I'm out on Tannehill

Uh, yeah, I've never made that claim, bud. You may want to get your eyes tested. And which is it, Seattle's D is ranked number one, or their D wouldn't have gotten us to the playoffs? Because I disagreed with you saying that having #1 defense wouldn't have affected the Dolphins wins. The Dolphins defense was highly ranked fir most of the season...they were fraudulent, as they didn't get stops on third down, specifically third long, and they continuously got rolled in the second half of games.

 

He just showed you how.

You cannot read the comparison, and pretend it doesn't matter, then ask how someone can compare.

Also, RW can't be left out of the conversation because he is clearly your benchmark for what defines a great QB in this day and age.

 

Actually they probably would have. They surrendered 0.7 fewer yards per pass attempt, 0.9 fewer yards per rush attempt, and 0.7 fewer yards per play, and Seattle led the league in points per pass attempt differential, whereas Miami was 20th in the league. All of that probably would've been good for at least the couple of more wins necessary to have made the playoffs. We're only talking about two or so wins here, and having one of the best, if not the best, defense in the league, likely would've done that. However, that doesn't mean that by having such a defense, Ryan Tannehill would be in any more position to carry a team than he is at present. Obviously if the Dolphins had such a defense, the defense, and not the quarterback, would be providing the additional push toward success for the team.

 

One of the things Wilson's running ability on passing downs does for the Seahawks, for example, is make opposing defenses pay for playing man pass coverages. I'm sure we've all seen color commentary during games on how when cornerbacks play man coverages and turn and run with receivers, it opens up the field for quarterback runs, especially on the perimeter. So, if defensive coordinators are more wary of playing man coverages, you've essentially limited the arsenal available to them on the basis of your QB's running ability alone. And that's not a minor difference. Seattle's offensive coordinator can essentially expect fewer man coverages by opposing teams and call plays for his own offense accordingly, and that's on the strength of his QB's running ability alone.

 

It's amazing that when looking at this season, people can have such varied views on the with that Tannehill actually did. One group looks at Tannehill and sees an average quarterback. The other group sees a quarterback who singlehandedly carried the team all season. Now, I'll say this, I find it hard to believe that any quarterback is dragging a team to the playoffs who gives up 25 points per second half over the last three games of the season. I dint think that Tannehill needs extraordinary help from other parts of the team, like you guys are saying. I think that Tannehill needs average help from his defense. Every quarterback needed a good defense. You're essentially saying that Tannehill needs to overcome a bad defense, a bad oline, and a bad kicking game, and that if he can't put up massive wins, he's just average. That's so absurd. I could understand if he had at least average pieces around him, and he couldn't get to the playoffs, being down him. But, what I see, is a QB playing at elite levels from about the 5th game on, while his offensive line, defense, and kicker all played at bad to below average levels.

 

Our defense was the number 2 defense until the Broncos game. Going in to the all important Ravens game its quite likely the record would have been the same, did the D cost us that game? I don't know, but everything that happened after that game was pretty much moot, not even Seattle's D on their best day could have held New England to less than 13 points in Foxboro.

Even in the Ravens game I think our D got screwed on a few bad calls, it should have been a safety and Wake's forced fumble should have been upheld. Those plays probably wouldn't have won the game because our offense only managed to score 13 points but who knows.

 

How many games have we seen Tannehill and the offense get the ball back with little time on the clock, setter the defense gave up a lead? How many games did the Seattle defense close out for the offense? I mean, we had three games this season alone where the defense gave up the winning points with under a minute left in the game.

 

And that's exactly the distinction I talked about earlier in the thread. A "TIER 1" quarterback (Rodgers, Manning, Brady) can carry a team with the surrounding talent the Dolphins had, and still make the playoffs. A "TIER 2" quarterback (like Tannehill and others) is going to need more talent for its quarterback. Again, folks, I think we're agreeing here far more than it looks like. Essentially everyone is saying Tannehill needs more talent around him. Is anyone really saying anything different?

 

I was preaching all season that our ranking was fraudulent. When you watched our defense on third down and in second halves, it was blatantly obvious that or defense was not that good. Shutting out the Chargers did alot to slant or numbers, as did the Raiders and Bears games. However, in games all year, and last year, the defense couldn't get stops. Drives going the length of the field, covering 3rd and long, routinely. Even against Green Bay, we held then a relatively low number...but the way they scored in second half was completely embarrassing.

 

No, they can't. Brady isn't making it through the season with this offensive line, much less getting to the playoffs. Brady won his Super Bowls on the backs of defenses allowing less than 20 points a game. That is just one example.

An elite quarterback back can make up for some deficiencies , but he's not going to cover up for three other units who are all terribly deficient. If your defense is not good, then your offense has to pick up the slack. But that's not all on the QB. If your defense is not good, and your receivers are suspect, and your kicker is erratic, and your oline is terrible, and your coaching is suspect, there's only so much even an elite QB can do. Tannehill is not elite, yet, but the guys preaching that we should jettison him is where the disconnect comes.

 

The strange thing about the poor closeout stats is that should be a great situation for us, if you had to choose between having the ball and a 4 point lead or the ball and a 4 point deficit it should be a no brainer that you take the ball and the lead. But it feels like we'd be better off if we were down by 4.

Our offense is 0 for 9 at closing out games and our defense is 6 for 11. Without looking it up for every team, while it feels like our defense is horrible I would bet they are right around average. I guarantee our offense is horrible and the worst by far though.

Offenses opportunities for the "closeout:"

2012
week 4 Cardinals 7 point lead with 3 minutes left. sack/fumble/TURNOVER
week 5 Bengals 4 point lead with 2 minutes left. PUNT
week 6 Rams 3 point lead with 2 minutes left. PUNT
2013
Week 2 Colts 4 point lead with 4 minutes left. PUNT
Week 6 Bills 1 point lead with 3 minutes left. SACK/TURNOVER
Week 11 Chargers 4 point lead with 2 minutes left. PUNT
Week 12 Panthers 3 point lead with 4 minutes left PUNT
2014
Week 6 Green Bay 4 point lead with 2 minutes left. PUNT
Week 10 Detroit 3 point lead with 3 minutes left. PUNT

 

Exactly. There should've been FAR more plays this year where Ryan Tannehill recognized a blitz with a man coverage and immediately rolled toward the sideline after the snap, where he could've passed the ball or run with it. Make defenses pay for those calls, and then the next time there's a passing situation, you're less likely to be facing such an aggressive defense. You can't stand back there like a statue play after play and expect defenses not to continue to tee off on you.

 

No, DJ, actually, both on this forum, and IRL to my Patriots friends, I preached that once Brady's offensive line was solidified, he'd be fine. And I was right. Look at Brady's Super Bowl years, and look at his defense. It's not a knock on Brady, I didn't mean it like that, I'm a big fan of Brady, but his defense played lights out. When Brady was setting passing records, he didn't win Super Bowls.

Elite QBs are in this conversation because Tannephins says that elite QBs carry teams to the playoffs, regardless of the talent around them. That's simply not true.

 

The St Louis game? LOL that was a special teams play at the end, a fake punt. In the Dallas game their D scored a TD and gave Wilson the ball inside the 20 on another drive, the ST unit also scored a TD. It was the offense that didn't show up.

Some of us DO pay attention, so don't come with the weak sauce .

 

And they did it rushing three and four guys. LOL. They routinely had 7 and 8 guys in coverage.

 

You can't tell your QB when to run or force him to keep the ball on read plays, it's his choice. You sure as hell can't call a bunch of roll outs and bootlegs, this aint Madden, defenses aren't stupid, and you can't press the reset button if your QB gets hurt.

 

Its possible they were never going to sustain those numbers, maybe even likely, but I don't think its any coincidence that we soared in the rankings the minute we got Trusnick and Wilson off the field, and plummeted once again as those guys got more playing time. Our best defensive performance of the season came against the Chargers with Michael Thomas getting a lot of playing time in the nickel, of course with our luck he only lasted one game...

 

Yeah, I agree, it's just that even when putting up good stats, the defense was still prone to giving up third and long, allowing massively long drives, and just generally failing in crucial situations.

 

The whole team took turns failing in crucial situations, they all did their part to be 8-8.

 

Lamar Miller closed out the Colts with a first down run in week 2 of 2013. Moreno scored a TD late in week 1 of this year to close out the Patriots.

 

Jones and Jordan were suspended, Ellerbe played one half. Wilson went down, then Thomas, then Finnegan, then Davis, then Taylor, then Delmas. Misi was hurt all year. It was brutal, as bad as I've ever seen.

So of course we need a new DC bc Coyle sucks .

 

Once again, Anybody who saw that defense play,even when healthy, and saw them as as the #2 defense is kidding themselves. This defense has folded in every big spot and every big game, even with Trusnick and Wilson off the field. Do you think that the defense giving up so many points in the beginning of the second half vs the Pats affected the offense's ability to stay balanced? Once this team became one dimensional, especially with a patch work OL, we had no chance. This Defense was the part of this team that was to carry us....And when games were to be won with that unit on the field(GB,DET) they were a fraud. Even a DD lead vs Den evaporated in minutes, when one stop, or holding them to a fg would've won that game. Once again, you have NO PROBLEM excusing this BAD defense(in the end, thats what they were) at the same time taking your shots at the offense(Tannehill). If you think we would not have won more games with Seattle D this season, nothing I can say will change your mind.

 

My lord, you have the entire team around Tannehill pegged as poor. That doesn't comport with an 8-8 record. You don't get average (or slightly above-average) quarterback play, poor play everywhere else, and end up 8-8. You end up 6-10 or thereabouts, like the Falcons, whose running game and defense were comparatively poor and dragged the team down despite Matt Ryan's level of play.

 

Everyone agrees that RT needs to improve his pocket presence. However, that's only a small part of the issue.

If we had a decent back up RB we could have kept pounding the rock and the Jets would never have gotten the chance. Same thing happened vs the Ravens. And Broncos. And Lions. Miller can't handle a full game of carries, Thomas and Williams are ineffective, so we have to throw 35-45 times, of course defenses are going to tee off. Especially the good ones.

 

How do you win games with the talent we had post Detroit when Albert went down?

 

Sorry, I should have clarified that those are all the closeouts involving pass attempts in the 4 minute drill. Moreno scoring a TD on a drive that started with 9 minutes left doesn't qualify.

And you realize that St. Louis closed out the game in the exact same fashion in the "fake punt" game right? In both cases the offense would have gotten the ball back with about 20 seconds left with the difference being the Colts needed a TD while the Seahawks needed a field goal. If Miller gets credit for the closeout in that game then Seattle's D should also get the blame for allowing Mason to close out that Rams game also.

 

I'm fully on-board with any points made that suggest that Ryan Tannehill needs more talent around him. Again, isn't that what everyone's saying in one way or another?

 

We got the ball up 3 with 9 mins left, had a 12 play 6+ minute drive to put us up 10, that's not a close out? I'm just trying to understand what the standard is bc that seems like the definition of a close out imo.

What we lost when Moreno went down was the ability to lean on the run or even stay balanced for a full game. Miller can't take the punishment, DT and DW were ineffective. It was basically pass or die, then Albert went down and the pass pro took a nose dive.

 

Agreed.

 

Ok fair enough, I'm not one to believe that getting blindsided in the pocket, or not being able to brace themselves as a QB completes their throwing motion is less likely to result in an injury than running the ball. I disagree about what your seeing. I'm fine with Ryan carries because I thinks it's the most effective for the Dolphins running game.


After that stretch were Ryan had all those 30 yard runs teams paid more attention to Tannehill. What I saw was that they filled with LBS and tried to bate him into keeping the ball by having the end crash. Miller averaged 5.1 yards a carry, Tannehill better be looking at least that before he keeps it imo. Ryan is getting the yards that are there, Lamar can create yards. Ryan is going to be effective when the passing game is effective and longer. Force that coverage further back and see how much room opens, because that's the yardage he's getting. Miller can take a lb in the correct position and beat him.


Edit: I should add that I mostly agree that he could be getting more scrambling when a play breaks down. However, I'm fine with him keeping his eyes down field first. That's where the bigger plays will come.