The Miami Dolphins are setting Ryan Tannehill up for failure

My abacus just slipped a disc. I'll get back to you on that.

 

Tannehill will be getting set up for failure if no improvements are made to his surrounding cast next year. Until that's determined I wouldn't label him as being set up for failure. A lot can happen between now and then, and hopefully he'll be playing through his mid 30s.

 

Getting production from two freakin receivers all year is sonic mind blowing material.

Can you imagine if one of them were to miss any time...

Hopefully the kid will become a better Qb because of it, like the analogy that fin D used..him trying to fit it into tight situations this year could benefit next year when things around him improve..

We have a whole damn offense to build guys..

 

RTs struggles belong to him. Sure it would benefit him to have a more talented surrounding cast but it does not change the fact that he is going through his growing pains before our eyes each and every Sunday. Right now his biggest enemy is himself. Nobody is at fault, its just a process.

 

I agree..I can judge whether a Qb is doing well or not regardless of what their stats say, throwing to the right receiver, being as accurate as possible, good touch, trajectory, velocity, he's shown well in these depts....I think a lot of his problems are in the pocket.

 

What rookie qb? I seriously am drawing a blank. This team lacks consistent playmakers. I don't know how anyone can dispute this. Yea he knows the offense which is why he isn't throwing into triple coverage as much as Luck does ( he has 18 picks and should have about 6 more.), but if you have NO ONE that could turn a five yard pass into a 20 yard pass, then you are not going to look good.

 

No, actually he could play exactly like RGIII, Andrew Luck, or Russell Wilson if he only had better players around him, and then I would have something to feel really good about with this team right now, instead of being miserable.

 

Im calling bull**** on this. You could plug RT into any of those offenses and he would not get the same production that his counterparts are getting. He isnt a starter caliber QB yet, they are.

 

Then we agree. My winking smiley was supposed to reveal my sarcasm above.

 

Both those players have receivers that make plays. No one is saying Tannehill is as good as these guys. He was a raw and needs time. However to say that he should do better because he knows the playbook is ludicrous when has very little help.

 

Right, to say that he's doing better because he's played in this offense for years is "ludicrous."

My lord, what is your threshold for "ludicrous"?

 

What good is knowing plays when people can't get consistently open or make plays?

 

Sorry guess Im slow this morning. Have not had my coffee yet.

 

Uh, you make fewer mistakes?

 

I don't see colors until I've had my coffee.

 

So he throws into double or triple coverage alot.

 

Agree... No doubt in my mind that not just Tannehill, but our whole offense was set up for failure this year. There's just not enough talent at the skill positions. Same thing we've been saying since Irelands first day on the job when Big Bill was still here too. Nothing has changed at that position. Bess emerged as a slot receiver, sure, and Hartline appears to be a decent option, but nothing too special because of inconsistency. That's our #1 and #2 targets?? Yikes. Im not sure why Fasano isnt involved more in the passing game, but he's not exactly a game breaker either. Egnew was thought to be that guy, but he can't sniff the field. It's just a dismal lack of talent on offense. It would be difficult for anyone to succeed at the QB position with that lack of talent, and help that RT has had to work with. Tannehill has made some mistakes, and played like a rookie at times, but its easy to see he has the tools to succeed, now its time to give him the help.

 

You need to factor in the 50% emotional enhancer. Good Luck!

 

[video=youtube;lNlGvq0c2F8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNlGvq0c2F8[/video]

 

LOL when it come to RT its excuses

Now for Matt Moore, their the truth

 

I agree with this. Its not working out this way, but IMO he was absolutely set up for success by having his college offense, college HC
and his college QB coach brought with him.

 

Well really we don't know whether it's working out this way or not, because for all we know his QB rating would be a whole lot lower if these elements weren't in place, or it could be the same or even better. It's entirely possible it is helping him a great deal, however.

 

It's not working in the sense that I don't think Tannehill is playing as well as the coaching staff hoped/thought he would.

 

Given how raw he was coming out, I think getting him up to the level of the average rookie QB, which is where he is, is quite the accomplishment, and I think it's directly attributable to his familiarity with the system he's running, and his OC's familiarity with him.

That's the logical perspective at least, IMO.

 

The question that needs to be asked then is this: Is the offenses struggles the result of the rookie QB or the pitiful talent that surrounds him? (And yes, as I type this I see where my question may lead this thread. And it is not my intent.)

 

I think its fair to say both.

Tannehill has not reached his ceiling, not even close. And we don't have a lot of explosive weapons around him.

 

I agree.
Also, the more I think about it, the more I think the team may have set Tannehill up to fail.
I think they tried to set him up for success by bring in all the A&M stuff. But throwing him out there with all the other stiffs on offense was a no-win situation for Tanny.
In the end, starting him will probably help in the long run because playing time was what he needed more than anything. But the lack of talent on offenses made it next to impossible to be successful.

 

Of course you think that, it further solidifies your Ireland hate.

I maintain, making him work without a lot of talent has just as much possibility to be better as it does to be worse. Its why batters put weights on their bat in warm ups.

 

Dude, did you not read my post. I'm trying to make this thread not about Ireland and his suckiness.

 

I don't hate Ireland, therefore I think that of the talent on offense.
I think that of the talent on offense, therefore I hate Ireland.

 

Every post you make brings up your Ireland hate, in bright bold colors.

The simple fact of the matter is that Tannehill will either come out better or worse because he doesn't have enough options, it could realistically be either. To state you think it will be one or the other without knowing anything about Tannehill's mental make up is agenda based.

 

No, because you think that of Ireland you think it will end up causing harm to Tannehill.

 

I think the interpretation of the statistics is interesting.

So, if I understand part of the argument correctly, Fasano who is 28 years old and is now in his 5th year as a starter is part of the no-talent options beyond Hartline and Bess. Looking at Fasano the last 3 years:
2010: 39 catches, 59 attempts, 528 yards, 13.5 YPC, 8.95 YAC
2011: 32 catches, 54 attempts, 451 yards, 14.1 YPC, 8.35 YAC
2012: 30 catches, 52 attempts, 233 yards, 7.8 YPC, 4.48 YAC

Keep in mind that Fasano had Henne and Moore as his QBs so it wasn't like Brady or Manning were throwing to him. Wonder how many yards he would have if he did...

We have a TE who should be in his prime as a 5th year starter and 28 years old who is averaging around 6 yards less per catch and 4 yards less per attempt this year than he did over the past two years. Which is more likely...A) significant decline in Fasano's talent, B) offensive scheme, or C) rookie QB not able to incorporate TE into offense effectively.

I would say C) definitely and B) is a contributing factor. Saying the problem is A) as to why Hartline/Bess have 60% of passing yards is definitively an interesting way to look at it.

Of course, we also have Reggie Bush getting targeted the fewest times per game (3.1 targets per game) in his career to go along with the fewest completions (2.3 completions per game) in his 7 year career.

I would think if a roster is deplete from talent at the WR position a TE and RB who have proven to be reliable options in the past should be incorporated more, not less into the passing game.

Given our roster I wonder how much more balanced yards would be if we had a veteran QB identifying the best place to throw as the play develops and spreading the ball around as opposed to a rookie QB who has more of a tendency to lock on to his primary WR.

 

It will be one or the other though.
I'm not convinced which side I fall on yet.
Try and turn this into an "I hate Ireland" debate all you want, I don't care.
My feelings on Ryan Tannehill playing this season don't really have much to do with Ireland. If you really want to have yet another Ireland debate lets move to one of the other 562 Ireland threads on this website.

 

Again, no.
I've said many times I wanted Tannehill to start because he needs playing time more than anything.
All I said was it's possible the lack of talent on offense MIGHT end up causing harm to him.
Or, hopefully Tannehill is a mental stud and this season only makes him better.

 

Well I can tell you this: the team as a whole is doing no worse than the average team that's gotten similar play from its rookie QB since 2004. And I see nothing going on with this particular defense that would account for that in itself. Therefore I'd venture to say the offense's struggles are almost completely due to the rookie QB.

 

So the porous offensive line, a sub-par WR corps and lack of big play talent has nothing to do with it?
We'll agree to disagree then.

 

We can do that, or you can present a convincing, objective case for why the team is playing no worse than the average team that's gotten similar play from its rookie QB since 2004, despite what you believe are its inadequacies in those areas, and then we would both agree with your point of view.

Those are your choices.

 

No, you can't tell us that. It's a superficial, baseless statement.