1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Tannehill & Rodgers Comparison

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by Da 'Fins, May 20, 2015.

  1. Da 'Fins

    Da 'Fins Season Ticket Holder Staff Member Club Member

    34,739
    47,803
    113
    Dec 19, 2007
    Birmingham, AL
    I thought I'd look at some numbers and found an interesting comparison.

    Aaron Rodgers (playing with a great offense, great talent, and great system, mind you) didn't start until his 4th year in the league. He came in very young (was 21 1/2 when he was drafted). Tannehill was almost 24 when he was drafted (but was 'younger' as far as a QB). So, Rogers first year starting was his 4th year (he was 24 and turned 25 during the season). Last year, Tannehill was 26 in his 3rd year. Will turn 27 this year. All things considered, however, I think they are pretty comparable seasons (AR - year 1 starter; RT - year 3 starter) in terms of experience/expectations (though I'd rate Rodgers skill talent around him significantly better in 2008). Here's how they compare:

    (QBR - is ESPN's QB rating; Rate - is the NFL's system)

    Rodgers 4th season - first as a starter (Age 24/25):

    [table="width: 10, class: grid, align: left"]
    [tr]
    [td]Year[/td]
    [td]GP[/td]
    [td]Comp[/td]
    [td]Attempts[/td]
    [td]%[/td]
    [td]Yards[/td]
    [td]YPA[/td]
    [td]TD[/td]
    [td]Long[/td]
    [td]INT[/td]
    [td]Fumb[/td]
    [td]QBR[/td]
    [td]Rate[/td]
    [td][/td]
    [/tr]
    [tr]
    [td] 2008[/td]
    [td]16[/td]
    [td] 341[/td]
    [td] 536[/td]
    [td] 63.6[/td]
    [td]4,038[/td]
    [td] 7.53[/td]
    [td] 28[/td]
    [td] 71[/td]
    [td] 13[/td]
    [td] 6[/td]
    [td] 66.5[/td]
    [td] 93.8[/td]
    [td][/td]
    [/tr]
    [/table]

    Tannehill's 3rd season (Age 26):

    [table="width: 10, class: grid, align: left"]
    [tr]
    [td]Year[/td]
    [td]GP[/td]
    [td]Comp[/td]
    [td]Attempts[/td]
    [td]%[/td]
    [td]Yards[/td]
    [td]YPA[/td]
    [td]TD[/td]
    [td]Long[/td]
    [td]INT[/td]
    [td]Fumb[/td]
    [td]QBR[/td]
    [td]Rate[/td]
    [td][/td]
    [/tr]
    [tr]
    [td] 2014[/td]
    [td]16[/td]
    [td] 392[/td]
    [td] 590[/td]
    [td] 66.4[/td]
    [td]4,045[/td]
    [td] 6.86[/td]
    [td] 27[/td]
    [td] 50[/td]
    [td] 12[/td]
    [td] 4[/td]
    [td] 59.1[/td]
    [td] 92.8[/td]
    [td][/td]
    [/tr]
    [/table]

    This just makes me salivate for the next couple of seasons with Tannehill. Yards per attempt are a significant difference and that is attributable to several more dump passes. However, I think that with this WR group, he'll have open receivers more quickly and won't have to dump off as much. And, short passes to a player like Stills, Parker or even Jennings will yield better YAC.

    OG play and RT keeps working to improve and I think this has a great chance to be a great offense. I mean great. One thing about RT is that he is a hard worker. (Yes, I think he definitely has areas to work on but I suspect he will work very hard on those weak spots - and that the offense will be more suitable for his talents this year).

    Someone made a comparison to Cutler in the comments of the PFT piece quoting Ryan's agent, in that the Bears signed him to a big deal expected him to improve. But, that's completely flawed. I think RT has a much higher ceiling than Cutler because Ryan has some humility about him and is more of a team player; he's very tough in taking a lot of hits. That garners far more respect than Cutler would ever have. And, he's not a prima donna unwilling to change but has demonstrated he is willing to put in the hard work to improve.
     
  2. CashInFist

    CashInFist Well-Known Member

    10,069
    2,624
    113
    Nov 30, 2007
    West Virginia
    I mean...seriously?...

    Rodgers vs Tannehill now? I like Ryan Tannehill's game, but this is silly bro.
     
    dolphin25 and gunn34 like this.
  3. JJ_79

    JJ_79 Well-Known Member

    4,587
    1,707
    113
    Nov 25, 2012
    Germany
    Maybe a poor mans Rodgers, with potential. But that is fine with me, as long as he improves like he has.
     
    MikeHoncho and Fin4Ever like this.
  4. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,159
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    That YPA gap is HUGE.

    When you have a good to great completion %, but a low YPA, we're talking serious dink and dunk.
     
    dolphin25, Bpk, gunn34 and 2 others like this.
  5. 77FinFan

    77FinFan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    8,215
    1,896
    113
    Mar 10, 2013
    Buckeye Land
    Agreed. How much of that is on Tanny do you think?
     
  6. jw3102

    jw3102 season ticket holder

    7,760
    3,486
    113
    Sep 4, 2010
    Maui, Hawaii
    I think a fairer comparison for Tannehill would be the third season of Andy Dalton. Dalton had 33 TD passes in his third season as a starter, his passer rating was 4 points lower than Tannehill, but his yards per attempt was higher than Tannehill.

    Dalton signed a big contract after his third season and preceded to regress in his fourth season as the Bengals starter. Now many Bengal fans are calling for him to be replaced as the starter, even though he has a winning record as an NFL QB and he has led them to the playoffs three of the four years he has been their QB.

    I am not saying Tannehill will turn into Dalton, but if you are comparing QB's, Tannehill is a lot closer to being a Dalton than a Rodgers, who is probably the best QB in the NFL at this time.

    Hopefully in a few years Tannehill will have developed into a QB who can be compared with the best in the league, but right now his stats may be improving, but he needs to lead this team to the playoffs on a consistent basis before you start comparing him to the top tier QB's in the NFL.
     
    dolphin25 and roy_miami like this.
  7. rafael

    rafael Well-Known Member

    27,364
    31,261
    113
    Apr 6, 2008
    Obviously the numbers are already very comparable. When we first drafted Tannehill I said that he had Rodgers like potential but that he would take time to develop and wouldn't get three years to learn on the bench so people would become jaded when he didn't look like Rodgers on day 1. I said back then that the real comparison would come when we could compare Tannehill's year 4 stats with Rodgers year 4 stats. I thought that after that year we would be able to reasonably compare Tannehill and Rodgers.
     
  8. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    If defense had played even average the last two years, Tannehill would have lead them to the playoffs at least once, maybe twice. So sick of seeing the argument of leading the team to the playoffs as the measuring stick. Winning is a team stat.
     
    PhinFan1968 and Fin4Ever like this.
  9. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,159
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    A bit. I can tell by Lazor's words he doesn't want to dink and dunk. But much was made about him shrinking the field and eliminating things the offense doesn't do well.
     
    dolphin25, Fin4Ever and 77FinFan like this.
  10. Piston Honda

    Piston Honda Well-Known Member

    7,853
    8,088
    113
    Sep 23, 2014
    Did you miss the part about Rodgers not playing until his 4th season?
     
    Pandarilla and Da 'Fins like this.
  11. Piston Honda

    Piston Honda Well-Known Member

    7,853
    8,088
    113
    Sep 23, 2014
    Dink and dunk is a good idea when you have shaky pass pro, with the new receivers on board a lot more of those short passes will turn into bigger gains. I also think Lazor wants to run more than he did last year, having a second back will go ablong ways towards making that happen.
     
    Fin4Ever, 77FinFan and resnor like this.
  12. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    I'll point out, that after the bye week, so the last two thirds of the season, Tannehill's ypa average was a 7, or a little over, I believe. Not bad for the third year guy, in a new offense.
     
    Da 'Fins, PhinFan1968 and 77FinFan like this.
  13. rafael

    rafael Well-Known Member

    27,364
    31,261
    113
    Apr 6, 2008
    IMO a large part of that was the new system install. If you look at the YPA after the first three games when Tannehill obviously got more comfortable his YPA the rest of the season was 7.34. His YPA those first three games was 5.03. Those first three games were clearly an anomaly compared to the rest of the season. I don't agree that the Dolphin offense was as dink and dunk for most of the season as the stats make it appear.
     
    Bpk, Da 'Fins, EverFin and 3 others like this.
  14. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Their college numbers were equally as similar.
     
  15. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,159
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    It was dink and dunk the middle. And of course the beginning I don't believe was as dink and dunk it was just very unsuccessful. Let's see how it grows this year. 9 passes over 20 yards all year. 3 TD passes over 20 yards all year. I'd like to see more.
     
    dolphin25 likes this.
  16. finsfandan

    finsfandan Well-Known Member

    2,547
    600
    113
    Dec 14, 2014
    Come on maaan. Tannehill will be solid to good but never on Rodgers' level. Stop with the statistics, guys. Use your eyes.

    This is why I don't put much stock into analytics. You can cherry pick stats to trick yourself into believing something like this.
     
    dolphin25 and gunn34 like this.
  17. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Thank you, Nostradamus. Can I get the Powerball numbers, as long as you're here?
     
  18. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    And by the way...You were advocating for a "Moneyball"approach...but now you don't put stock in analytics?
     
  19. Piston Honda

    Piston Honda Well-Known Member

    7,853
    8,088
    113
    Sep 23, 2014
    Lazor also had to deal w the fact that his only effective back could only give him 15 carries or so per game. A lot of the short passing was designed to augment the run and keep the offense on schedule. The problem w that was two fold. One, outside of Wallace and perhaps Clay, defense had nothing to fear down the field and routinely squatted on the shorter throws. Second, no one outside of Clay was a real threat to turn those short throws into bigger gains.

    Not only could teams squat on the short throws, even if Lazor dialed up vertical stems, after Albert was injured they could count on their pass rush to disrupt them before they came open.
     
    Da 'Fins likes this.
  20. Piston Honda

    Piston Honda Well-Known Member

    7,853
    8,088
    113
    Sep 23, 2014
    Dont worry, it's coming.
     
    EverFin likes this.
  21. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    Need to adjust for inflation. League has evolved. A passer rating of 90 is average now.
     
    dolphin25, Bpk, Fin4Ever and 2 others like this.
  22. CaribPhin

    CaribPhin Guest

    In a ranking situation you would adjust these numbers for performance relative to the rest of the league, sure. But outside of any major changes that affected the QB position, the numbers are comparable over time. It takes the same amount of work to produce these numbers. Relative to the league these numbers are now the 12th best instead of the 6th best QB, but, 2014 Ryan Tannehill is essentially 2008 Aaron Rodgers. Now, does that mean Ryan Tannehill will become Aaron Rodgers? No it doesn't. But, what it does mean is that the veneer on Tannehill's 2014 season is only less shiny compared to Rodgers's 2008 season because other people got better, not because Aaron Rodgers necessarily did anything particularly better in 2008. To be fair, this is a golden age of quarterbacks.
     
    dolphin25 likes this.
  23. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,159
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    Wallace improved Tanny's rating and YPA. And if these stats are accurate:

    http://www.reddit.com/r/miamidolphins/comments/2s7cer/ryan_tannehill_to_mike_wallace_stats/

    Wallace was overpaid so I'm not starting that argument. But he was pretty good for Tanny last year. That's a 7.98 ypa not terrible.
     
  24. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    There absolutely have been major changes that affected the position. There is a reason why the numbers are inflating.
     
  25. Brasfin

    Brasfin Well-Known Member

    2,435
    1,672
    113
    Apr 27, 2013
    Brazil
    This. People keep ignoring how the early part of the season brought his averages down a ton.. I think he will be just fine in the YPA category this season.
     
    resnor likes this.
  26. CaribPhin

    CaribPhin Guest

    Since 2008 have there been any verifiable changes?
     
  27. Limbo

    Limbo Mad Stillz

    2,476
    1,128
    113
    Mar 21, 2013
    Aside from the recent inflation as someone mentioned above, again the glaring disparity is there between their yards per attempt. That's my concern: that Tannehill since he entered the League has the same shortcomings he had in college. It's been five seasons and he hasn't been able to improve in this area of the game. Rodgers always had more dangerous big play ability, and was always more consistent attacking the whole field. His college numbers look a lot like his pro numbers, just like Tannehill's do. The issue is that Rodgers' college numbers suggested potential greatness, while Tannehill's didn't and still don't.

    There was always a lot of projection involved with Tannehill, and so far the improvements have been slow and incremental, and not in the most important depts of the game when we're talking about making a leap into a consistent contender.
     
  28. DolphinGreg

    DolphinGreg Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    5,227
    6,527
    113
    Dec 7, 2014
    ...or we could just watch a video. :)

    Here's Aaron Rodgers circa 2008:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ph4J1jv1Ds

    I'll be honest, I see a QB with a lot of potential there but definitely one still new to the NFL. I think it's very clear that he really gained confidence as the season went on. IN fact, while throwing for 200 yards only 4 times in the first 10 weeks, he did it every single week there after eclipsing the 270 mark 3 of those 7 times.

    But to be honest, I don't see a lot of plays from Rodgers 2008 tape that are beyond Tannehill's highlight reels either. There's a lot of quick passes, a lot of short routes, a lot of spreading the field out, a ton of quick slants and a boat load of play-action.

    Let's remember that back in 2008, the Packers actually ran the football. Ryan Grant had 1,200 yards and the team rushed for a total of some 1,800 yards that year. Rodgers actually contributed about 200 himself. If you look at the Dolphins over the course of last season, they too ran the football well despite the story being all about the QB. In 2014, Miami amassed a total of about 1,850 yards on the ground. Tannehill actually contributed about 300 of that. So if you go strictly by who Rodgers was at the time and consider what the two offenses generally looked like, there's a good case to be made that there are more similarities than differences.

    If you don't believe me, here are some basic statistics.
    In 2014, Ryan Tannehill averaged 253 yards per game with a standard deviation of 56 yards.
    In 2008, Aaron Rodgers averaged 238 yards per game with a standard deviation of 59 yards.
    Those two years were evidently pretty similar, especially considering the team rushing stats being nearly identical!

    If I drop the best and worst games we get the following: Tannehill averaging 238 yards per game with a standard deviation of 39 and Rodgers averaging 241 yards per game with a standard deviation of 47. So, if we try to eradicate possible outliers, we see the two QBs averaged nearly the same thing during most weeks.

    Simply put, Tannehill's year was really benefited by that late game at home against Minnesota in which he threw for 396 yards. He is a much less prolific QB when you look at the 15 other games. Even with his "worst" game taken out as well, Tannehill's average went down meaning the inflation due to the 396 was more significant than the deflation cause by the 177. So the consistency is there with Tannehill...but are we impressed by the product that he generally was week-in, week-out?

    By contrast, Rodgers' average actually went up when we erase his best and worst games meaning his biggest stinker was having a bigger impact than he's best game. That makes sense. He threw for 110 yards in a loss against Minnesota. His team actually managed a whopping 184 yards of total offense that day so I'm not sure the OP was correct to suggest he had a better team than Tannehill. In fact, the Packers went 6-10 in 2008...so yeah...they weren't really better than the 2014 Dolphins. :)

    Anywho, by the time 2009 rolled around, Green Bay felt Rodgers was ready to be "the guy" and it looked to everyone they were right by the end of 2009 as Rodgers and Warner aired it out for some 780 yards, 9 TDs and a combined 96 points!

    But before we conclude that Tannehill will do that, consider that Rodgers had a lot of experienced weapons that were way beyond just reliable--all of which he had worked with the prior year. In addition, he became a much more nimble QB in the pocket and began to roll out frequently. He had gained experience often operating out of the spread the year before and seemed to read the field remarkably fast. As was shown, the 2008 Packers weren't nearly as explosive and as expected they often crept up on the goal line forcing them into goal-to-go downs around the 5-10 yards lines. That wasn't the case in 2009, they regularly stretched the field with deep, vertical routes and Rodgers' threw the ball very well to his big-bodied and speed WRs.

    The team decided to open up the offense quite a bit in 2009 but Rodgers was clearly a large step beyond where he had been the prior year. Rodgers yardage went up to 4,400 yards, his 30 TDs was great considering he only threw 7 TDs. His completition percentage was nearly 65% and most impressive of all, he did all of that with basically the same 33 throws per game he had the year before. Where as Tannehill was average 10.3 yards per completion last year, Rodgers in 2009 was getting 12.7. That's a difference of 23% on each pass the QB completed.

    What's interesting is that Rodgers circa 2008-2009 was throwing the same volume of balls as Tannehill last year but he took a large leap forward going from an impressive 93 QBR to 103 in just a single year and he's never looked back. He's continued to post QBR numbers between 100 and 120 over the last 5 seasons.


    The moral of the story there is that while Rodgers 2008 looks a lot like Tannehill's 2014, it was really the jump that Rodgers made between 2008 and 2009 that was special. Will Tannehill manage to make that jump? We need hard evidence to support a yes or no answer on that. I don't understand how it happened with Rodgers so I can't even begin to predict that it will happen for Tannehill, particularly considering that Tannehill has already played 48 games as a pro where as Rodgers was only beginning his actual playing career.


    It had taken Rodgers--on a team with some great WRs (Driver, Jennings, Nelson, etc)--no more than a single year as the starter to become a really damn prolific player that was Play-off and even Super Bowl ready.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6yPiCAfObZA
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=awxZmEVd2o0


     
    Bumrush likes this.
  29. Brasfin

    Brasfin Well-Known Member

    2,435
    1,672
    113
    Apr 27, 2013
    Brazil
    Got ya:

    2008 (Rodger's 4th season in the league, 1st starting)

    1) Philip Rivers - 105.5
    2) Chad Pennington - 97.4
    3) Kurt Warner - 96.5
    4) Drew Brees - 96.2
    5) Peyton Manning - 95.0
    6) Aaron Rodgers - 93.8



    2014 (Tannehill's 3rd season in the league, 3rd starting)1) Tony Romo - 113.2
    2) Aaron Rodgers - 112.2
    3) Ben Roethlisberger - 103.3
    4) Peyton Manning - 101.5
    5) Tom Brady - 97.4
    6) Drew Brees - 97.0
    7) Andrew Luck - 96.5
    8) Carson Palmer - 95.6
    9) Ryan Fitzpatrick - 95.3
    10) Russell Wilson - 95.0
    11) Matt Ryan - 93.9
    12) Philip Rivers - 93.8
    13) Alex Smith - 93.4
    14) Ryan Tannehill - 92.8

    A 93.8 rating in 2008 which ranked 6th in the league, would have ranked 12th in 2014...

    Still, 2014 was Tannehill's 3rd season comparing with Aaron Rodger's (future Hall of Famer) 4th season... while I think it's premature and a little crazy to crown Tannehill a future HOFer, there's no reason to believe he can't at least crack the top 10 in passer rating this upcoming season. And as you can see by that list, 8/10 QB's in the top 10 made the playoffs, which is something I'd personally be very happy with, along with everyone here.
     
    dolphin25 and Bpk like this.
  30. finsfandan

    finsfandan Well-Known Member

    2,547
    600
    113
    Dec 14, 2014
    Much stock. The quote is much stock. There's a time and place for it. You don't need analytics to tell you that Rodgers is faaaar better than Tannehill. You need analytics if you're trying to figure out value.
     
  31. Fin-Omenal

    Fin-Omenal Initiated

    36,936
    10,264
    0
    Mar 25, 2008
    Thee...Ohio State University
    Tannehill doesn't have the personality to ever be an Aaron Rodgers. Aaron is Aaron not only because he is very gifted but he plays with an edge that thus far escapes Tanny.
     
    dolphin25 likes this.
  32. Fin-Omenal

    Fin-Omenal Initiated

    36,936
    10,264
    0
    Mar 25, 2008
    Thee...Ohio State University
    This is how shnit starts...you could likely use those "stats" and find about 10 QBs with similar numbers, and we want to compare him to the best QB in football?? Who wins with these unrealistic comparisons? It's all a trap.
     
    djphinfan likes this.
  33. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,159
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    He also had an EXCELLENT completion percentage through the rest of the year. 69%. I don't need to explain math that tells you, the higher the accuracy %, the less impressive the ypa number is when you are looking at chunk yardage. Like a seasaw.

    For example. Romo had a similar accuracy but 8.5 ypa which is insane at such a high completion percentage. I'm not sure many appreciate how good of a season he really had. If you normalize it, 7.34 ypa at 69% is Alex Smith like. He's getting the ball down the field similar to Smith, on a per pass basis, just having less incompletions to do so. Tanny's numbers of course are more desirable than Smith's (because less incompletions are always better) but in terms of dink and dunk vs chunk yardage, it's about the same. That's with subtracting the first 3 games.

    Essentially, we didn't throw it down the field and complete it much. Seeing as it was 9 completions all year above 20 yards, it makes sense. Matt Ryan had double that. Tony Romo had 22 completions that traveled over 20 yards in the air, and he only threw it 435 times all year (590 for RT) more insanity by Romo. Rivers had 22 completions with balls in the air 20 yards or more. Not sure Rivers had better receivers with Keenan Allen taking a step back. Bridgewater had 13, and he wasn't just learning a new offense he was learning the NFL.

    Ryan improved his accuracy big time down the stretch. Maybe it was Lazor simplifying the offense for a little while who knows. But if he can maintain that excellence while pushing the ball down the field further, we are going to see some great gains in our offense.

    Teddy B is someone to look out for IMO. CK nailed it with him so far. 85 rating without AP in his first year is something. Take a flyer on him late in fantasy this year!
     
    dolphin25, CashInFist and Fin-Omenal like this.
  34. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,159
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    Wilson has "it"
     
    dolphin25 likes this.
  35. adamprez2003

    adamprez2003 Senior Member

    37,392
    14,745
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    new york ciity
    wilson has herpes?
     
    Bpk, Conuficus and resnor like this.
  36. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Sure, but my point still stands: moneyball is all about analytics. For instance, with moneyball, you'd look at these stats, and elect to pay for Tannehill over Rodgers, since their stats are so similar, and Tannehill costs less. Moneyball isn't a guarantee, though, since it is all about stats, and there is no guarantee there, plus the NFL season is so short.
     
  37. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    As to the throws downfield, again, while Tannehill may have some struggles with them, that was totally exacerbated by an oline who couldn't give adequate time to throw, receivers dropping easy balls, and at least one receiver who didn't fit the scheme.
     
  38. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    It's funny, everyone dogged Tannehill for the low ypa, but now that it's shown that once acclimating to the new offense, he was at a 7.3, but that still gets portrayed in a negative light.
     
  39. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,159
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    The clap

    He don't need applause.
     
    Bpk and adamprez2003 like this.
  40. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,159
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    9 completions over 20 yards after 590 attempts. No need for YPA.
     

Share This Page