WP Insider - Mike Mayock, Todd McShay believe Ryan Tannehill could go in the first ten picks

[DexterSackMachine]

i was hoping that we'd have a good shot at tannehill in the second round.. but i dont think we'd be safe picking him outside of 6.

Very True. And if we are outbid for RG3, Tanehill has the biggest upside of the other prospects so why not take him at 6? On one hand we are so desperate to find a franchise QB that we are willing to way overpay with multiple high picks, but at the same time many of us think it's crazy to take Tannehill 10-15 spots too high to solve the same problem. Doesn't make sense to me. I'm all in on RG3 if we can get him for something short of a Ricky Williams/Hershel Walker deal, but if we miss out and they take Tannehill at 6, I will think we still did pretty good.

[sportjunkie07]

Very True. And if we are outbid for RG3, Tanehill has the biggest upside of the other prospects so why not take him at 6? On one hand we are so desperate to find a franchise QB that we are willing to way overpay with multiple high picks, but at the same time many of us think it's crazy to take Tannehill 10-15 spots too high to solve the same problem. Doesn't make sense to me. I'm all in on RG3 if we can get him for something short of a Ricky Williams/Hershel Walker deal, but if we miss out and they take Tannehill at 6, I will think we still did pretty good.

im an aggie, so ive watched tannehill for a while. my main problem is that while he has some great measurables, there are some legitimate concerns for his successful transfer into the nfl. he's a bit of a gamble, and i dont like that with the number 6 pick. we'll be leaving a lot of safe talent on the board, which is a little frustrating. but we've gotta do what we've gotta do.

[The Robert Griffin Experience]

Why take Tannehill at all? Weeden is a better QB outright, he,s just old.

[sportjunkie07]

Why take Tannehill at all? Weeden is a better QB outright, he,s just old.

i think tannehill is better in our system than weeden is.

[Skins3000]

im an aggie, so ive watched tannehill for a while. my main problem is that while he has some great measurables, there are some legitimate concerns for his successful transfer into the nfl. he's a bit of a gamble, and i dont like that with the number 6 pick. we'll be leaving a lot of safe talent on the board, which is a little frustrating. but we've gotta do what we've gotta do.

I must agree with you, I am not all in on a project quarterback in the first round and for that matter in the top 10. Playing only 19 games as a quarterback that was converted from a wide receiver is taking a huge risk. If the Skins do not secure RG3 and I doubt that would happen because I think the team is willing to mortgage the farm this year in the draft because free agency will be huge for the Skins. At any rate though if for some reason the Skins do not get RG3 please take the best available player and attempt to draft a qb in next year draft but the problem with that theory is the Skins will once again be in a position on the outside looking in due to the fact the team is competitive and will win games that keep them out of the top 5 positions. It is now or never in my opinion and I am not opposed to the team doing what they need to do to finally get our own franchise qb that has the tools to make the transition and not be some project that requires six years to only find out the project was only a backup.

[DexterSackMachine]

im an aggie, so ive watched tannehill for a while. my main problem is that while he has some great measurables, there are some legitimate concerns for his successful transfer into the nfl. he's a bit of a gamble, and i dont like that with the number 6 pick. we'll be leaving a lot of safe talent on the board, which is a little frustrating. but we've gotta do what we've gotta do.

As someone who actually knows something about Tannehill (as opposed to the rest of us who have youtube and articles by "experts"), what are the weak areas of his game that worry you the most?

[Slateman]

Tannehill is a huge gamble. He has limited experience at quarterback. He's a converted receiver.

This is what signing McNabb has gotten us. *sigh*

[Hitman21ST]

Tannehill is a huge gamble. He has limited experience at quarterback. He's a converted receiver.

This is what signing McNabb has gotten us. *sigh*

Not exactly right. He's a converted receiver, but at A&M he was a converted QB. He played QB in high school, WR for his first 2-1/2 years, then back to QB.

[Slateman]

Not exactly right. He's a converted receiver, but at A&M he was a converted QB. He played QB in high school, WR for his first 2-1/2 years, then back to QB.

That makes him a converted receiver. Period.

Weeden > Tannehill

Don't give me any of this "system" garbage. Exactly what in Tannehil reminds anyone of Schaub? Nothing. Tannehill is not worth a first rounder.

[Skins3000]

Not exactly right. He's a converted receiver, but at A&M he was a converted QB. He played QB in high school, WR for his first 2-1/2 years, then back to QB.

Why did A&M convert Ryan to a Wr? Just curious.

[SilkyDiamonds]

Why did A&M convert Ryan to a Wr? Just curious.

Because he lost the QB competition each of his 1st 3 years to Jerrod Johnson, NFL practice squad journeyman QB

[flock53]

No to this guy. Could be blah blah because he maybe the 3rd best QB blah blah.....Id rather have Foles later

[Hitman21ST]

Don't give me any of this "system" garbage. Exactly what in Tannehil reminds anyone of Schaub? Nothing. Tannehill is not worth a first rounder.

Your implication was that he had never played a down of QB before, which he had.

He has pocket presence, mobility, and can make the throws. He needs polishing, but he has the tools necessary

[LoudMouth12thMan]

Tannehill is not even close to being worthy of the #6 pick. No way Shanahan picks him at 6. There are so many players at positions of need that we could grab in the first round by either sticking with the 6 pick or moving out of it. If a player doesn't grade out at least close to where you're picking, you don't force a pick with the position of need approach just b/c you missed on a better player that came off the board before your pick. That's a BIG no-no and Shanahan won't do it. I'll eat my words if I'm wrong, but I'm confident that if we miss on RGIII that Tannehill will not be picked by Washington at #6. Just b/c other teams forced picks last year doesn't mean it's the right approach. Generally speaking, it's bad drafting to force a player into a slot he doesn't come close to grading out for.

[Skins3000]

Because he lost the QB competition each of his 1st 3 years to Jerrod Johnson, NFL practice squad journeyman QB

So Ryan lost out to a qb that is now a Nfl practice squad journeyman and expected to be drafted in the top ten. Really, and so the fan base is suppose to believe that this would be an upgrade to Beck and Grossman because Ryan played in a pro style offense and have some mobility to perform the waggles and boots the team run? I saw approximately one game of Ryan and I will admit that much but what I saw was nothing better than a younger John Beck. Some are going to say Brady did not start in Michigan early in his college career but once again one in a thousand quarterbacks.

[Chump Bailey]

No to this guy. Could be blah blah because he maybe the 3rd best QB blah blah.....Id rather have Foles later

Some of you guys have such Tannephobia for some reason

I'd definitely pass on Foles. He certainly does remind of JC in a bad way. Weeden and Cousins are head and shoulders better IMO.

[Missouri_Skins_Fan]

Some of you guys have such Tannephobia for some reason

I'd definitely pass on Foles. He certainly does remind of JC in a bad way. Weeden and Cousins are head and shoulders better IMO.

In fairness to those who don't want Tannehill.

I don't think it's so much "we don't want Tannehill, cause he sucks" is what's going on with the majority of anti-Tannehill base.

In fact, he probably will be very good and could possibly be a Franchise QB?

>

>>

>>>

>>>>

>>>>>

In 5 yrs..

The Redskins want RG3 or Luck because both can come in, go under center and play immediately.

Does that mean we are destine to make Playoffs their rookie season?

Absolutely not, but we understand that both have the smarts, the experience & the intangibles to make our team better than what Rex or Beck did here.

Forget the fact that Tannehill doesn't have what Luck & RG3 bring as far as the "extra" intangibles...

He also lacks the experience to boot.

"most" Redskins fans believe we are a "GOOD" QB away from not only competing for a Division title, but maybe making deep playoffs runs as well.

Can we do it in RG3 or Lucks 1st yr?

Probably not...but maybe his 2nd...shoot maybe even their 3rd yr.

Tannehill needs to sit for at least 1 season & probably 2 seasons.

Heck, he probably needs to do what Aaron Rodgers did in Green Bay while under Favre.

The point is...

If we ALREADY had a Franchise QB like a Manning or a Brady or someone of seasoned experience, the Tannehill would be PERFECT.

He could sit and wait and learn...

We can't do that...

We need good QB

RIGHT NOW...

One that we can throw in there right now & of course have the rookie growing pains.

But be ready to lead this team by year 2 or 3 at the MAX.

Heck, Shanahan is in yr 3 of his 5 yr deal, in rebuilding.

Do you want your Franchise QB to sit on the bench for 3 seasons & find out in 2014 if he's worth a damn? Cause that's likely what Tannehill needs to do.

RG3 or Luck?

I think they could play right now!

In fact..I think sitting RG3 for a season?

Would be a mistake...

And that's why we are all "No GOD No...Not Tannehill"

OK..I can't speak for everyone on this issue, but it's the MAIN reason why, I don't want him.

As far as his skill set.

I'm sure he'll be great.

[MartinC]

The point is...

If we ALREADY had a Franchise QB like a Manning or a Brady or someone of seasoned experience, the Tannehill would be PERFECT.

Which is why most posters looking at scenarios where we pick Tannehill also condition that selection with signing Peyton Manning in free agency so Tannehill can spend a couple of years on the bench learning the offense and developing as a QB.

I'd be really happy if we got RGIII but not at any cost and there are other options we should and I am sure are exploring - Sign Peyton and draft Tannehill is almost certainly one of them.

[Burgold]

The Redskins want RG3 or Luck because both can come in, go under center and play immediately.

Do you really believe that? Seems to me that almost every quarterback ever drafted would benefit from a year on the bench learning... possibly with Brady being an exception. Even Newton as explosive and impressive as he was could probably have benefitted from time watching and learning.

Whichever qb we draft, if we draft one, is going to face a steep learning curve and take a lot of lumps. Different system, different speed, different quality of opponent and planning. I don't think RGIII will be ready to go from snap one. If we get him he'll probably have to do that, but I doubt he'll be ready for it.

[Missouri_Skins_Fan]

Which is why most posters looking at scenarios where we pick Tannehill also condition that selection with signing Peyton Manning in free agency so Tannehill can spend a couple of years on the bench learning the offense and developing as a QB.

I'd be really happy if we got RGIII but not at any cost and there are other options we should and I am sure are exploring - Sign Peyton and draft Tannehill is almost certainly one of them.

I would totally be cool with that idea.

Sign P. Manning & draft Tannehill.

But I don't want him @#6 though.

i would rather risk losing him by trading down, than reaching.

I would rather us trade down to the teens, maybe pick up an extra 2nd or 3rd and then draft him.

If we could trade to #10 (In front of K.C. & Seattle) and pick up the 3rd?

That would be sweet.

But I wouldn't pick him any higher than #10.

[Chump Bailey]

In 5 yrs..

The Redskins want RG3 or Luck because both can come in, go under center and play immediately.

Eh, I just feel we're really, really cutting Tannehill short in some regards. I'm also not an advocate in favor of sitting a rookie QB. There's going to be learning curve for all of them and I really don't think RT's curve is that drastically different. I see a very smart young man who has accomplished much in a short period of time. We'll see come April though. I'm not going to jump out of a window if RT is the selection at #6. I'm of the opinion that Mike and Kyle like RT more than any of us think.

[HigSkin]

Which is why most posters looking at scenarios where we pick Tannehill also condition that selection with signing Peyton Manning in free agency so Tannehill can spend a couple of years on the bench learning the offense and developing as a QB.

I'd be really happy if we got RGIII but not at any cost and there are other options we should and I am sure are exploring - Sign Peyton and draft Tannehill is almost certainly one of them.

Totally agree with you and have said it often here regarding Skins Plan A and Plan B - It's Manning/Tannehill, maybe Cousins or RGiii/Orton, maybe Rex

[MartinC]

I would totally be cool with that idea.

Sign P. Manning & draft Tannehill.

But I don't want him @#6 though.

i would rather risk losing him by trading down, than reaching.

I would rather us trade down to the teens, maybe pick up an extra 2nd or 3rd and then draft him.

If we could trade to #10 (In front of K.C. & Seattle) and pick up the 3rd?

That would be sweet.

But I wouldn't pick him any higher than #10.

I agree with you that he is a reach at #6 and a trade down is the ideal way to draft him but I doubt he gets past Seattle so if we really rate him and are seriously targeting him you might have to take him at #6. All depends on what grade we give him and what Shanny really thinks of him. I'm pretty sure trading up to get RGIII is plan A but Peyton plus Tannehill is not a bad plan B.

[HigSkin]

I agree with you that he is a reach at #6 and a trade down is the ideal way to draft him but I doubt he gets past Seattle so if we really rate him and are seriously targeting him you might have to take him at #6. All depends on what grade we give him and what Shanny really thinks of him. I'm pretty sure trading up to get RGIII is plan A but Peyton plus Tannehill is not a bad plan B.

Except that you've got to decide on Manning before RGiii cause he's gonna be snatched up by some team in the next 10 days. I view the "Plans" the other way around.

[Missouri_Skins_Fan]

Do you really believe that? Seems to me that almost every quarterback ever drafted would benefit from a year on the bench learning... possibly with Brady being an exception. Even Newton as explosive and impressive as he was could probably have benefitted from time watching and learning.

Whichever qb we draft, if we draft one, is going to face a steep learning curve and take a lot of lumps. Different system, different speed, different quality of opponent and planning. I don't think RGIII will be ready to go from snap one. If we get him he'll probably have to do that, but I doubt he'll be ready for it.

Absolutely.

It's an option to sit him, but not required Burgold.

P.Manning started his rookie yr. (Colts went 1-15)

If they cut Manning & draft Luck, I would bet Luck does the same.

Eli started his rookie yr, but because of a Warner injury. (but their plan was to sit him till ready)

Of course Cam Newton started as a rookie.

Both Joe Flacco & Matt Ryan started as rookies.

Mark Sanchez started a a rookie.

It will just depend on what Shanahan feels, is best for RG3.

But I have no doubt that RG3 is intelligent enough, to learn the playbook as a rookie.

I think either way, there will be some growing pains for sure.

---------- Post added March-4th-2012 at 07:01 AM ----------

But I agree that a Plan B of getting Peyton Manning & drafting Ryan Tannehill, would be a very nice move.

I would love it, if we could trade down to like the 10-17 range.

Pick up an extra 2nd rounder & somehow land Tannehill there.

We could do some serious damage with two 2nd rounders.

2nd rd)#39

&

2nd rd)#42-to-#48 range

Could have some good talent, drop in that area.

Start Manning

sit Tannehill 1st rounder)

and land 2 studs in the 2nd