Oh, I see. Every play that takes 2.5 seconds is the same. Oh, what's that you say? They're not? Then why are we lumping them all together? The fact is, a play designed to be completed in 2.5 or less, and something goes wrong, causing the QB to have to extend the play, is much different than a play designed to take longer, or should I say, routes designed to take longer. I imagine most plays have routes at different depths, requiring a different amount of time for each route.
Bob Whitfield was talking about what makes Jameis Winston great, and he said his innate ability to deal with a chaotic pocket..how many times have I said that over the past three years as it relates to our own qb...he went as far as to say Phillip rivers isn't neccessarily mobile but is very deft at maneuvering with the confines of the pocket.. You can deny if you wish, deep down, how do you feel about it?, cause I know where I stand on this component of his game..scares the hell out of me and is the very reason why I Worry about championship football. I can tell he's isnt a natural for this, I can tell by certain things he does, I can tell he's trying to learn with the rare occasion he climbs the pocket with both hands on the ball..this component is not innate for him, now that can piss you off because I said it, or we can figure out what we're gonna do to diminish the issue.
Regardless, when the ball is thrown after 2.5 seconds, performance decreases on average, and dramatically so.
Spot on and thats part of the reason why our sack count is so high because of his inability to handle a chaotic pocket. This is the number 1 thing I want him to work hard at correcting this offseason, deep ball comes second.
Of course, because a large amount of that statistic is most likely broken plays. You can't cite a stat that includes designed plays and broken plays as anything meaningful in regards to time.
I know what you are saying but don't you think that can be attributed to RT17s lack of experience at the position. As he gains experience and the game starts to slow down for him I think we'll see progress in this dept. In fact I think we saw some progress in this dept this season.
What you can say is that when the ball gets out of there in 2.5 seconds or sooner, you're far more likely to be successful.
Even that is dependent on play design. 2.5 seconds, in and of itself, is meaningless. I agree, that if you get it off in 2.5 you are statistically more successful, but it's the WHY of the stat that's important, not the time itself. I could be way off base here, too...I mean, I don't really know if teams have plays with routes designed longer than 2.5 seconds as a regular play option.
Not really, because that tends to be about the amount of time that splits pass attempts in half. In other words, about half of the pass attempts in the league happen within 2.5 seconds after the snap, the about the other half happen after that. It isn't meaningless.
I do think there is merit that he's a special case of learning the game, no'one has ever attempted his type of transition before, but its been three years and I haven't seen very much improvement in this dept, so if its going to happen to a level that makes a difference in this game its going to have to be a large incremental jump, this component of the game can only be taught to improve very little, you either have it or you don't, and the very small incremental increases in this dept and I mean small, tells me thats whats probably happening, and that is he's innately struggling, but slightly improving by practcing certain drills..{sometimes you will see the occasional climb in the pocket with two hands on the ball} thats a technique that is taught time after time in practice.. there is some hope and its why I talk about prioritizing the line, and spending the necessary resources to protect him, moreso than qbs like Luck, Wilson, Berger, rogers, who are qbs who do have the innate ability.. obviously its about common sense, if he gets more time, it might give him a better head start in dealing with that chaos, but bottom line, chaos will come as the games become more important..especially on the road..and thats where things get gray for me when talking about winning championships.. See the deep ball is another topic, but imo, the statistic that shows he only took off on his own about a half of repetition per game, with the skill set that ryan tannehill has, is the most damning stat there is..jmo..
I dont think alot of those people have much perspective IMO. they want to compare Ryan to Luck, to Wilson to Roethlisberger to you name it and make unilateral judgements w/o factoring in individual conditions. does having 4 years in college as a qb not have anymore benefit than 1 1/2? if RT should be where these other guys are at this point, why was that harped on since it shouldnt be a factor? Luck and Wilson are in the same system they were draftd in while RT is in his second. Wilson has the beast and a beast defense. Luck much better team and he is a 1 in a lifetime qb. that isnt a factor? they also have better coaches. the worst oline in football isnt a factor? yes RT has improvement needed and would agree with many if he had 4 years coming out of college, but considering he had to learn to play qb in addition to learning the things luck and wilson had to learn. so why wouldnt you expect a larger learning curve?
Quick Question: How long are you gonna use this "RT17 doesn't have much experience..." argument for? Will you still be using this argument in his 7th NFL year? 9th NFL year? Seems like an argument you (and some others) are going to use forever because it's an 'excuse' that you can indeed use for however long you feel you want to use it for.... As well as the "Our OL sucks..." argument. Also, you say we shouldn't compare him to other QB's but then you go on and compare him to Wilson and Luck, totally contradicting everything in your argument. (I put your mission statement in underlined and then put your contradiction in Bold.)
Comparing systems is different than comparing the QBs. He's not comparing Tannehill's stats to either of them, he's simply saying that those who use Luck or Wilson as measuring sticks are conveniently ignoring the college time, and the different situations of each QB. You're trying to turn it into something he wasn't saying.
Andrew Luck and Russell Wilson both had arguably worse OL's, difference is, they both have WAY BETTER pocket presence and don't take unnecessary sacks. And I will ask you the same thing.. How long will you use this "RT17 doesn't have enough experience..." argument for? 7 years? 10 years? I would honestly like to know... I find it to be quite a funny argument because I really feel like you (and some others) will use this argument as long as you possibly can.
Yea, in 2014. They are both better at disguising how bad their OL is with their superior pocket presence which is something RT17 doesn't have and which is why everyone is so quick to blame our OL for EVERYTHING!
PFF had Dolphins dead last. They do not grade via how the QBs let them look. Both the Seahawks and the Colts were better than 20. Seahawks dealt with some injuries, however their line wasn't half as bad as Miami's once Albert went down. Same with Colts.
I think it's rather obvious that Tannehill is allocating so much of his attention downfield, making reads and determining whether receivers are open, that he has insufficient attention left to allocate to the pass rush and what he has to do to avoid it. Most QBs are able to divide attention between what's happening downfield, and what's happening closer by with the pass rush. When the latter is deficient, the QB is said to suffer from a lack of "pocket awareness," or "pocket presence." That fits Tannehill at the present time in my opinion. He has to learn how to divide his attention between what's going on downfield, and what's happening closer by. Perhaps when what's happening downfield "slows down" for him, he won't have to focus so intently on it, and he'll have a greater amount of attention left over to devote to the pass rush and what he has to do to avoid it.
He isn't a natural at the position (yet or if ever). These are key ingredients that he needs to work on if we will ever be able to run a Pass First Offense and be a serious contender. Otherwise, we need to switch to a Run First Offense (which I'm full on board with, most Super Bowl champs are Run First teams, outside of a handful of teams since 2000.) If we had RT17 back in the day with Ricky Williams and that great Power Run offense we might have an extra SB trophy in our franchise. Also, Run First Offenses keeps Defenses fresher throughout ball games.
There is no just thing as a "natural" quarterback. You aren't born with an ability to be a quarterback in the NFL. It takes hard work and dedication to create such a player.
No, there is such a thing. Usain Bolt is a natural runner. Kevin Durant is a natural scorer. Andrew Luck is a natural QB. RT17 isn't a natural (YET OR IF EVER) as I have already stated. Maybe if I put it in bold you will actually read it.
Running is a natural skill. Quarterbacks are players who have played quarterback all their lives. Andrew Luck has worked damn hard to become a quarterback. Quarterbacking is a skill. It isn't a part of our DNA.
Yea. His father was an NFL QB, so at a young age, he taught him how to be a quarterback. He practiced all his life to be a quarterback.
I think we're getting to the end of the "He only had one and a half years in college" argument. Really, you tend to give four year college starters about 3 seasons in the NFL before judging. This will be Tannehill's fourth. I expect to see Tannehill build on last year, and play like he did for the last 2/3 of the season, or better.
Some people are more athletic, and learn to shoot, hit, or throw better than others...but it's still a learned action. I dint believe in sometime being a "natural scorer." It immensely devalued the work they put into their sport.
I agree w/ this. Very frustrating at times when he takes bad sacks losing more yardage than he should. I expect him to continue to improve and to at times flash "frustrating plays." Having said that, I think another year in the offense will allow some things to come more quickly to him. I also expect Lazor to add to the playbook putting more on Tanny's plate. All in all, I think he will improve. Agreed.
BTW, we are all a 'natural' at something in life whether you know it or not. Every single one of us. Sorry for getting all spirtual up in here. Lol
But what's ironic about the "poor line" explanations is that having a poor line would presumably make the QB focus more on what's happening with the pass rush, at the expense of what's happening downfield, and so you'd have a quarterback whose skills in evading the pass rush were greater than those of making reads downfield -- a Russell Wilson, perhaps. Tannehill seems to be the reverse of that. I happen to believe that his line during his three years hasn't played any differently than the average line in the league prior to 2.5 seconds after the snap, and what's made his situation different is that he's focused so intently downfield up to the 2.5-second mark, that when the pass rush typically arrives in NFL -- and it arrives no sooner on average for Tannehill -- he's maladjusted to deal with it. He's been so busy allocating his attention downfield for the first 2.5 seconds, that when the pass rush arrives, he suddenly starts to pay attention to it, and at that point it's too late to adjust to it. What he needs to do is divide his attention between his downfield reads and the pass rush, during the first 2.5 seconds. There are not only things happening downfield during those first 2.5 seconds, but obviously there are also things happening closer by during that period, and paying some attention to them helps one react to them when one needs to. Tannehill instead is focused too exclusively downfield during that period of time.
You know what I'm saying, though, Shame. Some are naturally more athletic, but that doesn't translate unless they put serious work in. Like, Michael Jordan was probably naturally more athletic than John Kruk, but Jordan couldn't hack it in baseball because he didn't out add much time into baseball as Kruk. Does that make more sense?
John Kruk right up my alley being a Philly kid and all.... but I get what your saying, with time you can become a natural at something which is why I said about RT17 (yet or if ever). I was implying that he could become a natural with the time and work. I honestly dont know how that got misconstrued but its all good.
I agree on some of the things you talked about, I do think the line was below average but, I believe there is visual evidence of him not being able to multitask.
Question? How long you going to avoid addressing points in the argument? I mean I get it you have 0 perspective and have very rigid thinking that is if it isnt your own head you cant comprehend. Simply put you cant debate the point so you deflect, way top prove my point. Useless post above. Of course there is a point that his grace period runs out. but if you cant see the diff and how it relates, then it is clear to me it useless to have a conversation with you cause your clueless. Simple easy question for you. Do you believe there a single blueprint for qb development that fits all qbs regardless of style, experience, coaching, supporting cast? If you do I have it and will sell it to you! Oh and again deflection. see how I can call BS, BS? I didnt compare him to Luck nor Wilson, merely the situations they each came into, if you cant tell the diff then well enough said, if you can, then you again are just in " I have to be right" category of fan and will fabricate arguments. Now to address this how long will you keep up this exp argument yada yada. Until such time as it is reasonable to expect that Tannehill will have reached a point that the gap should have closed significantly to allow fair comparison. basically if this year Tannehill plateaus or falls off, then he is what he is. but if he progresses at the rate he has been he will be a really good to great qb. year 1 the exp gap is huge, Luck and wilson who are slightly better to better prospects only have to learn the nfl game, ryan has to learn position, mechanics and the NFL. year 2 you expect RT to progress and close the gap if your lucky and he is Marino good he closes it rapidly. sadly he isnt so he doesnt. year 3 he makes sign progress but is stifled by a brand new offense to a degree so haveto make some consideration. Year 4 should be telling. but when most qbs that have 4 yrs exp in college get 3 years, is it really unfathonable that RT gets 4?
Very well put. There are times when his spatial awareness seems lacking. What Id like to know is whether he's making a conscious effort to stay with his progressions till the last possible second or whether he's simply unaware of what's happening. If it's the former he will most likely get better, especially if he continues to refine his footwork. If it's the latter then he's gonna continue to struggle most likely.
