If the Packers don't come out and choke away the second half of the NFC Championship game, I wonder what the narritive on Wilson is all offseason?
I just read this stuff. Do we want it to be true soooo bad that we will make any excuse possible to make it true?
That is such a load. You gonna trot out Philbin now? This topic was so beat to death. I love how you say it like it's scientific fact. Tannehill was never in danger of being benched, and Philbin was a moron for handling that situation as he did.
Nope. It was simply to shove aside the notion that Ryan played better than average (statistically) but was screwed by his (insert excuse) into an 8 win situation. Which is stupid.
Wtf? Take a xanax dude, Ryan played bad early in the season...why is this such a big deal to you at this point?? Be happy he improved and took big steps like most of us are. And Im not a Philbin backer but obviously that motivation worked because about that time he started playing good football. (By the way: thanks for accusing me of speaking like something is a fact then claim definitively that Ryan was never in danger if losing his job...i giggled)
I learned that tactic from you. Giggle (And let's continue to ignore the fact that they were running a brand new offense, and that acclimating to it is a much more realistic reason for his improvement)
Not to jump into the middle of this, but he wasn't worth a damn to end the season either. My only statement was that he was average. If he falls into the 10 to 20 range as far as QBs, he was average. He is also trending upwards. Does one great game or one horrible game this season make it any different? No. He does certainly have the potential and is showing signs of breaking into that top ten. Hopefully for all of us, he gets there. It is too early to tell yet. He hasn't played a game this year. I think he has a chance to be pretty darn good.
Last four games: 98.9 73.5 118.8 87.4 That's not terrible by any means. And two of the three games before those four were 100+ rating games, too.
13 13 37 24 I would say, he played badly against NE, with 1td and 2ints. But the defense allowing Geno freaking Smith to have a perfect rating and the Jets score 37?? Get outta here with complaints about Tanne or the offense in that game.
When did I say that? I said he was an average QB last year. Every analist, so called expert and everyone who is not a fan of the Dolphins considered him an average QB last year. The good news is that he looks consistant this year. He could get good.
He played bad, that's all im saying. He had some good games and some bad games. These are simple truths that all too often get taken to other levels.
You said he wasn't "worth a damn" at the end of the season. As to analysts...they look at box scores. ESPN is roundly criticized, and their analysts mocked...until it comes to Tannehill. Analysts, like Gruden, have praised Tannehill since drafted. Analysts aren't necessarily a measure of anything. No, because points are not all on Tannehill. And out of the last 7 games, Tannehill had the games over 100 rating, and one game almost at 100. So, four of the last 7, he was well above average. I don't have an issue with people not being high on Tannehill, or criticizing him...I just expect people to not just make stuff up.
I get what you're saying. I'm saying, his bad games aren't really that bad. His lowest game didn't go below a 70 rating. I've pointed out other QBs, like Brady and Wilson, who went much lower in games last season.
I expect people to average the good games with the bad ones and come to the logical conclusion that he was average for the 2014 season but looks to be ascending. His QB rating for the season shows that. There are just as many negative as positive other stats to support either argument. Kinda makes it an average year for the QB. I'm plenty high on him and hope for great things this year. There were quite a few QBs better than him last year though. Are you telling me that he was a top ten QB last year? If he wasnt, he was average.
Bull ****. Just 4 freaking hours ago you said: That was your point and you're now trying to change it. Just once. Just once I challenge you to tell the freaking truth on here. Think how nice it will be to go to bed knowing you weren't THAT guy. Just once.
Average would not be simply outside the top 10. Average would be the average of every starting QB, giving you actual numbers. Above those numbers witted be better than average. That being said, "average" QBs aren't throwing for 4k yards, with a 92 rating, and a 2:1 td:int ratio. Agree to disagree, I guess.
Not sure why i waste my time typing this, but here goes... There is a nominal correlation of qb play relevant to team record, i say nominal (google is your friend) but that wasn't even my point when i made that post. It was to show that despite all the excuses made by a couple dudes, Ryan's record was right on par with his performances. Please. PLEASE, read this a few times...sound it out...try to let it penetrate that steel noggin of yours before you reply with yet another ridiculous comeback that nobody can make sense out of and one guy hits "Like" just because.
You read this very carefully. nom·i·nal ˈnämən(ə)l/ adjective 1. (of a role or status) existing in name only. 2. (of a price or amount of money) very small; far below the real value or cost. "some firms charge only a nominal fee for the service" synonyms: token, symbolic; Google is indeed one's friend. When you say his play has a nominal effect it means it doesn't really have an effect. Meaning his play couldn't have affected the record. I understand the concept, problem is that yet once again, you are changing what you're talking about from post to post, because you lack the fortitude to admit when you're wrong or you literally have no idea what you're talking about. So talk slow, talk fast, use big words or small ones, I don't give much of a damn and I'll keep up just fine, but for god's sake, stick to a point and quit changing it when you've been challenged.
The definition is context based, so naturally you've failed again. In this case it means an approximation as opposed to the real value. It's not a shock that yet something else has escaped you. I haven't changed ANYTHING, its your incapable of understanding what you read. I mean this is far from an isolated case of you misconstruing a post or a poster for that matter. You are a rockstar around here for all the wrong reasons. If you lack the aptitude to figure out my posts hit the ignore button...it's better than looking stupid isn't it? Again, this is what you do around here...a little self awareness might go a long way. Get well soon.
Hahahahahaha. Now you're going to invent a definition and give me **** over it? That's an impressive level of insanity.
I wasn't making you look bad over the definition, i was making you look bad because you have a disability to process things. Again, you get called out on this frequently and by other people. And now you're short comings have gotten us off topic.
If you go by yardage, rating, and td/int ratio, he was not middle of the pack. Support your argument that he was. You've given no proof.
LOL, they sure are desperate to be right. Sad that they can't show their faces in here again after RT makes the probowl this year. Pity.
Fight nicely you two!... And I'll just say this, When you argue with an idiot in public the people watching can't tell who's who. Take that how you will