1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Out of the 4 qbs listed below who would you want as your starter and why?

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by pumpdogs, Sep 22, 2014.

  1. ToddPhin

    ToddPhin Premium Member Luxury Box Club Member

    42,442
    24,982
    113
    Jul 6, 2012
    NC
    [​IMG]

    Wilson's stats in those 7 games vs Manning, Brady, Brees, Rodgers
    112.5 Rating
    14 TD, 1 INT
    2 TD, 0.1 INT per game
    8.2 yards/attempt
    63.9%
    *2 game-winning TD passes [these happen with Seattle's D on the sideline]
    *1 game-winning OT drive [this also happens with Seattle's D on the sideline]
    *26 offensive pts/game

    Rodgers: 3-3 vs Brees, Manning, Brady, Wilson
    95.7 Rating
    11 TD, 5 INT
    1.8 TD, 0.8 INT per game
    6.8 yds/att
    69.6%

    Manning: 8-14 vs Brady, Brees, Rodgers, Wilson
    93.0 Rating
    46 TD, 27 INT
    2.1 TD, 1.2 INT per game
    7.4 yds/att
    66.7%

    Brees: 6-8 vs Brady, Manning, Rodgers, Wilson
    100.7 Rating
    30 TD, 7 INT
    2.1 TD, 0.5 INT per game
    7.6 yds/att
    63.7%

    Yup, Wilson clearly needs not one but two sets of training wheels.

    For comparison, look at Sanchez's first 2 seasons behind New York's steller D and ground game. Now, this is what it looks like when a QB is dependent on both. Keep in mind, Sanchez was aided by NY's ground game in 2009/10 that rushed for 1,300 more yards than Seattle's past 2 years; Sanchez's O-line was significantly better than Wilson's [NY allowed 58 sacks & 105 hits in 2 years; Seattle allowed 44 sacks & 94 hits last year alone]; and Sanchez's pass catchers [Keller, Santonio Holmes, Braylon Edwards, and Jerricho Cotchery] were a better group than what Wilson has had.

    Sanchez: 5-5 vs Brady, Manning, Brees, Rodgers

    68.1 Rating
    11 TD/14 INT
    1.1 TD, 1.4 INT per game
    6.6 yds/att
    55.4%
    *14 offensive pts/game
    *4 games with 0 TD
    *7 games with <195 yards. [Wilson averaged 245]
    *5 games with <165 yards.
    *4 games with 2+ INTs.
    *2 pick sixes
    *Sanchez's INTs turned into 48 opponent points [compared to 7 for Wilson].

    * In Sanchez's 24-10 loss to Brees, NY's defense allowed just 10 pts... but Sanchez threw a pick 6 and fumbled in the endzone 2 drives later to give the Saints a quick 17-0 lead. But I guess you take all this decision-making stuff and not-making-mistakes for granted eh.

    * In his 31-14 loss to Brady, Sanchez threw a 1st quarter pick 6 to give New England its first score. Few drives later threw an INT at midfield that gave NE a field goal. To start the 4th qtr, NE led 24-14, those same 10 pts Sanchez handed them. Snachez responded by throwing 2 4th qtr INTs, one at midfield and one on NY's own 25 to give the Pats an easy TD. On the scoreboard it read 31-14 and seemed like a bad day for NY's D, but the reality was their QB ruined them by handicapping Brady 17 pts and giving him a short field for additional 7.

    *In Sanchez's 9-0 loss to Rodgers, NY's D was lights out. Score was 3-0 starting the 4th qtr [thanks to a GB blocked punt]. Sanchez had 3 drives to tie the game or win it. Instead he threw an INT at midfield to give GB another easier field goal, then turned it over on downs on GB's 35 with 4 minutes to play, and then turned it over on downs again on NY's own 22 to hand GB another FG.

    *In his 45-3 loss to Brady, Sanchez couldn't convert 3rd down on NE's 35 on his first possession. NY missed the FG, and Brady capitalized on the short field opportunity with a TD. Next drive Sanchez had a delay of game that subsequently forced a punt which was shanked on NY's own 32, handing Brady another short field TD. Sanchez can't convert the next drive on NE's 21, so NY settles for a FG. Patriots are now leading 17-3 when it should be something like 13-10 Jets. Sanchez has another chance at midfield but squanders it. NY is down 24-3 at halftime instead of 17-13. Sanchez throws an INT on NE's 9 yard line on the first drive of the 2nd half. NY should be winning 20-17 but are instead still trailing 24-3. Brady turns the turnover into a TD. Next drive Sanchez throws an INT on NE's 45, and Brady capitalizes with another turnover TD. Next drive Sanchez throws another INT at midfield that's returned to NY's 28, and like clockwork, Brady capitalizes yet again with his 3rd straight TD off Sanchez's 3rd straight INT. The next 2 drives Sanchez turns it over on downs on NE's 9 and NE's 34. This entire game was ruined by Sanchez. He set 'em up, and Brady knocked 'em down.


    See the difference? Great defense and great ground game for Sanchez yet a .500 record against Brady, Manning, Brees, and Rodgers, compared to an undefeated record for Wilson. Part of the reason Seattle is consistently able to allow so few points is because Wilson, unlike Sanchez, rarely makes mistakes for his opponents to capitalize on, and the reason Seattle is a perfect 7-0 against those elite quarterbacks and not teetering on .500 is because Wilson makes a drastic difference.
     
  2. Rick 1966

    Rick 1966 Professional Hipshooter

    8,565
    3,821
    113
    Nov 23, 2007
    Powell, WY
    All those stats say is that the Seahawks' D held good QBs to lower ratings than Wilson got against those teams' defenses. It doesn't say that he would have played better than those QBs were he the one playing against the Seahawks' defense, which is the best in the NFL currently. Your idiotic GIF just makes you look juvenile for being unable to address the issue without being insulting.
     
  3. The G Man

    The G Man Git 'r doooonnne!!!

    7,480
    5,637
    113
    Mar 18, 2009
    If we're taking where they were drafted into consideration, I'd say Foles hands down. And I'd probably lean towards him regardless.
     
  4. roy_miami

    roy_miami Well-Known Member

    1,385
    560
    113
    Oct 11, 2013
    I had to scroll up to double check the date on the op too.
     
  5. Phins_Fan_87

    Phins_Fan_87 Phins and Heat fan Club Member

    7,503
    4,979
    113
    Mar 9, 2013
    Weston
    doesnt matter, with this coaching staff, it doesnt matter.
     
  6. ToddPhin

    ToddPhin Premium Member Luxury Box Club Member

    42,442
    24,982
    113
    Jul 6, 2012
    NC
    They did? When did Seattle's 2012/13 defense play Manning 22 times and Brees 14 times? lol. When did the NFL allow Indy, Denver, New England, Green Bay, New Orleans, and San Diego to outsource their defense to Seattle, and where did they find the time machine to transport Seattle's D back to all the years before 2012?

    After your silly, obtuse response, your post was quite worthy of the gif I provided. Yup, Seattle's defense is the sole and irrefutable reason the Seahawks are 7-0 against Brady, Brees, Rodgers, and Manning. Yup, Wilson with a 112.5 rating, 14 TDs to an unfathomable 1 INT, an impressive 8.2 yards per attempt, and an overtime game-winning drive against Denver coupled with 2 game-winning TD passes against New England & Green Bay had absolutely nothing to do with it. Yup, that Seattle defense that allowed Manning to tie it up and convert the 2 point conversion would've somehow not only kept Manning from scoring in OT, but they themselves would've somehow won the game with a defensive TD or something. You realize a team still has to SCORE POINTS to win right, and they need to do so without making mistakes that allow the other team to score points, yes? To that extent, Wilson led 26 pts/game while only throwing 1 INT and providing his opponents minimal opportunity to capitalize on.
     
  7. DPlus47

    DPlus47 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    16,343
    4,501
    113
    Jul 14, 2008
    It's possible that Wilson has an unfair advantage because he practices against Seattle's defense nearly every day.
     
  8. seabass0795

    seabass0795 New Member

    1,400
    624
    0
    Feb 26, 2012
    Orlando
    LOL at anyone who said Cousins>Tannehill
     
    ElNino and PhinFan1968 like this.
  9. Jt0323

    Jt0323 Fins Up! Luxury Box

    12,967
    7,293
    113
    Dec 7, 2007
    Las Vegas
    Atleast Tannehill didn't have a 3 int. 1 fumble game. Knock on wood. Look at those bashing Eli, 4 tds tonight
     
  10. MikeHoncho

    MikeHoncho -=| Censored |=-

    52,652
    25,565
    113
    Nov 13, 2009
    RG3, amirite?
     
    ckparrothead likes this.
  11. seabass0795

    seabass0795 New Member

    1,400
    624
    0
    Feb 26, 2012
    Orlando
    Cousins had 17 turnovers in 11 games (Not all as starter). In those 16, 13 are INTs. Tannehill has only 2 INTs in 3 games.... But no please, convince me that Cousins is better, go ahead

    Edit: Had to change the 16 to 17, he threw another pick shortly after. But did you guys see the accuracy of the ball into the defenders hands??? Tannehill can't do that, the defense needs to work to pick Tannehill off. Clearly Cousins is more accurate. RIGHT??
     
    Jt0323 likes this.
  12. PhinFan1968

    PhinFan1968 To 2020, and BEYOND! Club Member

    But but...Cousins' YPA is 7.7....he's elite!
     
  13. DPlus47

    DPlus47 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    16,343
    4,501
    113
    Jul 14, 2008
    I'd take this Eli character. His INT tonight should have been a touchdown. What kind of football move are you supposed to do after you have come down with the ball in the end zone? Doesn't the act of scoring render a further move irrelevant?
     
  14. Jt0323

    Jt0323 Fins Up! Luxury Box

    12,967
    7,293
    113
    Dec 7, 2007
    Las Vegas
    4int and 1 fumble.
     
  15. PhinFan1968

    PhinFan1968 To 2020, and BEYOND! Club Member

    YPA climbing though...up to 8.1...eliteness!
     
  16. PhinFan1968

    PhinFan1968 To 2020, and BEYOND! Club Member

    LOL

    Andy Ruther ‏@AndyRuther 10m
    Kirk Cousins playing quarterback is way more offensive than the name "Redskins"
     
  17. Jt0323

    Jt0323 Fins Up! Luxury Box

    12,967
    7,293
    113
    Dec 7, 2007
    Las Vegas
    This is why I laugh at people bashing tannehill. Lets be patient. Not saying Tannehill is the answer but I'm not ready to give up. We put Moore in, were basically giving up. We can be 2-2 goung to a bye and fix things. Let's give him this year. I keep going back to Eli. People bash him but the guy won two superbowls against the best team in the league. Eli did what no QB could do and beat the 18-0 Patriots. He played amazing that playoffs. He had a bad year last year and people were ready to write him off this year. I even heard people say Eli should retire. Seriously?
     
  18. seabass0795

    seabass0795 New Member

    1,400
    624
    0
    Feb 26, 2012
    Orlando
    See I dont laugh at the ones who bash, I get annoyed by them. That is why I have barely gone on these forums since the Bills game. People have too high expectations for him, and unlike all the QBs who have had time to develop the QB position is HS and College, this guy was a WR turned QB who is still developing. There is a reason why he will take longer than Luck to develop into what he could be.
     
    PhinFan1968 likes this.
  19. PhinFan1968

    PhinFan1968 To 2020, and BEYOND! Club Member

    Lotta crow being eaten on the first page of this thread though.
     
    ToddPhin likes this.
  20. DPlus47

    DPlus47 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    16,343
    4,501
    113
    Jul 14, 2008
    There is a reason he was considered a reach at #8.

    I expect the guy to play like a middle-of-the-pack QB. He is not doing that right now. I'm not saying he's incapable of doing it, but he's not doing it right now.
     
  21. seabass0795

    seabass0795 New Member

    1,400
    624
    0
    Feb 26, 2012
    Orlando
    See this is something I never understood. People value how good a player is by the exact pick in the 1st round. Anyone look at Stafford and say "Yeah he is doing good, but not #1 overall good." Or does anyone really memorize where every single starting qb was drafted? Who cares that he was picked at #8, we didn't choose where we would pick and I would rather secure the guy we want than trade back and get a mid-round pick with Ireland's history of picking in mid-rounds.
     
  22. Jt0323

    Jt0323 Fins Up! Luxury Box

    12,967
    7,293
    113
    Dec 7, 2007
    Las Vegas
    he was picked number 8 because thats where we were drafting. Who else would you rather have drafted at 8? What happens then, Browns get him and we get Weeden?
     
  23. ElNino

    ElNino Well-Known Member

    1,535
    255
    83
    Aug 5, 2013
    Norfolk VA
    Right now i'd go...

    1. Wilson
    2. Foles
    3. Tannehill
    4. Cousins

    But as a dolphins fan, i want to see Tannehill at the top of this list by the end of this year. Would much rather have Tanny start clicking than a re-do of the draft
     
  24. DPlus47

    DPlus47 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    16,343
    4,501
    113
    Jul 14, 2008
    How about the guy who went #9 to the Panthers?

    Who says you have to pick a QB in the first if you don't want to reach?

    If I go to the store looking for beer and all they have is 40 ouncers of Budweiser for 12 dollars, I'll make it back home without buying beer.
     
  25. DPlus47

    DPlus47 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    16,343
    4,501
    113
    Jul 14, 2008
    I made the illustration because it was said that Tannehill needs more time. I was essentially saying, "of course he needs more time, he was a project."

    The project looks a little shaky right now, and it's year 3 and he hasn't established himself as a middle-of-the-pack QB yet. I'm bracing myself for another round of "just wait 'til next year."

    I'll be ecstatic if the light comes on and he suddenly gets better. Here's hoping it happens against the Raiders.
     
  26. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,159
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    Any of the BPA's and then watch Russell Wilson sit there for 67 picks. This isn't hindsight either. Wilson was LOVED by many on these boards.
     
  27. Jt0323

    Jt0323 Fins Up! Luxury Box

    12,967
    7,293
    113
    Dec 7, 2007
    Las Vegas
    But did miami? If not then we'd have weeden
     
  28. ckparrothead

    ckparrothead Draft Forum Moderator Luxury Box

    79,599
    159,162
    113
    Dec 1, 2007
    I think I saw someone say on twitter that 6.6% of all interceptions thrown in the NFL this season have been thrown by Kirk Cousins.

    LMAO.
     
    ToddPhin likes this.
  29. ckparrothead

    ckparrothead Draft Forum Moderator Luxury Box

    79,599
    159,162
    113
    Dec 1, 2007
    This is probably the only sensible way to have it.
     
    ElNino likes this.
  30. DPlus47

    DPlus47 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    16,343
    4,501
    113
    Jul 14, 2008
    That's a great stat. Also, Cousins threw as many interceptions last night as Foles has thrown this season and last season combined.
     
  31. seabass0795

    seabass0795 New Member

    1,400
    624
    0
    Feb 26, 2012
    Orlando
    Yeah a lot of people wanted Wilson (myself included), but at the time it was outrageous to think a non-first round qb would have success in the playoffs. Also, the amount of pressure we had to pick a qb in the first round was insane. If we didn't go qb people would have rioted
     
  32. seabass0795

    seabass0795 New Member

    1,400
    624
    0
    Feb 26, 2012
    Orlando
    The issue is that the key year 3 was a sudden offensive change, and Tannehill's first change of system. It will take time before he gets comfortable in this system. Bruce Arians said it takes him 8 games to truly be able to judge a vet qb in a new system. But everyone here is giving Tannehill 3 games as a developing player in a new system.
     
    resnor likes this.
  33. DPlus47

    DPlus47 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    16,343
    4,501
    113
    Jul 14, 2008
    I understand your POV. I'm trying to cut him some slack for being in a new system. It is highly likely that he'll start to play better with more reps, but there are some problems that have gone on for more than 3 games, however, and that concerns me greatly. We have no choice but to wait and see, but I also want a QB drafted high next year even if Tannehill turns it around somewhat. The position is too important.
     
  34. ToddPhin

    ToddPhin Premium Member Luxury Box Club Member

    42,442
    24,982
    113
    Jul 6, 2012
    NC
    And why is that? Is he a NASCAR driver relying mostly on his own ability to develop himself as a driver? Is becoming a great NFL QB merely like the law of Conservation of Energy where ability, proficiency, and know-how in the league are neither created nor destroyed; they're merely transferred via some form of diffusion from aging, declining veterans to young, inexperienced guys? Why exactly do you think Tannehill hasn't established himself in year 3? You can first answer this question by telling why you think he should be further along. What exactly do you think Philbin, the fired Mike Sherman, and a QB coach with no coaching experience have done right? Since Tannehill's development is dependent on them, you can't call out his lack of establishment without first determining if the coaches responsible for his development have allowed him to do so.

    Have they nurtured and developed his athleticism and mobility, you know- since that's one of his assets and is one of the reasons he was a 1st rounder to begin with, or did they treat him like a statuesque pocket passer ala Brady? Was Andrew Luck or Russell Wilson's athleticism and mobility deterred? Nope, Indy & Seattle fostered that aspect of their game which in turn helped Luck & Wilson further hone their pocket awareness and instincts under pressure, and it's become pivotal to their QB success ever since.

    Did Philbin & Sherman provide Tannehill a real NFL system to learn and develop in or did they install Texas A&M's offense to keep things familiar and simple? Was Andrew Luck handed Stanford's playbook when he arrived in Indy? No, he was tossed into a real NFL offense under Bruce Arians that would make life more difficult and bumpy for Luck's first few years but in doing so would leave him more prepared for years 3 and beyond. Remember when people were saying Tannehill looked as good as Luck as a rookie? Well, that's because Philbust was more concerned with creating a Texas A&M 2.0 offense that would provide him the best chance for immediate success than installing a real and more innovative, intricate offense that would provide Tannehill the best opportunity for future success. Now in year 3, Luck is reaping the rewards while Tannehill is getting his first real opportunity to develop the rest of his game and work on his mechanics rather continuing to do what's familiar and was executed better in college.

    Did Philbin & Sherman expand the passing routes to help Tannehill develop as a well-rounded QB capable of beating defenses all over the field with a full repertoire of throws like you'd expect from a great QB? Nope, they stuck with what Ryan was familiar with and better at in college while basically ignoring the throws that needed developing that are required of great quarterbacks. Did Mike McCarthy coach scared and restrict Aaron Rodgers to an endless barrage of out routes, comebacks, curls, and simple stop routes, caring more about minimizing early risks and mistakes? Nope, Rodgers wouldn't be the QB he is today if Green Bay did that to him. He learned the same offense Brett Favre ran; he threw to the same routes Favre threw to. Was Favre a Chad Pennington-like game manager who played to not make mistakes and was coached primarily to not make them? Nope, so Rodgers naturally wasn't developed in that mold either.

    Aaron Rodgers spent 3 or 4 years being developed in a system built for a great QB like Favre that would prepare Aaron for the QB he would become, just as Luck, Wilson, and Foles are now. Steve Young spent years being developed in a system that the great Joe Montana ran, not one that was better fit for Young's limited proficiency at the time. Meanwhile, Philbin & Sherman on the other hand created a system based on the QB Tannehill was in 2012/13 rather than creating a system for the QB he could become. Essentially, Tannehill was set up to fail in the long term so that he could be serviceable in the short term, and I count the days Philbust is fired for it.
     
    resnor likes this.
  35. DPlus47

    DPlus47 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    16,343
    4,501
    113
    Jul 14, 2008
    I agree with you. Especially in the above. I'm just not sure that you count too much on somebody coming in next season and undoing everything that is screwed up about Tannehill. I'm all for keeping him around, because he's cheap next year, but it's rare that a guy becomes a reclamation project without going somewhere else. All that comes to mind right now is Alex Smith in SF.
     
    ToddPhin likes this.
  36. ToddPhin

    ToddPhin Premium Member Luxury Box Club Member

    42,442
    24,982
    113
    Jul 6, 2012
    NC
    I agree with that; however, the reclamation project is what's starting this year with Lazor [or that we hope is]. What Tannehill is experiencing this year is what he should've experienced as a rookie. His mechanics were worked on heavily in the offseason to where he looked better in training camp when he was able to think about what he was doing. The route tree he throws to has finally been expanded, and understandably Tannehill has endured some growing pains during this adjustment just as he would've experienced as a rookie. He's taken a step backward this year [as opposed to regressed] but it's a necessary step back in order to develop him into a better QB for the future rather than settling for a game manager type who consistently plays to not lose games. People say he's "regressed", but I don't think that's fair or accurate. "Regression" would involve Tannehill experiencing a decrease in production and proficiency within the same system. He's in a new system, one that allows its QB to attain a higher level of production and greatness [if he has it in him], however, in attaining this greater level, it requires the QB to do more and make a wider array of throws than Philbust & Sherman previously had him limited to. This process will invariably require a separate level of development unrelated to what occurred or should've occurred during Tannehill's first two seasons, and this development will invariably require some time, not just 3 or 4 games and then a determination made about his season and potentially is future.

    IMO, Tannehill should essentially be treated like a rookie this year, and we don't give up on rookies 3 games into the season so long as they don't look like a disaster. Not even the abomination Blaine Gabbert was given up on as a rookie in a new system [as in- not the one he played in at Missouri]. Jacksonville then started Gabbert every game during his second season [until injury], as he was essentially a "rookie" again in another new system. He looked like crap once again and Jacksonville got off to a 1-9 start, but they still had to find out what they had in him. Tannehill has shown significantly more promise than Gabbert ever has, yet here he is 3 games into a new system, his first real "NFL" system, but here this a**hole Philbin is not standing behind Ryan's development nor being supportive of him through this time of adjustment and transition. It's really sad that young QBs with half Tannehill's ability and potential have been given longer leashes of emotional support when thrust into new systems.

    Like I said in my last post, the driving point is- Philbust created a system based on the quarterback Tannehill was at Texas A&M rather than creating a system for the type of QB he was capable of becoming. IMO that's an inherent flaw and quick way to kill a QB's chances of realizing his potential.
     
    DPlus47, cuchulainn and resnor like this.
  37. ToddPhin

    ToddPhin Premium Member Luxury Box Club Member

    42,442
    24,982
    113
    Jul 6, 2012
    NC
    What's in the best interest of the franchise is to give Tannehill the season in this new system, his first real NFL system, to see how he develops and progresses. At least Tannehill has flashed promise whereas Philbin has not. I wish this organization had a set of checks and balances that could step in and prevent a flailing head coach from benching who might still be the QB of the future should he think it could help save his job in the present.
     
  38. cuchulainn

    cuchulainn Táin Bó Cúailnge Club Member

    23,698
    39,847
    113
    Sep 7, 2012
    Hattiesburg, MS


    11 games, 18 turnovers:
    Kevin Seifert ‏@SeifertESPN 2h
    Kirk Cousins: 11 NFL games (6 starts), 18 turnovers (15 INT/3 FL). #Redskins




    Suddenly feeling not so bad about Tannehill. lol...
     
  39. pumpdogs

    pumpdogs Well-Known Member

    5,185
    2,907
    113
    Sep 22, 2009
    delaware
    This coming from the same guy that once posted to me chad henne would be just as good as tom brady if he played for the pats.
     
  40. Vertical Limit

    Vertical Limit Senior Member

    12,162
    5,057
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    I personally wanted Floyd.. Ryan was definitely a reach at #8 and was mostly drafted because of how good he looked in the combines/pro day in shorts. In his final season in Texas A&M he led all Big 12 quarterbacks in interceptions, and the school wasn't even in the SEC yet. Imagine had he faced teams like Alabama, LSU, Florida, Auburn like Manziel had to do a year later, Ryan wouldn't be a first round pick, he may not even be a 4th round pick. This is not a quarterback drafted because of efficient quarterback play at college, we drafted him because he was Sherman's guy.

    Manziel's schedule in 2012
    http://www.fbschedules.com/ncaa-12/sec/2012-texas-am-aggies-football-schedule.php

    Ryan's schedule in 2011
    http://www.fbschedules.com/ncaa-11/big-12/2011-texas-am-aggies-football-schedule.php
     

Share This Page