The one I just can't conscience putting in front of Tannehill is Kyle Orton.

Otherwise I think each guy he put in front of Tannehill arguably produces better and more efficiently than him...as of right now. That's the important thing to note. This is a 2nd year guy. Things won't continue like this.

Matt Schaub is an interesting case. As Angelo put it he went "from the penthouse to the outhouse" so incredibly fast that I can imagine putting him ahead of Tannehill just because you believe something else had to be going on. But he did not produce better or more efficiently than Tannehill this year.

 

Not exactly sure how Jerry Angelo can be seen as any kind of expert at the QB position. Looking at the list of who he brought in at QB for the Bears, you see the guy clearly doesn't have a great track record of evaluating quarterbacks.

 

^^^^^statement that wouldn't be made if had Tannehill ranked higher

 

I can't give any list credibility that has Jake Locker as the same grade as Ryan Tannehill.

Maybe if it was grade as a receiver or a safety. But a quarterback, no.

 

I don't see why Tannehill couldn't be at least in the groups between the 7 and the 7.9, specially when there you have QBs like Dalton, Stafford, Bradford, etc.

He basically ranked Tannehill the same as Geno Smith, which seems absolutely ridiculous to me.

 

Yeah; Jerry Angelo, Quarterback guru. :chuckle: The only way this could be more ridiculous is if Rick Spielman starts ranking QBs too.

Sorry; Jay Cutler is Jake Plummer—journeyman at best. He's never winning ****.

 

I hated Jake Locker coming out but he had a 99 passer rating as a rookie and an 87 passer rating this year. He also runs for good yardage and doesn't get sacked as much as Tannehill.

Given Tannehill's career 79 passer rating and Locker's career 81 passer rating I hardly think we're in position to act all high and mighty over the Titans and Locker.

I wish we could. Locker was such a sh-tty prospect coming out, I wish we could.

 

That has nothing to do with where Tannehill is ranked. I never said I disagreed with his rankings. Tannehill hasn't proven himself, so ranking in the bottom 3rd isn't some kind of horrible injustice. I just think it's funny that a guy who historically has never been able to find a good quarterback has an entire article dedicated to ranking quarterbacks.

 

Different offenses and different philosophies. Plus Locker is still made out of glass.

 

Eli Manning was not better than Tannehill in the 2013 season. No way. No how.

 

Locker was running for his life for a good part of his Senior year at Washington. Big guy, good arm, excellent athlete. His biggest flaw as far as I can recall was his accuracy, but it looks as if he's improved on that- to what extent I can't say because I've only seen him play so much for the Titans. Time will tell how good he becomes- I don't see a huge ceiling, maybe something very solid in line with Jay Cutler, who has too wristy of a throwing motion to ever be extremely accurate imo.

 

First off I`m not 100% sold on Tannehill being "thee " answer either, at least not yet, BUT to put him that low is just nuts. If he was sacked this many times behind a solid line then I`d say he deserves a lot of criticism due to poor awareness and his ability to keep a play alive. But again, I wouldn't put a large portion of the blame solely on him right now because of the lack of protection he had. The jury is still out on this guy but I really think he`s going to be a solid QB for us for a long time. There are a few QB`s on that list that I`d place lower than Tannehill.

 

So Cutler is better than the dregs of the NFL at the quarterback position over a 15 year period, and a 2nd year player who started with a putrid receiving corps, then played behind a putrid offensive line? That's not saying much.

 

Hard to disagree with his criticisms of Tanne. Sucks, but at this point, true.

 

Interesting you brought up the offenses and philosophies. In Miami Ryan Tannehill has perhaps the highest paid wide receivers unit in the NFL, and the benefit of being in the exact same system he learned in college.

I'd rather have Ryan Tannehill than Jake Locker but A) I wasn't a Locker fan coming out and B) I'm a Miami fan.

But I can't sit here and say that anyone who objectively looks at the two players and decides Locker is better is being ridiculous. I wish I could.

I think objectively Locker is one step closer to the bandsaw. But that's because he's had three years and Tannehill's only had two.

 

Not sure I would agree with this. Cutler is no doubt better then some of the QB`s we had but certainly not all of them . Quick example, if Cutler and Pennington were both 100% healthy I would take Pennington in a minute.

 

Jerry Angelo is/was one of the worst GM's around. His opinion means less then anyone else here with respect to ranking players. Same guy who gave 2 firsts for a below average Jay Cutler interception machine. No. Just no. Not hearing it. Pure trash.

 

^^^^^^^^^^defense that wouldn't happen if had Tannehill ranked higher.

Remember, Ireland is gone, so now everything is Ross', Philbin's, Aponte's & Tannehill's fault and you hate all of them now.

 

I don't think he "struggles" with accuracy. He has some "issues" especially with the deep ball, however I have seen him be plenty accurate on multiple occasions.

I also do not think that he is an athlete playing quarterback, unlike a Jake Locker. He is a quarterback who is an athlete. Miami doesn't have to dumb down their offense because Tannehill is incapable of running a pro style offense.

While I do not know 100% that Tannehill is going to be an elite quarterback or even a franchise quarterback, I do think the score is a little more harsh. Especially putting him as the same as Locker, who in the last three years put up numbers that are pretty comparable to Tannehill's second year.

 

Listen jack, you could put Usain Bolt behind this Oline and he will be as flat as a pancake in 2.12920002 secs. The fact that he was sacked that many times and never missed a start...and keep winning games...with no run game to speak of....

Give me a break please.

 

Jerry Angelo's ranking is only conspicuous in that every single quarterback who could be argued to be better than Ryan Tannehill, was listed as being better than Ryan Tannehill.

That's what shows me that he's just not a fan of Ryan Tannehill. If there were for example about 8 quarterbacks on that list that you'd expect could be argued OBJECTIVELY either way on whether they are better than Ryan Tannehill, then you would expect that a wider polling would end up with 4 above Tannehill on average and 4 below him on average.

Instead of that, Jerry Angelo has almost every single one of them above Tannehill with the exception being Mike Glennon.

 

That's no standard of measure; It's like trying to estimate how much food to make for a dinner party by measuring the amount of **** in a septic tank.

 

I can easily. Locker has taken 3 years to put up stats, he is made of glass and has short to medium accuracy issues.

Tannehill isn't perfect by any means. He needs to improve his ability to work the pocket, his deep ball can use some work, and he isn't a consistent amazing playmaker.

The other players on the list, I can see an argument for. Locker, I cannot.

 

Good points. How anyone can fault Tannehills athletic ability and not mention this putrid o-line in the same sentence, is beyond me.

 

But then again, he ranked Tannehill just barely better than Geno Smith, which just strikes me as utterly ridiculous.

Can we just at least say that his ranking system blows?

 

I would also put Glennon higher than Locker.

 

I'm tossing out Josh McCown and Kyle Orton because McCown doesn't have the body of work yet and Orton is a backup and shouldn't even be close to that high.

What you have is Tannehill ranked #25 amongst the QBs.

I also have about 10 quarterbacks that I think objectively you could make a case one way or another for any of the 10 guys versus any of the other 9 guys. Therefore I would expect that if you did a wider polling you'd get Tannehill ranked somewhere around #21 or #22. Could be as high as #17 or as low as #26.

That's my opinion.

 

To quote Angelo

When the Dolphins won their 8 games this season, which games did 2 of the 3 phases dominate or he was surrounded by high caliber players?

Did special teams dominate the Bengals?

 

"Issues" "struggles" ..,if you prefer that term, have at it bro. Semantics. Either one works for me. Of course we've seen him be accurate at times. It would be a lot worse if we never saw him be accurate, but he has had "issues" and yes, especially with the deep ball and he has had trouble sensing the pressure. I know we had a Swiss cheese OL, but that doesn't excuse all of it. We've all seen his issues with sensing pressure.

 

Here's the thing CK, you seem to be ranking the QBs based on ability, yet this guy is clearly ranking them based on production this season. Based on production this season there is no way in hell Tannehill should be ranked that low, regardless of where you think his ability lies when compared to the others.

 

I`m not a fan of Locker at all ,but to sit here and say right now Tannehill is better, man I just don't know if I can honestly say that. I can only hope this becomes a non-issue in a year or two after Tannehill progresses. Right now, too close to call.

 

I'm not ranking them on one thing or another. I'm taking it all into account.

 

What quarterback has perfect accuracy?

I had little problem with his medium accuracy. In fact, I would call it really good. I don't have many problems with his short accuracy. He could improve on his touch and placement. I don't think issues and struggles are semantics. Issues to me means that he has something to correct, struggles means he has a lot to correct.

Unless you think "a lot" and "some" are also semantics.

 

And that's really my take. He has to play better. And he's only played two years, so there is that room for growth.

But, this idea that he was fantastic and we won 8 games because of Ryan Tannehill is just so mythical. He was a reason we won and a reason we lost.

At this point, you can make the argument he's one of the bottom tier QB's. However, there is no argument out there that says he doesn't have to play better or us to win.

 

I can. Very easily. IMO the ability to stay on the field is important for a quarterback and RIGHT NOW Locker hasn't shown the ability to stay on the field. Plus I still don't trust Locker to run a NFL offense and I believe that he would have to be in a position where he uses his athletism over his ability to be a quarterback.

 

Who has the idea that he was fantastic?

I do believe that he is more of the reason why Miami won 8 games than he was that Miami lost 8 games. He still has a lot of room to grow.

I do not believe I am saying that because I am a Dolphin fan.