WADR, I know DAMN well who coached who where. You see, I live in the epicenter of Aggie-alumniville. Dallas is where all graduated A&M alum come for work. I have been watching Tannehill years before most in here had even heard his name, and yes, I.also know who moved him from QB, to WR and back again. I watched it unfold live on Saturdays. All this being said, there is nothing that he has done that anybody not wearing homer glasses has seen that projects him as being a better pro than Flynn... NOTHING. And, that certainly goes,back to college careers as well. For the record, I'm fine that we didn't get more aggressive to go after Flynn. I said the entire time that was going on, that,if Philbin, who knows him pretty darn well, didn't want him that bad, there is probably a good reason....but, at this juncture, don't pretend that Tannehill is a better prospect, cause to date he hasn't been. Will he be when its all said and done? I sure hope so. It's my team too.
Gotta disagree. Tanny is a starter in the NFL. Flynn is on his 3rd team and as of yet has failed to earn that position.
The statement, "Without wearing homer glasses," makes everything you say worthless. The idea that the only way someone could disagree with you is because they are too invested in the Miami Dolphins is both insulting and arrogant.
I agree with you. But it's no worse than someone putting forth the assertion that AZ only disagrees about Tannehill because he's "just not paying attention".
As a former scout, I strongly disagree with that statement. RT has far more upside in terms of physical ability than Flynn. What he showed on the field both at TAMU and in the pros reflects that higher ceiling as well. I liked Flynn and saw him as a safe option, but I said a year ago that in the long run RT would be the better QB.
Yes. Yes they did. They thought very, very highly of him. Tom Martinez banged the table for him. Loudly.
Thank you! I couldn't agree more. Tannehill has excited me more than any QB we have had other than maybe Pennington (since Marino era ofcourse) when we got him just because I know he was very accurate but short term solution.
So 2 verys gets you picked in the 7th? How many to get picked in the 1st, 100? it doesn't make sense. The fact that he was the 200th player picked that year proves that no one thought "very, very highly" of him. The Pats got lucky... It's as simple as that.
And, IF Tannehill had followed Flynn's career path, he would also be on his third team. Just because Tannehill is starting ahead of Chad Henne and Matt Moore does not make him any better than Flynn. I'm not saying that one is currently better than the other, because neither has had enough time to suggest that is true....but that is certainly a 2 way street. Perhaps, in 2 years or so, Tannehill will indeed be a top 10 QB in the league. I for one hope so, but to say he is better at this juncture is not accurate.
I agree they got lucky, but it doesn't mean they didn't think highly of Brady. Part of your draft assessment is to gauge what others think of a player. If I'm drafting Dan Marino and I'm convinced nobody else has him rated above the 7th round, I'm not taking him in the first just to prove I think highly of him.
I don't really agree with that because having someone rated at 7th isn't speaking very highly of them and being convinced no one is going to take him before the 7th is also speaking pretty low of the player.
Sure, or even if he was drafted in the 1st round. Trying to compare one draft to another? Exactly how does that help dictate who is a better QB? Are you suggesting he would be starting in front of Aaron Rodgers regardless of where he was picked? Really? EDIT: By this mindset, if Wilson and Tannehill were drafted by same team, Tannehill would be the starter simply because of where he was drafted? Really? BTW: That is a MUCH more accurate comparison seeing as how they were both in the same draft class
It's also just stupid, imo. "I think highly of this QB, as in he could be a good starter, so I'm going to just hope I'm right about the other 31 teams letting him fall to the 7th." lol Good luck w that strategy. Probably the reason it's worked about once in nfl history. If you really like a player then you should be thinking about drafting him earlier not later, imo. Proactive.
I know if Ireland waited til the 3rd to get Wilson or god forbid Brady in the 7th he'd be the luckiest mofo alive according to a lot of this fanbase and the media.
Whether the pats thought highly of Brady isn't really the point, in my mind. "Thinking highly" of someone doesn't really mean anything. For me, it comes down to this, if the Pats thought Brady had a real chance of becoming who he did become then waiting till the 7th to grab him is irresponsible. Same with Seattle and Wilson in the 3rd. PS, let's not forget there were rumors that Seattle was poised to take Tannehill if we didn't.
I would much rather have Tannehill than Wilson. I could be wrong but I feel Wilson isn't that great, just a product of playing for a talented team. Summary: Tannehill>Wilson
I don't think he would be picked by the Packers because they would have had to use a first round pick. I also don't think Wilson and Tannehill would be drafted by the same team due to the fact one is a first round pick and one is a third round pick. I also think Tannehill earned his spot as a starter, which is something Flynn has not done. He did lose out to two pretty good quarterbacks, however one he lost out mostly due to leadership. At the beginning of the year Wilson was not playing great football and many in Seattle wanted him benched.
Also to compare Matt Flynn with Ryan Tannehill, you have to compare their first years in the league. Matt Flynn had 5 passes his rookie season, Tannehill has 484. As their careers go, I would say Tannehill has had a better career. Tannehill might not end up having the better overall career, however after their first year, Tannehill is ahead. In fact, even after 5 years in the league, Flynn has to catch up to Tannehill, even with two amazing performances that Flynn had as a back up. For all we know Flynn is Billy Volek
And, I'm not saying he isn't. I'm just saying, that at this juncture, it's impossible to say that RT>MF
Theres a good chance Tannehill has a better career than Flynn. Poor Flynn went to a beat up Oakland team that almost no one can succeed at
But you don't seem to value the opinions of those coaches. Tannehill was rated a 1st round pick and Flynn as a late rounder/ UDFA type. Generally speaking, that means Tannehil was projected as being a better Pro. I guess you don't value the pro scouts' opinion either. Probably cause they aren't from Dallas . No one is pretending. Tannehill was/is the better prospect by just about every reasonable measure. If you're not convinced, again, how much more evidence do you need?
As is BB and Pete Carroll....there is much more than luck that goes into the process of drafting kids, but sometimes, it's just the luck of the right guy, right time, right place that vaults teams into success in addition to the work of scouting prospects... Heck, Johnny Unitas floundered around several different teams before Baltimore gave him a chance. Peyton Manning and Troy Aikman didn't exactly set the world on fire their first year. Comparing Wilson, Tanny, RG3 or Luck to the success that any of those guys at this point is useless.... In fact, we can't even really compare Wilson and Tanny since the team surrounding Wilson is much better at this point... What we don't know yet about Wilson, for example, is whether he's a flash in the pan or will defenses catch up to him....Personally, I don't see him as a flash in the pan, yet I do think that defenses will now have a year's worth of tape to figure out how to deal with his athleticism...and perhaps it'll be tougher for him this season than last... Tanny looks to have more weapons and a year of starts now and should continue to improve as we've seen him do... I think, like has been said about this, every draft is different and every situation a draftee comes into is different. David Carr would likely have been ranked ahead of Wilson and Tanny when he came out ?? Does that make those coaches/GMs inept ??
Saying Flynn hasn't had a chance is sort of like saying Tebow hasn't had a chance in New York. These guys practice and get evaluated based on that. It's just like with Tannehill beating Matt Moore out last offseason. There was sentiment that David Garrard was the favourite in Training Camp before he got injured. Clearly Flynn didn't impress where Wilson did. Was Carroll supposed to start Flynn just because they outbid the Dolphins to get him in Seattle, perhaps, but evidence would show that they made the correct choice.
You make a decision whether a guy belongs with you or doesn't, and then you pay market price or a little over market price for him depending on your level of conviction. The stock analogy is perfectly apropos. If I believe Apple is really worth $550 and it's trading at $430 right now I don't send an order to my traders to buy it with a bid price of $550.
That's perfectly untrue. Even the most ardent Jeff Ireland opponents give him credit for the likes of Reshad Jones, who was taken in the 5th round. According to you, he should get no credit for Reshad Jones. He was wrong about Reshad just like everyone else in the NFL. Perspective.
Not even close to similar. Tebow couldn't earn opportunities and snaps in New York despite their QB position being manned by a train wreck Mark Sanchez and late round Greg McElroy. Matt Flynn was beaten by a rookie QB who amassed a 100+ passer rating and performed the best in the playoffs that I've ever seen any rookie perform. Yes I'm sure trying to beat David Garrard and Matt Moore in camp was exactly like trying to beat Russell Wilson.
And they drafted Ryan Mallett in the 3rd round. Yes they did. They thought very very very very very very very very very highly of him. Gave him a 21 gun salute. Twice. Is that a 42 gun salute or just two 21 gun salutes?
Have a general problem with this argument that any player drafted below the 1st round that turns out to be a pro bowler is not a credit to the person drafting him because if the GM knew he'd be a pro bowler then he'd have drafted him in the 1st round so obviously he was wrong just like everyone else. That's some serious spin right there.
Yea bc the most ardent Jeff Ireland opponents always complain about him not spending a high pick on a safety. Don't try to compare drafting other positions late to QB, it's a waste of everyones time.
For your anology to work, there would only be one piece of stock for Apple. If you believe that one piece of stock is worth $550, and there is a general idea going out there that it is worth $430, you would have to trust that the 31 other people who are going for that stock has the same opinion than you. It only takes one person to believe it is worth $500 to outbid you. I also don't think this doesn't mean that they do not deserve credit for being able to get the Apple stock at $430, even though for the anology to be closer, it would be $100. No GM consistantly gets probowlers in the 5th round. Even though the Seahawks are getting close with their low round hits.
And i am comfortable with you believing that. After all, you also think that when a team loves a prospect they wait until pick 200 to draft them.
I told him his stock analogies are dumb. LoL i hope everyone like tavon Austin this year because if they do we can get him in the 7th round. Lol
lol So you think attempting stock market to draft analogies or comparing drafting a safety in the 5th to a QB in the late rounds is rational?