How good would tannehill be this year if we kept brandon marshall?

It's entirely possible that he would be worse and so would the team.

 

well he wouldn't know how to spread the ball around I would assume........

 

Considering your question, you should probably take a close look at how much Marshall helped Cutler and not at how much Cutler helps Marshall. Here you can see Cutlers career stats.

His rating in his four years with the Bears:
76.8 2009
86.3 2010
85.7 2011
85.3 2012 with Marshall

Don't get me wrong, I don't think QR is the ultimate measurement but maybe it gives you an idea of much Marshall would have helped Tannehill. I personally don't think we would be any better with Marshall.

 

That means we should have picked up Reggie Wayne then. Marshalls off the field issues, (and I mean the ones in the club house, not the club) aren't ones that I want a rookie QB to have deal with. Get guys who don't pout and take plays off if they don't have the ball forced to them, who don't have position coaches reportedly switch positions because they cannot deal with them, who don't have to have people pull them a side because of the way they behave in team meetings and tell them to get professional psychiatric help. Reggie Wayne was a free agent and would have been great, at least for this year.

 

lol. Is Tannehill having a hard time making the transition to the NFL?

When will people understand there's more facets to a player than just talent?

 

I think his stats and the overall offense might be a bit better, but I'm not sure it would be at all revolutionary- Or worth the risk.

 

I don't think it's any secret that I was no fan of Ireland's move get rid of Marshall. But it has more to do with losing a very talented player for less than we played. I think the offense would be better with Marshall, no question. But I also think there's a lot of truth to Philbin's offense not needing an elite #1 WR. I think the offense would be better, but only marginally. My problem with the move to get rid of Marshall has more to do with the value lost. No reason to get rid of a player of his caliber for less than paid.

Also how well an offense performs has so much more to do with the talent of the QB than the talent of the WRs.

 

Andrew Luck is doing no better than Ryan Tannehill.

 

We're all thrilled with Tannehill but that's just not true. His overall production is significantly higher, TD/INT ratio is better and his team has the better record with a worse defense. As of this moment, Luck looks better. Not to take anything away from Tannehill, but if you're going to be objective there's no other way to look at it.

 

I wasn't so bummed on Marshall, but I felt we should have gotten Mike Wallace. Wallace had a second round tender right? I still think we should have traded a 2013 2nd round pick and if necessary a 2012 3rd/4th round pick. Egnew isn't really doing anything and that just strengthens my conviction on it.

 

Having Marshall here as others have said may have stunted Tannehills growth. A guy with that ego with his demand for the ball could cause Tannehill to force throws his way without reading his progressions and making the correct throw. Of course this is speculation on my part. But I imagine that it would be pretty hard for a rookie to come in to a place with a big name WR who would be vocal publicly and privately about getting his touches and not feel obligated about throwing it his way.

 

^^^ This, b/c that's not the type of offense Philbin wants to run, and b/c that's not the type of habit we want our QB falling into.

 

A player of Marshall's caliber does a lot more than add to the passing game! It instantly takes the safeties out of the box which helps the running game. Having that threat helps the entire offense and with a Qb that knows this offense like RT will make teams pay big time if they try stacking the box on the rookie. So would Tannehill be better? Not necessarily but that's not what matters! It helps complete the offense....

 

I like the fact that he's learning the game with solid disciplined skillset players, kind of an inside out approach, he's learning to manage the position with skill players that are not explosive and who lack certain attributes that allow players who have them score touchdowns beyond the scheme..once we add those type of players to to the scheme, it bodes well..

Sure would like to get Eifert or Austin this upcoming draft.

 

You certainly implied it when you said this:

Let's take another angle, are Reggie Wayne and Brandon Marshall interchangeable? For argument's sake, let's say they knew each other's offense, could you swap the two and get the same production?

 

Brandon Marshall had all of 6 TD for the whole year last year.

 

Why? The last time Brandon was here he wasn't always happy, and it seemed to show on the field. The potential for an extra TD here and there would be great for our season but not at the expense of potentially impairing Tannehill's ability to take over the team, and especially not if it means potentially turning Tannehill into a see-it throw-it type of QB ala Jay Cutler rather than an Aaron Rodgers type who spreads the ball all over the field with great timing and an outstanding sense of anticipation.

 

Ofcourse we would be better with Marshall, and so would Tanny. All this Marshall is a problem child is nonsense. We never heard Moore or Henne complain about him. And ofcourse any good WR always wants the ball.

 

Of course he wouldn't.

We have heard plenty of stories about Marshall going off on Henne.

Yes or no, would you gladly field a team full of guys who had the exact same talent for their positions as Marshall but also the exact same issues? If you say yes, then that means your narrow football view begins and end with talent and that NOTHING else matters or effects wins or loses, just talent.

 

Wouldn't that be like trading in your 4 year old car and expecting to get the price you paid on the trade in. We ought to be happier than two pigs in a peach orchard that we got anything for him with his dropped passes, off the field bovine scatology, stupid penalties, and prima donna attitude.

 

I don't feel like Marshall was a cancer here at all. That's the difference. Most WRs are generally arrogant outspoken *****.

 

The real question is how much longer is Marshall going to be the Marshall we have seen in Chitown for them this year so far, but that's not something we have to worry about. However, having more talent on the field would certainly have helped Tanny and this team. I'm just not so sure that a guy with Marshall's other, less desirable traits would have helped Tanny as much as his stats would indicate...

 

He was and no most aren't.

Most receivers don't have the continuous off field issues and force coaches to move by being such a dbag.

 

Means nothing....

 

Talent is what every GM wants. Talent wins games. What said player did last night has nothing to do with what he does ON the field. That also has nothing to do with having a narrow view. If anything you're view is narrowing it down to players YOU want.

 

His issues were not detrimental to this team. His talent was/is undeniable. If your career depended on Chad Henne you would be on edge also. And like I said, I don't want a QB who is controlled by a WR...and I doubt Tanny would've allowed that to happen.

 

Sure there is.

 

Here's the definitive statement on this, IMO, from another thread:

If you disagree with that, then I suspect your personal philosophy, which can be proven neither right nor wrong, is that physical talent is significantly more important than these sorts of variables.

 

I don't know, I'm pretty settled on the Brandon Marshall issue right now, myself. IMO you have to remember that there is a new coaching staff here, trying to establish its own type of team culture, with a rookie QB. In that kind of situation, I think you have to just flat out remove players who stand to present a stiff obstacle to that, no matter how good they are.

 

Nothing?

Lol. ok. A guy paid to scored TDs has only 6 in a season (9 in two) and it means nothing. I suppose you say that of all offensive skill players right...low TDs means nothing.

 

How can you say that? There's is ZERO evidence to back up your claim.

There are reports he caused real issues.
The offense in every important stat from yards to TDs was worse when he was here then the year before he was here
Philbin didn't want him. Philbin the offensive guru told him to GTFO. Philbin who has had coached more excellent receivers than Bill Parcells didn't want him.

You have..............


...............


...............

 

Fine. Talent is all that matters. Forget drive, dedication, smarts, work ethic, staying out of trouble, willingness to learn, heart, brains, etc.

**** all that. Just talent.

Riddle me this, how come there's interviews and Wonderlic tests if all that maters is talent to a GM? Oh I know, who cares...TALENT!!!!!!!

 

Riiiiiiiight. The QB and OC that got him the ball 81 times are at fault. His 5 dropped TDs that could have been difference makers in each game and the season....all on Henning. I bet his wife stabbed him because of Henne too.