Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Other NFL' started by bbqpitlover, Oct 16, 2019.
Then how did he manage to have a regular season passer rating 1.03 z-scores higher than Mahomes?
Strength of schedule? I dunno, good question.... But a I know **** have sucked for a whole decade of developing WRs..
I mean when Derrick Mason is the best WR you've ever had in your franchise that just shows you something. **** and the Patriots suck at developing WRs.
Lets pray with Vrabel and A.J. Brown things change...
Welcome to the position a good portion of the Dolphins’ fanbase took in 2012-2013, when many people thought Tannehill was only “weapons” away from being great. Of course now he’s leading the league in passer rating and he still needs weapons.
You really don't understand the game at all do you? Just have your head buried in little numbers and think that qualifies to discuss this sport. Burn the numbers and spend a few years watching the game. Maybe you'll be taken seriously
Also to answer the question, Mahomes was hurt for a lot of the season.
The problem is that reliance on TO's is not sustainable in any way and very prone to negative regression. The fact they did so well with TO's against the prior two teams has no bearing on the upcoming game, and could as easily mean they are about to crash back to earth - the Steelers this year are a good example. They went through a great stretch of 4-5 games getting multiple TOs including touchdowns (Minkah with several). Once that well dried up though, they began losing key games, went 0-3 after being in the wild card driver's seat and couldn't beat anyone better than the Cardinals.
The Titans also have a ludicrous red zone TD percentage right now. Obviously a good OL and Henry are playing a huge role, and THill has been used effectively ... but other teams with good OL and RB combos didn't even come remotely close, indicating they are likely due for a negative regression.
The question isn't IF they will fall back, but WHEN. If they can sustain good TO ratio, points off TO and redzone percentage for 2 more games they could certainly win the whole shebang. If any of those things crashes back to the norm though, they are done.
Well in all fairness, Tannehill didn't start until week 7...so there would also be an absence of season long stats for him as well
It wasn't my intent to imply that the Titans relied on turnovers. Only to point out that they took advantage of them
I don't think they pay nearly as much attention to Mahomes run threat. I'm not sure how much you can take from the Baltimore game. I'd look more at what they did vs NE. Only KC has way better skill players across the board.
I get what you're saying, but creating turnovers is a skill not just 100% pure luck.
You shouldn't rely on them, but the reality is youre trying to win that battle every week.
Minimizing and capitalizing on mistakes I would say is one of the most important things in football whether it's a turnover or another type of mistake.
How many times have you seen our teams stop an opponent on third down, get a penalty, extend the drive and be scored on?
What you do with those tiny miscues can win or cost you a game any week and extends to turnovers.
It is a skill, but in the NFL many players have that skill. Over enough time, teams don't stray far from the averages, so a team riding well above it will inevitably come back to earth. It happens in short time frames (as with Pitt) or longer (see Bears defense last year vs. this year). It's something you want to capitalize on sure, but if that is your main strategy you will fail.
I know, but as I noted, they are doing that at a likely unsustainable rate overall with their insane red zone TD percentage. At some point, that will regress. The question is if it will come against KC, in the Super Bowl, or sometime next year. Obviously a Titans fan is rooting for the latter.
Hats off to them for doing what they have done, it's incredible. But the further the distance from the middle and the longer it goes, the more likely that the streak ends. The coaches meanwhile have to gameplan normally without relying on such an absurd stat.
The question isn't why he's engaging in a low-volume game. It's what happens when he doesn't.
This is why apparently no one here has faith he can keep pace with Mahomes this weekend.
You could say that in response to any post anyone made that featured numbers, and every time your response would be meaningless.
I'm really curious about where on the autism spectrum he falls. I'm not saying that to be funny or mean or disrespectful. He is blocked and I have no doubt who you are responding to.
Those are all good points, but you're focusing on random variables there, rather than systematic ones. The systematic ones that are far more troubling for the Titans' outlook are that 1) they don't have the caliber of pass defense that can diminish the performance of the league's best QBs (like Mahomes), and 2) they themselves don't have a quarterback who can outperform an opposing quarterback who is one of the league's best and is playing at his customary level, in a high-volume passing game between them.
That's a simple passer rating differential equation that doesn't augur in their favor, regardless of turnovers, and again it's why nobody here appears to have any faith in their chances, regardless of Tannehill's regular season passer rating. Tannehill's regular season passer rating has essentially been rendered meaningless by a common situation encountered by almost every team in the playoffs -- facing one of the league's best QBs, without a pass defense that can diminish his performance.
Statements like this one truly demonstrate lack of knowledge.
Tannehill doesn't have to keep pace with Mahomes
Mahomes doesn't have to keep pace with Tannehill
It's Mahomes and the Chiefs' offense versus the Titans' defense
It's Tannehill and the Titans' offense versus the Chiefs' defense
All of this dumb talk of one quarterback versus another quarterback is just that...***DUMB*** Nothing more than sensationalism geared to rile up emotions and irrational thought.
(MODS, please note I didn't call any PERSON dumb)
All of that fits nicely under the umbrella of passer rating differential and its ability to predict which team wins individual games in the NFL.
If you don't have a pass defense that can shut down the best opposing QBs in the league (and the Titans don't), then you'd better have one of the best QBs in the league yourself (and the Titans don't).
The only lack of knowledge being demonstrated is yours, with regard to how the game functions.
Please note the following
You can quote numbers, z-scores, passer rating, high volume, low volume, elite, average...all you want but the bottom line is, the Chiefs were defeated...this season...by the Titans...with Mahomes under center for the Chiefs...with Tannehill under center for the Titans.
They are NOT invulnerable
Tennessee Titans 35
Kansas City Chiefs 32
That is why when teams talk about the turnover battle it starts with what you can 100% control, your own handling of the ball.
I think a certain # of turnovers is something that will certainly go up and down, but I'd be shocked if the top teams didnt win the turnover battle more than lose it.
Nobody said the Chiefs were invincible. In the game you referenced, Derrick Henry's performance (23 carries for 188 yards) enabled Tannehill to play a low-volume passing game (19 pass attempts), and so the passer rating differential was 133.9 to 119.2 in favor of Tannehill. Certainly if that happens again this weekend the Titans can succeed.
But if it doesn't, then Tannehill will be forced to play a high-volume passing game, and his performance historically has plummeted under those conditions, while Mahomes's has not. Thus under those conditions the passer rating differential between them isn't likely to favor Tannehill, and again passer rating differential is a strong predictor of winning in individual NFL games.
Do you put any validity into the idea it might have taken Tannehill longer to develop given he spent a lot of his college career at WR?
I'm not saying it took up until now, but maybe it was 2016 when he really showed up as QB ready in most aspects to lead the team before his injuries.
After the injuries there was a definite difference in the way he played the game from 2016 and it wasnt all talent related.
It's entirely possible, but the point is moot given that he hasn't developed past the average level in the league (in effect), and he's now in command of at least an average QB's salary. As I've said before, that puts a team in a position in which it's almost impossible to win a Super Bowl.
Like I've said, ai truly believe all these years of Brady, combined to a lesser degree with Manning, Brees and Rodgers has skewed our perception of what is generally possible or impossible.
Those guys are/were on an entirely different planet during the time span we are talking about.
I think you're going to soon find that the numbers we think are necessary to win now wont reflect what they will be in the future.
The question isnt necessarily if Tannehill is the best thing since sliced bread, its does his brand of bread compare favorable to the others currently in the league.
Minus a few guys on the way out I'd generally say it does.
He's most definitely not an average QB. He's shown that.
I have no doubt that you will ignore this post, liked you do with all my posts.
Would that fall under the category of teams/players "coming back to the mean"? It's a small sample size, but it states that the average scoring production of a team that scores 50 in the playoffs is 15 the following week. If that holds then Tenn wouldn't have to do much to outscore KC. IMO it would take a combination of being opportunistic on defense (third down stops, TOs, etc.), taking advantage of those opportunities by scoring, and keeping the ball away from KC's offense (clutch passing and play-making). While KC is rightfully favored, I see all of those as things that Tenn has been successful at doing all year. I honestly wouldn't be surprised with a win by either team.
Outta curiousity, what does Tammy have to do to get your full trust that he is indeed a franchise QB?
Edit: Another curious question: whos your top 10 QB in the league right now?
I second the second question just out of curiousity. I'd also be interested in how many of the top ten hed consider Superbowl capable.
He can't answer that honestly without saying, "being the top elite QB in history," because whatever milestones and levels of play Tannehill ascends to, there will be a bevy of new stats and reasons why he still sucks.
He's checking the stats right now to make his opinion for him. It's taking a little longer for the algorithm to spit out his opinion.
That'll be one of my offseason projects, because what these playoffs have taught me is that it's not only how well a QB can play in general, but how well he can play in high-volume passing games.
We just saw how a high-volume passing game -- against an average pass defense, mind you (Tennessee's) -- absolutely ruined the performance of the likely league MVP at quarterback. It's going to be rare that a QB can progress through the playoffs and win a Super Bowl without playing such a game.
So the question becomes, who are the league's best quarterbacks in general, and who among them shows a pattern of performance that doesn't plummet in high-volume games? Just guessing at this point (without doing the quantitative research), I'd say that's Brees, Mahomes, Wilson, and Rodgers. If Brady's 2019 season was an aberration as opposed to an initial indication of his permanent decline, then we can include him in that group, but I don't think we know yet. Same goes for Roethlisberger.
I just took a look at Kirk Cousins out of curiosity, and when he has a below-average number of pass attempts in games, his average passer rating is 105.9. When his number of pass attempts has been above-average, his average passer rating is 89.9. Compare that to Mahomes, for example, for whom those figures are 111.7 and 104.9.
Now, that's not to say a lesser QB can't win a Super Bowl, but history has shown us that he needs to be on his rookie contract for that to have any decent likelihood of occurring.
Honestly I'd like to see Tannehill repeat his performance next year before crowning him with the ever-vague "elite" title and granting a solid top 10 status.
We have seen marginal QB's explode for a great season and a good playoff run and then crash back to earth before. Joe Flacco is the immediate potential comparison. He was legit really damn good during the 2012 Ravens season and playoffs. It earned him that huge contract, and then he went back to being marginal to actually bad and sank the ravens for the rest of the decade with an albatross contract.
That's not to say I personally would consider that the most likely scenario, but consistency is important. He's had a GREAT year and nobody can really honestly deny or take it away. Will it continue? We will see - personally I would enjoy it as the Texans need competition and maybe another team to drop their 2021 draft pick.
Is "an aberration" code word for just getting old?
The fact that seeking objective information in forming an opinion is somehow a negative in your world speaks volumes.
And the reason that's important, as I've said, is because there are QBs who can perform at elevated levels given sufficient surrounding talent, though the issue becomes whether that talent can be sustained. If it can't, then obviously the quarterback stands to come back down to earth when that talent is gone for whatever reason (free agency, salary cap cuts, retirement, physical/talent decline, injuries, trades, etc).
Contrast that with the QBs in the league who have more individual ability and thus aren't as dependent on surrounding talent, and their performances vary from year to year at a higher level than those of the aforementioned QBs. This is precisely why you need more time to determine which of those groups of QBs any single QB belongs to. You can't determine the level at which year-to-year variation in performance occurs in only one year.
The elite 5 is no more. BRADY, RODGERS, BREES, ROETHLISBERGER, RIVERS are no longer elite. They are all still good.more.or less but father time had taken it's toll. Really there is only one QB who flirts with being elite and that's Mahomes
As far as top ten, when you get rid of the elite 5, Tannehill is definitely in the top ten.
The fact that you NEED those stats to tell you that Mahomes, Rogers, Brees and Wilson are amongst the best in the NFL speaks volumes at how bad you are at watching football.
Joe Flacco had a playoff run only. He was not that good in the regular season in 2012. His passer rating in the regular season was 87.7. It was 117.2 in the playoffs. His YPA was 9.0 in the playoffs. Basically he did for 4 games what Tannehill did for 10.
This is how I rank the QBs. The lines represent clear gaps (IMO). Any order within the lines is fine. That puts Tannehill anywhere from 4th to 7th. I admit that I am biased in favor of accurate passers over runners.