The Jeff Ireland Discussion Thread

Kickers miss. You can run point scoring averages counting only offensive touchdowns. If you want to compile the data and suddenly pretend every kicker that has ever kicked in the NFL is perfect and 100% then have at it hoss. Good luck trying to explain why that's legitimate.

 

I've been doing it for years so I have a pretty good idea where it stacks up.

 

..... and how do you think the below stats rank compared to the rest of the league's tandems?

Here's Bess & Hartline's combined production/stats/contribution inside our opponents' 40 yard line

• 10 catches in 26 attempts
• 126 yards
• 54.3 QBR
• 38% reception rate
• 4.8 yards per target
• 0 TDs
• 0 RedZone yards
• only 15% of their 860 total yards

The above stats are quite significant considering 24 of our 59 drives crossed our opponents' 40 (excluding kneel downs & TDs prior to the 40).
That's 41% of the time we were knocking on the scoring door.

• Unfortunately those 24 drives resulted in only 81 points, including 0 from Bess & Hartline.
• It gets worse. Of those paltry 81 points, 30 resulted with neither Bess nor Hartline having ANY contribution whatsoever across our opponents' 40.

If you consider that as "more yards per pass route and more big play receptions than just about any other WR tandem" then we and the rest of the league have serious problems. Bess & Hart might be solid between our average starting field position (the 25) and our opponents' 40, but it's a completely different story inside the 40, and that's simply not good enough.

 

It probably doesn't rank that highly but I don't think it is the WRs' fault. The fact they are being targeted often suggests that they are getting open, or at least Tannehill thinks they are. I don't recall any INTs inside the opponents' 40 so that suggests that they are not just blanketed in coverage. I also don't remember a lot of passes defensed by the opponent in that area. That suggests that Tannehill's passes have been off the mark, not that Bess or Hartline are doing something wrong.

It is a fact that Bess and Hartline have a lot of big play (20+ yard) receptions and a high combined yards per pass route. It's simply not debatable.

 

That doesn't help the discussion

 

How are you accounting for this kind of play, for example?

[TABLE="class: mod-data mod-pbp"]
[TR="class: odd"]
[TD]2nd and 15 at CIN 41
[/TD]
[TD]R.Tannehill pass deep right to D.Bess pushed ob at CIN 13 for 28 yards (N.Clements).
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

 

31 of how many total plays inside the red zone?

 

If you say so.

 

I wouldn't? I wouldn't trade them for Nicks and Cruz? Or White and Jones? Fitzgerald and Roberts? Johnson and Walter?
It's one thing to acknowledge their performance and be appreciative of it, but to say they are a better duo than any of those or several others, is totally ludicrous IMO.

 

I question this. From what I can see, we line up in shotgun with 3 and 4 WR sets as much as we line up in 2 WR sets with Tannehill under Center.

And I'm sorry, but this argument is kind of silly when Jeff Ireland, Joe Philbin, and the Miami Dolphins have basically admitted their mistake with Legadu Naanee by cutting him. And then they've went right ahead and supported the argument that they would like to upgrade that 3rd WR option by going out and signing a finally/hopefully healthy Jabar Gaffney.

Their actions have basically supported everything I'm saying here.

 

So all of a sudden Tannehill becomes the problem when the field shrinks as we hit the opponents' 40 despite Bess & Hartline not being playmakers nor scoring threats, nor ever have been?

It absolutely IS debatable, as I just showed you the stats of a TERRIBLE yards per attempt (4.8) and an even WORSE number of big plays (zero) in 26 attempts, so stop making excuses for it. The fact that you've relegated your argument to scapegoating Tannehill for their abysmal production inside the 40 is a testament to their poor production all by itself b/c actual playmaking receivers who possess a legitimate ability to score don't need excuses made for them, and they don't need excuses made for them b/c they can still make plays and score on non-perfect passes, do so with the field shortening, and even in the face of extra coverage.

Would you like me to post hundreds of Youtube clips of WRs turning nothing into something inside the 40, turning a 10-40 yard quick pass into a TD, not dropping catches in the endzone as they're falling to the ground, or going over a defender to catch a fade (just in case you missed AJ Green's on Sean Smith despite Smith's coverage being pretty tight)? Hartline has had 2 TD opportunities that I can recall off the top of my head. One was dropped; the other he was outplayed on, just as he's usually outplayed in the endzone. Bess & Hart had 10 catches that were NOT turned into anything, and that's not b/c of Tannehill; it's b/c they lack scoring/playmaking ability. Out of the remaining non-completions, there are plenty of receivers around the league who WOULD have converted some of them. It's all about efficiency, and they lack it inside the 40, and there's no excuse you can make for them that changes that.

 

The 41 isn't inside the red zone.

 

Then I would seriously go ahead and make the comparison between Bess and Hartline and the league norm among starting receivers if you're going to relegate "red zone yards" to plays that start inside the 20. I think you'll find that there are lots of starting receivers with not so many yards in that area, quite a few with zero like Bess and Hartline, and quite a few with zero TDs like Bess and Hartline.

Please, gather the data and make the comparison.

 

I agree. Like I said..we are a mile wide and an inch deep. I am still not sure about RT.....I am pretty sure we still need help in the passing game and a FS. Then address depth issues. Then I think we are ready.

 

Neither is the 40, 39, 38, 37, 36 . . . 21.

 

I think we are thin at Wr, and Te, and Lb otherwise we are doing well.

Carroll and Wilson played a lot and did not embarrass themselves

I also think Amaya passes Clemons sooner rather than later, CC is ALWAYS 3 steps slow reacting to stuff deep down the field.

 

and quite a few others, it seems.

 

Yes, they cut a player who hadn't done much and fumbled at a critical time and then brought in another street FA to take his roster spot. They haven't panicked. They haven't made any trades or given up major assets to get the elusive No. 3 receiver. They aren't paying Gaffney much either. Nothing about their actions suggest they are in the least bit panicked about the No. 3 WR situation.

 

Padre, that was 31 attempts inside the 40, not the redzone.
Inside the redzone we've run 38 plays.
Bess & Hartline: 0 receptions

 

no kidding. I can count to potato, too.



On a side note, do you realize that football is full of situational moments and that being inside scoring range and in the redzone are unique in and of themselves, just as being on your own 2 yard line is uniquely different than being on your own 30?

I gave a specific, significant situational stat. There's nothing you can do to skew or discredit it. It is what it is. Period.

 

Wrong. I used plays that start inside the opponents' 40, not just the redzone, although they do get even worse in the redzone.
That's 39 yards of field (no small potatoes by any regard), as opposed to 35 yards from our average starting field position (the 25) and our opponents' 40 where Bess & Hartline produced most of their yards.

 

Ok, but the point remains. They saw it as a problem, and they took action.

I'd venture to guess that if Ireland had a do-over this past offseason, getting someone > Naanee would've been more of a priority. I think even he, himself will admit this

 

stop scapegoating Tannehill.

Convenient of you to ignore the significant situational aspects of football in order to make it seem like Bess & Hartline are productive all across the field.

No, you tell me what it is about Bess & Hartline's ability that suddenly makes them good inside scoring range when they've never been so, and don't tell me "Welllll, they're good outside it so that has to make them good inside it".

 

What?! That spans 39 yards of the field for crying out loud!!... you know-- the 39 yards CLOSEST TO THE ENDZONE.

If ANYONE is cherry picking stats it's your use of everything that happens from our average starting field position to the 40 (a span of 35 yards) and discounting everything that happens thereafter. Since you were the one trying to give out math lessons, you tell me which one spans more of the field, 39 yards or 35 yards. My money's on 39.

I'm not sure why you think situational stats are foreign to football. I got mine from SI.com. Most sites use them. Did I make up the term "redzone" or "field goal/scoring range" or have they existed for quite a while now? I'm sorry but the only thing that could help your argument is a magic lamp.

 

He was a cap cut, not merely let walk after his contract expired.

 

And let's not forget Brian Hartline was in the hospital for a while.

 

The Saints have 3 starting quality WRs though. Last year they had 4. The Chargers have 3 who have started quite a bit at some point in their careers. They aren't thin. We were very thin. Most teams have at least 3 starting quality WRs. Now with Gaffney we should too.

 

If Belichick traded Welker within the division for a 3rd round pick, he'd be insane.

 

PFF shows him thrown at 48 times including the Bengals game.

 

I've never seen anyone here even remotely hint that.

 

Here you go:

Bess's & Hartline's stats inside the 40

• 54.3 QBR
• 38% reception rate
• 4.8 yards per target
• 0 TDs

Tannehill's stats inside the 40

• 73.3 QBR
• 50% completion
• 5.3 yards per attempt
• 1 TD

Compare that to Tanny's stats inside the 40 outside of Bess & Hartline

• 100.6 QBR
• 67% completion
• 5.8 y/a
• 1 TD

So, you tell me who's bringing down whom.




(BTW, I misread Hartline & Bess's SportsIllustrated.com stats, so they were adjusted above)

 

Which he receives credit for doing, he did not try to squeeze another yr out of bullfrog and it panned out

 

Are you seriously trying to downplay a deficient aspect of Hartline & Bess's scoring ability (or lack thereof) in order to support your argument?

If a fade isn't the only way to catch a TD [which it obviously isn't] then I'm sure you have a whole list of other ways Bess & Hartline excel at sticking it in the endzone in order to make their "fade deficiency" a non-issue. The floor is yours.

 

Hold up a moment, Hartline is in the top 5 in receiving yards, and you are saying what exactly?

"inside the 40"?

Really? How many times is he targeted in the end zone?

Let's compare apples to apples here.

 

Thatta boy texans.

 

I'm saying 2 things:
1. that half his yards came in 1 game, and the last I checked we don't get to remove those yards and reapply them to other games as we see fit. How does Hartline rank compared to the rest of the league when looking at the 80% of his body of work excluding the Zona game? BTW, of course he's going to be top 5 when he has a 253 yard game through 5 games skewing his average, especially considering some teams have only played 4 games thanks to bye weeks.
2. that football is situational, and just b/c a player is good in one aspect of the game it doesn't make him good in all aspects of the game. The entire 40 yard stretch of field closest to the endzone is NOT some insignificant piece of land. It's at least as important, if not more so, than the previous 40 yards. There's a reason why great possession receivers like Bess (and Hartline) who excel at moving the chains can be had for $3.0 million/year compared to how much it costs for receivers who can both move the chains AND stick it in the endzone. I take it that being scoring efficient isn't important to you?

who said anything about targeting him in the endzone with every throw made inside the 40? And FYI, we've been inside the forty 24 times. That's nearly half of our possessions, so stop trying to downplay it.

Why are you trying to compare apples to apples when being inside scoring range isn't apples to apples with the rest of the field. It's its own situation.

 

Back then hos didn't want me.
Now I'm hot hos all on me.

 

lmao i hate that damn face