S m o k e s c r e e n~~~~~

 

If the Browns want Tanny ,he is theirs.
The only chance we have is if they pick someone else.

 

Yep, not in favor of wrecking the draft or the future by overpaying anymore than #8.

 

Especially for a guy who isn`t even a franchise QB.

 

I would be "if" Tannehill were a better prospect, he came into the offseason as a late rd 1 guy, now he is top 3 due to perceived need at Qb?

 

I like Tannehill, but no way should we trade up to #3 to get him. If Cleveland wants to trade up, then we trade down, especially if Richardson drops to #8.

 

**** it....do it.

 

Hope this is a joke.

 

I follow the Browns pretty close as I live in Cleveland and everything I've heard from local sports talk radio to sports page reporters for the Plain Dealer are that the Browns will pass on Tannehill and look at Weeden in the late first or second.

 

Much more "PG" than what I was about to say, lol

 

Problem is, he is the third Qb off of the board, third choice as it were which imo means if he were that great a prospect Washington would have looked at him more closely, instead they paid a ransom for RGIII and did not bother with him.

That should tell us a lot about his actual, inside NFL team offices value

 

This.

 

I don't believe Tannehill is worth the 8th pick in the draft, much less the third pick which is what the Dolphins would have to move up to if they want to stop the Browns from drafting him. I prefer that the Dolphins remain where they are and select a player who can actually come in and start immediately. If the Browns or some other team behind the Dolphins in the draft wants to move up in the draft to ensure they can draft Tannehill before pick # 8, I really don't care.

 

that means absolutely nothing to me. Just because he's third doesn't mean he can't be a really good QB. Ben Rothlisberger was third behind Eli and Rivers wasn't he? All three are pro-bowlers. everyone was focused on Eli and Rivers and Rothisberger was the third wheel from Miami of Ohio.

 

I hope is a smoke screen

 

It should, 3 franchise Qb's in the same draft is incredibly rare OF, if Washington thought he was a solid qb prospect they would not have had to given up 2 1's and 3 2's to take RGIII.

 

If he slides into the 2nd round go for it. Otherwise, **** Tanneyhill.

 

Yes, because Washington has such a solid track record when it comes to evaluating talent. I see your point Padre. The odds of 3 franchise QBs in one year happens once every 10-20 years. Given that, I only see one lock at franchise QB this year and it's Luck. RGIII and Tannehill both have a chance to be a good QB. IMO, the jury is still out on RGIII. If he were going to Green Bay, I'd be convinced he could be a franchise QB. But he's going to Washington. I don't see bust, but I don't see franchise QB either. On the flip side, I can very much envision Philbin's system setting up Tannehill (or Weeden) to be very successful if we can draft some WR's.

 

To say Tannehill isnt a franchise qb is way off IMO, but he is a bigger risk as well. He has the potential to be a franchise qb, but he isnt a sure thing. At 8 he is worth teh investment, trading up is not an option for him. For RGIII or Luck, yes but Tanne or weeden no. But the lests stay the course with Moore crowd need to get with reality IMO. You dont reach but you take more risk when teh qb has teh potrential. When you have a qb like moore where you KNOW he isnt franchise calibur based on actual NFL performance, you have to make an investment is one.

But IMO the risk is too much to invest the cost to move up. If Clev wants him, let them take him, we can get Weeden or wilson later

 

I won't argue that Rothliesberger was a great pick as the third QB taken in the 2004 draft. Unfortunately he is the only QB taken as the third QB in the draft in the last 12 years who has actually been a quality QB over this time period. Most of the QB's taken third over this period have been complete bust or mediocre QB's at best. The mediocre QB's on this list have included, Josh Freeman, Jay Cutller, and Jason Campbell. Last years #3 QB taken was Blaine Gabbert and there are still huge questions concerning him going forward.

The remaining QB's taken third in the draft over this time period include, Brian Brohm, Jimmy Clausen, Kevin Kolb, Kyle Boller, Patrick Ramsey, Quincey Carter, and Chris Redman. Kevin Kolb is the only member of this group who is not yet considered a complete bust but the Cardinals certainly were not happy with his performance last season after signing him to a huge contract in the off season.

So while Tannehill could always be the next Roeslisberger, it appears that as the third QB taken in a draft, he will more likely end up being a very mediocre starter or a complete bust if you just go by the past history of the third QB's taken in the draft over the last dozen years.

 

Great, let them trade up, then we can go back to say 15 and take Weeden. That is unless the Chiefs, Seahawks, or Cards are interested.

If we trade up to 3, there's no excuse for not having traded up to 2.

 

There's no way you just called Jay Cutler mediocre. He's a 4,000 yard passer when he has actual receivers, was a second half injury away from a possible Super Bowl, and a thumb injury away from the 2011 playoffs. Not to mention the complete sham that is the Bears offensive line. Not many QB's in the NFL are more talented than Jay Cutler.

Freeman regressed remarkably last season, but now with a second receiving threat, we'll get to see what he can do. Campbell is average but he did have the Raiders on pace for a playoff berth before his injury.

But again, this is all correlation vs. causation. Nothing about being the third QB means they won't succeed. Rodgers and Campbell went back-to-back. So you can't make the case necessarily that their perceived potential determined their draft position in every case. NFL fans need to stop looking for patterns in an irregular data set. Especially when they limit it to 'x' number of years for convenience. The NFL isn't a stagnant entity void of changes. It's like using the last 12 years of the stock market to predict it going forward and claiming precision.

 

First of all I admitted that Tannehill COULD have the same success as Roeslisberger. I merely pointed out who the QB's were that were drafted third at this position over the last twelve years. I will also agree that Cutler is probably the best of all the rest drafted in this position, but he is not considered at this time to be a top tier QB in the NFL. Most rankings of QB's I have seen have him rated near the middle of the pack of NFL QB's. So I'll upgrade him to average if you wish but he certainly hasn't proved that he is a franchise type QB as of yet.

Freeman played okay in 2010, but as you stated, he regressed quite a bit in 2011. He may end up being a very effective QB in the future or he may not. I can only base my opinion on what he has done so far and in 2011, he was one of the worst starting QB's in the NFL and certainly not one of the best.

The fact that the Raiders gave up so much in the draft to trade for Carson Palmer tells me all I need to know about how the Raiders feel about Campbell as a starting QB in the NFL. He played decently before his injury last year but the fact that none of the teams who are in need of a starting QB in 2012 went after him in free agency basically shows that he is now seen more as a backup QB in the NFL than a quality starting QB candidate.

While I am not a supporter of drafting Tannehill in the first round. I sure hope he is the next Roeslisberger and not the next bust, if the Dolphins draft him. All I was pointing out by posting this list of QB's drafted third at this position is that Roeslisberger was the exception for a QB taken at this position and not the rule.

As far as the stock market is concerned. Since I retired at age 54 and was able to do so because of the money I have made in the stock market over the last thirty plus years. I can assure you that I have a far better record in the stock market over the last decade than the Dolphins have had in the college draft.