Ryan had some nice moments in that game, that loss can not be put on him. However he did have an opportunity to close the game out and missed Landry for a 1st down....but one play does not make a game. That game was lost because of coaching-lack of execution defensively and then the offenses inability to close out. So yea...screw you Philbin.
He was an average QB last year. I'm excited to see what he MIGHT be this season. All reports say he has more consistancy. I feel he will always be a dink and dunk QB, but that is not necessarily a bad thing. I will be estatic if he becomes a top 10 QB. His performance is now considerably better than Matt Moore. I believe Moore could win 8 games. We just might get a playoff game this year if the entire team is not made of glass because we have serious depth issues.
See...I would consider Moore to be an "average" QB. If Tannehill is better than Moore, then he's better than average.
He appears to be now. Must show it in a real game. I feel that Moore could have done as good last year. Just my opinion. There seems to be something to him this year. I'm excited to see it.
Which poster on this site has been arguing that Tannehill bears zero blame? I realize there are a bunch of us who've argued that Tannehill was not the biggest problem (see oline, receivers). That is not the same as arguing that the ONLY problem was units other than QB.
You think that Moore does as well individually as RT, or you think that the failings of the defense and ST were such that they could not be overcome?
It is just my opinion. I feel that they are completely different QBs. Moore would take more chances and have bigger plays and more failures. I honestly think he is a better QB than some starting QBs in our own division. RT is the opposite of that. He is safe, but starting to be accurate. I think we would have had a similar result with either. It just seems that RT has gone to a different level so far this off season. Balls are not hitting the ground like they used to. That is a sign of good play. It looks to me like RT has surpassed Moore's ceiling this off season. There can be no argument between the two which I still felt was viable last season. I try to be positive, but I am a realist.
I like Moore, but with this group of precision playmakers I think Moore's value drops a bit, his strength has always been slinging it around and creating out of the pocket. This offense is tailored for a surgeon at QB....that's not Matt Moore.
I agree, but if we had to play Moore last year and if Lazor let him do his thing, would the end result as far as the win/loss be any different? My thought on this is pure RT love for him taking a step this off season. I'm not sure that would have been the case last year.
We would have been lucky to win five games with Moore as the starter. The defense had real problems last year.
RT was better than an average QB last year. He was significantly better than more last year. I believe you are undervaluing his performance.
What you are saying has some truth, but Ryan had 8 games where he performed under par with the league average QB, and 8 where he surpassed the league avg. Want to guess what our record was last year???
I dunno, if anything it may be worse...he was young and had some growing pains. This year I believe he will have significantly more good games than bad or average.
Actually.. Tannehill had 9 games below the average. Brady had 5 and Wilson had 6. Those records don't match up to your theory.
Actually, it seems like they match up pretty closely, at least based on that data alone. Tannehill was below average 9 times and the Dolphins lost 8. Brady was below average 5 times and the Pats lost 4. Wilson was below average 6 times and Seattle lost 4. Not an exact match, but pretty damn close. What were each of those teams' records in the actual games in which they were below average?
Not every game where he was below average was because he was playing poorly. See the first three or four games where receivers dropped numerous tds and lead the league in drops. In other words, not every poor game is the same.
Brady 2-3 Wilson 5-1 Tannehill 3-6 Tell me again how having a great defense and run game wasn't incredibly beneficial to Wilson?
Yeah...except it didn't really even out for him...they basically abandoned deep passing for most of the season after that initial stretch. Point was, statistically Tannehill had three poor games at the beginning, but I didn't think he played that badly. It looked worse due to the horrendous drops. I'm not sure most QBs deal with such bad drops.
Not sure anyone has ever claimed that the defense and run game in Seattle don't help. But Wilson has put up great stats in his own right and still had 50% fewer below-average games than Tannehill last year.
But Wilson's bad games were light years worse. He had games with ratings in the 40's. Tannehill didn't go below 70.
Certainly not i jc..said nothing. negative about Ryan..last years 8-8 was a team effort..from coaches down..tanny,landry,miller all had good seasons for us..but 3 cannot carry the team....i watched Marino do it for years..
You can bet your bottom dollar that every single QB that has ever played has dealt with drops. Dropped passes arent a universe vs Tannehill thing, I live in Philly area and I hate it when Eagles fans say it, only because every QB has WR dropping passes.
Wilson had 1 in the 40s. He had 1 in the 50s, but also rushed for 107 yards and a TD. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
For me statistics are just data points. I stipulate some performances were below the statistical average, but he was fighting an uphill battle with the line issues and the receivers checking out on him.
No it wasn't. Logic just isn't your thing. Question: What won the games where the QB was "below" average? Answer: Something other than the QB. So if something other than QB can win or lose games, then your theory is shot. Anyone wanna take a look and see if the "below average" QB games match up with the wins?
I agree that dropped passes are a data point. I agree that every QB has to deal with them. I prefer to determine if the receivers catch the balls with their hands first. Last year the ball skills of our receivers were below average. I factor that into any evaluation. This year most of the receivers have better than average ball skills. It will make a difference.
I already did: Brady: 2-3 in his below average games Wilson: 5-1 in his below average games Tannehill: 3-6 in his below average games
They certainly do, but the drop rate the receiving corps was handing RT in the first 3 games of 2014 was tragically pathetic (IIRC we had more than double what any other team had at that point). Most of them were sure TDs also, which compounds the impact they made on the team's passer rating and YPA.
Perhaps. I have a hard time believing that any QB deals with the sorts of drops that Tannehill dealt with through the first three or four games. We're not talking off the mark balls that go off fingertips. If they do, it's not on a consistent basis.
What?? My point is and was the entire team is responsible for the average season we had, and yes that includes your "buddy" Ryan Tannehill. Im sorry you have to hear it but it's true.
Stop lying. Your point was that Tannehill was over the average 8 times and below the average 8 times and that is why our record was it was.
While the Wr's didnt help, make no mistake...Ryan was playing bad football early on. He wasn't getting much support but he looked bad enough that being benched was a real possibility. He snapped out if it or we wouldve been a 5 win football team.
No. He was average. Moore is average. This year he looks to be above average. I'm waiting to see a few real games and we can then call him what he is this year. Pretty much everyone that is not a Dolphan (we have blinders on) considered him average last year and his play showed that. Not trying to crap on him. He looks real good so far. Excited to see if he can make his way into the discussion of top ten QBs. If you are outside that number, you are average.