1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Mel Kiper bashes Tannehill

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by yoge, Oct 8, 2015.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. finsfandan

    finsfandan Well-Known Member

    2,547
    600
    113
    Dec 14, 2014
    I don't get it. What's your point? That I didn't call people out and tell them our team is talented?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  2. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,327
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    That with at least decent oline play and decent defense, we win games, and that the offense would be good. That poor oline play and poor defense were the very major reasons we lost games, and why Tannehill looked bad.
     
  3. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    No. I made countless posts cautioning against blaming him for things with little to no information. Once there was adequate info, that wasn't colored by Parcells, I realized he was a solid talent evaluator, but he was a terrible team builder and a bit of a douche. I've seen nothing to say I was wrong about that.

    Again, I admit when I'm wrong and I have no reason to hide from my previous thoughts.

    Now, didn't you say Tannehill was holding Philbin back, in this very thread?
     
    resnor likes this.
  4. AdamC13

    AdamC13 Well-Known Member

    2,148
    1,398
    113
    May 3, 2010
    Do you disagree that in the NFL practically every single starter and most backups would play well when the OL and defense plays as well as Miami's did today?
     
  5. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    11,375
    11,392
    113
    Sep 28, 2015

    I will gladly accept any evidence that someone told you the OL doesn't effect Ryan's game, also will accept any evidence anyone said the defense doesn't effect Wins and Losses.

    Your hyperbole is only working on one guy, the majority of people are wondering where you came up with this nonsense.

    I'll be waiting.
     
  6. brandon27

    brandon27 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    45,652
    19,304
    113
    Dec 3, 2007
    Windsor, ON. CANADA
    I'm not quite sure how it's not being fair about it. The OL played better, and we had a run game for once, which allowed us to have a better passing game and performance from our QB. That's... you know, typically how it works in the NFL, or is that lost on you guys since the QB has to do it all?

    Unbelievable.

    Get over yourself. Seriously. Everyone is excited about Miami winning.

    If you can come here and ***** about the QB's play as if he's the only one on the team, guess what... other's are going to do that when the other area's of the team step up and allow the QB to do the job.

    and yes, I'm well aware, you're response will now be... but see, he needs others around him in order to be great, while everyone will neglect that happens on every other team.

    Round and round we go. blah blah blah.

    Finally done now, because you're right, we should all be enjoying a victory, but some of you just can't let it go. We could have Tom Brady, Andrew Luck, Joe Montana on our QB depth chart and people here in the mains would still ***** and complain.

    Back to the elevator I guess. Gotta get away.

    Have fun boys
     
    Fin D likes this.
  7. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,327
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Go search Tannephins, Shouright, or his other names. Then look at their posts, and find the ones you, and others clicked Thanks on.
     
    Fin D likes this.
  8. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    11,375
    11,392
    113
    Sep 28, 2015
    So the OL and defense must've made Ryan look good today then....unless you are admitting a double standard.
     
  9. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    His case was accurate.

    The OL playing badly was THE major reason Tannehill has had bad games. You want to pretend that an oline can only play bad for one reason. It played bad for numerous reasons.
     
    resnor likes this.
  10. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    That's the oline and the defense doesn't cost us games cause W/L is a QB stat.

    Go away now. I'm done with you.
     
  11. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,327
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Uh, no, the oline allowed Tannehill the time to actually play to his potential. It's not a double standard. It's a fact.

    In the face of evidence, you still stick to your guns. Impressive.
     
  12. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    11,375
    11,392
    113
    Sep 28, 2015

    Yea, "done with this thread" for the 3rd time in an hour huh....and I will wait on an example of saying the QB must do it all. The hyperbole from you guys is insane.

    You blame the defense every week, you blame the OL every week those units are the two biggest reasons we won today...and instead of giving credit to the entire team you guys run back to this thread and act ridiculous.
     
  13. AdamC13

    AdamC13 Well-Known Member

    2,148
    1,398
    113
    May 3, 2010
    Nice spin. I find it ludicrous for you to question my acumen when you couldn't see the poor job Ireland was doing during the time. And saying, "I admit when I'm wrong" is not the same as saying "I was wrong."

    I'm definitely not going back through each and every post of mine to restate word for word, but this is my view. Philbin is/was not a natural raw, raw coach that can pump up the play level of players during the game (he is no Rex Ryan) and needed a QB that could do that in order for him to succeed. Tannehill definitely was/is not that type of QB. I also think Tannehill's play significantly contributed to Philbin getting fired.

    So back to your ego. If I can acknowledge when Tannehill plays well, why can't you acknowledge when he doesn't instead of making excuse after excuse about why it isn't his fault?
     
  14. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    11,375
    11,392
    113
    Sep 28, 2015

    He litterally did not say any of the things you accused him of. And you actually quoted that as evidence?? Bahahahaha
     
  15. finsfandan

    finsfandan Well-Known Member

    2,547
    600
    113
    Dec 14, 2014
    His post didn't give any reasons. Just said the OL was a straight up liability, which was wrong. And so many agreed and thanked his post. They were all wrong too.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  16. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    11,375
    11,392
    113
    Sep 28, 2015

    What guns am I sticking too?
     
  17. AdamC13

    AdamC13 Well-Known Member

    2,148
    1,398
    113
    May 3, 2010
    LOL...you're not the boss of me. You go away if don't like it.

    The defense and special teams also add wins to Tannehill's total (think Redskins).

    In fact, three of the eight 4th quarter comeback's Tannehill has been credited with, the winning points were scored by the defense in one and special teams on the other two.
     
  18. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Ha. you're pretty ridiculous right now.

    I admit when he plays like crap. Hell, up to today, I've said in this thread the WHOLE team has played like crap.

    This isn't about Tannehill having a good or bad game, you're basically just lying right now.

    This is about you arguing that Tannehill was crap QB that held back the offense, oline and coaching staff and your asinine assertion that W/L record is a QB stat.

    Once again, be a man and sack up.
     
    resnor likes this.
  19. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    So because he didn't give you any reasons, you as I said before, made up what you decided he thought the reasons were then proceed to tell him he's wrong. That's silly.
     
  20. finsfandan

    finsfandan Well-Known Member

    2,547
    600
    113
    Dec 14, 2014
    He attributed the bad play to the OL. He didn't attribute it to the game plan like I said. I literally said we needed to run more and run screens and play action and I partly blamed that on Tannehill for not communicating with the OC and calling audibles to built in run plays.

    I called it. Why can't you admit that? The proof is there. I reposted it. Go back to the argument with Boomer and I. He just said OK. Very few agreed with me.

    Just admit I was right if you're being honest.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  21. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,327
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Yes, you were right about running more, to mitigate poor oline play. But more PA? They already ran a ton of that, and they did run some screens.
     
  22. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,327
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    And they subtract wins in numerous other cases.
     
  23. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Seriously, stop and think for one second.....

    Can the oline play badly because of scheme? Can the oline play badly because of injuries? Can the oline play badly because of lack of talent?

    The answer is yes to all three of those. Since Boomer didn't explicitly and in clear detail write that down, you literally made up what he was thinking he said he was wrong about what you made up he thought.

    This thread isn't, now nor ever will be about WHY the oline hurt Tannehill's effectiveness. The argument was and is, was Tannehill solely or even mostly responsible for the passing game woes.

    Very few people (except a select few in here) didn't think part of the oline issues were scheme, so you acting like you told us all something we didn't know is a little like claiming burning yourself hurts....well duh.

    Then you go further and try to claim that was the ONLY problem the oline had, completely glossing over our guards are below average and the most important oline player, Albert, was injured.
     
    resnor likes this.
  24. AdamC13

    AdamC13 Well-Known Member

    2,148
    1,398
    113
    May 3, 2010
    Too funny. I came on here posting that Tannehill played great today. I am genuinely excited about that and the Dolphins winning.

    But apparently that wasn't good enough for you and seemed to get into a huffy that after one game of me thinking he played well I didn't say "I was wrong" and Tannehill is a great QB and his poor play and inability to lead Miami to the playoffs has been everyone else's fault.

    Be upset if you want, but imo that's on you, not me.
     
    Fin-O likes this.
  25. AdamC13

    AdamC13 Well-Known Member

    2,148
    1,398
    113
    May 3, 2010
    I would argue his record as a starting QB is pretty close to his level of play.
     
  26. finsfandan

    finsfandan Well-Known Member

    2,547
    600
    113
    Dec 14, 2014
    The argument was always about how much blame was on the OL. He just said they were a liability. He gave no reason, therefore he was wrong.

    Nothing changed other than the game plan. They looked better. I called it. You just don't want to admit it. It's so simple.

    Resnor asked if I would run more considering how we've done thus far. He was part of the crowd blaming the OL. Literally all that's changed is what I said should change. Look at the outcome. Results speak for themselves.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  27. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,327
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Of course you would.
     
  28. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,327
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    But that isn't all that's changed. We got one of our best olinemen back. Man, look at last season. Once Albert went down, the oline was toast.
     
  29. finsfandan

    finsfandan Well-Known Member

    2,547
    600
    113
    Dec 14, 2014
    I'm sorry but one guy doesn't make THIS big of a difference. He helps a lot but not by THIS much.

    Edit: Part of the reason for that last season is he's exceptional in pass pro. Not so great at run blocking.

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  30. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    11,375
    11,392
    113
    Sep 28, 2015

    It has almost to a tee, that's not a slight just a fact. Team has been average since Ryan came into the league....Ryan's career has been average thus far.

    Disclaimer: This is not me saying Ryan is responsible for wins and losses....in fact as I mentioned earlier Ryan is rarely the biggest reason we win or lose, he isn't winning us games he isn't losing us games. It's strange and it's really turning into a Rich man's Alex Smith as his ceiling. Which isn't terrible...but you need your other units to play above their level to win in most cases.
     
    AdamC13 likes this.
  31. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Jesus dude, this ridiculous.

    He wasn't wrong, they were liability. They were hurting his game (which was Boomer's argument) and 2 major things changed on the oline today not counting scheme.
     
    resnor likes this.
  32. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,327
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    When you have two terrible guards, one guy makes a huge difference. But, you're free to interpret the evidence of what happens when he goes out however you want.
     
  33. CitizenSnips

    CitizenSnips hmm.

    5,525
    4,219
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    PA
    Ryan Tannehill is good at playing football.
     
    Fin D and resnor like this.
  34. finsfandan

    finsfandan Well-Known Member

    2,547
    600
    113
    Dec 14, 2014
    The point is the OL, including the interior guards, weren't as bad as you all made them out to be. You're telling me Albert made the biggest impact? More than the game plan?

    Albert needs a huge raise if that's the case. Greatest OL ever. Or is it more likely that the OL looked worse because they dropped back into pass coverage 75% of the time and the defense could just rush and blitz all the time?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  35. finsfandan

    finsfandan Well-Known Member

    2,547
    600
    113
    Dec 14, 2014
    I'll just accept that some posters will never admit your argument was spot on all along no matter how specific you were. No matter how much of what I said was used in a real game to win.

    You guys wanna say the OL was terrible before, for no particular reason other than they are bad. Now you want to say the OL is soooo much better with Albert back in. No matter what I predicted my game plan would do for the team.

    Unbelievable.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  36. CitizenSnips

    CitizenSnips hmm.

    5,525
    4,219
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    PA
    Y'all watching this bum Andrew Luck tonight? If this thread has taught me anything he should be finding ways to win, poor offensive line and terrible D be damned. What an avg qb.
     
    resnor and Fin D like this.
  37. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    11,375
    11,392
    113
    Sep 28, 2015
    You guys want to rank in order of importance in your opinion why we won and looked fantastic today?
     
  38. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    - Firing of Coyle.
    - Firing of Philbin.
    - Campbell lighting a fire.
    - Handcuffs taken off the dline (that smoothed out the deficiencies of the rest of the defense)
    - Albert coming back. (buy Tannehill some time)
    - Turner in at guard. (Opened up the run game)
     
  39. finsfandan

    finsfandan Well-Known Member

    2,547
    600
    113
    Dec 14, 2014
    Here's another post of mine from another thread:
    But yeah, I'm wrong. The other crowd was more specific. It was all on the OL.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  40. adamprez2003

    adamprez2003 Senior Member

    37,392
    14,745
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    new york ciity
    albert in isolation isnt that big a deal but when we have zero guards then losing him is the difference between being able to function and complete futility. its the law of 3/5ths as taught to me by a jewish bookmaker in new york. basically we were talking about what causes betting lines to move and we came to the oline. and he said if a team has five average olinemen and they lose one to injury leaving four the line wont move at all, if the line only has four avg linemen and it loses one the betting line may be moved by a point at most depending on the matchup. this is because blocking scheme and play calling can coverup for the two holes in the offensive line. but when an offensive line only has three avg linemen and one is lost to injury you could see a swing of as much as three points which is huge on a betting line. the reason is there is no scheme or playcalling that you can do for an entire game to cover up 3 holes in an offensive line. now granted this advice is from the eighties but ive found this 3/5ths rule to work like gold in gambling and scouting all the way to the present.

    as for people pretending that qbs are supposed to play well behind two offensive linemen, you are clueless. what boomer really said is all your analysis and scouting of the guy when he plays behind two offensive linemen is meaningless. you have to scout him, to get a real sense of him when he has at least three, because then you can see what he can do. you wont see anything behind two linemen. if you scouted brady behind two linemen you would be calling for him to be cut. and think about that. we're not even saying five avg linemen....just three. i cant even imagine tannehill behind a wall of five competent blockers. all of the gripes....pocket presence, deep ball accuracy,etc are all foolish if you're basing them off his games with two linemen. you know what his record with albert starting is......7-2 or 8-2. that should be the end of the discussion but it wont be becuase some people cant admit they're wrong. btw did lamar miller also get better today?

    and yes the scheme sucked but we couldnt run or pass with two linemen so the scheme didnt matter. it matters when we can do something like today when we have three linemen
     
    resnor likes this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page