Look, I'm not trying to argue anything in particular with Tannehill. I disagreed with a specific post of yours, and I identified why. You now want to change the argument into something else. As to playing worse, I guess it comes down to which statistics you're looking at. Because, he's simply not the worst in all statistical categories. So, keep acting like you're throwing out the only solid stats in the world, but realize, you're not counting the stuff that discounts your theory. Like his number of tds, or his ypa, or overall yardage, etc. Frankly, I'm sure you'll find ways of spinning things to discount them, like they're only "volume stats," or some other such thing to minimize the things Tannehill does well. Frankly, Tannehill is middle of the road this season for total tds, yet the offense is not scoring middle of the road, I don't believe. Why is that? He's on pace for like 28 tds this season, one more than last season, but our overall scoring is down. Why is that?
I didn't even bring Tannehill up so I don't want to hear anybody say I'm one dimensional. I wanted to talk about potential coaches. Can somebody please make that thread so we can move on? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
My approach to communicating wasn't off-putting to others until the 3rd or 4th time Resnor made a comment in this thread (quoting my post) with stuff like, "I hate it when people complain about Tannehill and try to blame him for stupid things." But that's how this forum works...you have a few people attacking anyone who speaks negatively of Tannehill, which is something they decided to start doing last season to eliminate all opinions other than their own. And for the most-part it's worked...hundreds have left the site thanks to their flaming...but I'm not going to be one of those people. So while I appreciate your advice, it's about two seasons overdue and directed at the wrong people. Personally, I'm tired of hearing how Tannehill is a top 5 quarterback when our team can barely get a single first down in a half. People that don't like Tannehill have just as much right to post here as the "RT fan club", and I'm tired of being told to shut up because those people refuse to even consider that they're mistaken. And again- that's not directed at you....just look back in any Tannehill thread and see the same 4-5 attacking away, regardless of who's sharing their opinion.
We're all fed up of the Phins. Not surprising if we occasionally get fed up of the same discussions, same positions, same posters. lol. It's all good. By the way, the reason I mentioned anything to you was that I happen to mostly agree with you. Just wanna make sure all positions on Tannehill and the roster and the team can be expressed and heard. Seems like our efforts as posters are as futile as the coaches' efforts some days. Good intentions, but not the results we want. Speaking of which, I look forward to Dan's coaching-discussion thread.
I would but Tapatalk doesn't have that function and this forum on Safari using and iPhone... [emoji20][emoji379] Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Okay, I put it back in the safe. Would you mind making that thread? I'd love to talk about anything other than Tannehill. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I've already explained how certain stats are somewhat unreliable. If you're not going to pose a better solution, what's the point of arguing it? Take the rankings with a grain of salt, fine, but we have to use something. Care to offer your thoughts on where other QBs stack up considering slightly better or all worse OLs? Don't have to use what I offered. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Just because we lack stats that tell you exactly what you want to see doesn't mean unreliable stats become more reliable.
Again...what the hell are you talking about? If there was a "pact" or some sort of joint effort to run off posters, then I'm really upset, as I was never invited to that party. And we're responsible for running of "hundreds" of posters? Get real, man. Really there's a handful of us who've tried to be balanced in assigning blame, and not just laying every fault of the team at the feet of the QB, and there's been an overwhelming number of people telling us we're wrong, and to stop talking. These discussions had mostly died down after last season, the criticisms were mostly deep ball related. Now, Tannehill is perceived as worse, since the offense is struggling this season, and the TEAM has played wore than people thought it would, and so, now we're back to everything bad about the Dolphins is Tannehill's fault. Tannehill may not be elite. He may need a decent offensive line. So what? I have no issue if you just come out and say, I want an elite QB who can play at an elite level without a decent oline, and I won't be happy until we have that. But that isn't the discussion, is it? Look, again, I specifically said what I had an issue with. You went off on this tangent. If you can give your viewpoint, I can give mine. Most of my involvement in these discussions has stemmed from my disagreement with the extent that people blame things on Tannehill, that I don't think are his fault. Like calling him a coach killer, for instance. The coaches are gone because they were bad. Now, if you want to provide facts to back up the SPECIFIC things that I disagreed with, feel free. Otherwise, enough with the baseless accusations.
You got me, I was dumb enough to think we had a QB who was going to make leaps in year 4. So instead of looking dumb (again) and holding out hope for year 5?? I'm going to just be very blunt about what he is.
Let's try this again. One of the things I specifically had an issue with you on. Please defend this statement.
Okay, but have you ever used the Passer Rating stat? Passer Rating can be misleading as well and doesn't always give a reliable account of how good a QB is. Care to give us your take on how other QBs have done with similar or worse OLs? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I've asked the very question numerous times and NO ONE answers it. Show me a QB that has thrived under ALL these conditions: - Bad OL - Bad OC - Easily abandoned run game - Not allowed to audible
WADR... You're being a bit dramatic here. That's never happened to my knowledge. The folks who appear to have been rid of, are those not just expressing a viewpoint, it's those doing so disrespectfully, and simply trolling, and baiting all the time. There's a difference. Our mods do a good job of that here IMO. Huh? I don't ever remember anyone ever saying Ryan Tannehill is a top 5 QB. I think you're being a bit dramatic here again. I guess I wouldnt be surprised, there's been alot of stupid stuff posted on this issue, but I dont recall Ryan Tannehill is a top 5 QB being one of them.
You're moving the goalposts. I can make the argument that OCs have failed because Tannehill limited them, especially with Sherman. Lazor came in with a magical offense that padded his stats, it got figured out, and now we see the real Tannehill again. I can also make the argument that our run game is abandoned because smart opponents only focus on stopping the run. Tannehill has almost never won a game without us winning the rushing battle (often by a lot) or being very, very close. I've posted these stats already. We just saw another game where we should've lost even with a strong running game. He hardly ever has big plays, much less big games (and no, I don't count garbage time stats). Maybe he just sucks at making adjustments. Sherman knew him very well and didn't trust him. Lazor, after being acquainted with him, didn't trust him. Tannehill was finally allowed to audible and had one of the worst QB performances I've ever seen. So let's just take into account the OL, please, because we can look at so many variables it's ridiculous. Let's evaluate QBs with similar and worse OLs. Please. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'm not moving the goalposts. I've been asking this question for a lot longer than the one you posted. You've ignored it. Every anti Tannehill poster has ignored it. And these things speak directly to how a QB can deal with a bad oline.
I just addressed it. We've had this conversation countless times. It's why we don't agree on Tannehill. So go ahead and make a handicap with your rankings, but take a look at the OL rankings. If your objective is to cast doubt into the rankings (even though there's no current alternative and it's just about as reliable as Passer Rating) and deflect blame from Tannehill to coaches then you're never going to be able to evaluate QBs unless every single thing around them is a known quantity. You can't have Belichick, the Cowboys OL, Adrian Peterson and Tannehill as QB to evaluate him. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
So, I'm going to assume, you can't think of a QB who's been successful while dealing with all those things at the same time? You realize, you could admit that even a great QB would struggle in that sort of environment right, without that meaning that you think that Tannehill is a great QB, right?
The only thing close is the claim that Tannehill played at a level of a top 5-10 QB over the four game span last season when he actually had an oline. That is not the same as claiming that he is a top 5 QB, though. LOL
No you didn't really address it. You didn't provide an answer at all. You realize no one has Belichick, the Cowboys OL and Peterson...right? I'm not going to ridiculous depths here.
You can come up with any number of variables that cloud QB evaluations. I said the blame on coaches has been a bit much. Sherman wasn't nearly as bad as people thought. He had ****ty WRs and an extremely raw QB. Lazor "worked wonders" for one season, which was really just lipstick on a pig. It was a QB friendly system that has been figured out. You can blame the OCs all you want but maybe they're just not working with much. Sherman knew Tannehill as a player better than anybody. He didn't trust him to start for a while and never trusted him to audible. Lazor quickly decided not to allow Tannehill to fully audible. Last game Tannehill was able to fully audible and he had one of the worst games I've ever seen a QB have. As for the running game, I'm a huge proponent of running the ball more. Buuuuuut you need a QB that opens the running game. Tannehill is bad at that. There's no argument against that. So what do smart defenses do? Focus on the running game and dare us to win throwing the ball. Can't be productive consistently without teams worrying about the QB. Maybe that means Tannehill needs a KC type of team like Smith has but that is not easy. Care to evaluate QBs with similar and worse OLs yet or not? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
There are ways of coping with a bad oline that other QBs have access to that Tannehill doesn't. Bad olines can be gameplanned for. You can run the ball more. You can audible at the line to adjust for what the defense is showing you. You can do all those things...unless you're Tannehill, because he has handicaps outside his influence that other QB's don't. What you're doing is comparing a guy that is handcuffed to guys that aren't and wondering why he's not performing like they are in a given situation. You want it to be a simple thing and it isn't. The fact that it isn't simple is not my fault...or even Tannehill's.
Look, with Miller averaging what he's been averaging, it's not about teams keying on the run. It was Lazor abandoning the run. Let's stop twisting this. How does the QB open the run game up? Can a run game open up the passing game? Are we going to discuss teams with poor olines who also ask their line to pass block 30+ times a game? Or just teams with bad OL's in general?
Alright, so Tannehill is one of, if not the most, handicapped QBs in the NFL? Can you think of any QB in a similar position this season or in previous seasons? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
No. That's specifically what I've been asking: It doesn't seem like anyone else can think of anyone either.
It's a combination of Lazor abandoning the run, teams honing in on the run and Tannehill not doing enough to counter that defensive game plan. A QB opens up the running game by having a higher YPA without relying on two games with an incredible amount of YAC. Also using his legs to run and scramble. A running game definitely opens up the passing game. It works both ways but it's clear who brings it more often between Miller and Tannehill. It all goes back to Tannehill making teams fear him to take pressure off the run. Once he does, he can pass 20 times per game and attempt another Wilson impersonation. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
So he's so screwed that you can't think of any QB that's ever had to deal with such a **** hand? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Huh? We aren't measuring ***** here. I'm merely pointing out that a QB can deal with a bad oline in only a few ways and many of those ways Tannehill doesn't have access to, and I've never seen any QB thrive in those situations. If you put 10 people in a foot race, and you put leg irons on one of them, then questioned why that person didn't win, all while saying the leg irons are just another of many variables, then you're not being intellectually honest at most or at least just don't understand the subject matter.
I'm not trying to measure anything. I'm asking you if you can think of any QB that's ever been dealt as ****ty of a hand as Tannehill. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
And I've answered it. Which you know because you replied with this: ....Which is also you implying what I'm saying is ridiculous. No one else has answered that question however.
So, just to be clear, you believe that Tannehill has been dealt such a ****ty hand that you can't think of any QB in the history of the NFL that's been as screwed as him? Is this because you don't know of anybody, or you're claiming for sure that nobody comes close in terms of ****ty hands? Because I don't believe his circumstances have been nearly as bad as you're claiming. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Why dont you be honest about that...you asked the first three and I presented you with one Philip Rivers, THEN because it waa a hot topic around the forum (despite ME bringing it up weeks before) you all of a sudden made it apart of this question you feel validates the poor play if Ryan Tannehill. So the audible option no longer exists and didnt Sunday, in a game inwhich our running game was consistent, our OL had maybe its beat game of the year, and Tannehill was given the option to audible. And guess what that produced from a QB who's only reason for struggling was those things??? Less than a 50% completion % less than 100yds passing (vs a BAD secondary). So now what? Whats the problem? He was finally given the keys to the car.....and he sucked even worse than he had the rest of the year. Care to explain? Come on now, you and your mate are good at deflecting one excuse into another, and another, then another.... So tell me?? Why did he suck with these better surroundings if they were what was holding him back? I'll be waiting. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
There is no reason for you to be having a problem understanding what I'm saying. I've been clear and concise. I want any and all anti-Tannehill people to show me a QB that has THRIVED under ALL of these 4 circumstances: - Bad OL - Bad OC - Easily abandoned run game - Not allowed to audible FTR, if you don't think he has a bad oline, bad OCs, the run game is abandoned too early and is allowed to audible, then.....I think its fairly obvious your problems with Tannehill have nothing to do with his actual play and you've chosen a member of the team to lay all the blame and the decades of frustration of being a Miami fan on. Or, he stole your wallet or something.
