Tannehill: 11th in NFL with 93.4 Passer Rating

I agree, except in the areas that I mentioned. It is ok to look at the things he does good and bad. If he can improve the bad areas, he will be firmly placed in the top 10. He sucks in the 4th quarter. He is worse than every other starting QB in yards per. He can't throw deep. He has trouble with the 4 minute offense. He has done a ton of good things too. He is far better than I thought he would be. I'm impressed with his toughness. He has the upside that I didn't think he had earlier in the year. Stats don't tell the whole story. If the Defense would play as good as their stats, we would have a better record obviously. I don't think 10-6 gets us in.

 

This is definitely the "clutch play" area that distinguishes him from the QBs who can win games for their teams without exceptional help from other areas of their teams (or from opposing teams that beat themselves). And you can include performance in obvious passing situations (based on down and distance) to your 4th quarter performance observation. The YPA and the clutch play areas are indeed what are distinguishing him from the QBs who are in a higher echelon in the league, and that is a major distinction. However, as you pointed out, it's a major stride forward that he's no longer part of the lower echelon of QBs who occasionally lose games for their teams and for whom there is some question whether they should be long-term starters in the league. Right now Tannehill is a QB who needs his running game to keep down and distance manageable in the passing game, and his defense to stop better QBs in the clutch if the game is close in the 4th quarter. In other words, he's not yet (and may never be) a QB who can win games by himself. He's at an Alex Smith level, not a Philip Rivers/Aaron Rodgers/Peyton Manning/Tom Brady level. And he's also not yet at the level below them consisting of QBs like Tony Romo, Ben Roethlisberger, and Matthew Stafford. He's in what I'd call the third tier of QBs in the league, consisting of players who don't lose games for their teams, but also don't win them.

 

tannehill has put the team in plenty of situations to win it in the 4th. green bay, detroit, denver were the defense letting down the team not tannehill and the offense.

 

It isn't unusual for teams to be in position to win games in the fourth quarter in the NFL, given the parity in the league. Of the approximately 380 games that have been played in the NFL this year, 251 of them (66%) have involved a seven or fewer point lead by one team after three quarters. 274 of them (72%) have involved a ten or fewer point lead by one team after three quarters. If a quarterback can't play well enough for his team to be routinely competitive into the fourth quarter, that quarterback probably won't be a starter for long. The difference for the teams above (Green Bay, Denver, Detroit) is that they have QBs who are the best in the league at clutch play. They routinely defeat opposing defenses in games that are still close into the fourth quarter. Tannehill on the other hand is about average in that area. The difference between 9-2 and 6-5 for the Dolphins this year is that they were defeated by the three best QBs in the league at clutch play, while having a QB who is about average in that area. This will need to be Tannehill's next step of development if the Dolphins hope to be highly competitive with him, unless they plan on pulling off the unlikely event of fielding one of the best defenses of all time, one that can pull off the rare and unlikely feat of routinely stopping the QBs who are the best in the league at clutch play, in the regular season and in the playoffs. They're better off hoping Tannehill takes that next step of development than hoping they compile 11 players on the defensive side of the ball who can stop the league's best QBs on a regular basis.

 

According to PFF Ckap is 34th among qualified players in adjusted accuracy percentage. There are only 32 starters lol. Great performance from him tonight.

 

Just stop, Hipster. Against Green Bay and Detroit, Tannehill didn't have a chance to win the game, as the defense list in final seconds. You're trying really hard to pin these losses on Tannehill, but they are not. Those three losses (GB, DET, DEN) are all the defense.

Speaking of fourth quarter comebacks, Tannehill has had then Enigk that I'm not concerned about him in that area.

 

kaepernick was horrible. How did he regress so much?

 

He was never good to begin with

 

If we are going to anoint Luck as the Dan Marino of the group can't we make Tannehill the John Elway (I'd like to think he gets us a couple of superbowls during his career).

 

Luck has flaws.. He's really good but I wouldn't say he will be the best when all is said and done.

 

That really is huge. Helps the D immensely too.

 

the only qb who doesn't have flaws is rogers, I have Luck in 2nd place.

 

That beard is disgusting. Huge red flag for me.

 

Even Rogers does at times.. He can fall into love with his arm and make some dumb throws.

 

not a good year for the team, turmoil in the front office and staff, just don't know whats going on behind the scenes..

 

meh, yes all qbs have flaws..who has the least..2nd least.

 

IMO Tannehill has been playing like a top 5 QB of late (since the Oakland game). I would say he's been a borderline top 10 QB if you look at the whole season and don't account for him (and the team) adjusting to a new system. I think the big hole in his game at this point is that he's still a bit conservative. I see some deep shots that are available that he still hesitates on. That's what hurts his YPA and that's where he can still make that jump to the guy that takes over games more consistently. He's also gotten better about knowing when to run and when to stay with the play, but as I've said all along, I believe experience is the key there. He can reach Roger's level but it will probably take at least five years of NFL experience. IMO Rogers is the best QB in the game right now and I've always maintained that Tannehill has a similar ceiling. But I've also always said that it would take a around five years

CKap really hasn't regressed. He just hasn't developed. I liked CKap a ton coming out, but I had him as a 2nd rounder. My big concern was that he was never asked to read defenses much in college. Even last season I said that I would take Tannehill over CKap b/c I hadn't seen much development in CKap's game. CKap was the far more dynamic playmaker, but if you don't develop that ability from the pocket, your game is always limited.

Luck is the one young QB I've always had above Tannehill. Tannehill is a more accurate and consistent passer, but Luck has a great ability keep plays alive. He's just such a horse. And he's way ahead of Tannehill in terms of experience. He knows when to take chances and when to run.

Wilson has always been a closer call for me. I love his sense of the game. He feels pressure and almost always knows when to be risky and when to be conservative. He actually reminds me of Joe Montana in that regard. I think Wilson is an under-rated passer in most people's eyes, but I still have his passing ability a notch below Tannehill's. I've maintained that Tannehill's ceiling is higher, but that Wilson was a far more finished product (and a very good one at that). I do see Wilson as a franchise QB. I think he makes his team mates better and carries the team enough of the time. I'm not sure he can reach Roger's level, but I expect he'll be a top 5 guy most years.

I was never a big RG3 fan. I thought he had the highest ceiling, but also a huge bust factor. His pocket feel was always horrendous and I felt it would hurt him against bigger, faster pro defenders. But what has surprised me is that he seems to not have many of the basics down. He has regressed. His coach doesn't seem to trust him enough to know how many steps to take on a drop or what side of the field to read. At this point I almost expect him to be a Jet's QB in waiting.

Dalton was the guy that was beloved by those that were overly focused on stats. I saw him as limited and his stats as inflated by the great talent around him. That's why I saw him as unlikely to develop into a top 5 guy and why I doubted that he'd ever have much playoff success.

Foles is the other guy that was often mentioned as a comparison after his great season last year. I like Foles, but I always saw him as very limited talent wise.

Rogers and Luck may be the only QBs I'd take above Tannehill right now. Peyton, Brady and Brees are still better but are reaching the ends of their great careers. I think Big Ben is a great, under-appreciated QB, but Tannehill is close, younger and a better face of the franchise. Wilson is very good as well, but I see more upside in Tannehill. I like Rivers more than most, but would put him half a tier below the top group. Basically if I was listing the QB I'd want for the next 8 years or so. The top of the list would be Rogers, Luck, Tannehill and Wilson.

 

Its really so hard to predict what Tannehill's true upside is. He keeps getting better. I cant imagine he doesnt get allot better at his deep throws, and once that happens, there arent very many holes in his game.

 

ESPN radio today (I forget who) said that both sacks and INT's are at very low numbers for the league as a whole.

 

As of right now it'd be hard to argue with that. If Big Ben and Rivers were younger I'd hesitate. Romo too. I feel Romo is wrongfully maligned. But he's old.

 

And that's essentially where his career is teetering right now in terms of his ceiling, because if and when he opens up his game in that area, it can go one of two ways. He can start hitting shots downfield, increase his YPA, and have that part of the game become available to him in the clutch, when it's been sorely needed, or he can deteriorate somewhat, have his completion percentage go down, hurt his YPA, and throw more interceptions. Right now his "degree of difficulty" in playing the position isn't as great as it is for the players who take those shots downfield more often. Aaron Rodgers for example has thrown 73 passes beyond 15 yards in the air this year (21% of his attempts), while Tannehill has thrown only 57 (14% of his attempts). In fact, all of the league's best QBs are up around the 20% level, meaning that they play the position better, despite that their "degree of difficulty" if you will is also greater. This is where the Alex Smith comparison also holds true, because Smith has attempted a more Tannehill-like 12% of his passes of 15 or more yards in the air. The difference for Tannehill this year is that the team is moving down the field more reliably because his completion percentage on those shorter throws has increased significantly. The problem last year was that not only did he not attempt the longer throws downfield, but his completion percentage in his "shrunken" game wasn't good enough to move the team reliably. If you're going to scale back your offense to a shorter field passing game, you'd better have Chad Pennington-like accuracy in that game, or the team simply won't move offensively.

 

Bunch of you who were on "Fire Sherman" bandwagon last year, do not get to complain about deep ball. You get to take it and love it. Sherman aired it out. Now with Lazor we don't. You axd for it, you got it!

 

I've been pretty impressed by RTH. I was extremely doubtful about him being a franchise QB after last year but I think he has proved me wrong. It appears that his struggles the first few games were him learning and adjusting to the new system.

He has show me improved toughness, grit in the pocket, better awareness of the defense and improved accuracy. I still think he needs to get better at moving around in the pocket and better at the deep ball. I think those things can come with time and practice.

Hell, to even have a QB who is in the top 1/3 of the league is progress for an organization that has churned through crappy QB's.

 

And hopefully it will, because we'd see his game take a quantum leap from where it is now if he were able to become more proficient at 1) evading pressure, extending plays with his feet, and finding open receivers who have broken free of coverage downfield, and 2) hitting those receivers at even just an average rate. He'd jump from where he is now (the "Alex Smith" level) up to being among the best in the league across the board, with regard to just about all facets of QB play, and the rest of the team wouldn't need to play as well for the team to be highly competitive overall. The team would essentially rise to the 10-6/11-5 level on QB play alone, with more typical support from elsewhere on the team making it among the Super Bowl contenders in the league. Right now Tannehill's play alone makes the team about 8-8/9-7, and it needs exceptional (and unlikely) support from elsewhere on the team to rise to the "Super Bowl" level.

 

I think when people say.."Alex Smith" level..or he cant throw the deep ball..its kind of a misnomer. Some QBs dont have the arm strength to make every NFL throw, so they are limited to throws in the 20 yard bix. Jay Fiedler,Chad Pennington,Alex Smith et . From my reading where 17 is going to make the next step would be in the offseason..and its in his footwork and hips. Hips opening to soon affect downfield accuracy...and it is just working and working on throwing accurate deep balls. Arm strengh is not an issue..at all. Hes got a cannon. And really..point out one flae hes had..where once he worked on it..it didnt greatly improve.

 

RT needs 211 yards on monday to become the 2nd fastest QB in dolphins history to reach 10.000 passing yards

 

And let me clarify that I certainly don't think he doesn't have the arm strength to get the ball downfield, but that he simply hasn't been accurate enough when making those throws. Part of that is that he's dependent on the kinds of throws that require greater accuracy and timing because he isn't making as many of the throws that happen after receivers have broken coverage downfield and Tannehill has bought time to throw to them by evading pressure with his feet. Those passes involve much bigger windows into which to throw, and have a greater margin for error for both the QB and the receiver. Tannehill's downfield game is instead more limited to the precise timing throws, the kind all QBs complete with much less frequency because their margin for error is so small. He definitely has the arm strength to get the ball downfield, but so does a percentage of the population who have no business stepping onto an NFL field. That alone isn't going to get it done for him. He needs to start evading pressure with his feet, buying more time to throw, and hitting wide open targets who have broken free of coverage. This is how Ben Roethlisberger and Mike Wallace did so much damage together in Pittsburgh.

 

This is one of the things that has impressed me the most with Tannehill and why a lot of people see a very high ceiling.

 

The ball tipped off of a Bronco lineman changing the trajectory very slightly but enough to cause the pick. I like Tannehill to Landry everytime. This was one of those freak plays where you wonder why the Football Gods hate us! Let's take it out on the Jets!!!

 

One quirk that "impresses" me is that whirl hand move with the ball when he steps forward in the pocket from pressure before he slings it. Reminds me of Dan Marino. It's like a swim move or something.

 

I think Wallace's time in Pittsburgh has taken on mythical proportion...

2012 - With Ben R at QB:
BLS: 10 recs, 0 TDs
1-10: 33 recs, 2 TDs
11-20: 15 recs, 2 TDs
21-30: 1 recs, 1 TD
31-40: 1 recs, 1 TD
41+: 3 recs, 2 TDs

At 21+ yards passing, Rothliesburger was 5 of 31 with 2 drops to Wallace.


2013 with Tannehill at QB:
BLS: 12 recs, 1 TD
1-10: 36 recs, 1 TD
11-20: 19 recs, 2 TDs
21-30: 2 recs, 0 TDs
31-40: 1 recs, 0 TDs
41+: 3 recs, 1 TD

At 21+ yards passing, Tannehill was 6 of 36 with 2 drops to Wallace last year.

This is per ESPN stats and splits on Wallace.

 

from blogger David Wannyheimer.

 

Awesome. Totally awesome.

 

Check the stats from 2010 and 2011.

 

And what about 2009? He had 6 TDs in PB in 2009 for his first season there and he had 5 TDs here his first season. He had 10 TDs in 2010. He is on pace for that here this season. He is our vertical threat. Hartline, Matthews, Gibson, Landry, Clay, etc... they aren't going to stretch a field or go up for catches. 2010 was a very good season that has never been repeated for Wallace or Roethliesberger.

Your point is to disparage Tannehill. You're wanting to say that Ben Roethlisberger is a better QB. Well, Ben was drafted in 2004. Wallace was drafted in 2009. Tannehill was drafted in 2012. Who should Wallace have had better stats with, the SB winning veteran who had 8-9 years of experience at that point, or the sophomore QB playing with him for the first season?

Changes nothing about why the passing numbers were so similar in each of the past 2 seasons.

 

The thing is..it's not like he can't throw the deep ball. He gets good trajectory with plenty of arm strength, he's just not accurate to Wallace. He's hit Hartline, Clay and several others almost perfectly though, so it's either a mental thing or just forcing it when there's too much pressure. Make no mistake though, he can throw the deep ball...just not to Wallace on a consistent level. Comparing him to Smith or Pennington is almost laughable though, because he has the goods....just not the right delivery.

 

I really do not see any issue with T-Hill's deep ball - the shots to Sims (v NE) and Hartline (v Buf) were right in the basket. The shot to Hartline was a higher percentage deep pass that they should be running with Wallace.

This begs the question...why aren't they running higher percentage deep passes to Wallace? If you look at Pitt, his best success deep came from the deep post. The only time I recall him running that here was the last second pass vs Carolina.

Do they believe Wallace is too injured (possible hammy) to run these routes? Do they think the pass pro won't hold up? Does T-Hill see the deep safety and call out of the play? It sure would be nice to know so we don't have to listen to that moronic Big O anymore.

 

Yep, there's a few of us on here been saying that for awhile, RTL, questioning why our deep shots at Wallace seen to always be on fly patterns. It seems stupid. Unless the other receivers are struggling to run the routes to open Wallace up on deep posts.

 

The deep ball issues are overblown. The bigger issue is the lack of attempts. That doesn't absolve RT. He passes up some good opportunities. In time he'll improve his decision making in that area as he has in every other area.

I also wouldn't put RT at Alex Smith's level. IMO he's already above that. If RT develops the long game as he has the other aspects of his game then you're talking about him being on Roger's level as the best in the league rather than just the top 5 level he's playing at now.

 

It very well could be the latter because there is such a speed discrepancy between Wallace and the other receivers.

One thing that is rarely mentioned is that our skill players are quite limited. Wallace is a poor route runner, Gibson, Matthews and Hartline are JAGs, Clay is injured and Miller is a poor receiver. I leave Landry out as he's obviously a player. I'd love to see this area addressed in the off season.