YoloinOhio Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 @theScore: The Dolphins and Ryan Tannehill are reportedly discussing a 7-year, $105-million extension. http://t.co/QYyrZBFyCmhttp://t.co/mPemoPyvvE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 (edited) Good luck with that. Average QBs at $100M is a recipe for disaster. I'd much rather Orton at $5M over Tannehill at $15M. Edited February 9, 2015 by Kirby Jackson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stony Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 Curious if this is one of the "new" QB contracts or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fadingpain Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 Some may not agree with the term or compensation, but this proves a simple fact of the NFL. If a QB worth a damned has been discovered, he will be unavailable on the free market as long as he is worth a damned. If a QB is available, it is because he is NOT worth a damned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 (edited) Good luck with that. Average QBs at $100M is a recipe for disaster. I'd much rather Orton at $5M than Tannehill at $15M.Yup. You'd almost venture they would come out ahead trading tannehill and rolling with Moore. Wonder what a 100m RT fetches is trade.... Other than flacco, has anyone played chicken with one of these mid tier qbs? I'm so curious what the market would bear out if these guys ever hit it. I guess Alex smith with the trade and 17m per year is the closest? Curious if this is one of the "new" QB contracts or not.You mean the kaepernick year-to-year model? Probably not far removed Edited February 10, 2015 by NoSaint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 (edited) Some may not agree with the term or compensation, but this proves a simple fact of the NFL. If a QB worth a damned has been discovered, he will be unavailable on the free market as long as he is worth a damned. If a QB is available, it is because he is NOT worth a damned. I think that it's a step further. It is like the Dalton situation. He is good enough to be your starter and not good enough to win a championship. At the same time you can't cut ties. I believe that having an average QB (Kaep, Dalton, Tannehill) on a big contract is worse than a slightly below average QB on a good deal. Edited February 10, 2015 by Kirby Jackson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Tuesday Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 His ceiling is Alex Smith. If he hits it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 His ceiling is Alex Smith. If he hits it. He's already had a better year than Alex Smith has ever had. And he's a third year player. What makes you think his ceiling is a lesser QB? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fadingpain Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 He's already had a better year than Alex Smith has ever had. And he's a third year player. What makes you think his ceiling is a lesser QB? This is my point entirely. We can hem and haw over just how good he is, or where his potential ceiling lies. The reality is that this guy is about to be locked up long term as though he is Joe Montana in his prime. The guys floating around this league as being "available" are not even on a Tannehill level, more or less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 This is my point entirely. We can hem and haw over just how good he is, or where his potential ceiling lies. The reality is that this guy is about to be locked up long term as though he is Joe Montana in his prime. The guys floating around this league as being "available" are not even on a Tannehill level, more or less. I get that's your point. That's just that market forces at work. A QB's price is what some team is willing to pay. Cutler got the same thing. So did Kaep and Dalton. Be adequate and you're worth your weight in gold. Tanny is good though. I like him as a QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QCity Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 Curious if this is one of the "new" QB contracts or not. I would bet it would be a Dalton 2-year prove-it deal. Don't lock in on the big $100M number. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K D Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 Good. I'm not worried about the Fish with Tannehill. We should be beating them for the next 7 years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 Mmmmmm...processed fish... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 Good. I'm not worried about the Fish with Tannehill. We should be beating them for the next 7 years We split with them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jobu Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 Some may not agree with the term or compensation, but this proves a simple fact of the NFL. If a QB worth a damned has been discovered, he will be unavailable on the free market as long as he is worth a damned. If a QB is available, it is because he is NOT worth a damned. The more you post, the more clueless you appear to be. What about Jim Plunkett, Trent Dilfer, Rich Gannon, Brett Favre, Kurt Warner, Steve Young, and on and on and on? Your argument is flawed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 Mario Williams likes this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K D Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 We split with them. That was a pathetic offensive effort and those responsible are now gone (thank god). We have a new offense now. We have won the last 3 of 4 by a wide margin. I expect utter domination this year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 That was a pathetic offensive effort and those responsible are now gone (thank god). We have a new offense now. We have won the last 3 of 4 by a wide margin. I expect utter domination this year Wide margin? We won one of those on a last second strip sack. Don't have the expectations you do for our "new offense." Some of those responsible are still on this team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted February 10, 2015 Author Share Posted February 10, 2015 That was a pathetic offensive effort and those responsible are now gone (thank god). We have a new offense now. We have won the last 3 of 4 by a wide margin. I expect utter domination this yearand it was TNF on the road - not an excuse but many teams have their worst performance of the year in that situation. Still, they didn't play well and deserved to lose. But the "rivalry" has been tilted Buffalo's way since Tannehill got there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HOUSE Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 That boy has no feel for the pass rush.....MISTAKE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts