Oh! So you don't care about winning the SB. Given how you've argued, 2nd place shouldn't count at all.
marino would have won 3 superbowls, if he had the teams tannehill has had the last 3 years. marino carried the fins on his back, unfortunately it takes a team to win the big one and he never had a complete team around him. also if you knew anything about my post i was making fun of the tannehill haters.
Didn't know you were making fun of Tannehill haters. Sorry about that.. it's hard to tell sometimes what's serious and what's not.
As a side note, did anyone notice the squire in the cartoon in the article who is deflating the balls before giving them to Brady.
Check out this article from Pete Prisco - http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/writer...that-are-screwed-because-of-their-starting-qb In a league that will have teams starting Kirk Cousins, Tyrod Taylor, Ryan Fitzpatrick, Brian Hoyer and Josh McCown at QB this season, I can't believe any Dolphin fan would feel anything but warm and fuzzy about our QB situation. I also agree with the assertion others have made that there are not many posters or fans that think he sucks. Does not suck.
RT17 doesnt suck. He is a good young ascending QB that hopefully improved on a few area's of hisgame. No reason any fan should think he sucks.
The haters have transitioned from "he sucks" or "will never be a franchise QB" to blaming Tannehill for team failures like win totals, playoffs or 4th quarter comebacks.
There can't be more than a handful of those who thought he sucked. Whether he'll ascend to elite is a different topic. I've got so much confidence in his ability to rack up yards and TDs he's on all 3 of my fantasy teams, although I have Wilson over him in my biggest. Whether he compiles stats are the team wins is a different matter. Fingers crossed.
..... and if those improve, all the sudden the narrative will shift away in ironic fashion from "team sport" to Tannehill.
It seems to me, that those that think Tanne is the 2nd coming, think that anyone who doesn't think he has proven that yet (which includes Philbin and the FO), thinks Tanne sucks. It's difficult to have a rational discussion with a person that already has a distorted perception about you.
I completely agree, and I think that the overwhelming majority that look at Tannehill OBJECTIVELY see the same thing...a kid that's taken strides in each of his first three seasons but has yet to put together a strong enough year to be considered for anything other than "average". Those who want to see him as crap can certainly pull from lots of plays last season to prove their point, while those who want to declare him a HOF lock have pointed to some amazing moments as well. But these people are not objective and they're only looking to prove their warped points of views, much like politicians do when they're talking out of their asses. But the cold, hard facts say that he's starting the season with better accuracy, more poise and a lot of confidence IN PRACTICES, which means nothing on the field when things really matter. As Bill Cosby used to say, "the proof is in the pudding" and it's far too early to judge how good/bad Tannehill will be this year.
The only people who will shift it to a Tannehill thing instead of a team thing are the ones already currently ignoring the team aspect of it.
Oh, and Finster, the issue has always been people pulling bad plays by Tannehill, and extrapolating that into Tannehill not being the answer, all while ignoring his good plays and his constant improvement.
I don't think Tannehill sucks. I do see needs of improvement in lots of areas before I call him elite or great. 3rd down conversions. 4th quarter rating. not locking onto his first read (play called)
...and attributing things outside his control to him...like Mike Wallace not being able to run clean routes or the line allowing jailbreaks.
Difference is that even IN PRACTICE he was inconsistent last year, per reports, while this year he had a very solid training camp and preseason to go along with it. This and the fact that he has improved every year since coming into the league makes us think he's poised to take the next step. I really don't see anything irrational about thinking this way. (Not directed at you or anyone specifically, by the way)
Nobody is ignoring that. The QB is not solely responsible for the team wins and losses. But they are the single biggest reason for team success or failure. They are more essential than any other player. And so it's one measuring stick. But it's not a litmus test. It's part of the analysis. Just one part. When Romo was playing well but the defense was giving up the most points in the league, you factor that. You drill down, did he fail in key situations? Or did he come through? Was the offense scoring? Tannehill after playing great against Denver led the offense to 16, 13 and 13. Winning one because the jets were held to 13. Unfairly or not, Tanny is going to be judged on his record at the end of his career. It's reality. But it's not a litmus test as I said earlier. He'll be judged on his play as well.
I completely agree with you...all the signs are there that he will have an awesome season. He started out last year down-right horrible and he honestly should have been benched after week 3, but it's hard to do that when the team has a winning record. So he got the benefit of the doubt and figured some things out, and ended up having a pretty solid season except for the late-stretch collapse. Coming into this season though, we're not seeing those things and I think he'll start off hot. But like you and I both said, that's what we "think"....meaning that he hasn't proven himself yet by any means. Because let's face it; if he does exactly the same thing as last year, finishes 8-8 and we miss the playoffs, then he could be looking for work in 2016. That's just how the NFL works...it's always a win-now mentality. Now, I don't think that will happen and with this team, I feel like it will be his breakout season. But that doesn't change the fact that people who claimed he was absolutely amazing 1-3 years ago are delusional. He's just now evolving into a game-changing quarterback with better accuracy, more poise and better decision making.
All of you who think Tannehill doesn't suck, this is your last chance to save him in Dolphin Survivor. Head on over and cast your votes!
LOL Are you a lawyer? QB is not solely responsible...but then you continue on to basically say that QB holds most of the blame for wins and losses. Nevermind that for every completion, it required a receiver to do his job. As to points in those games, it's been hashed ad nauseum, but he had some real letdowns by receivers, especially in the NE game. But continue pointing at these things. Also, you have zero way of knowing how he will be judged. He might amass massive stats, and never win in the playoffs. Or maybe he posts mediocre stats, and wins a Super Bowl and is a perennial playoff contender. Would be much different thoughts on Tannehill based on those hypothetical careers.
Let's suppose for argument's sake the QB influences the outcome of the game more than any other player (most think this is true). There are 53 players on the active roster. It's certainly mathematically possible that: 1) the QB "holds the most blame for wins and losses" among the players, and 2) the amount of credit/blame the QB gets is just a tad over 1/53 of the total, which one should note is extremely small. Not saying that's the actual fraction of total influence the QB has, but it's mathematically possible. Meaning.. just because one player has more influence than all others doesn't mean that influence is that large. That should take most of the sting out of the statement jdang307 made that you're criticizing. As far as I can tell, jdang307 said nothing inaccurate there (in the first several sentences of his post). And the general principle described above holds even if you distribute credit/blame among players, coaches, GM, owner, etc.. Oh, and regarding the WR's.. it's the same QB but different WR's for each pass play, so you'd expect each WR on average to get less credit/blame than the QB (could of course theoretically happen otherwise, but it wouldn't be expected if one could measure the influences of each player on the final outcome perfectly).
Except 53 players do not routinely see the field. In reference to the WR comments, it was Dan Marino who once said - there is no defense against the perfect pass.
Not sure why this is at all controversial. The two words do not mean the same thing. Both statements can be true.
I was just illustrating a principle. Even if most players get near to zero credit/blame, that still leaves the QB with maybe 10-20% total credit/blame, which isn't that much.
20% of the blame is nearly a 5th. It's arguably the most important position aside from head coach and main coordinators. QB's are the field generals out there who are not only tossing the pigskin, they are supposed to have control of the huddle and be able to get players in position. Competent ones are like chess players out there in control of audibles and adjusting play-calling. I mean WTH are we talking about here? Show me this list of legendary QB's with poor win/loss records. Clearly the position has major influence on the team.
It's trying to have it both ways. He says that he's not solely responsible, to try to come off reasonable, but then turn around and essentially say that it's the QBS fault when you win or lose. It's simplistic and false.
