Then you've missed the entire debate over the past two years. Certain people have been acting like Tannehill was the only problem. Myself and others have been pointing out Wallace's deficiencies, and the part they played, and the oline deficiencies, and the part they played. Then we were labeled Wallace haters, and accused of being Tannehill homers.
Amen Jimmy , amen . Looking forward to a receiving corp that can run routes , has the right attitude and helps their QB's out , as all receivers should .
There is the natural tendency to blame the QB for everything (even piss poor defense and lack luster special teams) and then there was the crap cyclone that was last year on these boards. As usual the rest of the league respect a decent QB way more than his own fans do. Walk around the discussions going on outside of this fan-base and you'll see that sports analysts and writers have finally woken up and realized that Ryan Tannehill ain't half bad.
I'd like to know how they count and come up with their ratings but Tanny was below average 11-20, and 21+ All wallaces fault? I think I'm just a bit weary of all of the blame going onto Wallace. No talk of Gibson having a shi**y season. Tanny did not complete a single pass past 30+ to anyone except Wallace. Yeah he's not Dez or Calvin. Never was. Whatever his rating was to Wallace past 30 yards it was zero to everyone else. According to Barnwell no drops past 15 while the rest of the team had 6 in less attempts? It is what it is. We got a new crop I'excited about stills and Parker.
I'm no chemistry major but Tannehill to Wallace produced a 114 rating with 10 TDs, did RT even top 85 throwing to anyone else? We know Wallace isn't a precise route runner, in a scheme that leans heavily on it. We know Wallace received more attention than any other reviever coverage wise. We know Wallace is primarily a deep threat and that he and Tannehill produced a virtual bloopers reel with all their missed opportunities. And yet the 114 stands. Far better than Tannehill had with any other receiver. 4th best in the entire league. I get it. Tannehill got the big contract, Wallace was traded for peanuts. The feelings of the brass are clear. Still, let's not go overboard and claim RT didnt have problems throwing guys not named Wallace. Last I checked Hartline and Gibson were cut while Clay was allowed to go to a division rival. Your point is well taken but let's not replace one bad narrative with another.
Week 1 Wallace basically stole a TD off of Darrelle Revis' helmet. Spectacular one handed catch over Stephon Gilmore for a TD in week 2. Great play for a TD on a highly contested/tipped ball vs Xavier Rhodes in week 16. The catch he made for a TD at NE is one of the best plays of the year by any WR. If you're saying Wallace doesn't fight for the ball or make contested catches then I dunno what you're watching cause it ain't the Dolphins. Sure you can bring up Dez, Megatron, AJ Green, Julio, or whatever 6'2" to 6'5" guy you'd like but Wallace is 5'10". You'd be hard pressed to find another receiver of his size that did much better in the contested ball category last year.
No, no, no, no I appreciate what Cefalo is trying to do, however, accepting poor performance is simply the miami way. THill, as much as I like his game this team's future with him at Qb, throws a really poor deep pass. When something is mechanically wrong, the further it travels the greater the problem manifests itself, when THill goes deep his placement inaccuracy is merely exacerbated. This and his mind blowingly under performance when facing no pressure are areas he needs to work on himself, not get out Coral Colored Paint to gloss over
The most painful mis-connection last year, IMO, was when RT was running from Pot Roast, flung it 50 yards, hit Wallace in the mitts in the EZ, and he caught it, only to land his 2nd foot OoB. RT put that ball in the only place it coulda been caught. That, and add the other inexplicably dropped sure TDs by BH and others in the first 4 games, and he'd be the subject of a much different convo...and possibly could've gotten a fatter contract.
Don't forget the time Wallace was OB in week 1 vs. New England, or Damien Williams drop right in the breadbasket.....both would have been easy TDs
Yes, Tannehill still needs work, but along with a better OL, he needed better receivers than Mike Wallace and Brian Hartline... Wallace's last year in Pittsburgh: 119 targets, 64 catches, 8 TDs = 53.8% catch percentage Wallace's last year in Miami: 115 targets, 67 catches, 10 TDs = 58.3% catch percentage Wallace's career: 661 targets, 375 catches, 47 TDs = 56.7% catch percentage. Even with Big Ben, Wallace is simply someone you HAVE to constantly feed the ball to and simply accept that over 40% of his targets are going to be wasted each and every season. In both of Hartline's 1K yard seasons, the best he did was 57.1% with his catches. By comparison, Greg Jennings has caught over 64% of his targets the past 2 seasons. Kenny Stills in 2014: 83 targets, 63 catches, 3 TDs = 75.9 comp% and 74.1% for his 2 year career. Jarvis Landry in 2014: 112 targets, 84 catches, 5 TDs = 75% comp%
I know we all have much respect for Ck but I disagree with him in this case, Ryan really didn't throw deep to anyone but Wallace, I mean like for real, please cite a traditional deep pass to anyone not named Wallace in the last three years,lets not kid ourselves, there are fundamental things, things HE needs to get better at..to say that some see these things is not the intelligent route is BS..I don't give a sh&& what anyone thinks, when your a qb you adapt to your skillets, not the other way around, stop waiting, stop hesitating, see your receiver deep, and like Philbin said, " he needs to let it rip" I mean Ryan was not even seeing his receiver he's been throwing to a spot blindly... Slow the tempo in your head, speed up your mechanics, see it, and just let it rip
Vision, pocket presence, deep ball accuracy, take off running more. Same OLD debate that has been re-hashed TOO MANY times...
Here is one of the fundamental misunderstandings about Wallace in Miami, or in his career He is NOT a plow horse WR, he is a thoroughbred Wr, capable of blowing the lid off of any defense at any time for 40 yd gains or long Td's 84 catches 5 Td's for Landry..nice for a rookie Wallace 57 receptions/10 Td's Landry .05 receptions led to Td's Wallace .17 receptions led to Td's over 3x the productivity, this with a Qb who any pass in the air over 40 yds is in dark water
How do you figure that as a fundamental misunderstanding? No one mistakes him for anything more than fast receiver with a catch ratio the square size of the numbers on his jersey... and now, we're back to the 1 trick pony conversation... It changes nothing. Regardless of the QB, over 40% of the targets simply aren't going to be caught. Depth doesn't matter. You're overlooking the fact that Clay was injured most of the year and we had no other viable RZ WRs. Wallace got 10 TDs by default of being on the field, not being Hartline or playing out of the slot - and he pitched a conniption fit if he didn't get targeted/forced the ball. He actually SHOULD have had closer to 15 TDs, but has duck vaginas in place of hands and no idea how to play the sideline... And ALL passes in the air over 40 yards high risk/low percentage. Since you bring it up, here: http://www.thephinsider.com/2015/1/...ike-wallaces-career-a-statistical-examination
Jarvis Landry caught his passes at an average of 4 yards from the LOS. Are we really comparing that to Wallace? Landry last year was basically a glorified pass catching running back. Stills is very good, although this past year the route he ran the most was the hitch route, one with a high percentage of completion (hence his ypc dropped from 20 down to 14, he ran a lot of go routes his first year but ... Brees).
Seriously? What was Dez Bryant's catch percentage the past 4 years and he has Romo throwing it, who has been borderline elite the past few years. It's hovered between 58% and 64%. All of a sudden 60% is reprehensible. What's AJ Green's numbers there. Have you checked Calvin Johnson's catch %? The two guys who run longer routes have lower catch percentages while the guy who runs 4 yards from the LOS has a high catch %. Does that reflect poorly on the QB or the WRs? That's why using catch percentage is so folly. You're not taking into account the depth the route was run and the difficulty. Was Wallace running routes by himself? Did he direct the other WRs to stand down and let him run one receiver sets? Did he tell Tanny NOT to throw the pass to anyone else but him? Did the coaches say, if everyone is open throw it to Wallace anyway? This taking away TDs from everyone else has got to be one of the silliest arguments I have heard.
If you check the actual figures that PFF post then mind blowingly bad with no pressure is Jay Cutler. RT is NFL average. RT comes out at basically NFL average at throwing the deep ball. The figures bounce around with the categories, but Jay Cutler and Eli Manning (QBs that no one labels as a deep ball liability) were significantly worse at throwing the deep ball than RT. So RT is playing at an average level and we would like him to step up. Bottom line is that RT isn't hurting the team, having said that he could help more.
Tannehill Deep 2014: 16 of 53, 4 drops Tannehill Deep 2013: 16 of 64, 5 drops Tannehill Deep 2012: 20 of 51, 2 drops Wallace Deep 2014: 6 of 24, 1 drop Wallace Deep 2013: 6 of 36, 2 drops Tannehill-Non-Wallace Deep 2014: 10 of 29, 3 drops Tannehill-Non-Wallace Deep 2013: 10 of 28, 3 drops Tannehill-Non-Wallace Deep 2012: 20 of 51, 2 drops Tannehill-Non-Wallace Deep Total: 40 of 108, 8 drops Tannehill-Non-Wallace Accuracy: 44.4% Ranking Among 2012-14 QBs w/ at least 60 Deep Attempts: 6 out of 38 I should mention that among those 38 qualifying quarterbacks, Tannehill-to-Wallace ranks 37th of 38 with only rookie Derek Carr coming in behind him. Did Ryan Tannehill have to deal with SUCH a bad deep receiver that his accuracy could go from being one of the best in the league to one of the worst? Is Mike Wallace the worst deep target receiver in the league that way to where Tannehill had to deal with this unbelievable disadvantage? No. Probably not. This is why I've always said he's average. He's not as bad as his deep numbers to Wallace, nor is he as good as his deep numbers to guys not named Wallace. But the narrative isn't that he's average.
The problem really is, CK, when talking about the deep ball, that guys don't want to talk about the 20 yard balls. They want to focus on the 45-50 yard balls...even though the accepted definition of "deep ball" is a ball traveling 20+yards in the air. So then we get into discussions around his deep ball, and we're not talking about the same thing as the guys on the other side of the discussion.
And the problem with that approach is you've now increased the specificity to such a degree that what we're talking about really doesn't matter anymore because we're talking about throws that are attempted perhaps once or twice a game, and completed perhaps once every two games. That's what the data says. So not only is the category insignificant, but the sample sizes have now become SO low that it is almost impossible to draw any statistically significant conclusions based on variation in completion.
Seriously let's be kind and say that these throws happen twice a game (they often don't, across the league) and there's a completion once every two games. You think well once every two games that can be significant enough to consider because these plays are worth about one touchdown when they do happen. Except we're talking about the VARIANCE of those passes that happen once every two games on average. If you've got a guy that completes 6 of 32 then that percentage at 18.75% looks a lot worse than the 25.00% average. But it's literally going to take you a full EIGHT games before you actually feel that variance in any meaningful way...by means of the absence of a completed deep ball that some other bloke would have completed. And who knows whether that extra completion would have happened in a game where it would have mattered. What are the chances that is the case? If we're peeling that many onion layers off, do we really even have an onion anymore?
Thanks. Do you have the breakdown 21-30, 31-40, 40+? I know they're all considered and accepted deep, but if we're talking about all the balls to the rest of the team are mostly less than 30, and vice versa for Wallace, that will add more context. I know, small sample size you've described above. But still interested in seeing, as looking at splits the only person who caught anything past 30 yards was Wallace, no other WR caught one past 30. So I'm interested in knowing how many were thrown to Wallace vs everyone else. By the way, according to ESPN Tanny only attempted 42 attempts 21+. Your stats say 53. http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/splits/_/id/14876/ryan-tannehill
Was just looking through those stats and I noticed that completion % and YPA for Tannehill start high in the 1st quarter, then get progressively worse each quarter. If you look at other QB's, you see some that are similar (Manning and Rodgers start out high in the 1st quarter, then drop and level off mostly afterwards), while others are vastly different. Look at Luck's page. He's worst in the 1st quarter, then gets better and peaks like crazy (at least for YPA) in the 3rd, and drops off. Russel Wilson is similar except he peaks like crazy for YPA in the 2nd. Also, for most other big name QB's the YPA per quarter tends to track passer rating, but Tannehill has this huge outlier in the 3rd quarter where YPA and completion % are getting worse but his rating jumps way up. I wonder if anyone has a good explanation for such patterns. Sample size isn't an issue, so there's something real here.
The #1 reason why Tannehill will be more successful with the deep ball in 2015 is because he have a lot of hands receivers. Parker, Stills, Jennings, even Landry, Cameron, will go up/reach out and snag the ball. Wallace was such a one trick pony body catcher it made me sick. All Tannehill has to do is throw it in the vicinity of our new WR corps and they should catch most balls (hopefully) That is a luxury Tannehill will have that he didn't have last year with Wallace and Hartline.
TDs play a big part in the rating and Wallace had 10. Wallace also tied for the team lead in redzone targets with 22 (Clay also had 22). IMO a big reason that Tannehill had the higher rating throwing to Wallace was the high percentage of redzone attempts to Wallace. And Hartline and Gibson are gone b/c there were better, cheaper and younger options available.
I've seen that. He was great in the 1st Q and 3rd Q, and noticeably dropped off in the 2nd and 4th. But he wasn't like that the previous two years. So I'll take it as anomalous.
Clay had that many but only 3 TDs. So this talk about Wallace "stealing" TDs from other players. I mean really? Not you rafael, but others keep saying Wallace only got TDs because he stole the opportunities from others. Now, we happen to be one of the worst red zone team last year, and posters want to talk about one player stealing TDs from others. We had some of the most chances of anyone in the NFL with red zone trips, yet had one of the worst red zone TD percentages. I'm not sure how you come up with that argument at all.
It is. But it's so deadly that people want to chase it. In 2010 Wallace had 11 catches that traveled at least 30 yards in the air, for 7 TDs. 6 of those 11 were for 40+, and resulted in 5 of those TDs. That's not our offense though, and not our QB. So 4 yard passes to Landry!
The question was why is Tannehill's rating to Wallace higher than to other WRs. The answer is that he had more TD receptions. He also had more redzone targets than the other WRs. These are factual statements that answer the question. It is also factual to state that Tannehill completed a below average percentage (relative to the league average) of long passes to Wallace. Another factual statement is that over the last three years Tannehill completed an above average percentage (relative to the league average) of long passes to all his other WRs. The most logical conclusion is that Tannehill had a problem throwing deep to Wallace but not throwing deep to other WRs. But that's not the narrative. The narrative is that Tannehill had a problem throwing deep to everyone and that assertion is simply not supported by the facts.
Agreed, Rafael. The dispute seems to be on why Tannehill had trouble hitting Wallace deep, as if it was one or the other. Imo it had more to with pass protection and the overall design of the offense than with either Wallace or Tannehill.
All these people defending Wallace obviously didn't watch him his last season in Pittsburgh, when he forgot how to catch the ball? Yet we still signed him to a huge contract? I took a lot of crap over this from "the locals". I guess we will see if he turns back into a deep ball machine in Minny? Good luck I wish him the best. Given the choice I am glad we stuck with 17 and are looking for other recievers, than kept 11 and looked for yet another qb......
yeah, I know for myself I'm talking about the ability to throw the DEEP ball, like in a traditional...DEEP... ball, ya know, drop back, measure it, and throw it accurately deeply..thats where he needs to improve, and I see it all as a mental thing...
the biggest problem ryan has on the traditional deep ball is thinking about trajectory, so lets see, I've seen him adjust his trajectory in mid motion, I've seen him actually think abut changing his arm angle, and then you have philbin calling him out by saying just let it rip..ryan has a more line drive trajectory naturally, so when he tries to add arc its not natural, so, just let it rip man..i guarantee he can throw 40 45 accurately if he just uses his natural motion...slight arc, stop trying to throw it out there with arc and let the receiver run under it..bad stuff happens.
TDs should play a big role, no? You make good points. But the narrative is that Wallace and Tannehill had no chemistry. No one says RT lacked chemistry with any of his other targets, even though his numbers throwing to them were much worse.
Much worse? Like when he turned Hartline into a 1,000 yard receiver? Or, are you referencing the rating thing again, which is hardly a valid way of looking at the deep ball. Or, are you referring to Tannehill having a far worse connection on deep balls to Wallace than to other receivers over his career?
