Well.. easy enough to tally up. If you look just at QB's that were 1st round picks from 2000-2015, there were a total of 42 (assuming I didn't count wrong!) out of which 6 did not start a single game their first year. Those 6 are: Pennington (2000), Losman (2004), Rivers (2004), Rodgers (2005), Quinn (2007), and Locker (2011). 10 QB's have been drafted in the 1st since 2012 so all of the last 10 drafted that high have started at least one game in their rookie year. Question one might ask is how many started only a few games their rookie year (at least one, but let's say less than 8). Turns out there are 10 of those from 2000, so 26 out of 42 = 62% seem to be starters their rookie year (start at least 8 games), 10/42 = 24% seem to fail as starters their first year but the coach tries them out as rookies, and 6/42 = 14% the coach seems to deliberately sit them, at least since 2000. EDIT: I see CK listed Palmer in a post below.. yeah, I missed that one (pro football reference actually leaves out any reference to his "rookie" year)... OK, so 7 that didn't start a single game their first year.
You're right...its about making a few others feel better about the crappy QB play they have had to watch all year. It's turning into Jason Allen being compared to the path Troy Polomalu took...desperate attempts to cling to hope. Feel for ya's.
Hard to have a pro bowl TE when he's being forced to block much more than he's used to since our OL is hot garbage.
Who argued that Tannehill did not gather valuable experience at Texas A&M prior to his starting? Not me. Now, if we're being HONEST, we are going to admit that experience was not as value as many of his contemporaries since he was a wide receiver and had to work on the position, which took away from his mental reps and focus on the quarterback position. That's just being honest and anyone who denies it isn't being honest, IMO. However there's no doubt he got experience learning the position at Texas A&M before he got moved back from wide receiver and became a starter. He was in meetings. He even practiced some as a thrower. Valuable. Just not comparable to his colleagues. It should also be noted he didn't switch to quarterback until he was a junior in high school. Again, compare that with contemporaries of his (e.g. Jameis Winston) who were drawing up plans for reading quarters versus cover two and beating both when they were like 12 years old. This "can't have it both ways" thing of yours is a completely made up construct and I'm not sure how it actually applies to anything I've said.
Phil Rivers sat. Aaron Rodgers sat. Tom Brady sat. Drew Brees sat. Carson Palmer sat. Eli Manning also sat most of his first year. Jay Cutler sat most of his rookie year. Hell that's three out of the four guys most everyone agrees to be make up the contemporary "elites" at the position (Brady, Manning, Rodgers and Brees). Obviously coaches are split on this issue and I fully acknowledge that. The difference is that you are not acknowledging any split. You're pretending those guys didn't sit.
Yes it is anybody's guess because a 4 game stretch doesn't prove a QB is elite. Chad Henne flashed greatness and he has been a career backup ever since he left Miami. You are operating under the assumption that if the aforementioned things are fixed that Tannehill will be the QB we are starving for. That assumes that something debatable like "coaching" gets fixed, he is allowed to audible (without knowing why it was taken away, maybe he couldn't grasp certain concepts or the coaching staff didn't trust him), or the OL becomes serviceable (again, how do you define that)? Assuming all of these external issues are fixed, who will determine they are fixed? What measurable statistic will you use to determine they have been fixed? Win loss record? QB rating? YPA? Sacks? I did not reach any conclusions other than fair or not, we will probably know more about his future in 2016 because if he continues to struggle, despite all the reasons you listed above, he will probably be cut or traded for salary cap reasons. You may not get the "definitive" answer on Tannehill but it will be a moot point. A team like the Texans can find out if he has been grossly underdeveloped or is just another run of the mill career backup. At that point we can continue to measure his performance but it won't really matter because he won't be a member of this franchise. Best case scenario, he improves next year with or without these issues being "fixed" and we have our franchise QB. If they can't be fixed and the results are the same or similar, the groundswell of Dolphin fan rage will reach Ireland status and the team will have no choice but to move on.
CK Speaking of guys like Fitzpatrick what do you believe has led them to improve their games? Did they flash the same skillset and just get better with experience? I don't remember paying too much attention to Fitz did he always have a decent touch and good escape ability or did he develop it significantly?
I'm not saying its impossible that Ryan is simply a late bloomer and will make the jump from low tier QB in 2015 to upper tier QB in 2016....I'm just saying it is unlikely.
Since Big Ben lots of high rated QBs have not sat unless they really sat behind a good QB. A big stink was made about Big Ben having the best rookie season since Dan Marino. We're talking 20 years between those two. I think the better model is to have a QB sit for at least a few years but that's not the reality anymore. Peyton didn't sit but luckily he wasn't ruined either.
It wasn't four games. And Henne never had that long of a stretch of exceptional play. Also, its patently obvious the line needs fixing. There's evidence when the line is average that he plays much better. These things are not up in the air.
How do you measure that in context with other offensive lines? How do you measure OL effectiveness if some QB's are better at stepping away from incoming pressure or rolling out, while others don't have that same ability? I'm talking in general terms, not only when it comes to Tannehill. FTR, I agree with you that OL needs to be fixed, but I'm not sure to what extent. Most teams in the NFL have OL issues, and all teams have to deal with injuries throughout the season. What I can't reconcile or even know enough about is how poor coaching technique/schemes can make an OL look worse, but it something that has been brought up in club.
I'm not trying to be excessively hard- but did you see the Fins play the last 3-4 weeks where we couldn't buy a first down on a passing play? When a team has 10+ 3 and outs in consecutive weeks, there's simply nothing left to talk about. Think about it objectively for a moment- what's more likely? 1) Tannehill can't be coached into a solid QB. 2) Philbin, Campbell, Lazor, Taylor, Sherman, Wallace, Hartline, Cameron, Stills, Bess, Fasano, Landry, Miller and Clay were all solid before Tannehill arrived, but they have held Tannehill back from success. I don't understand how anyone with an ounce of logic can look at what's happening on the field and even try to claim with a straight face that it's all on everyone under the sun except for Tannehill. In fact, I think it's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard in my life, and it just continues over and over again....we've heard it for four years now. It's the line....even though our line is average by NFL standards. It's the coordinator....even though his prior offense led the league in scoring. It's the receivers....even though we have awesome receivers and they excel elsewhere. It's the running back....even though Miller has continually exceeded a 5.0 YPC average. It's the head coach....even though the head coach doesn't call plays, it has to be the head coach....right? Because who else can it be? But you talk about being OBJECTIVE....saying he's the worst on 3rd down, worst in the red zone, worst "in the air" average....that is being objective, because it's 100% true. Saying he leads the league in fumbles, strip sacks, sacks, safeties, tipped passes and check downs is also 100% true....even though he's the 22rd most pressured QB in the league. Ten QB's have it worse in terms of protection, like Wilson in Seattle with a 7-4 record and an average of 10 PPG higher....yet we ignore that too. Because nothing about being a Tannehill fan is objective. He can't feel pressure...we blame it on the line. He can't scan the field for receivers...we blame it on the coaching. He can't scramble, even though he's great on his feet...that's the line's fault too. It's always someone else....some other BS excuse....because people do not want to see the harsh reality. He is statistically the worst QB in the league by a very wide margin, yet his numbers look semi-average because of all the check-downs to Miller and Landry that go for 8-12 yards. That's all he has though and 32 defenses know it....so I don't know what else can be said OBJECTIVELY.
Because pass rush pressure isn't the same thing all the time. One guy can get through the line and that is pressure. Three guys can get through the line and that is pressure. Three guys can through the line at the same time and that is pressure. Three guys can get through the line in a staggered manner and that is pressure. There's a lot more then that. So, do you think those different types of pressure have different degrees of difficulty for the QB? Of course they do. Let's think this through...if the oline isn't the real problem then Tannehill is. Ok fine, how is he screwing the oline? - Is he calling bad plays? No, he's not allowed to audible. - Is he holding on to the ball too long? No, its been discussed how he has one of the shortest times to throw in the league. Plus everyone complained that his YPA was so low because he always threw short passes. Short passes don't take a long time. - Honestly, I can't think of another way the QB can screw over the oline. As far as the coaching making the oline look worse, that's all due to an inability to mask and help problem spots. The biggest problem is not allowing a QB to audible. Think about it, if it was only about talent vs. talent, then why are there so many plays? Shouldn't there be just one play? Of course not. Not allowing the QB to audible allows the defense to dictate the attack and we can do nothing about it. They are gonna target Dallas Thomas and we can't make a correction on the fly, for example. The design of the play matters to. If its a long developing play, then the oline has to hold their blocks longer which always ends in problems. Not giving a guy help, with a chip or an extra blocker is also on coaching.
Our line is not average by NFL standards. Our coordinator did not guide an offense to league leading in scoring. Our receivers have not excelled since leaving here. No one is blaming Miller. They are blaming the fact that we abandon the run too early. He is not statistically the worst QB in the league by a little bit let alone by a wide margin.
The quarterback position is extremely mental/technical in nature. You will be limited by your inherent ability but the more you play and the more you learn how to approach the game, you're going to get better until your body gives out on you. In my experience linebacker is similar.
He can throw incomplete passes. He can throw for 2 yards on 3rd and 8. He can be staring off into space and have the snap hit him in the face mask...twice. He can be stand flat-footed in the pocket and oblivious to pressure. He can never scramble (unless he's told to) because that's what every other team with an average line does. He can check down on over 90% of his plays, even when a streaking receiver is wide open. I can keep going, or we can just say that there are many, many ways Tannehill can screw over his offensive line.
Exactly....no reason to admit cold, hard facts. Just pretend like they don't exist. Because every single one of them is 100% true if you're not already blinded to it.
I think it's going to depend on the quarterback and also the system. What's right for one situation may not be right for another. But I know there have been other situations where they fully intended to sit the quarterback and even announced as much far before the season began (e.g. Blake Bortles) and it just didn't work out that way because of the trash that was sitting in front of the player. If I remember right Russell Wilson and Teddy Bridgewater were similar situations, team intended to sit the player and didn't end up doing so because either the player was too good to sit or because the starter was too awful, or both. E.J. Manuel and Johnny Manziel were intended to sit. I don't see pretending that there are no longer two schools of thought on this issue. That seems to me to be what people are doing, pretending there's now only one school of thought and it's been that way for 20 years. It's just not the case.
Philbin, Campbell, Lazor, Taylor, Sherman, Wallace, Hartline, Cameron, Stills, Bess, Fasano, Landry, Miller and Clay were all solid before Tannehill arrived, but they have held Tannehill back from success Campbell was solid as a head coach? How about Philbin? Lazor hadn't established anything. Taylor...really? Wallace was no worse than his last year in Pitt, and he's possibly even worse since leaving Miami. Hartline? Had his best years with Tanne. Bess and Fasano? Are they in the league still? No one has argued that Stills, Miller, or Clay are/were holding Tannehill back.
That doesn't make the oline look bad. Are you aware that all QBs throw incompletes? They don't give him time to throw longer more often than not nor are the plays designed to do much more than that. Maybe he wasn't ready because the ball wasn't supposed to be snapped yet. That doesn't happen an inordinate amount unless its coming form the blindside. That's not true. Ok, prove your "over 90% while a man is open deep" numbers please. When you're not actually making sense it is easy to keep going, because you can literally say anything you want without the terrible burden of dealing in reality.
These are examples of the inappropriate negatives attributed to Tannehill. When people wonder why I argue about him, this is why. It's not because I think he's elite, it's not because I think he's the long term answer. It's because I can't stand the ridiculous things thrown at his feet.
Lol. You blaming him for the bad snaps now? Really? The New England game he was scanning the defense when the ball was snapped prematurely. The Bufflao game the ball was snapped a 100 MPH. Both Campbell and Pouncey admitted to it. "Staring into space" I mean, are you joking?
Exactly. I'm right there with you. I don't think Tannehill is elite, nor do I know if he ever will be, but when I jump into these debates at his point it's because people are laying every bad thing that happens on his shoulders.
I think we need to improve a few positions: LG CB FS MLB DE TE I think the biggest thing we can do is find a MLB and one that can hang in coverage. I think we need serious help at LB & DB before anything else. Secondary is finding a LG, more pass rush, and if Cameron doesn't restructure another TE.
I think you need to look up the definition of "cold, hard facts" because a lot of what you said is simply opinion.
We need to trade Tannehill for a third rounder, hold onto Moore and rebuild for three offseasons, then draft a QB. Our team's biggest needs are at guard and LB. If we can get those two areas fixed and maintain what we've got, I'd like to see McCarron here. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
