An interesting parallel i would like to draw in our Tannehill/Moore/Garrard situation is the 2008 Baltimore Ravens Joe Flacco is drafted in the first round, believed to be entirely too raw to start his rookie season coming out of a DI-AA school, goes into camp as the 3rd QB behind Kyle Boller and Troy Smith who enter camp battling it out for the starting spot under new head coach John Harbaugh. But injuries strike and by the third week of preseason, both Smith and Boller are unable to play, clearing the path for Flacco to play the entire third preseason game himself, and the last preseason game split with Casey Bramlet. The Ravens have no choice but to begin the season with Flacco as the starter eventhough he had a lackluster offseason himself. People predict doom with an offence that features an inexperienced rookie QB, an aging number 1 receiver in Derrick Mason, an older injury prone running back in Willis Mcgahee with an unproven rookie behind him. Ravens still go on to an 11-5 record that year, make the playoffs and go on to the AFC championship game. It can be done, history can repeat itself, Tannehill take us to the promise land!!!! (please )
The difference is that the Ravens had a good defense, which kept Joe Flacco from having to pass the ball tons in response to being behind by big margins in games. I don't see that capability with this defense, especially the pass defense, which would mean that starting Tannehill might be a mistake. I think it's okay to start a rookie QB, but you want to do it when you have a strong defense and at least a solid run game, if not a very good one. The big picture matters.
I don't think I'd be happy if Ryan Tannehill turns out to be Joe Flacco. It wouldn't be a wasted pick, but if you're drafting someone #8 you want more than that.
It's an interesting comparison but I too hope Tannehill becomes better than Flacco, and I don't think we have the team to put up that record this year. Would be nice though.
Good analogy. Our pass defense will be suspect but if we can get some pass rushing from Olivier then our front 7 can compensate for it.
I disagree with all of this... I'd rather Tannehill win the starting job on his own merits than by injury. And I'm hoping Garrard gets back soon so that Tannehill can beat him out on the field. Because if he doesn't... lets say Tannehill does get the starting job after playing the next three weeks better than anyone else. He has a poor game against the Texans (and their defense)... David Garrard is all of a sudden healthy... Lots of questions as to who should start... Philbin goes with Tannehill again... Tannehill has a good game, not great, Dolphins lose a close one... but then week 3 rolls around and he has another poor game... he's a rookie, inconsistency can happen. More questions... Philbin starts Garrard because he doesn't want to go 0 and 4. Yeah that's a nightmare scenario... But you get the idea.
If Tanny equaled Flacco's numbers for his first 4 seasons, I think most people would consider him successful. 86 passer rating, and 80-46 TD-Int ratio. Especially if it included at least a couple of playoff game wins.
I see where your scenario goes, but—and just listen for a second—what if the David Garrard was indeed, Bruce Willis, all along?
One time Eli Manning escaped 4 Patriots defenders who had him boxed in and launched a pass that David Tyree caught on his helmet on a drive that won the super bowl. Doesn't mean it will happen again.
If the worst that happens is RT is a good a s Flacco he would still be the best QB the Phins have had in a long time.
Ray Lewis. Ed Reed. Terrell Suggs. Haloti Ngata. etc. Last I looked, they are not on the roster. Not even "etc." is on it. 2008 Ravens were the #2 ranked D that gave up 15 pts a game. Pat White could have taken that team to 8-8. And, finally, 2008 Derrick Mason would be the star WR on this team.
of note... first this is just a dumb thread on a parallel i thought of with that ravens QB situation, not saying this is going to happen to us, not saying i want our top QBs to get hurt and Ryan to be handed the job, etc... second now that people have made comments about it, im not saying I want Tannehill being Flacco... saying I want Tannehill to be the young QB that most people were saying isn't ready to start to come in and have a plus 80 QB% and lead team to the playoffs... third, dont sleep on our defense... yes you can name individual players on that Ravens team, but in 2007 they were the 6th ranked defense in yards (2nd rush D) 22nd in points, Dolphins in 2011 6th in points, 15th in yards (3rd rush D), i wouldn't say our defense could not make the jump to a top 5 defense this year if they stay healthy... we certainly haven't regressed anywhere So again i think our defense can carry us, it carried us last half of last year to a 5-3 record when our offensive scoring output actually dropped, and that includes games we were winning @NE and @DAL... with how Reggie played the second half of the season, he showed he can give us a successful running game... combine a good run game with a good defense, and you can have a playoff team...
If Tanny could lead this team to the AFC Championship game with an 11-5 record with a lesser defense and lesser WR's then the Ravens had I think that in itself would make him better than Flacco.
Are Dolphin fans expectations for Tannehill that high that we'll be jumping off cliffs if he can't be like a QB that's had his team in the playoffs every year he's been in the league and was a dropped pass away from the superbowl? Yeah, Flacco isn't a superstar but as QB starved as we have been who wouldn't take that kind of production? I'm guessing most GMs if given the choice of Flacco or gambling on Tannehill's upside would take Flacco every day of the week and twice on Sunday. I hope Tannehill ends up much better than Flacco too, but Flacco sure would be a nice starting point...
No. Two things to consider: Dilfer played in a different NFL. That was a dozen years ago where defense could still win championships. Those days are gone. Flacco has meant more to his team's success than Dilfer ever did. He's not a superstar, but he wins games. And he has a lot to do with those wins, it's not the rest of the team winning despite Flacco at all.
The NFL is different but the Ravens aren't. Regardless, if you told me I could choose between an 11-5 this season with Tannehill only being as good as Flacco OR a losing this season and there's a chance for him to be an elite QB, I take the losing season and chance to be elite QB all day every day.
I can't disagree with that. Finding an elite QB is almost a necessity for a superbowl these days. My only point is we could do a lot worse than someone with Joe Flacco's skill set. I think the reason most of us are saying we would be disappointed is that we are all so hopeful and high on Tannehill right now, as we should be. But just imagine if we still had Chad Henne. I think we would be thrilled if he could play up to Flacco's talent.
I understand, I just don't see how Flacco being better than any QB we've had (outside of maybe Fiedler) since Dan means anything. He's till not a great QB and we want a great QB. Anything less is a disappointment. Tanny has the potential to be great.
People on this message board argue over semantics of fantasy situations and do so with such veracity that it makes you wonder sometimes.
Wait whut? People would be dissappointed or think it would be a wasted pick if Tannehill turns out like Joe Flacco?