Omar Kelly @OmarKelly · 1 min Ryan Tannehill said the flurry of interceptions lately are caused by the team working in new route combos vs different coverages.
Yup. I think folks also missed early on in the tweets where one of the reporters was saying that the team was running a "lot" more situational stuff compared to other practices.
I think a lot of young QB's have these sorts of games. I can't check right now, but if I recall Tannehill had 4 games last year with multiple interceptions? Similar numbers in his rookie year too. Peyton Manning had a bunch of years with 4+ multi-interception games, and he'd sprinkle in 4,5,6 INT games if I remember correctly. Brees has had multiple 2+ INT games in several seasons. Luck had turnover-happy games in the postseason. The difference being these guys started increasing their TDs/yards/wins/Playoff appearances and we forget it a little bit. I don't disagree that it'd be good to see some more consistency....but without Tannehill improving at all, a few less sacks, a couple more deep balls connected (by luck or skill) and his stats compare pretty closely to those kinds of guys in their first few years. And this isn't an excuse...but I would like to see the number of interceptions he threw at the end of each half when he was throwing a hail mary or trying to do something on a 4th and 28. I can think of a couple, but I just remember thinking it was an inordinate amount compared to all the other Dolphins QBs over the years who wouldn't even attempt them.
I find that disappointing. Coaches don't just try stuff for no reason. They don't suddenly say hey let's throw passes to the flat against tampa two. It seems to me they're trying out new stuff (i.e. stuff Bill Lazor is bringing with him from Philadelphia) and seeing if their players can execute it. They threw a couple of interceptions trying to execute it and now Tannehill is basically saying that's done, we're throwing that stuff out and going back to the normal ways we know to beat those coverages. Considering how much people around here WANT to see change compared with the ways we were beating those coverages under Sherman, and the ways Tannehill has been beating those coverages since Texas A&M...I would say that's a little disappointing.
I'm sure it's obviously hard for you to speculate... but what may be an example you think that they could be referring to? What type of coverage/route combo do you think that the team or Tannehill specifically would have trouble beating tht instead would lead to INTs?
Your reading into it a bit much when your saying they are throwing stuff out. He never says that. PBP has it as: Maybe he meant more of that they were done with that route for that time and that they will get back to it later. Bleh we really need to fast forward to a game with them playing at least a quarter. Be nice to see this live. Were definitely missing our guys being at camp to get their view. Speaking of.......are you going anytime soon?
Not really. Here is his EXACT statement: Right there. Plain print. Are you really suggesting this because you think it's actually true? Or are you just playing devil's advocate.
I'm suggesting it because the quote your sticking on is not a definitive quote. It's one of those quotes a reporter should really jump on and get a clearer answer. But in no way is that quote a 'throwing it out' statement.
Why don't you guys listen to it straight from the horse's mouth and draw your own conclusions: http://www.miamidolphins.com/multim...ing-Camp/6bb1f35e-58d9-45df-9d94-159d0bee6372 I think he did mean that they might want to see a different approach, but I don't find it necessarily "disapponting" as you put it CK... I just think Lazor is trying his to put the players in the best positions to succeed, there's no point trying to insist on something that doesn't work...
That they will come back to it later after trying other things instead of coming back the next day and bashing their heads against it. I highly doubt Ryan would openly state to media a give up forever attitude like your reading into it. I mean have you ever said to someone that you were going to move onto something else and have it interpreted as you were never coming back to said thing again? Edited for sucky grammar.
Thanks for that. Yah he even chuckles over it. It's almost like saying "Yah we sucked with this........lets move on and come back to it another day".
Omar Kelly @OmarKelly · Ryan Tannehill has SUCKED the past two days. Does it bother me? Not really. He's been bad two practices out of 10. It use to be 4 out of 10 Omar Kelly @OmarKelly · But.....there is no debating Ryan Tannehill has been bad the past two days. I'm starting to worry about his arm wearing down. Omar Kelly @OmarKelly · Tannehill is throwing A LOT of passes lately because of Miami's QB issues. Seth Lobato's arm looked like garbage today. Tannehill is human Omar makes a good point about Tannehill throwing a lot of passes...with a higher amount of attempts, besides the arm wearing down, there's obviously also a higher chance of throwing bad passes and picks.
I agree with this. He's trying out stuff he's seen work elsewhere, most likely stuff he's run elsewhere, and seeing if these players can execute it. They didn't give indications that they're executing it well, so they're going to have to move on. As you say, there's no point keeping something you don't have confidence is going to work during the games. I'm just disappointed that the stuff didn't work and so they're shelving the new idea.
I see zero indication he meant they'll come back to it. Moving on means they tried it, it didn't work, so they're moving on with things that will work.
Also interesting that if he's throwing that many passes, his % of INTs may not actually be that much worse. It's training camp, it's not like they are keeping track of stats. The only thing there is to report is when he throws an INT. He'd have to be throwing a ridiculous amount of passes to excuse 6 INTs over two days - but maybe it's not as bad as it would seem at first.
After hearing it myself, I agree. RT admitted that one of the INTs was his brain fart. I think he would have admitted it if two or three were his fault. I think his explanation was honest. My guess is that he was told to focus on trying to hit certain route combos against certain Ds. They were new and different from the ones they'd used before. Maybe they were just a variation or constraint play off of what they usually did. They didn't work. Who knows why? Maybe the timing didn't work. In my experience that's the most likely thing. I know I've tried route combinations to play off of an expected defense reaction that just didn't work on the field. They looked great in my head and even on paper, but in reality the timing just tended to be off between when the QB needed to decide/throw, when the receiver would be ready and when you could get the coverage to commit.
I also got a sense that a lot of the interceptions were exacerbated from the switch to a more timing-based offense. Ryan himself said his throws were a fraction of a second off. I don't know if you can find solace in that, but i interpret that as he was throwing them in the right spots. I hope timing would be easier to correct than accuracy, especially as the new offense becomes old hat.
All one has to do is watch a few Geno Smith games from last year. Tanny has never had games that poor, even in his rookie year. I'd be a little more concerned if that was the case.
By comparison, Nick Foles has thrown only 4 ints through 10 camp days, while Chip Kelly is implementing new routes. His top 2 receivers aren't practicing either. They have a rookie, Jordan Matthews, and Brad Smith starting at WR. Tannehill has thrown 6 ints in 2 days.
Is that accurate? Foles has only thrown 4 interceptions all camp? Tannehill may have thrown 6 the last 2 days but I'm quite positive the total is more like 10 or 12 for the 11 days. If that's true about Foles, maybe that's an unusual standard to be holding Tannehill up to. It could also be an indication of the extent to which Lazor is truly bringing over those Chip Kelly concepts of throwing into open space.
Yes, that is accurate. I have been keeping track of their camp as well as ours for comparison. Foles had 1 int in practice 5, practice 6, practice 7, and practice 8. Those were his 4. And, people were actually concerned because the 4 ints were more than the 2 he had thrown last year, LOL.
According to bleedinggreennation.com, it's 4 ints. http://www.bleedinggreennation.com/...-camp-practice-notes-nick-foles-interceptions You can track every practice at their website.
I hope so. Finnegan seems to have found the fountain of youth. I am very pleased with what i'm hearing in camp from him.
Edit: My fault. You were correct. He threw one more to Curtis Marsh on that day. So, that would make 5 ints in 10 camp days.
The title of the article says he threw a pair of interceptions. A few bullet points down from "#4" it says this: Curtis Marsh makes an impressive leaping interception to grab a Nick Foles pass. So 5 in 7 practices as of Sunday.
No problem. I think we're all overanalyzing practices anyway. They could run drills differently or have Foles throwing 15 passes a session and Tannehill 50. Who knows? Our guys are also reporting INTs on interception drills I think
Yeah, we already had a good pass defense last season and I'm hoping it gets even better this season.. I honestly think our defense is poised for big year
Agreed. I tend to try and refrain from commenting on who's starting/not starting (particularly the OL) and who's at fault based on TC reports primarily b/c I don't get to see them myself, but also b/c the reporter has very little idea what is being worked on. About the only thing I pay attention to is stuff that happens one on one and general comments about how a unit is looking. I figure a reporter can generally tell if a receiver or a DB made a great play or whether D-lineman beat an O-lineman or was stone-walled. And I think they can be generally be accurate as to whether the offense or the defense overall has looked better on a given day. But I don't trust them to lay blame for a completion or INT accurately (for example) or to know if the coaches like/dislike a player or a simply trying different combinations.
I thought our pass D was very good when Patterson was healthy (the few times) and that was with a somewhat hobbled Wake most of the year. If Finnegan can play as well as reported and we get a healthy Wake all year I think our pass D can be very good. Once Jordan returns and if Jones can bounce back from a sub par year, I think it could be one of the best in the league.
