Tannehill or Bortles?

[Digital]

Tannehill.

He has proven the ability to consistently throw accurately, be precise with timing patterns, stand unflinching in a collapsing pocket, take a hit and keep looking downfield the rest of the game, take a hit and remain durable, take responsibility, accept criticism when it is justified, take criticism when it properly belongs to his teammates, study hard, read defenses, managing blocking assignments, learn from mistakes and improve constantly. That's one hell of a lot of good attributes.

What I still want to see from Tannehill is deep ball savvy, ability to look off defenders, and take charge leadership.

Blake Bortles has looked good against collegiate and looked good in preseason ... but I don't really know most of those things with him yet. Frankly, out of this draft class I'd keep my eye on Derek Carr. That is the kid with the most talent. If he echoes fearless in the face of pressure and keeps working on his footwork, the sky is the limit for Derek Carr.

 

[Tannenbombs]

Tannehill.

He has proven the ability to consistently throw accurately, be precise with timing patterns, stand unflinching in a collapsing pocket, take a hit and keep looking downfield the rest of the game, take a hit and remain durable, take responsibility, accept criticism when it is justified, take criticism when it properly belongs to his teammates, study hard, read defenses, managing blocking assignments, learn from mistakes and improve constantly. That's one hell of a lot of good attributes.

What I still want to see from Tannehill is deep ball savvy, ability to look off defenders, and take charge leadership.

Blake Bortles has looked good against collegiate and looked good in preseason ... but I don't really know most of those things with him yet. Frankly, out of this draft class I'd keep my eye on Derek Carr. That is the kid with the most talent. If he echoes fearless in the face of pressure and keeps working on his footwork, the sky is the limit for Derek Carr.

I liked Carr the most in the draft, then Bortles, then Garoppolo. But Carr has really bad pocket presence. He showed that in college and confirmed it so far in the 2 preseason games. He has A+ arm talent, and incredible athleticism. Believe it or not he ran the same exact 40 times as Johnny (8ball, Middle Finger, Clipboard, Football). I just think the pocket presence thing will be what holds him back from being a franchise guy.. but what a great combo of arm strength/ accuracy/ quick release/ athleticism..

 

[finjim]

Haters will say Bortles, intelligent fans will say Tannehill.

 

[KTDolphins]

Based on what I have seen, I would take Bortles in a minute. T-Hill tends to hold the ball too long and has questionable pocket awareness.

---------- Post added at 06:05 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:04 PM ----------

Haters will say Bortles, intelligent fans will say Tannehill.

The world is not that black and white.

 

[Vaark]

Of course any personal preference nets out as more subjective than objective and is influenced by one's own perspective and biases, despite what we'd all like to think.

Some posters are firm believers in "pedigree," going back to high school as a precursor of things to come. In that regard, while both Bortles and Tannehill were 3 star high school recruits, Rivals ranked Tannehill the 23rd best at his position and Bortles at 44, almost twice as low.

And certainly some prognosticators consider the collective wisdom of the drafting experts to extrapolate out future success. Of course there exist anomalies like Brady as a 6th rounder and Wilson as a 3rd rounder that refute that wisdom, but even more indicative are the early swings and misses like Russell, buttfumble, Leinart, Freeman, David Carr, Harrington, Gabbert, Boller and Losman (some of those first rounders being the equivalent of NBA "lottery picks) who argue that the success of an early draft pick is only as good as the individual team and decision-makers picking them.

That being said, and acknowledging that it was the iconic Jeff Ireland who selected Tannehill at 8, my own opinion is that if this version of Blake Bortles was available in the '12 draft, he'd have gone 4th or maybe even after Weeden. A case can be made for both possibilities. So where a QB is selected is less a precursor of success and more a reflection of relativity vs other available QBs in that draft coupled with the skill of the major draft decision-maker. David Caldwell in his first GM job and draft in '13 picked Luke Joeckel which was almost a no brainer and looked good until being season injured in the 5th game and Cyprian in the second who had 86 tackles. But IMO the verdict's still out on him also.

So obviously I'd take Tannehill over Bortles as I would over RG3 and Weeden.. but not over Luck coming out or Wilson from what we know now. I was disappointed in him blowing the jest game (Peyton Manning himself would have been eviscerated behind our line in the Buffalo game, but by the same token, given the off the field disruptions, terrible offensive schemes and coaching, the loss of his most trusted receiver in Gibson and Keller in TC (net effect with Fasano gone, no one not only to block but also for red zone receptions), the offensive OL, the schizoid running game that couldn't block for crap, a rookie kicker getting the yips, etc and ad nauseum, my impression is that considering with what he had to work, it's a wonder Tannehill even kept us in contention through 14 games, especially that NE masterpiece.

 

[Geordie]

Bortles, based on what I saw from him over the last couple of college season, the guy's a leader and a born winner, those are things Tanny just doesn't seem to posses for me. Hoping to be proved wrong though this year, which is make or break for Tanny I feel.

 

[FinfanInBuffalo]

I
Bottom line, with Bortles you get the first quarterback picked in that draft, while we settled for third with Tannehill. That's not always the pivotal factor but as I mentioned yesterday it's always a race to steal a few percent here and there, not give it away. I default to the percentages.

Not only is it not a pivotal factor, it is irrelevant.

---------- Post added at 07:11 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:09 PM ----------

T-Hill tends to hold the ball too long.

Based on what?

 

[DolfanISS]

I would take Bortles because he's not on our team and the grass is always greener.

Being on any end of a Sanchez vs Henne debate speaks volumes for ones football knowledge.

 

[Built2Win]

Tannehill is poised for a breakout year.
I'd roll with Tannehill over almost anyone..

 

[finjim]

Based on what I have seen, I would take Bortles in a minute. T-Hill tends to hold the ball too long.

---------- Post added at 06:05 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:04 PM ----------



The world is not that black and white.

My world is.

 

[bird33]

any way you look at it, tannehill had a very poor oline and pretty much no running game and had a good 2013. sure he was awful in the last game of the season but lets see bortles or almost any qb perform under the circumstances tanne had to last year and come through the way he did. the guy has a huge set of bal*s to take that kind of pounding and have the year he did. id take tanne any day of the week over bortles.

 

[SuperMarksBros.]

Do we really have to destroy Bortles to prop up our own guy? Bortles looks like s a stud, with protection Tannehill looks like a stud. Lets just leave it at that.

 

[Tannenbombs]

Do we really have to destroy Bortles to prop up our own guy? Bortles looks like s a stud, with protection Tannehill looks like a stud. Lets just leave it at that.

Exactly. I didn't start this thread to tear down either one, rather compare the two. I like Tannehill more but think both are franchise qbs. Somewhere in the "pretty good- to good tier"

 

[MiggeMadness]

Bottom line, with Bortles you get the first quarterback picked in that draft, while we settled for third with Tannehill. That's not always the pivotal factor but as I mentioned yesterday it's always a race to steal a few percent here and there, not give it away. I default to the percentages.

Bottom line, with Elway you get the first QB picked in the draft, while we settled for sixth with Marino....

Sorry, just wanted to see how that rolled off the tongue...

 

[DolfanDuBbZ~]

Do we really have to destroy Bortles to prop up our own guy? Bortles looks like s a stud, with protection Tannehill looks like a stud. Lets just leave it at that.

This is what I was trying to do in the Wallace debate. I like Tannehill, but he has obvious holes in his game. To think other wise, is being shallow.

As for Bortles, I like him, or like what I've seen early. Mobility, accuracy and command are there early. But one poster here I hold in high regard, hoops, says he folds when Bortles gets hit. Its something I will look for the next time I watch Bortles.

As for the topic. I would take Tannehill, now, because he has 2 full seasons under his belt. Has improved, despite limitations, and continues to impress early this preseason. Its his 3rd year, no more excuses. Its his money year. Its time to **** or get off the pot. People seem to always say, it starts with the QB, then for some reason...make every excuse for the qb when some critical assessment is thrown his way. Tannehill needs to take this team and lead them. If he has a good year, with or with out the playoffs, I will be happy. If not, time to look elsewhere. Sadly.