they did have the number one defense that year. kept opponents to less then 14 points per game. so you didnt have to score that much to get a victory. if you add in our defensive ranking which is also in the 20s, then i would hazard a guess that you could look through the entire super bowl era and prior going back to the canton bulldog days and not find one champion who had both an offensive line in the bottom quartile and a defense in the bottom quartile
Oh and how ironic that you'd try to insult me considering your grammar. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Right.. but if you have some evidence that OL rankings (just the two you listed) don't matter much, then the reason for the success would be due to the other factors, in this case defense. Of course, to really test whether OL rankings don't matter much we'd need the entire distribution of those rankings. Then it's simple to test how much they matter. I'm just pointing out the 2% stat on its own doesn't look "small".
well to me its ol, qb and defense but if you broke it down by units you would have DL, LB, DB on defense OL, WR, RB, QB on offense and perhaps special teams and coaching too. with equal weight its about 8% or 9% each in the worth. but if you only have one offensive line that was poor that won a super bowl in fifty years i would say that indicates that that positional group should be elevated in importance to perhaps as high as 20%
Yeah, that's where your intuition is wrong. One in 50 years is not far off from what to expect if that pair of OL rankings don't matter. Again, I'm just talking about a single data point and would love to do the calculations for the entire distribution (maybe then it matters). Just saying 2.8% success is what to expect and you got 2%. Not much of a difference.
well consider then that trent dilfer, doug williams, brad johnson and jeff hostetler have won super bowls. you can make a case that offensive line is more important than qb, not that i'm ready to claim that, but i think a good debate could be had about it
Yeah, to properly compare which stats are most important (leaving aside any questions about how good the stats themselves are), you need the entire distribution. If someone posts the data for all the OL rankings (run + pass blocking) for the SB winners I'll do the analysis.
football outsiders only goes back to the 90s. on a side note: it would also be interesting to figure out whats more important....your strengths or your weaknesses. going back to pitt. obviously their oline was a weakness but having the number one defense mitigated for it. so are there areas you cant go below in competency and conversely do you have to have some strengths in certain areas
''if it takes using ryans legs more to get this offense going then thats what we'll do''....Zac Taylor ''yes, sprint outs, boots, read option, yes, we'll do it all''.....Dan campbell I guess not using his legs in every one of this elements didn't work out to well..poor offensive production, regression out of the qb..fired off coordinator....maybe they finally figured out you dont cut down on his production in those depts to that degree.. yes Zac, thats what its gonna take to help this offense..
So here's the breakdown of rushing stats in all wins with Tannehill so far. 2015: Redskins: only 74 to 161 but we won the turnover battle. Titans: 180 to 63. Texans: 248 to 71. Eagles: 99 to 83. 2014: Patriots: 191 to 89. Raiders: 157 to 53. Bears: 137 to 52. Jaguars: 148 to 176. Chargers: 132 to 50. Bills: 125 to 54. Jets: 74 to 277. Vikings: 110 to 119. 2013: Browns: 20 to 47. Colts: 101 to 133. Falcons: 90 to 146. Bengals: 157 to 163. Chargers: 104 to 154. Jets: 125 to 99. Steelers: 181 to 84. Patriots: 89 to 96. 2012: Raiders: 263 to 23. Bengals: 68 to 80. Rams: 36 to 162. Jets: 97 to 105. Seahawks: 189 to 96. Jaguars: 180 to 86. Bills: 182 to 154. That's it. The stats speak for themselves. The overwhelming majority of the time, we need very, very good rushing totals to win with Tannehill. This is RIDICULOUS. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Russell Wilson's career wins: 2015: 159, 110, 176, 113, 255, 100 2014: 207, 129, 225, 119, 149, 350, 124, 157, 188, 152, 267, 132 2013: 70, 172, 156, 179, 151, 135, 44, 198, 211, 93, 127, 134, 111 2012: 182, 127, 98, 85, 195, 174, 176, 284, 270, 176, 153 Would you say that Russell Wilson needs a RIDICULOUS running game to win? Running helps win... especially since a lot of it is "garbage" stats when you're trying to finish off a win. Wilson was the first guy to pop in my head, I'm sure that looking at most QBs will show similar results. Exceptions for Manning, Rodgers, ect.
We always win when Miller has 20 or more rushes, so lets just run it 20 straight times to start games. Undefeated here we come...
And how much did he rush himself in each game? How much pressure does he take off the running game? What's his YPA? Wilson had a stacked team with a great defense and running game but don't pretend like he didn't heavily contribute. Defenses are terrified of Wilson. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
All kidding aside, I'm game. We'd probably go 3 and out a lot and there'd be some awful 3rd down calls, but I'd admire the commitment to the run game. How refreshing would it be to say "damn if only we tried passing the ball a little more"
This is interesting. So Miami wins with a strong running game because Tannehill requires it. But Wilson wins with a strong running game because of his heavy contribution. So much for rushing totals in wins "speaking for itself", right? That was the point. Those stats show nothing in this context.
It's always been a criticism of Tannehill. He doesn't do anything to take pressure off the running game. Doesn't use his own athleticism, doesn't scramble, doesn't hit deep bombs, doesn't do enough play action, nothing. Wilson does all of this. You know who else does? Tyrod Taylor. Cam Newton. Heck, Kaepernick did all that better than Tannehill. Traditional QBs do most of that better than Tannehill. Even Alex Smith uses his athleticism more than Tannehill. So yeah, that's the difference. Throwing for a low YPA doesn't help. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Tannehill's hitting deep balls this year. How is tannehill not doing enough play action a criticism of tannehill? That's on his, now fired, oc. I wouldn't use Kaepernick in any argument ever. And Tyrod, I can't help but notice his two great games this season came against our **** defense. He's been alright this season, but his overall performance was helped immensely by getting to play miami dolphins defense twice.
Yeah, finally. We can definitely blame play calling but if the man audibled he could do it more often. We can argue about why he hasn't been able to fully audible but I guarantee you if he demonstrated to the coaching staff he was more than capable, they wouldn't have held off until they were fired. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Again, Ryan impacts this team so minimally its insane. Besides a rare occasion here and there we dont lose because of him, and we dont win because of him. This is why he is not a franchise QB right now and the window is closing on if he ever will be. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Hmmm, but what if...IF the Dolphins were to not only win out the remainder of the season, but win big, like we did against Houston...every single game? Do you still clean house or build on that? Don't necessarily think that's going to happen. Just posing the question, "what if?"
If that somehow comes to fruition, you except the fact that Bill laser was the worst offense of Cordinator ever draft a couple offense lineman....pick up some solid but not spectacular free agents and see what happens in 2016 Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Won a Super Bowl? Tannehill still hasn't even made the playoffs lol Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yeah, but is Ryan even playing at that level right now? In all seriousness, one looks confident one looks like hed rather find a way out.
Uhm... I get the point you're trying to make here. But, using those resources on early offensive players, is only effective if you pick the right players. We haven't done a good enough job at that. Lets be serious about the talent selected at those spots, before trying to make that argument. You went back 5 years. So... 2011 - Pouncey. Obviously a good choice - Clyde gates. Obviously not a good choice 2012 Tannehill - OK Jonathon Martin - Terrible Egnew - Is he even still in the league? Miller - should get a second deal with us. 2013 Dallas Thomas - Hot garbage Dion Simms - backup TE 2014 Juwaun James - an average RT Jarvis Landry - obviously a strong talent Billy Turner - average if we're lucky. 2015 Devante Parker - too early to tell Jamil Douglas - not showing too well early. So, I mean... sure, we're using resources in the draft on the offense, but we haven't made good choices. So, its hard to say our offense should be better after using those resources. I mean, sure, it should be, but when we arent making good choices... it kind of screws the whole thing up. As for free agency. Albert cant stay healthy. Wallace was... wallace. Cameron I feel like isn't makign the plays we thought since he's spending more time blocking, which isnt his strong suit. Again, I get your point, you can't keep neglecting the defense. But you also can't ignore the offense just because you've used picks there. If the previous personell guys messed up those picks, which is quite obvious in many of them, there's not much you can do. The problem here has been talent evaluation and development over the years. You get that with crappy GM's, and crappy coaching staffs. Sorry, just was reading your post going, wow, we have used that many resources, sure doesn't feel like the talent here is reflective of that. Jeez... it sure isnt. Scary isnt it. Interesting, thanks for pointing it out.
I find it interesting that the only remaining undefeated team is the only team that runs more than they pass. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Everyone who ever posts anything like that should be forced to read this (or a dozen articles like it) until they have it memorized. http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/content/troll-report-more-bad-news-for-merril-hoge-co/6067/ In today's NFL, running the ball a lot is a symptom of victory. Not a cause.
Having gaudy rushing totals doesn't mean much, that's true. Obviously a big rushing total is skewed by 1 or two big runs. But running the ball consistently and efficiently in highly conducive to winning. Lagarette Blount isn't churning out 200 yds a game, but he is picking up countless first downs. Cam Newton is the best dual threst ever, but Tannehill could physically do some of the stuff he does. Weve dialed up maybe ten designed qb rushes this season. The panthers do it every single drive. Especially in the redzone where I don't think we've done that once this season. Picking up first downs is how you win the game. Teams that run it efficiently, not necessarily with big numbers, win. In order to do that, you need to actually call running plays
He can spend all week in the building figuring out what should be done, in what situation, until someone hits him in the mouth. Have you seen him just stand there in the pocket while a guy is barreling towards him? A smart guy moves don't they? The field of play is different than studying books for medical school. My sister is an board certified allergist and pediatrician, and will curl up in a ball in an emergency situation. My brother in law is a neuro surgeon (he is actually on the Chargers sidelines a few weeks a year acting as the visiting team's neuro for concussions and head injuries) and is excellent in emergency situations (has to be). Not saying Tannehill can do it, but his being intelligent and book smart isn't necessarily evidence he can. Nobody has accused Dan Marino of being a brainiac (wonderlic score ...) but not many could top him on the field. The head coach said before they felt it was taking away from his flow. I think that might be coach speak for, it was slowing him down by having trouble with it. So if he gets to audible now, well let's see how he does with it.
Yeah, Fitzpatrick definitely looks better this year but their whole team looks better. I'd still rather have Fitzpatrick. He looks more natural out there. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
A week before playing Miami Fitzpatrick had a game where he completed under 50% of his passes and threw 2 interceptions. The week before he was also under 50% and threw two interceptions. Fitzpatrick also has 10 years experience to still be a mediocre quarterback.
Okay but he still looks better this season. Like I said, part of it is due to his much better supporting cast. I completely agree, experience is the main reason I'd prefer him. If we hang on to Tannehill for the remainder of his contract, he's likely to end up like Fitzpatrick anyway. I don't want to wait 5 seasons just to realize that. Edit: oh and we'd save a ton of cash. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
They're not taking into account individual offenses. Cbrad has shown us that our particular team is highly dependent on rushing for wins. Cbrad, can you post that stat again? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
C'mon JD, Berbick had a plan after Tyson hit him, to stand back up, there were some hiccups in that plan however; [video=youtube;sdWatf2ldj8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdWatf2ldj8[/video]
Can you blame him? From PFF: And it's not just the drops or pass protection breakdowns, it's penalties negating a 1st down or a big play, or a boneheaded call that disrupts what was starting to work. Easy to see why he gets discouraged.