My Opinion on Ryan Tannehill

You lost me at the "Patriot Way" (see above), but I think you have a pretty good bead on Tannehill. I will not go into detail as I know people don't like that conversation. Just going to continue to hope for the best for him and more importantly for the team.

 

Not true. In 1990 the Browns wre a horrible 3-13 team with a -234 point differential.

Belicheck took them to 6-10 with a -6 point difference, to 7-9 and 7-9 and then had an 11-5 season. The team showed steady improvement. Then in 1995 the Browns were 3-1 and looking good when Art Modell announced the team wad leaving for Baltimore and the bottom fell out of the sason.

Belichek did a good job in Cleveland until the owner torched the team.

 

Bud Carson ran the record into the ground the previous year, with a little help from interim "coach" Shofner didn't he? They were a competitive team that ended up with a bad coach for a year. A return to 6-10 is not a good job as it was not a total rebuild.

Tell the whole story though. What happened the next year? The year after that? A pair of 7 win seasons with a team that had higher standards than that in those days, followed by an 11 win year (good stuff). But then came the 5 win season and another 5 win season followed by...another 5 win season in New England, before the winning started there in 2001 which, not coincidentally, is where the first Spygate tapes date back to. The rest is history.

 

I'm saying that any average QB can win in that "system". I think Brady is ultra competitive and extremely hard working. He is not, however, athletic. Nor does he have a great arm or have great legs. If he had started his career with the Dolphins at the same time RT did, he would probably be out of the league.

 

So the fact that they were caught illegally taping Rams' practices before they won that Super Bowl is not evidence?

Just curious.

Also it very much has to do with watching their opponent in my opinion. They were watching what they were doing specially for the biggest game of the year - as the Rams were implementing and practicing plays designed to beat the Pats defensive tendencies. If we went on your premise then if studied the actual questions on a test rather than just studying for A test where I did not know the exact information required to answer the questions is not different; when in fact they wholeheartedly are. One gives you a distinct advantage over the other.

That doesn't mean one cannot duplicate the score one would achieve when knowing what the questions on that test will be without actually knowing those questions, but it will be a hell of a lot harder to do so.

And frankly whether the commentators believe he is a GOAT doesn't mean a hell of a lot. Commentators are paid to fill air time, not to be purveyors of altruism with definitive levels of success.

If it was up to John Madden then Brett Favre was the second coming of Jesus Christ, and I think it is safe to say that is not really true.

 

Really?? You guys just want to keep talking about this?

Let's start with one thing before going on to anything else. Someone explain to me how the Patriots could cheat like no one could imagine in the 2nd half of last year's Super Bowl but had absolutely NO ability to do so in the 1st half.

LOL.. it's crazy.

Oh.. and as far as your standard of evidence is concerned, the paper that reported the taping of the Rams practice retracted that claim and said they're sorry. There is as of yet NO hard evidence for what you claim. You know.. it's called a RUMOR. Here's a link from this year just to emphasize that:
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...thinks-the-patriots-filmed-the-rams-practice/

In any case.. I don't see the point in talking about this (though I'll respond if there's too much push back). Why not follow bpk's lead and say we have better things to talk about?

 

So they were NFL fined them draft picks due to rumor? And Mangini divulging what they do is also false? Also there was video released of what they recorded so a tape was made, otherwise where did the video actually come from. The tape that was aired IIRC showed the Rams walk through.

And yes I think the whole deflate gate issue was a bit ridiculous, but that isn't what I'm referring to.

You have the option to do as you wish - no one is forcing you to discuss this topic.

And the 2nd half of last years SB is not definitive evidence that they didn't cheat or that they did, their methods if employed may have just failed in the first half; there is that possibility. It only proves that NE scored enough points to win and that Matt Ryan threw a poorly timed interception.

 

lol.. I didn't say they were fined draft picks due to rumor. I said what you said was fact was rumor. That was clearly stated so please don't misrepresent.

I'm still waiting for an explanation of last year's SB.

EDIT: I see you added stuff to your post. Look.. to me last year's SB is just one example of how it's hard to believe cheating didn't work when the game began but somehow worked afterwards?? No.. I don't believe that.

But seriously, this isn't a useful conversation (for me at least). Like I told bpk, believe what you want but I don't see the mechanics of how the cheating we KNOW (not rumored) NE was responsible for led to 5 SB's. Just does not make sense to me at all.

I'm ending it with that. Peace dude!

 

A lot of players have come out publicly and anonymously about the Pats cheating. They taped the Rams. I understand that Goodell destroyed everything before the public, or anyone else, was able to see them, but ask Marshall Faulk. Ask Kurt Warner.

Ask Martz about this statement:

And when Martz gave his statement in writing, the NFL doctored it and fabricated things that Martz did not put in his statement.

The Pats did more than just tape in an area they weren't allowed to tape. Why else destroy the tapes?

The Patriots are proven habitual cheaters. As for last year, who knows? However, I won't give cheaters the benefit of the doubt.

 

even better than Rodgers? I ask only because I thought AR was the consensus (with a good margin) best one on this specific aspect, watching him sometime is almost surreal for his precision,


[As I said before, I don't consider TB the best because, simply put, watching him play I never thought he is the GOAT (as I felt watching Montana or Marino, for totally different reason) and I still think the main thing in considering Brady the best is the longevity+the rings and I think much of it is the consequence of the new rules more than anything (if Montana would have played until his 37-38 year, how many more titles he would have won? If Marino was phisically healthy in his 36-37 years? If Unitas? Steve Young? and so on)
Still one of the best - say... top5? - , mind you, I just don't feel like he is the best one I have watched play


and about the cheating... I still think that, for a top 5 all time, even a little cheating could have an enormous impact
I mean what could affect more the end result:
Tom Brady cheating even a little bit or a Mark Sanchez/Jay Cutler cheating a little bit?
The fact that he is such a good qb, IMO is something that makes the whole thing much more worse, not something that makes him less guilty.
Idem with one of the best coach of all time.
I think that BB cheating - even just a little bit - could have a much bigger impact that if it was Rex Ryan or Philbin doing it.
The fact that BB and TB are all-time good at their job is something that makes the cheating stuff - that is a fact, at least for the taping: they were even punished for it - much worse, not less.]

ps sorry for my English

 

He said he was a huge "Tannehill" fan. Now, he could love Ryan as a person, or just love cheering for sucky players, but there was no indication that is what he meant. It's just odd to say your a huge fan of a specific player and then proceed to explain why he needs to go. This wasn't a time for retirement scenario either. Agree with you that it's nothing that should challenge anyone's team fanhood status.

 

I think if you hold Joe Montana or Terry Bradshaw in high regard then Brady has to be right there.

He actually has had less around him than the other 2 guy's but all three you could justifiably call system QBs. Now. All three of those guy's would make just about any franchise BETTER....but they wouldn't have about all those rings in between them w/o the situation they were in.

Marino, Favre are guy's that would make any franchise a SB contender in their tenure....they were flat out just amazing QBs. Same goes for Peyton Manning.

Elway is sort of a tweeter, he was always a really good QB but never won a ring until he wasn't the best player on the offense and an outstanding defense.

You can't go wrong with these guy's, just depends on your own personal criteria.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

well, I said that for me is something like top 5-top 6 all time (Montana, Marino, Unitas, Rodgers, Brady and Manning for me, something like that), I don't know how much more "right there" can he be eh eh
I don't consider Bradshaw (even if I think he is underappreciated as a qb, like our Griese) on the same level of the the other qb mentioned.

I am not so sure that Montana had more to work with than Brady in his (Montana's) first two superbowls (the 49ers had 3 all pro against 2 for the patriots in the first sb, for example, according to pro-football reference; only one, Montana, in the second for the 49ers and zero for the patriots): they both had very dominant (and in some way very under appreciated, expecially the 49ers) defenses and kind of offenses without big super stars
What is interesting is that - as someone else pointed out before - both had clearly the luck to be coached by likely the best of their time

In the end, I agree that you can't go wrong with any of them (Marino, Montana, Manning, etc)

 

I challenge anyone who keeps repewating the Flutie helmet rumor to find a credible, direct source. Go down that rabbit hole.

Tell us what you find.

 

Montana had a system like the NFL had never seen. That and the best WR in NFL history, a HOF RB/TE and a few OL.

If Dan Marino had been traded to SF (remember that rumor) then he would've had more rings than any QB ever.

Of course that is just my opinion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

People would do well to ponder what stats Marino, Montana, Elway, etc would have put up in today's league. If Marino were a contemporary of Brady now, Brady's stats would look pathetic in comparison.

 

I intervened in the conversation because I think the guy who said he was a huge Tannehill fan meant he is pulling for him, even though he sees those flaws. I think that still qualifies as a fan. When he has seen enough and says he wants him to go I would say he is not a Tannehill fan. I think all he was saying was that he could end up going soon if he doesn't play well and I think that is true, especially when you look at his contract. If he were cut this year, it would be almost $25 million in dead cap so no way was that ever a thought. But next year it drops to $4.6 million and half that the following year. Still not what anyone wants to do, but the Dolphins can move on soon if they think it is necessary.

 

Far and away the biggest advantage that the Pats have had over the last 17 years is Belicheck and the continuity.

(I don't want to get into the cheating. It's obvious they do it and that it has helped them, but the degree of impact is impossible to know. The people and media who say they're GOATs regardless consistently ignore or at least minimize that impact. IMO that's as ridiculous as denying that they were great. Both things are obvious and the truth is somewhere in the middle.)

That's why they win when Brady plays well and when he plays poorly or when they have injuries. That's not to say that Brady hasn't been a great QB for them, obviously he has, but the primary reason for their success is BB. Like Montana, I believe that Brady may also have been out of the league had he landed in a less favorable situation. At a minimum both of those GOAT candidates would have been far less successful in other situations.

Conversely, I fully believe that if Tannehill had landed in a more favorable situation he'd be a SB champion and we'd be lamenting having passed on him. (I also don't believe we could have won a SB during the years Tannehill was here with any QB. Not Brady, Montana or Marino). Anyone claiming that we can't win a championship with Tannehill is ignoring history. Far lesser QBs have won SBs so it's ridiculous to claim that he couldn't. And it doesn't take a perfect team or a perfect line. That's just the fall back of poor analysis giving the QB to much credit and blame. Obviously he's not perfect. But he has improved consistently, more consistently than any QB I can recall. His continued development will obviously help the team, but he's already a very good QB.

 

Marino is physically the best QB of all time but he's a meathead. You'd wonder if he would have kept up with today's schemes as well.

Transferring QBs through eras don't work. They play when they play. The league figured Marino out after the first few years and he was still one of the best. But not 84-88 Marino.

He never broke 30 TDs after 1986 amazingly enough. Steve Young led the league in TDs more than Marino. And don't even look at passer rating especially in the playoffs.

Let the QBs play stay in the era they played. This transferring stuff just won't hold up

 

Marino struggled most against the Pats. The Pats were one of the few teams that shifted their defense post snap back then. They were great at zone blitzes. It's also what SF did against him in the SB. The trend then was for overload blitzes but not a ton of zone blitzes. Marino was never great at post snap reads. He was great at his pre-snap reads and his ability to complete the pass despite great coverage. He would torch teams with his quick release against teams that tried overload blitzes. He was just great at getting the ball to whatever zone the blitzer(s) had vacated, but if that zone was filled and he had to adjust, it made Marino a bit more human. Marino was instinctive but not overly bright. I believe that's why he never replicated those early great years after 88.

Now the coverage rules changed after 2001 so those changes would have worked in Marino's favor. The looser coverage would have obviously helped such an accurate passer.

It's impossible to predict which impact would have been greater. That's why you're correct in saying that the transferring stuff just doesn't hold up.

 

I figured he would struggle with a lot of the more well coached defenses like the Pats and Ravens

 

Yeah.. with all due respect to jdang307 and rafael, there is definitely value in adjusting stats in different eras by the average stats in those eras when comparing. Put it this way.. it's MUCH better than just saying "we don't know" and then using the raw stats to compare (which people often do btw).

To be specific, we do NOT know what would transfer from one era to another, that is correct. But adjustments based on league averages at the time DO allow you to see how good a player was RELATIVE to his era. And when you're talking about all-time greats it's useful to have info on how good different players were relative to their own eras.

Having said that.. let me be clear what adjustments I made. For each QB's stat in a given year, I divided that stat by the league average for that year, multiplied it by the 2016 average, then multiplied each year's adjusted stat by the number of games started (this weights everything by games started), then to get the correct answer mathematically you have to sum everything and then divide by the sum of the weights (sum of weights = sum of games started).

You get these expected stats for a single year for Brady, Montana and Marino when adjusted relative to 2016 averages:

Marino:
Passer rating = 102.4, Yards = 4,495, TD's = 29.9, Y/A = 7.63, COMP% = 66.3%

Montana:
Passer rating = 111.5, Yards = 3,826, TD's = 24.3, Y/A = 7.78, COMP% = 71.2%

Brady:
Passer rating = 103.9, Yards = 4,490, TD's = 31.6, Y/A = 7.71, COMP% = 66.2%

Well.. if this says anything it does tell you how important completion percentage is in passer rating because in raw (non-efficiency) stats Montana is well behind Marino or Brady. Efficiency-wise he's well ahead.

Either way, I do think adjusting this way is far better than comparing raw data or just saying we don't know what would transfer (which is technically correct of course).

 

Hard to adjust stats when defenses were built primarily to stop a running game. Wayyyyy to many factors to come to a true conclusion.

However it is a fun little exercise.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I disagree with you often but never really think many of your points are ridiculous. This one is pretty ridiculous.

On this same token you can argue If BB drafted Tanny he'd be done because he isn't football smart enough to run their offense.

Remember what the Ravens said about him before their beat down on the team.

Last year it was argued that Russell Wilson would be out of this league if he was drafted by the Dolphins. Now it's Tom Brady. Two of the best in the league. One that is going down as one of the greatest of all time

So basically the only person that would still be in this league if they were drafted by the Dolphins is RT.

That is a ridiculous statement on its face

Peyton Manning does not have a great arm nor is he athletic either. So basically pay Manning would also be out of the league according to your argument

 

What is a credible source in your opinion? I mean this with all due respect, I'm not trying to take anyone on here.

 

Every backup QB they have ever played has been successful while there, but once they got a contract somewhere else has sucked....That to me shows something. I think Brady is good.....but it isn't just Brady that gets the pats wins. Its a combo of coaching, and in my opinion cheating, along with having a solid team with depth. Put Tanny in that organization and he would look great. He has looked slightly above average here with crap around him, and last season he looked like he was turning a corner before injury. He has to prove it this year, and I'm pulling for him to do that if for no other reason than it means we finally start winning consistently again.

 

An actual quote from Flutie or the person he told it to. Last time I looked at it, it was just Lebatard talking about the rumor of the conversation, and then a guy writing about it in a book, but his source was Lebatard talking about the rumor.

In this very forum a few months ago I asked anyone to find me a better source and no response. It might be out there, but I never found it.

 

Cassell had a more successful season without throwing to Moss and Welker in KC. I don't know why people ignore that. Was he an all pro no. But he played to that level elsewhere. And with less talent.

 

He never had a year with a higher completion percentage, more yards,more yards per attempt than in 2008 with the pats. Only one other time did he come close to the amount of wins, which he tied once with KC, and every other season wasn't close. He had a couple more TDs with KC that same year. Every other year he started was miserable.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/C/CassMa00.htm

here are Tanny's stats to compare showing better results with a subpar team and i think supports my opinion that with the pats he would be well above average. I don't agree however that Brady would be out of the league if he had played for the phins, but I do agree he wouldn't be the player he is today.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/T/TannRy00.htm

 

I just went down that rabbit hole. Lebatard on his radio show was the source, and it was admittly heard second hand. Weirdly, Flutie has refused to confirm or deny this. I'm on my phone and lost my links, so believe me or not.

 

Well of course the source will always be LeBetard ias he first told the story, so nobody is going to really find you a different source because Flutie is not saying anything else publicly. Why would he? He loves the Patriots for giving him a chance at the end of his career. It's not that I think ESPN is always the way to go, but if I am Flutie and the rumor was false, I think I would answer requests for interviews to clear it up if I had been misrepresented. To me that makes it credible, especially when I look at all of the other evidence. I can tell you that Bryan O'Leary did not make up all of that conspiracy stuff. The NFL is under a gag order and anyone who talks about it would most likely be fired, if they are a current employee, based on reactions I have seen, and most likely ostracized if they were a retired player like Flutie. I tested that theory out on 3 NFL employees myself. I believe that O'Leary is right when he talks about the NFL threatening to isolate any media that push Spygate any further. Remember how quiet the other teams got after the owner's meeting in NY at Goodell's request?

 

Lebatard didn't even report it as true. He reported it as a rumor. Scuttlebutt. He didn't hear directly from either person in the convo.

 

50% higher td rate, 25% less INT rate, playoff berth. Higher rating. Without belichick or Welker or Moss.

It's not even close.

 

That's different and valid. Different than saying what if Marino played in the 20s

 

Wait...it was LeBetard who said this?!?!?!?

Jesus, I thought this accusation may have had legs. Nevermind.

 

I chased that rumor down the rabbit hole. Have been hearing about it since 2007 on the forums, and finally this year, 10 years later, decided to find the source

I kid you not. That Spygate book author literally cites Lebby as the source.

That show from what I've read, isn't even archived. And how doubtful is it, the author actually heard it live? So I have to assume he heard that Lebby said it.

If this is the level of sourcing you are willing to accept well, I really don't know what to say. This is the type of stuff that makes you think BB loves everyone thinking he's cheating. Having to come up with fake playsheets and 3 calls (one real two dummy calls etc.)

 

Super easy for Flutie to come forward and defuse it then right? You'd think with the Patriots being caught cheating twice that he would defuse that rumor for his old team. Alone, a report from any media member a rumor is something I take with a grain of salt. When I look at all that has happened and what has not happened (see above), I think this is more than the usual rumor. But each of us can take it as we take it, in context or isolated.

 

I think you are right. By the same principle, I often think back to Culpepper / Brees. Culpepper was a huge mistake and apparently he slacked on his rehab. But also, if you remember our line back then I wonder if Brees would have made it to November that year, or gone on to his huge success since then if he had come to Miami.

 

27td's in 2010, 21 in 2008 with New England. TD% of %6 vs %4. 11 INT's vs 7 INT's 10-5 both years. His win loss is 19-28 with KC, 10-5 with NE. Other than 2010 his numbers are significantly worse.