How much more time do we give Tannehill to prove he's got "it"?

"Silverphin wrote:

But win percentage is not an accurate way to judge a quarterback, though.

Remember, the Jets went to two (three?) straight AFC Championship games. But can you honestly say that happened because Mark Sanchez was playing great, well, or even decent as their quarterback?

All of this.

Multiple times.

Brutal schedule this year. Beat the Lions and Packers, that's the equivilant to last years Cards and Jets OT losses. ANyway, I'm still on keeping the status quo at if we get 9-7. If not then clean house. The loss of Albert and Moreno have led to the Dallas Thomas jinx. Problem is, Albert and Moreno both came with injury histories. The year before that losing Gonzales.

I think Tannehill is a good QB but he has a limited ceiling. I would absolutely call the team with the 1st or 2nd overall pick and see if we could trade tannehill for the pick and see if they would go for it. He will never be an elite QB. Also would save us money because of the contract extension he is gonna need soon.

"Fins Hipster wrote:

And one can certainly propose that there are other parts of the team responsible for his performance, but there is no objective evidence that when those parts of the team play better, so does he. Of course you can take that all the way up to the level of the head coach, and say he'd be playing better if the team had a better head coach, but there is no objective evidence of that, either. In the end there is going to be a great deal of resistance to viewing Tannehill as anything other than the QB of the future, because to do so is to realize that this team has almost nothing for certain going for it in the future. GM, head coach, OC, DC, QB -- these are all uncertainties. Nobody really knows how good any of those people are.

Listen, I agree with you. But you also can't overlook the overall ineptitude of this franchise. No legit WR's to throw to year one, one of the worst OL in NFL history last year, and more of the same this year.

Of course, you can always argue that great QB's overcome adversity and I'd have no counter argument.

It sucks though. That I know. I love Tannehill but at the end of the day he needs to be looked at like every other starter on the roster.

"fins104 wrote:

I think Tannehill is a good QB but he has a limited ceiling. I would absolutely call the team with the 1st or 2nd overall pick and see if we could trade tannehill for the pick and see if they would go for it. He will never be an elite QB. Also would save us money because of the contract extension he is gonna need soon.

Hahaha!

He was drafted where he was simply because his ceiling is so high. I say fix the oline, get a big physical receiver, and see what Tannehill does next season. Then act accordingly.

"PhinsMiami wrote:

You want stats? Here you go:
Tannehill performance

2013 vs the Bills a must win
10/27 87 yards 0 TD

2013 vs the Jets a must win
20/40 204 yards 1 TD 3 INT

2014 vs the Ravens a must win
23/33 227 yards 1 TD

and this is what makes you foolish, take these then factor in drops, defense laspses and no stops on 3rd down, blown oline assignments etc

Bumrush, I'd counter that the greats look like trash when their olines are a sieve. I'd counter that when a three man rush is getting crazy pressure that the QB has no I've to throw to.

"Bumrush wrote:

Listen, I agree with you. But you also can't overlook the overall ineptitude of this franchise. No legit WR's to throw to year one, one of the worst OL in NFL history last year, and more of the same this year. Of course, you can always argue that great QB's overcome adversity and I'd have no counter argument. It sucks though. That I know. I love Tannehill but at the end of the day he needs to be looked at like every other starter on the roster.

I wish to argue nothing other than there is no objective evidence that Tannehill is playing at the level he needs to for the team to be highly competitive without a stellar surrounding cast, and there is no objective evidence that it is attributable to anything other than him. Other parts of the team could indeed be at fault for his performance's not being better than it is, and he could certainly play better individually in the future than he is now, but there is no current, objective evidence that either of those things are true. People are certainly free to believe them, because people are free to believe whatever they'd like, but there is no objective support for those beliefs.

"resnor wrote:

Hahaha!

He was drafted where he was simply because his ceiling is so high. I say fix the oline, get a big physical receiver, and see what Tannehill does next season. Then act accordingly.

His ceiling isn't that high hate to break it to you. It's 3 years later and we can all probably agree to that. I agree with you though I would have no problem doing that, just listing an option i wouldn't be pissed at. If we can trade Tannehill for Mariota or Winston id take it and run. Realistically we need to add height to our receiving corps, interior o-line for yet another offseason, a NT and LB depth so badly.

"resnor wrote:

Ummm...you ignore the facts. I haven't received I've answer in this thread to any of the facts. Neither had any if the supposed "backers" to any of their facts.

LOL

Do you really expect someone who starts calling people's names when he seems to run out of things to say to discuss facts with you? Good luck man.

"Fins Hipster wrote:

I wish to argue nothing other than there is no objective evidence that Tannehill is playing at the level he needs to for the team to be highly competitive without a stellar surrounding cast, and there is no objective evidence that it is attributable to anything other than him. Other parts of the team could indeed be at fault for his performance's not being better than it is, and he could certainly play better individually in the future than he is now, but there is no current, objective evidence that either of those things are true. People are certainly free to believe them, because people are free to believe whatever they'd like, but there is no objective support for those beliefs.

No objective evidence?

You mean other than the fact that his stats drastically improved from year to year?

"PhinsMiami wrote:

You & Resnor are annoying as s**t. What happens next year when Tannehill fails to lead us to the postseason again? I bet you'll say but he's improving.

You still have no answers.

Typical.

But he's improving guys

"His ceiling is so high" after 3 failed seasons. It's the offensive lines fault, no it's the wide receivers fault, no it's the coaches fault. Does Tannehill get any blame or is he perfect in your eyes.

"PhinsMiami wrote:

"His ceiling is so high" after 3 failed seasons. It's the offensive lines fault, no it's the wide receivers fault, no it's the coaches fault. Does Tannehill get any blame or is he perfect in your eyes.

how much of today's first half did you watch?

"PhinsMiami wrote:

"His ceiling is so high" after 3 failed seasons. It's the offensive lines fault, no it's the wide receivers fault, no it's the coaches fault. Does Tannehill get any blame or is he perfect in your eyes.

What's your point man? If you'd down on the dude fine. Why do the rest of us have to be.

"PhinsMiami wrote:

"His ceiling is so high" after 3 failed seasons. It's the offensive lines fault, no it's the wide receivers fault, no it's the coaches fault. Does Tannehill get any blame or is he perfect in your eyes.

Except you won't find a single post here saying that Tannehill's perfect. I, personally, am not going to put the whole entire blame on Tannehill when it's obvious that there's a lot wrong with the units surrounding him.

"fins104 wrote:

I think Tannehill is a good QB but he has a limited ceiling. I would absolutely call the team with the 1st or 2nd overall pick and see if we could trade tannehill for the pick and see if they would go for it. He will never be an elite QB. Also would save us money because of the contract extension he is gonna need soon.

So this team with the 1 or 2 pick in need of a qb is gonna take a qb that you've decided isn't good enough so we need a 1 or 2 pick to get a better one. Worst. Logic. Yet.

"scotty_irnbru wrote:

So this team with the 1 or 2 pick in need of a qb is gonna take a qb that you've decided isn't good enough so we need a 1 or 2 pick to get a better one. Worst. Logic. Yet.

"Silverphin wrote:

Except you won't find a single post here saying that Tannehill's perfect. I, personally, am not going to put the whole entire blame on Tannehill when it's obvious that there's a lot wrong with the units surrounding him.

This.

In a nutshell.

Got no problem with drafting a QB to push Tannehill further. I just don't believe you give up on what has shown to be promising improvement.

"Vertical Limit wrote:

I love how angry the backers are and they cant argue back with facts. Hah weak.

I love how you have not given a single shred of evidence that he is below average. Your post is weak even for you and that is saying something

This forum in the 2 days after a defeat is the worst place to be. I like tannehill. I think he's got enough about him and he's improved enough that we keep going. It's the same waffle every time. Draft another qb. Tannehill holds this team back. He'll never be Marino. Deep ball. Same old same old. Like the teams problems since tannehill arrived. The oline and the run game. Weak. Fix the line. Let Miller run. Tannehill can take the perceived low percentage plays and we can get back to winning. Like we were doing. 4 weeks ago. When the line was working. And we could run the ball.

"Silverphin wrote:

Except you won't find a single post here saying that Tannehill's perfect. I, personally, am not going to put the whole entire blame on Tannehill when it's obvious that there's a lot wrong with the units surrounding him.

This ^

Its not that people have questions re: Tannehill ability to reach the level we need or want, its the complete and assinine way he gets undue blame for defense inability to make a stop, the clear to everybody but the complete biased drops and the revolving door oline. Tannehill has been asked to overcome failures by every facet of this team regularly and yes some of his own. he isnt w/o blame, but he has had a crap hand at times as well as a piss poor head coach and d coord that cant call a game to save his life.

to not blame anyone other than RT and not consider his inexperience and what the expected level of play should be at this time with the cards he has just shows bias. He has been below expecetd level but not by much IMO. adn he took major strides in the major area of weakness today.

Tannehill is not the problem.

He was the best player on the offense today.

"DolphinGreg wrote:

Tannehill is not the problem.

He was the best player on the offense today.

Absolutely.

By a wide margin.