Check out @FinsBroadcaster's Tweet: https://twitter.com/FinsBroadcaster/status/744168186455654400?s=09 It may not say much to most people who read this stat, but to me it's means a lot. This is because I feel we have such a good team and Tannehill is a part of it.
Here is the original article it was based from: http://miamiherald.typepad.com/spor...tannehill-dolphins-post-minicamp-nuggets.html
After years and years of our quarterbacks making stupid choices in order to take something that simply wasn't there, its so nice to finally have one who doesn't end the drive himself when things are going well.
KC Joyner has become relevant again because PFF took their premium statistics offline but there's a reason PFF easily knocked him off the pedestal in the first place. I wonder about some of the stats that Joyner puts together, not least of which is the 'bad decision' stat. For the longest time he kept trying to convince us that Ben Roethlisberger is really a terrible quarterback based on that stat, if I recall.
I always liked KC Joyner's stats more than PFF's. I didn't agree with everything of course, but I thought he was more reliable than PFF. He just had fewer WTF opinions compared to my observations than PFF. As for this stat in particular. I have been saying for a while that I felt Tannehill was a very good decision maker. I never agreed with the Lazor criticism in that regard. IMO the "bad decisions" seemed to more often be the result of poor play calls or poor play design that left the QB with either no good options or just unreasonably small windows to make a decision in. I wanted Tannehill to run more in those situations b/c it was the least bad option. I felt Tannehill tried too hard to trust the system that didn't deserve the trust. But going forward if Gase is everything we hope he is then QB runs will be less important and usually the less desirable option. I don't see Tannehill as a maverick who can/will compensate for bad coaching. I see him as a guy who excels at playing within a system and if he's paired with a good system then he can produce at an elite level. He's a good soldier. If you give him the right general the team can be very successful.
Even Philbin was complimentary of Tannehill's decision making. The problems are usually with the execution of the play - either by Tannehill, the OL, the backs, TEs, or WRs...
In what way? I don't see a single post in this thread that suggests that. Perhaps I missed the one you're referring to.
I was actually responding to your post, Gase has said that QB17 needs to make better decisions, I wasn't trying to be confrontational, just pointing out that Gase is of the opinion that his decision process needs to get better.
Completely agree... as for "Gase has said that QB17 needs to make better decisions", that's completely taken out of context. The quote from Gase was: Gase was both pointing out the good things Tannehill has done as well as pointing out where he needed to improve. He never ever said that Tannehill solely makes bad decisions. If anything Gase has been very complimentary of Tannehill since Gase has came on-board.
Thats kind of mincing words, no? Gase has identified that as one of his problems that needs fixing, so that it can start "translating into wins", is how I think he put it.
Absolutely not. Throwing to a covered receiver for an interception is a bad decision. Throwing for 11 yards and a first down to an open receiver is an OK decision Anticipating that a receiver will break coverage and throwing for a 40 yard TD is a good decision. Avoiding bad decisions is one thing. Making good decisions is another. You can have a QB like Jay Cutler who makes good and bad decisions. You can have a QB like Alex Smith who avoids bad decisions, but doesn't make good decisions. Both need to make better decisions for different reasons.
I would argue that making a first down is always a good decision. That's what I want out of my quarterback, and my offense. Move the chains, move the chains, move the chains, and don't turn the ball over. Then you need to make things happen in the red zone.
Yeah, but you're talking like this is some hypothetical exercise, when Gase has determined that it is an area of weakness that needs to be corrected in QB17. Whenever a HC points out an area of a player that needs to get better, it's because it isn't currently good enough.
Ok...you do agree that Gase could look at a play where Tannehill makes a completion, and could see a BETTER option available on the play, and could say "He needs to make a better decision." And you can see how that would be far different than Tannehill making a bad decision and throwing a pick on a play, right? Again, to many people always looking at these things as a glass half full, and trying to fit a quote to an agenda. Gase was clearly talking about a difference between a completion for a gain, and a completion for a big gain.
I mean, Gase said that he's "smart as **** right now." That doesn't sound like a guy who the coach thinks makes bad decisions.
In all honesty, if anyone is looking at a glass half full it's you, you are well known around here for being a homer, which I don't consider a bad word btw. The truth is, and try to live my life by this axiom, there is no such thing as a glass of water that is half full, or half empty, it is simply a half of a glass of water, pessimism and optimism are impressions on either side of a coin, and I am more concerned about the metal. When a coach identifies a thing that needs to get better, it is currently not good enough, obviously, or else he wouldn't be saying it needs to get better.
Yeah, I meant to say people looking at the glass half empty. LOL But, I can't help but notice you truly ignored the point I made.
Has anyone ever wondered why in the last 4 years we've never had one of those "broken play/coverage" touchdowns? I think the last one I remember from Tannehill was to Hartline in the 2nd game of his career at Arizona. Other than that, I can't remember a situation where a guy is wide open down field, we threw it to him, and it was a monster play/TD. That's what I'm taking from the last few points. I agree. I think there is a difference between a good decision and a better decision when it comes to QB play. Tannehill has done a great job of not making those bad decisions. The next step is him seeing those big plays when they are there and completing them.
I took that to mean in Gase's new system rather than what Tannehill has done in the past under different coaches. I know he showed some game film examples, mostly praising Tannehill, and that he'll obviously watch film to see what Tannehill does well and not well, but you can't always know what the old coaching regime was emphasizing. And reality is that I'm sure Aaron Rogers and every other QB at the top of that best decision maker's list is also saying, along with their coaches, that they need to make better decisions.
Point taken on different coaching, but reality is what it currently is, hoping that Gase makes a difference doesn't change the fact that he wants QB17 to make better decisions. You'll never hear any coach say that AR needs to make better decisions, that would be an idiotic thing to say in the press, and the coach would get flayed alive for it, and while we're on the subject, QB17 and AR have Philbin in common as a coach, just sayin'.
Our past receivers under Philbin rarely created that sort of separation and our OL rarely gave us time for such things to develop. That said, watch the Rishard Matthews highlights from the past 2 seasons. While Matthews had limited snaps under Philbin, he had a knack for getting open on Tannehill scrambles and Tannehill finding him. Against the Bills, on a busted play, Tannehill hit him on a scramble for a 46 yard TD. Also, Stills got open deep against the Giants last season, on an audible by Tannehill, and Tannehill hit him for a 47 yard TD IIRC...
I've often thought about that too. Not just under, but going back through the years. Every week when you watch highlights of other games, you see it happen all the time, and not just with the good teams. You'll see lousy quarterbacks, and lousy WRs do it and I just think, "Why is that never, ever us?"
now that I agree with. It is not like other teams play perfect defense only against us for all 4 quarter. These break downs are being missed.
Getting big plays on broken coverages isn't about WRs ability to create separation. Again, the one play I reminded of is Brian Hartline getting that big TD vs Arizona. He's the poster boy for not getting separation, yet it still happened. There were multiple plays available for that across the years. Matter of factly, I remember a few distinctly with Jarvis Landry. While those plays you highlight are nice, those are due to Ryan Tannehill making plays outside the pocket. The Kenny Stills play was just a fantastic throw. It wasn't a blown coverage, nor was he wide open. It was just a great throw by Tannehill. I think the lack of those plays are due to multiple reasons, one being the premise of this topic. Ryan Tannehill worked under the idea of getting the ball out as soon as possible. It wasn't exactly looking over a defense and trying to attack it. Now, that's not Ryan's fault. You can say that's the fault of the vision of the coordinator/offense, etc. Hopefully, we will see more of that this year and the coming years in an offense tailored to make big plays and develop Ryan Tannehill to understand mismatches/advantages/broken overages, etc.
I think he will see those opportunities for better plays when the offensive line protects him longer.
I would argue right back with you. If Stills and Parker are both wide open for huge plays but Tanny checks it down to Landry 5 yards from the LOS, who then gets 6 yac, and a first down, I wouldn't label that as a good decision. Dink and dunk offenses are HARD to sustain. You need Brady like precision, and Belichick like design. Chunk plays are the best plays for offenses to score. Two years ago we had the most red zone trips of any team. That would seem like a great thing, but it wasn't. It was a symptom of us not being able to score from outside the red zone. Up until week 14 or so, we had one TD from outside the red zone and it was a 21 yard pass to Wallace. That's horrible, and terrible. That was our best year, but teams will sit on you if you can't get chunk yardage. Kenny Stills is our best shot. Prior to coming here, his numbers were ridiculous. Drew Brees was only accurate on 59% of his catches according to PFF, yet he caught 79% of passes thrown his way. 79% would be fantastic for someone like Landry who had a 5.4 yards average depth of throw. Stills was at 12.6 yards adot. If we want to be explosive, we need more Parker, more Stills, to go along with Landry, and we'll see about Carroo. Landry is an excellent supplemental piece, but when he's the only main focus of your team, that's not a great thing.
Big YAC plays that come from either great play design or a wonderful move by the man with the ball are always welcome and awesome. There's little downside as long as the player is safe with the ball. Its also great when under similar circumstances a player is wide open and the QB gets him the ball for a huge gain. I have never been, nor will I ever be, a fan of throwing the ball deep into coverage though.
If you watched all the games in full, not just the highllghts, you'd see its just as rare for other team as it is for the Dolphins. You're comparing the best plays from 30 other teams against full games of the 'phins.
Understood, certainly. But what I meant was that these kinds of plays almost never happen for the Dolphins, period. Ones where the other team just wets their pants on defense, and the Dolphins have a big play on offense fall into their laps. It happens on defense at an about league average rate, I'd say, but not offense. Not even in the 90s when Dan was under center.
I don't know about that. It seems like weekly there is a break down in Dolphins coverage that allows for a big gain, while the Dolphins very seldom if ever get one.