that's what she said

 

Not exactly going on a ledge. That's true for pretty much every player.

 

Probably true.

Neither is Flacco, yet he won a Superbowl.

Tannehill is probably good enough to get there with a solid team and good coaching. We'll see if we have the latter of those two things this season.

 

Yeah, is he going to be Rodgers/Manning/Brady? Maybe not, those are the best of the best.

Is he going to be Big Ben? He's not transcendent but damn he's good. He was instantly good though, and showed more feel for the game from the get go. More than I've seen yet from Tanny.

Is he gonna be Tony Romo? Still improving after all of these years. Or is he gonna cap out at Matt Ryan/Joe Flacco/Eli Manning. Remains to be seen. Starting now.

 

It's possible. And since there are very few transcendent players odds are he would be right the vast majority of the time making that prediction for every QB. Tannehill may end up never going above Matt Ryan's level which is about where I see him now (I have RT slightly above Ryan, but neither has been transcendent), but I do see more upside in Tannehill than in Ryan. I see Ryan as a player that has plateaued while Tannehill has improved incrementally every season. Obviously, Tannehill could plateau where he's at now like Ryan did. But, at worst I don't see Ryan as a bad QB. I see Ryan as above average. I don't think Ryan will ever be top 5, but I also think he'll always be above 15 (until he declines). Tannehill was statistically top 5 for a significant stretch last season. I also recall an article from PFF where he was their # 3 QB somewhere around mid-season. To me that makes it kind of silly to suggest that he isn't capable of being a top 5 QB. Obviously you want him to maintain it for longer, but it's also obvious that he can reach those heights. I don't know if that would make him transcendent, but if Tannehill ends up being a top 5 QB for several seasons, I would have a difficult time complaining.

 

Who?


Wake me when it's someone credible, that has a clue, and isn't just mouthing off for ratings.

 

Nothing to see here...move along please.

 

Cowherd is wrong 90% of the time....

really like Tannehill's odds!

 

Yup, top 5 isn't quite transcendent for me (top 1-2 for 5 years to a decade is) but shoot, Big Ben, Romo, Brees level is pretty damn good. I'll take that all day and that is definitely reachable for Tanny. Same amount of attempts, same accuracy, same TD/INT numbers, just up the ypa to where you're around 4,500+ yards and he's set. Not a huge leap to take.

 

Well that settles it.

 

I don't know why anyone is offended by the comments. I think most of us realize he's never going to be Dan Marino. Guys like Marino, Brady, Peyton, Rodgers, Brees, don't come around often. So yeah, I agree, Tannehill isn't likely to be transcendent. I don't know where his ceiling is at this stage. It's so hard to tell because he came into the league as raw. As raw as it gets, really. The fact that he's improved every year through adversity is reason to be hopeful. Did anyone think Drew Brees was going to be the Drew Brees we know today, after his first three years?

I read an interesting article about Tannehill. It's not glowing by any means. It's not a flawless piece either. But anyone who wants to check it out...

http://www.footballperspective.com/comparables-to-ryan-tannehill/

 

Nobody beats the dead horse of easy stances quite like Colin Cowherd. Except maybe Mike & Mike.

 

When I'm listening to him on the radio in my mind I am always bouncing between thinking of him as "Cowturd" or "Blowhard." I can't ever seem to decide.

 

Not to mention everyone else that works for that useless network ESPN.

 

Come to think of it, I've never predicted a QB would be transcendent. Luck is the best prospect I've ever scouted and I never said that about him. The most I've ever said is, "top 5 potential".

 

Right now he is right about what the passer rating and QBR numbers suggest which is about a 11 to 15 caliber quarterback. He's got some work to do to crack into the top 10. Cracking into top 5 consideration would be a little surprising. Lately there's a little bit of a sense that he could just keep improving and improving and who knows where it goes. Maybe that's true. Don't know if it tends to work like that.

This "transcendent" business is just garbage though. Who says that? I mean really, who does that term apply to?

 

Just for some context, Cowherd was talking about the "QB Bubble." He was comparing it to real estate and technology bubbles, but said the "QB bubble" will not burst, because the game is just becoming more offensive. It wasn't a pot shot at Tannehill, Tannehill is just the latest QB to get a big contract. He said the Dolphins have to pay him because it is the "bubble." Obviously, if his production was equivalent at any other position, he wouldn't be getting near the money. I don't think you can argue that.


Its a silly statement saying "great" and then qualifying it with "transcendent."

But overall, he is likely right. Tannehill will never be one of the great QBs. He isn't making that mountain.
But that doesn't mean that mean he can't win Superbowls.

 

If the "bubble" is not ever going to burst then pretty much by definition it is NOT a "bubble". Rather just an accurate reflection of the position's importance to winning.

 

Oh I understand, just don't tell Cowherd.

I just wanted to give context, because the post makes it sound like a random pot shot at RT17.

 

Nobody really cares, but here's some career context. He's not an analyst, he's a guy with a radio show.

[video=youtube;I5m4tyaXyF4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5m4tyaXyF4[/video]

 

Those who are in conversation of GOAT. Montana, Brady, Manning, yada yada yada

 

The least he could have done is give us a stock tip or something useful if he can accurately predict the future. Who the **** cares about this when we predict the future?

I could really give a **** how much more Tanny improves. He's the best chance we've had in a while and his contract we can get out from under. So if he doesn't get us where we want to go then we move on.

 

Rodgers/Manning...probably not...Brady? IMHO he's not special/elite...never has been. Had some elite-type showings with all-world receiving talent in Moss and Gronk...they'd make Tebow look like a pro-bowler.

RT will surpass Brady in skill...maybe not in SB rings, but that's a team accolade.

 

Fixed that for you.

 

Amen brother...a-fkng-men.

 

He may be right, but one thing you can bet is that if he's wrong he'll never admit it.

 

Can he tell me the lottery numbers?

 

I don't know if ESPN made people stupid or if ESPN just reflects the stupidity amongst people but this is how a lot of folks in society think about sports. I guess if you have almost no information, or if you're going off only 1 or 2 stats as your predictor, you wind up having to rationalize along those lines.

I don't get the fascination with wanting to lay it all on one guy and make him a hero, especially when there's so much information out there from which to learn. I think most of us here are much more fascinated by the intricacies of the offensive and defensive systems and that's a good thing.

Then again, you could argue from a philosophical point that I'm entirely wrong and that the real objective of sports is to identify who the single most dominant players are in their respective arenas and to champion their glory to no end.

Seems a bit primitive but I guess that logic holds as well.

 

Yeah, if only Manning had someone like Marvin Harrison and Reggie Wayne to throw to.

Oops.

See, you use that argument to eliminate Brady and not Manning, who throughout his career had two HOF WRs to throw to.

 

Individually, Manning's skills and abilities throughout his career are FAR above Brady's IMO...it's not even close...just how I see it.

 

Brady was throwing decent numbers to trashy receivers before he got great targets to throw to.

 

Brady's best WR in 2006 was Reche Caldwell. Chew on that for a few minutes. Peyton's never had to deal with that in his career. Reche Caldwell who's best year outside of Tom Brady was 350 yards.

Peyton throws more INTs too.

 

Yeah, I may not be a Patriots fan, but trying to discredit Brady just never sits well with me. Dude has been one of the best, whether playing with garbage at receiver, or whether setting records when he had actual talent at receiver.

 

Manning didn't have someone whispering in his ear.

 

As if we needed any more of them since enough originate relatively nearby to keep the pot boiling!

I don't think we've seen Tannehill's max yet, and my gut says he has the capacity to end up bouncing around top ten rankings consistently -IF the team manages to fill in the rest of the parts of the lineup with at least adequate, with a few very good/excellent players. DEAD HORSE DRUMMING: If the O line continues to display mediocrity as it's primary attribute, so will the quarterback go, by and large. Note: I have the beginning of a twinkle of a glimmer of hope that the O line could just possibly be a little better than adequate this year, but this is the time when most fans wax eloquent about the teams's prospects.

But, back to Tannehill - he has the skills, but he has been hit, bumped and plastered by rushers more often than B-17s over Germany were hit by flak the past three years. That never makes for a good quarterback. That is what makes a quarterback roadkill.

 

Agree 100%.

One of the fastest ways to make yourself look dumb, imo. :)

 

That's pretty much sums up Colin Cowherd, alright. ​Where Colin was right, where Colin was wrong....