Jump to content

Rumor: Tannehill offered to ATL in Trade Up


Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, Titans279 said:

Personally I think Byard, Henry, and Tannehill are available for anyone who wants them. They aren't being actively shopped but teams know they'd be available.

 

The team is not a realistic SB contender and none of these guys are likely to be a part of the team when it next plans to be.

 

I think Henry might've been shopped to try and move up. Tannehill, though, has been potentially replaced. He's the only one I could see a fairly high probability of being traded at this point.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 323
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Maybe the objective for the season is to end a 7 game losing streak, win as many games as possible an reestablish a winning culture.  Just because the FO may think in the back of their minds that the

BTW - if Tannehill was on the trade or chopping block, the Titans would not be allowing him to be in the facility and risk injury.  They'd be on the hook for 27 M.

I called that one.  The NFC South is very winnable for ATL.  And I told you long ago, Tannehill will not be the starting QB of the Titans in September.  Now, you can keep following the leader of the t

Posted Images

35 minutes ago, BudsOilers said:

They were going to move up to 8 to draft a guy they passed up at 11?

 

 

I don’t believe this report, but if it was true I’d assume it would be for Skoronski, Carthon mentioned they were surprised he was there at 11 and the Bears were linked 

 

Saying that though, you’d have to be very confident you were getting Levis

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Sargo said:

Makes sense if you want to believe Ran when he said he didn’t think Skoronski would be there at 11. 
 

I would hope they revisit this in June and we can walk away with a 3 or even a 4 for Tannehill. It’s the Levis show now fellas. Cry UT fans.

That would have been a terrible gamble if it was to go up for Skor. They could have missed on Levis and given us a Malik season lol

Link to post
Share on other sites

This sounds like the kind of deal that gets negotiated before the draft but sits there waiting to see if the right player drops to the pick in question. Not something they were working on draft day after the top 3 QBs were already gone. 
 

I still think Atlanta is the most likely trade destination for Tannehill if that ends up happening (Washington probably would be 2nd). And Atlanta could do well with Tannehill, Bijan, London,  Cordarrelle Patterson, Pitts, and Jonnu. Currently they are stuck with Ritter at QB as their obvious weak link.

 

If Ran wants to get some future draft capital, plus save cap space, this is the most likely scenario. But it’s up to what the Falcons would give up. 

Edited by Starkiller
Link to post
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, IrishTitansFan said:

I don’t believe this report, but if it was true I’d assume it would be for Skoronski, Carthon mentioned they were surprised he was there at 11 and the Bears were linked 

 

Saying that though, you’d have to be very confident you were getting Levis

 

I have a real hard time believing they would have traded Tannehill to move up 3 spots for a OL with the only assured QB on the team being Willis.

 

Now if you'd have said this was a discussion about ATL's day 2 or early day 3 pick (s), it would be at least "believeable".

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, IrishTitansFan said:

I don’t believe this report, but if it was true I’d assume it would be for Skoronski, Carthon mentioned they were surprised he was there at 11 and the Bears were linked 

 

Saying that though, you’d have to be very confident you were getting Levis

It couldn't be for anyone other than Richardson. It would have left us with Willis at QB. It's either bullshit, or it's talking about discussions on draft night in between Texas moving up and the Colts taking Richardson. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, IsntLifeFunny said:

It couldn't be for anyone other than Richardson. It would have left us with Willis at QB. It's either bullshit, or it's talking about discussions on draft night in between Texas moving up and the Colts taking Richardson. 

 

84AEBA82-E24E-401F-AE23-0B9E019B8A35.jpeg

Link to post
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Righteous said:

I called that one.  The NFC South is very winnable for ATL.  And I told you long ago, Tannehill will not be the starting QB of the Titans in September.  Now, you can keep following the leader of the tard army, but even he wasn't stupid enough to take the get out of town bet.  Everyone knows, if I say a duck can pull a truck, STFU and hook it up.  Can't wait for Ran to remove this stain!

 

Explain why the team is having Tannehill be in the facility every day if the intention is to trade or cut him?  Did you not learn anything about the McNair situation in 2006?  

 

There's no way the Titans would be exposing themselves to a 27 M liability if the intent was not to play Tannehill in the fall.  This would have blown up by now if this was the case.

 

It's frankly amazing how some of you don't grasp this pretty basic fact.

Edited by BudsOilers
Link to post
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, oldschool said:

 

The team does not share your pessimism. They are absolutely trying to win in 2023.

 

I think you can both be trying to win (i.e. not tanking) while being open to moving off older guys with bad contracts. Their moves were definitely not aggressive. I think they'd be willing to part with these guys for the right price.

 

"When people look at teams, they sometimes do it in a very binary way," Adofo-Mensah said. "They ask, 'Are you either all-in or tearing down and rebuilding?' And I don't really look at the world that way. The way we look at it is we're trying to navigate both worlds. We're trying to live in today and tomorrow, or the competitive rebuild, however you want to phrase it or market it, and so I think that's kind of how we've approached this offseason."

 

https://www.startribune.com/vikings-competitive-rebuild-kwesi-adofo-mensah/600158783/

Link to post
Share on other sites

Very few teams look at it as burn it to the ground unless they are a SB team.....

 

The Titans have moved off of every older guy with a bad contract.  What's left is older guys that still can play that are expensive.  Something they can live with for 2023 since the easy out for all 3 (Tannehill, Henry, Byard) is 2024 or perhaps trade deadline 2023 if the season starts off poorly.

 

The entire system in the NFL is based on constant roster turnover year to year and the team always trying to find a better, younger, and cheaper alternative across the team.  The Tannehill, Levis, Willis situation is that in a nutshell.  Sometimes it works out as planned.  Sometimes not.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, BudsOilers said:

 

Explain why the team is having Tannehill be in the facility every day if the intention is to trade or cut him?  Did you not learn anything about the McNair situation in 2006?  

 

There's no way the Titans would be exposing themselves to a 27 M liability if the intent was not to play Tannehill in the fall.  This would have blown up by now if this was the case.

 

It's frankly amazing how some of you don't grasp this pretty basic fact.

 

Who says its the team having him show up?  Perhaps he realizes that his performance + being an offseason no show hurts his value more  than anything.  When he commented on his offseason availability yesterday, I did find it kind of interesting.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...