Ryan Tannehill 21-22 as a starter

Doesn't tim Tebow have a good career record as a starter?

Edit: yep, 7-4, greatest of all time!!!

 

DJ, the point is that TODAY in that game, Luck's receivers helped him. A TON. And the same people who look at Tannehill's stats to determine stuff well merely look at Luck's today and figure that he was throwing darts all day...when he really wasn't. I'm also trying to show that Luck BENEFITS from receivers who can adjust and make plays on the deep ball, something Tannehill lacks with Wallace.

 

I think it's hilarious that you are attributing lucks success to receivers that can adjust...

What about his rookie year, and last year, same adjusting receivers, please stop the cherry picking to make a point using Andrew luck, just please stop bringing Andrew luck into the conversation, his greatness is incredibly Evident.

I don't see the folks making these assumptions that your talking about with Ryan, anyone with half a brain knows he had the worst skill set players in football when he came into the league, and the worst oline in football last year..

All I see is some pointing out some weaknesses in his deep game and playmaking ability and trying to figure out a way where he can become elite, i think your protecting your qb when you hear criticism and using bad analogies to prove your point..

 

It's not a bad analogy. Luck is very good...And even he needs to be helped out sometimes. That is my point. Some people act like Tannehill is the only QB who underthrows wide open receivers. I saw it from Andrew Luck twice today, and McCoy once. Tannehill doesn't get bailed out on those throws, and his good throws have been dropped.

 

T-Hill is going to be discussed on these boards for as long as he's a Fin and for about 2-3 decades after.

He not at Luck's level right now but he was coming from so far back in terms of development. I am curious to see how T-Hill does in the next year or two. Not to mention, it hasn't hurt Luck to sit in the same division as the dregs of the league since he came in.

One thing I will say about T-Hill is that he looks the part of an NFL QB...which is a start. He appears to be better than most QBs that have come out in the 2011-2013 period not named Andrew Luck. He still needs better weapons and another year in this offense.

 

If you actually watched the games, you would see Tannehill is playing like a top 10 QB right now, yet you are using stats dating back to his rookie year on a bad team to try and prove he's not good enough? Are you even a dolphins fan? Maybe try enjoying the fact that the fins have good play at the QB position finally.

 

your point is every qb needs help?.... Ooooo k...so you saw Andrew luck underthrow two passes, stop the presses Res...I Think your conjuring up imaginary scenarios of what people are saying..

Here I'll make it clear, relatively speaking, Ryan is not throwing the deep ball well regardless of your two examples of Luck under throwing a couple today..

I'll make the statement even more definitive, nobody on this board can debate it, you know why?, because he hasn't done it yet this whole season..lol.

Now if you wanna take that and tell me I'm being to hard on our qb and that I should be happy and content with what he is right now, ok then just say that, because your comparisons using luck is so far short of reality..

It's just pointing out a flaw..something that the our qb has to get better at.

 

Here's the thing with T-Hill's deep ball this season...he threw two excellent passes vs NE (one Wallace couldn't get his second foot down and the second was right in Sims bread basket but couldn't come down with it). He missed on the int but he wasn't able to step into that throw and shouldn't have thrown it. Against Buffalo, he threw a perfect high percentage deep pass to Hartline which again was dropped. There's been a smattering of low percentage deep passes but not much.

The belief of T-Hill sucking at deep passing has become a narrative devoid of context or critical analysis. It's easy to just say he sucks and leave it at that. Rarely do people mention the aforementioned accurate passes or the fact that Wallace has a poor catch radius and struggles to separate off the line or the fact Miami has no physical mismatch receivers.

I tend to think the reason we do not pass deep as much is (a) the thought that Wallace is nursing a hamstring and (b) Lazor observed how many of these passes to Wallace were intercepted and determined that the reward is not worth the risk.

 

This is my opinion. It's a wasted play in this offense. I'd rather throw a 7 yard slant to Landry than an incompletion to Wallace. I'd rather miller run for 4 yds than an incompletion to Wallace. I'd rather throw a screen to Wallace than an incompletion to Wallace.

 

There's no devoid of context or lack of critical analysis, all of it has been taking into account, at least I have, to conclude that every qb has negative variables to deal with, relatively speaking he's not been good this year, or last year, I've seen him make mistakes in the process that if he were comfortable, he wouldn't be making them..I think there is genuine anxiety and lazor needs to throw it out of him..

The good news for me is when I see him do it, it's obvious what he's doing wrong, and I believe he has good mechanics to get better.

 

As well...go watch the clips of Wallace from last year. He is not moving like that this year. The hamstring has to be bothering him.

 

I tend to disagree. Go watch the over/under throws on YouTube from last year. Some of these were excellent throws that just missed 50+ yards down field. Any top receiver with even an average catch radius either plucks these passes out of the air or easily fights for the ball in one on one situations.

When he's passing deep to anyone not named Wallace these issues do not seem to appear.

 

Why these same arguments..Tanny has improved greatly this year like DJ said but Wallace for now is our deep threat and one of the FASTEST in the League..even at 54 I bet Dan can hit him in stride, over the shoulder, left or right, in the bread basket 50 + yards down the field....I hope they can all work together in the off season...yes we need a very good #2 WR..but until we get one, Wallace is our guy and we need to get him the ball deep at some point...it would put the cherry on the top for our offense..Run Wallace to the post deep and see if Tanny can hit him deep that way...dude gets plenty of separation if the ball is coming to him.P.S. When going deep, we are talking 70+ yards and most of us know that Luck is by far the better QB at throwing deep. Hopefully Tanny can close the gap.

 

I agree. Tannys deep ball has been decent this year the few times we throw it. I think our problem is our receivers more than tanny when throwing deep. Wallace is generally covered by a cb with help from a safety deep. The other wrs aren't really deep threats. The medium gm is what we're forced to exploit

 

People need to go watch other teams play. Hitting receivers 50+ yards downfield, in stride, picking a shoulder, just isn't the norm, nor does it happen with regularity. What you DO see, is QB's throwing the ball downfield, and receivers adjusting to balls and making plays for their QB. I saw three of those plays yesterday just in the Colts/Skins game. It's why I brought those plays up in this thread. Luck wasn't hitting Moncrief in stride.

Edit: throwing deep is now considered throwing 70+ yards?? Are you kidding me? There isn't a QB in the league throwing the ball 70+ yards downfield in a game with any semblence of consistency. Not Luck, not Manning, not Rodgers, not anyone.

 

While I don't think teams' records should be the basis on which quarterbacks are evaluated, the Dolphins' record during Tannehill's tenure is roughly what would be expected based on his play, all other variables being equal.

 

I disagree...based on Tannehill's play for most of this season, I would not expect their record to be 6-5. The Dolphins SHOULD have a much better record, if other parts of the team had played halfway decent down the stretch in games.

 

Why is this troll still allowed to post?

 

So in tannehills time we've beaten the colts, the patriots, the seahawks. We've gone toe to toe with green bay and Denver. You have previously ascribed success of teams to the quarter backs. Did each of these teams just suck? Luck is an outlier. He's drafted by a team nowhere near as bad as the record would indicate. He's a once in a generation player. Yet he still throws dumb picks. He's just got the mega brain and physicality to get put of trouble more. While tannehill may not be luck he's far better than you give him credit. Baring a complete meltdown he's the man here for the next 10 years and I'm happy with that. I'd rather build a team around his strengths than shuffle the pack again and hope we turn up something. That strategy has failed us since Dan went.

 

Dude, stop using logic!!

 

That basically proves that Tannehill is not good enough IE not elite. If Marino were the QB on these teams Tannehill is on they would be over 500

 

Here's some more logic. The afc south ****ing sucks. Much like Peyton before him, luck gets to coast into the playoffs because the titans, texans, and jaguars have not made it very difficult.

 

For an average QB like Tannehill that is correct, but not for the elite ones.

 

The Jets and the Bills have not been so much the past 3 years either.

 

Lol Peyton manning has won 1 SB in his 14 years he sucks

F go away trolls, you fool no-one and just come off as idiots

 

The jets were 8-8 last year. The pats almost won as many games as the titans, jags, and texans did combined. Even the bills at 6-10 would have come close to being second in that division .

Put us in the afc south and we'd make the playoffs easy

 

For someone that wants to talk about using logic, you fail to use alot of it on your own in these posts. I don't even have to get into the reasons as to why since others have already adequately done so to these quoted comments. However...

You keep talking about Tannehill not being Elite, and how if he was we'd be much better, blah blah blah. Well... No ****! Everyone knows that. The problem here, is you seem to think that elite QB's grow on trees. How many of them are there right now, playing? I'd say 3. Maybe 4. Brady, Manning, Rodgers. Maybe you could throw Brees in there, but I think he's falling off. Those guys to me, are elite. Then there's a teir of great/good guys including the next probably 8 QB's. That puts us at 11 or 12. Which is where we find our very own Ryan Tannehill if you base it on QBR which I believe was being discussed in another thread here.

Now... you want to keep waiting for the elite QB, and throw out the good one, then so be it. Enjoy your miserable life as a fan. Elite QB's are extremely rare finds, and often time it just takes finding an average/good guy, and sticking him in the right system, with the right surrounding cast to help him grow into that upper echelon. Which is... exactly what we are in the process of doing. I think the NFL is extremely lucky right now to have 3 or 4 Elite QB's. The guys I mentioned are elite. Not just because they are the top 3 or 4 at their position in the league, but because they are probably in the discussion of the top 5 or so to likely ever play the position. Luck might be in that group later in his career as he continues to develop. They are RARE. There's plenty of good and very good QB's in the league, they take time to get there. Very rarely could you class them as Elite.

Lets not forget, we're talking about a QB here that played WR most of his college career who's just now coming into his own in a system that plays to his skillset, and building a team around him.

Try applying some of that logic you want others to use to your own thought processes, you'll likely get more respect around here. Although, based on your replies thus far, I don't suspect you really care about that.

 

There's variation in the play of all QBs, though that variation hovers around a higher mark for the better ones than for the lesser ones. All other things equal, when a better QB has variation downward in a game, and a lesser QB has variation upward, the lesser QB will beat the better QB on that day. However, the better QB still plays better in general than the lesser one. This is similar to how you may have a warm day in Alaska or a cold day in Los Angeles, but in general Alaska is much colder than Los Angeles. This says nothing about what Tannehill is going to be in the future. I'm simply explaining how he might have beaten better QBs (all other things equal) while still being associated with about a .500 record based on his play alone.

 

Am I the only one who doesn't think it matters what Tannehill did his rookie season? That team was BAD. We had literally no offensive talent.

I don't really care what he did last year either since he's greatly improved. I care about his ceiling and whether or not he can reach it. That is really all that matters.

 

This is ridiculous on so many levels. Tannehill was a RAW PRODUCT WITH A HIGH CEILING coming out. Did everyone forget this??? We all KNEW it would take a couple seasons for him to get it going. Tannehill is not Marino, however, Tannehill should be 9-2 or 8-3 right now, with a few more deep completions and tds I'd his receivers had been on point early in the season and the defense played in the fourth quarter with a little bit of heart.

 

This guy is sounding more and more like a certain poster who's been banned twice now...

 

And your point is caller? What are you hoping for? We don't suck hard enough to get the number one pick and we aren't gonna trade the farm for it so this is our dude. He's probably been the 2nd or 3rd best drafted qb in the past 3 drafts. What more do you want? We are more than capable of winning with him as proved this year so yeah, I'm delighted. Also I look ace in my tannehill jersey. There 2 good reasons to keep him. That doesn't include the many many other good reasons. Like the lack of experience out of college. The not getting happy feet despite being battered last year. The fact that he doesn't pout and blame like Newton or cutler. Tannehill is our guy. He's still got growing to do but I'm ok with that. There will be ups and downs. As long as the team keeps growing around him I'm happy.

 

I probably couldn't care less about an individual player's "record". It shouldn't even be a thing.

 

Was he really banned twice? Maybe it was something that I didn't see, but I never saw him say anything that seemed worthy of a ban. He and I disagreed on a lot and had some extended arguments, but I never thought he was disrespectful and always felt he had an interesting viewpoint that encouraged dialogue and made this a more interesting place. If he was banned twice for just voicing unpopular opinions, that's pretty unfortunate.

 

What's more informative in my opinion is the record a QB's play is associated with, because it indicates how much help he's going to need from elsewhere on the team for the team to be successful. Tannehill's play over his entire NFL career, all else equal, is associated with about the .500 record the Dolphins have had during that period. His play over the past eight games, however, is associated with a good bit better record, and notice the Dolphins have been .625 (5-3) during that period, rather than .500.

 

Oh numbers... yay...

Tannehill played well enough for us to win in the Green Bay game, and in the Detroit game. We lost though due to defensive collapses in both games. Lets include the Denver game in that as well for arguments sake. That just throws your theory out the window, because the QB played well enough to win, but the team around him didn't. That's a huge swing in the numbers. You just can't objectively look at things by record like this... There's 3 teams that take the field for the Dolphins each week. The offense. The defense. The special teams units. All 3 contribute to that win/loss record, regardless of the QB's performance. It's easy for a ST unit to loose a game, or a defense to loose a game where the QB plays exceptionally well. The Denver game is an example of that...

We're better off not relying on disaster of numbers when it comes to a QB, I'd rather go by what I see on the field.

 

Per Adam Beasley:

Danny's 4th season was 1987. If we keep our current scoring pace, we would score more points than each of Marino's final 13 seasons. Also, we're also on pace to score 100 points more than last season.

Danny lost a lot of games where the defense couldn't hold opponents as well.