One of the big problems with taking an inexperienced QB is that the proper technique is not ground into them prior to getting in the NFL, a trained pocket QB doesn't have to think in those situations to square up before they throw, because it has been engrained in them to ALWAYS set and throw, and a guy like Tanne in the heat of the moment reverts, because he forgot to reset.
yea I didn't see happy feet there at all. What I Did see was him making a bad throw. He didn't adjust his throw with his momentum going left which allowed the ball to sail left and out of the end zone.
I think you guys are reading in to this way to much. He made a bad throw, he has already shown he can make good throws on the run, this one got away from him and I bet if he had to do it again he'd nail it 2/3s of the time.
Yeah, I was thinking, "Man, he is usually pretty dang good rolling to his left. It was a really awkward throw. Not sure I've ever seen him throw a ball like that before.
2/3? Offensive coordinators and coaches would love this every time. He needs to nail that 90% of the time.
They had the Redskins fooled completely on the fake pitch out to the right too. The outcome of the play was an abomination.
He threw it like 5 feet out of bounds. Manute Bol could barely get his feet inside to catch that thing. Here is a better angle of everything (but bad video quality) [video=youtube;UcbLGRcsmEU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UcbLGRcsmEU[/video]
It's happy feet boss. He was playing poorly and had basically no general awareness of defenders around him. His internal clock started going off and he fired the pass off-balance.
Considering it was a rollout to to the left passing across his body I'll take the 2/3s. Rolling to the right however should be even better. im not sure why you guys think that qbs need to be or ARE perfect. But no qb is making that throw 90% of the time.
I've realized that despite my usual positive to wait-and-see attitude on Tannehill, you guys are arguing against straw-posters, at least in regards to my posts. People like resnor and Fin D who have the context of my past posts are reasonable with what I'm saying but the newer guys here are just being reactionary. You people need to chill and stop taking this so personal. Multimillionaires can pay people to defend them this vehemently.
I brought up rating, cause some keep pointing at his rating as a defense of his play. Answer this: would you be happy if Tannehill played like this every week? If not, then don't keep saying he played well. I've been a staunch supporter of Tannehill, but saying he played well yesterday reeks of homer blindness. I'm not saying it's the end of the world, nor am I suggesting that Tannehill sucks. Just that he didn't play a great game. Like I said, I'd give him at best a C rating.
i never said he played a great game though. And if he played like the way he did yesterday in every game I'd be disappointed. I expect more. A B- grade that I gave him is nothing great, nothing I'd write home about at all. Something that still leaves much to be desired. My big thing is if THAT game was a D rating as many have suggested, what would it be if he threw an int or lost the game.? By overreacting so much you leave now room to adjust accordingly. but really, maybe it's just semantics but the difference between my B-and your C is pretty small. i give him that for not throwing an int. being accurate with the throws he made. The drive at the end of both halfs and taking in to account the overall offence, such as the oline and all the new players on the team still gelling. maybe I'm just not a hard as with grading like some
I wouldn't say he played well, but I always take the dropped INT's with a grain of salt. I'd say every week 3/4 or more of the QB's in the league have a throw that "should" have been intercepted. Some are and some are not. Just like Im sure he will have a game where our WR's drop a TD or two.
Bad game from Tannehill yesterday. Should have had a couple of INTs to go with the fumble and touchdown. Then again, should have had another touchdown if he doesn't overthrow Sims. Overall, decision-making was not up to his own standards. We really need to get another radio in his helmet. Maybe better film to study.
Yes. Exactly as I said. It was clear. It was designed. He had all the time in the world. He was looking that way the whole time. Just bad touch and accuracy.
I never said "great." You give him a B because defenders dropped easy picks??? Come on, man. Yes, he didn't throw a pick, but it wasn't because he made good decisions and had great ball placement. He had no picks because the Skins couldn't capitalize on two gimmes.
It was actually great play call and execution until the throw. I wouldn't take 2/3 with a guy open in the end zone. You need 100%. anything less and you should be pissed.
I agree with that, but it was still a very hard throw to make because of the angle and the undercut of the route, and the immediate adjustment that both players had to make instantaneously...it require magnificent touch, and touch is not a strength of the player.
It's definitely harder when your feet aren't set. Which is the point of contention on that play. He was never in danger of getting sacked.
it was an uncharacteristic play, he's usually deadly going to his left, its a strength.he wasnt settled in for this game, I have a solution to help him with that but neither he nor his coaches conceptualize it.
Tannehill played just like the rest of the team. He didn't play all that well but he made plays when he had to make them. The only stat I care about is the win. I'm confident hes going to be better than this so I'm not concerned.
That's a naive way to look at it. What happens within the game matters as much as the win/loss column. The more games we play, the more tape gets out on this 2015 version of the Miami Dolphins. and weaknesses will eventually catch up if they're not cleaned up. We're not playing the Redskins every week either, who were ravaged by injuries as the game wore on. I mean they lost their most lethal offensive player in the 1st quarter. Btw, our schedule is about to get a lot harder after the Jags game - particularly in the caliber of defenses we will be facing. If we had marched in there and taken care of business by putting them away early - then you'd find a lot more fans less worried and happier about the win. For now it has a phony smell to it barely eeking out a win in sloppy fashion.
What happens in the game matters, of course, but it certainly doesn't matter as much as the result. The Pats had to eek out wins last year against the Raiders and the Jets TWICE. 2 of the 3 at home. You know why? Because it's the NFL and sometimes you have to grind out wins even against poor teams. It's almost like I'm supposed to apologize for winning a game in sloppy fashion. I don't think so. I'll take 'em anyway I can get 'em. Again, I'm well aware of the fact we didn't play a great game. I'm well aware that we have improvements to make. However, we won and I'm very happy because we did. We could have played a very good game and lost, would you be ok with that then? Of course you wouldn't, because winning is all that TRULY matters. Expecting to just roll into away stadiums and devour opposing teams every time is naive. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You're doing it again with the bait and switch to prove your point. No logical fan would expect their team to devour every team they play on the road. If they did, they're not even worth a mention. There was a ton of hype leading up to this game - not only about the maturation of our QB and the signing of Suh - but also what a mess that Redskin organization has been from top to bottom leading up to the start of the season. If there was ever a time to kick them when they were down it was Sunday. We failed to do that and played down to a much inferior opponent - which has happened far to often throughout recent history. It's really simple .... put away the bad teams early and play the competitive teams tough.
And again, expecting to put away bad teams early isn't always as simple as you make it out to be. How do you know Washington isn't better than people think? And I'll ask again, since you want to put away bad teams early. Why didn't the Pats put away bad teams early last year when they won the Super Bowl? Why did they need a goal line stand to beat the Raiders at home? Why did they need a blocked field goal in the final seconds to beat the Jets? The other Super Bowl team last year also eeked out a home win against the Raiders. Shouldn't they have put them away early? By the way, we destroyed those Raiders last year and we didn't even make the playoffs. See? It's not as simple as you think it is. It's not always easy in the NFL. It's classic Week 1 overreaction. If we continue playing sloppy, then I'll be concerned.
Again, we played them in their building. I fully expected it to be a dog fight and yet we came out on top. I would be more concerned had we performed like this at home. The fact that it was on the road should be taken into consideration. My hats off to the Redskins, because they showed up ready to play and they gave us all we could handle. On to Jacksonville....
Washington is a much better team than given credit for. Front office disfunction aside they have a strong D Line, an explosive running game and a decent passing game w/ cousins. They played smart D against us I thought. We also did not play up to our hype at all. Where was the improvement in our run D? Why wouldn't, not couldn't wouldn't, we run the ball in the first half?
I think they are better than people think. They won't make the payoffs, but they have some talent there. Cousins isn't awful either. But really, even if they are just completely awful, that still doesn't mean that every good team that plays them is going to dominate them. Hell, we were 1-15 in 2007 and we played a TON of one score games that year.
You're right, no logical fan would expect it. However, it is the end result of your gripes. EVERYONE has said Tannehill didn't play great. EVERYONE. But that's not good enough for you so you keep acting like we're all ok with substandard play. You want us to be as worried as you about Tannehill, but we aren't because we know he can and will play better. Because of that and the voracity with which you are doing this, makes a lot of us think you're expecting perfection and will be pissy when it doesn't happen.
He didnt play well but getting a win when most of our team plays like **** is the sign of a decent team making progress Last year we wouldve lost that game
Knock knock... Hey guys.... Its Tuesday. Games been over few days now. We won. Lets revisit this discussion after next game.
I think the biggest problem ppl seem to be having is seperating their EXPECTATIONS from before the game such as Washington being a terrible team. Maybe they aren't as terrible as ppl think THat Oline is much improved, the whole running game is strong and Morris is a stud. With the (more)consistency of Cousins at QB I think it makes them a much improved team from last year. Plus they got some ballers on defense. I get that the blind homerism and one-sided analysis most ppl have in here is strong but maybe alot of those redskins "homers and one-sided analysts" were actually right about some of the things they were saying. Just don't let your OWN expectations before the game cloud how you feel about the team AFTER thegame...after a win even.
So if you take away the Sims pass and the two "almost" picks and the pass to Juice at the goal line that lost yards RT had a pretty decent stat line. [TABLE="class: data-table1, width: 100%"] [TR] [TD="align: center"][/TD] [TD="align: center"][/TD] [TD="align: center"]1[/TD] [TD="align: center"]1[/TD] [TD="align: center"]22[/TD] [TD="align: center"]34[/TD] [TD="align: center"]64.7[/TD] [TD="align: center"]226[/TD] [TD="align: center"]6.6[/TD] [TD="align: center"]1[/TD] [TD="align: center"]0[/TD] [TD="align: center"]3[/TD] [TD="align: center"]44[/TD] [TD="align: center"]93.5[/TD] [TD="align: center"]3[/TD] [TD="align: center"]7[/TD] [TD="align: center"]2.3[/TD] [TD="align: center"]0[/TD] [TD="align: center"]1[/TD] [TD="align: center"]1 [/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] I want to throw things when people say they only produced 10 points of offence and that's Tannehill's fault. There are so many reason's why that's a dumb argument. In the first half they had like 3 drives 2 were stopped with 1 yard to go and they were poised to score again but Juice took the ball to the house. Had Tannehill put together a long drive there (which we didn't get to see thanks to Landry) they might have killed most of the clock.
So, take away four bad plays? I think that's the issue. Those were all really bad plays. Thankfully, the picks DIDN'T happen, but really, they should have...and had they ocurred, I find it hard to believe we win the game. Now, I think Tannehill is the real deal, but I'm not interested in taking things away, to try to put him in a better light. He absolutely needs to play better in the rest of the games. I have confidence that he will.
