Why wouldn't you want Miami to have a team with an elite QB? That makes no sense to me. An elite QB can make up for weaknesses and when a team goes through bumpy transitions which all teams do. Do you know how hard it is to have a team with an elite OL, running game, receivers and defense year in and year out all in the hopes of making a below-to-average QB look good? Look at New England with a porous OL this year and WRs that might be the worst in the league with all their injuries and Brady is able to overcome that and make them look like a great offensive team leading them to a 10-1 record. I would argue that Newton and Wilson might be considered elite QBs at this point (Newton for sure. The guy is just a WINNER as is Wilson). And if not they at least have the door open and most of their body in. Bridgewater is doing a fine job managing the game and not turning the ball over for only being in his second year.
No offense 25, but I thought Moore looked awful in the preseason.. I was worried about him even being ok as a back up. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You weren't the only one. The general feeling seemed to be he looked awful and should be gone. We know what Moore is. We've had this conversation.
Thanks Scotty...I thought I was losing my mind. Always liked Moore as a back up... Starting is a different story. How long before people mention Cleo Lemon or Jay Fiedler? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That's exactly the model Miami should go with. No pass happy Dolphins team will win consistently late in the year. Jimmy and Parcells new it. Shula new it before he fell in love with Marino's arm and even with #13 he never won anything. My vision for this year's offense was 30-35 passes and 30-35 runs per game. Injuries played a role but there was never any real effort to do it. The blame game and scapegoats aren't my thing, I just k ow it didn't happen and IMO it's a big part of why the offense has struggled.
Agreed. If Tannehill played better Miami would have one more win. The Jax game. The lack of a run game has been a much bigger issue.
Jacksonville? I seem to remember he played very well in Jacksonville. 30 for 44 (68.18) | 359 yds | 2 TDs | 0 Ints | 108.0 Rat
You make a lot of good points. Special props for the rush stats. My problem is that for all Tannehill's flaws the offense can barely make a first down or two without the QB being on time and on target repeatedly. Houston was he only game where the offense was productive outside of Tannehill. He has no run game to lean on, the defense is inconsistent at best. I'd love to see Wilson come down here and try to win in this environment. Sunday was the first time in his career he won a game where the opponent scored 24 points.
And how do you know this? First, the coaches you are referring to coached in a league without the advantages given to the passing game in place today. Jimmy and Parcells weren't all that successful here. Second, plenty of teams win it all without a solid running game. Since the Tom Brady era began in 2001 the following is where Super Bowl winners have ranked respectively in Rushing Yards Per Game (13, 27, 27, 7, 5, 18, 4, 23, 6, 24, 32, 11, 4, 18)...that breaks down to 5 times in the top 10, 5 times in the bottom 10, and 4 times 11-18 range. The team that lost the Super Bowl have only finished in the top 10 in Rushing Yards Per Game 6 times in the last 20 years and twice finished 32nd in the league in rushing yards. In today's NFL, there is "NO" absolute one way to win. What is constant is good QB play. And the few teams that didn't have a top 10 QB using QB rating (3 overall since the Brady era...Flacco, E Manning, Roethlisberger) that won the Super Bowl all played top 10 football when in the playoffs (using the QB rating system). It's truly a QB league nowadays. Really always has been. The average rank (using QB rating going all the way back to the merger in 1970) of QBs the year their team won the Super Bowl is 6.4 and the Super Bowl losing team QBs average rank is 6.6
He was very good that day, in spurts. But 7 straight scoreless drives in a tie game led to the loss. A couple plays here or there would have made the difference. My point is that Miami is barely competitive in most of this year's losses, better play from the QB would not change the end result outside of that Jax game.
Thats actually false. And Wilson is an elusive QB, of course he would do better behind this OL than Ryan.
I know all Qb's benefit from luck and Ryan deserves all that comes his way....but he under threw an open Richard Matthews but luckily on that play a bounce went our way.
Good post, I agree with you. But I'm talking about Miami specifically not the NFL in general. This is a team that lives and practices is 75-90 degree weather year round. Theyre at a major disadvantage going to NE, NY, Buff, etc late in the year. Especially if they are pass happy. Marino couldn't do it and Tannehill isn't even close to that good. Run the ball, play D is the model most likely tp hqve success. I think history will back me up there. We ain't wining ish asking Tannehill to throw 40 times a game that's for sure.
The #1 predictor of a win is passer rating differential. That's it. Pass offense, and pass defense. http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/content/40-and-fabulous-praise-passer-rating/14959/
Wild play. But the one I remember most is the FG before half time when the refs gave Jax an extra three yards. If we cut up the throws RT made that day I think it'd rank as one of the most impressive vids of his career. He got lucky on that 4 vertical play to Matthews but Matthews and Landry dropped a few gimmes and Fox was very bad. The run game was it's usual dumpster fire. Overall I blame Tannehill for his lack of pocket presence and unwillingness to take risks down the field. I make zero excuses on that but there are so many other things wrong on this team.
What's false? Of course Wilson is mobile. He makes a ton of plays. But he also blows a ton of easy throws because of his shortcomings as a rhythm pocket passer and without a Beast Mode type in the backfield with him I think he'd be much less effective.
1 in 2014 exactly 24 1 in 2013 exactly 24 He's never won a game when his defense allowed more than 24. How often has the Dolphins defense allowed more than 24?
I just wish he'd do SOMETHING. If it's 3rd and 9 near midfield do not throw a frigging 2 yard pass to Landry. Ever. Throw it up for grabs to a WR down the field. Scramble around, he's go the athletic ability to do it. So what if he takes a sack or a INT, it's OK in that situation. If he's truly being told not to audible that's a travesty. He has more job security than Lazor, Philbin, or anyone else on the staff. Change the play. If they don't like it screw them. That's what it means to be a franchise QB, if he want to be one he better act like it.
You're still arguing semantics. Us out rushing or matching high totals of other teams is a good running game. Simple as that. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Appreciate it. Took a while on my phone to do it flipping back and forth. I think Wilson would make the offense more dynamic. His game opens up the running game a ton. I doubt the QB before him did the same. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
No Beast in the backfield Sunday and all he did was throw for 345 yards and 5 TD passes on 30 attempts in leading Seattle to 19, 4th quarter points to get a come-from-behind win over a solid Steelers defense.
Of course I'd want an elite quarterback. I never said I wouldn't. Elite quarterbacks are rare and hard to find though.
Exactly, there's only what, 3, maybe 4 in the league you could consider elite. All you need is one capable of winning.
[video=twitter;671837938037211136]https://twitter.com/AbramsonPBP/status/671837938037211136[/video] LOL
In Seattles losses this year they are averaging 25.4 ppg. You wanna guess what we average on offense per loss??? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You aren't watching the Steelers enough if you think their defense is solid. They're not as bad as we are, but they're not exactly solid.
Steelers D were only giving up 19.1 PPG heading into the game. If a team is only giving up 1 more point on defense than our offense averages then I'm going to stick with solid.
And he deserves credit for that. But if we're talking about his career as a whole then Lynch and a consistently great defense have to be factored in.
LOL.. great answer. Yeah, it should be pointed out that: 1) all these "predictors" are really stats that try to predict who won AFTER the end of the game!!, and 2) passer rating includes TD/A so the score is partially included in the formula (makes sense it has such a high correlation). Anyway, jdang307 is right about the importance of passing offense and defense for successful teams, but it's worth noting that passing Y/A and INT/A are included in passer rating and both of them have pretty high correlations with winning by themselves, so passing TD/A isn't adding much extra predictive power (once you have Y/A and INT/A). This means it's unlikely that passing TD/A matters much more (if at all) than rushing TD/A (educated guess.. not certain it's true). So for purposes of asking what the team should improve on.. it's probably best to focus on offensive and defensive Y/A and when possible (lower probability occurrence) INT/A instead of passer rating.
yes, in certain situations qbs can win games..its called making individual plays in crucial situations, where the recipient is just that, the recipient of that great individual play...a great play by a qb usually is an incredible read/decision, a great scramble, or a swift manipulation of the pocket to reset and fire.
Good post. YPA is a stat and no stand alone stat explains much of anything in football. Might as well say the key to winning is an elite QB. Miami doesn't have one, or a reliable running game. They use the short pass to augment their run game and it drags their YPA down but it's necessary for trying to win games.
Yes, so in his entire career, he has one game where they've won when the defense allowed more than 24. Tannehill routinely has teams scoring 25+ that he had to try to match, with no run game. As comical as it is to compare their skillsets, it's comical to act like their situations are even remotely the same.