Tanny started to bloom under Gase, until he got injured. Then he remained injured for most of his next two years. I think that Tannenbaum guy who was in charge of the FO was not a great help either.
The Titans running game came to life with Tanny at QB. You don't think he wouldn't do as well or better with our current RB room? I do.
In the very post you quoted I said he played elite his first 2 years. Doesn't absolve him of crapping in the playoffs in year 3 when the Titans were the best team in the AFC outside of QB. Tannehill had severe limitations even when playing with an All-Star cast: he couldn't overcome bad team play. Not the type of QB that typically wins SBs. He didn't really "bloom" under Gase even prior to injury. In 2014 he posted a 92.8 rating with Philbin. In 2016 prior to injury with Gase he posted a 93.5. Never did Tannehill show he was more than slightly above average in Miami. Titans were 6th in rushing (total yards) in 2018, the year before Tannehill. They already had a great running game. They went up 3 spots in 2019. Not a huge difference. It was for Henry, but not for the Titans. And as explained before this passing offense requires precise timing with quick release. That's something Tannehill doesn't have. The guy needs time in the pocket.
I should have stated it was Tanny on the field that brought Henrys numbers up significantly. Once the Titans started playing well under Tannehill as QB, they began to lose some of their best OL and receivers to FA. This is a common occurrence in the NFL, once a Team starts playing well.
In a hypothetical scenario… If Tannehill were here in Miami now…Tannehill of 5 years ago, he COULD play well provided McDaniel truly opened up the run game, more than he has with Tua. As we all saw in Tennessee, Tannehill played well…very well but when you take a look at what the Titans had built, the only thing they were missing was a viable quarterback. Tannehill brought a level of quarterback play to Tennessee that Mariotta couldn’t. Tannehill inherited the same team Mariotta had but Marcus just couldn’t produce. That’s the type of offense Tannehill thrives in, one that is balanced and has a potent run game that opens up the passing game. That’s why he did so well In Tennessee. Could he do well in Miami? Only if McDaniel called an effective run game to open up the passing game, something I thought he was going to do but hasn’t had to sue to the effectiveness of Tua.
I feel like it's been closer to 7 or 8 years, but either way, you know the full length of time isn't that important to the point I was making.
Yeah, Tannehill of 5 years ago is acceptable as a backup, not as a starter though. Need someone who can overcome bad team play if you want to win the SB.
No such thing as a quarterback that can overcome bad TEAM play and win a championship. The Chiefs learned that in their loss to the Buccaneers in Super Bowl LV. If a team makes it to the dance, they’re there because the TEAM is that good. One man can’t make up a poor team showing at that level.
So you think Tannehill could do what Brady did in SB 51, coming back from a 25 point deficit (28-3) to win the SB? No chance. The "team" (including Brady) played bad up till that point, but what you saw after that was yet another example of a comeback win by one of the greatest QBs ever — though that particular one is even amazing for Brady. Don't discount how important the QB is. You've been doing that for years. Unless you think Tannehill could engineer that kind of comeback — and if you think he could the question is why he never showed any ability similar to that — then that's evidence there's a difference between QBs. Given how average Belichick's record is without Brady, it's realistic to assume Tannehill with Belichick would have led to no SBs compared to 6 with Brady. Can't just dismiss QB play by saying (technically) it's the "team" that does everything.
I’m not discounting the importance of the quarterback, but let’s be honest…Atlanta had a 21-3 lead going into the half. What happened to Atlanta’s offense in the second half? A unit that scored 2 touchdowns in the 2nd quarter, scored a touchdown in their first drive of the 3rd couldn’t put up a single point in the rest of the game? It’s not like this was a scrub team, they were the NFC champions AND scored 4 touchdowns against Belichick’s defense!! What happened to Atlanta’s defense in the second half? They couldn’t stop the Patriots offense at all? Hell, they had a pick 6 on Brady in the 2nd quarter…they couldn’t stop them once in the second half. I’m not taking anything away from Brady’s performance in the 2nd half. He played brilliantly but that defense of Atlanta that smothered the Patriots in the first half just quit. These are the things I mean when I often reference TEAM. There’s no way the Patriots come back, win the Super Bowl and continue making Brady look like a living legend had Atlanta’s defense PLAYED in the second half.
Right.. but the point is there's no way Tannehill does what Brady did. With Tannehill NE doesn't win that SB. That's what I mean by overcoming bad team play. He can't do that, while Brady and some others have repeatedly shown they can do it. That's true even if technically it's a team game and other players contribute. So go back to the post you responded to where I said that's why you wouldn't want Tannehill as a starter — he makes it too unlikely we'd win a SB because he can't overcome bad team play. Not much to argue about if you think about it.
We’re going to end up going in circles I see. At a Super Bowl level games, no one player can overcome bad TEAM play. Again, not taking away from Brady’s performance in Super Bowl LI in the 2nd half, he alone doesn’t win that game. The entire offensive unit stepped up. Here’s the sad “truth” if you will about the quarterback position. If your team wins, you get the glory and if your team loses, you get all the blame. Brady played like hit garbage the first half of the game…the entire Patriot team did and yet, he gets all the glory. Mahomes played his a$$ off in Super Bowl LV, doing everything he could do to will his team to a victory and yet, because of the Chiefs poor team play, resulting in the loss, Mahomes was the one having to face all of the critical questions post game. Circling back to Tannehill, he was on a great TEAM In Tennessee that played great TEAM football. Like Aikmen in Dalls, he had a great supporting cast and was doing there what he was limited in doing in Miami…winning and winning decisively. During the regular season, when the level of your opponents may be less than stellar, a good quarterback can overcome team mistakes and get a victory but in the playoffs and Super Bowl, ONE player just ain’t enough.
We're only ending up in circles because you keep thinking I'm saying one person wins a game. How many times over how many years have I told you otherwise? Just recently I told you I estimated the QB to be responsible for 10-20% of win%. How does that equate to one person winning a game? You need to stop misrepresenting that to yourself so YOU don't go in circles! Now, once again the argument is clear: Tannehill CANNOT do what Brady did in overcoming bad team play (again: does not imply he won single-handedly.. don't confuse yourself!). Because Tannehill can't overcome bad team play while Brady and others can, you don't want Tannehill as a starter. It's pretty obvious. IF you actually understood this argument, then you'd agree with it lol.
Coaches don't play. And why couldn't Belichick do any of this without Brady? He was an average coach without Brady. So.. what was the difference? Yup: Brady.
We’ve had flashes of brilliance in the running game, but too many times I feel we’ve abandoned the run, or it’s become an afterthought. I know that having 13 different starting lineups in 17 games hinders the lines ability to effectively block, but unless that unit steps up, the RB room isn’t going to really determine if our running game is going to be better. I’d just love for the Dolphins to average 125 yards rushing per game. If we can run the ball that well, and I’m not talking about running out the clock, but effectively running during the game, our offense is going to be a dangerous unit.
Not really a fair comparison. Brady ran essentially the same offense for 20 years. The Patriots bring in Newton after Brady leaves. Enough said. The the Patriots start Mac Jones, a young quarterback still trying to adjust to the league…not near enough experience with the Patriots offense. Not to mention the Patriots lost a lot of talent in addition to Brady.
It's a totally fair comparison. There were a ton of people claiming Belichick was more responsible than Brady for those SBs and that even without Brady he would continue to flourish — they specifically predicted he could continue winning with an average QB. Brady leaving proved them completely wrong. Belichick coached for 4 years after Brady left, had more than enough chances to prove he could build a great team. But he couldn't get the QB position right, so he went from winning 12.3 games per season to 7.25 games per season!! And don't forget he only won 5 games in 2000 with Bledsoe at NE prior to Brady. Also don't forget he won 7.2 games per season over 5 seasons at Cleveland. Belichick without Brady averages about 7 wins per season while Belichick with Brady averages about 12. There's no question who was more responsible for those SBs: Brady, who btw also won a SB without Belichick at Tampa. Can't try to make excuses for 11 years without Brady lol. We're not talking one year dude. It's 11 years without Brady and he was less than an average HC over that time!
And we all know that would change for most haters as soon as he won his first big game coming in off the bench.
No it wouldn't. Tannehill is currently a below average QB and was never capable of overcoming bad team play, so this idea of him coming off the bench to win big is fantasy. One of the best things this franchise did was moving on from Tannehill to select Tua. No need to revisit the Tannehill mistake by bringing him back in, which we're not going to do anyway so your fantasy will remain a fantasy and nothing more.
Look, I like Tua as a person. He is a good QB. So isTannehill. Tannehill was not a mistake, but our offensive line at the time was full of them. They couldn't run block for s**t, and their pass protection as a group was even worse. The only standout players we had then were at Center, and an injury plagued OT. If Tua played behind that line he might not even be playing anymore judging from the year before last leading him to already consider retiring. There were a couple seasons Tannehill took insane punishment behind that line, but he was able to keep playing and never voiced consideration of leaving the team or the game . You could make the argument that shows greater mental and physical toughness. Tua will never have Tannehill's deep ball throwing ability, or the ability to scramble and make deep plays down field with his arm, or routinely run for the needed first down with his out of the pocket abilities. Tua will never drop 50 yrd passes on the numbers like Tannehil either. Otoh Tua has a much better quick release and better decision making in the pocket. Both have their strengths and weaknesses. All that said I would still rather see the Dolphins bring in a big mean tough as nails offensive lineman, or a big physical receiver with good hands and good leaping ability in free agency then I would see them bring Tamnehill back. No fantasy, just facts.
Tannehill was a huge mistake because he proved to be a slightly above average QB who had only 2 great seasons in his career and only when he was surrounded with an all-star cast that is extremely difficult to maintain in a salary cap era. Importantly, he never showed he could overcome bad team play. He was also the primary reason a #1 seeded team lost in the playoffs. You don't build a franchise around QBs like Tannehill because they lower the probability you'll win a SB by way too much. Tua is in a completely different league. He's now played at statistically elite levels for 2 years early in his career, not late in his career like Tannehill. No one in NFL history suddenly started playing elite consistently from mid-career. Tannehill was no exception. Tua's stats are in line with what you see with QBs that do end up playing at a very high level consistently for a longer period of time. No guarantee of course, but his stats are consistent with that. Furthermore, Tua has repeatedly proven he can overcome bad team play, including btw bad OL play. He just hasn't done this late in the season. These are two completely different talents. One QB (Tannehill) you definitely do not build a franchise around (i.e., a mistake), while the other (Tua) just might end up being exactly the type of QB that vastly increases your changes of winning a SB. The two are not comparable at all. So yes your assertion of Tannehill (especially the current version) coming in and having big games as a backup is fantasy.
Drafting Tannehill wasn't a mistake. Sticking with him when it became clear he couldn't elevate the team's play was.
Exactly. I have a ton of posts from 2016 after Tannehill was injured saying we should do everything to draft a QB high in 2017. By luck we would've ended up with Mahomes or Watson. Glad we at least have a chance with Tua now. But Mahomes on the Dolphins? Would've made Gase look way too good lol.
It's the same damned thing ever since Marino. We should have drafted Drew Brees but we didn't because we had Jay Fiedler. Like having one journeyman QB meant we just COULDN'T draft a rookie... Wanny and Speilman were freaking idiots.
My view in Tannehill is that he is one of the best 'on script' QBs in the league, but one of the worst 'off script' QBs. It isn't a co-incidence that his 2 great years came with an extremely disciplined team with a good OL preventing surprise sacks. It might be possible to win a SB with Tanny but you'd need a very good OL, receivers who run very disciplined routes exactly the way they are drawn up, and an OC who isn't predictable. That plus a good defence because RT isn't going to pull a team out of a hole. In other words you'd need the rest of the team to be above average and the coaching to be above average too.
He had all that in those 3 years with Tennessee and they didn't win. It's always "possible" to win a SB with a mediocre QB. It's just very unlikely. Of course you have those rare exceptions like that 2000 Ravens team where offense hardly mattered in the playoffs (opponents scored 3, 10, 3 and 7 points in 4 playoff games LOL). Yeah, Tannehill could win with that, but so could almost any QB.
It's like people just forget what Tannehill dealt with his first 4 years. The years where he needed serious development. How many head coaches? Learned a new offense like every other year. Terrible oline. I mean, the fact that he didn't turn into Derek Carr says a ton. People talk about Tua getting screwed his first couple seasons with coaches, but Tannehill's situation in Miami was just as bad.
You can't teach everything. There IS such a thing as individual ability. Tannehill would never, under any circumstances, have "learned" to become a QB who can overcome bad team play. Would he have done better early on had he been in that Titans situations from the outset? Sure. But he would have never developed into anything more than a slightly above average QB. Also, let's not forget that you and a whole host of pro-Tannehill posters repeatedly proclaimed that Gase was the guy he needed in 2016, that he finally had a coach that believed in him, etc. etc. And flop. It's not all about the environment. Eventually your abilities shine through. Also, don't forget that many great QBs went to teams that picked high in the draft because the teams were bad! Tannehill is hardly a rare case when it comes to a QB picked high going to a bad team. And yet you see greatness emerge with other QBs because they have inherent ability Tannehill simply doesn't have.
Did you claim that Tanny’s long balls are better than Tua’s? That’s just provably so wrong. As for running, Tua didn’t run much last season because he was very heavy and it was pretty obvious he was told not to run. However, during his college and most of his NFL career he’s been pretty good at it. He’s no Lamar or Mahomes, neither is Tanny, but his running ability is on par, or close to, with Tanny.
To be fair, it’s rare for a QB to overcome bad team play. Brady couldn’t do it. Granted he only had two seasons with below average defenses, but in those 2 years he missed the playoffs once and lost the WC in the other. QB’s like Manning and Marino consistently dragged poor teams into the playoffs.
It wasn't close to as bad. Ryan had his college head coach as O coordinator his first 2 years, meaning he ran the same O he ran since leaving high school to start his career. Compare that to Tua, dual coordinator running an RPO with no running game... Ryan had better O lines as well his first 2 years, Tua's were the worst in Dolphin history. Receivers were about equal with utter trash as a rookie, and good addition their 2nd year. Rookie Waddle and Mike Wallace being the additions.
Brady did it many times. The comeback in the SB against Atlanta is legendary. You don't get that with almost any other QB. Also, you can see the vast difference in wins per season for Belichick with vs. without Brady. That's Brady elevating team play well beyond what you'd get with an average QB. And of course there aren't too many great QBs. That's obvious. But the QB position is so important that you have to do what's possible to get one of those on your team. Tannehill was never going to be such a QB. Tua might be. People shouldn't be comparing these two in any way except to emphasize the contrast between the two.
I 100% agree that comparing Tanny to Tua is crazy. There’s nothing Tanny can do better except maybe throw the ball further. And that’s no way to judge a QB. If it were, Jamarcus Russell and Jeff George would be GOAT’s
Tannehill was also a better passer outside the pocket, and better at picking up yards with his legs whether by design or when forced to run because our horrible OL caved in like an old roof in a class 5 hurricane.
I agree with your points about Brady, but saying that Tua can hit that level is just unrealistic. I like the kid, we could've done far worse. But the flipside of that coin is we could have had Justin Herbert who with the right teams and coaching absolutely could become one of the best QB's ever in the league. He possesses all the skills Tua does, and also has the skills Tua never will. We missed our chance for that true elite level quarterback, and chose a good quarterback over him. In a front office known for some epic miscues, that one may yet go down as the worst fubar ever, even above passing on the opportunity to pick up Drew Brees.
It's still too early to tell how Tua will end up. You can't say Tua becoming elite is unrealistic. Based on what? He just had two statistically elite seasons in a row in years 3 and 4. There's no basis for assuming he won't end up elite. The only real issue with Tua thus far is he hasn't done well late in the season. Doesn't mean he won't prove otherwise in the future. Herbert on the other hand is less likely to end up elite. It's now 4 years in a row he's shown no improvement. In his 4 years he's posted 98.3, 97.7, 93.2 and 93.2 ratings. That is actually less consistent with an elite QB (over a career) than Tua. It's unlikely for any QB to end up elite, so the odds are actually against both, but if either is more likely based on stats alone it's Tua, not Herbert. The Brees thing I think we all agree on.
