FantasySharks.com

There are two types of Fantasy Football Owners: Sharks and Chum, which are you?
It is currently Tue 10.21.2014, 10:10

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 196 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 14  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon 04.02.2012, 09:06 
Offline
Megalodon
Megalodon
User avatar

Joined: Fri 03.28.2008, 14:43
Posts: 16722
Sand$: 17975
Donate
Location: Griff is a Demi God. I know this because I am one also.
min.gif
At this point Tannehill is a top 10 pick. New question is if Brock Osweiler goes in the first round.

Me thinks yes.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon 04.02.2012, 09:42 
Offline
Supreme Megalodon
Supreme Megalodon
User avatar

Joined: Sat 05.16.2009, 09:57
Posts: 30228
Sand$: 36024
Donate
Location: Arkansas
mia.gif
badgasman9 wrote:
At this point Tannehill is a top 10 pick. New question is if Brock Osweiler goes in the first round.

Me thinks yes.


3-4 round, imo.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon 04.02.2012, 11:17 
Offline
Leopard Shark
User avatar

Joined: Sun 09.05.2010, 13:17
Posts: 129
Sand$: 26
Donate
Location: Chapel Hill
car.gif
badgasman9 wrote:
At this point Tannehill is a top 10 pick. New question is if Brock Osweiler goes in the first round.

Me thinks yes.


I'm curious how much last year's trend of reaching for QB's continues. Wouldn't be surprised to see Weeden taken at the tail end of the 1st or very early 2nd.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon 04.02.2012, 11:57 
Offline
Great White Shark
Great White Shark

Joined: Mon 09.27.2010, 23:48
Posts: 5973
Sand$: 11914
Donate
gb.gif
Rammsteinfan1988 wrote:
badgasman9 wrote:
At this point Tannehill is a top 10 pick. New question is if Brock Osweiler goes in the first round.

Me thinks yes.


I'm curious how much last year's trend of reaching for QB's continues. Wouldn't be surprised to see Weeden taken at the tail end of the 1st or very early 2nd.

Depends whether or not the Browns take Tannehill and leave Miami hanging.


I mean, the current candidates for needing a QB, backup or otherwise, are:
Colts
Redskins
Browns
Dolphins
Chiefs
Buccaneers (they really need a vet to mentor Freeman)

The 1st 4 are 1st/2nd round candidates, the last few are 2nd/3rd/4th round QB candidates.


The rest of the teams are pretty well invested in their QBs, so they wouldn't be interested in a QB beyond a 2nd or 3rd string. That's 4th+ round territory. I don't believe teams like the Cardinals who are questionable at QB, but invested, have the foresight to get involved in a run on QBs.


So, no, I don't think there's a perfect storm for a run on QBs this year.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon 04.02.2012, 12:49 
Offline
Megalodon
Megalodon
User avatar

Joined: Fri 03.28.2008, 14:43
Posts: 16722
Sand$: 17975
Donate
Location: Griff is a Demi God. I know this because I am one also.
min.gif
Elmagister wrote:
badgasman9 wrote:
At this point Tannehill is a top 10 pick. New question is if Brock Osweiler goes in the first round.

Me thinks yes.


3-4 round, imo.


I agree. But since Ponder and Locker went 1st. At this point you can rule out ( provided the browns take tanne ) even the Jets, Phins , 9er's , hawks, cards, bills, ect. Maybe not with there slotted pick but trading up pick. I doubt it gets QB insane again but you never know. Tanne should not be thought of as a 1st round QB top 15. But he is.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon 04.02.2012, 13:27 
Offline
Supreme Megalodon
Supreme Megalodon
User avatar

Joined: Sat 05.16.2009, 09:57
Posts: 30228
Sand$: 36024
Donate
Location: Arkansas
mia.gif
badgasman9 wrote:
Elmagister wrote:
badgasman9 wrote:
At this point Tannehill is a top 10 pick. New question is if Brock Osweiler goes in the first round.

Me thinks yes.


3-4 round, imo.


I agree. But since Ponder and Locker went 1st. At this point you can rule out ( provided the browns take tanne ) even the Jets, Phins , 9er's , hawks, cards, bills, ect. Maybe not with there slotted pick but trading up pick. I doubt it gets QB insane again but you never know. Tanne should not be thought of as a 1st round QB top 15. But he is.

True.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon 04.02.2012, 14:05 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Fri 07.07.2006, 10:59
Posts: 44454
Sand$: 98918
Donate
Location: The North Coast
badgasman9 wrote:
I agree. But since Ponder and Locker went 1st. At this point you can rule out ( provided the browns take tanne ) even the Jets, Phins , 9er's , hawks, cards, bills, ect. Maybe not with there slotted pick but trading up pick. I doubt it gets QB insane again but you never know. Tanne should not be thought of as a 1st round QB top 15. But he is.
3 teams making mistakes over valuing QB's last year doesn't mean it is now the right thing for others to do it too. Wouldn't surprise me if it happens, but it just means there are even more dumb teams in the league for the talent rich to take advantage of.

I like Osweiler as a day 3 flier (more than Weeden, Cousins, etc.), but anytime before then is just plain dumb.

_________________
Follow me @mchamberlin32


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 04.10.2012, 10:47 
Offline
Great White Shark
Great White Shark
User avatar

Joined: Wed 10.18.2006, 14:09
Posts: 5487
Sand$: 1135
Donate
Location: The Great Northwest
gb.gif
hawkdogger wrote:
Markulous wrote:
I really hope Miami wants this guy. That will make us the perfect candidate to trade back at 7 with someone like KC.

But who knows, really...He could pull a Clausen and fall pretty far.



Is KC interested in Tannehill? I had not heard that here.
I w/d hope they wouldn't do that.


Don't know how much of this is a predraft smokescreen:

Quote:
The Kansas City Star believes the Chiefs "haven't seemed sold" on Matt Cassel based on their offseason actions.

Coach Romeo Crennel has pointed to Cassel's lack of "consistency" as a concern, and the Star suggests Kansas City as a possible destination for Ryan Tannehill if he gets by the Browns and Dolphins in the top ten. In Cassel's last 11 starts, including the 2010 playoffs, he's completed only 180-of-320 passes (56.2 percent) for 1,898 yards (5.93 YPA) with ten touchdown passes and 16 turnovers.
Source: Kansas City Star Apr 8 - 3:18 PM

_________________
I have a gambling problem. I never win.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 04.10.2012, 11:52 
Offline
Megalodon
Megalodon
User avatar

Joined: Mon 05.31.2004, 04:01
Posts: 14516
Sand$: 15551
Donate
I think Cassell's gonna have a pretty good year with Daboll as the OC, the return of Charles, and the addition of Hillis.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 04.10.2012, 12:30 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sat 08.01.2009, 23:39
Posts: 29859
Sand$: 49091
Donate
Location: https://twitter.com/endzoneview
nyj.gif
SonOfDad wrote:
I think Cassell's gonna have a pretty good year with Daboll as the OC, the return of Charles, and the addition of Hillis.



x2

WAH Charles, I think the Chiefs are going to be dangerous.

_________________
Upon Further Review - Week 7


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 04.10.2012, 14:32 
Offline
Great White Shark
Great White Shark

Joined: Mon 09.27.2010, 23:48
Posts: 5973
Sand$: 11914
Donate
gb.gif
fishfry wrote:
Quote:
Coach Romeo Crennel has pointed to Cassel's lack of "consistency" as a concern, and the Star suggests Kansas City as a possible destination for Ryan Tannehill if he gets by the Browns and Dolphins in the top ten. In Cassel's last 11 starts, including the 2010 playoffs, he's completed only 180-of-320 passes (56.2 percent) for 1,898 yards (5.93 YPA) with ten touchdown passes and 16 turnovers.
Source: Kansas City Star Apr 8 - 3:18 PM


IMO, Tannehill doesn't last past 8.

Philbin, Ireland and crew were all in attendence at pro-day. Supposedly Sherman is on record for believing in Tannehill.

Beyond that, we haven't heard a peep from anyone in Miami. Which means they don't want to tip their hand. To say yes or no would probably trigger someone to react irrationally and trade past them. Above all else, I believe they understand they have more rebuilding to do than just QB, which is why they haven't traded up (means giving up a next years #1).


The question is valid as to whether Osweiler or Weeden sneak into the 1st.

That answer really depends how secure KC is in Cassel. If they're sincere about wanting a #2 "purely for competition", then they'll wait til the 2nd and get Weeden/Osweiler. Otherwise, drafting a QB in the 1st round pretty much makes you obligated to start him, at some point. Either this year, or the next year. You don't go around drafting QBs in the 1st to throw them away. If KC really wants Tannehill, they'll draft-day trade up with STL or JAX.


Otherwise Weeden would probably go to the Browns in the #36 pick or possibly even the #22. With Osweiler to KC in the 2nd. I think the Browns interest in Tannehill is chaff, it's not Holmgren's style to draft a 1st round QB.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 04.10.2012, 14:46 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Fri 07.07.2006, 10:59
Posts: 44454
Sand$: 98918
Donate
Location: The North Coast
I don't see the Fins passing on Tannehill either, but if they do the Chiefs picking him wouldn't shock me. They've been sniffing around QB's all off season. Pioli strikes me as the type to be too stubborn for his own good and would continue to throw Cassel out there even though he just isn't the guy, but they've spent a lot of time and energy on the QB position for it to all be a smoke screen. I think at the end of the day they're at least looking at somebody. Hopefully it's Weeden. I'm not worried about the Browns taking Tannehill too early, but I am worried we'll take Weeden too early.

_________________
Follow me @mchamberlin32


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 04.10.2012, 14:56 
Offline
Blue Shark
User avatar

Joined: Mon 08.27.2007, 09:01
Posts: 462
Sand$: 1171
Donate
nyg.gif
It seems QBs are more popular, or valuable, in the draft due to new rookie salary cap.

All the talk is that QB is a key, if not the key position, on the team.

Locker, 2011 #8 pick, signed a $12.4m contract over four years. This compared to Bradford's six year, $78m with $50m guaranteed just a couple of years earlier.

If my team needs a QB, I may very well over reach and draft a QB a half a round, or even a whole round, early. The reward seems to out weigh the risks, when the cost is taken into account.

I can see Tannehill going 5-10. I can also see Weeden and Osweiler going earlier than expected.

_________________
12 Team Standard PPR except QB get 5pts-TD,1pt-30yds
*-starter
QB: Vick*
RB: McCoy*; Charles*; Bradshaw; D. Martin*
WR: Cruz*; Julio*; Blackmon ; Cobb
TE: Pettigrew*
K: Janik*
DEF: Sea; Cin*
IDP: Dqwell*


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 04.10.2012, 15:03 
Offline
Great White Shark
Great White Shark

Joined: Mon 09.27.2010, 23:48
Posts: 5973
Sand$: 11914
Donate
gb.gif
OarChambo wrote:
Hopefully it's Weeden. I'm not worried about the Browns taking Tannehill too early, but I am worried we'll take Weeden too early.


Well, if they're going to be choosy, they have to take him early. #37 minimum.

As you said, too many other teams need a back-up plan. Bills, Chiefs, Broncos, Cardinals, Ravens. If the right guy fell far enough, any one of them would snatch them up.

I'm not saying all of them would take 2nd, or even 3rd, round QBs, but each has their magical price tag.


Last edited by jnadke on Tue 04.10.2012, 15:26, edited 10 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 04.10.2012, 15:06 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Fri 07.07.2006, 10:59
Posts: 44454
Sand$: 98918
Donate
Location: The North Coast
sebringc4 wrote:
If my team needs a QB, I may very well over reach and draft a QB a half a round, or even a whole round, early. The reward seems to out weigh the risks, when the cost is taken into account.

Below are the QB's drafted in rounds 2 and 3 before the rookie wage scale, by this logic and that practiced last year these guys should either be mid 1st rounders (the guys taken in round 2) or 2nd rounders (the guys drafted in round 3)

2010
Clausen
Colt

2009
Pat White

2008
Brohm
Henne
O'Connell

2007
Kolb
Beck
Stanton
Edwards

2006
Clemens
Tarvaris
Whitehurst
Croyle

Just because some teams are doing doesn't make it the right thing to do.

_________________
Follow me @mchamberlin32


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 196 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 14  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: birddog, Buccs4life, c2a, DELTA6TWO, Fantasy40, hankrip, mbowen, PlumDaddy, schabadoo, spc, Tacks652, votingmachine, WasteOfTime and 29 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group