Ryan Tannehill

"danmarino wrote:

https://forums.rotoworld.com/topic/586531-brady-vs-manning/page/68/?tab=comments#comment-9014759

I knew this guy was weird....lol

Dude, that's seriously one of the weirdest things I've ever seen. That's crazy.

"Vertical Limit wrote:

I find it strange the bashing the Houston Astros, players staff and front office are getting... yet for everything Brady and Belichick been up to, they still get treated like royalty, even among dolphin fans..

why does cheating matter more in baseball than football?

Right? Pete Rose is still banned, and he didn't even cheat. Brady and BB will go into the HoF first ballot.

"danmarino wrote:

https://forums.rotoworld.com/topic/586531-brady-vs-manning/page/68/?tab=comments#comment-9014759

I knew this guy was weird....lol

Wait a second- online that's plagiarism and copyright infringement; it's an actual crime to use someone else's written statement as your own. Any original text on the internet is highly protected from that exact sort of thing- to the tune of up to a $5,000 fine PER INSTANCE from the Department of Justice once a cease and desist attempt is made.

Cashvillesent, this is your public notice to cease and desist. Remove all plagiarized content from this/other sites immediately and cross your fingers that Dan or this site's owners don't pursue civil/criminal charges.

I was wondering about that...

It's time for this thread to die.

"cbrad wrote:

Yeah.. results are as expected (for reference, I'm just dividing INT's by pass attempts and not counting sacks as pass attempts):

Thanks very much for doing that.
When I did a similar look at the data using win% I got a much more pronounced slope. Although the win% data uses the point spread as a starting point, so it may have more data points of good teams -v- bad teams pushed into the extremes than points differential.

"Bumrush wrote:

It's time for this thread to die.

This thread is Dracula, you can’t kill it.

"Bumrush wrote:

It's time for this thread to die.

There is almost nothing to talk about until March

"Cashvillesent wrote:

Randy Moss for about 2 seasons, Gronk for about 7 (he missed about 2 seasons worth of games due to various injuries), Welker/Edelman if you want to count them as a HOF type I guess? Best RB Brady had was Kevin Faulk and he never even made a pro-bowl.

Meanwhile Manning had: Reggie Wayne, Marvin Harrison, Edgerrin James, Demaryius Thomas, and Emmanuel Sanders. Not even going to mention the TEs.

Is this a joke? Whenever Brady had comparable talent on offense he won MVP awards just like buddy boy Peyton lol.

Wayne and Edge arent HOF players without Manning. Hes basically responsible for two above average players being able to put up HOF numbers.

Also Emmanuel Sanders is worse than Welker so I'm not sure why hes on there.

"Bumrush wrote:

It's time for this thread to die.

Go away Boomer.

"Pauly wrote:

This thread is Dracula, you can’t kill it.

bbqpitlover didn't know what the future held starting this one. Good job Tannehill way to not just die.

"resnor wrote:

Go away Boomer.

Sure thing TT.

"Bumrush wrote:

Sure thing TT.

Lol

You know I'm just messing around right?

Saw something that had 4 years $125 mil $75 mil guaranteed as contract terms for tannehill

assuming titans don’t tag him

"Hoops wrote:

Saw something that had 4 years $125 mil $75 mil guaranteed as contract terms for tannehill

assuming titans don’t tag him

Damn you HOOPS!!! This thread had ALMOST DIED!!!

"Puka-head wrote:

Damn you HOOPS!!! This thread had ALMOST DIED!!!

I don’t ever want it to die. We had our franchise quarterback and we lost him, lost him due to poor decisions made at the top in choosing some Wunderkind to be our head coach.

When folks gripe and bellyache about our quarterback situation I want this thread to be a constant reminder.

"The_Dark_Knight wrote:

I don’t ever want it to die. We had our franchise quarterback and we lost him, lost him due to poor decisions made at the top in choosing some Wunderkind to be our head coach.

When folks gripe and bellyache about our quarterback situation I want this thread to be a constant reminder.

We messed up with Tannehill long before Gase.

"The_Dark_Knight wrote:

I don’t ever want it to die. We had our franchise quarterback and we lost him, lost him due to poor decisions made at the top in choosing some Wunderkind to be our head coach.

When folks gripe and bellyache about our quarterback situation I want this thread to be a constant reminder.

Are you going to come back for some humble pie when Tua leads us to the Super Bowl? Or will this continue until after Tannehill's Hall of Fame enshrinement?

You act like Tannehill wasn't given a shot. He was here for 7 years under a multitude of mostly incompetent coaching. He also had flaws that led the team to move on. I know you feel great pleasure in the utopian idea of Tannehill's perfection but that wasn't the case for long stretches of his tenure here.

He's exceeded his predicted output elsewhere and has proven to be a very good QB under ideal conditions, and for that we should admonish the previous incompetent coaching staffs. But to go on like we let Dan Marino slip through our fingers is a bit ridiculous.

I wouldn't call Tennessee "ideal conditions." I mean, Mariota wasn't successful in the same "ideal conditions." Henry wasn't playing like a man possessed prior to Tannehill taking the reigns. I mean, I agree with with much of what you wrote, Bum, but I strongly disagree with the idea that Tannehill needs an ideal situation.

"resnor wrote:

I wouldn't call Tennessee "ideal conditions." I mean, Mariota wasn't successful in the same "ideal conditions." Henry wasn't playing like a man possessed prior to Tannehill taking the reigns. I mean, I agree with with much of what you wrote, Bum, but I strongly disagree with the idea that Tannehill needs an ideal situation.

Ideal for Tannehill.
Good to great running game.
Above average blocking.
Time in the pocket to move around.
A coaching staff that understands what a balanced offense means,

That's ideal for Tannehill. The accuracy and ball velocity can shine under those conditions. Mariota is just a bad QB who is very inaccurate. Defenders could just stack the box because they knew Mariota couldn't get it done. Tannehill, on the other hand, could throw 60 yard bombs to perfection against 1 on 1 coverage.

"Bumrush wrote:

Ideal for Tannehill.
Good to great running game.
Above average blocking.
Time in the pocket to move around.
A coaching staff that understands what a balanced offense means,

That's ideal for Tannehill. The accuracy and ball velocity can shine under those conditions. Mariota is just a bad QB who is very inaccurate. Defenders could just stack the box because they knew Mariota couldn't get it done. Tannehill, on the other hand, could throw 60 yard bombs to perfection against 1 on 1 coverage.

Every QB has their own set if ideal conditions and all of their teams strive to come as close to those conditions as possible.

I'm not debating the fact that some guys won't succeed in any situation. I believe that is true. That said, very few will succeed in all conditions.

"Bumrush wrote:

Are you going to come back for some humble pie when Tua leads us to the Super Bowl? Or will this continue until after Tannehill's Hall of Fame enshrinement?

You act like Tannehill wasn't given a shot. He was here for 7 years under a multitude of mostly incompetent coaching. He also had flaws that led the team to move on. I know you feel great pleasure in the utopian idea of Tannehill's perfection but that wasn't the case for long stretches of his tenure here.

He's exceeded his predicted output elsewhere and has proven to be a very good QB under ideal conditions, and for that we should admonish the previous incompetent coaching staffs. But to go on like we let Dan Marino slip through our fingers is a bit ridiculous.

Only if you too are just as willing to have a piece of humble pie with your bold prediction.

You speak of Tannehill having a shot here in Miami and blew it. That’s such a shortsighted uneducated statement. Football players are nothing more than pieces on a chess board, executing the plays sent in by the coaching staff. Some players execute plays better than others but the bottom line is that’s all they are.

Tannehill executed what he was told to execute and did so well. What was poor wasn’t Tannehill’s play with the Dolphins, it was the plays that and overall offensive scheme that was poor. His performance this past season in Tennessee puts this debate to bed once and for all. He played on a much better coached team, bottom line.

"resnor wrote:

We messed up with Tannehill long before Gase.

You're right...Philbin was no better. He was just lucky to have landed on a team that already had an ESTABLISHED offensive unit in Green Bay and penned that into his resume.

"Puka-head wrote:

Damn you HOOPS!!! This thread had ALMOST DIED!!!

I guess some people can't let go of the fact that they've got a lot of RT17 Dolphins gear in their closet which will never ever see the light of day again.

While I'm on, does anyone want to buy a Fitzpatrick 29 home jersey? :lol:

"The_Dark_Knight wrote:

Only if you too are just as willing to have a piece of humble pie with your bold prediction.

You speak of Tannehill having a shot here in Miami and blew it. That’s such a shortsighted uneducated statement. Football players are nothing more than pieces on a chess board, executing the plays sent in by the coaching staff. Some players execute plays better than others but the bottom line is that’s all they are.

Tannehill executed what he was told to execute and did so well. What was poor wasn’t Tannehill’s play with the Dolphins, it was the plays that and overall offensive scheme that was poor. His performance this past season in Tennessee puts this debate to bed once and for all. He played on a much better coached team, bottom line.

I pretty much 100% agree with this.

If your offense is predictable, lacks talent at key spots and is constantly struggling to run plays the way they are drawn up, most QB are going to look bad at least a portion of the time.