Mike Mayock is right about Ryan Tannehill and the Browns… sort of

The comments to our headline post about Mike Mayock’s opinion of Ryan Tannehill turned out to be a discussion of what it means for something to be newsworthy. In the case of Mike Mayock’s opinion, as someone who has invested pretty heavily in the Browns, I would rather know it than not know it. That doesn’t mean I believe it all, but it is an important part of the equation of how I go through my life as someone who follows the Browns closely. It sets a precedent not only for players who could potentially become a part of the Browns, but also the critic who puts the opinion out there. In this case, after reviewing Mike Mayock’s statement and really thinking about it, I am left to agree with him… sort of.

The sentence that everyone keeps repeating is when Mayock said, “I think Cleveland has to take (Tannehill) at No. 4 and if they don’t Miami is sitting there at No. 8.” I actually agree with that, but let’s re-formulate the sentence a bit, shall we? Mike Mayock said so much about Tannehill other than that one statement that I think it is important to boost the clarity for him.

Using only Mayock’s own quotes…

I think Cleveland has to take him at No. 4…

… if they want a quarterback today that is “not ready to play right now.”

… if they want a guy who “down the road, he could be a franchise quarterback.”

… if they want to draft a guy who is “probably going to go higher than he should.”

… if they want to draft a guy who doesn’t “trust his reads yet,” who has “a long way to go,” and who has “the tools necessary to be a franchise quarterback” … someday… maybe… but certainly not this year.

Yes, I am poking a little bit of fun. In the end, I do think if the Browns want Tannehill they will have to draft him at No. 4. If they don’t, without some crazy trade scenario, Tannehill will be gone, probably by eight, but certainly before they have another chance at No. 22. From that perspective of game theory in the draft, if the Browns want Tannehill they would have to take him at four.

That is, if they want him or more importantly in our minds, if they should want him. The consensus around Browns town appears to be that many would love to have Tannehill, but almost none of those people think it is worth taking that chance at number four. We’ll see what Heckert, Holmgren, Shurmur and Childress think.

In the meantime, I’ll just assume the only way Tannehill goes at #4 is if the Browns trade that pick to someone who uses it on him. For my money, the only options that I think will be there for the Browns who are worth being picked that high are Trent Richardson, Morris Claiborne and Justin Blackmon in that order.

  • Eli

    The other thing I find ridiculous about these analysts is that they limit their viewpoint to only one year. Do the Browns need a better option at QB? Yes. But do they have other position holes that could be filled by draftees where the overall team would be more improved by a player available at #4? I, and many others, would argue yes.
    Just because we don’t have our solution at QB doesn’t mean we must try and find it this year by eschewing better players and drafting a “possible maybe” at way too high a spot. 

  • I am not a blind trust kind of guy, but so far, I trust Heckert in this area. I think he has a gambling itch, but he scratches that in lower rounds like with Colt McCoy in the third round or trading up to get Montario Hardesty.

  • TheRobot57

    Why not build the franchise before buying the “franchise” quarterback? If you put Colt or Tannehill in this offense as it is neither is going to do well. How can you determine whether they’re a franchise QB with a situation like that? We could build up an offense and hand the keys over to Colt and see how he drives. If it doesn’t work, then we go after another franchise QB. Right now it would be like hiring Jeff Gordon as our race driver and putting him behind the wheel of a Civic.

  • mgbode

    the thing he forgot to not was that he’s a QB who goes downhill when things start to go bad.  take a look at the OkieState game on youtube.  up until the fumble by the WR (he had no control over that), he looked like a 1st round QB.   after that play, he looked like Derek Anderson in 2008 (and beyond).

    QBs have to have mental fortitude in the NFL.  particularly in Cleveland.

  • Eli

    I’m with you. Gambling in the 3rd round (or lower second) sounds just about right to me. 

  • Eli

    But does the Civic have a spoiler?

  • TheRobot57

    No but it has a mismatched body-kit. I feel that accurately describes the offense.

  • here’s some useful research.  nothing i’ve seen reported anywhere else.  it’s regarding an important measurable for QBs.  

    pretty relevant because if tony grossi has taught us anything, it’s that throwing spirals late in the season in the AFC North is important.

    foles, coleman: 10+”; luck: 10.0; osweiler, cousins: 9.88; weeden: 9.63; RG3: 9.5; TANNEHILL: 9.0.  

    tannehill has same size hands as jimmy clausen.

    other notables:
    mccoy= 9.38roethlisberger= 9.88

  • Max

    I get what you’re saying Craig, kind of like if my Aunt had a pair, she’d be my Uncle sort of deal.

    I’m just hoping that all the methodicalness we have gone through over the last 2.5 years trumps all that “if” stuff and they don’t end up making a choice that is more dependent on market conditions than anything else. If they take a guy at 4 who cannot start immediately, then my liver is going to be in serious troubloe

  • MrCleaveland

    Well said, Craig. Thank you.

    Mr. Maycock is being way too cute. He might as well add, The Browns have to take Tannehill at 4 . . .

    . . . if they want to make a stupid pick.

    . . .  if they want to sabotage their own draft.

    . . . if they want to tank the ’12 season.

  • I like what I see in Tannehill. I think he sees the field very well- probably from his time as a WR, and he also possess great poise in the pocket when pressure is in his face. Those are the 2 biggest knocks on McCoy. Arm I think at this point is equal between McCoy and Tannehill, but you can see Tannehill progressing from 2010-2011 so I think its reasonable to suggest he continues that in the NFL. I would not have him at 4, but I would not be surprised if hes the target in a trade down (since Heckert put the mark at 8 where Miami is…). My ideal draft is Blackmon 4, Tannehill 22. If he gets past Miami I dont see anyone else investing a 1st round pick on a QB before us. After our pick at 22 I think its a lot easier for a team like Miami to move up and get him early 2nd/late 1st territory as in no way hed get to 37.

  • ive yet to hear persuasive arguments on how tannehill is better than cousins or osweiler.

    this bothers me to no end.  

    how did this one year, small handed, lead blowing qb become a topic of conversation for the 4th pick in the draft?

    i could not be much more cynical with respect to professional draft experts who work for national outlets whose access to stories depends on keeping players and agents happy.

  • Eli

    I’m 10.25, can I get a tryout? Admittedly, my 40 time sucks due to being slowed down by my hands.

  • Tron

    The craziest thing about Mayock’s statement is that no player drafted in the top 5 should not be a starter. Seriously, 1-5 is for immediate starters, not a year 1 bench maybe hopeful develop into something. 

    I feel like the media just moves on to the next craze. All through the NCAA season it was Luck being the number 1 pick, once Indy got it and it was decided you never heard anything more about him. SO the media hyped up RG3 as the second coming of Christ himself and almost made him sound better than Luck, until the Skins locked him up. Now they’ve just moved on to the next QB in line….. I saw an ESPN segment this morning on how Tannehill was the best thing since sliced bread and the most promising QB in the draft. I couldn’t believe how ridiculous it was. 

  • Humboldt

    If I remember correctly, McCoy was Holmgren’s gamble rather than Heckert’s, right? But point taken.

  • Humboldt

     ….if they want to incite an “Occupy Lou Groza Blvd” movement in 2012

  • Max

    his agent is Bob LaMonte?

  • Max

    it’s one of the main reasons I have given up most things ESPN related. They have the attention span of a fruit fly and the memory of a goldfish (unless they’re running that loop of Elway, Jordan, Mesa et. al.). It’s almost like they’re pandering to 13 year olds.  

    One of the funniest things they ever did was the “Best college football teams of all time” list back in ’05, and they had USC somewhere in the top 5. The USC lost the championship to Texas.

    Who’s now? (what does that even mean?)

  • mgbode

    I’d say one of the funniest things they did was 2 years later when they did the same dang thing with the ’07 Buckeyes.   Except it wasn’t funny, it made me mad that they were senselessly pumping up a team I was worried about after that Michigan game, and they lost the Nat’l Champ game too.

  • here’s a cle-dot-com word cloud.

    in the name of all that is holy, PD.  

  • MrCleaveland

     Never thought I’d miss RGIII talk.

  • floydrubino

    First I don’t even understand why WFNY even is defending itself. I want you to show anything Browns related because this is why I look at your site. Put all Browns info up and I know what articles I want to read about. I didn’t think WFNY was hand catering to my specific needs as a reader I thought you were trying to put as much mainstream info that is out there. This article was on so if this isn’t worth putting up than what is.

    In regard to the Tannehill situation we would be insane to take him at #4 but we would be stupid to not milk this because Miami might want him. Trade down is the obvious answer but if we can’t then Claiborne is the obvious choice unless Kalil is there. I have been saying for weeks now that Brock Osweiler looked better than Tannehill so why would we even take Tannehill. The Browns have a real chance here to build something if they pick only DB’s and o-linemen with 4 out of first 6 picks(2 guards,1 tackle, and one DB). Trade down get more picks and use the extra picks for the Greg Little upside skill players in 3rd round area.

    Hopefully Brock Osweiler will be there for us to take in the 3rd round but he probably won’t last this long. Take LaMichael James or Isiah Pead in the 3rd hopefully for a running back if Osweiler isn’t there. BJ Cunningham might go in the 6th or 7th and he is just as good as some of these receivers in the 3rd round. We have to load up with trench players because it’s not worth picking players that you can get in later rounds with same chance to do well when some of these monster linemen who can run well are sitting right there that will succeed without question. You win games by wearing people down over 4 quarters.

  • TSR3000

    I find this comment to over value Jeff Gordan and under value civics.

  • TSR3000

    Eli…… Manning?

  • edpro1979

    Craig I love your sarcasim and your writing and your point of view.Thank You and keep up the good work.

  • edpro1979

    Thank you Tron…I couldnt have said it better myself !

  • edpro1979

    I would rather use a second,third,or fourth round pick on offensive line help.Why do we have to reach or just HAVE TO draft a QB? Dont waiste a pick on the 3rd,4th or 5th best QB just because we need one.We have next year and we’re better off using one of those picks on another position who is rated higher.

  • Modellsux

    Yes yes yes and YES

  • Steve

     I like how much credit Tannehill gets for the rest of his team blowing leads. No credit for his performance against Griffin, all the credit for when his defense can’t keep anyone out of the end zone. Sounds reasonable to me.

  • if youve heard anyone other than the dissenters to the hype machine (ie, posters here in these threads… certainly no one in mainstream media) so much as point out that tannehill had 3 picks in his three biggest games, you be sure to link them, ok?  

    if youve seen anyone in MSM mention that texas am (ranked #12 coming into the season) was a disaster this year, 6-6 in regular season, but yet the browns MUST TAKE HIM AT 4.. do share.

    but hey, why think for yourself when you’ve got joe lull and mike ‘gabbert over newton’ mayock and of course — mary kay cabot?  

    you be sure to let us know when you can provide an argument as to why tannehill is better than the guys i mentioned.  ad hominen attacks that im not as informed as MSM types.. yeah… no.  ive heard em but they still dont address the very reasonable question.

  • If the Browns take a QB at 4, I will never be a fan again!!! It would be the biggest waste pick ever, and the whole front office should be fired before they pick again at 22. We need other players, Te reason our QB’s never succeed is we draft them before we have a team for them to play with. Then they get killed, and they never become a thing, get the pieces in place, NOW> Then if you want next year draft a QB if only one is there, Never reach for a QB, We have done this several times, in our recent history, And yet we are blind to the facts,  Cleveland screwed themself twice this year so far, First losing out on RG3, then Hillis leaving, Just think. If we just kept hillis, we could draft the wide out we need in Blackmon, But now we have to take the RB to replace hillis, I pray one day we will have someone with a brain in the front office, And for all you heckert and Holmgren lovers, You think they are so great, But yet there record shows they are no better the mangini, Thank god your not the owner or we would really be in bad shape. Also have you ever been right when it comes to football?

  • Jointmanipulation

    Tannenhill is too risky @4! we need a sure thing take claibourne or trade down. Afc north requires strong D first and foremost! this team is starting to build nicely no need to set it back by reaching for a project qb with 4th overall pk. Tho im all for a good smokescreen to encourage someone desperate to overpay for the 4 spot 😉

  • khdenn

     I agree with you that the AFC North is a D-driven division…..but I also believe that our D becomes a GREAT D if our offense improves.  Defenses feast when offenses become one-dimensional.  We can make our opponents one-dimensional by putting them in a hole early and often with an offense.  Not trying to say pick Tannehill at 4 – but offense needs to be the 110% focus of this draft to make our defense better.

  • Dee

     I trust the Browns when they told us that the real story on Hillis has yet to be told….I agree they are idiots if they just let him walk for no good reason – but I don’t think they are idiots, and “we the fans” don’t know what really went down with him last year.  There is so much smoke – and rumors of even the players being fed up with him that I am not critical of the move.

  • khdenn

     The Browns have a real chance here to build something if they pick only
    DB’s and o-linemen with 4 out of first 6 picks(2 guards,1 tackle, and
    one DB). Trade down get more picks and use the extra picks for the Greg
    Little upside skill players in 3rd round area.

    —This idea intrigues me very much.

  • khdenn

     It’s almost like they’re pandering to 13 year olds.


  • The Browns are irrelevant, and they have been since there return. From the owner, down to his now, four stooges, Holmgren, Heckert, Shurmur, and you can now add Childress. They are not trying to win, and it’s obvious.. I here trade down, really, your all pathetic sheep, have some sense and just a little self respect. Trade down, that’s why this site exists, next year, it’s always next year. Stop the less than mediocre mess, that is EVERY year, you pay top dollar to watch the crap they put on the field, shouldn’t you get something good in return ? You do have the right to demand much better than what there giving you, for the hefty price they are charging you. Would you go pay for a burnt stake and a hard potato week after week, year after year, paying top dollar and then the president and his other top heads, telling you, this is how it is, and your going to like it? NO YOU WOULD NOT.WAKE UP, you so called Browns fan.   

  • Foghorn Leghorn

    Very constructive Todd.  You added a lot of valuable insight to the conversation. I especially like the choice of sheep to describe Browns fans.  Its original, and such a poignant metaphor for all of us.  As for the rest of your post, I have no clue what you’re talking about (especially the steak, potato, president thing), but I would love to hear more.

  • Buckeye49

    I didn’t realize that there were so many ‘gurus’ out there.  I guess everyone but me has coaches tapes and sit for hours studying them.  The only thing I have is what the so called experts say.  Everyone is ready to throw Colt McCoy away with very little justification other than what xeperts say.  My guess is, and I maybe wrong, but I think Holmgren, Hechert Shurmer and Childress have more insight than I do.  We outsiders are only giving opinions.  As I say I maybe wrong but I think fans don’t have the same wherewithall that the people in charge have.  I not saying they can’t be wrong but they have more to go on to be wrong.

  • DontbringLBJback

    Look, we’re all disgusted right now because of the state of our sports teams… but we have to play with the cards we’ve been dealt.  Maybe we are sheep, maybe we’re deer in the headlights… I don’t know.  What I do know is that the F’ing Steelers have won 2 Super Bowls recently, the F’ing Ravens won one only 4 years after they stole our team, and even the Bungals managed a turn-around this past year.

    It’s no wonder we’re all so damn angry.  We keep going 4-12 and our bitter, hated rivals are staying on top or improving.  But we have no choice but to hope and pray Holmgren can turn it around.  He did it in Seattle… they did make it to the Super Bowl.

    But one things is for certain…. this draft is huge.

  • frenchtoast

    Yeah, picking Kellen Winslow five picks before Ben Roethlisberger worked out great for us.  If the FO likes him like I do, then this guy HAS to be the pick at 4.

  • Jim Brown

    Ryan Tannehill, QB, Texas A&M

    While Andrew Luck’s and Robert Griffin’s Pro Days got all the attention
    of the national media, Ryan Tannehill’s workout was
    much more beneficial for scouts. Tannehill is coming off a foot injury and teams needed to see if it had any lasting
    impact. From all I’ve heard from evaluators there, Tannehill’s foot
    looked fine, he showed off his athleticism with 4.61 seconds in the 40,
    and his throws showcased high velocity, completing NFL throws that now
    further increase his chances of being a Top 10 pick come late April