The Talent Surrounding Ryan Tannehill: Part II

You're not supporting it, and you're not attempting to objectively, though.

 

I just added more examples for you. Check 'em out.
SOMETHING has to contribute to the variation. It's a FULL SEASON not an isolated game so you can't just say "exception to the rule".

BTW, how is it an "exception to the rule" when you're dealing with 11 years as an initial measuring stick and then following it up with 4 yards of comparison? You're the one saying the QB makes the QBR, so how can you explain such a wide variance when it involves the same QB? To use your argument against you, did the QB "suddenly go from being skilled & talented one year to losing his talent & skill the subsequent year" or go from talented to non-talented to back to being talented again?

 

LOL. If that's not the pot calling the kettle black!
YOU'RE THE ONE ESSENTIALLY TRYING TO ARGUE HOW PASSER RATING IS DUE TO THE QB RATHER THAN A PRODUCT OF THE PASSING OFFENSE AS A WHOLE, so now it's ON YOU to explain how all these QBs I'm giving you can see such an extreme variance in passer rating and production from one year to another when their surrounding cast is either affected or changed.

I'm not trying to "support" anything. I'm giving you numerous examples that CLEARLY DISPUTE what you're attempting to push forward, yet you have zero counter for it. ZERO. Either counter it with something of substance or accept that your argument has been proven flawed. It's that simple.

 

The problem is that when you have talented surrounding cast, it helps your qb rating more than it doesn't. You are treating qb like it does not depend on what you are working with. Look at all those Qbs, most of them have talented supporting casts. They have players that take a 5 yard pass 80 yards.

 

.... and I'm giving you plenty of examples showing how 1 player's QBR can be widely variant, and you seem to not want to explain how that can be possible despite you purporting QBR is a direct measure of the QB's individual performance alone.

Of course elite QBs will post better QBRs; that's basic common sense considering QB represents one aspect of the passing offense. However, where your argument fails miserably is when average to good QBs are involved, where the surrounding cast DOES have a big impact and where QBR is a true function of the full passing game's production rather than the QB himself. But still, even elite QBs perform at a higher level with the greater the surrounding talent, and perform at less than their fullest potential with a reduction in surrounding talent. Plus I already showed you how Brady's recent 5 games w/o Gronkowski and a banged up Hernandez featured 3 sub 75.0 passer ratings.

 

I already posted the LONG list of HOF QBs who had outstanding pass catchers to work with, with the only exception being the massively mobile Fran Tarkenton. But apparently that long list is nothing but me cherry pickin'. lol.

It's also interesting to look at how quarterbacks performed when throwing to any of the NFL Network's all-time Top 10 Receiving Corps list compared to when NOT.

 

We have Luck. We have Wilson. We have RGIII.

Luck is rating wise doing worse than Tanny. He has better talent around him and everyone believes he's head and shoulders better than Tanny.. RGII & Wilson also have better talent around them.

 

No, it doesn't make it clear cut true just as you can't say Tannehill is the one holding back his receivers; HOWEVER when looking at a talented, top-10 draft pick QB with seven 90.0+ passer ratings thus far, it's more applicable to explain the passing offense's inconsistent QBR on the fact we have a small, slow undrafted, slot receiver starting on the perimeter, a one-dimensional 4th rounder as a primary target, and a slew of either practice squad, late round, or recent FA acquisitions as the #3, #4, #5 receivers.

 

And yet...as i said before Tanny has an unheard of difference in knowing the offense already. Again, why the difference in YAC yards between Welker, Hartline and Jones?

 

So then he should be worse, and he's not. That's not that unheard of btw.

You still have to account for the difference in skill levels of me and say, Gronkowski. If you can admit that then you understand the fundamental principle of why your stance is wrong.

 

I'm pretty certain that Shouright was trashing Hartline before it became trendy.

 

You might as well ask me to prove air or water.

- It takes two people to make a completion. That is fact.
- One person can do his job perfectly and the other can not and that affects the stats you're using. That is fact.

Those 2 things don't need a statistical analysis. They are true. You can prove that for yourself. Throw any object at an empty space with no one around. If its a completion, then you have a point.

And you're far from unbiased.

 

Wrong. Basically by default, the greater the QBR is compared to his "norm" the more likely the offense will score more points. That's like a no duh kind of statement. That should be roughly universal for all QBs. .... HOWEVER, what you're leaving out is exactly what contributes to Atlanta's higher "norm" than Miami's to begin with, as the norm is what's most significant here. Why are the Falcons ranked 5th in scoring yet Miami is 25th?.... and why, when Ryan has a great day, are his passer ratings significantly higher than Tannehill's great games? I'll tell you why. It's because Julio, Roddy, and Gonzalez create MORE opportunities and are MORE productive with their opportunities, considering that what they do with the ball in their hands directly affects QBR, that their ability to haul in more difficult passes directly affects QBR, and that their ability to score TOUCHDOWNS hugely affects QBR.

 

Tannehill earned the job over last year's 12th rated passer. Just sayin. Context and all.

 

By far this was the best post of the thread.

 

That doesn't mean jack. It's not even a correlation. What you're doing is removing EVERY SIGNIFICANT factor involved in creating QBR in order to make Tannehill seem exactly like those 23 QBs. That's a load of horse ****.

Tannehill's passer rating is a direct reflection of what his baseline QBR looks like with an inferior group of receivers who make ZERO plays for him and can't score touchdowns. His 76.9 QBR is his STARTING POINT, not his ending. If his receivers could've made some goddam plays for him, the QBR would've appropriately increased, with the greater the number of plays made (like Atlanta's did for Ryan) the higher the QBR increases.

With a dozen more completions due to better receiver ability (like Atlanta has), an extra 300 yards due to YAC and those extra dozen completions (like talented receivers like Atlanta's provide), and a realistic 6 extra TDs due to talented receivers making plays (like Atlanta's does), you're suddenly looking at an 86.0 QBR, and we're likely in the playoffs.

 

No. I figure that has to do with having crap at receiver not elevating his QBR just as crap at receiver does. Are you seriously so dense as to not understand that what a receiver does once the ball leaves the QB's hand has a DIRECT impact on passer rating?

 

Shouright you do understand that if a WR makes plays with his feet after the catch, that affects QBR right? You do understand this?

 

What exactly? What % are we talking about here?

 

Sigh. Fine.

Aaron Rodgers 343 of his 512 passes were caught buy someone other than Aaron Rodgers.

Do i need to list all the QBs?

If 1/2 of those passes are dropped, what would his QB rating be? Answer 78.17

That means if yards, TDs, & INTs stayed the same, he'd have a rookie-ish rating if half of his current completions were dropped.

 

Some of these examples don't involve the same QB, with the same team, the same system, with just adding play makers. Rypien is weird, because they didn't add any players. They had the same players in 1992 and they did in 1991. It's just Rypien started sucking. Not even sure how you include Cunningham as he had the exact same players in 1999 when he started sucking. So if these players made Rypien and Cunningham better, why did they fail to make them better after just one year?

 

Do our WR's lead the league in passes dropped? Another way to look at it is if Tannehill puts it in the right place to be caught, and our WR's drop it. So that's one way to normalize the stats.

Of course, that doesn't take into account our WR's lack of ability to get separation. So someone can see how many dropbacks Tanny takes and has to throw away the ball, scramble or is sacked because our WR didn't get separation.