, the Rams can keep trading down and never take anyone. That way they will have a million picks. and no talent.

JMO RG3 will be the best player in the Rg3 trade. and it won't be close. The rams might get a couple starters, a guard here, a corner there, but It's alot harder to get pro bowlers at 6 than at 2. They aren't gonna find a left tackle to start day 1.

And if they were being honest with themselves, they'd sit tight and take RG3. Cause Bradford is a fabrege egg... or take Kalil to protect that egg. Instead they are going with Saffold at LT again? bad idea jeans.

Steady Lurkin · 03-13-2012, 11:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bitonti

as will farrell said in zoolander I feel like im taking crazy pills

this player has done nothing, all spring, to justify a top 10 selection.

he beat NOrthwestern in the Mainake Car Care Bowl. BFD.

don't get me wrong I like Tannehill... in late 1 or early 2. but he missed SB he missed Indy his stock isn't going up. It's going down.

and let me add a side note the Rams will regret trading away from Kalil and if the Vikings do as well, they will regret it too. I've done the 3 round mock drafts, the only place you're getting a true day 1 starter at LT is in the top 5. all these other guys, be it Reiff, Martin, Adams etc are gambles. If that position is a need (and it is for the Rams and Vikings) it's dumb to trade away from him. i don't think there's a top 3 tackle next year, certainly not one with a pro bowl brother already in the league.

"Stock up" and "stock down" are terms used for guys who there generally hasn't been a lot of exposure to.

Everything we've heard (since early in the CFB season, no less) is that the NFL scouts love Tannehill. His stock isn't going up OR down. I'd argue it's static - right where it has been throughout most of the season.

I think the whole idea of guys "moving up" or "moving down" is a complete fallacy anyways. It usually just means "a scout finally talked to the media about this player", or a "we need to double check on this guy, because his scheme kinda hid him" guy a la Stephen Hill.

Put it like this...we know he can throw. We know he can run. So what where we really going to learn about him in workouts anyways?

NGSeiler · 03-13-2012, 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by keylime_5

Or how 'bout you give us #6 and your 3rd rounder and we'll give you the rights to Blackmon at #4? ;D

No deal, Howie!

Quote:

Originally Posted by bitonti

ideally, the Rams can keep trading down and never take anyone. That way they will have a million picks. and no talent.

JMO RG3 will be the best player in the Rg3 trade. and it won't be close. The rams might get a couple starters, a guard here, a corner there, but It's alot harder to get pro bowlers at 6 than at 2. They aren't gonna find a left tackle to start day 1.

And if they were being honest with themselves, they'd sit tight and take RG3. Cause Bradford is a fabrege egg... or take Kalil to protect that egg. Instead they are going with Saffold at LT again? bad idea jeans.

Maybe he will be, but the reality of the situation is the Rams weren't parting with Bradford and couldn't pass up a monster trade package. I like Kalil, but IMO, he's not worth passing up two additional first round picks and a second rounder this year.

Plus, as I said before, if Blackmon or Claiborne are still on the board at six, I'd prefer to stay there and make the pick. But if the Rams' options at six comes down to Richardson and some lineman of questionable value, then I think another trade down becomes more appealing.

keylime_5 · 03-13-2012, 11:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bitonti

as will farrell said in zoolander I feel like im taking crazy pills

this player has done nothing, all spring, to justify a top 10 selection.

he beat NOrthwestern in the Mainake Car Care Bowl. BFD.

don't get me wrong I like Tannehill... in late 1 or early 2. but he missed SB he missed Indy his stock isn't going up. It's going down.

The idea of guys stock going up or down is just where they are viewed by the media and the public. When a guy goes from a fringe 1st rounder to a top 10 pick despite not doing much if any working out in the predraft process it's because the NFL viewed the guy as a top 10 pick all along and the media is just starting to find that little secret out. This applies to all players, not just Tannehill. Tannehill I think was always viewed by NFL people as a likely top 10 or top 12 pick.

Steady Lurkin · 03-13-2012, 11:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by keylime_5

The idea of guys stock going up or down is just where they are viewed by the media and the public. When a guy goes from a fringe 1st rounder to a top 10 pick despite not doing much if any working out in the predraft process it's because the NFL viewed the guy as a top 10 pick all along and the media is just starting to find that little secret out. This applies to all players, not just Tannehill. Tannehill I think was always viewed by NFL people as a likely top 10 or top 12 pick.

Winner winner.

Babylon · 03-13-2012, 12:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bitonti

as will farrell said in zoolander I feel like im taking crazy pills

this player has done nothing, all spring, to justify a top 10 selection.

he beat NOrthwestern in the Mainake Car Care Bowl. BFD.

don't get me wrong I like Tannehill... in late 1 or early 2. but he missed SB he missed Indy his stock isn't going up. It's going down.

and let me add a side note the Rams will regret trading away from Kalil and if the Vikings do as well, they will regret it too. I've done the 3 round mock drafts, the only place you're getting a true day 1 starter at LT is in the top 5. all these other guys, be it Reiff, Martin, Adams etc are gambles. If that position is a need (and it is for the Rams and Vikings) it's dumb to trade away from him. i don't think there's a top 3 tackle next year, certainly not one with a pro bowl brother already in the league.

They're all crazy to be talking Tannehill as the #3 pick but we've seen how teams will roll the dice on a QB even if it means they are setting themselves up to get burned. I just keep thinking of the David Carrs, Joey Harringtons and Akili Smiths of the world. Tannehill might turn out to be a good NFL QB but to take him over guys with much higher rankings personally makes no sense to me.

FlyingElvis · 03-13-2012, 12:52 PM

I think the big factor is the new CBA. While you give up a lot in terms of draft picks (which is dumb, as well, to some degree) you don't get financially handicapped by the bust anymore. Now that the double whammy is gone, teams are more willing to make the big move to secure the QB.

SolidGold · 03-13-2012, 12:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steady Lurkin

Winner winner.

Quote:

Originally Posted by keylime_5

The idea of guys stock going up or down is just where they are viewed by the media and the public. When a guy goes from a fringe 1st rounder to a top 10 pick despite not doing much if any working out in the predraft process it's because the NFL viewed the guy as a top 10 pick all along and the media is just starting to find that little secret out. This applies to all players, not just Tannehill. Tannehill I think was always viewed by NFL people as a likely top 10 or top 12 pick.

I like the logic with you guys. +++ rep all around

SolidGold · 03-13-2012, 12:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FlyingElvis

I think the big factor is the new CBA. While you give up a lot in terms of draft picks (which is dumb, as well, to some degree) you don't get financially handicapped by the bust anymore. Now that the double whammy is gone, teams are more willing to make the big move to secure the QB.

Yes!! Taking a QB early (or any position for that matter) will not impede a team down the road as much if they do not pan out.

bitonti · 03-13-2012, 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steady Lurkin

"Stock up" and "stock down" are terms used for guys who there generally hasn't been a lot of exposure to.

Everything we've heard (since early in the CFB season, no less) is that the NFL scouts love Tannehill. His stock isn't going up OR down. I'd argue it's static - right where it has been throughout most of the season.

this is an interesting perspective. I can check the BLESTO and National rankings after work. Im not convinced that Tannehill was graded out _that_ highly. But I will check.