I don't disagree that Mike Sherman does not have a good feel for playcalling and the flow of the game, but to say that we simply haven't using him properly is BS. The guy is not a good route runner at all. You can't use him on the same routes that you use Brandon Gibson and Brian Hartline on. As far as throwing more deep shots per game, that's like shooting long two point shots in basketball. It's the least efficient pass that you can make, and then when you consider that Mike is not very efficient at catching these passes, you can see a reason for not throwing 6 or 7 shots a game. Heck, he's been targted on 24 already. He was targeted on 31 last year.
It's certainly one of the main reasons. and that is absolutely undebatable. He is throwing 7-8 times more per game and it is easier to throw more TDs when you throw more. Especially when you throw more in the red zone, which he is also doing. And, of course, it is easier to get more passing yards when you throw more. And I think he has improved as one would expect from one's rookie year to 2nd year. Remember, Tannehill had only 2 TDs in his first 5 games last year as a rookie with less than 2 yards of starting experience in college on a team with a new HC/OC, etc. Over the next 10 games (he got hurt so early in the 2nd Jets game last year), he had 10 TDs. This year he has 17 in 12 games. There's some improvement there, but not a huge amount. He went from a TD% of 3.2 over those last 10 games last year to 3.8% this year.
Any improvements in the passing game is because of Ryan Tannehill, not the receivers. Ryan's lowest QB Rating is when he throws to Wallace. He has a 63.3 QBR throwing to Wallace. No other receiver is below 85.4.
I don't think anyone is sayign the passing game hasn't improved. Whether it has "greatly" improved is pretty debatable -- Tannehill's rating is still in the low 80s. And no, Wallace does not have as many TDs as the whole "receiving group" last year. The receiving group includes TEs and RBs too. There's be no reason to applaud an increase in TDs to WRs if it came with an equivalent reduction in TDs to TEs and RBs. A TD is a TD. Counts for 6 points no matter who catches it.
All true, for me the real comparison would be long plays, say 25 yds or more, when Wallace was in the game, that would be a more accurate view of his impact on the offense This yr, in the passing game it seems like we are getting longer plays, not neccessarily Td's Also think it interesting that in the same number of games, THill has produced a lot more this season compared to last season, w/4 games to go
This crap about he can't run more routes is a joke. How many does he need to run for people to think he can run more? How many drag routes have you seen? Slants? Post? Corner?Double moves? Sure a function of the oline sucking hurts this but come on. Just because he's fast doesn't mean you run him only deep. Football is chess which I know you know better than most. Too make some one think about the long ball is a huge thing for running combination routes later in the game. If you run Wallace deep early and actually throw it when he runs deep later the safety has to respect that play in which you have a guy like Clay run a corner route underneath Wallace, no saefty no corner, easy. Basketball and football are not the same but you do give guys fadeaways so later you can fake it and take the baseline. Making people thinking about soemthing even for a split second is all you need. I'm not saying playing early Madden where you just keep throwing it deep nor just nine routes. have him run a post-corner get the corner changing direction and opening his hips and maybe turning the wrong way on the turn because he's reacting faster than he wants too. Many ways we can throw long and it not be a 60 yard 9 route. If you don't beleive he's helped the offense on some plays, just go watch some of our wheel route combos where Wallace runs a post and takes the corner and the safety with him. Miller dropped two that should have gone to the house because there was no one left.
It's not true that deep passes are the least efficient passes. The QBs that do it well get 15-20 ypa on deep passes, which is well beyond what anyone gets on short passes. And TD% are much higher on deep passes than short passes too.
Which means..nothing. Wallace as you pointed out has been targeted roughly the same number of times deep by THill as he was by Ben R and other Qb's last season with slightly better success, the difference is THill is getting a pass on his poor throws to Wallace and Wallace is taking the hit for them. The TB hail mary Int, the next to last play v Carolina, and missing Wallace 3-4 times deep, those reflect on QBR, which is why the NFL is not naturally designed to be a stats based league as the game has context. In an nutshell, Sabremetrics, or that approach, does not fit how the league works out on the field Real key in all of this is continuing to target Wallace deep down the field.
But we are not getting more of those long passes this year, at least not at a higher percentage. Wallace has been in on 92.3% of our passing snaps this year, so he's been in on almost all of them. Last year Tannehill threw for 671 yards on deep (20+ yards past the LOS) passes (20 completions) as compared to 450 (12 completions) this year.
Every sport has context. The people who do "Sabremetrics" well account for that stuff. For example, some fo the PFF metrics exclude throw aways, spikes, hail mary's etc. The new stats are certainly no worse than the old. There's context to rushing yards, ypc, receptions, etc. too. But stats do show objectively the result of what happened on the field. How you use/misuse that information is up to the individual.
I figured, but that still begs the question of why should we, or anyone, care if the TD pass is caught by a WR or by a TE?
Have you actually watched his attempts to run anything other than a straight go or a crossing route? The guy doesn't even come off the line properly. In this offense, the routes have to be run to precision. If the in breaking route is designed to be run at 12 yards, it has to be run at 12 yards every time. Not 10 on some routes, 14 on others. 12 on every route. Otherwise, the timing of the play is thrown off. Mike Wallace rounds his routes off when he has to make sharp cuts or breaks. When Joe Philbin described Clyde Gates as a neophyte route runner, that is a description that can be used on Mike Wallace's routes. He's a neophyte as a route runner. One of the worst route runners in the NFL.
Ah, Fineas, here is another area where a stats based approach does not work THill would hit DBess and Hartline on comebacks and outs, that is one of the reasons why RAC and YAC was so miniscule last season, the route was not designed to keep the Wr going down the field, this is what Wallace offers and THill has missed often enough hitting that route to make an effect on the numbers Add in, "20 yds in the air past the los" also does not reflect his impact, as hitting underneath stuff and having the receiver do the work COULD be an effect of Wallace running off the coverage deep down the field I'm thinking of Thigpen v NOLA and Clay v SD W/o context, bulk stats are only good to show trends, they do not tell the entire story
Oh yeah...Earl Thomas, the Pro Bowl safety...seems like someone here went on and on about his being only a nickel back in the NFL. To the same great lengths someone is currently dissing on Wallace. Who could that have been? Cannot seem to remember now...
Stats tell the entire story. If you pay attention to stats, you would have known that Mike Wallace gets most of his RAC yards on shallow crosses to the left. In all other areas, his RAC yards are very limted. If we had paid attention to the stats, he would not be a Miami Dolphin today.
....and he's one of the worst run defending safeties in the league with a 1.7% run stop percentage, which is what I said he would be before entering the league.
And you know what we are all wrong about a player or a topic from time to time.... But when someone insist on speaking so matter-of-factly it's kind of funny to watch a blow up in their face. Case in point this thread Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk
Something struck me when I watched Wallace' non-reaction to the Cromartie interception and it's something I previously wondered in relation to his deep ball tracking skills. I wonder if Wallace has a clinical visual processing deficiency. It would seem to explain these concerns because I am remiss to believe that an NFL player is just so lazy that he won't make a play to save an interception for his QB.
Nobody is claiming stats tell the whole story. But we really haven't had a big YAC improvement this year. It has improved by less than 0.2 yards per attempt. Take away either the Thigpen or Clay plays you cite, neither of which were attributable to Wallace's presence in any meaningful way IMO, and YAC is probably down this year. I'm not even sure Wallace was on the field for the Clay TD against SD -- if he was he was on the other side of the field. Wallace did go downfield on the Thigpen play against NO but any WR runnign that same route would have accomplished the same thing -- the CB is going to follow the WR no matter who it is. In truth, a bigger WR who was a better blocker than Wallace may well have enabled that play to be a TD.
I kind of believe it's a direct reflection of Ryan Tannehill's growing development. Not to spite Mike Wallace, as he has been increasingly important in the offense, it just seems that maybe perhaps they are getting on the same page and the offense is starting to work. Credit also goes to the coaching staff and Tannehill also. Offense is still growing and I can kind of start to see bright spots under this decade-long (or longer) black cloud.
It wasn't limited to the WRs, it was about the whole passing game and all the pass catchers, including the TEs and RBs.
You're question is too vague. It's the nature of the TD that counts as well, not just the 6 points by a WR or TE. It's what the TYPE of TD reception shows, as to present and future performance. A long TD by a WR is most likely a sign of a viable deep threat, unless the DB fell down or something. What would you be more stoked over, a 3 yard pass to a wide open TD or a 95 yard TD to a streaking WR blowing by everyone on the way to the endzone? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=arKd8qnPB-I I know which one I'd be happier with.
Sure, the long ones are more exciting, but they are all 6 points. If you asked me to choose between 20 long TDs to WRs or 30 short ones to TEs and FBs, I'll take the 30. And if the 3 yd pass to a wide open TE was the game-winner and the 95-yard highlight reel play came in a 35-7 loss, I'd be much happier about the 3 yd TD.
Yes but you need hundreds of other short passes to get those short TDs. That's the big picture here. Chunk yardage = less changes for something bad to happen. A 90 yard TD from 1 play 3 feet from your own end zone. A short 3 yard TD throw most likely required 8-12 other perfectly executed plays, including passes and runs. A more consistent run game would help immensely with deep shots. 2 and 1? Take a shot why not. 1st and 10 when you have good runners and good pass catchers underneath, etc.
Lol you would make a terrible defensive backs coach. Its not necessarily the coverage calls that change so much as the way the calls are executed. In a two deep zone any safety to Wallace's side would be cognizant of his speed and get more depth in his drop to guard against the deep route. That opens the field up for other players. In a single high coverage the safety would probably be more concerned with Wallace than any one else, he'd have to get more depth than usual in order to be in a position to make a play on any deep route to Wallace, again giving more space to the other receivers on the field. Typically there is either a safety over Wallace with a corner in press or a soft corner with a safety buzzing underneath to guard the shorter routes. It doesn't happen that way all the time, teams take chances, as they do with all receivers, but for the most part you can see an uncommon level of respect for Wallace in terms of the way he is defended and in most cases it provides some level of relief to the other receivers.
Indeed. As KB points out every 2.3 seconds, Wallace isn't good with the timing routes. His releases are inconsistent and he doesn't run precise routes. But the biggest factor IMO is the overall design of the offense. It's a quick passing game, predominantly 3-5 step drops. By definition most of the vertical routes, take offs, posts, digs, post corners, corner posts, deep comebacks, etc are not an option and defenses know this. It makes it a lot easier to predict and defend against Wallace's strengths. Due to the 3-5 step game and the protection issues, most of MWs big play opportunities come on play action (requiring a credible run game) or off of the QB extending the play past it's natural end point (not a Tannehill strength). As those two things improve Wallace's production will increase.
I don't believe our receivers are particularly any good in that category, even Wallace, he doesn't have precise n.s.e,w compact explosiveness like his former teammate brown, its more graceful speed that needs the ball in the air.
this is true imo and I believe ryan needs to adjust any of his calls at the los where the corner is playing press against Wallace, these two have to have the freedom in the offense so ryan can learn to throw the ball quickly to the outside over the top of the corner about 25 yards from the los, the trust has to be there, andryan just has to throw it a couple times a game.
I don't see it as a stretch at all. If I were the DC and I just saw Wallace get behind the a good D on multiple occassions and the QB complete a couple of passes I would certainly consider playing my Ss deeper. In fact, I'd be an idiot if I didn't, particularly when Cromartie didn't seem fully healthy.
hehhehe...interesting right...the norm for an athlete like this is usually the opposite, but when you get a chance check out ole floopy feet...
100%, Can't say it any better than that. My biggest concern about Pitts D is their LBs vs our backs and TEs in pass pro. Lebeau is a master at getting 1 on 1 matchup for his LBs, Philbin prefers getting more guys into pass routes but this might be a good week to take a more conservative approach. If Tannehill has time to throw I don't think their secondary can hold up. I think they'll have Taylor shadow Wallace and beat him up off the LOS but that'll require safety help. They like to have Polamalu near the LOS, leaving Clark deep (over Wallace) and 1 on 1s for Hartline, Matthews, Clay, etc.
