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

Will we be able to rebuild the OLine before we have to get rid of Tannehill ?

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by Dolphinzdawgg, Nov 15, 2015.

  1. adamprez2003

    adamprez2003 Senior Member

    37,392
    14,745
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    new york ciity
    Under Mike Sherman, everyone wondered why Ryan Tannehill shouted “go” before snapping the ball on most passing plays and “go go” before running plays.

    Under coordinator Bill Lazor, two different issues have surfaced that irritate fans and elicited recent criticism from CBS analyst Rich Gannon, both on air and off:

    ### Issue 1: Why doesn’t Tannehill have the freedom to change to any play he wants?

    As a Dolphins player explained, Lazor gives Tannehill two options on some plays (usually one run, one pass) and Tannehill can call either, depending on the defensive look. But he cannot call anything other than those two plays. But on many other plays, Tannehill goes to the line with one play and isn’t allowed to change that play at all.

    “It’s a big mistake,” Gannon said last week. “If you can’t change protections and change plays on the fly at this level, you’re in big trouble.”

    I asked Tannehill if he’s tempted to ask Lazor to give him permission to change to any play he wants or a lot more than two.

    “We’ve had conversations,” Tannehill said. “But he’s the coordinator.”

    This isn’t the way every team does it.

    Receiver Kenny Stills, who spent his first two seasons in New Orleans, said Drew Brees had the authority to audible to any play he wants at the line of scrimmage. Does that make it more difficult or confusing for the other players?

    “No,” Stills said. “It gives us an advantage because we can see what the defense is giving us” and the quarterback can then adjust.

    Dolphins and former Green Bay receiver Greg Jennings said Aaron Rodgers “had a lot more freedom that Ryan does. We don’t run audibles here. The adjustments we make are with protection, not changing the play.”

    So why don’t the Dolphins give Tannehill the freedom to change to any play he wants?

    “When you do that, there’s two schools of thought,” interim coach Dan Campbell said Thursday. “When you do that, certainly Ryan can handle that mentally but you take the chance it slows him down in his rhythm. You open the full playbook up, those are sometimes the problems you run into. I’ll be honest with you. His first few years with Mike Sherman, he somewhat had that a little bit.

    “He had a lot of options he could do. He did a good job of getting us into the right plays and protection, but we felt like it slowed him down a little bit with his rhythm. We felt like he could be a better passer by taking a little bit of a load off of him. And he is throwing the ball better.”

    Gannon criticized the Dolphins’ restrictive audible policy after unblocked Eagles players sacked Tannehill twice on blitzes last week.

    Tannehill said on the first one, which resulted in a safety, he had the option to make a short throw before the blitzer swallowed him up on his blind side.

    That throw, if attempted, likely would have gone to tight end Dion Sims, who said his assignment on that play was to go out in coverage. “That was my fault,” Tannehill said.

    But Tannehill said on the other sack, the play called by Lazor did not give him the ability to change to a quick, short throw, which seemingly could have helped avoid a sack.

    “We felt we were all right on those plays, but they got us,” backup quarterback Matt Moore said. “Our execution has to be on point when we don’t have the freedom to change the play.”

    Center Mike Pouncey said “me and the right guard [Billy Turner] have to do a better job coming over” and picking up the blitzer on those plays. He made clear that right tackle Jason Fox wasn’t to blame on either.

    Lazor continues to play the semantic game with the audible issue, saying he believes there were four occasions last week when Tannehill changed the play. But he changed the play to a second option that Lazor had made available to him.

    “I watched in the Jet game, him walk up, make the call, change it,” Lazor said. “He changes it with words, he changes it with hand signals, hopefully subtly. He audibled at the line of scrimmage against the Eagles. Certain play we could have called the play with motion or line up and shift to it, and he had a chance to call the way he wanted it to, run and pass. You know me enough to know I'm not lying.”

    He's not lying, but he's telling only a small part of the story. And the full story is Tannehill cannot go to the line of scrimmage (or the huddle, for that matter) and call any play he pleases.

    ### Issue 2: Gannon, like fans, wondered why the Dolphins --- on third down --- run so many routes that are short of the first-down marker.

    Two issues are at play here: “Sometimes, we allow the defense to dictate our routes, and that’s our fault,” Stills said.

    But Stills said other times, the routes called are intentionally short of the yardage needed to make the first down because Miami’s offense is “designed to catch and run.”

    The Dolphins’ 5.8 yards-after-catch average ranks 11th in the league. But the Dolphins nevertheless are converting only 29.5 percent of their third downs, second-worst in the league and ahead of only St. Louis.

    Lazor said on one occasion last week, a receiver did not run a route deep enough.

    “There was a play run last week that was caught short of the sticks that was disappointing,” Lazor said. “Sometimes on third and long, we complete a decent number of passes that have been short of the sticks. He shouldn't be short of the sticks, but the guy getting the check down ends up getting [the ball]. If they cover what you have intended down the field, that happens.”

    http://miamiherald.typepad.com/spor...-audibles-um-coach-sea.html#storylink=addthis
     
    resnor and BigNastyDB13 like this.
  2. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    WTF are you talking about?

    I gave you list of criteria.

    You gave an answer.

    I asked how you quantify it.

    You gave an answer.

    Rocky made a post in Club with the new info.

    That made me realize there's a HUGE piece of criteria I'm missing. I added it.

    In doing so, it explained away your answer because Rivers is allowed to audible. I even asked you about it.

    There's nothing nefarious going on here, except you jackholes can't except Tannehill has legit reasons as to why he hasn't achieved all you expect him too and they are beyond his control. I'm not you, I don't need to play games to try and win an argument.
     
  3. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    No, he gave me one he thinks is. There's no confirmation Rivers has a worse OC or worse oline.

    Then I learned about new information that completely negated the Rivers example.

    Seriously, what is wrong with you people?
     
  4. Finster

    Finster Finsterious Finologist

    3,087
    2,038
    113
    Jul 27, 2013
    If this is true, then he drops even further in my estimation, because this basically mean he really has very little pre snap read ability, or it is very "tunnel vision" with it, at the very least.

    If you know somewhat what your looking at it's abundantly obvious that he has issues, and talent, but I am in the corner of not having to look past his lack of ability on the money down(3rd) and clutch moments/games, because if you can't perform at the very least, to your own standard of play, then it's really just wasting time, because that ability is what really separates the winning QBs from "the rest".
     
  5. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    11,375
    11,392
    113
    Sep 28, 2015


    LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL, whatta convenient coincidence for you.
     
  6. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Yes, you figured me out. I carefully crafted the whole thing.

    I contacted Barry Jackson and convinced him to do a story on audibles. Then I told him to post it after 9:00 pm here. Then I plotted it out with Rocky to post the article in Club at exactly 10:06 pm. Then I had BigNasty start crap with me earlier today, just in the hopes that you would jump in tonight so I could spring my devious trap.

    And I would of gotten away with it too, if it wasn't for you meddling kids.....

    Sigh.
     
  7. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    11,375
    11,392
    113
    Sep 28, 2015

    You know, I gotta give you credit...when it comes to these things?? You are Rocky Balboa minus the wins...you keep taking these massive beatings but you keep coming back for more.

    Ya got heart kid, i"ll give ya that.
     
  8. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    I'll give you credit, you're on the ground bleeding and you think you won. That's really heart.

    Wait, no, that's just stupid.

    You didn't prove what you think you did in regards to Rivers. You merely put forth your side of the argument.
    And you didn't prove what you think did in regards to me. You merely put forth something absurdly dumb.

    Do you do this every where else in life? I mean when you're humping your little heart out, are you looking in the mirror and flexing thinking to yourself, "I'm knocking the bottom out of this!", all while she actually fell asleep 10 minutes before?
     
  9. BigNastyDB13

    BigNastyDB13 Well-Known Member

    767
    386
    63
    Oct 12, 2012
    :lol: you're getting predictable.
     
  10. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    11,375
    11,392
    113
    Sep 28, 2015

    That would require me lasting more than 10 Min.
     
  11. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,159
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    You know this isn't true and you asked this very question in the club and got an answer.
     
  12. adamprez2003

    adamprez2003 Senior Member

    37,392
    14,745
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    new york ciity
    the oline of the chargers was ranked slightly better than miami's overall as of last week. i havent had the time yet to update the rankings for last weeks games. they had the 20th best oline as opposed to miami's 24th oline. the chargers were 27th run blocking and 12th pass blocking according to football outsiders. miami was 17th running and 25th pass blocking. this excludes last weeks games.
     
    Fin D likes this.
  13. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,159
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    Let's be honest here. Nobody here thinks Tannehill is football smart enough to audible plays willy milky yet. He has enough trouble as it is. He'll Tyrod Taylor is recognizing things Tanny is missing.
     
    Rock Sexton likes this.
  14. AdamC13

    AdamC13 Well-Known Member

    2,148
    1,398
    113
    May 3, 2010
    http://www.thephinsider.com/2015/10/...-audible-maybe

    The only ones they mention that aren't are Drew Brees and Aaron Rogers. Two experienced vets who are the at the top of the food chain. How many players of Tannehill's level of play? According to Lazor in the link I posted Tannehill has more in decision making than any QB he has coached so it is fair to say he had more than Foles who posted a 119.2 QB rating in 2013:

    "Let me say this first overall, before I talk about the audibles, Ryan does as much in decision making as any quarterback I’ve coached and he can," Lazor replied

    Coach Campbell acknowledges that Tannehill was given more options in the past but it affected his passing and now that those options have been removed he is passing better:

    “He had a lot of options he could do. He did a good job of getting us into the right plays and protection, but we felt like it slowed him down a little bit with his rhythm. We felt like he could be a better passer by taking a little bit of a load off of him. And he is throwing the ball better.”

    Gannon's criticism of Dolphins restrictive audible policy on the two plays with an unblocked blitzer was also addressed as one being on Tannehill (the safety) and the other on the OC and/or OL. So we can assume that not all the sacks are the fault of our OL. Some, as many have said, are a lack of Tannehill's inability to read defense, lack of pocket awareness and/or inability to escape:

    Tannehill said on the first one, which resulted in a safety, he had the option to make a short throw before the blitzer swallowed him up on his blind side.
    That throw, if attempted, likely would have gone to tight end Dion Sims, who said his assignment on that play was to go out in coverage. “That was my fault,” Tannehill said.
    But Tannehill said on the other sack, the play called by Lazor did not give him the ability to change to a quick, short throw, which seemingly could have helped avoid a sack.
    “We felt we were all right on those plays, but they got us,” backup quarterback Matt Moore
    said. “Our execution has to be on point when we don’t have the freedom to change the play.”

    We also see that Tannehill has the option on plays (how many?) to call a run or a pass and in the link I posted Tannehill was changing plays where the primary was a run play into a pass. So the criticism about the Pass-to-Run ratio is in part on Tannehill himself.

    He had plays where a run was called and without having to change anything, he decided to throw the ball. So if people don’t think he makes those decisions, then we’ve done a heck of a job with our disguises.”

    On throwing passes short of the 1st down marker on 3rd down. How much is on WRs running routes shorter than designed, OC, or Tannehill not willing to throw to WRs running beyond the 1st down marker and checking down is not clear:

    “There was a play run last week that was caught short of the sticks that was disappointing,” Lazor said. “Sometimes on third and long, we complete a decent number of passes that have been short of the sticks. He shouldn't be short of the sticks, but the guy getting the check down ends up getting [the ball]. If they cover what you have intended down the field, that happens.”

    So as to your points in your previous post:
    - a crap oline = Yes, but perhaps not as bad you are claiming it to be as some of the sacks fall on Tannehill as was acknowledged on safety by Tannehill himself.

    - a crap OC = I actually think Lazor had implemented a system that plays to Tannehill's strength by getting to throw short passes and keeping it simple for him b/c his passing struggled in the past according to coach Campbell (or is he a liar?)

    - an underused run game = We have reports that some plays have run / pass options and the only ones reported changed are Tannehill forgoing the run in order to pass. How many plays could Tannehill have gone with the run but chose to pass?

    - is not allowed to audible = He apparently does have some audible options, but not freedom to choose any play he wants b/c as coach Campbell said it affected his rhythm passing the ball and he is doing better now that he isn't afforded the options he used to be.

    - a horrible WR group = As you acknowledge that excuse has been put to bed as Matthews/Landry/Miller have significantly inflated his numbers on short passes turned into long gains this year.



     
  15. AdamC13

    AdamC13 Well-Known Member

    2,148
    1,398
    113
    May 3, 2010
    The short pass is just one option in the routes being run. Lazor has acknowledged that most plays have a deep route built into them and it is up to Tannehill to take the shot.
     
    Phins Up Wins Up likes this.
  16. Rocky Raccoon

    Rocky Raccoon Greasepaint Ghost Staff Member

    30,224
    36,965
    113
    Dec 2, 2007
    Jersey
    Did you read Barry Jackson's article? Those quotes come from players, including the head coach and Tannehill himself.
    So yes, it's true.
     
    resnor likes this.
  17. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Did I?
     
  18. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    WTF are you talking about?

    I say something logical and you reply by ejaculating stupid on the screen.

    Oh yeah, I guess that does make me predictable.
     
  19. pumpdogs

    pumpdogs Well-Known Member

    5,185
    2,907
    113
    Sep 22, 2009
    delaware

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    delaware
    Posts
    2,523
    Thanks
    460
    Thanked 595 Times in 405 Posts
    Rep Power
    63
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by AdamC13 View Post
    Even when Miami wins Tannehill moves down the ranks...




    1.I am trying to avoid this topic but why don't the tannehill backers open up the link and comment on where the outside sport writers see tannehill.
    2.$97 mil and our qb gets rated 25th.I bought into the hype before the season started and how dissapointing he has become.
    3.So there are 24 winning teams in the nfl this year?
    4.Well I am sure the Gms are all dumb evaluators also.Not quite on par with the posters on this site.
    5.Aaron rodgers has a history of being a great qb and every player can have a down year.Tannehill has proven nothing in this league in 4 years.
    6.You said Sports writers are the dumbest evaluators if he is on a winning team he must be good and if he is on a bad team he must be bad.Only 11 winning teams in this league and yet they still rank 13 non winning qbs ahead of him.So whats your point?
    7.Do you smoke crack or something?The article says he is 5th.And yes this is a down year for rodgers because he is usually top 2.
    These are all my post to that other guy.Where do you see I mentioned cam newton in any of these posts?It was the other guy that mentioned cam I didn't respond..Read before you post.
     
  20. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Dude, you need to learn to read.

    No one said you mentioned Cam Newton.

    You touted the article that Adam linked. In THAT article it lists Rodgers beneath Newton.

    Again, it was clearly explained here:

    Then it was further explained here:

    Now the question you should be asking yourself, if you can't even follow a simple forum discussion because you missed very obvious things due to you having a certain bias, how the hell can you trust your assessment of QB play?
     
  21. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    You are quoting an old article with old information that the new article refutes. You are ignoring the new info, because it hurts your stance.

    That is sad.
     
    resnor likes this.
  22. pumpdogs

    pumpdogs Well-Known Member

    5,185
    2,907
    113
    Sep 22, 2009
    delaware
    Wow really?I give up you are a stubborn mule that needs to get laid.Please go out and find some tail.
     
  23. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    I missed this post.

    I wish it had stayed missed.

    This is really very stupid and baseless.
     
  24. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    What????!??!?!??!?
     
  25. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Wait...we're using Philip Rivers to show that a QB can be successful with garbage around him? The Chargers best season in the last 5 years has been to get to 9-7. That's a whole one win more than the Dolphins best season under Tannehill. What are they, 2-7 this year? So, as good as Rivers might play, it certainly isn't translating into wins for them, is it? And isn't wins the "best" indicator of whether or not a QB is playing well?
     
    Steve-Mo and Fin D like this.
  26. Phins Up Wins Up

    Phins Up Wins Up Banned

    1,471
    269
    0
    Nov 27, 2014
    Well he is putting up numbers despite bad O line play, no run game, and no defense. Holes on his team isn't stopping him from doing his job. And hey they actually made the playoffs a couple years ago. Something this team has done since 2008. Philip Rivers is an example of a great QB doing his job despite bad pieces around him. Something you Tannehill fans says can't happen. A QB will struggle and can't put up the numbers with this many holes. And we've discussed how the Pats, Packers, Cowboys, and Steelers can't win without their QBs.
     
  27. AdamC13

    AdamC13 Well-Known Member

    2,148
    1,398
    113
    May 3, 2010
    Lol...both articles are recent and I quoted both to give a more complete picture. Your article didn't include that Tannehill has as much in decision making as any QB Lazor has coached. And the other quote shows specifically that Tannehill has changed run plays to pass plays which the pass-to-run ratio is something you've complained about holding him back. You're link merely pointed out he has audible rights to do it.

    From the article you linked:

    “He had a lot of options he could do. He did a good job of getting us into the right plays and protection, but we felt like it slowed him down a little bit with his rhythm. We felt like he could be a better passer by taking a little bit of a load off of him. And he is throwing the ball better.”

    Tannehill said on the first one, which resulted in a safety, he had the option to make a short throw before the blitzer swallowed him up on his blind side.
    That throw, if attempted, likely would have gone to tight end Dion Sims, who said his assignment on that play was to go out in coverage. “That was my fault,” Tannehill said.
    But Tannehill said on the other sack, the play called by Lazor did not give him the ability to change to a quick, short throw, which seemingly could have helped avoid a sack.
    “We felt we were all right on those plays, but they got us,” backup quarterback Matt Moore said. “Our execution has to be on point when we don’t have the freedom to change the play.”


    “There was a play run last week that was caught short of the sticks that was disappointing,” Lazor said. “Sometimes on third and long, we complete a decent number of passes that have been short of the sticks. He shouldn't be short of the sticks, but the guy getting the check down ends up getting [the ball]. If they cover what you have intended down the field, that happens.”

    From the article I linked:

    "Let me say this first overall, before I talk about the audibles, Ryan does as much in decision making as any quarterback I’ve coached and he can," Lazor replied

    He had plays where a run was called and without having to change anything, he decided to throw the ball. So if people don’t think he makes those decisions, then we’ve done a heck of a job with our disguises.”

    The only thing that is sad is your understanding and that you denied that all these quotes contradict the very things you claim holds Tannehill back as a QB. Actually, that is more funny than sad.
     
  28. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Try to keep up. We haven't said that a QB can't put up good numbers with a poor oline, or a struggling defense or receiving corp. We've said that a TEAM will struggle to win. You guys continue to meld arguments together. When people talk about Tannehill's record as a starter, we start pointing out the garbage around him. Tannehill had crap last season, yet put up damn good numbers, but the argument became, the team is average under Tannehill, and Tannehill doesn't put teams on his back to win games and get to the playoffs.

    And now Philip Rivers is being touted as an example, except Rivers is exactly what we've been saying about Tannehill.
     
  29. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    11,375
    11,392
    113
    Sep 28, 2015
    No?




    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  30. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    11,375
    11,392
    113
    Sep 28, 2015
    Philip Rivers was brought into this conversation because it was assumed that no quarterback can overcome bad surroundings, Rivers is a clear-cut top 10 quarterback in the NFL and has very bad surroundings.

    But again Rivers is a special talent so it's not a slight at Tannehill, just an example of how it is possible to play well under bad circumstances


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  31. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Look, the article that I linked was posted 9:00 last night on the paper's site. The one you posted was over a month ago.

    The reason Barry Jackson posted the article was because there had been conflicting reports about audibles. You are choosing to believe an article full of coachspeak from a press conference over actual quotes form the players involved. Its silly.

    Just deal with the fact that you've been wrong this whole time, suck it up, be a man and admit you were wrong and unfairly judged Tannehill. It is will be a lot more respectable then silly crap you're trying now.
     
  32. AdamC13

    AdamC13 Well-Known Member

    2,148
    1,398
    113
    May 3, 2010
    The very article you linked addressed this, not that he isn't smart enough but that it affected his passing.

    “He had a lot of options he could do. He did a good job of getting us into the right plays and protection, but we felt like it slowed him down a little bit with his rhythm. We felt like he could be a better passer by taking a little bit of a load off of him. And he is throwing the ball better."

    Does the "D" in Fin D stand for "Denial" or "Dodo"?
     
  33. Finster

    Finster Finsterious Finologist

    3,087
    2,038
    113
    Jul 27, 2013
    I'm still waiting for the group that says wins are not a QB stat to post some links to some experts that agree with that philosophy, but those links don't exist, because since George "Peggy" Parratt completed the first ever pass to "Bullet" Dan Riley, the NFL has become a QB driven league, and now so more than ever.

    Just think about that terminology;

    QB driven league

    That says all you need to know.
     
  34. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    No. It was assumed that no QB can overcome these SPECIFIC surroundings. You've yet to actually refute that and its pretty telling how tenuous you know your stance is that you have to "de-qualify" what was said.
     
    resnor likes this.
  35. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Explain the Broncos this year. QB rating in the 60's team is 7-2.

    Now go away.
     
    resnor likes this.
  36. Phins Up Wins Up

    Phins Up Wins Up Banned

    1,471
    269
    0
    Nov 27, 2014
    Nope you've said Tannehill can't play better because of lack of offensive line play. Luck and Rivers have similar issues on their line and they are elite. Luck has had injuries this year but every other year he has played great. So once again now that you're called out on it you change you stance. Pats 21st in pass blocking. Brady puts up the numbers and they win. Cowboys bad defense. They were 12-4 last year with Romo. Rodgers up until this year had had bad defenses and bad offensive line play but they are a contender every year. The Pats over the years have had some bad defenses as well. The Seahawks have bad offensive line play. But good quarterbacks can overcome short comings from their team. Do some research before you spout off nonsense. The excuses you guys make is ridiculous. This offense is averaging 19 ppg and is the worst 1st quarter scoring offense in the league. But that's the defenses fault right? Tannehill isn't putting up the numbers except in some garbage time and this offenses is one of the worst in the NFL and he gets no blame. Seems ideal for a Tannehill fan boy.
     
  37. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Oh. So now wins aren't the best indicator.

    Weird.

    Who cares how well Rivers is playing, if they're losing games? That's what I've heard alot in regards to Tannehill, at least. Apparently Rivers, as good as he is, doesn't possess the ability to will his team to wins. He can't just put them on his back, and make plays.
     
  38. Phins Up Wins Up

    Phins Up Wins Up Banned

    1,471
    269
    0
    Nov 27, 2014
    Oh great you found an outlier and claim it happens on a regular basis. Because so many Trent Dilfers win a super bowl.
     
    Finster likes this.
  39. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    No it stands for Dafuq Are Talking About.

    So you admit the article doesn't say he's not smart enough but you think that some how backs up jd's point which was Tannehill is too stupid to audible?

    When questioning someone else's intelligence, its probably a good idea to display some of your own.

    Also, Sherman was here in Tannehill's first two years when he was a raw rookie. Of course he struggled some.
     
  40. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    11,375
    11,392
    113
    Sep 28, 2015

    FinD....

    I just don't feel right doing this to you again today, it's Friday man we have a fun game coming up with the Cowboys this Sunday.

    I have no desire to mop the floor with you again today, what's focus on some good things.

    We are at home against a rusty quarterback and a dysfunctional team I see no reason why we can't pull out another victory


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     

Share This Page