dfv87 Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 I was flipping stations this AM so it was either KFAN or 93X... An interesting conversation was on the radio this morning regarding Tannehill from TX A&M and his stellar workout... So we know Miami would love him at #8 but with Cle needing a QB maybe they would deal with us or maybe Cle would switch 3 vs 4 and kick a 4-6 rounder to us to make sure Miami doesn't jump up? If we flip with Cle we still get Kalil... if we drop to #8 we still likely can get him or go Martin from Stanford (I am assuming we are pretty set on going OL with our 1st pick, unless someone amazing falls to us.) Anybody think this coversation has legs? I am not sure we want to move down as we have 10 picks already and while we have ALOT of holes to fill I am not sure if 10 rookies makes us better quickly. I thought we should have gone after some established guys in FA... But they get to make those calls. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMD Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 I could see the trade with CLE potentially, but that would be all because my understanding is that Kalil is who MIN wants and would fit a great need. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brentastic Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 I'd be shocked if CLE moved up to grab Tannehill. Mike Holmgren, apparent QB guru, has never drafted a 1st round QB (per NFLN last night) so I'm guessing he sees better value in a later round OR is still optimistic about McCoy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeeR Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 No. Dumb idea IMO and little chance it happens despite MIA's desperation for a QB, which is why they would take him at 8 anyway but I doubt even they are willing to spend what it would take to jump to 1.03 which is way too high. Frankly 8 is a bit high IMO but again they are desperate and the trend (God forbid teams should not follow trends) is to reach for QBs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfv87 Posted March 30, 2012 Author Share Posted March 30, 2012 Both Fair statements, but I was thinking with all the grumbling in MIA, not getting MAnning or the chance at RG3, that they could be the ones to move up in front of CLE... And there has been disappointment in CLE about losing out on the RG3 deal with St Louis... I would love to see the Vikes use that to get one of them off the dime. With our lack of urgency in FA they need to amass a ton of talent in this draft and/or next years draft... IMO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackass Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 no way for tannehill. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 If somebody wants to trade with MIN good for MIN. I don't see the Browns doing it, and I'd be furious if they did. If they want him and he's there at 1.04 go ahead, otherwise take Richardson (who I'd prefer even with Tannehill there). A friend who follows all this more than I do was saying last week that the Browns had several offers being considered to move down (in the 6-8 range) for teams who wanted other players. Holmgren told GM Heckert to go ahead, but only if the Browns can still get their guy (or one of their guys, presumably Richardson, Blackmon or maybe even Tannehill). As to the disappointment in CLE over losing out on RG3, I suppose there is some from people who think a new QB suddenly fixes everything. But for the price that WAS paid, I'm glad we passed. There was also some talk recently about CLE wanting to trade with STL for Bradford, both before 2010 and now. STL said no way. Maybe just more posturing to get people to think we want a QB and might take Tannehill at 1.04. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeeR Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 I think McCoy would be fine if he actually had some weapons. IMO Richardon is the best answer both because Hardesty isn't reliable and not only is Richardson a better runner but also can catch. If they get him and can find a legit deep threat, CLE has the makings of an offense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaP'N GRuNGe Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 I'd love for Minnesota to move down a couple slots as any of Kalil, Claiborne, or Blackmon fill great needs. I don't think they will find a trade partner though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j2v Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 The "trade up for Tannehill" talk pretty much boils down to if the Dolphins are jonesin' for him and feel the need to leapfrog the Browns. Feels like a bit of a panic move for several of the reasons mentioned above, but Tannehill is this year's fast riser; many of the draft analysts I track are talking about him as a top-10 guy. And after missing on Griffin, Manning, and Flynn Miami may be feeling the heat to get a QB now. Tannehill has ties to OC Mike Sherman... but Flynn had ties to HC Joe Philbin and that didn't seem to mean much. As for the Vikings' end, while they do have many, many needs and Claiborne and Blackmon would each fill one of them, passing on Kalil would be a mistake. He's being compared to Jake Long and Joe Thomas, the kind of guy you put at LT, sign to a big extension in five years, and otherwise don't have to worry about the position for a decade. An upgrade at LT makes AP better, should make Ponder better, basically upgrades the Vikings' offense across the board. Moreover, this is a shallow OT class; Kalil >>> Martin, Reiff >> others; conversely, it's pretty deep at WR and CB. So going Kalil followed by CB (Josh Robinson?)/WR (Rueben Randle?) on Day Two should be far more effective than going Blackmon or Claiborne, then trying to fill the OT hole with a lesser talent. 2V Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Beatings Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 I could see Cleveland trading up, but then swiping Kalil from under the Vikings instead of taking a QB, and then the Vikings would be totally unprepared and would miss their 1st round pick while trying to figure out what just happened to them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaP'N GRuNGe Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 Cleveland is going to have 2 stud LTs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Beatings Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 Cleveland is going to have 2 stud LTs? Well, just because you draft somoene doesn't mean he ends up on your active roster. But I was really just attempting to be funny there Grunge, not actually predicting what will happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaP'N GRuNGe Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 2V...look at the huddle mock...I've got Minnesota on the clock at 2.3 and think they really need a WR here...who do you take? Jeffery Sanu Randle Hill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaP'N GRuNGe Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 Well, just because you draft somoene doesn't mean he ends up on your active roster. But I was really just attempting to be funny there Grunge, not actually predicting what will happen. I know...but I thought you were going for the Spielman is incompetent obvious joke but it turned into a so is Cleveland thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 2V...look at the huddle mock...I've got Minnesota on the clock at 2.3 and think they really need a WR here...who do you take? Jeffery Sanu Randle Hill bernard berrian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaP'N GRuNGe Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 bernard berrian Won't make it past Chicago in the 1st. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfv87 Posted March 30, 2012 Author Share Posted March 30, 2012 bernard berrian C'Mon Ref!! Throw a friggin flag already, that is excessive right there! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ice1 Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 Franchise quality QB's are very tough to come by. Tannehill has all the tools to be an uberstud so it is very possible Cleveland or a few other teams make the move to ensure they get him. This is a QB driven league and the talent differential between the top 3 QB's is razor thin. Luck and RGIII may be more NFL ready due to experience but talent wise they are all very close. Given this is a QB driven league it should not really surprise anyone if Tannehill ultimately goes #3. He can really play. This is a very strong QB class at the top. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piratesownninjas Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 Franchise quality QB's are very tough to come by. Tannehill has all the tools to be an uberstud so it is very possible Cleveland or a few other teams make the move to ensure they get him. This is a QB driven league and the talent differential between the top 3 QB's is razor thin. Luck and RGIII may be more NFL ready due to experience but talent wise they are all very close. Given this is a QB driven league it should not really surprise anyone if Tannehill ultimately goes #3. He can really play. This is a very strong QB class at the top. He also is extremely raw and is an interception factory. He should be a late first at best. They're freaking out drafting for a position instead of a quality player at a position of need. Tannehill may be good, but he's in large part, a huge gamble. I don't think you can spend a top 5 pick on a massive gamble/raw unproven guy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ice1 Posted March 31, 2012 Share Posted March 31, 2012 (edited) He also is extremely raw and is an interception factory. He should be a late first at best. They're freaking out drafting for a position instead of a quality player at a position of need. Tannehill may be good, but he's in large part, a huge gamble. I don't think you can spend a top 5 pick on a massive gamble/raw unproven guy. He is raw given he has only 19 starts but the NFL drafts based on ability. Learning to read defenses comes with coaching and practice. NFL teams draft on ability even more so at the QB position. He will be drafted based on what the team believes he will become at the next level. Huge gamble is not a phrase I have heard him described as by any scout. I assure you the NFL machine is well aware how inconsistent the Aggie WR's were dropping well over 60 passes last season. I agree there are several players more start ready at RB, DB, WR but those positions are very easy compared to QB. Teams are more concerned with the potential 3 years out at QB. Newton was an interception machine last year too. It takes time to learn how to read defenses. I do get opinions will vary widely on this player, i just believe he has franchise ability so teams will/should move way up to draft him. Edited March 31, 2012 by Ice1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted March 31, 2012 Share Posted March 31, 2012 He is a better QB than tebow is now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted April 1, 2012 Share Posted April 1, 2012 He is a better QB than tebow is now. So are you. And me. And Bronco Billy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.