Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Mike tanenbaum says colts have worst qb in the division.


Recommended Posts

40 minutes ago, PRnum1 said:

I would rank them

 

Watson

Tannehill

Wentz

Lawrence

 

Frank's got some work to do to get Wentz to pass the other two

I would prefer to have Wentz over Tannehill.  Therefore, I rank Wentz above Tannehill.  Lawrence is currently unrankable, imho.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 122
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

This coming from one if the worst GMs in the league. There's a reason he's on ESPN and not a GM.

As of today, what Tannenba said may be true.   But it doesn’t matter.   We’re not playing games today.   We’re playing games in 6 and a half months.  A lot can and will change between now and then. 

Mike knows QBs. He was the former GM of the Jets....look at all the great QBs they have had.

He might be right.  We're still gonna play the games tho.  There are alot of "media guys" who are gonna be backpedaling on Wentz hot takes imo......recency bias be danged.  I'm optimistic.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Stephen said:

I wonder if Seahawks  and Texans may switch qbs like the cutler  trade a while back

I hadn't seen that idea floated... I think that might have some attraction to 3 out of the 4 variables, but I dunno that Russ is agreeing to go to Houston.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Stephen said:

I disagree about tannehill  being  on 2017 wentz level this past year. 2017 wentz would have finished  with many more tds if he had played in all 16 games


Sure...if you cherry pick passing TDs. Wentz had a slightly higher TD % in 2017 (7.5%) vs. Tannehill in 2020 (6.9%). So assuming Wentz maintained that % (which is an outlier for his career)...he would have had 7 more passing TDs that season (so 40 vs. 33 for Tannehill). 
 

But he also would have had 60 more PAs. Give Tannehill 60 more PAs...and he throws 4 more TDs...so that difference is 3 TDs...since we are just extrapolating. 

And Wentz had 0 rushing TDs in 2017 and Tannehill had 7 in 2020...so that more than makes up the difference in passing TDs.
 

Also, Tannehill’s TD% in 2019 was even higher than Wentz’s in 2017. Tannehill has maintained a high % over nearly two seasons...and it was high in 2018 as well.

 

There is an argument for which of those two QBs was better...but it gets really subjective because Tannehill was awesome last season. To say otherwise is silly.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Flash7 said:

I personally would rather address a person's arguments rather than attack the person themselves.

 

:scoregood: 

 

I don't agree with Mike Tannenbaum and he probably said it to boost ratings and get folks riled up as we see here, but the personal attacks are unnecessary. It is the ad hominem logical fallacy.

 

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

Lawrence - Jax has a lot of draft capital and can make TL's rook year/life much easier if they want. Will they? Anyway, I'm sure he flashes some, but doubt he looks pro-bowl first year. Now second year....

 

They have one of the worst defenses in the league, but I still think it would be smart to get Trevor some help on offense.  They are obviously not in super bowl or bust mode, might as build around the franchise player before worrying too much about defense 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, BlackTiger said:

 

They have one of the worst defenses in the league, but I still think it would be smart to get Trevor some help on offense.  They are obviously not in super bowl or bust mode, might as build around the franchise player before worrying too much about defense 

They've got some good WRs, so I don't think they need to do a lot for him. 

 

And they have:

1, 25, 33, 45, 65, 97, 121, 129, 154, 193, 214

 

That's a HUGE haul. 

 

Their primary and secondary needs are

QB, OT, CB, TE

S, EDGE, WR

 

Given they have the 22nd ranked OL, I think they have to use 2 of the 5 early picks on OL to protect their investment.

I'd go 

1 - QB

25 and 33 - OT and CB'/DE

45 - OL

65 - TE

97 - S

 

I'd solve for CB/DE (whatever I don't draft with 25/33) in FA. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

Call me crazy, but I’d take this quarterback with this team over Andrew Luck and the rosters he had around him, and he was better than all of them. This is looking like a damn good team. 

Imagine if we had both.....

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, NFLfan said:

 

:scoregood: 

 

I don't agree with Mike Tannenbaum and he probably said it to boost ratings and get folks riled up as we see here, but the personal attacks are unnecessary. It is the ad hominem logical fallacy.

 

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem

I seriously doubt MT was trying boost ratings or upset anyone.   QB is the most important position and in his view we have the 4th best QB in a 4-team conference.   There are very few ratings to boost in the AFC South.   Houston is the only major market.  The other three cities don’t move the needle much. 
 

A simple straight forward opinion.  He’s likely doing the same thing for the other 7 divisions.   It’s just the usual off-season talk,  nothing more. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, PRnum1 said:

I would rank them

 

Watson

Tannehill

Wentz

Lawrence

 

Frank's got some work to do to get Wentz to pass the other two

This is how I would rank them as well. Lawrence IMO will be very good eventually, perhaps great but not until like year 3 or so. He has a lousy team around him. Watson is the best QB by a landslide (top 5 in the league) but he may get traded. To me Tannehill and Wentz are close but Tannehill has played well for a year and a half now. I would say Tannehill is above average which is better than average. He does have Henry however which helps. If Wentz can get back to even 2019 Wentz he is basically on par with Tannehill at that point.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

seriously doubt MT was trying boost ratings or upset anyone.   QB is the most important position and in his view we have the 4th best QB in a 4-team conference.   There are very few ratings to boost in the AFC South.   Houston is the only major market.  The other three cities don’t move the needle much. 
 

A simple straight forward opinion.  He’s likely doing the same thing for the other 7 divisions.   It’s just the usual off-season talk,  nothing more. 

 

I get what you are saying. My point was that the personal attacks against Mike Tannenbaum were not necessary. We see that too often when someone has an opinion with which we disagree.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

Call me crazy, but I’d take this quarterback with this team over Andrew Luck and the rosters he had around him, and he was better than all of them. This is looking like a damn good team. 

 

Good point. It is about the team, not any one player. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Stephen said:

Mike said watson, tannehill,  and Lawrence  are all better than Wentz and we gave up too much to get him. He's  a former  nfl gm and said it on espn.

Well he’s not wrong about us having the worst QB. And I don’t fully agree with him about giving up too much but it really depends on how Carson plays this year. 
 

that said, we’ve beaten two of those three QBs and I still don’t trust the Jags not to screw up Lawerence. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

I seriously doubt MT was trying boost ratings or upset anyone.   QB is the most important position and in his view we have the 4th best QB in a 4-team conference.   There are very few ratings to boost in the AFC South.   Houston is the only major market.  The other three cities don’t move the needle much. 
 

A simple straight forward opinion.  He’s likely doing the same thing for the other 7 divisions.   It’s just the usual off-season talk,  nothing more. 

He absolutely was IMO.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know we can’t really rank or rate Lawrence or whatever, but if I had to start a franchise with one of those four guys I’d either pick him or Watson. No idea if the Jags will actually win games, but I think he’ll clearly look the part.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, csmopar said:

Well he’s not wrong about us having the worst QB. And I don’t fully agree with him about giving up too much but it really depends on how Carson plays this year. 
 

that said, we’ve beaten two of those three QBs and I still don’t trust the Jags not to screw up Lawerence. 

 

 

Does anyone actually think Tanny would be Tanny without that incredible assault weapon in his backfield?

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Fisticuffs111 said:

I know we can’t really rank or rate Lawrence or whatever, but if I had to start a franchise with one of those four guys I’d either pick him or Watson. Think he’ll be good right away, expecting a Herbert kind of rookie season for him. No idea if they’ll actually win games though.

I'm surprised more people can't look at it that way.  I would pick one of Watson or Lawrence and move on.

 

Honestly I would not even consider Carson for this one, though I think he will be fine for us.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, groundnpound said:

 

 

Does anyone actually think Tanny would be Tanny without that incredible assault weapon in his backfield?

No but he does have him at the moment so I’d still put him above Wentz at the moment 

Link to post
Share on other sites

How is this even a hot take, let alone a controversial one? Watson is great...Tannehill has been playing at a top 7 level for the past 1.7 seasons...and Lawrence is the most highly-regarded QB prospect since Luck.

 

The only question mark is Lawrence. But given how Herbert and Burrow were playing last season, I can see why there would be a very rosy outlook for Lawrence. 
 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, groundnpound said:

 

Fair enough, but i hear 2000 yd rushers have a bearing on your success level.

Very very true. But regardless, the stats stand. I mean Wentz May end up being best in the division or he may be the worst. No one can really say with any degree of accuracy, it’s all speculation at this point. Yeah, there’s a variety of factors involved. My point is, who really cares what some talking head says at this point in the off-season. No one knows. And the NFL is mostly unpredictable and anything can and will happen. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, groundnpound said:

 

 

Does anyone actually think Tanny would be Tanny without that incredible assault weapon in his backfield?

 

Probably not. But does it matter? Henry isn't going anywhere...so we have to assume that Tannehill will be Tannehill next season, as he has been for the past two seasons. And if we are looking at the QB situations in the AFCS...it's fair to say that the Colts could have the 4th-best.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, groundnpound said:

Based on last season, yep, I would agree. But any QB that played last season even one snap is better than Luck was last season cause Luck is sitting on his couch or on his snow board and not playing. 

Just now, shasta519 said:

 

Probably not. But does it matter? Henry isn't going anywhere...so we have to assume that Tannehill will be Tannehill next season, as he has been for the past two seasons. And if we are looking at the QB situations in the AFCE...it's fair to say that the Colts could have the 4th-best.

AFCE? You mean AFCS right?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, csmopar said:

Based on last season, yep, I would agree. But any QB that played last season even one snap is better than Luck was last season cause Luck is sitting on his couch or on his snow board and not playing. 

AFCE? You mean AFCS right?

 

Yes. Fat-fingered it.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, shasta519 said:
24 minutes ago, csmopar said:

AFCE? You mean AFCS right?

 

Yes. Fat-fingered it.

Ah, ok. I thought you'd traveled 19 years back in time. :P

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, NFLfan said:

 

I get what you are saying. My point was that the personal attacks against Mike Tannenbaum were not necessary. We see that too often when someone has an opinion with which we disagree.

“The personal attacks against Mike Tannenbaum”.  ???

 

I assume you meant BY Mike Tannenbaum?

 

MT is an analyst.   He’s analyzing the quarterbacks in our division.  His comments, whether anyone agrees with them or not, are NOT personal attacks.   They’re just analysis. That’s all.   Nothing more.  Nothing less. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, shasta519 said:

How is this even a hot take, let alone a controversial one? Watson is great...Tannehill has been playing at a top 7 level for the past 1.7 seasons...and Lawrence is the most highly-regarded QB prospect since Luck.

 

The only question mark is Lawrence. But given how Herbert and Burrow were playing last season, I can see why there would be a very rosy outlook for Lawrence. 
 

 

 

 

Given how gadner minshew  looked like tom brady in our first game last year I could see Lawrence  beating  us in atleast one of our two matchups. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, groundnpound said:

He absolutely was IMO.

Mike Tannenbaum doesn’t have that kind of juice.    People don’t tune in for him.

 

He’s an analyst.  Offering opinions is the definition of his job.  What he said is NOT controversial.   It’s not a “hot take”.   

Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

“The personal attacks against Mike Tannenbaum”.  ???

 

I assume you meant BY Mike Tannenbaum?

 

MT is an analyst.   He’s analyzing the quarterbacks in our division.  His comments, whether anyone agrees with them or not, are NOT personal attacks.   They’re just analysis. That’s all.   Nothing more.  Nothing less. 

 

No, you read it correctly; I meant against Mike Tannenbaum. If you go back to my original point, perhaps it will be easier to understand. Someone wrote that instead of attacking Mike Tannenbaum the person for what he said, it is better to attack what he said. I agreed. Many have written that because Tannenbaum failed as a GM, he should not make judgments on QBs in the AFC South (I'm paraphrasing). 

 

Anyway, I will leave it at that. There is no point in going back and forth.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Here may be the future issue complicating signing additional Free Agents to sem-big contracts is that we still have to sign Leonard, Smith, and Nelson to big contracts and will be in similar off-season situation again with available cap space.  Have to figure the Colts will want to resign MAC, Muhammad, Mack if he stay healthy and Hines.  Glowinski might be a wild card to resign at RG and so far haven't really found a solid RG replacement for next year if we do let him walk.    The Colts would be wise to keep what we have now for defensive lineman and save the cap space with consideration of signing the Vikings RT Brian O'Neill next year.  According to early estimates the Vikings are going to be hurting for cap space next off-season and O'Neill might price himself out of Minnesota.  Now I was very high on O'Neill coming out of Pittsburgh college and regarded him as one of the better left tackles available at the time.  Like Smith he has proved himself at RT.  The Colts could acquire O'Neill with a few options of either letting Glowinski go and moving Smith back to his original college position of RG and letting O'Neill play RT.  The other option is keeping Glowinski at RG and Smith at RT while moving O'Neill to LT but estimates leaves us around $7 million in cap space without signing other big future FA names of Hilton, Rhodes, and Pascal.  Any ways have a feeling next year's FA is going to look a lot like this year with little additions due to limited cap space.
    • Keep in mind Leno was a 7th round pick in 2014 but didn't start full time till 2016. He signed an modest extension in 2017, but then made the Pro Bowl in 2018. Had a bit of a down year in 2019, but rebounded for a good year in 2020. He graded better than AC. IMO, he's the best and healthiest option left of the FA OTs. He hasn't hit 30 yet. Fisher is injured and 30. Okung is 33. Given he's the youngest, healthiest, and rates over 70, he'll be in higher demand, as there are still several teams looking for a LT. If he wanted 9M a year for 2 years, I'd take that in a heartbeat. I just doubt he'll be OK with that.    Keep in mind the Bears pretty much had to cut him as they couldn't afford to keep him. They were negative cap. It's why they drafted Jenkins. And Denver, who is one of the few teams to have more cap space than Indy, is highly interested in Leno.   Fisher coming off that injury is a big dice roll. That will impact his market value. Healing at 30 years old is tough for some guys, especially big uglies.   I don't see Leno taking less than 3 year / 30M. I don't see Fisher taking a one year deal at all. Worst thing he could do is do a one year after an injury, look meh this year, and he's done. He'll want 2-3 and some guarantees. He'll take less per year, but he'll want some security.  The team will have most leverage with Okung in terms of $ and duration.
    • The Paye pick makes a lot of sense but the Dayo pick surprised me. I wanted a left tackle and thought that there were a couple of guys who would have made a lot of sense.   Ballard and co know way more about those players than I do, however, so I'll continue to trust their judgement until they demonstrate that I shouldn't.    I'd rather have two good pass rushers than one good pass rusher and one bad left tackle.
    • I like the breakdown and agree although i caveat with this:   I don't think Leno or Fisher was 2-3 year deals unless they get what their market is before being cut.   And I do not think CB is going to big against himself to do that.   Leno basically made $8M-$9M each year ($8.8, $5.0, $8.1, $8.1) and was slated to make $9.0M this year before cut.   If the Colts are going to offer him $8-$9M a year I think he would gladly take a 2-3 year deal. But if the Colts are bargain shopping then I think he and Fisher will both be happy to take 1 year deals and prove their worth and re-enter the market next year when there is a lot more money to go around.   Fisher probably won't go for a 2-3 year deal unless he is making $10M+    I would actually ideally like to see us give one of them a 2-3 year deal where we have cost control on a decent contract for a year or two beyond this one.   I think that is a big win if so. More likely scenario has us giving one of them a $6M-$8M deal for a year and then having to either try to extend them if it works out or let them walk if it doesn't. 
    • Best option if healthy - Fisher (will still likely want 2-3 years)   Safest option - Leno (likely wants 3 years min)   Most expensive option - Leno   Cheapest short term option with a level of safety - Okung (PFF predicts a 3 year deal, which I don't see).   IMO, if you don't grab one of those guys, or other quality FA, you'll end up starting Tevi. If you start Tevi, before long you're moving Nelson to LT.... Ballard likely doesn't want to give Leno 3-4 years and high dollars. FIsher comes with risk. IDK... 
  • Members

    • OhioColt

      OhioColt 125

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • ColtsGermany

      ColtsGermany 312

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • BlueStallion

      BlueStallion 29

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • ClaytonColt

      ClaytonColt 296

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • csmopar

      csmopar 7,701

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • boo2202

      boo2202 462

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • ScotColt

      ScotColt 188

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • jmac_48

      jmac_48 377

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Roosarioo

      Roosarioo 2

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • esmort

      esmort 433

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
×
×
  • Create New...