I dont think thats fair. He did play well and thats not unexpected of a rookie qb.
Yes it is. It's not the 1990s anymore. 3 rookie QBs severely outplayed him THIS YEAR ALONE, including some drafted after him.
I dont think thats fair. He did play well and thats not unexpected of a rookie qb.
Absolutely not true. He may not have had the impact the other 3 had as a rookie, but there are plenty of commentators that think he has a very bright future and needs weapons. Your mistake is comparing him relative to the other 3 QB's rather than relative to his own experience and talent surrounding him.
Ponder, Locker, Weeden, Wilson and Gabbert are not even close to Tannehill's ability with pre snap adjustments. Luck and Tannehill are by far the best of the young QBs that do this. I am not trying to minimize Wilson and RGIII but give Tannehill the Seahawks defense, WRs and running game and Tannehill is battling Luck for ROY.TO be fair dolphin fans do the same with Ponder and Locker even though they look like promising qb's also. hell in actuality Blain Gabbert looks like he has promise.
Another example is how people act like Tannehill played so much better than Weeden even though they played pretty damn similar. My main problem with Weeden was lack of development time
TO be fair dolphin fans do the same with Ponder and Locker even though they look like promising qb's also. hell in actuality Blain Gabbert looks like he has promise.
Another example is how people act like Tannehill played so much better than Weeden even though they played pretty damn similar. My main problem with Weeden was lack of development time
Ponder, Locker, Weeden, Wilson and Gabbert are not even close to Tannehill's ability with pre snap adjustments. Luck and Tannehill are by far the best of the young QBs that do this. I am not trying to minimize Wilson and RGIII but give Tannehill the Seahawks defense, WRs and running game and Tannehill is battling Luck for ROY.
Tannehills rookie year is virtiually indistinguishable from Chad Henne's first year starting. Enough said, really.
RG3 and Wilson have much better supporting casts as well. Power running games, seam threat TE's and better WR cores.I dont think thats fair. He did play well and thats not unexpected of a rookie qb. He still played well( well for a rookie)
Rg3 and Wilson were way ahead of anyone else but thats year one
This past season was an exception. Even during the draft last year they talked about how great the QB class was. Luck was pro-ready and took a sorry roster to the playoffs, Washington and Morris did wonders with that system for RG3, and I bet Wilson ends up being better than both of them.Have you noticed on every national program that covers the NFL they talk of 3 stellar rookie QBs instead of 4?
You get my point. Tannehill had Brian Hartline as his #1, Fasano as his main TE and still managed 12 TDs against 13 Int's. His pre snap adjustments, pocket awareness and pocket presence are superior to RGIII and Wilson who run as soon as the pressure is on. Tannehill threw numerous first down and several TDs after audibiling out of the called play. Numerous analysts have set the celing very high for him.Why would he battle Luck for rookie of the year when RG3 was rookie of the year
RG3 and Wilson have much better supporting casts as well. Power running games, seam threat TE's and better WR cores.
Tannehills rookie year is virtiually indistinguishable from Chad Henne's first year starting. Enough said, really.