Quote:
Originally Posted by GTripp0012
Well, Tannehill trying to push the ball down the field, even into wide open spaces in zone coverage, really leaves a lot to be desired. And that's what you're asked to do in this offense.
|
I'm a little confused by what you mean here.
Do you think Tannehill can't drive the ball with velocity on intermediate throws? Or do you mean the deep ball on a go-route?
Tannehill's ability to drive the ball with velocity on intermediate routes is a strength to my eye.
His deep ball touch doesn't match his ability to drive the ball, I would rate his deep ball as average.
Quote:
|
Tannehill's tendency to throw blind deeper into the progression isn't a dealbreaker for me, but it's a red flag.
|
Don't understand what you mean by 'throw blind'.
But, Tannehill follows his progressions as well as any other top prospect considering his level of experience.
It also helps that he's making his progressions from a pro-style offense that is a direct variant of Kyle's offense.
Quote:
|
The potential dealbreaker on Tannehill in this offense will be to what degree his athleticism helps or limits his pocket passing ability.
|
Completely disagree.
There is no way to spin athleticism into a negative.
Athleticism doesn't limit a prospect in anyway, its only a strength.
Quote:
|
At Texas A&M, Tannehill proved he could throw underneath on the run with good fundamental mechanics, but the downfield throws were not ones he made, particularly when they moved the pocket with him.
|
Disagree completely.
One of the reason I followed Tannehill last year was his arm talent.
Tannehill can drive the ball with velocity both inside and outside the pocket.
I would think this is evident in any A&M game.
The playcalling's reliance (often times to fault) on Tannehill's ability to throw deep comebacks and deep outs are a testament to his ability to drive the ball downfield.
I'm still trying to understand your view of Jones vs Tannehill as fit for this offense.