Go back and look at Thill's record when he has any 3 of Pouncey, Albert, James & Tunsil starting and playing significant snaps. Seems to me, its easier to find a solid olineman than a QB that qualifies as a +1 win a year guy (assuming that QB is above Thill's level but below Rodgers). When does the eyeball test supersede stats and vice versa?
Not with 1 pick (at least not IMO.. we have more than one hole there after James has started regressing). Besides you know how hard it's been for us to put together a good OL even with high picks. Rather gamble on a QB tbh. In principle, you can test which is better in a specific situation by comparing predictive power (e.g. how well you can predict some outcome like win% using either stats alone or human intuition alone, etc..). No one does that, but in principle you could do it. In this case, it's easy. You don't even have the stats because you don't have separate conditions (we didn't have two separate starting QB's with the same surrounding cast). So if the stats don't even exist, you go with what you have.
That makes no sense. Under no circumstances and in no place in the history of the NFL, has it been easier to find a QB just below HoF level, then it is to find a decent olineman. As hard as you say it has been to put together an oline, its been waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay LONGER to find the QB you're talking about. The number one pick can be used to shore up other parts of the team that desperately need it, like LB or DE. The oline can actually be fixed in later rounds (as depth is our biggest issue). Its interesting how fluid that is. The eyeball test doesn't supersede stats (even when no stats exist under the circumstances you presented about 2 QBs under exactly the same conditions) if the desired result is to show Thill in a negative light. Or the EBT does supersede stats, if that gets top the negative result. There's a consistency going on here, that is questionable....to say the least.
tannehill is still average... 5 years later, how about that? the last 5 years I been told that will change, still hasnt.
For 5 years we've been saying a number of things surrounding have needed fixing. Those things still exist for the most part. But that's irrelevant to what I'm discussing with cbard.
We don't really know what any of the other QB's could do while starting, we are only assuming. If we are not going to make the playoffs again I think it is best for the franchise to see what the others have to offer.
It's always hilarious to see people arguing tooth and nail about the quality of our starting QBs over the years, as if their opinion or the opinion of anyone here means anything. The reality is, the starting QB only gets so much time to prove themselves in today's NFL. If they don't do it with one team, they're usually given a second chance with another, and sometimes a third chance. But that first team will still cut them. Tannehill is going to be cut or much less likely traded if we don't make the playoffs this season (or at least post a winning record on the order of 10-6, and then don't make the playoffs because of tiebreakers). It's not that I hate him or you hate him or that guy over there hates him...it's that he's had his time to make it in Miami and it hasn't happened. Maybe not his fault, maybe surrounding talent, but in the end, it doesn't matter. It's just the way things are.
One person does not, BUT one person can put you over the top and into the playoffs. With a QB like Rogers we could be 3-1 now with wins over Seattle and Cincy.
I voted to start Doughty. Lets see what he has. I agree with Rick in thill has had five years to prove something and still hasn't. Most QBs don't get that much time. Next Man Up!!!
Tannehill is QB beautiful. He looks the part. He is tough as nails. He is smart. He has a strong arm. Something is just missing. I watch other games and their QB's get out of pressure, not all of the time, but way more often then Tannehill does. I just hope Gase sees past the beautiful part and sees what is.
RT put the Dolphins in position to win against Seattle. The defense failed. Rodgers, against Seattle last January was 19-34, 1TD, 2INT, 178 yards. That's a 55 QBR. Two years ago Rodgers was 26-43, 1TD, 2INT's, and 244 yards against the Bengals. That's a 64.5 QBR. The Packers lost against Seattle and beat Cincy. RT posted a 75 and 80 QBR, respectively, against those teams. The Dolphins were 0-2.
Rodgers got 3 years on the bench. Brady got one year on the bench. Both have played with the same coaches throughout their careers. Brees failed for years before he became good.
Do you really think Daughty can go straight from practice squad to this? [video=twitter;781920212916502528]https://twitter.com/Cianaf/status/781920212916502528[/video]
The next play he got destroyed from the right side. On Thursday, Tannehill needed to be ready to throw in 1.5 seconds and wasn't. He was hopping on the balls of his feet in the pocket the 1st two games and seems to be more flatfooted since. That's on him. He has a HOF reference to help him with that. That being said, I also didn't see any routes where the receiver was ready to see the ball in that same time frame even if he was ready. I'm not sure what's going on here.
His protection wasn't bad at all until sometime in the 3rd quarter. Not that its not happening, but he seemed to suck just as bad when not facing pressure.
If you bench Tannehill...hes started his last game as a Phin, IMO. Gase wont start Moore as long as he believes in Tannehill , IMO.
You gain nothing by benching Tannehill the rest of the year. Now I'm an advocate of pulling him if he comes out of the gate playing like he has the last 8 quarters. That could perhaps light a fire in him internally and maybe we get a better version than we have ever seen. Pulling out all the stops I know, but do you know what happens if he continues this play and we DONT take that chance? Nothin.
How many draft pick are you willing to part with? If the gloom and doom contingent is correct, the Dolphins have a real shot at the #1 pick in next year's draft.
Your sniping isn't really adding to the conversation. What's the compensation? How hard are you coming?
? Was I appointed for some task I didn't know about? I've never spoken on cleaning up anything? Wrong guy. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Brees didn't fail for 5 years like your boy has. None of the guys you listed has failed for 5 straight years. I would challenge you to find a QB who has had 5 straight years of failing then becoming good. Tanny has had long enough and hasn't worked out. I've said it before...he is one tough athlete. We need a QB, not an athlete playing QB. You never know what he can do until you put him in there. We know tanny can't win get a team to the playoffs, let's see if we have someone who can. I wouldn't bench him now, but do like the idea of pulling him from games when he sucks. If we already have the season lost, I would play another QB the last four games.
My boy? If telling the facts about RT makes him "my boy", then so be it. However, in regards to Brees, he sat the bench his first season. His first 5 playing seasons, he averaged an 87 QBR. RT has an 85 QBR. Brees had 105 TD's. RT (currently 1/4 the way through his 5th season) has 93. Brees, in his first 4 complete seasons, threw more INT's than RT in his first 4 seasons in all except one. RT also averaged more passing yards per game than Brees in each of their first 4 seasons and RT is on pace to beat Brees in their 5th.
Those first years for Brees were played when passing was way harder. You can't compare raw stats. In his 3rd year of starting, just his 4th year, he posted a 104.8 rating.
This reminds me how half the board kept telling me that Jason Allen was going to be an impact player because if you look at how Troy Polomalu's career started they were virtually the same. Desperate fans LOVE comparing the 1 in a 100 scenarios.
2002-2006 was "way harder"? No, they were not. Cherry picking one season will not lead to any real truth. It may lead to a person's own biased definition of the truth..which isn't the truth. Overall, Brees and RT, during their first 5 years in the league (even though Brees got to sit and learn for a season) weren't much different.
If what I wrote reminds you of that, then you need to go back and comprehend what I wrote. I never said that RT was going to be good because of X. I said, in reply to another poster's false assertions, that even after 4 years in the league QB's can get better.
Nope. I mean, sure, if you cherry pick. Or maybe you're one of those people who judge individual accomplishments based off of team stats? If that's the case, then yes, Rodgers is having a much better season. (Not really though. Just in that case) However, if you look at their entire body of work, Rodgers (who is maybe the GOAT) is having a better season than RT. Just not that much better.