Would You Take Tannehill?

NinerSickness · Post #1 » by **NinerSickness** » Wed Oct 7, 2015 3:20 am

Say the Niners can't get Goff in the draft or even Connor Cook. Say the Fish cut Tannehill in the offseason. Would you take him as the QB of the short-term future?

I always liked him a little, but I know he's never going to be a great QB. However, with a high pick in the draft and some Kaep space, the team could rebuild the rest of the team & try to win the 2011 / 2012 way.

Whad'ya think? I'd prefer Cook or Goff, but there aren't many options outside of those 2 IMO.

Keep in mind, the dude actually has very little experience playing QB compared to a lot of other guys. He played wide receiver at A&M before moving to QB.

Post #2 » by **CalamityX12** » Wed Oct 7, 2015 3:26 am

Not sure anymore after his comments...

Doesn't sound like a leader or winner

NinerSickness · Post #3 » by **NinerSickness** » Wed Oct 7, 2015 3:28 am

CalamityX12 wrote:Not sure anymore after his comments...

Doesn't sound like a leader or winner

What about before those comments?

clyde21 · Post #4 » by **clyde21** » Wed Oct 7, 2015 3:41 am

Nah, and I liked him coming out. He's pretty close to broken.

Post #5 » by **Ray_Dogg** » Wed Oct 7, 2015 3:47 am

Never liked Tannehill. Still don't.

Post #6 » by **CalamityX12** » Wed Oct 7, 2015 4:08 am

NinerSickness wrote:
CalamityX12 wrote:Not sure anymore after his comments...

Doesn't sound like a leader or winner

What about before those comments?

This season he fell off... Imo

A couple yrs back he looked interesting in carrying an offense

Tomikcon1971 · Post #7 » by **Tomikcon1971** » Wed Oct 7, 2015 5:02 am

I don't know man.....just having his eye candy wife around might sway me.

Just saying......

clyde21 · Post #8 » by **clyde21** » Wed Oct 7, 2015 5:30 am

Tomikcon1971 wrote:I don't know man.....just having his eye candy wife around might sway me.

Just saying......

What...Kaep's pet turtle doesn't do it for ya?

B-King · Post #9 » by **B-King** » Wed Oct 7, 2015 6:11 am

I would pass on Tannehill. We need so much getting a retread doesn't help much. Better off focusing on building through the draft.

clyde21 · Post #10 » by **clyde21** » Wed Oct 7, 2015 8:00 am

On a more serious note, Tannehill's contract is brutal. 45mil in guaranteed, and balloons to 17mil+ per year from 2017 on. Unlike Kaepernick's, in which if he gets cut before April 1st of that particular year, nothing is owned to him.

No way anyone would take that contract on at this point in time unless they feel like they can fix him.

DoobieKeebler · Post #11 » by **DoobieKeebler** » Wed Oct 7, 2015 8:05 am

If the Niners cannot or will not draft Goff in 2016 I would go all in on the o-line, even if AD comes back. And when I say all in, I mean Iupati/Davis/two 1st round picks all in.

After that I would be willing to take Tannehill if he signed for a Gabbert level contract and was open to beginning the 2016 season as Kaepernick's backup, knowing there is a strong chance of getting some starts a few weeks into the season if/when Kaep continues to falter.

But unless all that would fall into place, HARD PASS ("The League" joke). I've got a buddy down in FL with a pretty high scouting IQ (IMO) who is a 'Fins fan and all he can talk about is how much Tanny regressed since his rookie year.

Tomikcon1971 · Post #12 » by **Tomikcon1971** » Wed Oct 7, 2015 11:41 am

clyde21 wrote:
Tomikcon1971 wrote:I don't know man.....just having his eye candy wife around might sway me.

Just saying......

What...Kaep's pet turtle doesn't do it for ya?

I totally forgot he had that turtle or tortoise.....whatever it is.

Post #13 » by **Ruzious** » Wed Oct 7, 2015 11:55 am

clyde21 wrote:On a more serious note, Tannehill's contract is brutal. 45mil in guaranteed, and balloons to 17mil+ per year from 2017 on. Unlike Kaepernick's, in which if he gets cut before April 1st of that particular year, nothing is owned to him.

No way anyone would take that contract on at this point in time unless they feel like they can fix him.

Yeah, I wouldn't touch that contract if I was yous guys. I don't see him becoming any better than Kaep.

Post #14 » by **MHSL82** » Wed Oct 7, 2015 4:56 pm

CalamityX12 wrote:Not sure anymore after his comments...

Doesn't sound like a leader or winner

Are you talking about the practice squad salaries comment or has he said more?

Post #15 » by **CalamityX12** » Wed Oct 7, 2015 6:16 pm

MHSL82 wrote:
CalamityX12 wrote:Not sure anymore after his comments...

Doesn't sound like a leader or winner

Are you talking about the practice squad salaries comment or has he said more?

Yea.. the practice squad comments....

That's very awful to say IMO... one thing to joke but another to say it in vain. Let him have his money cuz that's all he's going to get with the way he's playing.

Pattersonca65 · Post #16 » by **Pattersonca65** » Wed Oct 7, 2015 7:12 pm

I really liked tannehll a couple of years ago when he played against the 49ers. Seemed to have potential then. Haven't watched him play since that time. The practice squad comments were really bad. Makes the guy seem like a jerk

NinerSickness · Post #17 » by **NinerSickness** » Thu Oct 8, 2015 1:11 am

Ruzious wrote:
clyde21 wrote:I wouldn't touch that contract if I was yous guys.

Just for clarity, the premise of the question was whether it would be a good idea to sign him if he were cut by the Dolphins in the offseason (and if Goff & Cook were out of reach in the draft). So he wouldn't have the same contract.

thesack12 · Post #18 » by **thesack12** » Thu Oct 8, 2015 8:23 pm

Jeez man, anybody who mentions bringing in somebody like Tannehill, or worse Sanchez, or to play Gabbert is really only interested in making a QB change just for the sake of change. Those guys have proven to be consistently terrible, and have never done ANYTHING of note.

Making any semblance of a commitment to any of those guys will inevitably set the franchise back for however long they are wearing your uniform, and your QB search never stopped.

No Gabbert, no Sanchez, no Tannhehill, No Cutler, and No to any other craptacular retreads. Really there really isn't such a thing as a retread QB, because if they are available they never provided much traction in the first place.

There is a reason why these guys become available. Think about it.

NinerSickness · Post #19 » by **NinerSickness** » Fri Oct 9, 2015 5:25 am

thesack12 wrote:Jeez man, anybody who mentions bringing in somebody like Tannehill, or worse Sanchez, or to play Gabbert is really only interested in making a QB change just for the sake of change.

Calm down Joshy. I just opened up the topic for discussion. I'm firing up the "Sign-Tannehill bandwagon."

Oh, and in case you were wondering, literally any other QB option would be better than DumbDumb & his salary at this point.

clyde21 · Post #20 » by **clyde21** » Fri Oct 9, 2015 6:04 am

NinerSickness wrote:
thesack12 wrote:Jeez man, anybody who mentions bringing in somebody like Tannehill, or worse Sanchez, or to play Gabbert is really only interested in making a QB change just for the sake of change.

Calm down Joshy. I just opened up the topic for discussion. I'm firing up the "Sign-Tannehill bandwagon."

Oh, and in case you were wondering, literally any other QB option would be better than DumbDumb & his salary at this point.

Which can be completely avoided if he's cut before April 1st next year.