Tannehill would be this year's number 1 overall QB prospect?

just stirring up conversation in this dead period before the draft...

so, Todd McShay has posted his rankings for the current QB class and compared those with his top rated QB's over the past decade.

http://www.espn.com/nfl/draft2018/story/_/id/23115321/todd-mcshay-nfl-draft-grades-every-first-round-qb-2008-plus-2018-top-qbs

you'll be happy to know he saw Tannehill (coming out of college) as a higher rated prospect than any of the QB's in this years draft. he has Tannehill at number 9 with a draft grade of 94 - one position above this years highest rated Sam Darnold. of course he has Carson Wentz at 14th with a grade of 91, so i am not too sure how much we should trust McShay's pre-draft QB talent evaluation.

how do you rank the prospects in this year's QB class and where would you have put Tannehill?

Tanny's class was a deep one.  Luck and Griffin both looked fantastic before injury, and Wilson has turned out to be the best of the bunch, though the fact that he lasted until the 3rd round tells you a lot of teams missed on him.

This year has six above average prospects IMO so it is deeper than most.  Maybe 7 if one considers Falk to be a sleeper.  I think Rudolph is being underrated, and has a chance to be a very good value for someone the way that Wilson and Carr turned out to be in recent years.  I think Jackson has a real chance to succeed on the Vick/rookie Griffin level if he can stay healthy.  I'd probably rank Rosen, Mayfield and Darnold in that order, with no real idea of where to put Allen (he's the most likely bust IMO).  I'd have Rudolph fourth and would have no problems taking him. Allen could be the best OR the worst of the bunch.

If Tannehill were coming out this year, well, it's kind of like Allen, you're projecting based on limited info. Tanny hadn't started very long going into 2012 but the physical tools were there. He's turned out to be OK, all things considered. We have just had a very bad mix of coaches and front office to the players for a very long time. I'm not sure Dan Marino could have dragged Philbin past the first round of the playoffs.

HalCHorn wrote:I think Rudolph is being underrated

agreed. i'm tempted to put him at my no. 2 behind Mayfield. throwing percentage and the ratio of TD (high) and INT (low) to attempts are the biggest determinants for me for QBs coming out of college. very rarely do college QBs have poor college stats in those areas and then improve in the pros. both Mayfield and Rudolph stand above the others in those categories.

HalCHorn wrote:Allen could be the best OR the worst of the bunch.

i see Allen as this year's Brandon Weeden. i'm not sold on Rosen and i think he'll never be more than average/bottom half of the league type QB. Darnold can look so good at times and so pedestrian at others. i think he may post a good (not great) year or so and then go the way of most every other recent USC QB. i'm not sure what to think of Jackson, but i do know his style of play is not sustainable in the NFL.

so yea, i guess outside of the potential for Mayfield to be really special (or a colossal failure), i guess Tannehill would've ranked higher (or as high) as most of this year's crop.

What a load of crap. Tannehill would be lucky to be picked 5th if he came out this year.

Darnold is light years ahead of where Tannehill was, in every way. Allen has FAR more potential than Tannehill ever did. Mayfield is everything that Tannehill is not...Mayfield is a born leader and a field general.

You've got to remember - these guys are all QBs. Tannehill was a QB/WR. Developmentally, Tannehill simply wasn't close to the level of any of the top guys this year.

mercury22nathan wrote:throwing percentage and the ratio of TD (high) and INT (low) to attempts are the biggest determinants for me for QBs coming out of college.

okay, so maybe i really need to re-think how i evaluate QBs. recent college QBs with high completion percentages and great TD to int ratios.

https://twitter.com/fbgchase/status/986777453153669121

wow, what a shitty list of NFL QBs. (cough, cough, note no. 4 on the list)

This kind of thread makes me salty, because Nawrocki apparently retired so no NFL draft guide this year. I'd LOVE to compare his grades on QBs with the previous three years.

Just IMO, from what I'm reading, there are TONS OF QUESTIONS on all of these guys. In other words, there is no Andrew Luck. Also, no one knows if the Browns will take Darnold (that was the thinking about 8 weeks ago), or whether they are now onto Allen instead.

Personally, if I was a fan of a team needing a QB (haha), I'd be very scared to draft one of the top 4 high in the first round. Especially with bust-proof, blue chip talent available. Namely, Chubb, Nelson, and Barkley.

Say all you want about drafting a guard high in round 1. But Nelson by all accounts is bust-proof and will play at an all pro level for ten years. I'd take that ALL DAY over say.... Dion Jordan.

I do put a lot of weight on completion percentage - but I'm not necessarily looking to see who is best in that category. I like to see QBs that are consistently in the 60s, and hopefully increasing their completion % each season. If I see a QB in his final year of college completing in the 50s, that's a red flag.

That said, you also have to take into account the team they played for. Josh Allen, for example, didn't have a lot of talent around him and completed just 56% of his passes with only 16 TDs this season. In contrast, Mayfield had a stellar OL and excellent skill players around him and his numbers were insane.

Allen is very intriguing, because despite his mediocre stats he has a Hall of Fame-caliber arm and you can see obvious improvement in his skillset this entire offseason - he's clearly putting in a lot of work to get better. He strikes me as a guy that can take a GIGANTIC leap forward with NFL coaching and talent around him. He's got all the tools. Darnold is my favorite QB in this class by far, but Allen has the highest ceiling IMO - and seems very coachable, which is key.

Back to the original topic - if you look at Tannehill before the draft and Allen before the draft, it looks like a little kid compared to a man...the difference in skillset is that significant IMO - and Allen is clearly way ahead of Tannehill in terms of natural skill.

white1 wrote:

Personally, if I was a fan of a team needing a QB (haha), I'd be very scared to draft one of the top 4 high in the first round.  Especially with bust-proof, blue chip talent available.  Namely, Chubb, Nelson, and Barkley.

It's a great point...but you have to get the QB when you can. The Browns are in great position to get BOTH a QB and a blue-chip player too, assuming they keep both picks. That's the ideal.

But a team like the Jets...they MUST get a QB. There's really no choice.

It's a great point...but you have to get the QB when you can.

I'd add one edit, the RIGHT QB.

Of all these prospects, there has to be at least one team sold on them. And the teams that are sold, have to be thinking "this can be my franchise QB for the next 10 years."

If that's the case, great. And I agree... you MUST take a QB if you think he is your franchise caliber guy.

However, if you are not sold... DO NOT SETTLE because it is a QB. In fact, I'd try like hell to trade down, and if that fails, draft another player.

I totally agree you have to take the QB when you can. But you better have conviction it's your franchise guy. Because taking the wrong QB is worse than not taking one at all. I'd argue the Browns are suffering from that very thing. They are taking QBs all the time. Just the wrong ones. And they still haven't recovered.

white1 wrote:

It's a great point...but you have to get the QB when you can.

I'd add one edit, the RIGHT QB.

Of all these prospects, there has to be at least one team sold on them.  And the teams that are sold, have to be thinking "this can be my franchise QB for the next 10 years."

If that's the case, great.  And I agree... you MUST take a QB if you think he is your franchise caliber guy.

However, if you are not sold... DO NOT SETTLE because it is a QB.  In fact, I'd try like hell to trade down, and if that fails, draft another player.

I totally agree you have to take the QB when you can.  But you better have conviction it's your franchise guy.  Because taking the wrong QB is worse than not taking one at all.  I'd argue the Browns are suffering from that very thing.  They are taking QBs all the time.  Just the wrong ones.  And they still haven't recovered.

Yep, agree 1000% and that's a very important caveat. At the top of the draft, don't just take a QB to take one - take one that you believe will be the face of your franchise and get you where you want to be.

The "face of the franchise" part is key - you want a guy that you can market that will generate interest for your team and put asses in the seats. In the Jets' case, I think Mayfield can be that guy. I generally hate small QBs, but man, that guys looiks like the total package.

And regardless of what any of us thinks of Tannehill on the field, he is NOT that guy for Miami...he's more of a JAG than an actual "face of the franchise"...too much of a "dud" and not enough of a "stud" in terms of personality and intangibles.

Wow, look at this link.

The Browns are so unsure of the first QB they take.... it's looking possible they will ADD ANOTHER later in the draft.

To me, this just underscores the lack of certainty around even the top 4 QB prospects this year.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2018/04/19/the-browns-have-actually-considered-taking-two-quarterbacks/

white1 wrote:Wow, look at this link.

The Browns are so unsure of the first QB they take.... it's looking possible they will ADD ANOTHER later in the draft.

To me, this just underscores the lack of certainty around even the top 4 QB prospects this year.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2018/04/19/the-browns-have-actually-considered-taking-two-quarterbacks/

The Browns have a ton of picks, so that approach makes sense - like what the Skins did drafting both RGIII and Cousins the same year. Double down and get it right...the QB position has been a black hole for too long in Cleveland.

No matter how much you like a particular QB, the reality is that you just never know how they'll work out. If you have the resources, doubling down is the way to go...improve the odds and maybe give yourself a future trade commodity too.

The Browns solidified their flexibility in this draft when they signe Tyrod Taylor. While I don’t think that he is an elite QB by any means, he is a vast experienced starter than those before him. I personally like Tyrod Taylor and hoped Miami gave him a look.

The Browns have a good nucleus of young talent and experienced veterans. Landry makes them stronger and if they can get Barkley, the pressure on the QB is far and away less than in previous years.

The draft is a crapshoot.

We have professionals whose JOB it is to study and understand this stuff every day, and how many of them get every pick right?

None of them because there are too many variables.

Hal makes THE point, and I emphasize THE, because to me, WHERE you get Drafted, and WHO Drafts you, could make all the difference. Had the Steelers had the guts to draft Dan Marino, a hometown boy, and gave the boot to Terry Bradshaw, anybody want to guess how many Super Bowls Dan the Man would have in his resume?

Ask the Colts if they would rather have Andrew Luck or Russell Wilson? Sure it may be injury that undoes Luck's career, but....

And would Russell be the success he is today had the Dolphins drafted him? Not likely IMO.

That's why all these draft grades and stats are nearly useless IMO. They are all just one part of the total equation. Important, yes, but not nearly as important as WHERE the player gets drafted IMO.