Yeah. Lazor was so dumb he didn't even evaluate Ryan's ability to audible... except the article says they did and they felt as a whole it slowed the offense down too much and threw off the "rhythm." If they couldn't get plays off quick enough, that's a problem. Doesn't matter if you get into the right plays if you can't do it quick enough consistently and without subtracting from your overall performance. I have no idea how anything this offense does is in any sort of rhythm. We saw an example of Tannehill being able to audible with a strong running game. Maybe this was what Campbell was referring to. It slowed down the offense and threw off Tannehill's "rhythm" so much that we should've lost to one of the worst, injured teams in the league and he produced 86 yards at 47 completion percentage. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Im in my fantasy league playoffs with R. Wilson at QB vs Balt.....and I'm really considering picking up Ryan and starting him. I think he is DUE for a good game at some point...and the Giants allow the most YPG to any QB in football. Plus I have Landry... What to do.
When he was asked about the audibling, he rambled on about Tannehill being able to audible, and then specifying that his plays have several options, and Tannehill can use those options. Now, perhaps Lazor would use a traditional audible system with a different QB. You're right, I can't prove he wouldn't. But, right now, I've seen no evidence posted that Lazor deemed Tannehill unable to audible. Frankly, Campbell said that, as far as audibling itself goes, that being switching plays and calling protections, Tannehill did fine. He said that the rhythm suffered. Not surprising, frankly for a raw QB in his first or second year.
Should I start Wilson @ Baltimore or Newton at home vs Atlanta? I'm leaning towards Wilson and picked up Baldwin off the waiver wire. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It seemed there was some sort of a consensus because the quote included "we." Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It's been stated several times that Tannekill not having the freedom to fully audible was a hinderance to the team. According to the coaching staff and last game, the evidence points to the contrary. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yes. But, taking away audibling because it messed with the rhythm of a raw first or second year QB is NOT THE SAME THING as Lazor deeming Tannehill incapable of making the right choices when it comes to audibling. You're using proof of "A" to prove "B." When"A" and "B" are not the same thing.
I love how you're using one game, with a team with an interim head coach and interim OC, neither of whom have experience at either position, to bolster this ridiculous argument.
You're telling me people who have built their careers on knowing football couldn't tell if a QB could audible well? Even fans can tell. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
And you're completely ignoring the part about Tannehill being a raw prospect, in attacking him on the audible issue. Not to mention, after two years under Sherman, Lazor bright in a new system. How many first or second year QBs, with Tannehill's experience, are allowed to audible?
Apparent not. The problem with Tannehill audibling, AS SAID BY CAMPBELL, was not the audibling itself. It was that it messed with the rhythm. Again, using "A" to prove "B", when"A" and "B" are not the same.
Newton. Im really considering benching Wilson for Tanny if that tells you anything. WC team on the east at 1pm tend to be sluggish. Over/Under for that game is 40. Baltimore will try and run the ball as much as possible. Newton IS the Car offense...as much as I like Wilson?? I'd take Cam over almost any QB in football. He is a transcendent player...I have zero doubt Miami is in the playoffs with Cam Newton. He doesn't need an OL so thats a big advantage.
It still doesn't prove what you guys are trying to say it proves. And there's the chance he's saying "we" in reference to the team in general, without actually making himself specifically. You know that's how people talk.
He said it slowed down the offense AND it threw off his rhythm. Maybe that's what happened last game. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yeah, that tells me you had a stroke and lost half your brain cells [emoji23] The Dolphins are 3-10 in their last 13 MNF appearances. Baltimore SUCKS and Wilson is on fire. Newton has done really well too but that matchup is tough to pass up. Edit: oh and the Giants are fighting for a playoff spot. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'll just add my 2 cents here.. I'd assume that any OC would give the QB as many options as possible, until they see performance start to suffer because the QB can't process all that info. In principle you want more options because the OC can't predict what the defense will look like on any specific play. So it seems highly unlikely Lazor didn't try to see what Tannehill's abilities were when given more options. That's not "hard" evidence of course, but there are some fairly obvious things you won't get "hard" evidence for. Do you have "hard" evidence the President actually went to the bathroom (as in the actual room) in the past month? Probably not.
Actually just decided Im rolling with Hoyer...although I do think our offense is due to breakout. Ofcourse I thought that last week.
I'd consider starting Miller, Landry or Parker. The Giants are smart, so they'll likely focus most of their attention on Miller and dare us to win passing the football, so I'd be most hesitant with him. Landry is more of a volume pass catcher than anything, so if we're not clicking, he's likely to disappear. Parker is most likely to get red zone targets and deep bombs, so there's that in case the WRs have few opportunities. Plus the NYG have one of the worst passing defenses in the league. I wouldn't start Tannehill against anybody in fantasy. The QB position is really deep in fantasy football, you don't need to rely on him. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
But, if I said that I have 100% certainty that he went to the bathroom in a specific place, you'd have every right to ask my evidence. And, further, if you had quotes from the president that had him stating he pooped in a different place, you'd have even more reason to question my certainty. Again, slowing the offense or disrupting the rhythm have zero to do with being bad at audibling, which is the specific argument I'm arguing against. Further, without showing whether or not is common for first year, or second year, quarterbacks to have full audible control without issue, especially ones with Tannehill's relatively limited experience, why are you bothering to draw any conclusions? Instead of reframing the discussion so that you can argue with me, why don't you try understanding what I'm saying?
You're reframing the question from the first sentence, onward. Humans, including the President, poop. NFL OCs, including Lazor, evaluate their QBs every single way. It's what they do. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Ahh... I'm more of a fan of standard scoring, but I'm assuming you're using FanDuel or DraftKings. In that case, definitely Landry. It's risky considering Tannehill's inconsistency, his poor performance last week against a worse team and the fact that the Giants are fighting for a playoff spot with Coughlin and Manning still around. However, since it's a PPR league, the potential reward outweighs the risk. Honestly, I'd try to go for somebody else. Dolphins skill players are so hit and miss for many reasons. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You're crazy. Wilson is HOT. You play your studs, not matchups. I'm in 2 playoffs and i have Wilson as well as Tanny backing him up. Tanny JUST came off a 10 pt performance.
great post. Coaches that have been around have already set the expectation level. Which in of itself is Tradition. I guarantee all these plug in play players in New England for example have never worked so hard in their lives!!!
Not In my league my.options r Tannehill or Alex smith.Going with Tannehill against worst pass.defence in NFl.Hoping for a shootout or typical Tannehill garbage Tds.I also am starting parker.
