Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Please convince me that I am wrong.
Not sure who's been saying that, but if they're thinking like me you're taking this out of context.It's not pass on Tannehill to take Barkley next year. It's pass on Tannehill and if the current QB's flop we will be in position to get Barkley next year. If the current QB's don't flop then we won't be in position to get Barkley next year and will build around our kept QB's. Tannehill's ceiling is higher than Barkley's, but he is much riskier. The type in which you'll have to wait at least 2 and probably 3 years before knowing if he'll pan out or not. That'd be fine if Tannehill were a day 2 pick, as he should be valued, but since he's not no team's fans are comfortable with him. Picking him in round 1 likely means you're picking early again in 2013, already committed to Tannehill, and can't even consider going after another QB (like Minnesota and Jacksonville this year). Not a position this fan wants to be in.Draft offensive skill positions players now, if we still suck it means Colt still sucked, then make sure to get Barkley next year who will have more experienced weapons to work with than if we had gone Tannehill this year.
There are very few NFL starting QB that wouldn't out shine Tom Brady athetically. Your premise is flawed. Obviously, Tom makes up for it in other ways: intelligence, accuracy and being a fierce competeitor.
I am looking for more analysis than this. I remember when Leinart went back to school he was romanticized as being the next great QB. Only when the pre-draft process started did critics started picking holes in his game. Prior to that time, anyone saying Cutler would be better QB than Leinart would have been laughed at.
Barkley doesn't have a noodle arm or poor work ethic like Leinart. There really aren't any warts in his game, there just isn't any wow factor. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but if he is ever going to go from a good QB to an elite one he'd have to develop like Peyton or Brady from the neck up.
There are very few NFL starting QB that would outshine Tannehill "athetically".....therefore the original premise is flawed...according to your logic and spelling.
/thread
My point is that physical tools don't make someone a great QB. I don't care if Tannehill is a top 10 pick. I only care if he pans out or not. On paper he certainly doesn't appear to be an elite prospect. He looks like the typical type of QB prospect that scouts overrate because he's tall and can throw hard. Losman, Boller, Flacco, etc. We've seen a lot of these. Flacco seems like the best comparison. I could see him becoming that type of player. Anything better would surprise me.
Kyle Boller was a 4 year starter and completed 53.4 % of his passes in his senior year. Tannehill started 19 games and completed 61.5 % of his passes in his senior year. I guess you feel that Tannehill like Boller won't improve with experience. What's not to like about Flacco? He doesn't put up fantasy numbers? Last time I watched him, he outplayed Tom Brady in the AFC Championship with Vince Wilfork constantly in his grill.
Tom BradyDrew Brees
I agree with all of this. I've watched 4 or 5 games of his and I'm not impressed with his passing. There's potential there but the same goes for a lot of QB's. His athletic ability and desperation of teams that need a QB seems to be trumping the flaws in his passing game. Tannehill may not have a weak arm, but he plays like it and throws a terrible deep ball.
good assessment here.unquestionably barkley is superior physically to leinart. the lobs leinart got away with at usc (with a physically dominant mike Williams going against 5'10 corners) don't fly as well at the nfl level. leinart would just lay his wrs out to dry continuously. big reason he never got support with the cards (along with other fundamental flaws - footwork / leaving the pocket at the slightest hint of pressure vs. stepping up in pocket).
I would argue that Tannehill doesn't have a strong arm either. I keep hearing how it's "strong enough" but that's what we heard about Mark Sanchez too.
I think he has a strong arm, he just isn't accurate with it.
Matt Cassel didn't start at all in college and has performed average
Or you could assume that the stats will favor any qb playing for a powerhouse team like USC. http://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/players/jay-cutler-1.html
This isn't an accurate comparison. Cam was the best QB in his class, Stafford was as well. Tennehill is nowhere near the best QB in his class. In one situation you are comparing the best QB in 1 class vs. the best in another. Then in another situation, the Tannehill one, you are comparing the (at best) 3rd best QB vs. the other classes best.Yes, Barkely is head and shoulders better as a prospect. I think the OP is missing the point of people saying they wouldn't draft Tannehill though. It's not that people want to not draft him and wait for Barkely. That is silly. There are no guarantees that they will be in a position to draft Barkley next year. As a matter of fact, it's highly unlikely. Assuming of course he is the #1 player. It's simply that they don't feel teams should drastically reach for a QB prospect of Tannehill's caliber so early in the draft, say top 15. There is far too much talent on the board to waste an early pick like that on an average QB prospect.
Barkley has Robert Woods and Marquise Lee. Can you imagine Tannehill with those two? Last year, Barkley had Ronald Johnson in place of Lee. Yea exactly, Who?Tannehill is a more accurate Jake Locker. I also see a more athletic Matt Ryan.'fatkid said:
But if you see a guy as a first round talent and you need the position, I don't think it matters where you take them in that round.'renesauz said:
Barkley also makes up for his lack of athleticism in other ways. As does Peyton Manning, Eli Manning, Drew Brees, Philip Rivers, Tony Romo, and Matt Schaub among others. Any analysis that shows a correlation between athleticism and QB success in the NFL would be of great interest to me, so if you know of any please show it. Otherwise, I think this entire thread is based on a flawed premise.'Donnybrook said:
The OP says, "convince me", but it really seems like he doesn't want to be convinced? 
He's the guy that introduced college stats like they mean something. Colt McCoy was a 70% career passer in college. Tim Tebow was a 66% passer with 9.3 yds/att.Yes, that's exactly what he's saying'Donnybrook said:
Read the following sentences and tell me the conclusion is not flawed.Athletically Aaron Rodgers is a better prospect than Tom Brady was, doesn't mean he can play QB. Athletically Cam Newton is a better prospect than Tom Brady was, doesn't mean he can play QB. Being athletic doesn't obviously make you a bad QB so the logic is flawed.
Cassell was a seven round pick and was pretty much undraftable in fantasy world'benson_will_lead_the_way said:Matt Cassel didn't start at all in college and has performed average'KellysHeroes said:
I'm struggling trying to determine what you're trying to argue with this post.. could you reframe this post differently?
Message should be pinned a top the Shark Pool.In hindsight, everyone is a genius.
I heard Solomon Wilcox saying basically the same thing on the NFL XM radio stationWilcox said that once the season was over no one considered Tannehill a top prospect and since there haven’t been any games played since the season ended he just doesn’t understand why anyone would adjust their draft board and draft Tannehill in the 1st round.
whenever I see people here predicting him to be taken in the top 4...top 6...even top 8. NFL scouts aren't that desperate to waste an early pick on a guy who is mid-second round material just because there are only 2 good QB's in this draft.Well in fairness the ravens have nobody to pressure a Qb into mistakes'Donnybrook said:
Well, at least Tannehill has scouts like Mayock in his fan club. Mayock has said that Tannehill has a bigger arm than Luck - not that it means anything. On the other hand, Mayock was not high on Quinn. On draft day, I recall Mayock saying that Tyler Palco was more of a natural passer than Quinn.I will be surprised if Tannehill falls for another reason. I believe the rookie salary cap has changed the way teams draft QBs. A rookie QB's salary is not going to a huge burden on a team. They can trade or cut a rookie QB if they choose. Christian Ponder, for example, signed a 4 year $10.15 million deal. Sam Bradford will usually make more than that in a single season. Teams can now afford to let their 1st round rookie QB sit and learn as a developmental prospect.Barkley by a MILE. Tannehill is insanely overrated by armchair draft gurus. He's going to get the Brady Quinn treatment and we'll see him dropping WAY farther than any of you expected. He's just not very good. Watch the tape.
I
