Is Ryan Tannehill the long term solution at QB?

I voted yes. Can't judge a QB who doesn't have an oline due to poor front office management.

We have the recievers, a quarterback, runningbacks. All we need is a solid line and we're talking playoffs beyond the wildcard game.

 

resnor and everyone else keeps ignoring me when I point out 2013 with the 25th ranked total and scoring defense, Rodgers had them on a 11.5 win pace. His replacements had them on a 4 win pace. It's an extreme example because Rodgers is the best but it's still more evidence than these guys can provide

 

I think we can find some common ground.

This is for the crew that I always seem to argue with (resnor, yogi, Fin D, adamprez, etc.)

What are some criticisms you have of Tannehill? Please don't mention the OL but please do be specific in your evaluations.

Let's end the flame war already.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

1. I don't like how lethargic the offense looks. I don't put all the blame for that on Tannehill, but he's part of it.
2. I don't like that Tannehill isn't more mobile. Again, I don't place all the blame for that on Tannehill.
3. I would like to see more fire from Tannehill, but that might not be how he is.
4. I have not been happy with Tannehill overall this season...but again, I don't place all blame for that on him.

I was very critical of Tannehill after the first game or two this season.

 

Good, good. We probably actually agree more than we disagree.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

That's because nobody has said it's ALL on the quarterback!!!

And you can keep making these backhanded insults they do not bother me.

I really don't care what you think I deserve, that's taking an Internet discussion to whole other levels but in my opinion is immature.

If you can't back up your comment and decided to bow out for the 13,000th time, please do not be offended when I ask you for proof when you claim half the board puts all the blame on the quarterback because that is nonsense and is a factual, when you yourself have already called an opinion.

I suggest something more logical like you guys blame the quarterback too much, I can get on board with that, but generalizing with that stupid comment won't get this topic anywhere but in the same circle it has been going around in for four years.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

This is pretty much how everybody feels nominally, funny how out of hand it gets.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

That's what I was getting at lol. I think the nature of threads like these tend to boil over into "fans" vs "fake fans" when it's not even about that. Some of us are more defensive, some of us are more critical. The truth often lies somewhere in between.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Insults? Ok...

I'm not sure what you're getting bent out of shape about. I've already said I basically agree with you in the sense that there's many flaws in his game right now. Where we have the issue, is your refusal to acknowledge anyone who says "it's not all on the QB". You want to have a one sided conversation about something that has multiple sides. That's what creates the problems.

Maybe nobody has said it's all on the QB. However, when people spout off their opinions, mostly negative, some positive about the QB, they like to pass it off as fact that it's all on the QB. People don't have to come right out and say it, because they imply it within the argument. It happens on both sides. I'm not sure why you want to keep going on about this. You're the one who flat out said anyone that says its all on the QB is ridiculous and you stop reading. How does that lend to a discussion around the issues?

Like I said, I agree with you in principal. Yes, there's issues about Tannehill we can discuss, that he needs to address. We all know that, we can all list them. Then there's issues about his game we can discuss, that don't necessarily mean he has to address them, it could be attributed to something else within the team dynamic. Those are the issues that tend to create problems in these discussions because they aren't being looked at properly. Instead it's passed off as some, as if it's all on him. I'm not saying you.

There's just no point in this carrying on. I don't need to back up my comment. It's all over this thread, and the others about this issue.

I'm just saying, we need to be more open, and aware to the opinions of others, then there can be a conversation, instead it's more about who's right, who's wrong, blah blah blah.

 

Bingo.

This is a good summary. I think we'd all agree for the most part, but it just always gets blown out of proportion, because some, don't want to look at both sides. You are. Fin-O is agreeing I see... and that's what I'm saying.. There's issues there about Tannehill's game, that are on him, and extend past him. Which is what I'm saying, you can't then say all of that, and agree with it, but then at the same time take the stance of anyone saying "It's not all on the QB" is ridiculous. Because... well, that's what we just did here. It gets out of hand though when people don't want to look at the big picture, that's all I'm saying.

It is what it is. It's the QB. He's the most discussed, most polarizing figure on the team. I get it... I just don't get the point of some of the arguing. Like I said, it seems some people are more concerned with "being right" down the road, than actually discussing it.

 

Why would you have been critical after the first two weeks? A slow start in game 1 is understandable. The way Tannehill played against the Jags in week two (aside from a couple errant throws early) was probably his high water mark so far.

It's really how he has played more recently that seems suspect. You sure you aren't incorporating the final score with how the guy lookdd?

 

No, I came onto the forum blasting Tannehill after the first game.

 

Everything else aside, I'm glad there's a not sure option on the poll.

 

my whole narrative when it comes to ryan is how he's not personally fufilling his own potential, its how the offensive coaches are not exploiting his entire skillset, its what needs to be done to achieve both ceilings, and how those things not being realized are dragging our qb and offense down..

 

res, you drowning here, wth hell are you doing.

 

I guarantee everyone here wants ryan to succeed, even his toughest critics have that glimmer of hope in their words..I think folks who are dishing out criticism seem cognizant of not shutting the door on him, there are a few who have seen enough but for the most part were trying to point out the obvious flaws, trying to isolate the player, and trying to figure out the things he can be much much better at..but then, the oline issue is just that hard to put into contect as it relates to the criticism...I base all my opinion on taking into account all variables then watching in isolation.

my problem is the things that I think he should be doing to get better just keep getting ignored by him...that initself has started to piss me off to no end...do I deserve to be called a ''hater'', or some stupid name for a click like ''faction'' or ''those people''...

thats not how people should be catergorized...its immature and quite frankly beneath the overall intellect of this forum.

 

Peyton Manning is also an elite QB. Maybe he put his team on his back?

 

I think it's too early in the season to answer this question. As bad as Tannehill and the rest of the team have been playing, he can still put together some good games, come out of the season with top 10-12 QB stats and lead us to the playoffs.

If by the end of the season we see more evidence of him having reached his ceiling or regressed, I think we can start thinking about drafting a QB next year, if only to serve as a backup (Moore's contract is up). Tannehill will probably be our QB for the next 2 years so we'll have more time to evaluate him, but I see no reason to not pick up QB in the draft, it'll be a position of need either way.

We can't forget the bigger question, though: If Tannehill is NOT the long term solution at QB, what can we do to find him? Keep drafting QB year in and year out until we get one? Go after a FA? Really, it's easier said than done. I personally think we'll have a very hard time finding someone better than Tannehill at this point.

 

Or like when Rodgers did convert a first down in an almost identical situation and never let Brady see the field again.

 

He played well yesterday, but he's been relatively dismal this year. If you just go by what he's done this year, he's nowhere close to being an elite QB. In fact I'd easily choose Tannehill over the 2015 Peyton Manning version.

 

I wanted to believe in him, but I just don't see it. I have a feeling he will get destroyed in Buffalo just because he can't elevate his game when it needs to happen. Some will blame it on the OL, but some the Bills have lost to some pretty weak teams lately.

 

If a QB is bad and has poor pocket awareness and/or holds the ball too long his o-line is also going to look bad, right? So in this scenario aren't you going to be stuck in a never ending loop of not being able to judge the QB as long as the o-line continues to look bad?

 

Well, yeah, everyone complained after week 1 because the offense only scored 10 points. We thought they'd run the ball all over Washington and they didn't, both because they didn't run enough and because the O-line didn't make it a more appealing option for the OC.

But to criticize Tannehill for his week 2 performance seems strange when I don't think any offensive player did more for the team and that game itself was probably his most dominant outing.

Now, I agree with you on the lethargic look of the offense but I think that's because it's being controlled from the sidelines. I don't know how many NFL offenses are operated like that where the QB seems to have little if any authority. To me, the underlying implications of that are more dangerous that any sort of problem there might be with Tannehill being overly calm.

Joe Flacco was overly calm and he won a Super Bowl. Being too calm isn't the problem as I'm sure you agree. Being unaware or unable to think quick enough to see you're in danger and acting nonchalant when you can't move the ball because your ignorant of the fact your team is badly in need of momentum is the issue.

I think that might be the truth about Tannehill.

It could be that he's just kind of a sheep out there. I definitely don't think sheep win Super Bowls, no matter how efficient they may be in the right circumstances.

 

Buffalo is a must-win game for us to get a wild card. How everyone (including Tannehill) plays will be magnified in importance because of that. Maybe the most important evaluation will be Campbell, not Tannehill. How his team responds after a loss will tell us a great deal about whether he's our future HC or not.

Either way, this is a winnable game (as you said Buffalo isn't playing that well either), so people damn well better step up and perform!

 

I think when res said he was critical after the "first game or two", he really just meant game one. I remember he was very critical after game one. Tannehill's passer rating was clearly inflated because of passes that should have been intercepted but weren't. But I don't remember res being highly critical after game two (that's just my memory). So I don't think there's grounds for a debate here about how he evaluated Tannehill in game two.

 

And hasselbeck is better than luck using this flawed logic

 

What are you talking about? There's people saying that the problem was that Rodgers threw too often. He threw 22 times in the game. That's hardly alot. They were down by 7 points at one point in the third quarter. The offensive line was terrible for Rodgers. He was getting smacked all game long. His receivers had what, three fumbles? I'd think that the fumbles would have more to do with the loss, than Rodgers throwing only 22 times.

 

Has a slight problem throwing ten to fifteen yard sideline patterns. His problem is that he doesn't always spot the safety coming over to play inside coverage and will throw to the inside rather than the outside leads to an occasional pick or near pick

Situational awareness. He gets a bit overaggressive when down. Relax, take what the defense gives you

I'm generally ok with his pocket presence. He doesn't get nervous and he stays focused down the field even with intense pressure. I would like to see him step up or step to the side a bit more in the pocket to buy an extra second when available. Marino was a master at it. I don't want to see him run just a step or two when it presents itself

I would like to see stills play more and then take more shots down the field but that's more on lazor. Maybe he could ***** to lazot now that he's in his fourth year

Other than that I love his ten to twenty yard accuracy, love that he uses his arm and not his legs to beat you, love his toughness, resiliency and refusal to quit

 

Ok, my mistake. My apologies to you Res!

 

Yeah, I couldn't remember how long I was critical. I was pissed at his play in game one.

 

im still digesting that you would take ryan over peyton this year, but totally agree with you about the bill game and what dan brings to the table..I feel very confident that we will see the team we saw before new england.

 

i sincerely dont know what your trying to prove using the analogy of rogers oline compared to us and Ryan..stop using one play or one game sample sizes to formulate an opinion and see I told you so's.

 

Jesus!How long can you all debate about the same thing over and over again?You people really need to get a life!!!!!!!

 

It's very simple, DJ. Even one of the greatest to ever play, Rodgers, can struggle to play at a high level when his oline is allowing him to get smashed. Now, Rodgers, being elite, may be able to overcome that sometimes. We all agree, that at this point in time Tannehill is not elite. So, why do people expect him to look really good behind such a terrible oline?

 

Peyton last night was very different than the few times I saw him earlier this year. In some games he looked hesitant, the arm strength seemed like it was an issue, and it led to inaccurate throws. It's showing up in his stats too, especially in the TD/INT ratio of 7/11 (that's not a typo).

This is Peyton's last shot, and as the announcers said yesterday Elway is to some degree forcing a different offense on Peyton (one that relies much more heavily on the run) than Peyton directed for most of his career. It's an implicit admission that the QB doesn't have the same abilities as before.

Personally, I really hope he can get another ring before he retires (has to happen this year). Peyton at his best is about as good a QB as I've ever seen (maybe overall Brady will be remembered as the greater QB, but Peyton in his prime makes an OC unnecessary).

 

As of now, Tannehill is barely just good enough. What if, what if, this is all we get? Throughout college and the pros, 5 years now, he's looked kind of the same. Sure he took a hit in 2012 adjusting to the NFL, but he's never been prolific. Someone posted his college numbers earlier and yeah, they aren't impressive. Sure, not all prolific college QBs are any good in the NFL, and not all good QBs now had prolific numbers in college (Matt Ryan comes to mind). But he only started 1.5 years in college, wasn't all that great doing it, so we drafted him high based on potential. Someone with more college knowledge can shed some insight, but was he all that impressive in college? Did we get seduced by his athletic ability and strong arm? He's been a 7.0 ypc guy throughout his career.

He's improved every year but there is no guarantee he will keep improving. If I had to wager I'd bet on him getting better but again, that's not guaranteed.

 

Tannehill "apologists" always do exact what they've done recently in this thread. Pointing out Aaron Rodgers game last night and looking at the offensive line as the culprits. Rodgers OL is bad, he's played tremendous outside of last night. Rodgers OL hasn't been great since he came into the league.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Yeap. Rodgers has had some pretty bad olines. Big Ben too.

 

has ryan played well enough from the pocket that he simply doesn't have to put his legs in the repetoire?.

 

True, he's the most sacked QB in the league since he's been a starter, he's led the league twice in sacks, while also having masterful pocket presence, his Olines have sucked.