Damn, then Tannehill & Philbin must be complete idiots for making a big deal about it since you've clearly shown it was just a one time thing. JMHPhin-> "I'm a professional crocheter but I like to talk about football from time to time even though I have no idea WTF I'm saying".
After leading the NFL in 20+ yard production [both yards & TDs] the previous 4 years combined, the NFL's best deep receiver has just 1 TD from 20+ this year amidst a season where the HC & QB have stated Wallace has gotten deep all year but Tannehill failed to connect. Do you need it in brail or something?
Dude, have you watched the plays? And are you assuming that deep throws not being completed to Wallace are his fault? When so many have been woefully underthrown, thrown late and off target? How can you, with a clear mind and a straight face, blame ALL of this as you do, or even a great majority of it on Wallace when the deep throws to him by RT have been so crappy? And do you think that it's some kind of great deception when RT himself and his coaches acknowledge this as a major issue? If anyone is seeing things as they want to and not how they really are, I would say that you're the one.
And yet, people continue to claim that Tannehill was supposed it throw it before the receiver even turned around to have a look at where it would end up. I suppose Tannehill skipped the mandatory mindreading 101 symposium in the offseason or something. Slacker.
Some writers are good, I happen to like Barry Jackson among others, some are not so good. That's how it goes. That doesn't form my opinion, but imo it is relevant if almost everyone including Ryan Tannehill and his coaches agree that his deep passes to Wallace need major work. I find the idea that Tannehill is lying about that as a means of self deprecation is bs as it pertains to this discussion. His deep passes blow, and he knows it.
a) that's a bull**** contrived trend that fits your unfounded argument....... ...because b) the last 12 of those games has featured a QB directly causing the downfield efficiency issues, and that's straight from the goddam QB's mouth. Obviously it IS a coincidence b/c the deep opportunities have been there but Tannehill has failed to deliver, and the only thing being "ignored" is the fact Tannehill has failed to deliver. Forget about Wallace for a minute. Since you're such an advocate of the QB making the receiver and how greatly responsible an offense's success the QB is, then answer me this- do you find it acceptable that Tannehill has missed all those downfield opportunities that he says he should've hit? That question is open to anyone BTW.
Given Wallace's momentum to the left and the fact that the ball traveled about 65 yards in the air, maybe that wouldn;t have been such a bad thing to do. Symposium or not, Tannehill harped on his own areas that need improvement. Timing. Anticipation. Funny how he knows it himself, yet others argue that it's on Wallace and not him.
His deep passes don't blow. He actually throws a rather neat deep ball. However, his deep passes to Mike Wallace blow. I would attribute some of that to Tannehill (he certainly left plays on the field), some of that to Mike Wallace (it's not like he got a free ride in Pittsburgh; over here, he isn't making tough catches at the same rate he used to make them in 10/11 ... and deep passes quite often end up being tough catches, that's the game) and some of that on the play design. It's pretty tough to hit a guy like Wallace in stride when the play has your quarterback going through three other options first. By the time Tannehill gets to Wallace, he's often very open but the pocket's collapsing and what could've been an easy 20 yard pickup for a huge gains suddenly becomes a rather tough 40 yard pickup under pressure. I usually have the feeling that we're playing it "check the timing routes first, if none's open, look for the deep one to Wallace", and that's not making good use of a player like Wallace. Plus, in Pittsburgh he had Roethlisberger who keeps more plays alive behind an awful OL than most hospitals do with patients.
Wallace produced because he has unique skills that an elite Qb could exploit.. Wallace is under producing because our Qb is not playing at an elite level.
LOL at all you people thinking it's ok for a QB to miss as many deep opportunities as we have this year, especially with the game's best vertical threat at his disposal. And going so far as rationalizing such poor downfield efficiency as being acceptable just blows my mind. Welcome to Loserville with that mentality. You cynical hypocrites complain about the offense not scoring enough but feel a noteworthy contributor of that deficiency [Tannehill's vertical passing game] deserves a free pass. Doesn't get any lamer than that.
So you're saying that a wild shot with the game on the line and the hope that your receiver turns in time to track the ball while the safety is obviously reading the quarterback was somehow a better idea than taking that safety out of the play and throwing it to where your WR was able to get both hands on the ball for the game winning TD if he simply makes the catch?
What you're describing is pretty much a hail mary. And yes, given Tannehills arm strength and Wallaces's speed I would have rather seen RT throw the ball to the left, leading Wallace in the direction of his momentum. Does it have to be pointed out again that of all the crappy deep throws to Wallace this year, this is far from being one of the more offensive ones? And yet it's being harped on incessantly- curious. It would be far better to discuss a compilation of Tannehill's deep throws this year imo, much more productive than this, a pass 70 yards away, down by 4, 20 seconds to go in the game. This is just not terribly relevant to the central discussion.
If he had caught the ball, he was tackled short of the goal line, right? Would there have been enough time for the offense to sprint to that spot, reset, and spike the ball with time left on the clock?
Wild shot? First of all, are we excactly sure what the play called was? Second of all, we all pretty much agree that fighting for the ball isn;t a strong suit of Wallace's, so how much sense does it make to put Wallace in a hail mary situation where he's positioning and dueling for the ball? It doesn't. Do you have any more relevant deep passes that you'd like to discuss, or are you stuck on this one that is more of a desperation time throw? 70 yards away, 20 seconds left, down by 4- this play doesn't rate very highly on the totem pole as to the reasons that deep balls from RT to Wallace aren't what they'd should be. It was a desperation time throw- decent pass, catchable ball. But not an easy ball to catch.
Ck knows I like and respect him, but that's just not true. Anyone watching could tell. Gruden immediately commented on that one and it was obvious, but whatever and the bolded line is really arrogant, but no surprise there, especially because you're wrong. You ignored everything else I mentioned, which again, no surprise there, but it's very true. It cracks me up when you act like you know everything about the scheme, completely based off what they did in Greenbay when Philbin didn't even always call the plays there. Any great coach acclimates and adds their own wrinkles to schemes. They are also smart enough to be able to use a player's strength regardless of scheme. Philbin himself said that when comparing Wallace to Jennings that he felt Wallace brings more to the table and fits more of need. You can say that's a reason for some internal rift amongst the staff, but one of the very few things you can take away from Hard Knocks was the Clyde Gates situation. Philbin gave Ireland his restrained opinion first and then let Ireland have his way and gave Gates some more time and then the next time they met, he was very adamant about him being a neophyte as a route runner and Ireland cut him the next day because he knows Philbin knows a lot more than him about football. Feel like I am wasting my time yet again.
My guess is that Wallace's head and body went down as the ball went through his hands. I think that if he caught it he would have stayed up a fraction of a second longer and made it into the end zone.
Good one. I feel in my place now. Wallace has done exactly what he did in Pittsburgh that made him the most dangerous and most productive deep receiver in the game- which is get behind coverage. Tannehill says it. Philbin says it. The game film says it. We're not paying Wallace for production. We're paying him to create opportunities for production, which he is doing, but Tannehill is unfortunately failing to capitalize. Wallace is getting behind coverage, period. It's not like he's dropping deep passes left and right or is tripping over his feet after catching deep throws in stride that should've been TDs. Even announcers with NFL experience stop to glowingly note how his mere presence on the field affects coverage and creates opportunities for others.
You came up with the Youtube clip of that play and analyzed it. I simply happened to think it was (and still is) a lousy analysis. Don't shoot the messenger. No, not an easy ball to catch. And deep throws aren't easy throws to make. Ideally, the quarterback, the wide receiver and, to some degree, the coaching staff are bailing each other out on those low percentage plays. In Miami, no one is bailing anyone out. And that's the problem.
Well, it wasn't a youtube clip, but my point is that this play is at best a side issue. I'm losing interest in the whole subject until we can see all of Tannehill's deep throws this year, to Wallace and others, to take a closer look at where the breakdowns are coming from.
I don't believe there's enough open mind here (and incidentally I'm not referring to you) to make it worthwile. Take, for instance, the Wallace TD against Carolina. A terrific throw by a quarterback on the move, and a darn good catch. And yet, some people act like there's 20 quarterbacks in the NFL who can make a throw like that (or a better one, given that it was "underthrown"). There aren't. That's a money throw. Mike Wallace used to catch a lot of similar passes in Pittsburgh; and yet I don't see anyone saying how poorly Roethlisberger always underthrew the guy. Yes, Ryan Tannehill left plays on the field. So has Mike Wallace. But I'm not sure there's any point in going over them, seeing that there's a certain mob out there looking for someone to crucify over Wallace's predictable drop in production.
hey don't let truth hit ya where the good lord split ya. Here's some easy logic. Multiple teams offered $50+ million to Wallace, and the only way that happens is if they expect an NFL QB to make those deep throws when they're there, period, b/c no team is gonna pay any receiver that much to just catch short passes. However, some of you are treating a deep completion as if it's like using a box, stick, and string to trap a damn unicorn.
That's like saying, "He's a really good chef except for half of the menu he keeps burning". Wallace is a Miami Dolphin so you can't just omit him like he's not part of the equation. If Tannehill's deep passes to his primary deep receiver suck, then he doesn't throw a rather neat deep ball at the moment.... unless by neat you mean it looks pretty and spins nicely in route to not making it where it's supposed to go.
You really don't think Tannehill will figure it out? He's already figured out how to survive with a weak OL and not much of a running game.
I hope you guys do realize that - on both sides - this argument has become beyond mind-numbing. Here's the way I see it. Last year and even this year when Tannehill throws deep to Hartline it is either spot on or a very slight misfire. This suggests that their timing is in sync. With Wallace, the pass is either underthrown, slightly underthrown or overthrown. Given Tannehill's passes to Hartline, this suggests to me that this is ultimately a timing issue and no critical defect from either player. Here's to hoping they've been working on their timing and that this will ultimately be a non-issue come next season.
Jim, if Tannehill's deep ball accuracy hasn't been an issue, these people would have a lot more than a hail mary throw to support their claim..... but they don't, so they're trying to use it as a distractor.
Here it is at 1:02 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0t44xgKLse4 I don't think that it was a very good throw. Granted RT is rolling to the right, but it's short and too far to the right. Wallace blew by his defender, got open deep quick, was wide open, adjusted to a rather difficult catch that should have been easy with a better throw and got into the end zone. I give Wallace an A on that play, Tannehill a C. That was damn near not a touchdown, the DB was allowed back into the play by RT and almost batted the throw down because it was late, short and to the right. Wallace once again had to put on the breaks and he positioned his body well to make the catch. I don't think that I'm being hard on Rt at all here- Wallace was the star of that play- he blew past his man, got open deep, adjusted for a ball off target, made the catch and got into the end zone. For all the talk of him not being able to to adjust for a deep ball or fight for one, he did a pretty decent job of it here. Roll out or no roll out, that just wasn't a particularly good throw from Tannhehill- I went into watching it again trying to give him the benefit of the doubt, and I still can't rate that throw as anything higher than average. The play at 1:25- Rt waited too damn long. It's hard to not look at that throw and see, in some ways, a well thrown ball. Kind of like 55 yards on a rope. The problem is that it was late. No matter how you cut it, Wallace had his man beaten by five yards and that should have been thrown earlier and been a touchdown. Time and time again, maybe the fastest receive in the game has had to slow down or just about stop to adjust for an underthrown ball when he's WIDE OPEN. The solution is simple: THROW THE DAMN BALL SOONER, WALLACE IS TOO FAST TO WAIT SO LONG, YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE HIM SLOW DOWN AND WAIT FOR THE BALL. THAT IS NOT GOOD. What gives me a great deal of hope is that Tannehill is imo quite capable of throwing good deep balls. Maybe he's just too used to throwing to WRs who run like Bess and Hartline, ie slow to average speed. When RT gets it in gear and releases the ball earlier, imo the RT/Wallace connection will take a quantum leap forward.
You're touching on something here. We all must realize how difficult it is to judge the speed of a player that runs in the 4.2 range. The margin of error is so small. It's no different than shooting at a moving target, the faster the target the more difficult it is to hit. We see far better deep throws to Hartline and beyond their familiarity, maybe it's just easier to assess the movement of a player who runs 4.5. We must realize that even with Ben, a lot of the deep passes required some adjustment on Wallace' part.
Tannehill figuring it out [which I think he will] has nothing to do with what has happened up until this point, no? Figuring it out deals with the future, but we're talking about what's already transpired. I'm a huge Tannehill fan but I won't contrive all sorts of silly arguments to rationalize his overall poor vertical passing thus far, and I'm certainly not gonna scapegoat the NFL's best deep receiver [who has consistently gotten behind coverage this year] for the lack of deep ball execution. They can blame it on Sherman; they can blame it on the Oline; but to blame it on Wallace is just flat out absurd.
I believe it was mentioned on ESPN by one of their ex players that Tannehill should've led the pass further to the left and that it was a TD if he did.
Exactly. He should have led him toward the middle part of the field, not put him in a corner closer to the sideline. Look at 1:22 of the clip, the replay- the DB was allowed back into the play because the pass was late and short, not to mention it drifted to the right and took Wallace with him. How much did the DB miss knocking that pass down by? A millimeter? And on a play that should have been an easy touchdown. Wallace was purely outstanding on that play and showed not only speed to get open deep but concentration, good hands and the ability to adjust for an off target pass with a DB who was all over him by the time the ball got there. Seriously, what more could anyone ask for from a receiver on that play? Wallace made that play happen, and quite frankly Tannehill just about screwed it up with his less than stellar throw.
Wallace' role on that play was no different than Moss' one handed grab against us at home in 07 - and that was coming from all time great Tom Brady. There's no doubt that work needs to be done by both to make this deep connection work but I do think we are into that stage where it's being over-analyzed.
"Neat" means drinking your Scotch straight up with no ice, which is often what I feel like doing when I see Tanne miss a wide open Wallace streaking down the field time after time.
Explain 7 receptions out of 31 targets in 2012 then. It's funny that all of Mike's woes are due to Ryan, yet he caught essentially the same percentage of deep throws in Pittsburgh last year. 7 of 31 last year and 5 of 24 this year. That's the trend. Apparently, 5 of 24 is a lot worse than 7 of 31 though.
...and there will always be an issue with timing when it comes to Mike Wallace because he is such a poor route runner. But, hey. I'm just the guy that told you all before he signed that he was not fit for a timing based scheme.
The speed isn't the issue. It's the routes. Hartline and Bess run their routes the same. They are very polished in their route running. The same goes for Brandon Gibson. Mike Wallace is extremely poor as a route runner. He doesn't run them with the same speed or to the same depth. His cuts are not sharp. He rounds off his breaks. He doesn't read coverages well. There will always be timing issues with him because of his routes. This idea that Ryan cannot adjust to his speed is a joke.
LOL. I find it amusing that one side is operating on facts, and the other side is operating on "interpretations" of the facts..... yet the interpretation party is acting all uppity like the fact side is the one employing interpretation. Fact: Wallace is an elite vertical receiver, the best in the NFL the prior 4 years. Interpretation: those 4 years of stats and everything said by the NFL & commentators about Wallace's deep ability are lies. Fact: Miami's vertical game has been problematic this year. Interpretation: this is normal for every NFL team and any good QB-WR tandem. Fact: Philbin & Tannehill both stated Wallace has been getting open deep all year. Interpretation: Philbin & Tannehill are lying. Fact: the film shows Wallace getting open deep all year. Interpretation: the film is lying. Fact: Philbin & Tannehill both said Tannehill has had problems converting downfield opportunities. Interpretation: Philbin & Tannehill are lying. Tannehill threw the ball 70 yards that one time so he's obviously been a great deep passer. yeah suuuuure, the fact camp is the one who should be doing the "proving".
You are not operating on facts. You are operating on opinions. I'm still waiting for the explanation of 7 of 31 last year.
