Tua...''He's the greatest prospect ever''

There are quite a few cases where backups came in and did much better than the starter. The list is long. Yes, on average they're worse, but the variability is very high — much higher than with starters, which is why you see stuff like that. Point is, the stuff you're pointing out will not account for a massive difference. If the only argument is small sample size, then we're OK. But your attempt to bring in other stuff that won't account for the massive difference is the sticking point, i.e., the examples are valid if you ignore sample size. But if sample size is the only issue, then one simply acknowledges that while still pointing out that it's informative data we have on what happens with vs. without Tua.

 

False. When the 49ers had to choose between keeping Young or Montana they chose Young.

i knew several 49ers fans at the time and precisely none of them thought Montana was better than Young. The majority had Young as slightly better than Montana due to his rushing and the rest thought there was no difference and Young was a better health risk.

 

Great QB no doubt but, I wonder how much Young benefited from being 30 years old and in the league for 7 years before getting the starting job in SF. He was essentially a veteran QB (as least with respect to practice, film study, and time in the league) with almost no wear and tear. He was also a good athlete. At the time when many QBs had taken many games of poundings, Young was just getting started. Also, imagine his career passer rating if he had stayed 5 or 6 more years in Tampa Bay racking up passer ratings in the 50s and 60s.

 

I was comparing Young and MARINO. Also, SF chose Montana, year after year after year until he got hurt. He missed the entire 1991 season. He wasn't the same after that. Montana was 5 years older and coming off injury.

 

Again, arm strength is not about throwing downfield.

I'm not even talking about Tua, just arm strength is about throwing outs, things like that. It absolutely does matter. Weaker arms have a more difficult time with those throws

 

Whether arm strength matters or not for a "weaker armed QB" depends on that QB's production. For Tua specifically it does not matter because he's producing at an elite level. For any other "weaker armed QB" that is not producing at a high level, then you can argue it does matter. There's no generality here that applies regardless of the QB because ultimately what matters is production.

 

I didn't say it didn't matter. I said if it's not necessary for success, it may be an overrated attribute. Art Schlichter and JaMarcus Russell had absolute cannons but did less with them than Tua is doing with his chicken wing.

In other words: It matters less if somebody has the strongest arm than if he has an arm that is strong enough.

 

It only matters when things don't go as planned.

 

You kinda missed the point as well. It wasn’t a choice as to who to pick. That wasn’t it at all.

Those who are so critical of Tagovailoa have to point to this lack of Marino esque arm strength. Who cares? Tua is playing a lot like Montana and has led the Dolphins to the best record we’ve had in 22 years.

I think NFL history looks favorably on Montana despite his lack of Marino skills…so will NFL history view Tagovailoa similarly.

 

That people are arguing things that literally NO ONE is arguing. That's my point.

You guys have been doing this for years. Argue a strawman that none of us are saying, then complain and call us trolls when we disagree with your strawman.

 

That is fine. Tua just has to be careful making some throws late. The big armed QBs do too. They just have a bit more margin for error. I'll trade that limitation for Tua's advantages all day, every day.

IMO arm talent and arm strength are not the same. Tua has elite arm talent and average arm strength. I'll take that over elite arm strength and average arm talent every time.

Also Tua has elite foot work, release speed, eye manipulation, and pocket awareness. He is developing into an elite processor also. He is already better at all of those things than most other QBs, including Herbert and Allen.

IMO, the top three QBs are Mahomes, Burrow, and Tua. The order is being determined throughout the season.

 

I've seen what Josh Allen does when things don't go as planned. About a third of the time when plays break down, he uses that big arm to throw it to the other team.

 

I think people are remembering statements like this:
https://thephins.com/threads/4-0-with-him-0-3-without.97835/#post-3497068

Remember, one of the goalposts that was moved was the claim that Tua would never be a good deep ball thrower. He IS a good deep ball thrower because the production is there. Arm strength is irrelevant if you can put up the production.

 

In 84 the next closest TD passer was 16 away from his total. Somehow you don't think he would be dominate in this era. You are entitled to your opinion.

 

At the HOF induction it was all about Marino. It was almost like Young was not even there.

 

I didn't say he wouldn't dominate. I'm saying your claim he'd put up 50 TDs every year isn't supported by statistics on how TDs per game and TD% have changed over time. He'd still have the occasional 48 TD or 44 TD season, at least in his peak years, but to expect him to put up 50 TDs every year is just divorced from reality.

btw.. Peyton Manning in 2013 put up 55 TDs and the next closest was 39 TDs. It's not uncommon for an exceptional year to look like that.

 

What does that have to do with Marino? Young was younger, it was a "logical" choice to keep Young.

 

Some QB's have it and some don't. It is important to have a coach that understands that ability. Gase for instance had no clue what that would even mean.

 

TD % would not have been the same in 1984 without Marino jacking that number up. No doubt he would jack up the TD numbers in todays easier to pass game as well.

 

Not that it matters a whole lot, but he isn't usually able to get it out in front. Hill generally waits up. Not a big deal, to me, but to act like it isn't true is just ridiculous.

 

Omg, the worst.

 

I don't disagree with it not being a big deal.

 

I was there. I think there were more Marino Pitt jerseys there than Young jerseys.

 

Marino had almost no effect on the 1984 stats. TD% would go from 4.3% to 4.1% without him. Remember, today it's 4%, and this is cherry picking an exceptional year, not what Marino usually put up.

* And to quantify "almost no effect", the mean TD% since 1984 is 4.16 with a 95% CI of 4.16% ± 0.55%. So you'd need to see a QB change league average TD% by 0.55% before we can start talking about a statistically significant effect.

Point is, we have TONS of data on how passing statistics have changed due to changes in rules. In 1984 the average passer rating was 76.1. Today it's 89.2. Completion percentage was 56.4%, now it's 65.3%. INT% was 4.1%, now it's 2.4%.

However, TD% has remained the same. If Marino were really putting up 50 TDs per year (taken literally) that corresponds to predicting a 70% increase in TD's per year for Marino, and only Marino, while all other QBs would statistically speaking see no difference. No, your claim isn't based on any evidence we have about how rule changes have affected the passing game.

So to be clear. Marino would still be one of the top QBs today, but he would have similar TD numbers. At least that's the realistic expectation.

 

"isn't usually" is not the same as "just doesn't have". That implies that he cannot do it and it is obvious that he can. His more recent deep passes to Hill have all been in stride, including the 42 yard TD against the Pats.

 

It was insane the number of Marino Jerseys. I felt bad for Young I purchased a meet and great package through Dolphins travel so it was pretty cool

 

I'm in the #13 jersey in that picture!

 

Kyle Van Noy pushes back on the narrative that he's Omar's Why-am-I-wasting-my-career-playing-with-this-guy? anonymous source.

 

you say no passing stats have changed even though everyone says passing rules have changed to help with the ability to pass. Marino is regarded by pretty much everyone as the best pure passer ever. Yet, you claim his stats would not be any better. Uhmmmm, OK.

 

That has been nice to see for real. The last 3 long ones have all been in stride to Hill

 

I always thought that person was X.

 

I provided actual evidence on WHAT changed. You want to ignore that and live in fantasy land fine, but then you're divorcing yourself deliberately from reality. TD% is not one of the passing stats that has "significantly" changed over time. All the evidence suggests Marino would have similar TD numbers, but higher completion percentage, more passing yards per game, lower INT% and higher passer rating.

 

I don't believe Van Noy one bit. He was the guy.

 

Tua will never be the guy to uncork a 60-yarder, on a scramble/on the run, to a receiver that is improvisationally breaking free from their man deep down the field. And it would probably be unwise to have him in an offense predicated on a lot of deep outs.

But that's not what our offense is, nor do I think we suffer from not having it in our play book judging by the current results. The freakish improvisational play just doesn't happen as often as anyone fantasizes. It reminds me of that pro day throw from Zach Wilson that everybody got a chubby about. It means next to ****-all in the framework of a NFL offensive gameplan- it just doesn't happen that often.