1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Last two sacks given up

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by Brasfin, Nov 12, 2013.

  1. Brasfin

    Brasfin Well-Known Member

    2,435
    1,672
    113
    Apr 27, 2013
    Brazil
    What exactly happened on the last two sacks at the end of the game? I was talking to a friend and he was quick to point out that Tannehill was equally responsible for at least one of the last two sacks, as he failed to throw to the hot read... should the o-line take most of the blame or should Tannehill also take some blame for the last drive stalling as it did?
    Maybe some of the more knowledgeable posters can help out.
     
  2. padre31

    padre31 Premium Member Luxury Box

    99,377
    37,301
    0
    Nov 22, 2007
    inching to 100k posts
    Arguable, the first blitz was 5 on 5 that was not read, the second sack was JJerry simply whiffing on the block, he tried a punch tech and the DT just steamrolled him
     
    gunn34 and CitizenSnips like this.
  3. Unlucky 13

    Unlucky 13 Team Raheem Club Member

    51,931
    63,009
    113
    Apr 24, 2012
    Troy, Virginia
    I don't know what happened, but that was the third game (Baltimore and Buffalo) that essentially ended the exact same way, with huge pressure destroying the right side of the OL after they'd looked pretty good for a while before that.

    Whats the opposite of clutch? Because that's exactly what this offense is.
     
    maynard likes this.
  4. finfansince72

    finfansince72 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    13,843
    10,283
    113
    Dec 18, 2007
    Columbia, South Carolina
    Its pretty simple. Our offensive line sucks, you don't need to over analyze things, we have one of the worst lines ever fielded in the history of the league. We had the worst rushing game in the history of the franchise. Our offensive line is the worst one we've ever had.
     
  5. phintasmic

    phintasmic Banned

    985
    154
    0
    Oct 21, 2013
    I timed the 2 blitzes at the end. Keep in mind 3 seconds is the norm for a QB to take his drop, find an open WR and get rid of the ball.

    First sack, the defender was on him in 2.6 seconds

    Second sack was 2.1. He didn't even complete his 3 step drop before he was hit. It's ridiculous.

    Unacceptable line play. It's a joke.
     
  6. Brasfin

    Brasfin Well-Known Member

    2,435
    1,672
    113
    Apr 27, 2013
    Brazil
    I understand that, what I meant is that maybe Tannehill should have done a better job recognizing the blitz and getting rid of the ball quickly. I mean, as Unlucky 13 said, this is the 3rd time a game has ended this way, shouldn't our QB have this in mind? Shouldn't he know that our OL just can't hold blocks up, especially against the blitz in the end of the game?
     
  7. Ohio Fanatic

    Ohio Fanatic Twuaddle or bust Club Member

    32,072
    22,828
    113
    Nov 26, 2007
    Concord, MA
    no different than the running game. what was the stat, 11/14 times the RB was met in the backfield last night? it reflects how well Tannehill played at the end of the 1st half when he completed 11 in a row. defenders were in the backfield all night.
     
  8. padre31

    padre31 Premium Member Luxury Box

    99,377
    37,301
    0
    Nov 22, 2007
    inching to 100k posts
    No other way to put it, to me, they have -0- to lose by simply making wholesale changes in season, as arguably, McKinnie and Garner are better players then they guys they have stuck with all season.

    What really bothers me is they also do not appear to know their assignments, let alone actually carrying them out, holy crap Turner or Sherman or Tannehill (calling protections), someone is not doing it right.
     
    smahtaz likes this.
  9. finfansince72

    finfansince72 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    13,843
    10,283
    113
    Dec 18, 2007
    Columbia, South Carolina
    We don't have a 3 down back capable of picking up the blitz either. There are some things we can do, rollouts, etc but we can only mask how putrid the line is so much. Its so bad we simply cannot have a consistent offense. Its inexcusable how bad this line is.
     
  10. phintasmic

    phintasmic Banned

    985
    154
    0
    Oct 21, 2013
    They had called deeper routes, they took to much time to develop.
     
  11. Frumundah Finnatic

    Frumundah Finnatic U Mad Miami?

    39,245
    10,681
    0
    Dec 2, 2007
    Miami FL
    A play cannot be set up in less than a second.
     
  12. 77FinFan

    77FinFan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    8,215
    1,896
    113
    Mar 10, 2013
    Buckeye Land
    This is huge.
     
  13. Unlucky 13

    Unlucky 13 Team Raheem Club Member

    51,931
    63,009
    113
    Apr 24, 2012
    Troy, Virginia
    I think that it would be VERY wise next offseason to replace Thomas with a veteran 3rd down back. The kind of player that teams like the Patriots and Steelers have been winning with for years.
     
  14. DOLPHAN1

    DOLPHAN1 Premium Member Luxury Box

    i find it really difficult to place any blame on Tannehill right now. we need to put him behind a line that can actually function and give him adequate time. than if he struggles we can start to point out his flaws.
     
  15. MAFishFan

    MAFishFan Team Tannehill

    3,561
    447
    83
    Sep 20, 2011
    Massachusetts
    :confused2:
     
  16. Brasfin

    Brasfin Well-Known Member

    2,435
    1,672
    113
    Apr 27, 2013
    Brazil
    That's exactly what I mean, doesn't Tannehill have the "power" to call an audible at the line and set up a short route after recognizing the blitz? I'm not placing the blame squarely on him, but to me that's what good QB's are supposed to do. This isn't the first time a game ended this way, it should be something he is completely aware of considering how weak our oline is.



    It wasn't less than a second, it was more like 2 seconds... and yes, a play can be set up in 2 seconds, especially if it's a shallow route designed specifically to avoid the blitz.
     
  17. Claymore95

    Claymore95 Working on it... Club Member

    6,447
    11,200
    113
    Sep 8, 2012
    Peebles, Scotland
    Without the benefit of rewatching, I recall Miller picking a blitzing LB up at least twice, he may have missed on others but as far as I remember the sacks were on the OL in this game and not the RB's.
     
  18. NolePhin15

    NolePhin15 Well-Known Member

    965
    520
    93
    Dec 15, 2010
    Jupiter
    I think youre trying way too hard to place blame on Tannehill. And in those circumstances, a play call with shallow routes would be absolutely useless.
     
    Claymore95 likes this.
  19. Brasfin

    Brasfin Well-Known Member

    2,435
    1,672
    113
    Apr 27, 2013
    Brazil
    [video=youtube;y9mazUGG9-g]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9mazUGG9-g#t=153[/video]

    Here's the first sack, I already put it at 2:33 in the video... there is a flurry of defenders getting to Tannehill, but he manages to complete his 3 step drop and just as he switches to his second read, he gets sacked. There is a huge empty space in the middle of the field around 5 yards beyond the LOS where the LB vacated by blitzing, if Charles Clay gets to that spot, it's an easy completion. It wouldn't have been a big gain, maybe 3 or 4 yards, but it wouldn't have been a sack and it would have put us in a better position to get the first down afterwards.

    I know it's really hard to do all of this when there's 5 defenders in your face, but just pointing out that Tannehill could have possibly made something happen out of nothing, which is a great trait for QB's to have and I want to see Tannehill do more of.

    EDIT: apparently there is no way of making the video start at a specific time, so for those of you who want to see the sack, just foward it to around 2:33.
     
  20. Brasfin

    Brasfin Well-Known Member

    2,435
    1,672
    113
    Apr 27, 2013
    Brazil
    The first sack was actually a 6 man blitz... you can't expect a bad O-line and a bad pass-blocking RB to hold up their blocks for longer than 2 seconds with no shallow routes as escape valves. Something went wrong on that play and it wasn't just the offensive line. Either it was a terrible play call with no option to switch it up at the LOS, or the QB and/or WR's screwed up by not audibling/changing routes.
     
  21. vt_dolfan

    vt_dolfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    I wonder..if Tannehill actually manages to survive the season...with a better oline and clean pocket to throw from..hes gonna feel like he has all afternoon. Could this season actually help in some ways?

    Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2
     
  22. ckparrothead

    ckparrothead Draft Forum Moderator Luxury Box

    79,599
    159,162
    113
    Dec 1, 2007
    My initial take on it was that on the first sack he had time to sense the pressure and get the football out, but that he had to keep his eyes up the field because of the situation and he ended up taking the sack because of it. He's got to sense that blitz coming as they rushed two extra guys on the play, and he's got to know the football has to come out. I think a lot of sacks have been put on him this year that weren't necessarily his fault, but this one I kind of put right on him. He's got to get the ball out.

    Though the sack was costly, it was not game killing. If you recall, during his final hero drive of the Cincinnati game before overtime, his first play of the drive (1:18 remaining and zero timeouts) was a sack on 1st & 10. He recovered from it easily, got the football down the field and put us in position to tie the game and go into overtime.

    This situation was tame by comparison, as Tannehill had 2 minutes remaining and all three timeouts. So that first sack while costly was not a situation where he was in "don't get sacked at any cost" mode.

    What REALLY killed us was the second sack on 2nd & 18. And that had nothing to do with Ryan Tannehill. That was the sack that looked like a scene from The Walking Dead. A bunch of Bills players busted through the offensive line quickly and just completely overwhelmed Tannehill before he could even finish his drop. And what's worse, it was a four-man rush. He had no reason to suspect his line wouldn't even hold up long enough for him to finish his drop, because there were no blitzers. That one you put directly on the offensive line and it killed our chances of tying the game. Anyone trying to put that second sack on Tannehill is grasping at straws, IMO.
     
    mlb1399 likes this.
  23. vt_dolfan

    vt_dolfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    You mean Bucs..right we are talking about?

    CK..you may have mentioned this already..but..IYO...if you had to put down an answer is the kid our franchise Qb?


    Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2
     
  24. ckparrothead

    ckparrothead Draft Forum Moderator Luxury Box

    79,599
    159,162
    113
    Dec 1, 2007
    That's not an answer I can give you at this moment. Nor can anyone.
     
  25. Nappy Roots

    Nappy Roots Well-Known Member

    10,191
    4,187
    113
    Dec 3, 2007
    Bradenton,FL

    Where is this happening at? Certainly not here on this board, every sack this year was the OLines fault according to this board...
     
  26. ckparrothead

    ckparrothead Draft Forum Moderator Luxury Box

    79,599
    159,162
    113
    Dec 1, 2007
    [​IMG]
     
  27. Brasfin

    Brasfin Well-Known Member

    2,435
    1,672
    113
    Apr 27, 2013
    Brazil
    I probably wasn't very clear, but I was talking specifcally about the first sack. After I saw both sacks I did realize that the second one Tannehill really had no chance at all. But he was responsible for the first sack and that put him in that 2nd and very long situation which then put pressure on the O-line to hold up their blocks.
     
  28. Nappy Roots

    Nappy Roots Well-Known Member

    10,191
    4,187
    113
    Dec 3, 2007
    Bradenton,FL
    :bless:
     
  29. vt_dolfan

    vt_dolfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    Well..I suppose thats better then a difinitive NO.

    Heres why I ask. Potentially..we may be looking at a new HC and GM next season. I wonder if coaches will look at RT and say..Thats a kid we can build around. I get the feeling that having a young potential franchise Qb makes you a desirable place to coach.

    I get the sense that Jon Gruden would very much enjoy getting a chance to work with Tannehill. In his time away from coaching he has studied the NFL like a mad man. I think hes just waiting for the right moment. I cant see him doing the filmwork and breaking down that he does..just to be a TV analyst.

    Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2
     
    Brasfin likes this.
  30. ckparrothead

    ckparrothead Draft Forum Moderator Luxury Box

    79,599
    159,162
    113
    Dec 1, 2007
    This "pressure" you speak of exists on every single pass play. Especially every single pass play in which the defense is expecting you to probably pass the football. And in fact, a 2nd & 18 is usually a draw or screen in this league, even in the 2 minute situation they were in. They had two timeouts so the draw/screen was entirely possible.

    Don't connect the second sack with the first sack. The connection isn't there. The first sack was an unnecessary sack taken by Tannehill during a difficult situation in which he's trying to keep his eyes up the field and eat up chunks of yards. And based on the coaches tape it wouldn't surprise me at all if one of his receivers missed a hot route adjustment he was supposed to make given the blitz from the linebackers (specifically, either Charles Clay or Mike Wallace). I'm not positive on that but it just looks like the only short option he had was Mike Wallace, who had Darrelle Revis squatting on his hitch. By the time Tannehill clicked over to try and find Rishard Matthews he had bodies on him.

    The second sack was unrelated. They were asked to hold up against a four-man rush. That's not "pressure". That's doing their job. The entire right side of the line caved in, with Gerald McCoy beating the hell out of John Jerry and DaQuan Bowers beating the hell out of Tyson Clabo. And Bowers isn't exactly a star at this level despite how he looked in college.

    The job the line did on second down was worse than the job Tannehill did on first down, and in a MUCH more costly situation.
     
  31. CantinaJack

    CantinaJack New Member

    210
    129
    0
    Aug 7, 2012
    Washington DC
    people are letting Sherman off the hook on this one, and I don't know why. Why in the heck he spread everyone out like that without a back or TE for extra protection, or at least roll the pocket is beyond me. This is the third game now that we lost because of crappy obvious play calling at the end.
     
  32. Brasfin

    Brasfin Well-Known Member

    2,435
    1,672
    113
    Apr 27, 2013
    Brazil
    Well I'd think blocking well on a game-ending drive holds more importance than any other situation under the same circumstances, especially when two of your other games ended in the same fashion, and that's what I meant by "putting more pressure on the o-line". I'm not in anyway saying that Tannehill's mistakes are "worse" than the OL's mistakes or even equal.. just that Tannehill probably should have done a better job on the first sack. If we're expecting Tannehill to be a franchise QB we should start evaluating him as a franchise QB, and most franchise QB's should not make that mistake under those circumstances. And I am aware of the possibility that a WR may not have adjusted accordingly, so it may not have all been RTH's fault either way.
     

Share This Page