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

How good will Tannehill be in 2017?

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by zatrex99, Jun 11, 2017.

  1. zatrex99

    zatrex99 Member

    63
    59
    18
    Apr 9, 2017
    Agree or disagree, Ryan Tannehill is a good QB, his average stats don't lie. This is what you can expect from him on a a yearly basis:

    4000 yrds, 62.7 comp%, 24 TD, 13 INT
    (Yearly average of 4 seasons, throwing out his rookie year and takes the 8 games after the first five of last season to average into a full year.)

    That's good enough to help guide your teams to the playoffs once in a while, but not the kind of stats that make you a perennial contender and win a few SB's along the way in this modern day age of football.

    Tannehill needs to take the step to being a great QB, which I define as posting at least 3 franchise years, using D. Brees and P. Manning as the gold standard (I discounted Bree's career in SD):

    Brees: 4800 yards, 35 TD, 15 INT, 67.8% cpmpl%
    Manning 4200 yards, 31 TD, 12 INT, 65.3% cpmpl%

    Brees' is the benchmark for an exceptional Franchise Year, Manning's the lowest possible to qualify as such.
    • Aaron Rodgers had 4 such seasons and won the SB 0 times when he did. He just missed the mark in 2010 where he did win one.

    • Brees has had 9 and won one SB

    • Brady has had 4 and won 0 SB's, but had a near miss in 2014 and won one.

    • Manning had 8 and won 1 SB with it.

    The question is can Tannehill put up such numbers? On the surface, you would certainly think so. He has a glut of weapons and an offensive guru for a coach. But will he?

    In trying to answer that question, I wracked my brain to try and figure how much blame could be assigned to him for an atrocious career sack rate of one per every 13 pass attempts. After the first 5 games of last year it improved to 1 in 17, but that's still atrocious compared to Brady's career ave of 1 in 26 (Manning and Marino 1-30). To some degree, Tannehill has poor pocket awareness, but I couldn't assign it a percentage. The line gets at least 50 percent of the blame, but how much went on game planning and missed assignments? Or the go-go,go vanilla offense Philbin ran?

    And all of that led to the real X-FACTOR on whether he will or won't. How well Tannehill can read the defense pre-snap and audible. He's a smart guy and I would at times argue too smart, making him too robotic and not feeling the game around him, so it shouldn't be a problem (Much like Manning and the complete opposite of Marino). Except for one thing. Until last year, he's never been asked to. If you're not allowed to audible, you don't need to make pre-snap reads. And that's what this season comes down to, barring injuries.

    I'm thinking he'll be just fine and put up this season.

    4500 yrds, 67.0 comp%, 39 TDS, 10 INT
     
    Last edited: Jun 11, 2017
  2. JPPT1974

    JPPT1974 In this Together

    375
    72
    28
    Apr 15, 2012
    Yeah as just hope that he can continue to keep on playing. And playing well. It all depends as he can't do it by himself. Needs to have a supporting cast with him.
     
  3. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,161
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    Well you kinda just jumped to 39 TDs didn't you lol. Considering there have only been 18 seasons ever, with 39 or more TDs that's a tall leap you're asking him to take.
     
    VManis and Tin Indian like this.
  4. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    10,031
    9,529
    113
    Sep 28, 2015
    Tannehill has always been great. He just needed some new G's.

    Anything beyond that wasn't his fault.
     
  5. Bpk

    Bpk Premium Member Luxury Box

    Welp, he hasn't gotten those yet.
     
    Last edited: Jun 12, 2017
    GARDENHEAD and Puka-head like this.
  6. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,653
    9,089
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Tannehill had a 67.1% completion percentage last year on 261 completions with 389 attempts. That was over 13 games. If we extrapolate that over 16 games that gives us 321 completions in 479 attempts.

    OK.. with 321 completions in 479 attempts with 4500 yards, 39 TD's and 10 INT's you get a passer rating of..

    115.5!!!!

    Do you realize that this would put Tannehil at #6 ALL TIME for single season passer rating??
    http://www.pro-football-reference.com/leaders/pass_rating_single_season.htm

    Yeah.. I think this is very unrealistic.

    Realistic and good enough is hoping for mid-to-high 90's average passer rating next year from Tannehill. That should put him in the lower part of top 10 among QB's and that would be a great sign given what he's done so far.
     
  7. Bpk

    Bpk Premium Member Luxury Box

    Wait, I am unclear. If you took his actual stats from 13 games, and just extrapolated that out to what 3 more games would have added, why would that be unrealistic? Or is that not what you did?
     
  8. thetylernator

    thetylernator You're as cold as ice, Officer Friendly.

    516
    623
    93
    Dec 31, 2014
    I do think Tannehill is going to take the "next step" this season, and he'll surprise a lot of people in the process. Everything seems to be coming together for him at the right time: a second year in a right-minded coaches system, an abundance of offensive firepower, and Tannehill's own personal growth as a (soon-to-be) 29 year-old passer, which, historically, is a good age for QB's.

    It might also be worth noting that severe injuries sometimes turn a player into an even better one once recovered; this doesn't apply to everyone, given the severity of the injury and said player's own personal drive, but I have a feeling Tannehill is one who will come back stronger than before.

    31 TD's, 9 INT's, 4,400 YDS, 68.0%, and roughly a 103 QBR.
     
    zatrex99 and Tin Indian like this.
  9. dirtylandry

    dirtylandry Well-Known Member

    4,214
    1,750
    113
    Aug 2, 2015
    Another Tannehill thread!

    Look, Miami's run game has the potential to bury any "Fantasy Pass Stats," however, In Gase's offense (combined with the uncertainty of the defense), RT needs to show improvement in his stats. With points and converted 3rd downs, comes the stats. I see no reason why he shouldn't have at least 30 TD's and less than 10 INT's.
     
  10. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    97,031
    49,962
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    I disagree..I think for Ryan to elevate his game and improve our chances of winning games and ultimately winning a championship, he must make more individual plays that affect the game at crucial moments, '' off schedule plays''.
     
    Tin Indian and Finster like this.
  11. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,208
    3,150
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    For the last 3 years Tannehill has shown he can be a 100 rated passer for slices of up to half a season or so, depending ng on exactly how you slice the data.
    I believe he has the ability to be a 100 rated passer for a whole season..
    I think s 100 passer rating season is a reasonable expectation for Tannehill, based on his previous performance and my expectation of an improved team performance and Gase growing into his role.

    However I view Him as closer to a Bob Griese type QB who can produce very good efficiency stats instead of a Dan Marino type who can produce great volume stats.
    I think 4,000 yards and a 30-10 TD-int ratio is about the maximum you can expect from Tannehill. In fact if the yards in particular go up I'll be worried because it will probably be because our running game has collapsed and I don't see Tannehill as the type of QB who can reliably operate at high efficiency without a run game drawing some defenders into the box.
     
    Last edited: Jun 12, 2017
    zatrex99 and danmarino like this.
  12. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    13,431
    7,647
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    He extrapolated Tannehill's completions for last year, then used the predicted yards and tds from the previous poster to find what that rating would be. So, no, not an actual extrapolation of his stats from last year.
     
    Last edited: Jun 12, 2017
    Bpk, cbrad and danmarino like this.
  13. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,653
    9,089
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    I only extrapolated number of attempts.

    With the extrapolated number of attempts and the predicted stats from zatrex99 you get 115.5 rating which is unrealistic to predict really for any QB. I mean it's rare anyone performs at that level (only 5 in all of NFL history ever did that).

    If you extrapolate Tannehill's actual stats from 13 games to 16 games you get the exact same passer rating he had last year: 93.5, not 115.5.
     
    Bpk likes this.
  14. zatrex99

    zatrex99 Member

    63
    59
    18
    Apr 9, 2017
    Let me apologize. I wasn't trying to inflame the message board, I'm simply trying to project what Tannehill could do under Gase in year 2 and what x-factor may keep him from doing so.

    I chopped off the first five games from last year and then averaged his last 8 into 16 because after the first five games, Gase simplified the offense for him, which resulted in better protection. That's no reflection on Tannehill, but the rest of the offense learning the offense.
     
  15. zatrex99

    zatrex99 Member

    63
    59
    18
    Apr 9, 2017
    That's an interesting thought.
     
  16. Finster

    Finster Finsterious Finologist

    3,087
    2,038
    113
    Jul 27, 2013
    It's all about the TDs, lol, but it's true, and of course TD/INT ratio.

    If you're going to throw 12 INTs, then you need 30 TDs to balance that out, which means he'd have to raise his TD%.
    If you're going to throw 24-27 TDs, your INTs have to be single digits, so he'd have to lower his INT %.

    For 20 mil, you should be getting one of those 2 options, just saying, that should be the expectation, and I don't think i'm asking for the world either.
     
  17. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    6,537
    8,572
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    I hate any "statistics" that start with, "Well, throw out this and that, plus pretend this didn't happen...." Tannehill doesn't need anyone's excuses or exemptions...that's what you do when you don't think you have nothing to improve on and you want to stay mediocre. For instance, let's throw out Moore's worst game last season and "poof", he was the best QB in the league.

    I do think that Tannehill will have his best year ever in 2017 and I am very excited to see him in action. What I'm not looking forward to is all the excuses when he takes a sack, throws a pick or misses a receiver. Those things happen and there are no excuses necessary....that's just life in the NFL. Every play is a learning experience.
     
  18. danmarino

    danmarino Quarantining like a MoFo Club Member

    10,169
    11,091
    113
    Sep 4, 2014
    For average pay he should be only average? Because he's getting average pay.

    I don't think his pay, especially average QB pay, should be focused on.
     
  19. danmarino

    danmarino Quarantining like a MoFo Club Member

    10,169
    11,091
    113
    Sep 4, 2014
    The problem is, it's been shown that the overwhelming majority of RT's sacks are unavoidable and thus not "taking a sack". And his comp% is one of the tops in the league. I don't ever recall seeing anyone making excuses for RT. If he makes a bad throw, as every QB in the league does, he gets criticized. If he makes a bad throw because he has 4 defenders hitting him all at once he really shouldn't be criticized, IMO.
     
    zatrex99 and resnor like this.
  20. dirtylandry

    dirtylandry Well-Known Member

    4,214
    1,750
    113
    Aug 2, 2015
    The framework is there for him to have a good season. And yes, that means stats. Why not? Look at the skilled players he has. If Miami's run defense is mediocre vs porous, we should get the ball back more.
     
    danmarino and zatrex99 like this.
  21. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    6,537
    8,572
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    Sure, but we've also heard that 100% of Tannehill's problems are the receivers not making plays, the linemen not making blocks, the lack of a run game, etc.

    I don't think the overwhelming majority of anything was unavoidable either. He's been sacked 213 times over five years....the overwhelming majority would mean 180+ never gave him a chance to move. That's just not the case. Did the line suck at times? Yes. Did Tannehill freeze at times or run straight into the tackle? Yes. This isn't a situation where one person is 100% at fault 213 times and someone else is blameless.

    For instance, Gase said his #1 priority last year with Tannehill was his footwork in the pocket. Why would he say that if none of the sacks were Tannehill's fault? And why did Tannehill turn in his lowest sack rate ever in 2016 (29 sacks)....exactly half of his worst showing in 2013 (58 sacks)? Our line played their worst ever in games 3, 4, and 5...yet RT had his best season ever in that regard? It is very obvious that he improved in navigating the pocket, rolling away from pressure, not freezing when a big hit was coming, etc.

    And since both the head coach and Tannehill personally said that it was a priority last off-season, I'm not sure what else there is to say. The vast majority of his sacks resulted from bad blocking and bad movement from Tannehill...it was a group effort.

    As far as the completion percentage goes, just look at the distance per throw. The two stats go together to form a complete picture- Pennington has an awesome completion percentage as well. And while throwing a high number of screens isn't a bad thing (especially when it opens up the deep ball like in 2016), it's not an overall indication of performance.
     
    Finster and cbrad like this.
  22. dirtylandry

    dirtylandry Well-Known Member

    4,214
    1,750
    113
    Aug 2, 2015
    We would be fools if we don't share the blame. Plain and simple. In the past it was lack of talent around RT and RT himself. Miami has upgraded the talent around him exponentially. The players around him will play better. Let's see what happens this year, no excuses. We aren't talking about RB, WR, TE or OL this summer. It's really just run defense. Offense has enough talent
     
    danmarino and KeyFin like this.
  23. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,653
    9,089
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Yeah we've seen years of excuses for RT. Everything from not good enough coaching, OL, running game, defense, etc... Thing is, RT isn't the kind of QB that can overcome bad surroundings as well as some other QB's like Marino could.

    Are the excuses justified? Depends on your expectations.

    On one hand, there's enough precedence of QB's overcoming bad surroundings that it's justified to put more blame on Tannehill if you use the same standards across all QB's. On the other hand, Tannehill happens to be the type of QB that needs his surroundings to be decent before he can show he's consistently above average.

    So I agree with KeyFin that at least over a full season one should not use "what if" stats and that one should use stats with no excuses attached. KeyFin is wrong about one point though: Matt Ryan was so good last year that the only way Moore is the best QB in the league is if you only take Moore's best 2 performances (which first of all means you're removing half his data and second all means you're comparing a 2-game sample to a 16-game sample lol).
     
  24. danmarino

    danmarino Quarantining like a MoFo Club Member

    10,169
    11,091
    113
    Sep 4, 2014
    Tannehill’s pocket presence “issues” have either been vastly overblown through his first five years - a product of having a less-than-stellar offensive line throughout that time - or it suddenly developed in 2016. Tannehill seems to know what to do in the pocket to avoid a sack, either by making the right read, moving the right way in the pocket/roll out, or getting rid of the ball on a throw away. Even as reporters continue to ask about how Tannehill can get better at avoiding sacks, Fahey demonstrates that, it does not seem to be on Miami’s quarterback nearly 97 percent of the time.


    http://www.thephinsider.com/2017/5/...unavoidable-cian-fahey-quarterbacks-catalogue


    That's "overwhelming".
     
    resnor likes this.
  25. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    6,537
    8,572
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    Quoting your "proof" article-

    In other words, this guy's opinion is that if an offensive linemen misses his block, there's nothing a QB can do. If receivers aren't open quickly, there's nothing a QB can do. If we went by that standard then no quarterback has ever been sacked by their own fault in the NFL- you can ALWAYS blame either the line or the receivers. And I'm sorry, that's complete and utter BS.

    For instance, the team comes up to the line and the safety has crept up showing blitz on the weak side. Who's primary responsibility is it to spot that? The QB. And maybe he spots it...that's not the point here. The point is that if that safety lays Tannehill out, it's automatically counted as an unavoidable sack in this formula....when it's actually the QB's fault TWICE (once for missing the blitz, the second time for not rolling out to the strong side when he does see it, throwing the ball away, running for yardage, etc.).

    This guy is playing devil's advocate in a pretend scenario where everyone on offense is an all-star except the QB...that has no bearing on reality though.
     
    Last edited: Jun 12, 2017
  26. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    6,537
    8,572
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    I crunched the numbers in my head to see if dropping the Pitt game would be enough...it was fairly close so I didn't throw the NE game in there as well. But the bigger point was that it was ridiculous to do that in any case.
     
  27. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    13,431
    7,647
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    So which QBs have faced the same obstacles but put up better numbers and the team had winning seasons?
     
  28. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,653
    9,089
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    One thing neither you nor anyone you have argued with or against has provided is operational definitions for what constitutes a "good OL" or "good coach" independent of win/loss records which I know you don't like.

    I can quantify how good or bad a defense is by points allowed (or by other measures) and the running game by yards or yards per carry etc.. But what about OL, etc..? Sacks according to you guys tell only a portion of the story so that's dismissed. So what do we use?

    Without such operational definitions there's no way to estimate how good or bad Tannehill's situation has been in comparison to others. It's all opinion.

    With such definitions, I can at least extrapolate what adjustments we need to make to Tannehill's stats so that we can compare. So if you ever agree on which readily available stats to use to measure how good or bad an OL or coach is, I'd love to take a crack at the problem.. even if the definitions aren't perfect.
     
  29. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    13,431
    7,647
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Yeah, but you said there is "enough precedence" of other QBs overcoming bad surroundings to put the onus on Tannehill. I'm asking which QBs you're referring to. Which QBs have overcome bad coaching, bad oline, no run game, poor receivers, and not allowed to audible, and put up better numbers and the team was able to win games.

    Which QBs are you referencing?
     
  30. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,653
    9,089
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Marino had a bad defense and a bad running game. Arguably good pass protection and good coach. No way I'd think Tannehill could come remotely close to Marino in the same situation. So personally I think Marino is capable of overcoming a lot more than Tannehill.

    More recently, Luck hasn't had much luck in his surrounding cast either, etc.. What about Wilson and his OL? There are a lot of QB's that didn't have all 4 components at decent levels.
     
  31. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    6,537
    8,572
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    As a former lineman myself, we were graded on things like explosiveness, footwork, core/lower body strength, etc. None of that translates to talent though...it was just a baseline.

    For run blocking, we were graded on getting our bodies/shoulders on the proper side and then holding the block for 1-2 seconds. As an offensive guard, I'd hit the DL to push him towards the center, release and then pop the linebacker. The idea was that I should hit and release to keep moving downfield as the play advances, but you won't find pure numbers that can show you that. Run blocking is graded purely with the eyes past the initial block. Watch Pouncey....that's why people say he's so elite. He's amazing at the 2nd and 3rd level.

    But even if you fired off and held the block for 1 second before getting beat on a run, it was considered a success on most plays (not on a delayed hand-off, screen pass, etc.). Because if that running back hasn't past you by the 1 second mark, then that's on them. So I guess you could start there.

    Pass protection was the exact opposite because I didn't always know who I was blocking at the snap. For instance, I knew everyone I'd hit on a run play before the ball is snapped, but on pass protection all that goes out the window. I might initially be on the defender right in my face but if the LB crashes that A gap, then I release and try to engage him. If the LB blitzes the B gap, the tackle is supposed to release and pick it up or a RB steps into the hole. So there's a lot of variables there that the average person wouldn't get by watching the game live....it may look like the guard completely screwed up when he did exactly as he was supposed to do.

    I honestly don't know how you grade that UNLESS a lineman engages and gets beat within the first 1.5 seconds. You'd have to know schemes, coverages, etc to know exactly who messed up in other scenarios and that's not always crystal clear. For instance, let's say a safety blitzes to the outside and the DT stunts around that way as well...the tackle is supposed to pop the outside guy and then slide down to the interior rusher. Then the RB has the outside person. Meanwhile, a linebacker is crashing the A gap on the opposite side. That's where the center goes as the guard blocks down, which means that the RB should pop that right-side DE since the TE released (since the tackle now has to block down as well). That RB is blocking the blitz on the left though which means the right side DE levels the QB untouched....and we say that the right tackle completely screwed up. In reality though, everyone did their job exactly as it was drawn up.

    If the QB doesn't spot the blitz pre-snap and move his TE to that side, then the play is doomed before the snap. And in that case, the TE would hit the safety and release since he knows that the QB is going to be pressed for time. Or if it's a designated play for Stills, then maybe he holds the block. There are so many variables in play

    So all I can tell you there is to look for a player engaging and holding the block for 1.5....and don't penalize him if he pops someone then blocks down. If the rusher beats the player to the inside then it's his fault...if he's beaten to the outside then someone else likely messed up. And if there's just too many bodies to block, then it's on the coaching and/or the QB for not getting out of that play or scrambling to make something out of a weakened secondary.

    Can you quantify that with numbers though? It would take a heck of a lot of film watching.
     
    Last edited: Jun 12, 2017
    cbrad likes this.
  32. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    13,431
    7,647
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    What QBs have faced all 4 of those things? Wilson had a great run game to support him, and a#1 ranked defense (I forgot that in my post).

    Oooh, and lets add in that Tannehill was very raw, and everyone knee he was going to need more support than your usual 1st round pick.
     
  33. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,653
    9,089
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    My point is.. how do we really know Tannehill's situation was so bad? Come up with measures for these things and we can test that assumption.

    For example, people keep bringing up this idea that the running game was bad pre-2016. OK, do you guys realize we were ranked 12th in YPG and 2nd in YPC in rushing in 2014? That is the precise opposite of "bad". That's above average.

    Oh, and we were ranked #7 and #8 in defense by points allowed in 2012 and 2013! We were top 10! So just given this little info how can one claim Tannehill had all 4 things going against him?
     
    Last edited: Jun 12, 2017
  34. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    6,537
    8,572
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    I just told you EXACTLY how to grade linemen. Will you do it? No way....that's watching every single play of last year at least a half dozen times. You're talking 4-6 hours just to grade out a single game and we played 17 of them. And when you look at someone like PFF or one of the other "expert" evaluation services, I question whether they do it correctly as well. That's a heck of a lot of snaps to analyze to figure out what the exact coverage was, who was supposed to block who, and where the mess up came. Unless a guy gets flat-out beaten, then it's not obvious at first look because you don't have a Dolphins playbook in front of you.

    Unless you can accurately grade the linemen though, then you have no idea if it was a bad situation or not. Our eyes tell us that was the case for games 3-5 last year wen Tannehill was getting hit almost every play, and we have even more evidence when Gase fired two linemen on the spot. However, it's unfair to say that those linemen "always sucked" just like it's unfair to say "Tannehill has zero pocket presence". It was a combination of the two.

    So if you can't grade that way, all you have left is an apples to apples comparison. Look at other teams who had perceived line problems and see how their QB's did. This is where our conversation always gets ugly, because the closest comparison is Seattle....great QB, lousy line that allows league-leading blown coverages. They were the league's worst 4 out of the past 5 years. In situations where Tannehill would freeze and brace for impact, Wilson would scramble. And make no mistake, Wilson was running for hi life way more than what should be acceptable in the NFL, so it's not fair to say that Tannehill (or any other QB) should be able to respond like that. It's probably Wilson's biggest strength.

    But in an apples to apples comparison, Wilson came close to winning two Super Bowls behind a worse line than what we have in Miami.

    What does that mean? I have no idea other than Wilson is amazing in avoiding pressure. I just don't see how you quantify that and apply it to the Dolphins....we didn't draft Tannehill for his escape abilities. Yet he sure did need it.
     
    Bpk likes this.
  35. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,653
    9,089
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Yeah this is where stats actually become useful. You don't need a perfectly accurate measure to get an estimate on how good or bad something is, just something that correlates well with a perfectly accurate measure.

    And that would be sacks and sack percentages if we're talking pass protection. Maybe at some point I'll look at the history of the league to see how much we should decrement passer rating for each increase in sack percentage. That should at least give us some way of quantifying the effect of bad OL protection.

    EDIT:
    Just did that for 2012-2016. Quite surprised the relationship between sack% and passer rating is so weak. The average decrement over that 5 year period for 1% increase in sack% is -1.14 decrease in passer rating (2015 is really weird in fact that there is a positive relationship between sack% increase and passer rating lol.. thank guys like Russel Wilson for that).

    So you only need to decrement passer rating by a few points in any year at most to adjust for sack%. That means either that sack% doesn't correlate well with a perfectly accurate measure of OL ability (possible) or that it does and that the QB is more responsible for sacks than one might think. Who knows..
     
    Last edited: Jun 12, 2017
  36. Conuficus

    Conuficus Premium Member Luxury Box

    17,128
    16,238
    113
    Dec 8, 2007
    Well away from here
    We are not talking about the Oline? We have a choice between Pouncey missing time again, Larsen who basically is a journeyman and a fifth round pick who has flexibility and mobility issues. The Oline is most definitely an issue and especially the interior.
     
    danmarino and Bpk like this.
  37. Conuficus

    Conuficus Premium Member Luxury Box

    17,128
    16,238
    113
    Dec 8, 2007
    Well away from here
    The running game was bad in the sense that we never stayed with it consistently. Whilst we had good numbers in those areas we were poor in number of carries per game.

    We never used Miller enough IMHO.
     
    danmarino and resnor like this.
  38. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    6,537
    8,572
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    I agree with the bolded statement because the down on which the sack occurs is almost more important than the sack itself. For instance, if I QB is sacked on 1st and 10, now it's 2nd and 12-16. That's still manageable and if you get a first down, then the sack was basically a non-factor in the drive. If you're sacked on 3rd and 7 though, then it's somewhat of a game-changing play since possession changes. You could even argue that a sack on 3rd down is just as good as an interception.

    So if we want to get really accurate, we'd have to compare the sacks on 3rd (and 4th) down to changes in QB rating. Then we'd have something where we know the game changed because of it.

    That also brings me to a different point as well- that sacks measure the line's and the QB's ability equally. Because even if you're sacked on 1st down, it really comes down to what you do on the next play to turn the drive around. The better QB's will surely make up for the mistake while the lousy players will use it as a scapegoat. Unless the sack comes on 3rd (or 4th) down though, it doesn't solely define the drive.
     
  39. dirtylandry

    dirtylandry Well-Known Member

    4,214
    1,750
    113
    Aug 2, 2015
    No. Because we didnt address it, Gase and Grier are going to bed with it


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  40. danmarino

    danmarino Quarantining like a MoFo Club Member

    10,169
    11,091
    113
    Sep 4, 2014
    In 2014, RT threw 27TD's with 12 INT's had a 93 passer rating. Seems as if the average rushing needed is correct.

    2012 was his rookie season under Philbin and RT was taught to be a robot and treated like a child (like the rest of the team) and the team rushing was below average. I think 20th in ypc.

    2013, again Philbin and poor rushing.
     
    zatrex99 likes this.

Share This Page