Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 27

Thread: New York Times: "Tannehill is one of the Safest Quarterbacks in This Entire Class"

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    10,353

    Default New York Times: "Tannehill is one of the Safest Quarterbacks in This Entire Class"

    Buffalo Bills

    FREE iPad Download

    http://fifthdown.blogs.nytimes.com/2...in-2012-draft/

    Matt Waldman is the author of The Rookie Scouting Portfolio, a testament to his obsession with film analysis, now available for download. Examples of his work can be found at his blog. He is helping The Fifth Down rank skill position players before the draft:

    3. Ryan Tannehill, Texas A&M (6-4, 221)

    Tannehill has the least experience in the college game of all my top-five quarterbacks, but he might have the best overall feel for the game. Tannehill walked onto the A&M roster as a quarterback. He accepted a switch to wide receiver despite the fact that he lost a competition to Jerrod Johnson and Stephen McGee.

    During these years as a receiver, Tannehill managed over 100 receptions and was arguably the most reliable and versatile receiver on the roster. He displayed sure hands, the ability to stretch the seam and good skill after the catch. Despite his success at a new position, Tannehill still attended quarterback meetings because he told Coach Mike Sherman that he still thought he was the best quarterback on the roster.

    When the teamís star quarterback, Johnson, had off-season shoulder surgery and struggled to regain his throwing form during a disastrous start to the 2010 season, Sherman replaced him with Tannehill and the junior quarterback reeled off enough victories for Texas A&M to make a bowl game.

    The fact that Tannehill has only a season and a half of starts at quarterback in his college career has elicited skepticism from media and fans that he is a raw prospect. I prefer to call him a more refined prospect than most realize, but inexperienced relative to the others quarterbacks in this class. Besides, Jets quarterback Mark Sanchez had fewer starts than Tannehill and the biggest reason he has not developed is the turmoil in New York, not his lack of starts at U.S.C.

    Tannehill has enough arm strength and accuracy to develop into an upper echelon pro passer. He can deliver the ball over the top or with a three-quarter motion. He is capable of generating good velocity and pinpoint accuracy with his throws.

    His three-quarter and side-arm deliveries make it easier for him to throw the ball on the move and from off-balance positions and still generate velocity. This makes him a dangerous passer when the pocket breaks down. Tannehill is simply a very natural thrower of the football.

    He is capable of delivering the ball with good anticipation and timing. In the pocket, Tannehill will go through multiple reads and throw the ball with good form and footwork with 3-, 5- and 7-step drops as well as hitches. Iíve seen him make strong passes with terrific accuracy in tight coverage on the deep out from the opposite hash as his second or third progression on a play. He throws comebacks in tight coverage with pinpoint placement, and Iíve seen him get the ball to areas where only the receiver can make the play on 25-yard seam routes or crossers while rolling to his left. In other words, he frequently displays pinpoint accuracy and has shown no fear targeting players who are covered by college standards but open by N.F.L. standards.

    Tannehill is adept at play fakes and looking off the safety. He also uses an assorted number of ball fakes that include pump fakes and shoulder fakes to set up throws. He has a pump fake where he shifts his entire body as if heís stepping through a release, and it frequently fools the opposing defense and the TV cameras.

    What stands out with Tannehill is his pocket presence. He senses pressure and does a good job of sliding away from it both from the outside or up the middle. While heís eluding pressure, Tannehill keeps his eyes downfield and body square to the line of scrimmage to deliver the ball after resetting his feet. He does the same when heís on the move.

    The same things that made Tannehill a productive receiver for the Aggies is what shows up when he is forced to break the pocket: speed, vision and toughness. Although he runs a pro-style offense, the Aggies occasionally used him on spread option plays as a runner and he demonstrated the ability to hit a hole and outrun defenders in the secondary for big gains.

    Tannehill has controlled aggression with most of his attempts but can get impulsive and reckless when he feels pressure in the pocket, and heíll try to squeeze sideline throws that are ill-advised because defenders are hanging off him. He has to learn to throw the ball away or take the sack in situations where his team can punt.

    While he can throw the ball over 40 yards with good velocity, I didnít see the deepest range with his arm, and from what I have seen, he lacks that rare arm that a player like Griffin or Matthew Stafford owns.

    I believe Tannehill is actually one of the safest prospects in this class of quarterbacks despite his inexperience, because all of the things he already does well are tough to teach. The fact that he came to this program to play quarterback and never outwardly faltered in his belief that he was the best on the roster is a telling indicator of his confidence and thatís a good indication that heíll handle the trials that lie ahead for him in the N.F.L. with poise, determination and a strong work ethic.

    Itís why I wouldnít be surprised if he ends up with a career as good or better than those of the top prospects I have ranked ahead of him, and I donít think heís a reach as a top-10 player in this draft. If I were to rank him within the scope of last yearís class, Iíd place only Cam Newton ahead of him. Mike Sherman describes Tannehill as a player who is a lot like Andy Dalton, but with a better arm.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    5,084

    Default

    Interesting article. I didn't know he put those kind of numbers up at wide receiver. If he is a bust at QB maybe he can become the next Wes Welker. I think Miami will take him. If not, Dolphin fans may go crazy like they did when they drafted Ginn ahead of Brady Quinn.
    ďThe pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails.Ē -William Ward

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    4,590

    Default

    Yeah, if the kid was as bad as some people on here say he is, would like an explaination as to how Texas A+M scored so many points despite their horrid defense.

    http://espn.go.com/college-football/...5/texas-aggies

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    17,959

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AWorldOfPain View Post
    Interesting article. I didn't know he put those kind of numbers up at wide receiver. If he is a bust at QB maybe he can become the next Wes Welker. I think Miami will take him. If not, Dolphin fans may go crazy like they did when they drafted Ginn ahead of Brady Quinn.
    Why would he be Wes Welker? They are completely different types of WR (Tannehill is 6-4, Welker is 5-9) and Welker never converted from QB.
    Buffalo Crossing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ibhappy View Post
    On the final point, so what. If brains, were so important, why does the Ivy League produce so few NFL quarterbacks?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Communist Sweden
    Posts
    6,811

    Default

    Just as good as the article that said he had the best arm in the draft


    Quote Originally Posted by likei'vebeentherebefore View Post
    he just loves jets. and the color green. he loves the color green and jets really bad.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    3,907

    Default

    New York Times is not a credible news source............................................ .....sorry.


    .
    ....Retake....Repeal....Recover....

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    North Buff
    Posts
    2,927

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by B-Man View Post
    New York Times is not a credible news source............................................ .....sorry.


    .
    I think you mean New York Post. NYT is one of the oldest and most reputable papers in the western hemisphere.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    3,907

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jer View Post
    I think you mean New York Post. NYT is one of the oldest and most reputable papers in the western hemisphere.
    No sir, I meant exactly what I typed.

    The NYT was reputable, that has changed over the past few decades, as any honest person would note.


    and to bring this back to football, the fact that they are touting Tannehill only strengthens my point.


    thanks.

    .
    ....Retake....Repeal....Recover....

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Rochester
    Posts
    7,459

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by B-Man View Post
    New York Times is not a credible news source............................................ .....sorry.


    .
    I am not a fan of the NY times, but they are indeed a credible source.

    Thanks for posting the article OP!
    Michael: Who are you people?
    Ben: We're the good guys Michael.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Jamestown, NY
    Posts
    9,053

    Default

    I guess any media hack can say whatever 4 days BEFORE the draft and get away with it. As big a gamble as it is to draft a QB in the top ten; I'd feel safer with a guy like Luck or RGIII but even then it's not guarranteed.

    Sorry Mr. Waldman, I'd rather take advice from a gypsy.........

  11. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim_Starks View Post
    I am not a fan of the NY times, but they are indeed a credible source.

    Thanks for posting the article OP!
    I disagree...far too political and biased. NOT a credible source of information.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Hicksville NY
    Posts
    4,195

    Default

    The thing with Tannehill is that a team in the position that the Bills are in can not waste a top 10 pick on a developmental QB. They need a guy that will contribute on day 1, not ride the pine hopinh for an injury.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    42į 46′ 25″ N, 78į 47′ 13″ W
    Posts
    86

    Default

    NY Post Sports section > NY Times Sports section

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    WNY
    Posts
    1,981

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim_Starks View Post
    I am not a fan of the NY times, but they are indeed a credible source.

    Thanks for posting the article OP!
    It is not a credible source it is an opinion........
    "Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to their own facts." -- Daniel Patrick Moynihan

    "Taking a man against his will, in to a direction he does not choose." -- Cyrus Kouandjio

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Jamestown, NY
    Posts
    28,008

    Default

    Throwing 3/4 and sidearm means that the ball will leave Tannehill's hand at about the same height as a much shorter QB. That's the same issue with Osweiler. Why bother taking either one in that case?

    Draft Russell Wilson. He's done more than the two of them together, and if they all release the ball at about the same height, his being 5'10" doesn't really matter, does it? Wilson has a better arm than the other two anyways, and he's a better athlete than Osweiler.

    FTR, the Bills already have a WR converted from QB. We don't need another one, especially in the first round.
    Should have kept Marshawn ... and Andy ... Jairus ...

    Buffalo Bills, 2000-????: same trailer, different park.
    1999 ... 11-5, playoff loss
    2000 .... 8-8
    2001 .... 3-13
    2002 .... 8-8
    2003 ... 6-10
    2004 ... 9-7
    2005 ... 5-11
    2006 ... 7-9
    2007 ...
    7-9
    2008 ... 7-9
    2009 ... 6-10
    2010 ... 4-12
    2011 ...
    6-10
    2012 ... 6-10
    2013 ... 6-10

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Currently in prison awaiting my blue fairy Godmother.
    Posts
    3,648

    Default

    He has a high bust factor feel to me.

    ETA: If he's drafted by a team with a solid starter and is allowed to sit for a couple of years he could be good. A first round pick though, no. JMO
    http://ftw.usatoday.com/2013/09/this...fted-ej-manuel

    #Bills @EJManuel3 is 1st @NFL QB since 1960 to post rating of 89+ (min. 20 att.) in each of 1st 2 gms of rookie season (105.5, 89.3)
    6:24 PM - 15 Sep 2013


    PLAYOFFS HERE WE COME!!

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Rochester
    Posts
    7,459

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LINDA_D View Post
    Draft Russell Wilson. He's done more than the two of them together, and if they all release the ball at about the same height, his being 5'10" doesn't really matter, does it? Wilson has a better arm than the other two anyways, and he's a better athlete than Osweiler.
    Russell Wilson struggles to throw the football toward the middle of the field. His height is a huge problem. I recently watched his games, and saw a huge flaw in his game.

    And no, Wilson doesn't have a better arm than Tannehill.

    Tannehill has more upside than Wilson. But then again, this is an irrelevant conversation, seeing as how he's unlikely to be a Buffalo Bill.

    Do you watch college football Linda?
    Michael: Who are you people?
    Ben: We're the good guys Michael.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    10,353

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nateodoms'bff View Post
    The thing with Tannehill is that a team in the position that the Bills are in can not waste a top 10 pick on a developmental QB. They need a guy that will contribute on day 1, not ride the pine hopinh for an injury.
    I don't think we are ever going to be in a position to draft a Quarterback in the 1st Round to suit everyone's preference.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Rochester
    Posts
    7,459

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nateodoms'bff View Post
    The thing with Tannehill is that a team in the position that the Bills are in can not waste a top 10 pick on a developmental QB. They need a guy that will contribute on day 1, not ride the pine hopinh for an injury.
    The logic here is deeply flawed. What if you have a prospect which you know will struggle his first two years, but will turn into the next Aaron Rodgers/Eli Manning in year three or four. Do you really pass on him, simply because he can't start day one?

    So at the end of the day, ask yourself this question: Why MUST we have a day one starter at the QB position? Isn't the objective to get better in the long run? Don't these players sign for deals longer than one or two years?
    Michael: Who are you people?
    Ben: We're the good guys Michael.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    4,590

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nateodoms'bff View Post
    The thing with Tannehill is that a team in the position that the Bills are in can not waste a top 10 pick on a developmental QB. They need a guy that will contribute on day 1, not ride the pine hopinh for an injury.
    He looks like a good fit in Chan's system to me and I don't think a guy that put up those kind of numbers would necessarily be a project. Heck, one could argue that the current starting QB is a project until he is able to produce for more than five or six games out of a sixteen game season.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •