I was reading on profootballfocus (site is currently down) about how different QBs perform under pressure. According to their stats: - RT faced a significantly higher % of pressure than the average QB - RT was in the top 3% of QBs when pressured. - With No pressure RT is at the league average - Against the blitz RT is at the league average. Now I'm no expert on how PFF gives out their grades but this seems to counter to some popular perceptions about RT as a QB, specifically the often repeated trope that "he needs to improve his pocket presence". The PFF grades indicate that RT is actually good under pressure, but needs to step up his game when he has time to throw.
I'm ok with it. A little nervous about that long of a commitment this quickly but Tannehill proved he has what it takes last season.
I would strongly disagree w Wilson being able to win titles with a dozen teams. Seahawks, Bills, Bengals, 49ers when healthy, def with the 08 and 09 Jets. But nothing like you're suggesting. He certainly wouldn't have gotten Miami, or any other pass heavy team, to the Super Bowl.
The better analogy would be a goaltender who faces 35 shots per game on a team that scores 2.5 goals per game vs another who faces 25 shots on a team scoring 3.5 goals per game.
I will say this. There's been a huge push by fans and the GM to get Tannehill "QB Friendly WRs." Think about that. Has anyone talked about getting Wilson, Brady or Big Ben "QB friendly wrs?" Naw, it's jut Tanny. Wonder why. Just sayin.
By every measure he's been a great passer, he even holds at least one NFL PASSING record that I know of for Gods sake. In his first two seasons he's second only to Marino in total TD passes. I don't know how you people conclude that because he has Lynch and a great defense he isn't a good passer, but you're sure as hell not using logic...
I think that Wilson is good. I like his personality a lot and think its great he's doing well. He executes in their offense. But subjectively, watching him play, he's not the type of QB that I think could be dropped onto most teams or most offenses and do as well as he's done there. To me, that's the mark of a great QB. Marino could have, or Elway, or Peyton. Maybe Wilson develops into that, but he's not close to being there now, IMO. That's not to say he's poor in any way, just that he gets more credit than he's do.
i believe thats where your wrong, his game translates to any system because of his style of play..his improv and movement game does not need a system to flourish. When it comes down to it, on offense, he had one great player to play with, because his online, his receivers and his tight ends were all sub par units.
Mike Wallace, Emmanuel Sanders, Antonio Brown, Markus Wheaton, Martavous Bryant, Leveon Bell, all drafted by Pittsburgh in the last several years. Seattle traded two first rounders for Harvin and Graham, a 2nd rounder on Paul Richardson, more picks on Norwood and Harper, they already had Sidney Rice, Doug Baldwin, Zach Miller and Golden Tate. The Colts drafted Fleener, Allen, Hilton and now Dorsett, they signed three former first rounders in Heyward Bey, Nicks and Johnson. They already had a HOF WR in Wayne. Maybe their fans aren't talking about adding wrs because it's already happening.
Seriously. Look at NE. They always have QB friendly receivers. Welker? Edelman? Gronk? Hernandez? Amendola? How about Denver? Detroit? Arizona NEVER got QB friendly receivers. I could go on. Bottom line, teams try and get receivers that fit their system. They don't generally try to surround their QB with terrible receivers who don't fit the system or what their QB does well. Yet again, a sly way of taking a shot at Tannehill.
Are we arguing Wallace is now a QB friendly WR? Heyward Bey is a QB friendly WR? Hilton and Dorsett, two absolute speedsters? When did Fleener and Allen turn into wide receivers? You guys are proving my point for me.
There is talk of getting Wilson WRs period, not necessarily QB friendly ones. When you get to the superbowl and are 1 yard away from winning it all, with Baldwin as your best WR, and he still puts up a 95 rating, and over 100 rating the previous two years with only Golden Tate as a good WR? Think you guys are missing the point. We are targeting WRs who aren't necessarily fast, but have good catch radius and excellent hands. Landry and Parker. Why are they emphasizing the super glue hands and large catch radiuses? Slightly off target passes perhaps? They specifically mentioned qb friendly wr's a few times. It's not a coincidence. Not system friendly, not superior athletes. But QB friendly.
I think this is being made into way too big of a deal. Wallace was a very QB unfriendly receiver. However, Tannehill was not bad to other receivers.
Something recently popped into my head regarding Tannehill. It may mean something, it may mean nothing. Earlier this year, Tannehill had Lasik eye surgery. While I'm not a Lasik aficionado, athletes who have the surgery all seem to agree, it's shocking just how much it dramatically changes their vision. From Dwayne Wade, LeBron James, Tiger Woods, etc... All saw their games improve the following the surgery. I remember reading Tommy Maddox having it done, starting the year 0-3, then winning 10 straight after having the procedure done. I remember Tannehill posting a photo of himself, his wife, and doctor. I haven't heard much about it since. I wish the media did a follow up. Or perhaps they did and I missed it? Anyway, just a random thought. I'm not suggesting Tannehill's going to be a top 5 player now or anything, but a vision enhancement that can fix contrast, blurry vision, depth perception, etc... can't be a bad thing. At worst, the effect is nil. Which I find hard to believe.
Wrong. Greg Jennings is a WCO WR. He fits the system perfectly. Good athlete. Very good-great YAC receiver. Devante Parker is a perfect fit as a #1 in a WCO. Good athlete. Jarvis Landry is a WCO system fit.. Great athlete, with natural running ability, despite lacking top end speed. Kenny Stills comes from Oklahoma spread and played in WCO in NO. Great athlete. Jordan Cameron played in WCO in Cleveland. Amazing athlete and former basketball player. The reason we're going after these types of receivers is because our WR's for the last few years haven't been very good. At one point last season, our team lead the NFL in dropped passes. As it did the season before. And the one before that. Emphasis on pass catching ability was needed. So we addressed it. We also struggle in the red zone, because we don't have bigger targets in a physical and condensed area of the field, so we addressed bigger bodies (Parker, Cameron). Are they QB friendly? Sure, but not at the expense of their athletic ability or system fit. The idea that our new receivers were hand picked to make up for any abilities Tannehill lacks, isn't true. They were picked because they fix massive deficiencies we've experienced in this offense for 3+ years. Marshall, as good as he was, dropped 100 TD's a year it seemed like. Mike Wallace's nickname? Stone hands... Great athletes don't always make the best WR's. Our staff has seemingly learned that lesson.
I saw this picture, though not with his wife... [h=1]Big thank you to Dr. Lessner and @havelasik for making my vision better than its ever been! #nomorecontacts[/h]
Thats funny bc I could seriously do a better job of arguing your side than you're doing. Outside of Tannehill, Wilson is the QB I study the most and Imo it's almost like you're trying to prove yourself wrong.
Because anyone with a brain can see that goaltending is more like quarterbacking than being in the batter's box.
Hmmmmm.....114 to Wallace in 14. They say that they had the 3rd highest rating last year. I'd say he was QB friendly last year with 10 TD's here. I am happy now with the moves we made at WR this year. I do think that over all they will be better.
I thought Wilson was overrated until the NFC championship game last year. I don't see him play a lot because I almost watch the Dolphins exclusively, unless it's nationally broadcasted. But man he made some plays when his team needed it. He was playing like **** most of the game, but in crunch time he got it done. It was crazy, almost like it was scripted. He has a great feel for the game, senses pressure, and makes quick efficient decisions. The more pressure, the better the outcome. Early in the game he'll throw picks and fumble the rock, in the 4th quarter dude is in the zone. I'm all positive about Tannehill and his future with Miami, but Wilson is definately a play maker, can't say that about Tannehill.
For me one of Tannehill's best plays of the season was the TD pass to Mathews, it was an amazing play and Tannehill was definitely "in the zone" that day. The problem is those types of plays are too few and far between. I do watch a lot of Seattle games and Wilson makes one or two of those types of plays a game, where Tannehill might make 2 a season. On top of that, Tannehill does a few stupid things a season that Wilson doesn't do, like sliding a yard short of the first down sticks, week 17, with the playoffs on the line. In a vacuum, making one throw 10-20 yards from the pocket to an open receiver I could buy the argument that Tannehill and Wilson are equals. But one guy has all of the intangibles and one doesn't. And over time those intangibles will make a big difference in the record. If they didn't make any difference, why would they even be talked about as if they are a thing in the first place?
Look at the passer ratings last year between the two of them. Tannehill never went below a 70. Wilson went as low as a 46. Tannehill is steady. The only reason Wilson even had a chance to make a play in the NFC Championship game is because the defense kept the gave so close, despite Wilson playing so poorly. Tannehill had a similar bad half against Green Bay, but played phenomenal in the second half, but I don't see many people crediting him with that.
Huh? I think Russell Wilson could set the stadium on fire, watch it burn, and people would praise him for grabbing a couple hot dogs on the way out.
Because ANYONE can catch redzone TDs right? ROFL. Let's not confuse a bunch of redzone TDs to Wallace inflating Tannehill's rating. Tanny should be in the low 80s still. Subtract 10 Tds. Tannehill benefited greatly when Lazor removed deep attempts from the game. Last year Tanny averaged 7.4 yards in the air per pass, 28th in the league. Lots and lots of screens to Landry. He hasn't proven he can throw it deep yet. He's 26th in the league in rating for passes thrown 15 yards or more. We need to see those numbers go up if we're going to challenge some of the better defenses.
Wallace had some highlight reel redzone TD's last year, catches that were VERY QB friendly, so I don't think you can take away the TD's from him. Having said that, he is normally not that QB friendly.
Regardless of what everyone thinks of Wallace (I like him but thought him an ill fit for our offense, and very overpaid) he was forced to become a better WR last year. You saw the huge jump he took in the intermediate and short game. He's not a typical redzone WR with huge size, strength, awesome hands and great jumping ability. He's a burner. For him to catch that many red zone TDs was remarkable. He's become a more complete WR after 2014. Not one of the best, but still.
The TDs vs NE in week 1, Buffalo week 2 and Minnesota week 16 were very QB friendly. But yeah I agree Wallace isn't all that QB friendly.
To be fair, Wallace was the only guy who was a vertical threat and the offense was geared to throwing quickly. I agree Tannehill hasn't shown much talent hitting deeper passes but it's not all on him. This new WR group will be much better both on vertical stems and with creating yardage after shorter throws. Tannehill should look better in that respect even if his individual play doesn't improve.
