I have a feeling you will see what a QB with a good deep ball will do with an asset like Wallace, I'm hoping Ryan improves this flaw that is apparent to 95% of people who watch the Miami Dolphins. Ryan wasn't exactly nailing anyone else on the deep pass all season either. He simply is not very good at that pass, this doesn't mean he is a bad QB but a spade is still a spade.
Found this graph of league-wide passer rating as a reference (from 1970 to 2012) showing the inflation has been mostly steady all the way from 1970 to today: https://instantreplay1.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/pr-chart.jpg They don't show it, but the average for 2013 was 86.0 and the average for 2014 was 87.4.
Bridgewater isn't a good deep ball thrower. So I don't think we'll be seeing anything but Mike Wallace pouting.
Not really. You are too swayed by "Aaron Rodgers" ca. 2014. Had we only had knowledge of Rodgers 2008, that would be a completely different color. The point is that when you look at their games at what I believe is a pretty similar place in their careers (b/c RT is still a very young QB in terms of work there). Even accounting for league differences it's not that far apart and it also has to be recognized that Rodgers had Greg Jennings in his prime and Donald Driver still close to his prime (in fact, the following season, Driver had a year that was right in line with other years in his career). He had a 2nd year James Jones for 10 games and Jordy Nelson as a rookie (other than Wallace, I'd take any of those players over the Dolphins weapons last year). And, he had Ryan Grant in his second best season - Grant was also a better receiver and blocker than Miller. Beyond that Rodgers had a veteran, but not aging, offensive line in which all five starting linemen were in their third season together as starters (Several had played two or three seasons together more than that). In fact, the entire starting offense was in tact from the year before (a team that went 13-3). And, that was the same quality starting lineup the following year. Those are significant variables in favor of Rodgers. But, the key point is not to compare or say that RT will become Rodgers, as noted in the OP, but that in terms of development there are several similarities both statistically and in the quality of plays and throws that both were making. The one area of needed improvement is the long ball. But, that was also the case for Rodgers when he was on the bench and he and his coaches worked hard to improve in that area and he did so. It was largely hard work and a focus on better fundamentals. There are also personality differences, as someone noted, but that doesn't mean RT is not a strong competitor. There are a myriad of different personalities among successful QBs.
Correct on all points. There were SEVERAL drops early in the season...on the long throws, the drops were particularly bad, as they were right in the hands, including one that Wallace even blamed himself on (going OOB in the endzone, when RT was running from Pot Roast, about 50+ yds in the air). Hartline & Sims dropped sure TDs in the first few weeks.
Tannehill came in as a very raw QB. We all talked ad nauseum about how it would take him longer to develop. It is disingenuous to ignore that now and claim that his ceiling is more limited b/c he began with less experience. I compare them b/c their skill sets are similar and b/c I don't see their pats as that different. One got experience playing in every preseason game and running the scout team in practice daily for three years as well as watching a hall of fame QB. The other had to play right away on an inferior team. The experiences were different, but they were both gaining experience and now that their level of experience is becoming comparable we can also compare their stats. Personally, I see it as very likely that Tannehill surpasses Eli and Flacco statistically. Whether he has the championships will depend on additional factors.
I agree. Well said. There is a comparison in styles and development. Different paths, but I think they are about equal in development at these relative stages b/c Tannehill didn't play college QB until his Sr season and then played on a lesser team in Miami (Rodgers took over a 13-3 team that lost in the NFC championship in OT to the SB champion the previous year).
I agree. Well said. There is a comparison in styles and development. Different paths, but I think they are about equal in development at these relative stages (which is why I put up the comparison) b/c Tannehill didn't play college QB until his Sr season and then played on a lesser team in Miami (Rodgers took over a 13-3 team that lost in the NFC championship in OT to the SB champion the previous year).
I keep hearing this and it's not actually correct. Tannehill was recruited as a QB. He was far enough down the depth chart that Sherman suggested if he wanted playing time that he was athletic enough to play WR. All the while he did that he also attended the QB meetings and trained and prepped as one too. And correct me if I'm wrong but I think it was actually his JR year he started, he had 19 starts in college?
He didn't play QB, though. He played receiver. So, he only had 19 games as a QB in college, which is less than half what most guys getting drafted in the first round have.
I get that but people keep making it sound as if he played WR then switched to QB. he may not have been the starter which is not uncommon but even tho he played on game day as a WR he still trained and attended meetings as a QB. I think in some ways that actually helps him as he was on the field and could see the plays from both ends. Much better than riding the pine until it was his turn.
Sims vs. Pats was a perfect deep ball, squarely dropped. 30+ yard pass to D. Williams on a wheel route, dropped. Hartline against Bills dropped. Then there were a few strange plays - Wallace stepping out of bounds, Hartline losing the ball in the sun, etc. Doesn't seem like much, but just a couple of catches here would change the % numbers people keep going to. He hit plenty of guys in-stride year 1 and the numbers showed as much.
Yep. What if Tannehill had 15 balls over 20 yards? That would be almost one a game, and some if those would have been tds. When you don't throw deep very often, and you have a bunch of drops, it's a problem.
Considering how the 2 of those TAM QBs he was behind turned out, it really makes you wonder about who was doing the evaluations; and with him moving to WR, just how bad the TAM WRs were as well - both while he played WR and after he moved to QB.
According to this: http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/1...es-defensive-holding-illegal-contact-increase it's less actual changes to the rules than in how rules that were on the books are being enforced, specifically emphasis on calling defensive holding and illegal contact. This article points out it's not just rule changes: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000...g-league-explaining-the-nfls-aerial-evolution it's also the greater prevalence of spread offenses in high school and college (QB's are better trained for such a passing offense), better athletes (WR's specifically), and changes in schemes and mentality of coaches.
He started out rough but towards the end of the year improved quite a bit, and enough to end up 6th in accuracy over 20 yards when you factor in dropsies. He was overthrowing early in the year but was more comfortable by the end. Ahead of Teddy were: Ryan, Rodgers, Brees, Romo, Flacco, and Luck in order. After Teddy were Wilson, Peyton, Palmer, Roethlisberger, Rivers. That's factoring in dropsies. Ryan was 56% over 20 yards, pretty good. http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2hfm9z_teddy-bridgewater-s-deep-passes-rookie-year_sport He threw a few beauties against us.
I think the tannehill to Rodgers compArison is the best one to make to judge where tannehill is in his career and since Rodgers didn't start until his fourth year it's the first year we'll really be able to see how far back or ahead of Rodgers he is. I think he'll be ahead of him this year compared to Rodgers first and ultimately will be real close careerwise. I think getting the QB friendly receivers who fit the scheme was step one and an overhaul of the offensive line next year will be step two and then I think you are going to see some real good qbing. He will be a top 5 QB in three years
I just don't see how you quantify it. It'll never be perfect. 3 years of actual experience is worth much, much, much more than running a scout team. It is what its. It's all academic. He either gets better or he hits a wall. We'll see. I'll be happy if he hits Matt Ryan's 2012-2014 level.
Ever see Aaron Rodgers in the preseason pre 2008? Horrid is the word that comes to mind. Had Rodgers started as a rookie, he would of made Tannehill look godly. His mechanics were completely revamped and it took him a while to learn to read defenses. And when he got his chance, he was surrounded by talent. Green Bay was a Brett favre blunder from the Superbowl the year before.
IMO far and away the biggest factor is just being in the NFL. Playing in the regular season games is a mixed bag in terms of experience when you're on a bad team and your system is changing. And IMO Tannehill is already at Matt Ryan's level.
IIRC the whispers out of GB regarding Rodgers were far from positive. They ended up drafting Brohm in the 2nd round that year b/c of it.
If I was a Packers fan in 2008 I would be pretty excited over those passing stats from the first year starter, the 6-10 record would be cause for concern though. Tannehill has yet to match that in any of his first 3 seasons, so he's less impressive. And Tannehill does not possess some of Rodgers intangibles. So Tannehill will probably have to become as good as Rodgers to overcome some of his other deficiencies. Its possible but I'd feel safe giving 10,000-1 odds against it.
Posting this here as it pertains to the discussion at hand (deep ball and low YPA) and people might skip over the other thread since it's 25 pages long. http://www.thephins.com/forums/show...through-2020&p=2600540&viewfull=1#post2600540
As a Dolphin fan, I'm pretty excited about the numbers Tannehill put up last year, over all, but more importantly after the acclimation as that is the indicator of where he is now. After that acclimation point, Tannehill did arguably match Rodger's first season (some numbers were better others were lower), so about equally impressive. Will Tannehill continue to progress? Nobody can say, but Tannehill did have a significant stretch where he was putting up top 5 in the league numbers so we know that he's capable of producing at that level.
I don't have him there just yet. 2012 was pretty good for Ryan. Yes he had some studs in Julio and Roddy. We'll see this year. 68% at 7.7 ypa and we'll be cooking with peanut oil.
Yup. And they tried to trade him too. Oakland didn't think much of him and rejected a trade for Randy Moss. I do remember Bill Parcels calling GB about A-Rod, back in 08 but nothing ever came from it, sadly.
Did you read the entire thread, and then still decide to post this witty comment? Or did you just click on the thread, after seeing the title, and then throw down that nugget of wisdom?
I mean....he is obviously closer to Alex Smith than Aaron Rodgers at this point... These stupid threads normally turn in to this, why bother with these moot comparisons that only spark more banter?? It reminds me of when the board was divided on WHY Jason Allen had such a little impact his first two seasons, do you know how many ridiculous Troy Polomalu didnt play until the middle of year 2 threads were created to justify why he couldnt get on the field? Way too many. Ryan is Ryan and trying to compare him to an ARod isnt doing him any favors.
I think you wouldn't see people making these comparisons if there weren't very vocal people talking down Tannehill. It's people saying, "But look, this guy here was at a similar point, and look where he is today." And no one is comparing him to A Rodgers TODAY. You wouldn't want to compare 2008 Rodgers to 2014 Rodgers, either.
This thread is about Tannehill's 1st 3 years not where he stacks up now. Alex Smith has 18 TDs his 1st 3 years. Tannehill has 63. No comparison.
You and I can both agree that an optimistic projection of Ryan Tannehill's future doesn't begin with an attempt to downplay or diminish any portion of Aaron Rodgers' career. An analysis of Rodgers' first couple seasons as a starter shows that he took about 8 games to get his legs under him before he got comfortable and eventually became a beast of a QB in his 2nd year. Whatever he figured out, it happened relatively quickly. It didn't take a lot of actual playing time for him to put it together. NOBODY has attempted to quantify how significant sitting on the bench was for his abilities. He certainly didn't look other-worldly in the beginning so I'm guessing he learned a lot more by actually playing. I'm willing to bet that the 2nd and 3rd year sitting on the bench were probably next to worthless in his development as a passer. My take on riding the bench is that you aren't gaining anything after about 6-8 months. After that period, whatever you study in the film room or in the play-book won't mean a damn without actual in game experience. It's a simple case of diminishing returns. The frustrating element of this thread is that it offers no conclusion, but rather asks a question. Can we take anything from Aaron Rodgers success that speaks globally to all QBs? Can we learn anything that would help us predict Tannehill's future, good or bad? My guess is no and here's why. Rodgers came out of college with some experience, about on par with Tannehill, but sat behind Brett Favre for an extensive period of time. He inherited a team with some good offensive weapons none of which were as one-dimensional as Bess, Hartline or Wallace so he never faced that kind of uncertainty, which I think has hindered Tannehill. Rodgers worked with coaches and within an organization that are generally viewed positively. Most amazing however was how clear the transition was between Rodgers' game in 2008 and when he returned in 2009. He was a QB with a great deal more confidence and the instincts to get outside the pocket and move. We kind of forget with all the Seahawks success that Aaron Rodgers was unbeatedable there for awhile. He could run and he was deadly passing from both inside and outside the pocket. Within just a few years of taking over, Rodgers had replaced a HoF QB and had most people convinced he'd walk into the HoF based on being far and away the most impressive QB in the league. Rodgers success was so good in fact that it helped get Joe Philbin promoted to the role of HC on another team. By comparison, Tannehill came out as a similar prospect but was rushed into service without that 1 good year of polishing that he probably needed. We're not sure the level of coaching he's had because he only ever worked with Mike Sherman (solid coach) and Zac Taylor. No one seems to be sure what kind of effect Philbin had on Rodgers and no one seems to be in any hurry to give any of the credit for Tannehill's emergence to Philbin in Miami either. Go figure. But while Rodgers came off the bench and within a year was a dominant QB, Tannehill's path has been completely different with an upward trend the relevance of which is often debated amongst the fans. So as I said, I don't see Tannehill's path into the NFL as being anything like that of Aaron Rodgers and certainly don't have any reason based on watching Tannehill to believe he'll turn into a SB-winning, record setting, NFL-leading, beat you inside and outside the pocket type of QB. Come to think of it, there are about 100 other prospects with 1000 different seasons who we could all compare to Tannehill just for the hell of it. So if this thread wasn't started to imply that there's a correlation between Rodgers and Tannehill, I see no sense is not electing to name any of those other 100 QBs.
Huh? Their college stats are the same and they posted similar stats at similar points in their pro careers.
