Browns questioned Tannehill's leadership

[steviey013]

The Browns are fricken lahooosers! and by the way Holmgren is just a big phony blowhard.

 

[Finland]

Obviously we will all see how it turns out. Even as a Dolphin fan I find it funny that people dis the Browns by saying basically, "who wants to take their opinion very highly, after all look at the crappy QB's they have had under centre". Not a very good stance for a Dolphin fan to take is it? Who were the great Dolphin QB's in the last 10 years again? And maybe we better let it play out before we call Sherman's opinion so grand. Hopefully Miami made a great decision for the future and likely for a bunch of games this year with Tannehill. But lets not forget how many great QB choices we have had since Marino. Looks like we are a highly sensitive bunch I guess. We need some wins! Hopefully Tannehill can help.

 

[Finland]

From the interviews I have seen of Ryan T. He seemed to be a pretty mature guys. Maybe he just didn't want to play in Cleveland. Maybe he gave a less than enthusiastic interview.

Get what you're saying but maturity and leadership are not the same thing. I hope RT does great, that being said.

 

[Finland]

I don't think it's a significant concern to be honest. Cleveland's not wrong, but it's not going to matter that much either. The three keys in being a leader are confidence, talent and effort...and the first two have to come before the last. I think everyone realized Ryan Tannehill probably isn't where he's going to end up being from either confidence or talent standpoints. And when you get all that 'effort' before you have the confidence or talent, that's when you get a Brock Osweiler.

Like your posts man, but to simply say confidence, talent and effort are the keys to leadership, is a little short. You need to also be inspiring, have vision and be able to communicate that vision well situationally to different types of people. Your three are also needed but you could have those things and not be a strong leader. With all six, you would most likely be a great leader. Back to the thread point, I've not been shown yet that Tannehill does not have these things. Lets hope so. Back to your three, effort (I call this enthusiasm & work ethic) is huge. Confidence and talent are vital for the leader, especially the QB type that is a player and a leader. I think you also need integrity and creativity.

I respect Payton Manning, but don't really like him. I've cheered against him since Marino kicked his ass when he was rookie. That being said, he has all the qualities we are discussing (for example).

Keep up the top notch posts, just felt like adding to that.

 

[Dsteve]

since when is 6'5" 230 small for an average person?

 

[datruth55]

all the ota leadership and fanfare won't add up to a hill of beans if weeden doesn't get it done on the field beginning this september...not to rain on anyones parade and clearly ck feels like weedens gonna be legit but i've seen this same talk more times than i can count about guys before the pads go on and the hitting starts and then things change real quick...

i've learned my lesson about falling in love with guys before the real bullets start flying...and they don't start til training camp...it won't be long

Good point hoops. I think the same was said about John Beck when he was here. He was also an "older" rookie at 26.

 

[1972fins]

I don't think it's a significant concern to be honest. Cleveland's not wrong, but it's not going to matter that much either. The three keys in being a leader are confidence, talent and effort...and the first two have to come before the last. I think everyone realized Ryan Tannehill probably isn't where he's going to end up being from either confidence or talent standpoints. And when you get all that 'effort' before you have the confidence or talent, that's when you get a Brock Osweiler.

I think the age difference conbined with Weeden's pro experience should make him a more polished individual.
Give RT five years of experience and I'm sure he would be fine.
Your point about the Gruden show is a very good one.

 

[BlueFin]

Incorrect. He will still be 28 years old when the season starts. He turns 29 about halfway through the season.



I think you're in the minority on that one.

Ok...if were gonna quibble about a few weeks...Weeden turns 29 the day of the Browns 6th regular season game, they will have 10 remaining with a 29 year old rookie.

I may be in the minority on not being impressed with Weeden's intelligence...However, I was in the minority on this board before the 2005 draft in wanting Aaron Rogers #2 overall versus drafting Ronnie Brown as well.

My real point was the Browns were basing this assessment on "interviews", not "on the field" actions according to the article. I upon listening to both Weeden and Tannehill's different interviews and camp's with Gruden, came away more impressed with Tannehill than Weeden. I came away with no doubt Tannehill can run an NFL offense, whereas Weeden ran a shotgun Spread offense that takes advantage of the great mismatches you find in college football that are much rarer in the NFL.

One would expect a man 5 years older, who has played professional sports to be more polished and perhaps more confident at this point, and that may be true in the short term.
But I honestly am much higher on Tannehill than Weeden.

Time will tell..............................

 

[Kinzua]

I don't think that the Browns' opinion that Weeden > Tannehill is out of whack with what a lot of NFL pros and fans think.

The big rap on Tannehill was and is his inexperience because that makes him even more of an unknown than your average first round QB. He is definitely NOT nearly as NFL ready as Luck or Weeden or even Andy Dalton. However, being good enough to start in the NFL as a rookie does NOT guarantee future success, either. For every Ben Roethlisberger, there are many more Trent Edwardses and Mark Sanchezes.

That he needs to sit and learn doesn't mean that Tannehill's NOT going to make a good NFL QB, just it's probably going to take him longer to hit his stride if he's able to do so.

 

[ChambersWI]

we'll see soon enough. I've seen cases for both sides of the argument. The big question is when the team faces adversity, will Tannehill be able to get the troops to rally around him? CHad Henne couldn't, Mark Sanchez hasn't shown that ability yet, Vince Young couldn't.

 

[hoops]

i want to see how weeden handles taking contact...he rarely got even sniffed at okla st but in that division against those defenses and how meh an athlete he is he's gonna take a lot of contact...lets not act like this kid is peyton manning in the way he disects things and sees the field and gets the ball out of hand...i think there is gonna be a transition period also for weeden to a pro style o...and taking drops...i doubt this is all gonna be lollipops and rainbows...

balltimore and pittsburgh twice a year and heck even cincis d is solid...better eat yo wheaties

 

[ckparrothead]

weeden didnt fit in here. plain and simple. tannehill will have the longer and better career imo and thats not just bc he is a phin, ive been saying it forever. i wish i saw what you saw in weeden but just dont. and we will see once the bullets start flying.

I see why you would like to believe that, but it's really not the case. They chose one over the other because they liked one over the other. If Weeden is successful in Cleveland, he most assuredly would've also been successful in Miami. Talent reigns.

 

[hoops]

i don't know that weeden fits what we want do all that well either...forget the age factor looks to me like we want to run a lot of roll outs and move the pocket type stuff and have our qb making a lot of plays outside the traditional pocket and i don't see that as being a strength of weedens game...tannehills pretty damn terrific on the huff and he's got real feel for the pocket and pressure...you can't teach that stuff...

i don't see much evidence of weeden having backside initial pressure or feeling pressure period in college cause i rarely saw damn pressure...maybe he does but i know tannehill does

anyways...for me the upside play is tannehill over weeden...i think there's a significant difference in tannehills ceiling and weedens personally...and i'm fine with taking the chance on the major upside player over the long term

by the way kinzua should be getting some love for best non dolphin poster...i don't always agree with his takes on some things but he knows the game and brings some good stuff to the table...now i'll move back to my side of the sofa

 

[ckparrothead]

Yeah because the Browns have such a winning tradition and expertise at knowing how to pick winning players and QB's. Hahahaha....what a joke. Can you say Brian Sipe and Bernie Kosar...and they were probably two of the best QB's they have had over the years, which should tell you a lot.

Well I hate to burst your bubble but the Browns' 0.544 franchise win percentage is 9th in the league amongst active franchises. You can claim they haven't done that lately but then, wait a minute, what have we done lately that merits such haughtiness? The last five quarterbacks we invested anything significant in were Chad Henne, Pat White, John Beck, Daunte Culpepper and A.J. Feeley. Do we really have so much room for mirth about the Cleveland Browns' quarterback choices?

 

[ckparrothead]

Question is if we didn't take RT and he was still there at Clevelands 2nd pick in first round would they have taken weeden still? I doubt it. What are they going to say? We really wanted RT but he was gone so we took Weeden?

From what I know, the answer to that question is an emphatic yes. Their target was Weeden. That was who they were going to walk out of the Draft with, one way or another. Why is this so hard to accept? Different strokes for different folks.