Not a believer yet. Tannehill's had one game in his career (the last one against the Chargers) where he was IMO no question a franchise QB. Today he was typical Tannehill.. bad for a bunch, but great for some drives. One improvement: he was great when it mattered (that clutch stat people like to dismiss). Either way, we need a QB that can consistently elevate offensive play. Tannehill hasn't shown me that yet. In fact, most of the time he needs perfect surroundings to play well. Still.. the clutch stat today counts (at least for those of us who've said it's important), and that's a plus.
I will admit I have been wrong about Tannehill. I never wanted the Dolphins to draft him in the first round and I have been a harsh critic of his on the forum for the last few years. While I have always remained a Dolphin fan, my belief has been that he would never be more than a mediocre QB at best. He is proving me wrong and I am happy to admit this. The last few weeks he has made the plays in the fourth quarter of games which top tier QB's make when the game is on the line. I now happily concede that we have our QB of the future. Hopefully we can use the off season to upgrade the other areas of the team which need to improve, if this team is going to be a legitimate SB contender in the next few years. We certainly don't need to be looking to upgrade the QB position anytime in the near future. For all of you who have defended Tannehill all along, you were right and I was wrong and I freely admit it. You will now have to excuse me while I go eat crow for dinner.
And look at what Tannehill was capable of doing with 3 key OL out (Tunsil was also out) in the last two drives. Why could he not do the same earlier? We had 10 drives that ended in punts and 1 in an interception with practically no 3rd down conversions before the 2 key drives at the end. All I'm asking for is some consistency. He's proven he can play well with reduced personnel. He's never proved he can do it consistently. For me, a franchise QB has to prove that.
I've been on the fence for five years now, but I'm a believer after today as well. The stats weren't there, the game was ugly with the rain and a 2nd string line, but none of that matters when your franchise QB can rally in the final minutes and go to work. That's two weeks in a row Tannehill put his big-boy pants on when it really mattered....and there's really no higher compliment for a QB in this league. I don't care if Parker was an absolute stud or not....we went to work and got it taken care of. That's all you can ask as a fan/coach.
He's consistently winning, how's that? Since half this board is convinced QBs are the sole ones responsible for it. How was his 'consistency' with all 5 oline?
If you don't think RT is a franchise QB, it is time for you to get off this board. The Rams are an elite defense, and we got shut down in the rain. RT never gave up. He forgot the first three quarters and put the team on his back. I PROMISE you all... In the last 10 years, we woulda lost this game every single time. If you cannot see the change in culture, you are blind!!!!
None of this board is convinced QB's are solely responsible for wins and losses. In any case, if he consistently wins I'm on board. But this streak is very recent. Small within a 5-year span (or take just last 3 years if you want to exclude the first 2).
Last 2 drives Tannehill went 12 of 13 for 115 yards and 2 TDs. Difference was that he had time to throw and Devante Parker, who had screwed the pooch most of the day caught everything those last 2 drives thrown at him.
Then you haven't been paying attention the last few years. There are plenty of people that will solely blame Tannehill for games out of his control, or solely blame Tannehill for not 'bringing' us to the playoffs, as if only he does it by himself. No I won't dig you up quotes. It's a joke you'd even try and argue that.
I've paid attention and explicitly asked those posters accused of believing wins and losses are solely due to the QB what they really think. And guess what? Not one poster believes that as far as I can remember. There's a difference between assigning credit/blame to one player vs. saying everything is due to one player. They may assign credit/blame to one player, but no one believes wins are solely due to a QB.
It's god damn sad that there's STILL people who don't think Tanny is good QB after what he did on those last two drives. But hey I'm not going to go after them after this. I'm just going to straight up ignore them.
Then how do you explain the dozens of posters (at least) who claim Tannehill isn't the 'one' because HE HIMSELF has not brought us to the playoffs? or HE HIMSELF is just not 'clutch' regardless of the team. Just because it hasn't happened recently doesn't mean it hasn't happened at all. It's been happening for YEARS.
5 straight wins with good statlines mixed in with some career best days is consistency. He appears to be looking for 'perfection' and not consistency.
In their minds, a better QB would've led us to the playoffs with the same team, for example. No way to test it, but that's what they mean when they assign blame to a single player. Doesn't mean it's not a team game.
Except unfortunately, What you are saying is NOT what they say. they say "Tannehill SUCKS because HE can't/doesn't get us to the playoffs". You're assuming. I'm quoting. Let it go dude. You may have asked a few people here to further explain their positions, that doesn't cover all posters on this site. Maybe not everyone MEANS it that way, But quite a few appear to. Plenty of people have seen what i'm talking about.
Let me address this. If you look at the SB winners last 10 years, you basically get a who's who list of QB's. Yeah.. Peyton wasn't great last year, but otherwise it seems (statistically) like you need a great QB (or at least great QB play in the playoffs) to win the SB. So while what Tannehill has done last 5 games is really encouraging (especially the game against the Chargers), I really feel like one should be absolutely certain it's the type of QB that can win a SB with high probability before proclaiming we have our QB. That's all.
I'll change my mind when you present me a poster that explicitly says wins and losses are due to nothing else except the QB.
Even though you want to dismiss it statistically, Denver still proved you can win the big game with a water boy at QB.
No offense, but screw the last few years. Seriously. Anyone who is still saying "I told you so" is just a complete jerk (and that's the nicest word I could think of). The team is winning and that's SUPPOSED TO BE all that really matters. I think the moderators need to make a "Stuck in 1999-2015" sub-thread to put all these senseless arguments in. The "leave the board" comment was definitely out of line, but it gets so old for every thread to turn into a hate-fest about what happened in the past or who was smarter last year.
I already said i'm not quoting for you. It's been here on this board since his first season, well before you were. Don't care if you believe it or not.
And the Giants did it twice with Eli who if we're being honest here wasn't a Elite QB when he won his titles.
You're confusing him saying no one on this site has ever said or meant 'Tannehill didn't get us to the playoffs' and me telling him he is comically incorrect, with being "stuck in 1999-2015"
Well if 5 straight wins with CAREER best days and game winning drives in Q4 aren't consistency then I can't wait to see what Tannehill looks like when he IS consistent with a consistently healthy o-line (Ohwait)
I'm not confusing anything. If someone says something that obviously "biased" (again, nicest word I could think of there), it doesn't mean that it's time to hijack the entire thread to create a huge argument about nothing. But it's correct, Tannehill has never been to the playoffs, so he obviously hasn't got us there yet. Neither has anyone else on this roster. Those are FACTS my friend, not things that need to be argued about.
If only people worded it like you did, but they don't. Those are also FACTS, guy. With his line being healthy the past 4 games before today he was almost the textbook definition of consistent and GOOD and he's arguing about consistency in a fluff thread. It's a joke.
The difference on those last drives was that the play calling improved. They did a bunch of chips to help out the pass pro. The WRs also didn't have the drops they had earlier. Also the rain let up or stopped. While the conditions were far from pristine, they improved.
I have been a huge anti Tannehill person, despite all the horrible play today he rallied the troops and that game winning TD was purely amazing. It seems to me Tannehill is learning to like winning, this could be dueto Gase approach. Keep winning guys.
It's a joke. Everybody will say that they don't solely blame the QB, but will then turn around and do exactly that. They go on and on about how Tannehill isn't the one b/c he doesn't elevate the play of everyone around him or individually carry the team to the playoffs.
This is being severely overlooked by some people. Passing game takes a huge toll when it's raining. Seemed like in the 4th quarter it stopped raining, is this true?
I agree the play calling improved at the end. In fact, one mystery for me is why the play calling under Gase has sometimes been so bad, like during much of the first part of today's game. I expected better. Anyway.. whatever leads to the desired consistency is fine with me. Better play calling, healthy OL, or better QB play. As you and others say it's a team game. But I still have to see the consistency. This type of 11 consecutive punts or INT drives, even accounting for the Rams defense, isn't indicative of a team that can challenge the Patriots.