Why Isn't Tannehill Further Along? | Page 3 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Why Isn't Tannehill Further Along?

AdamC13 said:
That's one way to spin it...your words, not mine. Where have I said he sucks? With the #8 pick do come certain expectations from fans. It would be nice to read from a coach or player that Tannehill is showing the qualities that make him worthy of the #8 pick in the draft and future franchise QB.

I started this thread with a legitimate question as to people's opinions as to what separates a player like Newton or Luck from a Tannehill type (insert numerous players here)...it doesn't appear to be the wonderlic score, pass attempts in college, games started, combine drills, age, etc...

I remember when coach Shula talked about Marino he said it doesn't take long to go from his head to his feet or to his arm. Is that it? It that coachable, but only to a degree?
Click to expand...

You didn't say it, but others already have in this thread. You set the foundation the others built the building.

The difference between those players and Tannehill is that they are in completely different situations. Refer to post 23 for more information from me.
 
Nublar7 said:
Newton was so bad in training camp and preseason last year that the Panthers actually considered starting Clausen in week one. Yet some are overreacting about Tannehill before he even gets to go training camp and play in preseason games. The whole "Tannehill is #3" reports never came from the Dolphins or inside sources. It was the writer at the Palm Beach Post that got a lot of flack for calling Philbin a liar, that speculated Tannehill was going to be the #3.
Click to expand...

I think Reggie Bush's comments has something to do with this also.
 
Sadly, Tom Brady never amounted to anything since hes been in the league as he couldnt even beat out Bledsoe during the offseason. Ive tried telling people this to look at past example. Remember the horrible carrer Steve young had after Montana left. that time on the bench backing him up really did some damage.
 
bush went from tannehill should start to tannehills the #3 qb in like 2 weeks it seemed...i'm sure there's some relevance to that...i'll wait for camp though and hope tanny gets some 1st team reps to show what he's got...
 
hooshoops said:
newton was not "so bad" in training camp last year...yeah there was media talk that the panthers could go with clausen but with the way the panthers catered the offense to newtons strengths i don't buy that was ever really in play...

that o was built for cam newton...
Click to expand...
Newton was pretty bad last preseason. When he played the Dolphins he looked confused and flustered the entire time he was in there. I also just looked it up, he only completed 42% of his passes and didn't throw a touchdown pass until the final game. The thing was, Clausen was just as bad or even a little worse, so they had no choice but to go with Newton. They always wanted to go with Newton because they never had a viable veteran to run the team until he was ready. Lucky for them, he quickly got used to the speed of the game and excelled during the regular season.

The Dolphins offense will be similar to Sherman's Texas A&M offense. So you could say this offense was built for Tannehill. But they have the luxury not to have to insert him just yet. Who knows though, maybe after training camp and preseason they do choose to go with him. Just because he hasn't taken a commanding lead in June shorts and shirts practices means squat.
 
I promise that after this month is over I'll do a massive write up on Ryan Tannehill and what I see/don't see. I'm far from an expert but I have some experience around an offensive coordinator and a quarterbacks coach, and I've listened/learned what they look for in a quarterback's development. That might help.
 
AdamC13 said:
That's one way to spin it...your words, not mine. Where have I said he sucks? With the #8 pick do come certain expectations from fans. It would be nice to read from a coach or player that Tannehill is showing the qualities that make him worthy of the #8 pick in the draft and future franchise QB.

I started this thread with a legitimate question as to people's opinions as to what separates a player like Newton or Luck from a Tannehill type (insert numerous players here)...it doesn't appear to be the wonderlic score, pass attempts in college, games started, combine drills, age, etc...

I remember when coach Shula talked about Marino he said it doesn't take long to go from his head to his feet or to his arm. Is that it? It that coachable, but only to a degree?
Click to expand...

When training camp begins and the players finally start practicing in full pads, we should get a better indication of what is going on but until then...does this suffice?

Brian Hartline: Ryan Tannehill had flashes in workouts.
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000...rtline-ryan-tannehill-had-flashes-in-workouts
"He definitely has a presence," Hartline said of Tannehill. "Which is great. He's a guy that, he knows what he wants, he knows the offense. I think that definitely helps him a lot ... For me, I feel like the first couple of weeks, you hope to see flashes. Because you've got to have something there, and there's no doubt in my mind that I saw flashes. The ball coming out of his hand is good, is great. His timing is really good. On a couple of routes, you can tell he's really comfortable. He can plant that foot and release without any gather step, so there's definitely some flashes.
Click to expand...
 
hooshoops said:
bush went from tannehill should start to tannehills the #3 qb in like 2 weeks it seemed...i'm sure there's some relevance to that...i'll wait for camp though and hope tanny gets some 1st team reps to show what he's got...
Click to expand...
Bush should certainly learn to keep his mouth shut.
 
just imagine if the panthers had sat a cam newton for a david garrard or a matt moore...that outlook going forward in charlotte would not be near as rosy right now...newton wasn't stellar in the preseason but he also never showed he didn't belong on the field...

when you have that kind of talent and upside you ride with it...not some average veteran...
 
as for the o will be built around tannehill here i don't think that will necessarily be the case if he's not the one under center...garrard at this stage is more your pocket passing qb matt moore doesn't throw well on the run...with tanny wouldn't surprise me if half the time we either move the pocket or roll him out to take advantage of his strengths...i sure hope we play to these guys strengths...
 
Nublar7 said:
Close to being the same, but not 100%. Plus, you don't think Moore and Garrard eventually learned the playbook and were able to play better in the offseason program. Sure they might have been confused initially, but they are professional veterans who have learned new offenses before. It was never going to take them months to learn it. In terms of knowing the offense, I am sure Garrard and Moore got on even level with Tannehill pretty quickly.
Click to expand...
What OC comes into the new season with 100% from the season before?

Nublar7 said:
The thing is, Miami is in no rush to put Tannehill on the field in 2012 because they do have two solid veterans also on the roster. Besides Newton, who did Carolina have last year? Besides Luck, what do the Colts have? Besides Griffin, what do the Redskins have? Even in Cleveland, only McCoy is any threat to Weeden. None of those teams had a former Pro Bowl quarterback or another veteran who was in the top half of the league in QB rating. Also, Tannehill is the most raw of the 1st round quarterbacks this year with only 19 college starts, the rest of them are more prepared to step in from day one. Doesn't mean those other guys are going to play well or that Tannehill would suck if he had to start from day one. Weeden might be able to play from day one, but Tannehill in the end will likely become the better QB and will have a much longer NFL career. Tannehill has all the tools and the mental capacity to be a very good NFL QB, and Miami has the luxury of not having to rush him and put him on the field this season.
Click to expand...
This is part of my original point. It isn't like Tannehill has come to a team that is on roll when it comes to making the playoffs and has high expectations. We are 20-28 over the last three years with three losing seasons. Indy, Cleveland, Washington all could have gone out and signed Garrard or Henne or any number of veterans for a year or two. Heck, the Colts could have resigned Peyton Manning. My point was Tannehill is not having to compete against Brady or Rodgers or Brees...it's Garrard and Moore.

Nublar7 said:
Ireland, Philbin and Ross even tried to hint to fans right after he was drafted that he likely was not going to enter the season as the starter and that one of the veterans would. Another thing to keep in the back of your mind that after the 2012 season, both Moore and Garrard become free agents. So it is pretty clear to me the plan is to let Tannehill sit for one year, soak everything in, and get inserted as the starter for the 2013 season. Maybe he does start a couple of games later in the season, but there is no rush to put him on the field.
Click to expand...
I think Ross just goes along with whatever he is told :lol:, but clearly the plan is to let Tannehill sit for a year. I am not saying it is a bad one given the context. However, imo, if Tannehill did show signs of being further along they would be open to letting him compete for the starting job.

So I disagree with the responses that are saying it is b/c we have a different situation than those others. When is there a better situation to let a rookie QB drafted in the top 10 start than have his college coach become the OC installing basically the same system he was a part of the past 4 years, drafted by a team that has a string of losing seasons, bringing in new players that can develop together and clearly doesn't have a franchise QB on the roster. I would argue that Tannehill is in the best situation to start if he were further along. Which gets back to the original question of "why isn't he" as compared to other QBs drafted in round 1.
 
hooshoops said:
bush went from tannehill should start to tannehills the #3 qb in like 2 weeks it seemed...i'm sure there's some relevance to that...i'll wait for camp though and hope tanny gets some 1st team reps to show what he's got...
Click to expand...

Bush never said Tannehill should start, he said that in terms of knowing the offense he has the "upper hand", never said he should be the starter. He did say that IF Tannehill became the starter that he thinks he would be successful and be able to lead them. Later when he supposedly said that Tannehill would be the #3, again he never said that. The question was whether Tannehill would likely start the season as a backup and not the starter and he said "I would probably agree with you on that. Ryan can watch the veterans and learn. When he gets the call, he’ll be ready."

So, no his tune never really changed. He said Tannehill has the "upper hand" in knowing the offense and he has confidence in him when he is called upon. Though he thinks that Moore or Garrard will probably start out as the starter in 2012. The power of the press can distort words and make quotes sound like something else. In that same interview where he said Tannehill has the "upper hand" the reporter started off asking him about his quote saying he "would lead the league in rushing in 2012." Bush just laughed and said he had to correct him because he never said that. Just said that his GOAL was to lead the league not that he was saying he would. That everyone's goal is to be the best in the league at their position.
 
Crazy685 said:
I promise that after this month is over I'll do a massive write up on Ryan Tannehill and what I see/don't see. I'm far from an expert but I have some experience around an offensive coordinator and a quarterbacks coach, and I've listened/learned what they look for in a quarterback's development. That might help.
Click to expand...

how bout you let us know who these guys are and then i'll decide how much stock i want to put in it....
 
well if thats the case with bush and he never actually said those things they sure did put words in his mouth with some of the article titles i saw...that's all i know... i guess thats kinda like a lot of the misleading thread titles on here...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom