My name is Ryan Tannehill, and this is my city.

Forecast is to be close to 70 today though, may go golfing later. Later in the season, I want to go snow skiing in the morning and play a round of golf in the afternoon. Been wanting to do that since I moved here 10 years ago.

 

Not to rain on any parade, I love what Tanny is doing too, but doesn't the progress we've seen all relate back, week in and week out, to the performance by the OL... As the OL plays, so does the progress/digression of this O go.... And even tho Tanny did have some late game heroics, remember that the O only scored 13 points. We aren't going to win too many games at 13 points per...

 

So jealous. CO is amazing

 

Happens in Seattle all the time

 

The AAA only holds like 40, 000 or more fewer people. Apples and oranges.

 

I'm enjoying the fact that two people on here that live in Florida would rather live in Colorado.

 

Only until January.... then the yearning for propping one's feet up on the transom with two lines behind and two on the riggers, and a cold one in hand would kick in. Beat's kissing a tree at warp three any day!

 

Do you bother reading any of the thread BEFORE you post?

 

I live in Vermont..and would rather live in Colorado.

 

The fact of the matter is this - Shula established a culture of winning, that playoffs was never in thoughts it was assumed. It was could we advance in the playoffs.

Then he was forced out and we became a comedy of errors. Dallas had a run after Landry after forcing him out that most would love here. BUT they still are a joke because they messed with the formula. Pitt got lucky but what they did diff was they didnt panic and didnt falter. They stuck with Cowher in some lean times, yes he had success but he had some duds as well.

They dont reach for names, they won 2 super bowls with a coach we passed on.

What does this mean, what am I getting at? Is that sometimes you have to get out of your own way and build success, stop panic mode.Panic mode makes you interview for HC when you have one. It makes you do dumb things.

If you believe Philbin is the guy, then you only replace him when you have the evidence that you cant win with him. You draft Tannehill, you have to know what he is and what he needs and until you have provided all the toools and he still fails, then you replace him. You believe the GM is the guy, you stick with him until its clear and undeniable the team is devoid of talent.

See a winning organization is one where the owner through the kicker are on the same page and are working together. You tweak what is needed, you leave alone what doesnt. You dont make decisions on emotion.

 

Great points sir, and imo should be it's own thread topic cause I don't feel like it's been logically discussed...it's always been a hard concept to get a feel for, sticking with your coach thru the rough times, even if it doesn't fit the perception as to what is a good progression, so many variables come into play when trying to judge a head coach..I truly think the organization has to be patient until he's had a fair enough time to aquire his type of players, I don't think two years is enough time to do that, I mean if your going to hire the head coach then you must believe in his vision for how the team is going to perform, and how their gonna go about getting there, that's why I'm content with an improvement on win total, and not a playoff ultimatum.. I believe three offseasons is enough time to aquire your type of players, so in year three how that particular team performs during the season should be a direct reflection of how that coaches vision materialized.

 

I'm a Tannehill fan also, but he still has a number of humps to get over yet before he can truly be considered "the guy".

I remember Mark Sanchez starting out his sophomore season with 8 TD's and 0 INTs. Practically everyone up here thought he was their franchise guy. But he still had some holes in his game he has never been able to fix. Tannehill has parts of his game that need improving, which are on him and not necessarily caused by circumstances around him.

 

28 attempts for 208 yds and one TD is decent, not great. Considering the opponent you can bump that up to good. But by no means was that a great performance IMO.

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

 

Efficiency would increase if there wasn't a PI on that Wallace pass in OT though.

 

I grew up watching Griese and then Marino. It's pathetic imo how low the bar has become at the QB position. Miami was 3 for 14 on 3rd downs and the offense barely outscored the defense 13 to 9. As was indicated the running game was working and the OL played well, yet Tannehill was able to lead Miami to "3 points" in the second half of a tightly contested game. Played great, REALLY?

The best that can be said about Tannehill last Thursday was he didn't cost Miami the game with untimely turnovers in the 4th quarter like he has done so several times already in his short career. As long as Tannehill throws passes within 5 yards of the line-of-scrimmage he seems to do fine and gives Miami a chance to win, but played great? Huh