Justify these scenarios please..

I hope it's the bolded part. I think his ceiling is sky high when he stops thinking so much, stops being such a good, obedient coaches' player and begins to improvise and play with natural talent and feel.

I think Ryan Tannehill's biggest enemy is just being himself instead of being who is told and expected to be.

(See Terry Bradshaw, Roger Staubach, Brett Favre, Kenny Stabler, Dan Marino… any of those could give Tannehill a little dose of what he needs)

 

After 27 games.

PLus the games Sherm had to develop Tannehill in college to teach him to play the way he wanted.

More and more I think Sherman is the issue.

The truth is NO ONE has seen what sort of Quarterback a Shermanless Ryan Tannehill actually is.

 

I understand what you are asking and it hasn't really been answered. Yes - I do think it's necessary to develop a young QB's passing skills from the pocket - even at the expense of available yardage on the ground. If a QB gets too used to relying on his legs, he runs the risk of becoming nothing more than a "one read and run" QB. I'm going to give the coaching staff a bit of slack with this issue and think this has been part of their consideration. Maybe they feel that Tannehill has developed enough as a passer where they can unleash him on the ground without stunting his development as a pocket passer.

I think the best comparison is Andrew Luck. Since his rookie season he's relied heavy on his legs - with great success I might add. But this has come at the expense of his development as a pocket passer. He was a 54% passer last year and is a 58% passer this year. Admittedly I haven't seen all their games but from reviewing their message boards, the theme of inaccurate passing (especially overshooting) and inability to locate 2nd and 3rd reads are often identified as issues. This may very well be due to his over-reliance on his legs.

Only time will tell.

 

If this is true, and the coaching staff has purposely held back his ability to run to first create a solid pocket passer (thinking long term) with the ability to run when needed and if it works for the future.. Wow.. Just Wow..

 

Both RG3 and CKap are limited when it comes to making reads from the pocket. IMO RT is and has been ahead of both of them in that regard since he came out of college. My belief in the importance of that aspect of NFL QBing (for long-term success) is why I have consistently put RT at the top of the class of young QB prospects even when RG3 and CKap were having much more success. But RG3 and CKap are both great play makers. That's why it's so easy for the media and fans to see their strengths and fail to understand their weaknesses. Since I believe that being able to beat teams from the pocket is critical in this league, I was always more hesitant in my praise of RG3 and to a lesser extent CKap. (I was high on CKap when few thought he was worthy of his draft slot, but I was cautioning that he still struggled with his reads when people thought he was unstoppable).

But RT does have the ability to be more of a playmaker than he has shown. I was actually pretty happy with how he played in the Carolina game. I think that if we had had just an average run game that we win going away. I liked how they moved the pocket. Obviously you can't do it every play, but you can and should use that tool more often than they have this season. I hope Philbin realizes he was being disingenuous when he said, "you can't do it every play". Nobody was saying you should move the pocket every play. People often resort to the extreme example when their argument is weak. Early in the year the coaches did a very good job of game planning and making half-time adjustments but the last 6 games or so they've struggled.

I also liked that RT seemed to try to extend plays on his own more. Frankly he needs a little more of that. There's always a balance between knowing when to trust the system and knowing when to freelance. That largely comes from experience. All along I've been saying that we shouldn't expect RT to be fully developed in those areas until about year 4 or 5. But I had hoped that this season would look a little more like the Carolina game where the coaches took the reins off a bit and called plays to make him work outside the pocket. Of course it's a balance. RT's struggles with anticipation in the middle of the field are examples of him not trusting the system enough. His first year his receivers and TEs didn't do a particularly good job of getting quick separation or presenting themselves as targets quick enough so I can understand RT not trusting them in those situations. (That was where I questioned getting rid of Marshall). This year he had Gibson early on who did a great job of quickly presenting a target for the QB. We lost an important element with that injury and with Keller's. Matthews is filling the void some, but he's doesn't always get the play right which obviously affects trust. IMO the coaches have stubbornly tried to force RT to trust the system when there were plenty of reasons not to. For all those plays like the one Philbin mentions, "he was wide open", there are several where the target wasn't in position. IMO the coaches should have adapted and encouraged more freelancing. I think they should have balanced it better rather than forcing things to the trust side as much as they did.

So to answer the OP's question (albeit circuitously and possibly evasively), the justification is that RT's lack of trust from the pocket was still evident in what some called lack of anticipation, but IMO they should have adapted to the reality that injuries to our middle of the field targets, poor protection and even the lack of a run game made that lack of trust reasonable or at least understandable. If they had interspersed more plays where they encouraged RT to use his athleticism outside the pocket they would have been developing his decision making in those situations while simultaneously making it easier for him to trust the system from inside the pocket (as the D would have to account for the QB scramble threat on the edges and at the line).

 

CKap has really struggled with some pocket stuff this year, and this is a direct reason why SF has struggled more than they usually do this season. Jim Harbaugh started out slow with him, having him make half field reads, playign a lot off of play action, and letting him utilized his mobility and athleticism. That was fine and had success early when defense couldn't adjust to it, but those defenses have adjusted to this stuff now. So, Jim went into this season wanting to put more on CKap's plate, and to this point, he has not responded to the pocket stuff. The debate that will be eternal is whether they should have thrown everything at him last year for development purposes, because you could make a case that allowing him to use his athleticism last year instead of developing him as a pocket quarterback only accentuated those instincts in him.

The difference that I see in Ryan from Kap is that when Ryan was at TAMU, I saw a lot of natural pure quarterback ability in him that was simply raw.

Think about it this way. His head coach openly admits that he had nothing to do with Aaron Rodgers's development. His offensive coordinator, who coached him at TAMU, has a background as an OL coach with no past experience as a QB coach. His assistant QB coach is a guy who played quarterback in college but has very little experience coaching the position.

 

I touched on it earlier and I know it goes against conventional NFL narrative, fandom and media portrayal but I am concerned about Andrew Luck. I just don't see an accurate, rhythm passer. He's still built like an ogre but I'm just not seeing those nuanced plays from the pocket that I was expecting. I don't think I'm going out on a limb by saying that Tannehill is showing more pure passing skills than Luck.

And the league needs all these guys to pan out because the product on the field is at stake because some of these games (the Skins performance yesterday obviously included) are borderline unwatchable.

 

http://www.thephins.com/forums/show...t-that-made-Ryan-Tannehill-the-8-overall-pick

I started a similar thread like this. The coaching of Tannehill has been very questionable with respect to this. Disgustipate is saying it well.

It seems he turned it off like a switch this past Sunday(and developed a pocket feel in the 2nd half of last season, which screams that for the first 9 games this year he was being coached to lock is eyes downfield.

 

How would you translate this comment?

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/packers-adjusting-their-offensive-line

The first quote that I bolded tells me that they aren't changing their system just because they might be playing two rookies at tackle. If anything, it tells me that those rookies have to get up to speed with the system if they are going to play.

The second quote makes me think that they give an early look to everyone, and the ones they think will cut it in the system are the players they will focus on developing.

I'm just pointing this out to show that these coaches are more than likely very much sold on the system as it is and are not willing to change it much. From Joe Philbin's standpoint, he coordinated the game plans for an offense in this system that averaged over 35 points a game in 2011 with proper execution. He's essentially putting his trust in the system and is saying that if the players execute, the system will make it possible to score a lot of points. This system has often been described as one where you "pass to set up the pass". It's very much a quarterback centric system, so with their handling of Tannehill, you are not only seeing them trying to develop the quarterback, they are trying to do it while also developing the system.

Honestly though, this is what happens when you hire someone because you like the system they ran at a previous stop and think he can replicate it. From my standpoint, I would much rather have a coach that will come in and build a system to fit his talent.