Ryan Tannehill

"Carmen Cygni wrote:

Peters is a perfect example of the Raven's acquisition to further Martingale's philosophy of being able to scheme pressure without a plethora of pure pass rushers while maintaining a sound defensive backfield.

Sounds like Dean Pees.

Both D coordinators are pretty good at it

"Carmen Cygni wrote:

I'm not Marty McFly, so calling me chicken isn't going to work, stat slouch.

The truth is that you wouldn’t even know where to start. LOL. Take care.

"Cashvillesent wrote:

Sounds like Dean Pees.

Both D coordinators are pretty good at it

I liked Peas; good defensive mind. Peas also had excellent coverage schemes as I also enjoyed watching his disciplined secondary, but his problems arose bc he wasn't bold enough to trust it and bring pressure. A defense can only maintain sound coverage for so long before it breaks down and the offense improvises and finds holes (which every defensive call has).

"The Guy wrote:

There have been good performances by quarterbacks against the Ravens’ defense this season.

High volume:

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/201909220kan.htm

Low volume:

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/201912010rav.htm

There’s no reason why the quarterback with the highest regular season passer rating in the league can’t replicate something within that range against them.

You couldn’t be more obnoxious if you tried. The whole board is collectively giving you an eye roll.

"The Guy wrote:

Anybody who says that is implicitly defining a quarterback's individual performance in terms of whether his team wins or loses. That obviously isn't the best way to do it.

What I've been saying is actually the opposite: "yeah, they won, but ." If they would've lost and he played well I would've said that as well, without invoking the team's loss as a measure of his performance.


A passer rating of 117 or more (era-adjusted) in the playoffs has happened on 23 of the possible 198 occasions since 2010 (11.6% of the time), usually by the likes of Tom Brady, Drew Brees, Matt Ryan, Russell Wilson, and Aaron Rodgers during that time period.

If he has a passer rating of 95 or higher I'll call it a success for him, even regardless of how many passes he throws, and certainly regardless of whether they win or lose.

I don't believe a word you're saying. Tannehill has performed game after game after game ever since he started week 7 and you're continued mantra has been "we need more data"

You've had all the data you need and still criticize him. He wins a playoff game and he's still criticized. I stand by my statement...this is going to continue after the Baltimore game.

I do worry about Baltimore's defense. Brad and I disagree about defense winning championships, but this is where defense becomes so vital. Offenses are much better in the playoffs than wha't typically faced during the regular season, so you have to have an elite defense to be successful. Sorry Brad, not going to change my mind...that being said...

Tennessee's OL is REALLY going to have to show for this game. They're going to have to get those running lanes opened for Henry and give Tannehill adequate protection to be able to get GOOD throws downfield. Harbaugh has the playoff experience and is not taking this game lightly and the Titans are going to have their hands full.

With that being said though, Tennessee needs to be who they are...a powerhouse running game, keeping their defense honest and exploiting the lack of coverage in the secondary when its there.

I'm really pumped about this game

"The_Dark_Knight wrote:

I do worry about Baltimore's defense. Brad and I disagree about defense winning championships, but this is where defense becomes so vital. Offenses are much better in the playoffs than wha't typically faced during the regular season, so you have to have an elite defense to be successful. Sorry Brad, not going to change my mind...that being said...

Tennessee's OL is REALLY going to have to show for this game. They're going to have to get those running lanes opened for Henry and give Tannehill adequate protection to be able to get GOOD throws downfield. Harbaugh has the playoff experience and is not taking this game lightly and the Titans are going to have their hands full.

With that being said though, Tennessee needs to be who they are...a powerhouse running game, keeping their defense honest and exploiting the lack of coverage in the secondary when its there.

I'm really pumped about this game

Bro...that defense is legit. Why can't they just do exactly like NE's defense did, trusting their offense to do better on their side (as it no doubt will)? I'm sure they'd be happy to give up 2 TD drives knowing they're gonna get 4+. This one just feels like such a blowout...the line is 10 / 9.5 on this one. Gonna be fugly.

One other thing, these "underdog" defenses need to stop dropping gimme INTs. They're far too rare in the playoffs to just let 'em go (Titans and Texans both). Texans dropped 2-3 gimmes, Titans dropped 1 (REALLY rare from Brady).

"The_Dark_Knight wrote:

I do worry about Baltimore's defense. Brad and I disagree about defense winning championships, but this is where defense becomes so vital. Offenses are much better in the playoffs than wha't typically faced during the regular season, so you have to have an elite defense to be successful. Sorry Brad, not going to change my mind...that being said...

Tennessee's OL is REALLY going to have to show for this game. They're going to have to get those running lanes opened for Henry and give Tannehill adequate protection to be able to get GOOD throws downfield. Harbaugh has the playoff experience and is not taking this game lightly and the Titans are going to have their hands full.

With that being said though, Tennessee needs to be who they are...a powerhouse running game, keeping their defense honest and exploiting the lack of coverage in the secondary when its there.

I'm really pumped about this game

As has been said over many decades thru different ages, and remains so ever true: offense wins games, defense wins championships. It's a different animal come playoff time. The game, approach, and playing level changes in the postseason. What got you there (playoffs) won't necessarily bring the same success if you can't adhere to the game's fundamentals when it's win or go home.

"Carmen Cygni wrote:

I liked Peas; good defensive mind. Peas also had excellent coverage schemes as I also enjoyed watching his disciplined secondary, but his problems arose bc he wasn't bold enough to trust it and bring pressure. A defense can only maintain sound coverage for so long before it breaks down and the offense improvises and finds holes (which every defensive call has).

Carmen, what's your take on how they prevent 13 and 12 formation slaughter? Ravens got that stuff wired.

"The Guy wrote:

The truth is that you wouldn’t even know where to start. LOL. Take care.

No way. You do not get to criticize for someone not breaking it down. You continue to refuse to do it to support you Tannehill played bad claim. Let's see your proof.

"resnor wrote:

No way. You do not get to criticize for someone not breaking it down. You continue to refuse to do it to support you Tannehill played bad claim. Let's see your proof.

The all-22 is out there. I've seen it myself. Pats had the Titans' receivers shut down and blanketed. Even then, Tannehill made several very difficult tight window throws in that situation. None of which were picked off, or even close to it. They were dimes. That 3rd and 8 conversion was a thing of beauty...in the rain.

If he can replicate those throws this week (which, frankly, he has all year), and his receivers can get even slightly more open, they should look much better in the passing game.

I don't know if there's a version of the film available that's embedded in an Excel spreadsheet though.

"The_Dark_Knight wrote:

Brad and I disagree about defense winning championships, but this is where defense becomes so vital. Offenses are much better in the playoffs than wha't typically faced during the regular season, so you have to have an elite defense to be successful. Sorry Brad, not going to change my mind...that being said...

"Carmen Cygni wrote:

As has been said over many decades thru different ages, and remains so ever true: offense wins games, defense wins championships. It's a different animal come playoff time. The game, approach, and playing level changes in the postseason. What got you there (playoffs) won't necessarily bring the same success if you can't adhere to the game's fundamentals when it's win or go home.

Yeah I guess you guys will never change your minds about this, but whatever you think or say about this, we're not talking about differences of "opinions" here. The data actually show that the average performance level of the offense in the playoffs, relative to league-wide performance, is greater than that of the defense (not every game of course). That's true for the playoffs overall as well as for the SB. Defense wins championships is a myth.

Again.. it's not an opinion. This is what the data show (using points scored and points allowed relative to league-wide distributions). And I'll keep pointing this out because it's not good when people keep pushing the theory they believe in even when it's contradicted by the data. And if anyone wants I'll repost the z-scores of every single playoff game or SB to demonstrate this.

"PhinFan1968 wrote:

Carmen, what's your take on how they prevent 13 and 12 formation slaughter? Ravens got that stuff wired.

Easily said, but more difficult to do is simply eye discipline by a defense. Mainly (and I'll repeat the overdone but tried and true "do your job" motto here) the defenders responsible for the dive, QB, and pitch options must retain discipline and not overrun their responsibilities.

Pistol formations (like the Ravens use in large majority) are geared to run downhill. Traditionally you defend them by spilling the runner to the sideline and cleaning up from there. Problem is, not many offenses pose the threat of speed at the QB position like Baltimore has in Jackson. So if you force them inside they have powerful blockers and a RB to boot to punish you inside by overloading with power (which in the Ravens case is usually to the B gap on the shaded nose side). But should you spill the play, Jackson will keep and has the speed to beat you to the edge and beyond.

The Ravens Pistol form also causes fits with one gap teams because a defense must be flexible and be able to gap exchange to alleviate confusion.

In split alignments used in the Gun (RB to either side of the QB) defenses are provided a better situation to align properly as they do so toward the RB side and then can ID their backside defender for bends. But in the Pistol their intentions remain anonymous until the snap and more specifically, until the RB declares his steps/angle. Throw in the ability for the Ravens to lineup WR's and/or TE's in tight 3x1 sets and it can cause havoc. Here you can force the defense to have the Mike tucked into the A gap in order to defend the receiver heavy side and the speed option weak is a wide open. All the while, Andrews has proven to be quite the TE to exploit LB coverage as well, which is especially useful for RPO plays.

Staying 2 high, regardless of offensive form, allows the D to have an overhang on either side and the Mike to man the middle vs inside runs and also to vacate the box vs full flow (though C2 can leave the deep middle seam susceptible and Andrews is more than capable) That coupled with maintaining personal defensive responsibilities (which is easier said than done when a significant QB run threat is posed) and eye discipline is essential. IOW, don't fall for the eye candy.

"cbrad wrote:

Yeah I guess you guys will never change your minds about this, but whatever you think or say about this, we're not talking about differences of "opinions" here. The data actually show that the average performance level of the offense in the playoffs, relative to league-wide performance, is greater than that of the defense (not every game of course). That's true for the playoffs overall as well as for the SB. Defense wins championships is a myth.

Again.. it's not an opinion. This is what the data show (using points scored and points allowed relative to league-wide distributions). And I'll keep pointing this out because it's not good when people keep pushing the theory they believe in even when it's contradicted by the data. And if anyone wants I'll repost the z-scores of every single playoff game or SB to demonstrate this.

So that would indicate teams play the same as they usually, points-wise, do in the post-season, compared to that same regular season?

"Carmen Cygni wrote:

Easily said, but more difficult to do is simply eye discipline by a defense. Mainly (and I'll repeat the overdone but tried and true "do your job" motto here) the defenders responsible for the dive, QB, and pitch options must retain discipline and not overrun their responsibilities.

Pistol formations (like the Ravens use in large majority) are geared to run downhill. Traditionally you defend them by spilling the runner to the sideline and cleaning up from there. Problem is, not many offenses pose the threat of speed at the QB position like Baltimore has in Jackson. So if you force them inside they have powerful blockers and a RB to boot to punish you inside by overloading with power (which in the Ravens case is usually to the B gap on the shaded nose side). But should you spill the play, Jackson will keep and has the speed to beat you to the edge and beyond.

The Ravens Pistol form also causes fits with one gap teams because a defense must be flexible and be able to gap exchange to alleviate confusion.

In split alignments used in the Gun (RB to either side of the QB) defenses are provided a better situation to align properly as they do so toward the RB side and then can ID their backside defender for bends. But in the Pistol their intentions remain anonymous until the snap and more specifically, until the RB declares his steps/angle. Throw in the ability for the Ravens to lineup WR's and/or TE's in a succesful 3x1 set and it can cause havoc. Here you can force the defense to have the Mike tucked into the A gap in order to defend the receiver heavy side and the speed option weak is a wide open. All the while, Andrews has proven to be quite the TE to exploit LB coverage as well, which is especially useful for RPO plays.

Staying 2 high, regardless of offensive form, allows the D to have an overhang on either side and the Mike to man the middle vs inside power and also to vacate the box vs full flow (though that can leaves the deep middle seam susceptible and Andrews is more than capable) That coupled with maintaining personal defensive responsibilities (which is easier said than done when a significant QB run threat is posed) and eye discipline is essential. IOW, don't fall for the eye candy.

So essentially a LOT of coaching, and discipline. This Titans defense lives off of that slogan, "do your job," so maybe the can at least slow them down a little.

"cbrad wrote:

Yeah I guess you guys will never change your minds about this, but whatever you think or say about this, we're not talking about differences of "opinions" here. The data actually show that the average performance level of the offense in the playoffs, relative to league-wide performance, is greater than that of the defense (not every game of course). That's true for the playoffs overall as well as for the SB. Defense wins championships is a myth.

Again.. it's not an opinion. This is what the data show (using points scored and points allowed relative to league-wide distributions). And I'll keep pointing this out because it's not good when people keep pushing the theory they believe in even when it's contradicted by the data. And if anyone wants I'll repost the z-scores of every single playoff game or SB to demonstrate this.

You sound like John Madden. "The team that scores the most points tonight will win".

Save it. Defense wins championships.

"Carmen Cygni wrote:

You sound like John Madden. "The team that scores the most points tonight will win".

Save it. Defense wins championships.

Certainly won the last one...and a few other Patriots championships.

"PhinFan1968 wrote:

So that would indicate teams play the same as they usually, points-wise, do in the post-season, compared to that same regular season?

No, there's no inference like that. I was only looking at the z-scores of all offenses and defenses of playoff game winners (not losers), so there's no inference about how the teams play points-wise. The graph I created is up to 2017 (I'd have to regenerate it to include last year) and the average z-score of playoff game winning offenses is 0.7294 while for defense it's 0.5464. That means that playoff winners tend to play both above average offense AND above average defense, but that the offense is slightly more important for winning.

For SB's it's 0.9389 for the offense and 0.4072 for the defense, so an even bigger difference.

"Carmen Cygni wrote:

You sound like John Madden. "The team that scores the most points tonight will win".

Save it. Defense wins championships.

So it's clear: the only question here is whether you or anyone else agrees that points scored is the most important measure of the offense and points allowed is the most important measure of the defense. If you agree with that, the rest is just statistical analysis and the result is that at least on average offense is more important in winning championships.

btw.. here are all SB results:
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/super-bowl/

Can you try to explain to us how "Defense wins championships" was true when the Eagles beat the Patriots 41-33? Or when SF beat the Chargers 49-26? Or the many other SB's where it's pretty clear the offense was more important?

Let the data drive the theory and don't be so dogmatic. Well up to you of course. But your "save it" response isn't at all convincing. Data is.

"cbrad wrote:

Yeah I guess you guys will never change your minds about this, but whatever you think or say about this, we're not talking about differences of "opinions" here. The data actually show that the average performance level of the offense in the playoffs, relative to league-wide performance, is greater than that of the defense (not every game of course). That's true for the playoffs overall as well as for the SB. Defense wins championships is a myth.

Again.. it's not an opinion. This is what the data show (using points scored and points allowed relative to league-wide distributions). And I'll keep pointing this out because it's not good when people keep pushing the theory they believe in even when it's contradicted by the data. And if anyone wants I'll repost the z-scores of every single playoff game or SB to demonstrate this.

It feels chicken or egg.

An offense attacks a defense. A defense tries to stop an offense. When an offense performs above average, is it because the offense is above average or the opposing defense was merely average (or worse)? Or even then, since offenses differ and defenses differ, on planes beyond just talent level, is the above average offense just appearing that way because it ran into a normally above average defense that just happens to be susceptible to that kind of specific offense?

Since these metrics you tout are just a sorting of results, why are you so sure they are giving reasons for those results? The team that scores the most points wins, so of course the metrics show offense wins games. It is like using only blood pressure to check a person's health and justifying that tactic with the correct notion that 100% of all deaths are due to heart stoppage. A defense stopping an offense comes across to you, as a problem of the offense, not a success of the defense. All offenses and defenses have weaknesses that can be attacked, not just by the greatness of talent of the opposing unit, but by the unique strategy of that unit. A statistically bad defense can stop a statistically great offense if it happens to only be good at that one weakness of the great offense. Vice versa. And numerous levels in between.

These are the things your stats not just lose sight of, but incorrectly sort into the wrong column.

Stats/metrics are one tool. They are a check. They are not the sole answer. Regardless if you say "they are not the sole answer", your conclusions belie that statement. You argue against tape watchers as if your answers are definitive causations. It is as if you believe stats can answer any question, but also readily admit that somethings are too hard to track so we can assume they come out in the wash.That's always been the problem. Stats leave no room for nuance. My argument isn't new...it is has been the argument since stats were invented.

"cbrad wrote:

Can you try to explain to us how "Defense wins championships" was true when the Eagles beat the Patriots 41-33?

"Fin D wrote:

It feels chicken or egg.

An offense attacks a defense. A defense tries to stop an offense. When an offense performs above average, is it because the offense is above average or the opposing defense was merely average (or worse)? Or even then, since offenses differ and defenses differ, on planes beyond just talent level, is the above average offense just appearing that way because it ran into a normally above average defense that just happens to be susceptible to that kind of specific offense?

Since these metrics you tout are just a sorting of results, why are you so sure they are giving reasons for those results? The team that scores the most points wins, so of course the metrics show offense wins games. A defense stopping an offense comes across to you, as a problem of the offense, not a success of the defense. All offenses and defenses have weaknesses that can be attacked, not just by the greatness of talent of the opposing unit, but by the unique strategy of that unit. A statistically bad defense can stop a statistically great offense if it happens to only be good at that one weakness of the great offense. Vice versa.

These are the things your stats not just lose sight of, but incorrectly sort into he wrong column.

Stats/metrics are one tool. They are a check. They are not the sole answer. Regardless if you say "they are not the sole answer", your conclusions belie that statement. You argue against tape watchers as if your answers are definitive causations. It is as if you believe stats can answer any question, but also readily admit that somethings are too hard to track so we can assume they come out in the wash.That's always been the problem. Stats leave no room for nuance. My argument isn't new...it is has been the argument since stats were invented.

All those confounds exist in the regular season. So GIVEN those confounds what is the result is what is being asked here. You don't need to know all the cause-effect relationships to estimate something statistically.

Besides.. it's not like I'm the only one using points scored and allowed to argue this specific point. Remember last year's SB? Yeah.. a bunch of people used ONLY the 13-3 score to once again say defense wins championships is true, ignoring of course all other SB's. And Carmen (our X's and O's expert here) has in the past said that points scored and points allowed is the most important measure of offense and defense (he's right about that btw.. correlations to win% show that).

Can't just cherry pick and use those stats when it supports an argument. Have to live with the consequences of using such stats.

btw.. there is NO ONE that can actually answer the types of questions you are posing. People can have opinions, but don't be fooled into thinking any tape watcher or "expert" can tell you what percentage of the success of any play was due to X, Y or Z. NO ONE can do that.

"Carmen Cygni wrote:

Ah yes.. cherry pick one moment in the game and ignore all others. Sorry.. not convincing.

"cbrad wrote:

All those confounds exist in the regular season. So GIVEN those confounds what is the result is what is being asked here. You don't need to know all the cause-effect relationships to estimate something statistically.

Besides.. it's not like I'm the only one using points scored and allowed to argue this specific point. Remember last year's SB? Yeah.. a bunch of people used ONLY the 13-3 score to once again say defense wins championships is true, ignoring of course all other SB's. And Carmen (our X's and O's expert here) has in the past said that points scored and points allowed is the most important measure of offense and defense (he's right about that btw.. correlations to win% show that).

Can't just cherry pick and use those stats when it supports an argument. Have to live with the consequences of using such stats.

btw.. there is NO ONE that can actually answer the types of questions you are posing. People can have opinions, but don't be fooled into thinking any tape watcher or "expert" can tell you what percentage of the success of any play was due to X, Y or Z. NO ONE can do that.

Was the Eagles offense better than Patriots offense or was the Eagles defense better than Patriots defense? Because again, the Eagles defense may have been statistically worse than Pats offense in the season and playoffs, but just so happened to be good enough at the one weakness the Pats had. You don't know without tape because stats won't tell you that.

"cbrad wrote:

Ah yes.. cherry pick one moment in the game and ignore all others. Sorry.. not convincing.

That defensive play sealed the game. Much like Malcom Butler's INT vs Wilson in SB XLIX.

It wasn't cherry picking, it was the cherry on top.

Though, speaking of cherry picking, you chose a mere two examples out of 53.

And while speaking of defense wins championships, it's a postseason accomplishment, not specifically the SB itself.