Ryan Tannehill

"The Guy wrote:

The noteworthy thing there is that his percentage of pass dropbacks in the first two playoff games was 6.3 standard deviations below the regular season league average in 2019. In the regular season he had the second-lowest percentage of pass dropbacks in the league (only Lamar Jackson was lower, for obvious reasons).

So yeah, if your team has the luxury (provided by Derrick Henry) of essentially having you drop back to pass the ball only when the circumstances are highly favorable, then of course you're going to perform well!

Now, let's see if that situation is sustainable or replicable in future seasons. I suspect not.

Why do you assume that the Tennessee opponents weren't willing to let Henry run, and instead were focusing on stopping Tannehill and the passing game? I mean, I'm sure teams know what we know, that rushing isn't nearly as important as passing when it comes to wins, so it would make sense to stop the guy that took a 2-4 team averaging 16 points a game, and lead them to the playoffs, and not worry about Henry.

"resnor wrote:

But how can you test whether or not Tannehill actually made those garbage players better? I mean, he turned Hartline into a 1000 yard receiver, for instance. He took over a 2-4 Tennessee team, and lead then to the playoffs, and they looked very different with him at QB then they did with Mariota.

You are ignoring the possibility that while Tannehill had garbage in Miami, he actually made them look better than they were.

Here is some proof of what you say. Here is a summary of the OL turnover in Miami from 2012 to 2019. It is a lot to take in but two things are striking. First the average number of seasons that a lineman played 30% or more of the snaps was 1.9. Second, a staggering 13 players never played another down in the NFL after playing 30% or more of the snaps for Miami in their final season. Finally, the average change in snap count year over year for the top 5 linemen was 50% and for all the linemen playing 30% or more of the snaps was 47%.

In 2013, they had four players that played 40% or more of the snaps THAT NEVER PLAYED ANOTHER DOWN IN THE NFL!!!!!

Amazingly, the following year, they had three more (all fixes to the OL according to the Guy) that played 30% or more of the snaps, then never played again. From 2013 to 2016, they averaged 2.75 linemen PER YEAR that never played another down in the NFL. If you add Jamil Douglas (who was out of football for 2 years and came back last year as a backup), a ridiculous 3 players per year weren't good enough to play anywhere else in the league AFTER PLAYING a significant number of snaps for the Dolphins.

8 times from 2013 to 2018 they brought in or promoted a player to start on the line and that player lasted one season and was out of the NFL. The number of "no hit blunders" is unbelievable.

This is the crap that the Guy has tried to defend for 7 years.

[ATTACH:full]

pfffff...

You guys aren't presenting any facts, your just using confirmation his and an echo chamber to determine that Miami was bad.

Also, I don't care if Miami was average...all that would mean to me is that the majority of teams are bad. Probably why you see the same basic teams in the playoffs year after year.

"Fin-O wrote:

I will say his surroundings in TN with that offense and that staff are pretty ideal for any QB. I mean, look at Ryan’s numbers in two playoff wins? You don’t win those games with your Qb playing like that with just an average supporting offensive cast.

What is ignored is that while the surroundings in TN were very good, they have been equally good for many many QBs. How many of them have had a passer rating of 117.5 and a YPA of 9.6?

Finally, regarding Tannehill's peformance in the playoffs. NE was the #1 pass defense in the league and used a game plan designed to stop the passing game. Tannehill and TN responded by playing strong defense and running the ball.

Against Baltimore, Tannehill was responsible for 3 of the 4 TDs and punished the Ravens early to create the big lead.

"FinFaninBuffalo wrote:

What is ignored is that while the surroundings in TN were very good, they have been equally good for many many QBs. How many of then have had a passer rating of 117.5 and a YPA of 9.6?

Finally, regarding Tannehill's peformance in the playoffs. NE was the #1 pass defense in the league and used a game plan designed to stop the passing game. Tannehill and TN responded by playing strong defense and running the ball.

Against Baltimore, Tannehill was responsible for 3 of the 4 TDs and punished the Ravens early to create the big lead.

You don’t have to convince me. I was in this thread defending the stats vs hidden stats.

My stance however hasn’t changed that his surroundings were/are pretty damn good

"Fin-O wrote:

You don’t have to convince me. I was in this thread defending the stats vs hidden stats.

My stance however hasn’t changed that his surroundings were/are pretty damn good

I agree 100%

"Fin-O wrote:

You don’t have to convince me. I was in this thread defending the stats vs hidden stats.

My stance however hasn’t changed that his surroundings were/are pretty damn good

Weird fact that might interest only me. Tom Brady made the playoffs 17 times with the Patriots (damn that hurt to type). In 13 of those playoff series he had 1 or more games with a passer rating below 80. He has passer ratings of 57.5, 57.6, 66.4, 68.6, 70.4, 71.4, 73.3, 76.1, 77.1, and 78.4 in playoff wins.

But but but... YOU HAVE YOU ADJUST!!

/sarcasm

"The Guy wrote:

That's precisely what we're looking at. So which is it -- that 1) Tannehill's surroundings 2012-2018 were horrendous, and his surroundings in 2019 were merely average, or 2) his surroundings 2012-2018 were average, and his surroundings in 2019 were exceptionally good?

What I'm saying here is that no one is providing objective support for possibility #1.

You are assuming it HAS to be one of those things... And you speak of Bias? You WANT it to be one of those things because that is what you are framing argument #137 why you were right all of those years ago when you said Tannehill would never be a Good QB

The 2012 to 2018 teams were BAD... and the 2019 Titans team is AVERAGE

But those were not on the list for your little survey. For someone wanting to ignore Bias and explore the data... You sure have a odd way of conducting your experients in the name of being non biased.

"Etrius24 wrote:

You are assuming it HAS to be one of those things... And you speak of Bias? You WANT it to be one of those things because that is what you are framing argument #137 why you were right all of those years ago when you said Tannehill would never be a Good QB

The 2012 to 2018 teams were BAD... and the 2019 Titans team is AVERAGE

But those were not on the list for your little survey. For someone wanting to ignore Bias and explore the data... You sure have a odd way of conducting your experients in the name of being non biased.

Be warned. He is laying low for a day or two. He will come back later to try to get in the last word, probably by reiterating some old nonsense. Pretty normal behavior for him.

"Fin-O wrote:

You don’t have to convince me. I was in this thread defending the stats vs hidden stats.

My stance however hasn’t changed that his surroundings were/are pretty damn good

I wouldnt say they were good surroundings, they just fit his game well.

They basically have 1 WR and Henry. Their line is average but I cant give plus or minus points for average.

"FinFaninBuffalo wrote:

Be warned. He is laying low for a day or two. He will come back later to try to get in the last word, probably by reiterating some old nonsense. Pretty normal behavior for him.

What more is there to say? There is no definitive way of determining who is right and wrong with regard to the topic. The only thing that could possibly do that is more information, and none will be forthcoming until another NFL season has started.

Topics like these become nothing but snarky sniping at this point (the quoted post above being an example, as likely will be any responses to this post). I'll pass. You all take care. Let's move on to the draft, where there is something of real value happening.

"The Guy wrote:

What more is there to say? There is no definitive way of determining who is right and wrong with regard to the topic. The only thing that could possibly do that is more information, and none will be forthcoming until another NFL season has started.

Topics like these become nothing but snarky sniping at this point (the quoted post above being an example). I'll pass. You all take care. Let's move on to the draft, where there is something of real value happening.

I agree 100% with this. I've been snarky myself and I apologize for that.

Your posts on other subjects raise no similar debates or concerns and at the end of the day, even with statistics, it boils down to unquantifiable things, but I absolutely do respect your attempts to use certain stats to tell your view.

Is it really the end of the world if we all agree to disagree on a fan forum?

I'd like to see you post this much on other subjects honestly. I think people may have a more sympathetic view point if they saw they agreed on other things.

"The Guy wrote:

What more is there to say? There is no definitive way of determining who is right and wrong with regard to the topic. The only thing that could possibly do that is more information, and none will be forthcoming until another NFL season has started.

Topics like these become nothing but snarky sniping at this point (the quoted post above being an example, as likely will be any responses to this post). I'll pass. You all take care. Let's move on to the draft, where there is something of real value happening.

I'd add a caveat. I don't think things turn snarky for no reason. I think things turn snarky when people feel you aren't actually considering the responses you get. I think many feel that you just ignore what they write, and push on with your belief. It isn't a conversation. It's a constant defense of positions.

"resnor wrote:

I'd add a caveat. I don't think things turn snarky for no reason. I think things turn snarky when people feel you aren't actually considering the responses you get. I think many feel that you just ignore what they write, and push on with your belief. It isn't a conversation. It's a constant defense of positions.

It doesn't bother me that things get snarky -- I'm not saying I want that to change. It's just a sign for me that the topic has been exhausted.

Sidenote

If you have to change the basis of your argument and cling to statistical data only to abandon it once disproven... after 137 unsuccessful attempts at this, you might want to avoid saying things like: " I come here with facts. "

Because, dude...

"Etrius24 wrote:

Sidenote

If you have to change the basis of your argument and cling to statistical data only to abandon it once disproven... after 137 unsuccessful attempts at this, you might want to avoid saying things like: " I come here with facts. "

Because, dude...

Even though I disagree with him in the end, the statistics he uses are factual and not something he is making up or pulling from his ass.

The interpretation of what they mean is entirely up for debate IMO but I wouldnt say his argument isnt factual on some level.

"AGuyNamedAlex wrote:

Even though I disagree with him in the end, the statistics he uses are factual and not something he is making up or pulling from his ***.

The interpretation of what they mean is entirely up for debate IMO but I wouldnt say his argument isnt factual on some level.

Alex

I appreciate his tenacity in some ways... But you lose a lot of credibility if you have to make so many different arguments... and one by one they get easily defeated....

Guy's problem in this regard is that every time his "Facts and Stats" got shot down by people better at looking at data than him... There was no admission of his bias... He just abandoned the stats and facts that he once held so dear and changed gears looking for something else to prove he was right.

This is the opposite of unbias. When you are unbias you look at the data and then form conclusions based on what the data shows you. He did the opposite... He combs through the data trying to find anything to back up his Bias.

And we are 180 pages of a thread and we have burned through countless claims by him before he even makes a point that is partially defensible. And through all of that... Still no admission he was wrong. No admission he was biased.

"Etrius24 wrote:

Alex

I appreciate his tenacity in some ways... But you lose a lot of credibility if you have to make so many different arguments... and one by one they get easily defeated....

Guy's problem in this regard is that every time his "Facts and Stats" got shot down by people better at looking at data than him... There was no admission of his bias... He just abandoned the stats and facts that he once held so dear and changed gears looking for something else to prove he was right.

This is the opposite of unbias. When you are unbias you look at the data and then form conclusions based on what the data shows you. He did the opposite... He combs through the data trying to find anything to back up his Bias.

And we are 180 pages of a thread and we have burned through countless claims by him before he even makes a point that is partially defensible. And through all of that... Still no admission he was wrong. No admission he was biased.

I think we should also consider the fact that he doesnt like to accept "logic" without statistical evidence to back up the logic. Also, just playing devils advocate there are certain times we may feel like we have disproven something but that can be subjective, maybe he doesnt see the refute the same way you or I do or consider it to be disproven.

I dont know, to me an argument or debate is going back and forth with new information. Unfortunately for the thread I think we ran out of relevant new material a while back which has lead to us all talking in circles for tens of pages.

Well yeah...I mean there hasn't been a football game in months. How long can we talk about like 11 games from Tannehill? Hahaha

I'm impressed we made it this far.

"Etrius24 wrote:

Sidenote

If you have to change the basis of your argument and cling to statistical data only to abandon it once disproven... after 137 unsuccessful attempts at this, you might want to avoid saying things like: " I come here with facts. "

Because, dude...

I don't think you follow the discussion well enough to comment on it in that way.

"Etrius24 wrote:

Alex

I appreciate his tenacity in some ways... But you lose a lot of credibility if you have to make so many different arguments... and one by one they get easily defeated....

Guy's problem in this regard is that every time his "Facts and Stats" got shot down by people better at looking at data than him... There was no admission of his bias... He just abandoned the stats and facts that he once held so dear and changed gears looking for something else to prove he was right.

This is the opposite of unbias. When you are unbias you look at the data and then form conclusions based on what the data shows you. He did the opposite... He combs through the data trying to find anything to back up his Bias.

And we are 180 pages of a thread and we have burned through countless claims by him before he even makes a point that is partially defensible. And through all of that... Still no admission he was wrong. No admission he was biased.

You're confusing "bias" with a sensible attempt to explore situational explanations for the change in a player's performance for one year, following significantly different performance for six years.

It would be biased not to explore the situational advantages a player may have been experiencing when that has been his pattern of performance.

Imagine that someone on the Cincinnati Bengals message board spent part of the offseason between 2015 and 2016 exploring the possible situational advantages afforded Andy Dalton, after he finished second in the league with a passer rating of 105.2, 15 points above the league average that year. Dalton has never had another season like that in his career, and so he must've been experiencing situational advantages that year.

Likewise, Tannehill may have been experiencing situational advantages in 2019. With regard to whether that was the case, and because of my efforts in this thread, you now know the following:

1) The correlation between Tannehill's passer rating and Derrick Henry's yards per rush, game-by-game, was astronomically high when compared to the league norm.

2) Tannehill's percentage of pass dropbacks was the second-lowest in the league in the regular season, behind only Lamar Jackson, and that percentage plummeted even further in the first two games of the playoffs, when it was 6.3 standard deviations below the league average in 2019. That percentage of pass dropbacks (regular season 2019) was significantly lower than the percentage of them he had in his six years in Miami.

3) Tannehill's performance in high-volume passing games -- i.e., when his percentage of pass dropbacks wasn't so low and was above the league average -- involved a decrement in performance similar to that he exhibited previously in his career, and which isn't seen among the top QBs in the league, ones who exhibit comparatively high season passer ratings on a more consistent basis.

Now, the meaning of all of those things is up for debate, and again I think we've exhausted the debate and should end it. But it isn't "biased" to have explored those things and reported them here, any more than it would've been "biased" to do the same thing with regard to Andy Dalton after 2015.

"The Guy wrote:

But it isn't "biased" to have explored those things and reported them here, any more than it would've been "biased" to do the same thing with regard to Andy Dalton after 2015.

Show me one time where you seriously explored the possibility that the surroundings were crap in Miami and sought out the statistics to demonstrate it. You've never seriously explored that possibility.

"The Guy wrote:

I don't think you follow the discussion well enough to comment on it in that way.

I don't think you understand football well enough to comment, but here we are.

Guy

Even if you want to put an asterisk next to it Go ahead...

4th highest QB rating of all time.

Higher than Brady when he had Welker and Moss in their prime.

#1 red zone QB

#2 scoring offense when he took over as the starter.

over 70% completion rate ( I am waiting for you to argue that Henry ran after hour practices and also taught Tannehill how to throw a football. )

Led the NFL in yards per pass.

Nobody here has suggested that Henry is not a good player. When will you admit that the numbers from Tannehill were special... Completion percentage QB rating Yards per pass... all elite levels... Numbers you see from HOF qb's

So when will you put on your big boy pants and openly say that Henry or no.... Tannehill f*cking killed it as the QB of the Titans

When Guy?

It is time