Gase on Tannehill: “I see him as our starting quarterback” in 2018.

[fin415]

Or actually listening to Medical professionals instead of, I don't know, guys on a message board , who second guess every decision without any consequence when they are wrong

or any actual information (e.g., how bad was the damage, why did the Doc think he could be effective with a non-surgical treatment vs. surgery, etc.)

 

[fin415]

What this team needs is for Tannehill to go one way or the other, either be that guy who without question you can hang you hat on, or clearly not be. In his time with us he's been right in the middle and that means the debate never ends and we spend time and money trying to fix things around him to ensure we can say for certain it's not his fault. We shouldn't be still having a debate on if he is a franchise QB, 6 years into his career with us.

... (deleted other stuff)

I know we have other holes and other priorities in the draft, so understand the logic in looking elsewhere, if they do, I think it is a clear indication that Gase isn't just playing lip service here, he means it and is staking his reputation on Tannehill getting to that next level.

You are 100% correct -- it's time for Tannehill to make a clear statement this year that he is good enough to build the rest of team around or next year we get really need to get serious about finding his replacement (with the possibility that might take a couple of years to find the right guy). For many of those looking at his 5 playing years, he's not good enough. For those looking at his growth over those 5 years (I'm in this group), his growth every year and his 2nd half of the 2016 season gives us lots of hope that he IS the guy. On a side note, under normal circumstances, no one in their right mind would stick with a QB for 6 years unless they felt their job wasn't at risk. Here on the boards, our jobs aren't, so some scream from the rafters "he's only (better than) average..." without taking into account that because we drafted a converted WR with only 2 years under center, he needed more than the usual 2 or 3 years to get the expected level of performance.

But either way, drafting to fill out the rest of the team with quality starters and some depth is good on it's own merits, so even if we don't have one of the higher quality QBs fall to us at 11 (or at least to a place we'd be willing to trade up too), we're making the team better -- which will be good for Tannehill or whoever comes next.

 

[fin415]

We're sunk if Tannehill's knee can't withstand sacks. Really sunk.

And why would anyone worry about this when we've seen countless running backs, Wides, and the occasional QB recover from this kind of injury without a hitch? The real risk is (and someone posted this somewhere here on the boards) is did it get into his head and impact his game negatively.

 

[The Goat]

be ready to get yall's heart broken again... 30y & 2x ACL... and wasn't a franchise qb to begin with...

At this point, you're just making stuff up.