Wasn't able to watch the game but have the dvr set for Sunday morning. Just those 2 highlights have me excited for this season! At this point I'd be happy with just seeing Tannehill get some quality reps this year and show he can be the guy. A winning record would just be a bonus.

 

Gotta admit I feel a tiny tremor of optimism.....

 

Comparing the way he carries himself on the field is vastly different than Henne ever did. He gives me confidence in his ability. Henne never did that.

 

Which is something MM didn't do at least one time that I noticed and kept the run play that got stuffed instead of checking out in a similar situation , kudos to 17.

 

IMO he showed the #1 quality a young Qb needs..BALLS

I can recall when Henne did the same thing..then was neutered.

Also though Devlin showed balls and savvy as well.

 

From NFL.com/Around the League... Link

 

I'm hoping Tannehill does enough in practice this week to get the starting nod against Carolina.

 

I was more impressed then I thought I would be.

 

They should start him. What do we have to lose? It's obvious we don't have the talent on defense to do much this year, so use the year to develop him.

 

This....start the kid, again there isn't much drop off IF any....it isn't like MM or DG is going to win 3-5 more game than RT.....

I do disagree on the defense though, the talent is there, however I always said the biggest loss with TS was canned was Nolan leaving.....just how much remains to be seen....

 

But what about ruining his confidence??!?!!?!?!? Just kidding. Start the kid. Let him take his lumps, figuratively and literally.

 

Its way too early to tell on Tannehill though I was impressed. Did any of you think as I did that he stared down his receivers a little too much?

 

I disagree. If he's good, the experience won't hurt him. If he's not, no amount of sitting on the bench will make him good.

 

That makes no sense.

 

When you draft a prospect with franchise potential you see franchise skill! I know it's early but I'm excited.

 

Agreed. he looked better than Blaine Gabbert all last season

 

Our offensive line isn't that bad, at least not at pass-pro. He'll be fine.

 

To you. It makes perfect sense to me and a lot of other people.

 

The other 52 guys on the roster.

Yes he looked good, but I'm more concerned with the details. Footwork, progressions, protections, etc. Most of all, he has to earn the job in the eyes of his teammates. We all saw what happened when our last young Qb was thrust into the starter's role when the rest of the team (and coaching staff) didn't feel it was earned.

17 is still a rookie w/ 19 starts under his belt, I won't get to up or down about a few drives in a preseason game. If he continues to play well then things will take care of themselves but I fear the anointing oil is being broken out a little to soon.

 

That's actually the biggest reason he could start over Moore.

Ryan has a better cieling, but the only reason to start Moore is his experience.... unless he isn't USING that experience. Moore did NOT check out of a run play on Friday when the run blitz was coming because despite being a veteran he did not recognize it. A vet who doesn't recognize stuff has no advantage over a rookie who DOES.

 

And?

Simple fact of the matter is everyone handles things differently. You know nothing about Tannehill on any level that qualifies you to make the call if he should start right away or not. Sherman does and by extension so will Philbin. Their call is all that matters. If they start him immediately, that won't mean you were anymore right than the person who wins a coin toss. Not all QB's flourish by being thrown into the fire, and it will hurt some QBs and has. History proves me right, you have what on your side besides a feeling?

 

HorseShiite. I was 9-10 on coin tosses in my last season of Madden. Name me one Head Coach with a QB evaluation of 90%...

 

From what I've seen, some of those should be lost. Particularly in our defensive backfield.

 

You've made the false assumption here that you know what the coaching staff feels on the matter. You don't.

 

Actually, I didn't. I never said what the coaches were going to do.

Maybe you'll notice where I said:

So, about false assumptions and which of us is making them.........

 

I made assumptions, don't know that they are false because your post comes across as having some knowledge of how Sherman and Philbin think on the matter. You also say "history is on your side," but that's an overstatement. There have been QBs that failed after having been thrown into the fire, but that is in no way proof that they wouldn't have still failed if they'd sat on the bench for a season or two. I believe they weren't going to be good no matter what.

 

lol. Ok. So you're just gonna double down and keep making false assumptions. Awesome.

 

This may be off topic a bit but does anyone else think he looks a bit like Phillip Rivers? The hair cut, the face to an extent, even the confidence (luckily he isn't cocky like Rivers yet).

 

Nope. I made an assumption that may or may not be true.

 

Sorry, but this is nothing like 2007 and John Beck. That offensive line was horrible from the start.

This offensive line consists of an all-pro, two veteran guards with proven success in this league, a promising 2nd year Center who will just get better drafted in the 1st round, and a 2nd round ? at RT. This line, on paper, should be one of the top in the league. And at the very worst, on the field, they should be an average NFL unit.

IMO, this is actually an ideal OL situation for a rookie QB.

 

Some rookie QBs get thrown into the fire right away and do fine. Others struggle at first, but eventually develop. Some have their psyche permanently damaged by being rushed into the starting role. It did not hurt guys like Favre, Palmer, Rivers, Rodgers, et al to not start right away. In fact I cannot think of one 1st round QB who was negatively effected long term by being a backup as a rookie. On the flip side, a case could be made that plenty 1st round QBs were ruined by being made the starter too soon. Then again, maybe they'd have never been any good either way. I just cannot think of one case though where it hurt a rookie QB's long term development to err on the side of caution, and sit him as a rookie. Can anyone else name one?

Many fans are impatient and just want to play with their new toy though.

 

I have said I think at this point that Tanne should start, but that is because I think he has the mental abiility to handle the peaks and valleys. I do agree that it is not detrimental if they sit. And if the coaches has any reservations then sit him.

 

I'd love to get everyone's opinions on Tannehill's play action. It's just one of many of the things he does that I'm super impressed with so far. It makes Chad Henne's PA look like a pop warner QBs.

CK made many good points about the lack of attention to detail that Henne and coaching company had with the PlayActions. It's really is nice to see a QB actually try to sell the fakes rather than just "go through the motions". I had this giddy grin on my face just thinking to myself "That's how it's supposed to look. That's how it's done. How hard must that be and how hard will that be for opposing defenses to stop?!!! He looked like he was gonna hand that ball off." And to be fair, the OL sold it too. One play the whole TB linebacking core was playing run. It was a thing of beauty.