• Changing RCF's index page, please click on "Forums" to access the forums.

2012 Offseason: Quarterbacks

Do Not Sell My Personal Information
Gooby said:
For us? Osweiler, offers more upside. Weeden is just too old to justify taking him with our only 2nd rounder.
Click to expand...

i completely agree. i think that osweiler is worth taking at 37, i might be in the minority on that though.
 
He's a big body who is supposed to back that up with superior arm, but he doesnt have it.

If this dude were Colt McCoys size and keeping everything else the same, he'd probably be a 5th or 6th rounder.
 
polska2211 said:
would you rather take osweiler or weeden at 37?
Click to expand...

Is none of the above an option? The bust rate for QBs outside of the 1st round is preposterously high. If we don't get a guy who we deem to be a legitimate franchise caliber guy, I'm all about rolling with Colt next year and finding a developmental guy in the 4th-6th rounds. That way, there's no commitment to anyone going into next year and we can flush the position clean with minimal collateral damage if we need to. I don't want to be like the Panthers and take the "best of the rest" like Clausen who is now worth nowhere near the 2nd round pick he cost. Hell, we already did it ourselves by taking Colt in the 3rd when we whiffed on Bradford. Some guys taken within 10 picks after Colt: Eric Decker, Navorro Bowman, Tony Moeaki, Jimmy Graham. Hopefully Colt pans out but if he doesn't, think Holmgren did us a favor by forcing his QB pick on a divided war room?

QB is the one position where an early selection needs to be made with the ultimate front office conviction and commitment. That's why a trade up for RGIII would've been great even with the risk involved - at least we would've decided on a guy who has legitimate franchise upside and committed to him 100%. If there isn't a guy left in this year's draft who fits that mold because we missed out on both already, it'll suck but... wait until next year.
 
Greg Cosell posted some interesting stuff about Tannehill on twitter:

Tannehill better prospect than Ponder. NIce feel in pocket. Good pocket mobility re: lack of experience. Willing to make stick throws.

Tannehill needs work with progession reading but can be coached. Must learn to validate safeties after snap. Threw well outside the numbers.

Tannehill threw w/anticipation. NFL throws: Outs, seams, hooks. Poised w/downfield focus. May have best pocket command + mobility in class.
Click to expand...

i still think he would be a nice option if we could move down a few spots (not gonna be easy with Miami sitting there at 8)
 
Spectre said:
Is none of the above an option? The bust rate for QBs outside of the 1st round is preposterously high. If we don't get a guy who we deem to be a legitimate franchise caliber guy, I'm all about rolling with Colt next year and finding a developmental guy in the 4th-6th rounds. That way, there's no commitment to anyone going into next year and we can flush the position clean with minimal collateral damage if we need to. I don't want to be like the Panthers and take the "best of the rest" like Clausen who is now worth nowhere near the 2nd round pick he cost. Hell, we already did it ourselves by taking Colt in the 3rd when we whiffed on Bradford. Some guys taken within 10 picks after Colt: Eric Decker, Navorro Bowman, Tony Moeaki, Jimmy Graham. Hopefully Colt pans out but if he doesn't, think Holmgren did us a favor by forcing his QB pick on a divided war room?

QB is the one position where an early selection needs to be made with the ultimate front office conviction and commitment. That's why a trade up for RGIII would've been great even with the risk involved - at least we would've decided on a guy who has legitimate franchise upside and committed to him 100%. If there isn't a guy left in this year's draft who fits that mold because we missed out on both already, it'll suck but... wait until next year.
Click to expand...

none of the above is DEFINITELY an option. just trying to spur some discussion. for me, i would prefer to take tannehill mid to late first round (hopefully at 22), or no quarterback at all.
 
i cant believe im the only one that wouldnt touch tannehill in the first or 2nd? to me it seems like another classic example of a QB that has "all the tools" but has proved absolutely nothing.
 
Tannehill at 22 is he's available.

I would also be interested in Weeden if we moved back into the 2nd round or got him in the 3rd. Osweiler is intriguing but not in the first 3 rounds IMO. Foles and Cousins in the 4th round. Anyone else would be a 6th rounder or later.

That would be where I would take them. I believe Tannehill goes 8, Osweiler and Cousins will go in rd 2 and probably Weeden. Foles I think goes in the 3rd round.
 
Last edited:
okay so for anyone that likes tannehill, anywhere in the draft, can you please explain to me why? to me the cons are pretty damn big

cons:
has very limited experience as a college QB (which is a HUGE negative)
as a college QB had almost no success, after his first couple of starts. his senior year he drastically underachieved
was not able to win a starting QB position on texas AM until midway through his junior year competing against jarrod johnson who beat him out as the starter both of their sophomore and junior years, this after stephon mcgee beat him out when tannehill was a freshman
 
bob2the2nd said:
okay so for anyone that likes tannehill, anywhere in the draft, can you please explain to me why? to me the cons are pretty damn big

cons:
has very limited experience as a college QB (which is a HUGE negative)
as a college QB had almost no success, after his first couple of starts. his senior year he drastically underachieved
was not able to win a starting QB position on texas AM until midway through his junior year competing against jarrod johnson who beat him out as the starter both of their sophomore and junior years, this after stephon mcgee beat him out when tannehill was a freshman
Click to expand...


The Bold is further from the truth as he was taking snaps in practice as the number 2 QB while being the number 1 WR.

I think it was more of Johnson not sucking that bad until his JR year. Tannehill to get on the field volenteering to play WR (after being recruited as a QB) and then when Johnson was sucking it up do you go with your LEADING WR and move them back to QB just because your QB sucks Or do you stick with the QB that sucks because well he has the more experience.

The problem was Tannehill was their leading WR before going back to QB.

Also if you are knocking Tannehill for the Lack of experience then you had to have knocked Cam Newton, Aaron Rodgers, Brandon Weeden, Brock Oswieler for the lack of Experience.

He has a lot more intangebles than Colt coming out of College.
 
bob2the2nd said:
okay so for anyone that likes tannehill, anywhere in the draft, can you please explain to me why? to me the cons are pretty damn big

cons:
has very limited experience as a college QB (which is a HUGE negative)
as a college QB had almost no success, after his first couple of starts. his senior year he drastically underachieved
was not able to win a starting QB position on texas AM until midway through his junior year competing against jarrod johnson who beat him out as the starter both of their sophomore and junior years, this after stephon mcgee beat him out when tannehill was a freshman
Click to expand...

Pros...
Ran a West Coast Offense under Mike Sherman (disciple of Mike Hologram)
Played QB in High School, Recruited as a QB but athletic enough to be moved to WR after he lost the starting QB role
First Team all academic Big 12 in 08, 09, 10. Studying to become a surgeon
Great Build- 6'4 225lbs
Throws well on the run
Above average accuracy on short and intermediate throws
Can make all NFL throws with good arm strength




To counter the argument that Tannehill couldn't even beat out Jerrod Johnson
Johnson was 2nd team all Big 12 in 2009 (Tannehill's frosh year)
Johnson was pre-season player of the year in the Big 12 (2010)
Johnson is A&M's career leader in total offense and passing yards
Tannehill lost the starting QB battle with him in 2009 but after poor performance by Johnson in 2010 replaced him as the starting QB after the 7th game of the year
Tannehill wasn't bench or relegated to WR because he couldn't beat out a scrub. He lost out to a more experienced QB who was a good starting college QB.

He has played only 19 games at QB and that concerns me a great deal. Where ever he goes he will not be a week 1 starter. He needs time to develop. I think he has a lot of upside and would fit well into our system. He would be a good risk at 22. I wouldn't take him any earlier though because there is a bust potential there based on his limited game experience.
 
All of these QBs have too many negatives and are way too risky to pick anywhere in the first two rounds. We should wait until next year to draft a QB IMO.
 
ClevelandR0cks said:
All of these QBs have too many negatives and are way too risky to pick anywhere in the first two rounds. We should wait until next year to draft a QB IMO.
Click to expand...

taking any quarterback is risky. the key is to balance the risk and cost.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Video

Episode 3-14: "Time for Playoff Vengeance on Mickey"

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Spotify

Episode 3:14: " Time for Playoff Vengeance on Mickey."
Top