The "Inside Word" on the QB Search

[Dirtbag59]

My biggest fear with Flynn is not that he'll be the next Kolb but rather the next Brees. An UFA franchise changing QB that was there for the taking but passed up by us.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by Dirtbag59

My biggest fear with Flynn is not that he'll be the next Kolb but rather the next Brees. An UFA franchise changing QB that was there for the taking but passed up by us.

Trust me I'd take Flynn over throwing everything in for Luck or RGIII because we'd have to take Luck witht he 1st pick .... won't happen, and RGIII we'd have to trade with probably the Rams in order to move up above the Browns. I don't see the other teams trading out.

Flynn would be a lot cheaper, or atleast I'd guess he would be.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Dirtbag59

My biggest fear with Flynn is not that he'll be the next Kolb but rather the next Brees. An UFA franchise changing QB that was there for the taking but passed up by us.

That's how I see him.

[Big C]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

That's how I see him.

the difference is that brees and kolb were both 2nd round qbs with some pedigree, and brees had already had success in the nfl over an entire season. flynn has yet to do that, and was a 7th round pick.

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by Dirtbag59

My biggest fear with Flynn is not that he'll be the next Kolb but rather the next Brees. An UFA franchise changing QB that was there for the taking but passed up by us.

Brees was a good QB before he banged up his shoulder and SD decided to play craps with the Manning pick. Flynn is a...former 7th(?) round pick who has played two NFL games well and had a decent college career. Not the same thing.

Flynn is going to cost too much for what he really is worth.

[44Deezel]

Originally Posted by Dirtbag59

My biggest fear with Flynn is not that he'll be the next Kolb but rather the next Brees. An UFA franchise changing QB that was there for the taking but passed up by us.

Good point. We didn't even sneeze in his direction when he was available. How's his bum shoulder of his holding up in New Orleans?

[skinsfaninok]

I want Flynn if we can't get Luck or Bradford... SO Yeah

[30gut]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Ryan Tannehill: See Jones. Though honestly I think they're more likely to take Jones at 6 than Tannehill. Feeling is Jones can start now, Tannehill may need a little more time

My gut prediction as of today...Landry Jones (I know I've been saying Tannehill but I'm honestly going back and forth on the two) and Rex returns as the backup.

Thanks for the info, I'm a bit surprised by the view of Jones as more of an immediate starter then Tannehill though.

There is no dount that Tannehill lacks experience but he actually knows this offense because A&M runs it; this actually gives him a leg up in learning the offense especially considering that Jones comes from a spread.

Tannehill isn't as inexperienced as most think and will have more snaps then Cam Newton and Mark Sanchez both of whom were day 1 starters.

There's as much to suggest that he could be a day 1 or midseason as their is to suggest that he needs to sit for a season.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by 30gut

Thanks for the info, I'm a bit surprised by the view of Jones as more of an immediate starter then Tannehill though.

There is no dount that Tannehill lacks experience but he actually knows this offense because A&M runs it; this actually gives him a leg up in learning the offense especially considering that Jones comes from a spread.

Tannehill isn't as inexperienced as most think and will have more snaps then Cam Newton and Mark Sanchez both of whom were day 1 starters.

There's as much to suggest that he could be a day 1 or midseason as their is to suggest that he needs to sit for a season.

I think Landry Jones could start day one in Kyle's offense because I don't think Kyle's offense requires the quarterback to have a great grasp of coverages to complete passes down the field.

The biggest Landry Jones problem is how much his accuracy suffers when he is pressured. I mean, every quarterback's accuracy suffers when pressured, but when Jones can stand back and deliver the football, he's really accurate. When he has to move, he has awful fundamentals. Right now, Landry Jones lacks even the ability to buy an extra half second to get rid of the ball. Which should be worrisome.

I still think he's a much better fit than Tannehill. Kyle requires a passer with superior pocket mechanics.

[30gut]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I think Landry Jones could start day one in Kyle's offense because I don't think Kyle's offense requires the quarterback to have a great grasp of coverages to complete passes down the field.

I think either QB has the skillset to start or sit.
I'm not into predicting whether a QB can/will start.
Its largely dependent on the volition of the staff that drafts them.

The biggest Landry Jones problem is how much his accuracy suffers when he is pressured. I mean, every quarterback's accuracy suffers when pressured, but when Jones can stand back and deliver the football, he's really accurate. When he has to move, he has awful fundamentals. Right now, Landry Jones lacks even the ability to buy an extra half second to get rid of the ball. Which should be worrisome.

Yeah, that's one of the reason why I think Tannehill is a better prospect.

I still think he's a much better fit than Tannehill. Kyle requires a passer with superior pocket mechanics

Que paso?

I don't follow your reasoning on why you think Jones is a better fit?
Tannehill knows the offense, Tannehill is more mobile and can extend plays.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by 30gut

I think either QB has the skillset to start or sit.
I'm not into predicting whether a QB can/will start.
Its largely dependent on the volition of the staff that drafts them.

Yeah, that's one of the reason why I think Tannehill is a better prospect.

Que paso?

I don't follow your reasoning on why you think Jones is a better fit?
Tannehill knows the offense, Tannehill is more mobile and can extend plays.

I'm with you all around on this and with Tripp on the points of agreement.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by 30gut

I think either QB has the skillset to start or sit.
I'm not into predicting whether a QB can/will start.
Its largely dependent on the volition of the staff that drafts them.

Yeah, that's one of the reason why I think Tannehill is a better prospect.

Que paso?

I don't follow your reasoning on why you think Jones is a better fit?
Tannehill knows the offense, Tannehill is more mobile and can extend plays.

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. Maybe we're seeing an inconsistent mechanical issue that's causing Tannehill this trouble. Tannehill's tendency to throw blind deeper into the progression isn't a dealbreaker for me, but it's a red flag.

The potential dealbreaker on Tannehill in this offense will be to what degree his athleticism helps or limits his pocket passing ability. 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. If he progresses into an elite pocket passer with the ability to move with the football, that makes him one of the best players in the league at the position. If he progresses into a quick triggered player from the pocket who never learns to use or trust his eyes, he won't last very long.

[SkinItup]

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. Maybe we're seeing an inconsistent mechanical issue that's causing Tannehill this trouble. Tannehill's tendency to throw blind deeper into the progression isn't a dealbreaker for me, but it's a red flag.

The potential dealbreaker on Tannehill in this offense will be to what degree his athleticism helps or limits his pocket passing ability. 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. If he progresses into an elite pocket passer with the ability to move with the football, that makes him one of the best players in the league at the position. If he progresses into a quick triggered player from the pocket who never learns to use or trust his eyes, he won't last very long.

I'm right there with you. Tannehill has looked good at times but never for a whole game. He has a good arm but his ability to read college D is shaky and he is about as consistent throwing the ball as Locker.

At most trade down and get another 2nd round pick and maybe another late round pick and hope he is still there in the teens.

[30gut]

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.

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.

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.

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.

[cpayne5]

Awesome post and information. Thanks.