Where does Tannehill rank among quarterbacks today?

18 days til countdown..

 

til the season starts.

 

I think he's about 15, Flacco behind him seems odd..

 

I think hes around 10. Almost all media have him 10-15.

 

You can legitimately argue anywhere from 12-16 IMO if you don't factor in future/potential.

 

I have Eli lower, but otherwise fair. I think you could make an argument for any order among the QBs ranked 9 through 15. Going forward I'd take Tannehill above all of those guys, but I wouldn't say he's been clearly better than the others thus far.

 

Personally, and there's likely some home-cooking involved (don't care either), but I'd move your 9-12 down a spot, and park RT at 9.

A lot of that is prospective ceiling and proven improvement trend...also a year experienced with this system.

 

Don't agree with Andrew Luck being #3. If I was starting a franchise today, Luck would be the pick. Let's get that out of the way right off the bat. Here's why Andrew Luck isn't the 3rd best QB in the NFL.

1. Soft division. Andrew Luck's best statistical performances have come against his own division. A division featuring the up and down Texans and two teams barely fielding NFL rosters in Jacksonville and Tennesee. Both picked in the top 5 of the draft (2nd, 3rd). In 2014, Andrew Luck and Colts went 6-0. Andrew Luck's statline for his division rivals? 16 TD, 3 INT, 65% completion, 1733 yards, 8.4 YPA, 111.2 rating. 40% of his TD's and 36% of is yardage came from against his division. Let's compare that to a much better division the Colts played in 2014, the AFC north. Andrew Luck's 4 games against the AFC North in 2014 featured 8 TD, 6 INT, 56.6% completion, 7.14 YPA, 1350 yards, 80.8 QB rating.

Suddenly, it's easier to understand why he's struggled so mightily in the playoffs. You're not competing against a single bad team. They're not perfect, but they represent the best of the conference. I'm not saying Andrew Luck secretly sucks, but his statistical prowess in 2014 is a bit exaggerated. Like any other 25 year old QB, he has struggles vs. good competition. He's still learning, despite being ahead of the curve. The arrow is pointing upward, but it isn't nearly as high as you and many others put it currently. It's like John Elway syndrome. People talk about John Elway as an all-time great QB. Top 5. Top 3. He was never anything of the sort. He was the beloved golden boy, who was hyped up to be greater than he really was. That's the same space Andrew Luck currently occupies. Andrew Luck is the new golden boy. Again, I'm not saying he secretly sucks. He's just not elite. Not yet. But everyone is just dying to tell you he is...


2. Turnovers. We talked a little about it before, but let's get right into it. In 2014, Andrew Luck was second to only Jay Cutler in turnovers with 22 (16 INT and 6 fumbles lost). That number could of been even bigger, as Andrew Luck lead the NFL in most fumbles (13). Not to mention an additional 4 INT's in the playoffs. Luck doesn't take care of the football. In fact, you could say he's careless with it.


For his career, Andrew Luck has thrown 18int, 9int, and 16int in the regular season. 12 Int lifetime in the playoffs. He's fumbled 10, 6, and 13 times in his regular season career. In 2014, Andrew Luck lead the NFL in fumbles (13) and fumbles lost (6). That's a pattern. A pattern of a QB not taking care of the football. He's young. Maybe those numbers get better as he develops and gets more experienced. It's excusable for now. But it does stop him from being "elite" and the 3rd best overall QB in the NFL. Luck's defense may not be the 85 bears, but he's not exactly helping them out by giving the ball to the other team and forcing his defense on the field in bad positions.

* Odd, Andrew Luck's sophomore season featured 9 INT's and 6 fumbles. Yet, the INT's and Fumbles are ballooned in his rookie (expected) and 3rd year (unexpected). Will the real Andrew Luck, please stand up? Curious to see how these numbers look at the end of 2015. At the very least, the sophomore year is looking more like the statistical anomaly, sandwiched between two consistent years of massive turnovers.

Truth is, Tannehill isn't all that far behind Luck. Excluding their rookie years, namely because Tannehill was obviously ill prepared to start as a rookie compared to a 5th year senior and 4 year starter in Andrew Luck, let's look at their last two year average.

-Andrew Luck is averaging 32 TD, 12 Int, 61% completion, 4292 yards, 7.2 YPA from 2013 through 2014.
-Tannehill is averaging 26 TD, 14 INT, 63.4% completion, 3979 yards, 6.8 YPA from 2013 through 2014.

Now let's consider a few things.

1). Adversity: Tannehill has faced a far greater amount of adversity than Luck. Ryan Tannehill has been beaten to death the last two years. His pass protection ranked 32nd and 31st in '13-'14. I think it's fair to say Andrew Luck has better pocket awareness at this point. Maybe he always will. Maybe Tannehill develops in this regard. We'll see. Regardless of what might or might not happen in the future, Tannehill has played behind garbage. When Tannehill did finally see the oline start gelling in 2014, he played extremely well. It all fell apart when Albert was hurt. Our rookie RT was playing LT, our pro bowl center was playing guard, and Dallas Thomas started at RT. Yikes. Andrew Luck hasn't had great offensive lines, but they're no where near what Tannehill has had to endure.

2). Competition. The AFC South is a bad division full of bad football teams. The AFC has it's share of bad teams, but they play great defense. While the AFC south balloons Andrew Luck's numbers, the AFC East has punished Tannehill's. Tannehill had an 83 QB rating vs. the AFC EAST in 2014. Against the AFC west in 4 games? Above 100. In 4 games against the NFC North, another QB rating above 100. Last year, the story was similar. Against the EAST, Tannehill struggled while playing pretty well against everyone else. Tannehill has a much tougher road having to play his division. And that road isn't getting easier in 2015. The AFC South on the hand is still cake division. Thankfully, we play them in 2015... Bottom line? Andrew Luck and Tannehill are opposites. Andrew Luck has dominated his soft division and been a mixed bag against everyone else. Tannehill has struggled against his own tougher division and has been better against everyone else.

3). Andrew Luck also has better weapons. TY Hilton is a stud and Coby Fleener has the ability to stretch the field (15.2 YPC) and is a redzone threat. In fact, Dwayne Allen and Coby Fleener had a combined 16 TD's. Having big targets in the redzone for easy layups is something Tannehill hasn't had. Hopefully, with a healthy Cameron and Parker, that changes and Miami starts experiencing more success in the redzone. Which certainly will add to Tannehill's TD totals, as Miami had a ton of missed red zone opportunities.

4). Andrew Luck has "it." He's got the clutch gene... How many times has Tannehill put Miami in a position to win a game only for someone else to blow it? Whether it's a kickers missing GW FGs or the defensive failing to hold a lead on the final drives. If that was happening in Indy, fans and media alike would defend Luck as powerless to stop his team from snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. Tannehill just gets kind of hung out to dry (even by his teams fans, who see the **** go down...).


Luck > Tannehill presently. Luck has more experience, is more seasoned, more poised, better awareness, etc... In all major areas, Luck might better than Tannehill. But the gap isn't nearly as huge as it's make out to be.



I disagree with a lot of rankings on the list, but I wanted to point these two issues out the most.

 

If this is ranking QB's for the upcoming season I refuse to believe anybody has Brady being at that number 2 spot. There is no argument that I would take seriously to put him in the top 5. Especially given his current 4 game suspension.

 

I dont know what how performing at a high level in the playoffs and being MVP of the Super Bowl overrates someone..lol..making the playoffs, all the way thru then on to Super Bowl victory is no joke, it takes great concentration, playmaking ability and decision making during the process, so that the statement makes absolutely no logical sense.

 

Slightly below Ryan. Ahead of Newton, Wilson and Flacco. I think that Wilson and Flacco get too much credit for their team success.

 

I'd have Tony Romo higher, switching out with Brees, but pretty fair.

Romo has quietly gotten a lot better the past 3-4 years. Once they realized he doesn't need to be passing a bazillion times the whole team improved.

 

We'll have to agree to disagree I suppose. Houston has the 21st ranked pass defense, I don't think they're good. Indy's schedule of the AFC South and the NFC East helped Andrew Luck produce 28 TD's and 7 INT's in 10 games. In the other 6 games, 12 TD's and 9 INT. I don't think that balances out, IMO. While it's true that all good QBs will produce lesser stats vs. harder competition, I'm pointing out there is a massive discrepancy between how Luck performed against good and bad teams, and that certainly helped him put up monster numbers. I think his stat line was absolutely inflated by a soft schedule.

Peyton Manning's first 5 years in the league came before 2004. That's important because it was the beginning of the new passing era, in which the NFL altered the defensive rules of the game. Statistically, all QB's saw a rise in statistics. And it hasn't stopped since. The fact that Peyton threw more picks in a defensive dominated area doesn't speak well of Luck doing the same in a passing dominated era.

I agree with you Luck can improve. That's not the debate though. The debate is whether or not Andrew Luck is elite right now, and the 3rd ranked QB in the NFL? There's honestly no basis to suggest he is.

The weapons argument was a comparison between Tannehill and Luck. Separate from the debate about Luck. And I think you sell T.Y. Hilton short. He's been nothing short of a game changer for Indy, regardless of his draft position three years ago.

Andrew Luck lead his team to the championship game, with a 71 QB rating. He wouldn't have gotten out of Denver with a win if Peyton Manning wasn't hurt. Peyton could barely throw 10 yards in the game. It was sad to watch. Andrew Luck didn't play very well in that game. But he's Andrew Luck. So let's credit him anyway, right? Like I said before, people are dying to tell you how good Luck is, despite the fact that he's above average at this stage of his career.

It's not a stretch, at all. Tannehill and Luck have very similar stats. That's just a fact. And Tannehill has played against tougher competition. As for the short passing game... That's been debunked quite a bit. After the first 3 games, in which Tannehill's YPA were abnormally low, he posted a 7.3 YPA rating for the next 13. Andrew Luck finished with 7.7. They're not all that different. Over the last two years, 6.8 vs. 7.2. Not all that different. Ryan Tannehill is judged far too harshly by Miami fans, while celebrating other QB's.

 

Bottom line is that unless you have a Rodgers or Brady you pretty much should hope to have a QB who can be good with the right cast and should be very happy about it.

We can nit pick the Matt Ryans, Eli Mannings, Matt Staffords, Ryan Tannehills of the league all day and FIND something undesirable in their games. These guys will never be elite but thats fine because we dont have very many incredible QBs in the league. Im happy to have a QB who gives us a chance to win just about every Sunday, rather he ends up a hall of famer or not.

 

i love tanny, but dont see how he is better than flaco right now.

If you needed a game winning td drive, which qb would you want on your team? a good case can be made that flaco give a team a better chance today. hopefully that tannehill progresses a lot next year from good to elite(i dont think flaco is elite)

 

3 read options...1 rollout..and practically 0 on his own accord is underutilization alright.

 

this is just plain false..you do realize he was one perfect pass that turned into the worst drop in raven history from going to the Super Bowl..what about that run..thats two runs where he should of been in the Super Bowl against the pats...on the road... certainly was not his fault, it was a perfect pass under pressure..imo when I judge a player, I judge on individual merit and performance..thats two great runs.

2 great playoff runs is no joke for a whole career..

So he's WON playoff games in 5 of his first 5 seasons..lol

oh wait, Joe Flacco has led his team to 3 playoff runs......Thats 3 AFC championship games..in one of the THREE PLAYOFF RUNS he did this,

be objective if your gonna put it out there, give the credit where the credit is due...one playoff run my ***.

 

What these lists come down to are two things: stats and winning.

As such, these lists have looked pretty much the same for the last 5 years because the individual stats of each QB don't seem to change all that much in relation to each other and the same guys keep on winning.

To me, it seems that the same "elite" names that are put in the top-5 all have winning records and have great stats to back it up. Sometimes one of them will stop winning (Brees, Roethlisberger, etc.) and he'll drop down a few spots but still lead the pack of guys behind the "elites," mostly because his stats are still good and because fans don't want to push a guy with good stats down the list too far.

There are a few new names that have thrown themselves in the mix which ironically have come mostly from a single draft class. Their positions are not surprisingly a reflection of stats and winning. It's predictable that the one with the best stats is on top (Luck) and the guy with the biggest wins is runner up (Wilson) with the other guy (Tannehill) positioned in third.

There are also guys who have decent records, (Romo, Flacco, Ryan) but their presence around #10-12 usually shows that fans respect individual stats a little bit more than just winning, or that they don't take wins to be "to the QBs credit" unless he can do it with great stats.

To be honest, it's impossible to settle the argument of "ranking QBs" unless folks are willing to agree on a single metric. For a long time now, it seems that fans want to put together these lists by using individual stats.

I'm fine with however someone wants to do it, just come out and say so.

Settle on the metric and the list creates itself. And of course if you don't settle on a single metric, you'll constantly feel like you have to tweak the list to "look right." And constantly tweaking the list to better fit your own eye is not a good way to do it--that tells you something is wrong in how you graded them initially. If you can't justify raising a QB above another based on something in your metric, then you're metric isn't very good or you just have awful biases toward or against certain guys. You should be adjusting the metric, not faking the results.

I'm fine with ranking QBs based on stats or on wins or on a combination. Doesn't matter to me.

 

I think your list is ok. I don't 100% agree with it, but like Fin-Omenal said, you could argue Tannehill anywhere from 12-16 and I agree with that.

What I don't agree with is having Jameis Winston and Marcus Mariota anywhere on the list at all. They don't deserve to be on any list in the NFL now. They haven't proven anything and there have been far more 1st round busts at QB than there have been good/great ones. They both could just as easily bust as they could be elite.

 

This year will do well for the comparisons between Luck and Tannehill's production. The AFC East plays the AFC South so they'll have six common opponents. Of course Luck will have three extra games against his division while Tannehill will with his, but you'll get to see the difference in production.

Hopefully we get that elusive win versus the Texans.

 

FWIW my Top 15 QB's are...


Elite:
1. Aaron Rodgers: Throws like Dan Marino, runs like Steve Young. Underrated intelligence, on par with Manning and Brady. The perfect NFL QB, IMO.

2. Drew Brees: Over the last seven years, has averaged 37 TDs, 68% completion, 5000 yards. Regularly competing for the triple crown (TD, Completion %, and yards).

3. Tom Brady: Despite not having a great supporting cast outside of Gronk, has consistently played to a high level. Arguably the smartest QB in the game.

4. Peyton Manning: Benefits from having elite talent around him throughout his career, but there's no denying his skill level from top to bottom. Re-defined the position in terms of intelligence.



Cusp of elite:
5. Tony Romo: Has had some health issues w/his back in the past, but he's taking care of himself these days. Best 4th quarter QB rating all-time? Tony Romo. Get's way too much blame for the problems in Dallas over the years.

6. Russell Wilson: Tom Brady, circa early 2000's. Despite a revolving door of mediocre WR's and poor pass blocking, Wilson has manged two seasons of a QB rating over 100 and one of 95. Has any QB done more with less? I would rank him higher if not for the inconsistency he experiences from time to time. Perhaps that's because of his surrounding cast? Hard to say, but Jimmy Graham is his first real weapon in the passing game and that should enlightening. True threat comes from running ability in combination with passing ability. Wilson might be the best running QB in the NFL. Get's yards, doesn't take big hits, keeps the chains moving. Only going to get better, IMO.

7. Matt Ryan: Very underrated QB. I've heard people cite his weapons as a primary reason for his success, but that doesn't appear accurate over the last number of seasons w/Julio Jones and Roddy White both experiencing significant time missed w/injuries and a revolving door at RB. His Oline has been shaky at best. Case and point? In 2013 Julio Jones played 5 games, Roddy White played 13 (on a bum leg, in which he was completely ineffective). With Harry Douglas as his primary receiver (leading receiver in catches and yards), Ryan still managed to have a strong year. Over the last three seasons, 29 TD's, 67% completion, 4600+ yards. He's got to get those INTs down though, or else he's going to stay on the cusp of elite.

8. Ben Roethlisberger: In two games this past season, back to back, Big Ben posted 12 TDs, 76% completion, and a whopping 860 yards. Certainly inflated his season totals quite a bit. Otherwise, Big Ben has been a consistent and steady player in 2014 and overall the last couple of seasons. The emergence of Bell as the best RB in the NFL certainly gave Pitt balance that it lacked the last few years. And Ben has helped elevate some young WR's. I'd still rank him below Ryan as I think Ryan has done more with less. But it's close.

9. Philip Rivers: Another under appreciated QB. When Philip rivers took over in SD, he had a great offense. The oline was strong, he had weapons in Gates, Vincent Jackson, and LT. Put up strong numbers consistently, won a bunch of games, made the playoffs, made some noise getting to the AFC championship game in his second year starting, etc... Then, it kind of fell apart. Marty got fired and everything changed for the worse. He's had horrible offensive lines, no running game, and his receiving corps has been filled with journeyman. Yet, he's still playing consistently well, all things considered. Give Rivers some talent, and he can go from number 8 to top 5 in a blink, IMO.


Best of the rest:
10. Andrew Luck: The worse thing you can say about Andrew Luck, is he doesn't protect the ball. Everything else? Above average or better. At 25 years old, he's ahead of the curve and all signs point to him continuing to get better. By the time Andrew Luck is 28, he may very well rank #1 on this list.

11. Eli Manning: Inconsistent. When Eli is hot, he's on fire. He's unflappable. He is a little too streaky for my liking, and he turns the ball over too much, IMO. but his dominating playoff performances speak for themselves. Another QB who hasn't had it easy in terms of talent surrounding him. His offensive lines have been bad, his primary receivers have been hurt (Nicks, Cruz), and his RB's aren't the greatest. The emergence of Odell Beckham Jr. helped Eli rebound from a terrible 2013, with a career high 30 TD's, career high 63.1% competition percentage, and the 14 INT, the 3rd lowest number of INT's in his career. Going into year 2 of McAdoo's offense, coupled with Beckham's sophomore year and getting Cruz back, could potentially get NY back into the playoffs.

12. Cam Newton: Still a work in progress at 25. I debated putting him at #10, but I think Eli rebounded with a stronger season. His 2014 campaign was weaker than his previous three, after three straight years of ascending QB play. Has elevated himself with all-time greats in terms of total production after 4 years. In 2014, Cam missed two games because of a car accident that left him playing with broken vertebra in his back. His entire WR corps left in FA. His offensive line lost it's best lineman in LT Jordan Gross and generally had poor offensive line talent. Like Wilson, Newton is being asked to do more with less. Let's be honest, Carolina is picking #1 without Cam Newton. They have some good talent on defensive side, but that offense is ugly. Cam Newton has put that team on his broken back... I expect a better year all around from Cam, but until Carolina gets serious about protecting this guy and putting serviceable talent around him, it's going to be hard for Cam to evolve into elite, despite having the ability.

13. Joe Flacco
14. Matthew Stafford
15. Ryan Tannehill

I have Tannehill at 15 at the moment. I don't see that as a negative. QB 10-15 could become heavily interchangeable based on perspective and context. Ryan Tannehill could easily jump into the top 10 after 2015. Same for Newton, Flacco and Stafford. 9-15 are all very closely grouped together.

 

Luck's receivers have a little something to say about that...

They fight for the ball, out-position the defenders, and maneuver their routes to be in a good position to win the play, better than our recent WR corps. They make those catches where they need to adjust to the flight of the ball and physically win the play...saw it several times last year. We had MW and BH who couldn't reliably do those things.

Strictly looking at 2014 and ranking for the upcoming year (after all, you can't compare entire careers for current ranking...that wouldn't be very current), I wouldn't say RT is way behind Luck, in part because I believe Luck is much closer to his ceiling than RT is to his.

 

qb is no different, rank on individual performance, how he executes his responsibilities, from the evaluator..

 

I do not agree DJ, with the disagreement being that the offensive line is very much a factor in how the QB plays and how to rate them. Also, I guess having one SB victory by guys like Flacco & Dilfer obviously means that you have them rated higher than Marino.

 

I don't have any idea where you got that comparison or analogy from...the original poster claimed that flacco is overrated because he had ONE playoff run...obviusly that is a gross misrepresentation of the truth considering the facts I laid out, like WINNING PLAYOFF GAMES IN HIS FIRST 5 SEASONS..LOL..3 AFC CHAMPIONSHIP APPEARANCES, AND WHAT SHOULD OF BEEN TWO SUPERBOWL APPEARANCES..lol .read them again..His accomplishments should not be categorized as ''overrated because of one playoff run"'

and yes, you can still judge and come to some conclusions about a qb even though he has shoddy protection, I do agree it makes it more difficult in terms of play from the pocket but you can also determines strengths and weaknesses..Pressure engages certain characteristics from qbs, good and bad.

 

Clark, you completely left out a top 5 qb.

 

I did leave out Big Ben. Good looks.

But top 5? Nah... He's not better than Rodgers, Brees, Brady, Manning or Romo. I have him at number 8. I think Wilson ranks ahead of him, easily. And I think Matt Ryan is arguably been a more consistent passer in the last few seasons, especially after having to deal with the injuries to Julio and Roddy White. Like I said, Matt Ryan turned Harry Douglas into a 1,000 yard receiver. That's pretty impressive, IMO.

Roethlisberger has always been a consistent QB. That's high marks for him. He's not producing mind blowing stats, but he's top 10 every year, in almost every category. 2014 was a career year, setting high marks in almost all categories. The one thing that makes me weary of trusting that, is the back to back games in which he posted 12 TDs and almost 900 yards. Were those games statistical anomalies? Judging by the rest of the year and his whole career, I'm not sure, leaning yes. Big Ben needs another season like he had in 2014 before I'm convinced he's top 5.

 

Never been a Flacco fan. Given the same teammates around him, I'm going RT for a game or a season, either way.

 

What I'm saying is that there are only certain ways you can rank QBs. It's easy to say Aaron Rodgers is better than Andy Dalton, but why? Even though Aaron Rodgers may have a few things working in his favor, we're willing to assume that the statistical differences between Rodgers and Dalton are enough to justify us saying Rodgers is better.

What happens when we try to rank QBs like Philip Rivers and Matt Ryan, who are statistically very similar?

It becomes difficult when we compare guys like that because something changes--the uncertainties behind the stats become more important than the statistical differences themselves. We acknowledge that whatever differences there are in TDs, INTs, yardage, etc. could easily be over-matched by the things working in favor of one QB (better protection, better WRs, better coaching, etc.).

Once you reach that point where uncertainty is the overwhelmingly factor, you're done. You can't go any further in justifying a list.

And unfortunately, the mere act of watching football doesn't add any credibility to one's analysis...else we'd all get paid for what we're giving away here for free.

 

You can always go further. Personal opinion is always a reason. And I love lists and catagorizing

 

Lucks' receivers are a product of him...TY Hilton isn't relevant on about half the teams in the league.