Gimmie a break nothing. Those passes get completed less than 50% of the time a deep ball is thrown. That's not a "unicorn" but its not an all the time occurrence either. The point I am making and have been making, is that Tannehill's passes don't have to be perfect if the $60 million receiver would fight for the goddman ball. Why you and the rest of you guys are not holding Wallace to any standard in that regard is effing baffling.
I saw this timing issue broken down i think on the phinsider. They were showing that by the time Tanny had gone through the play action fake maneuvers and gotten ready to throw, Wallace was already too far down field for any NFL QB to hit him in stride- so essentially the timing of the route and pre-throw play execution were off - seemingly due to poor play design - either the wrong route drawn up or the play fake took too long to execute. It made sense when i read the original source complete with pictures, and i'm not explaining it nearly as well, but that's the gist of the timing issues and poor play design folks are pointing out..
The recent one against Pitt wasn't from play design. He flat out held it until the play overdeveloped. Even when it did involve a slower developing play, there were times where he didn't execute it with enough urgency. It's not like play-action to fast receivers is new to the NFL, and it's not like we're talking about Pennington's arm. Other teams and QBs around the league execute it with fast receivers, including Roethlisberger with the very same Wallace. Here's Ben successfully executing the same play-fake to Wallace that Tannehill has left well short b/c he lollygagged it. Aaron Rodgers on a half roll that Nelson can still catch in stride b/c Rodgers executes his footwork with more urgency. Ben successfully getting the ball out promptly on the same play that Tannehill severely underthrew Sunday b/c he held it too long. Stafford doing the same with Calvin Johnson. If he pats it a few times like Tannehill did, it's a bad underthrow.
No you're right, Tannehill's deep ball has been a glowing example of what every QB should aspire to achieve. It's been a standard by which all others are measured and couldn't possibly need room for improvement regardless of what he himself says. Have a merry day. So you're joining KB on the straw post brigade, huh? Neither I nor Jim have said Tannehill's deep passes have to be perfect, and I SPECIFICALLY mentioned how Tannehill does NOT have to throw a perfect ball for it to be caught in stride. Either reread the posts and respond accordingly or shaddup. fixed that for ya. Wait, let me get this straight, you're moaning about standards in the same breath that you're suggesting Tannehill shouldn't have to execute on his end? Dafuq?
Again, show me where I said that or quit fabricating my argument. Jesus, you'd think if your stance was so damn rock solid, you wouldn't have to resort to such BS. WTF are you even talking about? Again, where did I say any of that bull****? Goddamn man, you have real effing problems. You tell me to read, but you're the one not reading and are instead just flat out making up an argument. I challenge you to pay just a little attention, turn off the Todd Argue Machine 2000 Deluxe Model and read what I'm saying... If Tannehill is throwing it late by fractions of seconds, that is less a problem than Wallace being a ***** and not fighting for the ball. Tannehill's passes may not be good enough deep to get the go ahead score, BUT THEY ARE CATCHABLE. Wallace not fighting for the ball is more egregious than Tannehill being off by a half second, because at least with a "slower" pass its catchable. If Wallace would try, he may not get the 50 yrd TD but he might actually catch a 30 yrd strike or draw a PI, but no instead of wanting the $60 million vet WR to act like he wants the effing ball, you'd rather **** all over a 2nd year QB who is carrying the offense on his back all over half a second. Its not like the guy has a lot of games at QB or anything, but no, eff him he needs to be better on his 30 yrd + throws while Wallace is being a *****. Are they both problems? Sure. A cold and cancer are also both problems, they aren't equal though.
Mike Walalce as the most productive vertical receiver? Maybe 2nd. Desean Jackson has dibs on that this year. Also depends whether you consider Demaryious Thomas a vertical WR.
I agree with Todd here. Did we overpay for Wallace? Ya. Is that his fault though? We didn't pay Mike Wallace to go up and get balls. We paid him to stretch the field vertically and run by guys. Tannehill needs to start making the throws. I think his footwork and use of his legs on these have been a real issue too.
The deep passes that are missed are when Wallace is running 55 - 60 yards downfield. That's at the edge of any QB's range (with any sort of accuracy). If the pass is thrown sooner, Wallace would be closer. When Clay or Hartline runs the same pattern, they're closer b/c they're slower and the completion percentage is higher.
It's still a timing thing. IMO the play actions are taking too long. We rarely run the quick playaction in those examples or the really fast developing play with Stafford. We tend to run those slower playaction where it looks like a stretch first, by the time that's done, Wallace is too deep.
The problem is with both of them, but Wallace is the more experienced and accomplished guy. We should expect more from him. Before this season, our sophomore QB had never thrown to a guy with Wallace's speed, or a receiver who apparently needs such a perfectly placed ball. Wallace on the other hand, just isn't going to make a play for a ball that isn't two feet in front of him. They are hurting each other with the misses, and the team. I still think after this season, and the next offseason together, they should have this worked out come next year. That said, Wallace losing this one really hurt... Tannehill made a gutsy play and took a hellacious hit to place it where only he could get it at 67 yards down field. Wallace has to make that catch. It was in his hands.
That's a fabrication, he's fast but he runs a 40 in about 4.3 and that's straight line speed. So even with ball in the air him being 60 yards down the field represents about the slowest developing play you can imagine. Philbin said it best, Ryan just needs to let it rip. Of Todd's examples most of the plays are in the 7 second range wich is nearly the same as a lot of the under throws. I don't expect Tanny to be Aaron Rodgers in his second year, they certainly aren't easy throws. What is RIDICULOUS is the popular scapegoat is Wallace....I'll say it again, the guy is doing exactly what he always has...put himself in position to produce game changing plays. His contract and people's overall distain for him have blinded the facts that he is every bit the playmaker we knew he was. This issue will be remedied if you ask me, two years together and another year under his belt and Ryan will make those throws and the scoreboard is going to light up. But until then we must not be afraid to call a spade a spade in regards to our young stud QB.
I see your point but let's be realistic here. Saying Mike Wallace should go up over defenders and catch the deep balls is like saying Lamar Miller should bulldoze through the line when there's no hole or that Hartline should juke defenders and rack up tons of YAC when he makes a reception. Personally I put the onus for the missed deep balls on RT because he's the one with the skill set to fix the problem, by throwing the ball earlier and or farther down field. Whether he makes 6, 60 or 600 million Wallace is never going to be a 50/50 ball guy.
Isn't it like saying Miller shouldn't try to lower his shoulder or Hartline shouldn't try to get yards after the catch? Because more often than not Wallace really hasn't tried , at least tried to the level he should or should be expected imo.
No, it's your agenda to support your position which is Wallace is underperforming. Huge difference. Hence you say Pitt decided to let him walk, when in fact they offered Wallace a contract. And he rejected it. They got pissed, and offered Brown a lesser contract (5/40 instead of 5/50 as reported) two years before Brown contract was up. Does that sound like a Steeler move? Give a guy a huge contract two years before their contract is up? The Steelers were scorned and they were pissed about it. But the fact remains, they offered Wallace money first. After a holdout. This doesn't fit the narrative of they let Wallace walk.
There has been several posters who said Pittsburgh let Wallace walk, as an argument against Miami signing him. You know, the one that goes something like, "well if he was any good, why did Pittsburgh not try to resign him?????" Pittsburgh made a very generous offer a year earlier, but Wallace turned it down. They then signed Brown to a big long term contract instead. But, they tried first to sign Wallace. Some folks seem to like to forget that little nugget. If you're not one of them, then never mind.
\No, that is not a valid analogy. You expect ALL receivers to make a play for the ball no matter if they are speedsters or possession guys. Wallace is the ONLY receiver, I've ever heard anyone argue that its ok to essentially alligator arm the deep ball. This is seriously some bizarro world stuff.
I still do not understand why this argument continues. There are three outcomes from these deep passes, an underthrow, a hit in stride, and an overthrow. Of these, the underthrow is the easiest pass, the hit in stride is the hardest pass, and the overthrow is the worst pass. From watching the NFL, I'd say on average QBs are underthrowing around 50% of deep passes (45+yards), hitting in stride around 30% and overthrowing around 20%. Right now Tannehill is obviously throwing these passes at a higher underthrow rate than 50% (for whatever reason you want to argue, skill, timing, chemistry, mentally, etc etc), and I don't think anyone here is or has argued otherwise. Wallace and everyone would absolutely love if a larger percentage of these passes were of the hit in stride variety, but right now it isn't happening. Right now all he is getting are majority underthrown. So what is he doing about this, not much at all. Even with the passes being underthrown he still should be coming down with a much larger portion of them. Right now Wallace is a receiver who you can only depend to catch the in stride deep ball, or none at all. This is a problem. It is a problem because even if Tannehill improves to where he is league average or even beyond at hitting the deep pass in stride, the majority of those passes are still going to be of the underthrown variety, and Wallace is simply not catching those consistently. No one is saying he should be catching 100% of these throws, but he should definitely be fighting for 100% of them.
The DB made a great play on those throws to Wallace and we're not expecting Tanne to hit Wallace in stride on every throw, but one, at least, somewhere on target, would be nice. I never expected Wallace to be able to jump up and reach his hands over a defender to snag a ball out of his hands. The defender made a great play. He's not a go-up- and-get-it type receiver, but I never expected him to be. I do however expect him to be a guy who can get open deep and that's what he's done. We haven't been able to capitalize and exploit that strength.
On the issue of Tannehill's deep accuracy, one has to realize that deep passes are hard to complete (probably around 35% is the league average) and we are talking about very small sample sizes. Tannehill has attempted only 26 to Wallace this year. That's a fair number relative to most, but from a statistical standpoint it is a very small sample. One should never judge a hitter in baseball on his first 26 at bats of the season or a basketball player on his first 26 three-pointers. It just isn't a truly representative sample size. 3 pt shots in basketball are a pretty good comparison because they are made at roughly the same rate that deep passes are completed. But if one were to draw conclusions based on small sample sizes (even ones twice as big as 26 attempts), one would draw the following nonsensical conclusions: 1. Marco Bellinelli (.566) is far better 3 pt shooter than Ray Allen (.389). 2. Andre Iguodala, a career.333 3pt shooter, is suddenly one of the best in the NBA (.479). 3. Ben Gordon, a career .403 from 3, is now one of the worst shooters in the NBA (.143). 4. Andre Miller, a career .216 from 3 is now one of the league's best (.571). Obviously, none of these are even close to being true, but with small sample sizes (in some cases much bigger than Tannehill's 26 deep throws to Wallace), they appear to be true.
That's like saying that Lamar Miller has to improve as a blocker- important, but not really the central issue. Wallace's main job, and the main reason why he's paid so much money, is to get open deep and stretch defenses. This just isn't a Alshon Jeffrey type receiver, he'll probably never be all that great at fighting for jump balls. That being said, I haven't seen anyone here write that it wouldn't be better for Wallace to be more aggressive in fighting for underthrown passes. Regardless, the main issue is Tannehill's inability to throw quality deep passes to Wallace- it's so bad that short, underthrown passes aren't the exception, they're the rule. Big problem. Also, you have to differentiate in the underthrown/in stride/overthrown classifications. A little underthrown is sometimes not all that bad, badly underthrown is a different story- that's when Wallace ends up stopping, waiting, back pedaling, all of that. Those kinds of throws are pretty much wasting Wallace's primarily ability and functions- getting open deep and making plays. Overthrows are few and far between, and given Wallace's speed I'd gladly risk that being the result, only if Tannehill would release the ball sooner and take advantage of Wallace's ability to get open deep. And btw in stride doesn't mean that is has to be a perfect pass, it's indicative of a well thrown ball. I'm not addressing that to you personally, I've seen some posts alluding to others as demanding that RT throw perfect passes to Wallace, which is far from correct. I have to disagree with your statement here: "Right now Wallace is a receiver who you can only depend to catch the in stride deep ball, or none at all." Look again here at 1:02, that's just no tthe case: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0t44xgKLse4 Also, his body of work at Pitt indicates far more than what you suggest, plays like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVMp_1ZtlOA Or this game winning play where he works the sideline like Tannehill: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6vaR0nobrU No matter how you cut it, the main issue, the central issue as to deep passes from RT to Wallace not connecting is passes that are short and late, bottom line. Almost 800 posts in this thread and a lot arguing against something that is so self evident, that's surprising to me.
Deep pass arguments aside, I don't understand why we aren't using him more like this: [video=youtube;9m1nV6xcXyQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9m1nV6xcXyQ[/video]
It is a central issue because even if Tannehill starts hitting more passes in stride, the majority of them are still going to be underthrown. The majority of passes going 45+ yards are underthrown, this is a fact, and all the youtube highlights you post won't change this fact. Tannehill needs to start hitting more passes in stride for Wallace, this is non arguable. However, as long as Wallace does not fight for divided balls and start hauling in some less than ideal passes, he's going to continue to be inefficient and continue to leave a lot of plays on the field. The fact that you'd rather want overthrows than underthrows speaks volumes as to why this argument continues. Overthrows are simply the worse of these passes because an overthrow simply means zero chance at a positive result. Don't post me a video where Wallace makes a contested catch, because that has been just about the only time he has done so as a Dolphin. Notice I said "Wallace is a receiver who you can only depend" keyword being depend. For that catch, there have been 4-5 catchable balls he has made poor or no attempt to catch.
Being slightly underthrown is better than slightly overthrown. You can't go faster if you're going max speed, but you can slow down a little. Tannehill needs to figure out the timing so his passes are only slightly underthrown and not flat out underthrown. Wallace isn't a fighter. Wallace is no Marvin Harrison, but Harrison was also not a fighter. I've seen him dive when faced with a defender in the middle rather than get hit. Marvin was a sick route runner with great hands, but he's not muscling a Cromartie for the ball like a Steve Smith would. Different strokes. Wallace's best attribute is speed. If he's even with a defender, Tannehill has to trust he's going to get past that defender.
It's hard to take your post seriously after this first sentence: "It is a central issue because even if Tannehill starts hitting more passes in stride, the majority of them are still going to be underthrown." The passes don't have to be so long, that's a huge part of the problem- Tannehill is waiting too long to throw them. And perhaps you should read more carefully and try to grasp what I'm saying: "Overthrows are few and far between, and given Wallace's speed I'd gladly risk that being the result, only if Tannehill would release the ball sooner and take advantage of Wallace's ability to get open deep." Try it again and see if you can get it this time- it's not easy to overthrow Wallace. The rest of your post is just more of the miscasting of Wallace in a role that he's not particularly good at, fighting for jump balls on crap throws. It isn't a question of "less than ideal" deep passes, is a question of particularly bad deep passes that are short and late thrown, pretty much snuffing out the deep passing game from the get go. Wallace is supposed to be using his speed to get open deep, catch balls and outrace DBs to the endzone. What he's not supposed to do is turn into Charles Barkley positioning himself for a rebound. That's not his skill set. It would be nice if he were better than that, but again that's not the central point. We might as well have Jeff Fuller at WR instead of Wallace if that were the case- it ain't. Tannehill simply has to make better, quicker deep throws- maybe one day you'll actually understand that, up to you.
If Wallace isn't good at fighting for the ball and can only do one thing on the field, then why is he getting $60 million? It's classic overpaying for a skill you can get for a lot less money. He's getting $60 million when he should have gotten no more than $10 million over 3 years at best.
I'm not surprised you don't understand. You're so entrenched in your argument, you are incapable of seeing things with different perspectives. I for one, am rational enough to see the issues from both sides.
Another issue at play here is people seriously undervaluing the rarity of these deep passes in stride. They are rare passes people. People asking for Tannehill to hit Wallace in stride with a deep pass once per game, let alone multiple times per game are seriously deluding themselves. If this was the case, then Wallace would have had multiple 20 touchdown seasons with Pittsburgh, because Big Ben would have been able to hit him at least once per game, resulting in 16 touchdown via these passes alone. It isn't realistic. Wallace needs to catch the underthrown passes as well. As long as he does not do this, he'll be a productive receiver, but he'll also be an inefficient and unreliable one, which was a case in Pittsburgh too.
Whatever dude. "Less than ideal passes" doesn't begin to describe what Tannehill is serving to Wallace as per deep balls. That is the issue, not the ACKNOWLEDGED shortcomings of Wallace as to fighting for these crappy, underthrown deep balls. Again, even Tannehill himself and his coaches acknowledge this. That is the core, central issue, not Wallace trying to clean up Tannehill's mess, ans he did in the Carolina touchdown catch. What makes that catch particularly relevant is that it's the only successful deep ball TD to Wallace this year that I can recall, I've lost count as to the Tannehill misfires/late/short passes when he's tried to go deep to Wallace.
Write a letter to Jeff Ireland, because his cost is not an issue relevant to the argument. He's getting open....he needs thrown the ball. Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk
That's the point though, no one is or has ever argued that the passes don't need improvement. The passes need to be better. Period. Full stop. Whether it is skill, mechanics, timing, play design, chemistry, mentality, etc etc, it is something that needs to be worked out. However, even with all that, there is an issue with Wallace as well. It is there, and it is independent of the other issue.
...and more importantly, Wallace's issue of being a ***** when it comes to fighting for the ball is stopping completions from happening. Most of these "notoriously awful under throws" by Tannehill are still effing catchable balls. Further more, its not even clear what the culprit is behind Tannehill's throws.....is it the play, the pass, the timing, the route, the drops, etc.? Much more complicated to diagnose and fix. The issue on Wallace's end? Easy, he's being a ***** and he needs to play the ball. Diagnosed and solution given, simple. Solve that ****, then we'll worry about Tannehill's "issue".
This. And for me most of that frustration is taken out on Wallace. Wallace shouldn't be chastised because he's making $60 million and doesn't go up and fight for the ball like Larry Fitzgerald. Jeff Ireland should be chastised for using money improperly. If he wanted that kind of ability, he could easily just go and sign Ted Ginn. So, the argument that Mike Wallace should be doing more is a little misguided. He's doing exactly what he was brought in to do. He stretches the field, he takes safety help, and he creates big plays. There are a ton of those plays left on the field. While, I would absolutely love to see more from him, I didn't expect that. I think fans did because he was paid that much. In my mind, that blame should be directed at Ireland, not Mike Wallace.
Catchable by who though? Take away the Top 30 receivers and name me players that come back and make those catches. Brian Hartline doesn't. Wes Welker doesn't. DeSean Jackson doesn't. Those types of plays being made are typically reserved for top end receivers. Now, I totally agree that we paid Mike Wallace top 5-10 WR money. However, he isn't that player, nor was he ever going to be. Ireland should be at fault for paying him that contract. Mike Wallace was brought in to do exactly what he has done. He's created big plays. He's been at fault at times, like Tannehill. He's done what he's always done. Why are we expecting him to be more? Because we have a GM that blew the doors down by giving him that contract.
I don't think it's about hitting him in stride, I think it's about throwing it out there where he can adjust moving forward, literally moving forward..if he throws it out there the worst thing that can happen is an overthrow, noone is outrunning Wallace for the ball.. What Ryan can do is find his platform quicker than he is, if he's got to shave off a few tenths in his fakes then so be it, just get to that platform ASAP and throw that sucker baby, he has the talent to do that.
No one's asking him to become Megatron and start hauling in jump balls in double and triple coverage. All people want for him is effort in 100% of these balls, and to catch a few of them. That's not an unreasonable request to ask of him.
I think the problem might be that Ryan is throwing when Wallace gets open rather than anticipating and throwing him open. It works with other guys, but with Wallace he is further down the field quicker. That is my conclusion.
Sorry, but when you pay a guy $60 million, he should do more than Wallace does, period. Mike Wallace wasn't paid $60 million to be a decoy in this offense. He was paid $60 million because our GM foolishly thought he was the best receiver on the market and overpaid to get him. Regardless of that, when you get paid $60 million, you are expected to do more than Wallace is doing.
