Baldinger: Tannehill as a franchise QB is a pipe dream | Page 7 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Baldinger: Tannehill as a franchise QB is a pipe dream

Dan Silly O is an idiot, he got fired in Tampa for calling the players there monkeys and now he is the Sid Rosenberg coke head replacement. I make it a point not to listen to QAM at all. Joe Rose has hyperventilation syndrome and is a wierdo, Mike Irvin garbles and you can understand what he is saying

Its a shame. I moved to Orlando from So Fla 10 yrs ago and I don't listen to So Fla local sports radio any longer. I'm one of the older fans and I have fond memories of listening to guys like Mandich, Joe Zagacki, Jeff Deforrest, Rick Weaver (play by play) and even Hank Goldberg (as arrogant as he could sometimes be).
 
These guys are long on hyperbole and short on specifics

Very true, many American sports analysts focus less on analysis and instead make bold, sweeping statements in the hope that a few hit, making them seem like a genius. Baldinger, Sapp, Dukes, Millen, Bayless et al. (the list is endless). Listening to some of these guy's diatribes laden with sporting clichés, hyperbole and broken metaphors makes we want to switch off. The truth is though, that the general public (for the most part) do not want to be bored with in-depth analysis and would prefer to watch Warren Sapp shouting "QB killa" every two minutes.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
He hasn't otherwise he wouldn't be saying what he's saying.

What, because I am not agreeing with you by saying "Tannehill sucks", "Shouldn't have been drafted at #8", means I haven't watched any of his games and highlights? Just because I don't agree with the notion that he is a failure before he even takes a training camp snap doesn't mean I haven't watched any games. You might not like him or how he projects to the NFL, but at the same time there are a lot of people that do like what they saw and how he projects.
 
What, because I am not agreeing with you by saying "Tannehill sucks", "Shouldn't have been drafted at #8", means I haven't watched any of his games and highlights? Just because I don't agree with the notion that he is a failure before he even takes a training camp snap doesn't mean I haven't watched any games. You might not like him or how he projects to the NFL, but at the same time there are a lot of people that do like what they saw and how he projects.
I like Tannehill but Barkley is better. I have major questions about Tannehill's decision making, does that make me a bad fan? I don't think so.
 
I like Tannehill but Barkley is better. I have major questions about Tannehill's decision making, does that make me a bad fan? I don't think so.

Barkley isn't even in the conversation for the Dolphins after the they took Tannehill. The object going forward and in next year's draft is to give Tannehill a better supporting cast to make sure he is successful when he does eventually become the starter. They are not going to replace him after one year or bring in a 1st round QB in 2013 to compete with him. They will probably draft a QB in 2013, but as a mid-late round prospect to be Tannehill's backup.

The Rams had a shot at RGIII this draft, but continued to build the team around Bradford. The Jaguars could have taken Tannehill, but decided to give Gabbert a weapon to help him continue to grow.

You can like Barkley better, that is not what really is the topic though. The Dolphins committed to Tannehill as the guy they see as the franchise quarterback of the future. If Andrew Luck struggles(as expected) this season and Barkley is on the board when they pick next April, should they take him? Or do you get Luck a big time WR, or a running back, or maybe some offensive line help? Or maybe do what the Rams did and trade the pick for multiple 1st round picks?

Look, I understand the Tannehill is raw, has some questions that need to be answered and in the end might not turn out to be the franchise quarterback the team thinks he is. Really any of the four first round quarterbacks might end up being duds, but after you commit to them your job becomes making sure you do everything possible to have them succeed. It isn't about replacing them just one year later. Tannehill had limited tape for teams to evaluate him, but Miami had the (unfair?) advantage of having his college head coach as the offensive coordinator. You have Ireland who had been scouting Tannehill extremely close the past couple of years, have Sherman's first hand evaluation and have a head coach in Philbin who has a track record of developing quarterbacks in the NFL. Maybe they all turn out to be wrong and those without all the inside knowledge on a message board(us) turn out to be right. We will just have to wait and see. What we do know is that Tannehill is extremely smart, very athletic, strong arm but ultimately raw because of limited starts in college. There are a lot of unknowns because he wasn't a two, three or four year college starter, but he does have the tools to become a big time quarterback.
 
The important thing is that we're trying to find the guy. I prefer to see us gambling than churning through the has beens and never wills.

There was nobody at 8 outside of Tannehill who could potentially turn the franchise around. So if he doesn't work out -and I believe he will- we didn't really lose much by taking him. We'll just have to go again for another good guy.

If I have any criticism of our approach to drafting a QB this year is that I prob would have doubled up with Wilson in R3.

We'll start with Garrard, try to shape Moore into a WCO while Garrard is here, then slowly introduce Tannehill middle of next season or so and keep Moore as backup. That's my guess.
 
Barkley isn't even in the conversation for the Dolphins after the they took Tannehill. The object going forward and in next year's draft is to give Tannehill a better supporting cast to make sure he is successful when he does eventually become the starter. They are not going to replace him after one year or bring in a 1st round QB in 2013 to compete with him. They will probably draft a QB in 2013, but as a mid-late round prospect to be Tannehill's backup.

The Rams had a shot at RGIII this draft, but continued to build the team around Bradford. The Jaguars could have taken Tannehill, but decided to give Gabbert a weapon to help him continue to grow.

You can like Barkley better, that is not what really is the topic though. The Dolphins committed to Tannehill as the guy they see as the franchise quarterback of the future. If Andrew Luck struggles(as expected) this season and Barkley is on the board when they pick next April, should they take him? Or do you get Luck a big time WR, or a running back, or maybe some offensive line help? Or maybe do what the Rams did and trade the pick for multiple 1st round picks?

Look, I understand the Tannehill is raw, has some questions that need to be answered and in the end might not turn out to be the franchise quarterback the team thinks he is. Really any of the four first round quarterbacks might end up being duds, but after you commit to them your job becomes making sure you do everything possible to have them succeed. It isn't about replacing them just one year later. Tannehill had limited tape for teams to evaluate him, but Miami had the (unfair?) advantage of having his college head coach as the offensive coordinator. You have Ireland who had been scouting Tannehill extremely close the past couple of years, have Sherman's first hand evaluation and have a head coach in Philbin who has a track record of developing quarterbacks in the NFL. Maybe they all turn out to be wrong and those without all the inside knowledge on a message board(us) turn out to be right. We will just have to wait and see. What we do know is that Tannehill is extremely smart, very athletic, strong arm but ultimately raw because of limited starts in college. There are a lot of unknowns because he wasn't a two, three or four year college starter, but he does have the tools to become a big time quarterback?
I agree that we won't take a QB next year unless Tannehill looks like Gabbert and Ireland gets fired.
 
Barkley isn't even in the conversation for the Dolphins after the they took Tannehill. The object going forward and in next year's draft is to give Tannehill a better supporting cast to make sure he is successful when he does eventually become the starter. They are not going to replace him after one year or bring in a 1st round QB in 2013 to compete with him. They will probably draft a QB in 2013, but as a mid-late round prospect to be Tannehill's backup.

The Rams had a shot at RGIII this draft, but continued to build the team around Bradford. The Jaguars could have taken Tannehill, but decided to give Gabbert a weapon to help him continue to grow.

You can like Barkley better, that is not what really is the topic though. The Dolphins committed to Tannehill as the guy they see as the franchise quarterback of the future. If Andrew Luck struggles(as expected) this season and Barkley is on the board when they pick next April, should they take him? Or do you get Luck a big time WR, or a running back, or maybe some offensive line help? Or maybe do what the Rams did and trade the pick for multiple 1st round picks?

Look, I understand the Tannehill is raw, has some questions that need to be answered and in the end might not turn out to be the franchise quarterback the team thinks he is. Really any of the four first round quarterbacks might end up being duds, but after you commit to them your job becomes making sure you do everything possible to have them succeed. It isn't about replacing them just one year later. Tannehill had limited tape for teams to evaluate him, but Miami had the (unfair?) advantage of having his college head coach as the offensive coordinator. Ireland had been scouting Tannehill extremely close the past couple of years, have Sherman's first hand evaluation and have a head coach in Philbin who has a track record of developing quarterbacks in the NFL. Maybe they all turn out to be wrong and those without all the inside knowledge on a message board(us) turn out to be right. We will just have to wait and see. What we do know is that Tannehill is extremely smart, very athletic, strong arm but ultimately raw because of limited starts in college. There are a lot of unknowns because he wasn't a two, three or four year college starter, but he does have the tools to become a big time quarterback?

Obviously you give Tannehill a chance to succeed. That being said the team will have a very good idea of where he is at by the end of this year. If there were any doubts he can do it and a Barkley type is sitting there you should take your opportunities as they come and strongly consider it. Hopefully Tannehill turns the corner. It's kind of strange watching this board sometimes with people coming up with nicknames for him and stuff the same day he is drafted. People called Henne the future as well in the same fashion. Can wait to see the guy play in the NFL and hopefully he is the steal of the century. We have all seen how hard it is to score a QB in Miami however so I have a "we'll see" attitude on it. I hope he turns out because I'm a little wondering if Philbin put way to much stock in Sherman otherwise, assuming Sherman had a big say and perhaps he should not have had. Those are my thoughts, but I have not made an opinion on Tannehill yet and I shouldn't have either until we see him in NFL action.

I don't think there is anything wrong with a reporter suggesting he was a reach. He is a long way from a lock or sure thing, right?
 
Obviously you give Tannehill a chance to succeed. That being said the team will have a very good idea of where he is at by the end of this year. If there were any doubts he can do it and a Barkley type is sitting there you should take your opportunities as they come and strongly consider it. Hopefully Tannehill turns the corner. It's kind of strange watching this board sometimes with people coming up with nicknames for him and stuff the same day he is drafted. People called Henne the future as well in the same fashion. Can wait to see the guy play in the NFL and hopefully he is the steal of the century. We have all seen how hard it is to score a QB in Miami however so I have a "we'll see" attitude on it. I hope he turns out because I'm a little wondering if Philbin put way to much stock in Sherman otherwise, assuming Sherman had a big say and perhaps he should not have had. Those are my thoughts, but I have not made an opinion on Tannehill yet and I shouldn't have either until we see him in NFL action.

I don't think there is anything wrong with a reporter suggesting he was a reach. He is a long way from a lock or sure thing, right?
how so? I don't think he even starts a game, if he does that means we're on our third string QB and our Offense has been decimated.
 
If there are any doubts about Tannehill you go after Barkley? What's your justification for that statement? There are still doubts surrounding Sam Bradford yet look what the Rams did. They decided to stick with their franchise QB and shove all in on him, getting a major payday as a result.

At this point in the NFL, even if you have a young guy who has a fairly positive and productive season (say... 2010 Josh Freeman, perhaps?) you STILL have doubts simply because this is a league where it's tough as hell to put together ONE great season, let alone MULTIPLE great seasons.
 
Picking Barkley is a clear message that the team would have given up on Tannehill. I can't see any team nowadays picking a quarterback in the top 10 in back to back seasons. If Miami is indeed unfortunate to pick in the top 5 next year, I would rather someone like Robert Woods to give Tannehill a big time weapon.

The bottom line is getting the QB situation right. If Barkley is there for us, we would be crazy not to take him.
Taking another QB in the top 10 is not the end of the world, especially with today's salary cap structure.
 
The bottom line is getting the QB situation right. If Barkley is there for us, we would be crazy not to take him.
Taking another QB in the top 10 is not the end of the world, especially with today's salary cap structure.

But then you alienate your previous 1st round pick at the position without ever giving him time to develop.
And what if Barkley ends up being a bust. Seems like that would mean we chased our tail again.
Getting the QB situation right?. Seriously. What about development.
The 2012 season hasn't been played yet. Maybe we should wait and see how that plays out.
 
Back
Top Bottom