Most passing yards in the first four years of a players career

Curious to me, Marino is one of the top 5 Qb's all time, yet that is Tannehill's standard?

To me, Bob Grieses' career track is a better comparison, for that matter, even Alex Smith.

What stands out to me about Tannehill is his Td to Int ratio, that has been solid since his rookie season.

 

Sparano used to talk about "leaked" to me Tannehill improved his deep passing, his pass placement has regressed

 

In depth and logical...thanks for your incredible input.

 

That's your argument? QBs get to stay in the league for more then 3 years? Lol.

Ya don't say?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Are you really arguing that its not conventional wisdom that people say give a QB 3 years before you can properly evaluate them? Really?

 

What are you talking about? Yes. Bad OL will keep any QB from being the best version of them.

That doesn't mean we can't watch him and still make a determination on what he is. Bad OL doesn't keep good QBs from ever making plays at the right time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I think that's a dumb blanket statement. Yes. You don't give a QB 3 years before you can evaluate them.

You give them 3 years before of chances to prove they are worth it, or prove your evaluation wrong, if they are a high pick maybe, yes.

By the way. This was the end of year 4.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Are you ESL? You keep saying this statement.

 

You guys are wasting your time. Block and move.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

What do you mean what am I talking about? Its pretty clear what I'm saying. Out of one side of your mouth you acknowledge a bad oline can severely hinder a QB's performance then out of the other side of your mouth you act as if that has no bearing on Thill play.

I said properly evaluate him. That is not different from what you said. And yes its his fourth year, that was the point, he was raw and has the worst set of circumstances for a QB to thrive in.

 

Lol show me where I said out of one side of my mouth where it has no bearing on THills play?

I'll wait?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Show me where I said you said it, or, do you not understand the difference between me saying you said something or saying you act like?

I'll also wait.

 

So you agree I didn't say it...but somehow, I am "acting like it" over a message board...with only words. When I've said the opposite.

You guys have literally, lost your minds. So glad this season is over.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

You pay lip service to the effects of the oline, but it doesn't change or even temper your bull **** evaluation of Thill. That, is acting like it doesn't matter.

Jesus christ man.

 

No it is not. Because I DO factor in the offensive line. "Jesus Christ!"

And I don't believe it has to be perfect situation to evaluate talent. Sorry.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Yes it is acting like it.

WTF is it with you people? Why is it ALWAYS one extreme or another? Who said anything about perfect situations? Seriously, are your arguments that bad that you have to resort to these bs extremes? Why is saying Thill has the worst environment to thrive for a QB mean you can't evaluate him unless he gets the perfect situation?

Its so freaking annoying.

Last year, he had a significant stretch of games where his oline wasn't great, they were just average, his OC sucked, his receivers still included Hartline & Gibson, he couldn't audible....and he put up Top 5-10 numbers. That's not an effing perfect situation at all. But wait, I know, I know, that doesn't count for some ridiculous reason or another.

Not a one of you can name another QB that thrived, that has had to deal with ALL of the handcuffs Thill has had to deal with but you're evaluation is that he sucks. That is absolutely ignoring these things, like it or not.

 

I know you like to view things from a phone booth ...... but why does the game from Sunday matter more than their overall record and being in the playoff hunt?

 

You're totally missing his point.

I'm typing this without shock.

 

I'm not missing any point. You whine about "extremes" and here one of your compatriots is trying to use one game the Packers had against Rodgers entire season.

 

No he isn't. As I siad, you're not surprisingly missing the point.

 

Zzzzzzzzzzzz.

 

If you stayed awake more, you wouldn't be missing so much.

All Falco was saying is that look what an epically bad oline (and a few other handcuffs) can do to an all time great QB, even for just a game. Nothing more, nothing less.

You missed that. I suspect, you'll still be missing that after you read this. Hell, I suspect Falco could come back, layout exactly what he meant in the smallest words possible, and you'll still miss it.

 

Who cares about "just a game"!?! What matters is the overall impact and ability to compete in the league and make the playoffs.

Not surprised this would be any of your arguments, I mean I'm talking to the same people who cling to singular flashes of potential as if they're indicators of future greatness.

 

lol, its like I'm an oracle.

 

Nah, just an insufferable malcontent who spends waaaaaaaaaay too much time bickering with strangers on internet forums errrrrr uhhhhh attempting to "police the narrative" LMAO.

 

Yeah, I should totally be more like you and not argue with anyone on the forum.....

anyway, back to the point that you keep missing, do you suppose that if horrible surrounding circumstances can severly impact one fo the all time greats for even one game, it could do the same to Thill for the entire time he's dealt with those things?

Nah, couldn't be.

 

How is the Redskins oline. From previous rankings I see them sitting near the bottom this year. But Cousins is playing great with not a lot of NFL experience and supposedly a bad oline

 

And?

 

That guy saved my fantasy team and won me the championship! What a tear he's been on.

[video=youtube;bsB7UQ8BlE0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bsB7UQ8BlE0[/video]

 

Don't talk about anyone else's misfortune. Nothin will EVER compare to how bad the stuff THill has to deal with.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Rodgers has shown in other games that he can work to overcome their deficiencies. That is why they clinched a playoff spot already.

 

Exactly. Rodgers and Big Ben oline have been horrific yet they played at elite levels.

Go watch some 2008-2011 steelers games and see Big Ben run for his life.

 

You're still not getting it.

Ok, try it from this angle....why did Rodgers play so bad the other day? Did he have to deal with more shackles than just a crap oline?

 

Never mind

 

The problem is that these arguments are the same ones since day one. Tannehill can't throw deep, Tannehill has no pocket presence, Tannehill isn't clutch, Tannehill can't win. These aren't arguments that came up this season, after he'd had time to develop. So, now, this season, people are pointing at things as evidence that these arguments are accurate. But, realistically, Tannehill still has a garbage oline, just like year one. He now also has a flawed offensive system, that refuses to run the ball. He has better weapons, at least on paper, but his weapons aren't exactly clutch.

Essentially, the problems he had to deal with in season one, are still problems today. And people expect that the raw prospect who had limited college starts to be playing at the same level as for year starters, who didn't come into totally dysfunctional teams.

 

I'll admit it's pretty impressive Tannehill has some of the stats he has given what he's had to play with. That shouldn't be discounted too much, even in this new era where passing stats are easier to come by.

But the criticisms shouldn't be dismissed either. The pocket presence, clutch and also decision-making arguments are valid in my mind, not because those are weakness of Tannehill per se, but because he hasn't shown any improvement in them this year (only the deep ball argument doesn't really hold as much now). He's had a crap OL for many years now, so the lack of improvement this year is a cause for concern and I think is one reason many more have soured on Tannehill this season.

 

The problem is the criticisms being levied today are all things so intrinsically tied to the terribleness of the oline (and the other shackles like badf OC, no audibles, etc.), they can't be all that accurate. They may turn out to be right, but we can't know yet.

They are also being levied by the same people who refused to believe Wallace (along with play design) was the problem with the deep ball.

 

Did you just decide its not worth it or did you realize how screwed your point was?

 

I think the criticisms have merit. You can look at how Tannehill sometimes just stands there letting a guy sack him, or not running when that's a good decision to make, or not shifting in the pocket more like some others do it, and say he doesn't have the pocket presence some other QB's have. What's hard to disentangle is the effect that has on wins. It's much easier to evaluate the QB on a play-by-play basis and see Tannehill doesn't have as good pocket presence as some other QB's do.

Same with the clutch argument. The OL is bad the whole game. It's unreasonable to argue the massive drop-off in Tannehill's performance while "trailing" in the 4th quarter is all due to the OL suddenly playing worlds worse in exactly those situations than in every other situation. The drop-off is so large it's rarely seen elsewhere. Point is, the criticisms have merit even if it's hard to determine what effect they have on wins.

And none of that addresses the lack of improvement issue unless you think there's no way any QB could perform better with this surrounding cast (which I think is an untenable position).

 

He's the same player he was at Texas A&M. Same tendencies, same strengths, same weaknesses. Never been a high achiever relative to his peers. He's been remarkably consistent since he started playing the position. I get that he's had some weak supporting casts, but six years of similar production and efficiency is a lot of evidence. Really good players overcome bad situations for at least a while, flash a season or two at least (Luck, Newton). I just don't expect Tannehill to make these big improvements to become a player that he's never been.