Adam just for reference on Jake Long. He had one holding penalty that I know of that wiped out a 20 yard gain (1 of 2 holds on that drive itself for the Rams). He also missed a bit of the game injured suggesting he's still not healthy. Plus its Arizona. Not exactly pass rush central. Verdict is way out still. Martin needs to get his crap together regardless....although I would love to go after Jacksonville's FA Monroe in the off season.
You think he can see his WRs on either side of the field, 5 -15 yards from the LOS without moving their head? A football field is 150 feet wide. Maybe when they're 30-40 yards down the field he doesn't have to move his head. On top of all this, do you want your QB using his peripheral vision only to decide to throw a ball, with a sneaky DB lurking just outside of it? I'm not saying he locks on his WRs too much, I'm saying you need to move your head buddy.
Show me where I said that all of Tannehill's INT's last year were because he locked on to receivers. I dare you.
I didn't say you did. I asked a question, based on the video you put up. Do you understand a question is not the same thing as a statement of fact? I maintain that you can't tell a QB is locked on to a receiver based on broadcast footage, and you post broadcast footage of INTs to try and counter that point...twice. Either you think it proves your point because the INTs were made because Tannehill was locked on to receivers OR you posted the video for no reason. i don;'t which one of those was your point, hence the goddamned question I asked (which was not a statement.)
You didn't? You didn't say this in post #72?: "Wait...so now your completely ludicrous argument has changed to all of Tannehill's INTs last year were because he locked on to receivers?" Golly, it sure looks like you did.
So you don't understand the difference between a statement and question. But again those amazing eyes of yours can see what the QB is thinking. Ok man.
If you don't think that NFL Quarterbacks turn their heads in terms of scanning the field, reading Safeties and following their receivers, then you're in fantasy land. That doesn't mean that there aren't quick reads or plays in which a QB doesn't scan the field before throwing- what it does mean is that your picture, while interesting, is indicative of nothing as a whole, in terms of what you claim it to. Tannehill was known for locking on to receviers at Texas A&M and as a Dolphins rookie- your claim that one picture proves otherwise is bogus, and your entire thesis deserves nothing more than getting flushed down the toilet. Tannehill looked better on Sunday, but that's one game- hopefully he keeps it up. Your blanket statements based on one picture and one game are a fail, plain and simple.
You have not given any evidence to the contrary. I have. I have proven that a QB can in fact be looking in a direction his head is not pointed in. If he can do that, then you cannot claim he locks on to recievers unless you've seen footage that shows where his eyes are looking. I've proven this with common sense. I've proven this with a photo. I've proven this with video. All you've done is basically attack and insult me, on your way to changing your point numerous times, misread posts with your amazing eye for detail, and not prove a single effing thing. I suspect you're doing this because you take great pride in sitting on your *** while screaming at the TV about a QB locking on to receivers because you think it makes you football smart or something. (<------not a statement of fact by the way, I'm guessing at the reason you've been so effing hostile and steadfast in a point with no merit).
Doesn't really matter where his eyes are. Defenders are going to read his head and shoulders. Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 4
The issue at hand, is can fans tell if a QB is locking on to receivers based on broadcast footage in real time with accuracy. The answer is no. A QB cannot be locked on to a receiver with just his head and shoulders. As for what you said specifically, that is not true. No one is taught to watch the QB's shoulders. They are taught ot watch the QB's eyes.
What's the point of having his eyes in a different place? He's not moving the defenders doing that, and at dome point his head and shoulders have to move toward where the ball is going. Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 4
Has any one pointed out that the typical field of view for the human eyes is almost exactly 180 degrees horizontally infront of you ? There is no reason that he couldn't keep his head 100% still and scout near the entire field. Now common sense will tell you he shouldn't, and he won't. But he can. Those that were saying the field is too wide to do so are really off base. I don't remember the exact conversion, but the human horizontal FOV is roughly wider than a football field to begin with.... Tanny had/has a laser lockdown problem that he is working on, no doubt. But it is 100% accurate to say his eyes can be doing things we as viewers cannot see and only interpret as locking on... The pic is a great example.
Nothing is changing. I'm just saying the premise of your theory is flawed. Locking onto a receiver isn't dictated by his eyes. Its dictated by his head, shoulders, and feet. Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 4
That's not true though. This is not the NBA, there aren't "no look" passes. No QB will throw to a person he isn't seeing with his eyes. That's why defenders are trained to watch his eyes and not his feet or shoulders. You're flat out wrong. To prove yourself right, you'll need to prove QBs are throwing the ball to receivers they aren't looking at.
My opinion on this is a little mixed or at least different than the argument here. I do believe the claim that RT locked on to his receivers is false, both for last year and this year. But I also believe that you can tell when a QB goes through his progressions and looks off defenders from the broadcast or more easily from the all-22. I don't know if people remember the old Edge NFL Match-up show? I imagine it's still on somewhere. Anyway, Jaws made a point of showing when the QBs were and were not going through their progressions and/or looking off defenders. But it was obvious that RT was doing that even last year. The reason that fans seem to get confused is that i quick passing offenses, (like we were trying to run), there are many plays where you are supposed to just look at at one or two targets in one area of the field. This is not an example of the QB locking on. It is the design of the play, yet inevitably some fans would see that and bring out the old "he locks on his receivers too much" crap. That's why IMO that says more about the poster's lack of knowledge than about RT. On a few of the others "lies": While Bush was great in Detroit, it's kind of ridiculous to claim that he would have performed as well here behind that OL performance. I was mixed on whether or not to keep Bush, so I don't have a strong conviction as to which way was the right call, but using that stat line as proof of anything is just stupid. Equally ridiculous is using the stat line as proof we should have re-signed Long. Also Hartline is clearly a #2 WR. I don't understand why the stuff about him being a #1 is even brought up. The most anybody ever said was that they thought he could be good enough for a season until a true #1 was brought in. That, by definition, is saying that Hartline is not a true #1. It also declares that he is a true #2 despite the lack of TDs that became such a singular issue for much of the board. Hartline is a good #2 WR and was a smart and reasonable re-signing.
Defenders aren't trained to watch his eyes. They're trained to watch his feet and shoulders. The fact that you can't throw to someone you're not looking at just proves that the QB will need to reset his body.
FACT: I have yet to see Omar Kelly acknowledge that Tannehill got his arbitrary, made up, bull**** KILL stat.
If Ryan threw the ball to the right shortly after the picture was taken, this would have been looking off the coverage.
Who cares if he has to reset his body before he throws? That has nothing to do with locking on to receivers. The simple fact of the matter, is a fan may be watching the game and think Tannehill is targeting Hartline because his is that way, but he may actually be watching Wallace on the right or even Gibson in the middle. What you are inexplicably arguing is that QBs are making "no look" passes all the time. That's the only result of what you're saying.
No, I'm saying targeting a player is a result of what your shoulders and feet dictate, not your eyes.
No its not. Its what people misrepresent as "targeting" and why they are wrong when they scream QB X is locking on to his receivers.
Right, you believe that DBs are reading a QBs eyeballs. I believe they're reading his head, shoulders, and feet. You've made that clear and cant go back. Everyone can make up their mind as to what they believe is reality.
WTF? I'm not going back on anything. A QB will not throw the ball where he's not looking. It doesn't happen. You're...just....wrong. Again, what you're arguing is that a QB will be facing to the right, eyes looking left and throw the ball to the right. That never happens. His eyes go to where he's throwing first and its why all you hear, "watch the QB's eyes....". They never say watch the QBs shoulders or feet.
Good luck with Safeties 30-40 yards away from the QB seeing where his pupils are pointed inside his eyeballs and reading off of that. Defensive players judging based on head, shoulders and feet is much more on target- DBs would need binoculars to see where the QBs pupils are pointed, makes no sense.
This is a fundamental disagreement we have. You believe that defensive players are trained to read the QBs eyeballs. I believe they are trained to read the head, shoulders, and feet. It is what it is.
Seems like a point of distinction is that "not locking on to receivers" is different from "looking off defenders". The savviest QBs do both. I believe all Fin_D is saying is that you can't tell the first from the broadcast, which the photo is ample evidence of. Now, looking off defenders, that's definitely going to take body language to accomplish when defenders are moving downfield and can't focus in on the eyeballs. Apples and oranges, both good fruits for a QBs toolbox. or something like that.
Locking onto a receiver is when a QB right after the snap, turns his head, shoulders and feet and points it at one guy and waits and waits and throws it. You can tell that by tape. You don't need to see his eyes. If he goes through a progression then obviously his head will turn. He can stare straight ahead and then at the last second turn to his WR and throw it. Locking onto a receiver requires he eventually throw that way. I'm not saying Tanehill locks onto his receivers, because I haven't watched the film. I'll leave that conclusion up to those who have. But I'm saying absolutely you can tell if he's locking onto a WR from the tube. Because after the ball is snapped, the QB turns to their favored target and waits for the route to develop, then throws it. It's that simple.
No. You and many others are wrong about what locking on to a receiver means. - If Tannehill is facing Wallace and looking at Wallace, then he's locked on to Wallace: Irrelevant though because you can't tell that from broadcast. - If Tannehill is facing Wallace and looking at Hartline, then he's not locked on to a receiver: Irrelevant though because you can't tell that from broadcast. Locking on to a receiver is a problem because then there's visual cues as to where the pass is going. However, the pass must go where the QB is looking. QBs do not throw no look passes. They will reorient their head, shoulders, feet, etc. to where they are eyes are pointed. Sure, 30 yards down the field a safety isn't looking at the eyes. Its also not fairly common for a safety to be standing around 30 yards down field still waiting for subtle visual clues from the QB anyway. Based on the photo, if Tannehill throws to his right, then he did exactly what he was supposed to do in regards to looking off the defenders. If he throws to his left, then he's clearly going through his progressions like he is supposed to do. Neither thing he could have done if he was locking on to his receiver yet from broadcast, that's exactly what people would have said he was doing. Why are they saying that? Because, people cannot tell if a QB is locking on from broadcast footage in real time.
IMO that's wishful thinking. I hope we get him more touches myself and he learns to act better when we don't. He admitted he was just upset with himself after he was talked to.
Why is this even a debate?? Ryan Tannehill played fantastic and Fin D is finally spot on with his assessment. Just because your a homer, doesn't mean you can't be right. For all the doubters...take a look at the Hartline TD, and tell me he locks on. He moves the safety with his eyes and throws a "perfect" ball to Hartline for a TD. That is fairly damaging evidence to the "lock on" theory. Besides, if you have ever played QB, and I have for many years, there are times when locking on is better for accuracy. When you know the pattern can't be reached by anything but single coverage, "locking on" is optimal for the best pass and quickest pass possible. It helps time the reciever and you know instantly when he breaks free and the ball should be released. You look off, ONLY to move safetys and linebackers when needed. It is a tactic not a rule to playing QB. That is all ! - You may resume your futile debate over Ryan Tannehill, because he is going to be your QB for a good many years. Believe that.
Yes but we're talking about cases where as soon as ball is snapped, Tannehill or whoever is the QB, locks his shoulders, head body and feet to Wallace's side. I don't care if his eyes dart around. From the broadcast, if Tannehill locks his whole body to Wallace's side, and then throws it to Wallace, that's locking on your receiver. His eyes darting around mean nothing until his body shifts that way, because he is never going to throw elsewhere until his body changes. A safety is not going to be fooled simply by eyes darting around. Until Tannehill moves his head and body the other way there is no threat of a pass. That's why the good ones do the ol' pump fake. If eyes were enough pump fakes would not be needed. Pump fakes take a lot of time. Again, I'm not saying Tanehill is locking onto a receiver. I'm saying, when one does lock on it's obvious. Wide receivers line up pretty damn far unless they're in the slot. A QB locking on will have their head and shoulders tilted one way then throw it that way as the route develops. You can absolutely see this from a broadcast. A few times yesterday Tanny was going through his progression and his whole body was turning. That is NOT locking onto a receiver. Until a QB has turned his head he is under no threat to throw it that way. IF tanehill is facing Wallace, his eyes are on Hartline, then he turns around and throws it to Hartline, then yeah he's not locked on. But the players are usually so far apart in order to get a good look at coverage you have to turn your head. If the WR is on the edge of your peripheral vision than what or who is lurking right outside of that peripheral vision? Probably a defender. You gotta turn the head and I don't get those who say you don't. That's how INT's get made.
