I hate that argument because the opposite will set us back longer and that is starting Colt. I have a feeling regardless who we draft that if Colt struggles the "fans" will call whomever a bust and that we need to get Colt more weapons.
Also I think Gabbert is the only QB that started in the NFL last year that I wouldn't want over Colt and you can talk me out of that (meaning taking Gabbert over Colt).
How does drafting Tannehill set the franchise back? If you stick with Colt that means he starts 2.5 years and allowed you to "miss" out on better options for those 2.5 years. There have been rumors on Philly, KC, Buffalo and Miami trading up to get Tannehill. Why is it good for them but bad for us? BTW I will take all their starting QBs over Colt all day and twice on Sunday.
Thats stupid. On here, Ive seen zero people who stick up for colt and blame the offense on someone other than him. Almost all of the fans realize that we need to fill the quarterback position still.
You would take Grossman, Ponder, Skelton, and Blaine Gabbert over mccoy? ok...
Despite Gabbert being the epitome of shittiness, Jones-Drew still led the league in rushing yards. Despite Ponder being terrible, Foster still had a very good season. Gore also had a good year despite Smith not being able to throw the ball long range and an almost nonexistent passing game.
Honestly, judging from your posts, it seems you have a personal vendetta against mccoy. You fail to acknowledge that the browns led the league last year in drops, and that somehow that could affect his success.
Draft Richardson. All those other quarterbacks that are shitty didnt seem to impact the performance of the running game that much. hell, even a year ago peyton had a decent running year and that really opened the field up for mccoy. He won't be called a bust because mccoy is bad, i can assure you that.
Draft some weapons for mccoy. I wonder what his numbers would have looked like last season without all of the dropped passes. Give him a year with good receivers, and see what he does. If he sucks majorly, then we know for sure and we will be drafting low enough again to snag a true franchise quarterback. If he doesn't suck, then give him more time. Win - Win. Unless you hate colt, and you do.
It absolutely will set this franchise back if we squander the number four pick on a major reach to grab a quarterback who has shown as little as Tannehill. At four, he's a HUGE reach. Instead of having a quarterback who might develop into a good quarterback, we could have the best running back prospect since adrian peterson. Thats much more of a sure thing, imo. Tannehill, in order to be groomed correctly, wouldn't even start next season.
Finally, if mccoy plays shitty next year with a better supporting cast, then the franchise qb we grab with our low draft spot next year will come into a team with a beast running back, decent receivers, and a good defense.