Is Ryan Tannehill the long term solution at QB?

You made a post about what you see...and you think we should swoon.
Adam made a post about what he sees...you cried.

Once again, no one else is allowed to give their opinion but you.

 

A whole lot of ASSuming from you once again, filled with making up garbage as you go. Who do you have pictures of around here??

 

Just stop, I'm not assuming anything.

You made a post about what you see and Adam did the EXACT same thing about what he sees. You treated him like a fool for doing what you just did.

 

Gotta love the Ad Hominem Ryan Tannehill fan club.

The one thing that NEVER gets addressed is why Ryan Tannehill "is" the answer.

Of course, we all know the answer to that. To show evidence that Ryan Tannehill is the answer the following would need be addressed in the positive:

Decision-making
Pocket presence
Positive Win/Loss record
Ability to elevate the players around him
Leadership
Ability to make big plays
Ability to stretch the defense helping to establish the run game
Consistency
Clutch / late game heroics
Ability to consistently convert 3rd downs keeping drives alive
Turning plays that have disaster written all over them into big plays
Ability to lead the team to playoffs
Ability to elevate his level of play at the end of the season when the playoffs are on the line

How about just addressing "ONE" of the above that Ryan Tannehill is elite, top tier, franchise worthy or whatever you want call it in that area with "actual" solid evidence.

It probably would be much easier for the club to make its mission in life to get all sports media to drop wins/losses for coaches, QBs and pitchers.

 

I gave an an example of what I personally need to determine my opinion of our QB or any player for that matter, he gave an example of what he predicted in a game that Juwan James got hurt.

How do you not comprehend the difference in that? I'm guessing that it's because you are more worried about WHO is saying what rather than what is actually being said and what it means.

Should maybe think about this and decide WHY.

 

Yep like how the Ravens before Joe Flacco weren't a very good team despite having a great defense and RB with Jamaal Lewis. They needed that QB play to put them over the top. Another example is the Seahawks before Russell Wilson. 7 win team and only made the playoffs because they won their division. After drafting him later they win the super bowl and are an 11 win team are better each season. A good quarterback can greatly influence the win column.

 

now i understand why you dont get the game. you are missing several traits QBs need to be good and you have a ton of traits that are nonsensical. out of all the traits you listed there are only three that matter

Decision-making
Consistency
Pocket Presence

Apparently the ones you feel have no place in determining a good QB are

Accuracy
Arm strength
Intelligence
Toughness
Competiveness
foot work
instincts
touch

 

lol. how many games has wilson won when the defense has given up more than 24 points?

 

This just isnt true. If having an elite QB equated to wins than why has Drew Brees been struggling for wins the last few years? Why did Marino struggle for wins much of his career? Why are Luck and Wilson struggling this year? Theres a 1000 other examples. Wins are a result of team and great QB play will generally give you a couple of extra that a good QB wouldnt have gotten for you.

The same holds true for coaches....I regard Tom Coughlin and John Fox as the 2nd and 3rd best coaches of the last 20 years or so and yet both are around a 55% career win %. Not elite by any means but yet when faced up against the best coach of their generation Id say they both fared very well...coughlin winning 2x and Fox losing on a last second FG in a game when his teams headsets werent even working in the first half.

 

it wasnt a prediction even it was just knowing the team. you cant and i repeat cant function with only two linemen. zero qbs can unless they have a stifling defense that keeps them in the game or a running game that you can lean on and only throw 15 times a game

 

lol. i can understand missing accuracy, i mean the hall of fame is full of inaccurate QBs

 

Yes, and my reasoning is simple"

THill is producing more with a worse offensive line and running game then Henne, and given weapons, having them perform with him at Qb.

We USED to have an outside in problem at Qb, "bring an Alpha Wr and Henne will be great!", now we have an inside out problem, "improve the offensive line and Tannehill will produce even more"

Rishard Matthews, Miller, Landry has always been highly productive with Tannehill

Now do have issues with Tannehill, mainly there are times when his field vision lapses, otherwise happy to have him

 

Why do you have basically every all time great QB with a very favorable W/L record? Did they just happen to get on the right team?

And I'm not even pushing the Wins losses tells the story of if you have a a franchise QB but it absolutely is a huge part of the equation in the long run. I mean if Ryan retires in 10 years with a .500 record, I have no doubts a lot of people will make him out to be a victim of circumstance which in my opinion he is not. He has been an average QB on an average team that in his tenure has an average record.

I don't think any of this is a coincidence and his career is being held back by everyone else.

 

bill walsh always had a formula. year one was teaching the QB the system. Year two was developing the skills needed within that system. Every single year Tannehill has improved. This year he improved his touch greatly. He no longer just throws lasers. He can arc a ball over one defender's head and in front of another. he couldnt do that the first three years. but unfortunately there are no stats that measure touch passes. apparently you actually have to watch the game to notice it

 

Out of all of those the only one I can say Tanny is strong with, is arm strength, toughness and competitiveness. Accuracy, footwork, instincts, touch, decision making, consistency, pocket presence, all leave something to be desired this year. I don't find him to be a natural qb as he doesn't do any one thing at an elite level. I think he works really hard to improve and has decent competence in these traits. But there isn't anything to separate him from the pack.

 

the guy just set a record for accuracy and you dont find him accurate? footwork is pretty good. he's always throwing off his front foot. he almost never throws off his back foot. instincts can improve. touch has improved tremendously this year. is it drew brees level no but its no longer a weakness. decision making is tough to determine sitting on a couch. are the receivers open? did they run the right routes. you almost need someone on the coaching staff to tell you if his decision making is good. they would know, we can only guess. consistency to me is dependent on the olines health this year. when the oline has three competent players , tannehill is very consistent. when it has only two he isnt and every qb sucks when that happens. pocket presence is hard to gauge but i would like to see him manipulate the pocket a bit more the way marino used to by just moving up or to the side a step here a step there. there is a touch of the mechanical in his game but i think it will disappear once they get him an oline and he realizes that he doesnt have to fear for his life every snap

 

They might. Or do you think that when teams believe they have "the guy" they are then able to allocate resources to surround him with a good team?

I mean, you guys don't even know the answer to the question, but you keep spouting "ELITE QBS HAVE GOOD WIN LOSS RECORDS!!!" as if that means something.

 

was steve bartkowski or bert jones elite? they played on a lot of crappy teams. was archie manning a bum or was he simply cursed by having to play for new orleans (i dont even know the answer to that one) would ken o brien have been one of the greats if his offensive line wasnt setting records for giving up sacks every year of his early career to the point where he got happy feet for the rest of his career? if marc brunnell had gone to pittsburgh instead of jacksonville what would his career have been

 

Ummm that does matter, a lot. Certainly a helluva lot more than a high completion percentage at about 5 yards per attempt.

Ryan is average the team is average, I'm not arguing an extreme either way...

 

It is over time. Nobody is arguing single seasons. They are talking LONG TERM. Just like looking at a single game for passer rating is not a good measurement. But it is fairly correlated over time with wins. Passer rating differential is 80% correlated with wins. Yes, that means defense plays a large part. But so is the guy who throws the ball on every pass on the other side.

The team that wins the passer rating differential wins 80% of the time. Every year it is very consistent.



As for career win loss you can see the quality of QB just going down the list (with a few outliers)

http://www.footballdb.com/stats/qb-records.html?sort=pct

Look at the players at/near/below .500

There is still time. But at the end of a career, the good QBs will generally be involved with winning teams.

 

his pocket presence has improved as well. people talked about seeing him step into the pocket, in new england he did that just fine except he got blasted for it.

tannehill has things he has to work on no doubt, but like someone on fox sports radio was saying earlier tonight about andrew luck. its hard to be consistent when those in front of you(oline/coaching) are inconsistent. tannehill with a solid oline would look more like the tannehill against the titans/texans then the one against the patriots. until that oline problem gets fixed, our offense will continue to be inconsistent.

 

10 of 19 passes were at or behind the LOS. Do we really need to go over that? They averaged 3.5 yards from the LOS. You are in the club. You hear what is thought of his decision making. Terrible some weeks, good others. We've seen only a few touch passes that indeed were nicer than before but has not been consistent.

I don't think he's very bad at anything, but nothing seems natural watching him play. Accuracy means accuracy all over the field and only the biggest homer would argue he has that. The fact that it does not look natural but his play is around middle of the league is a testament to his work ethic but he has a ceiling so we're all guessing/projecting where that ceiling is.

Last year when Albert went down we had crap at LT and RT, crap at guard, meh at Center, and Pouncey not playing well at RG. Tannehill still played well for a couple of games.

Are you saying what we have now is less than last year? After Albert went down did we have a single strong olinemen?

 

I've never said that. That's bollocks. You are just making sh** up now. My argument is in the very post you replied to that started this tangent. The VERY POST. Seriously. This is silly. You're being intellectually dishonest here resnor.

It has been said AD NAUSEAM it is not all on Tannehill. But is Tannehill helping, hurting, or is JAG there?

Takes a real special person to go from this (talking about Sanchez):

to arguing wins and losses are all on the QB. I said the second step of the evaluation is to see how the QB played. See if it helped, hurt or was neutral to the team's success. Jay Fiedler I'd argue was pretty neutral, while Ray Lucas was disastrously negative. 2002 Dolphins were stacked on D and run game. Started 5-1 with Fiedler. We all know what happened next.

Average QB play with a stacked team can lead to wins in the regular season (playoffs are tougher). But over time it'll catch up because stacked teams never stay stacked for long.

The only logical dilemma in your post is created by you, because you made up the argument whole cloth. When you say this

That is an inaccurate restatement of our argument. QB is the player who can influence wins AND losses the most. Because a team wins doesn't automatically mean the QB is the one who influenced it. If you have a guy who plays league average, then the team will rely on the other parts of the team. If you have a guy that sucks, the other parts must be really really good to make a run. If you have a guy that is really good, you only need maybe one more component to make a run. If you have a guy that's elite, you are in contention every year.

I've said it 100 times Big Ben, Brees, Romo are damn good but they're not enough to make runs every year. Which is why I have them in tier 2.

QB has the capacity to make the biggest influence. But a neutral influence is just that, neutral. It can be positive. It can be negative. Tannehill is in the neutral category. We want more. A lot more. He's not directly losing us any games. He's not directly helping us win a lot of games either. he's right in the middle. Everything about him is in the middle.

 

I recognize that his surroundings aren't ideal, but I'm not sure what everyone has seen so far to come to the conclusion that he has done enough to warrant anything north of being optimistic about what he still might become. As it stands today I'm unimpressed with Ryan's play the past 4 years, it has been plagued with inconsistency and playing the worst games at the worst times.

Again, he is the kind of player that will almost always be a product of his surroundings...he hasn't elevated his team, they haven't done their part to elevate him. He has been average they have been average the record is average, it's kind of obvious what Ryan and the Miami Dolphins are.

I voted need to see more because although I'm disappointed and in my mind he has taken a step backwards (I'm singling out Ryan because the topic is.....RYAN) he has not looked like the top 12 QB I thought he was...but hopefully that changes and we start getting better play from him and the rest of the team.

 

For the apologists, how do explain this away? How could all these QBs win so many games when their surroundings change so often? Did they just always have a really great supporting cast? I guess Manning and Favre got to 186 wins because they were good and had supporting casts better than Tannehill for their entire careers.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

you sure do have a lot of conviction, I citicize our qb but I never mention the physcological health of the ones that dont..lol

 

Its insane how Resnor has adopted the art of making accusations out of his own misinterpretations and assumptions...sounds all too familiar.

And I don't think you are a bad poster Res....but that's not a good path to follow.

 

fade route is a touch throw.

 

Still has to produce, there is no OL in the league with 5 all pros at every position, there will be pressures, hits etc.

Short term, think Campbell was overly influenced by Lazor and the Texans drubbing, meaning KISS for these zombies collecting paychecks on the offensive line. That is when THill does perform his best, otherwise the inconsistency cannot solely be placed on Tannehill and in a inverted way, neither on the offensive line B/c the Qb should make plays happen either way.

Third problem for Tannehill was Philbo's reluctance to play guys who are excelling now, a couple of years ago.

That skews everything, 'gosh, Miller and Matthews are pretty good, who knew"

 

Post #3 of this thread. Somehow this turns into,

I've been very consistent

I really gotta stop getting sucked into these Tannehill threads. I've excised myself from POFO mostly. Perhaps I need to do the same here.

 

ryans manipulation of the pocket, his ability to anticipate pressure in the pocket, his perpheral vision in the pocket looks the same as it did..he occassionally backs out of the pocket to make a rare play on a full run, but rarely manipulates the pocket to reset his platform..

also like I mentioned before his run production is down 50 % across the board...he has absolutely no clue as to when to tuck the ball and just run for some yardage, has no clue that when a defense turns their back to you you make them pay..that scares the hell out of me..

 

Pouncey was not as good as a guard as he is a center but he was an avg, mediocre guard, satele was avg center and james was avg tackle so they had three serviceable linemen. If turner can play at just an avg level then we can probably function against defenses that don't have a top ten dline. But watching the pats, if a team can collapse a pocket with a three man rush have its linebackers sitting in the short lanes and have five DBS taking away the mid and long range game I don't like our chances going forward

 

Don't know. Didn't follow football much back then. Whether he was or wasn't it doesn't change the fact that 99% of elite QBs have winning records.

So because Cassell won 10 games on that team you can't be sure that Brady would be capable of winning 10 games without Belichick and the team he assembled?

How can that be interpreted other than you think all QBs are equal and success is just a function of the teams put around them? What kind of record do you think Brady would have had if he played in Miami since 2012?

I'm pretty sure that 99% of non-Tannehill homers would agree that Brady or Manning would have led the Dolphins to a better record than Tannehill did.

 

James was NOT an average LT. He was bad. If he was average at LT than Philbin wouldn't have been roasted for ruining two positions by that boneheaded decision. Pouncey was not a good fit at RG. He wasn't Dallas Thomas bad agreed, but he wasn't all that good.

 

I'm not asking for five all pros. I'm not even asking for one. I'm not even asking for a complete line. Just give me three serviceable linemen, three not five, not great just avg will do. You can at least function with that. Neither tanny nor any other QB can function when 3/5 the of the line is Jason foxes

 

Did you like Marino lol. Marino never saw a running lane he didn't pass up. I don't get your infatuation with running.all the running qbs are being benched. I agree on the manipulating the pocket part. Probably not to your degree but I would like to see him keep improving on it. He's starting to move around the pocket a bit but there is more room for improvement I agree

 

Tannehill is an incredible athlete but he's not good at actually playing the game. This will always cost us a win or two every season, especially in the playoffs when everything is magnified, and it probably has a lot to do with the fact that he has a losing record right now.