Ryan Tannehill looks forward to more 'freedom' in Dolphins' offense

Yes, there is a difference. Yet essentially you're talking about hitting a specific point 30 or more yards downfield, while a receiver is running a route. All a QB can really do is put the ball where a receiver can get his hands on it. It's also why having receivers who run good, consistent routes is imperative to the deep passing game. If we're discussing a deep ball being maybe a foot away from "perfect" then it's still a good ball.

 

Also what the receiver does can make a huge difference.

The clip of Parker going up in the air to catch a ball showcases the difference a receiver can make. Wallace for example would have run under that ball rather than go up for it,which would have left the CB and S in better position to make a play on the ball. I'm not saying Wallace wouldn't have caught it, but that Parker's approach improved the likelihood of a successful outcome.

I think that people can discern between a perfectly laid out ball that gives good opportunities for YAC and a ball that is less than perfect but still catchable. But in the second case it can be difficult to say whether the problem is a less than accurate pass, a bad route, a bad read, pass pressure affecting the throw or poor play design. Considering that few QBs reach even 50% catchable rate on their deepballs I'm generally happy to accept catchable being charted as successful outcome for a QB on a deepball.

Obviously some caveats apply, more so on underthrows than on overthrows.

 

That happened in 2014. He had a more technically sound looking deep pass in 2015. Are you following the same team?

 

Not really. If a guy has 5 steps on his man but has to hold up and it's a jump ball that's not accurate. If the receiver had to reroute just to get to the ball, again, it's not accurate.

 

And if the QB can't step into the throw because the oline isn't stopping the pressure, then the throw will be shorter.

 

Exactly.

I don't think people realize how much arm strength it takes to throw that ball, WITHOUT being able to step up into the throw.

 

Right?? Dude can't step up, cause the pass rush is like 10 yards deep, throws it off his back foot, and it comes up a foot or two short. Yeah, that's the throw to criticize Tannehill for.

But you're just a reasonable guy when it comes to this stuff.

 

Didn't you hear? The oline, the WRs, the OC....they don't effect deep passes...its all QB.

 

That wasn't an easy throw by any means and everyone else was covered. That was almost 40 yards. Looks like he threw it 39 yards in the air off his back foot (41 to the 25) as Dallas Thomas was stood up and steam rolled back into him before he could step into it. Would've been nice if Landry had been able to secure it as he had it in his hands.

In fairness though, it was failure all around... Tannehill was never set, his hips and feet aren't facing the direction of the pass, not that he couldn't step into it anyway as Dallas Thomas failed at the POA and was driven back into him, then Landry didn't secure it once it arrived.

Illustrates a point someone else made during the season that if Tannehill isn't damn near perfect with each throw, no one else steps up either...

 

Yep. We've been arguing that Tannehill has to play at elite levels all game every game for the Phins to have a chance at winning.

 

no he had a more technically sound deep threat. you guys were wrong about his deep passing accuracy in 2014. the problem was wallace. i think having been cut twice in two years proves that

 

Well if you compare that clip with the Parker TD clip, if that was Parker receiving he would have gone up top got two hands on the ball and secured it before the CB could hack in. If you look at the Brandon Marshall clip from the article Brandon Marshall in a similar situation cut back to the ball and used his (bigger) body to box the DB out of the play.

Landry is a great receiver, but that clip is one of the few times he could have done better.

 

Who designs a play that puts Dallas Thomas in isolation for blocking?

Pouncey couldn't slide over to help because he needed to leave a lane for the RB to run a route through the left A gap. By the time the RB is through the hole Dallas Thomas is 5 yards behind him. Just run the route through the right A gap and give your probowl center an opportunity to assist your most inept lineman.

 

Its precisely why that gif tells us so much to counter the rabble for these past few years, because of the oline, Thill, Wrs and the OC, the only one actually doing his job...Thill.

And still, the Tannehaters want to use it as proof Thill is the problem.....

 

Completely agree. Looking forward to seeing more of Parker on the outside. Kid's a beast who attacks the ball.

 

I read, on this very board, "watch what Wallace does with a real QB who can actually throw a deep ball."

In 2014, with Tannehill, Wallace, and a bad O Line we scrapped the deep ball because of Tannehill.

In 2015, we have Tannehill, the same line (but somehow worse) and minus Wallace...and for some reason we re-introduced the deep ball even though we kept the same QB.

Then somehow, Tannehill threw the deep ball well enough that some unbiased guy watched the tape of all QBs' deep passes and said he was in the top 10 for most accurate deep ball passers in 2015.

So even though none of us know Lazor's thoughts....it seems that there's much more evidence that Wallace was more of a problem (in regards to the deep ball) than Tannehill.

 

Everyone sucks but apparently we only need to replace the QB to make the playoffs.

 

Ryan Tannehill looks forward to more 'freedom' in Dolphins' offense


Didn't he have 'freedom' after we fired Lazor? There was a bunch of chatter here saying how he was free to make audibles after we got rid of Lazor. How'd he do in those games as opposed to when Lazor was handcuffing him? That'll be a real sign of how this 'could' be.

 

A few corrections.

The team introduced the deep ball in the back end of 2014. It wasn't eliminated for the whole year. That's why, by the end, the number of deep attempts were almost the same as the year before. Go check the second Patriots game in 2014. Tannehill threw it a deep a ridiculous amount of times. So when 2015 rolled around they didn't re-introduce it, it was just a continuation.

http://www.miamidolphins.com/news/a...Patriots/a284b591-6467-490b-97f5-0ee0f1f3646e

That's 10 attempts in one game. So with Tannehill, Wallace, and the bad oline we scrapped the deep pass for a little, and reintroduced it the last few games.

The lack of a deep pass game was a failure in the Tannehill to Wallace connection. You can argue it was Wallace, you can argue it was Tannehill. Wallace needs a specialized set of circumstances to thrive. Offense that takes vertical shots (Bruce Arians comes to mind), a QB with a strong arm, that is accurate. He had that in Pitts with Arians and Big Ben. He hasn't had it since. He was a bad fit here, because let's face it, Tannehill doesn't throw it like Big Ben does. So as a GM what do you do? You bring him QB friendly WRs. Guys who will win battles. Look at that Parker TD. Not a lot of WRs can high point that and grab it. But Parker can (hence why he went as high as he did). Parker's not a burner, he doesn't get a lot of separation. Similar to what Alshon Jeffery looked like when he came out. What he does, is win battles. Battles against smaller, shorter DBs.

I think we're finding out Tanny, for whatever reason, doesn't mesh well with faster, deep route running WRs. He's never going to be Big Ben, and that's fine. Kenny Stills isn't Mike Wallace fast yet the Tanny to Stills combination produced a 42.9% catch rate. That is pathetic. With only 2 drops attributed to him.

The thing about Stills is, he was the best deep pass catcher the past two years before Miami. Before being traded to Miami, he caught 82% of his targets past 20 yards. How is that even humanly possible, I don't know. But Stills did it. This is the best PFF has seen since 2007. In other words, he's a great at catching deep passes. And they didn't always have to be on point.

For two years in a row, PFF labeled him the best in exceeding his expected catch rates. It's subjective, but they look at where the pass is, and how much the receiver had to adjust to catch it.

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2015/06/16/qb-and-location-adjusted-catch-rates/
https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2014/04/21/depth-and-passer-adjusted-catch-rates/

#1 both times. PFF isn't gospel but still, #1 both times.

So why the pitiful 43% catch rate overall here? Remember, he had a 79% catch rate past 20 yards. 43% overall here. Was it Tanny? Philbo/Lazor? Oline?

So we can sit here and blame Mike Wallace but the next guy, who has demonstrated he was one of the best at catching deep passes, one of the best at adjusting to catches with a large catch radius, comes in here and stinks the joint up.

But let's focus on Wallace.

 

Yeah, I agree with those that point out Tannehill has been hampered by a bad OL (for sure), not so great play-calling, and Wallace simply wasn't a good fit for him. But there's no question in my mind that Tannehill is also part of the problem (regarding the deep ball) and you're right the Stills experiment provides some evidence for that.

Personally, I think most of these Tannehill deep ball debates would go away if people just agreed that everyone involved, from QB, OL, WR to coach, was part of the problem. I don't think you want to argue that for most other things, but for this particular Tannehill deep ball issue I think it's accurate.

 

One could also argue that Wallace wasn't nearly as effective once he was put into timing based offenses.

Anyway, cbrad, the idea that Tannehill had some blame, along with Wallace and oline, is exactly what we've said for a couple seasons. It's just that many posters wanted to place all the blame on Tannehill, and act like Wallace and the oline didn't matter in regards to the deep ball. Does Tannehill throw an excellent deep ball? No. Does he throw a terrible deep ball? No. He throws pretty much an average deep ball, although he has excellent arm strength. Maybe he needs someone to work with him on the deep ball like Rodgers did.

 

It's not just deep ball. It's deep ball to speedy WRs at this point. Devante Parker high pointing a deep pass 30 yards down the field over a defender, is easier than Speedy Gonzales running away from you at full speed. It's just a harder throw no matter how you cut it. The Parker throw is throwing to a spot. Hitting Wallace running a 9 route is ... hard. Really hard. Only a few can do it.

I read an article a few weeks back where the author made the argument that Tannehill is fine when he can see where the WR is running instead of the WR running away from him. Post routes vs simple go routes. He's not great at anticipating where the WR will be in the time he releases it until it gets there.

The thing about Wallace and I noted this before, is Tanny had an anticipation problem. He would hesitate ever so slightly when deciding to throw it deep, and when you do that with someone as fast as Wallace, he's 60 yards down the field.

If you watch the deep TD toss to Wallace against the Panthers a couple years back, you see this.

Look at how long he takes before deciding to toss the ball. As soon as Wallace breaks outside he's beaten his man. Four steps in. ~6 yards from the LOS. He's not past the DB yet, but he's beaten his man and Tanny should start throwing it then. But Tanny waits, and waits, and waits, and then throws the ball. Sure the end result is a TD, but the ball was late. You can hear the announcer discuss the bad throw and how Wallace saved it.

Maybe that will come with experience, but Tanny to me, is a see it throw it kind of guy. It's not natural yet. He's not a gun slinger. And that's not a bad thing. But these strikes are like daggers, and some more of them would be great.

http://www.miamidolphins.com/multim...p-For-TD/1bdf53cf-bfe2-4e8e-95d6-3e0483fff358

 

Yeah his deep ball is average I agree.

Can't remember/don't know everything posted about this in the past, but who here right now and today believes all the blame should be on Tannehill, regarding any deep ball issues? I'm asking because if no one thinks that, maybe we can keep this thread from regurgitating all the arguments from the past.. board is a lot better when the disagreements are real.

 

Yeah, deep ball to speedy WR's sounds right.

Regarding anticipation issues, if memory serves correctly I don't think that clip you linked to is indicative of what usually happened with Wallace. My feeling was (based on what I saw during games) that Tannehill was releasing the ball just as Wallace went into another gear. I always thought that was one of the reasons he had trouble with the timing. In the clip you show he actually has time to see Wallace in full stride.. not sure, maybe it was just a difficult throw because Tannehill was also on the move.

Anyway, the solution here is obviously to come from Gase. Deep balls only need to be one (smaller) part of the game and if he's a good coach he should be able to create the appropriate game plan to utilize Tannehill. Not getting my hopes high till I see him prove he's a worthy coach though because of our pathetic recent history with coaches.

 

Let's not gloss over how important being able trust your oline and step into throws is when throwing the deep ball.

 

It could be any number of reasons you're right. Let's just see what happens this year. We have a great threat in Stills who caught 80% of passes over 20 yards the two years before coming here. That's ridiculous.

 

Still glossing over the oline.

 

It was an oversimplified way to disprove something I read here ad nauseum for two years...that Tannehill was solely to blame for all deep ball issues and most (not all) "Tannehaters" never gave a single inch. Meanwhile, there were a very few people who tried to say that the problems were on the o line, poor coaching, poor chemistry, bad play design, etc. and were called blind and "Tannelovers" and whatever else.

I know there were deep balls thrown in the Pats game in 2014, a bunch of them, and they were all generally accurate. There was a Williams drop and a Hartline "oops it is in the sun". I even said this back then and the reply over and over was basically "well why did they scrap the deep ball huh? It has gotta be because he is the worst deep passer I've ever seen. Wallace was the best deep ball target in 2011!" So I am not focusing on Wallace, I am simply sticking with my views I have had for 3 years. Tannehill was an average deep ball thrower the whole time and the o line, coaching, and play design were poor....and Wallace had a small catch radius and was a bad fit in the timing offense and had a pretty bad attitude.

No idea about Stills. I mean I remember some pretty rough drops, but half the team's highlight reel were his plays too. Maybe it was overall team chemistry? He did just say he felt disrespected as a man last year. But, if he had the best catch percentage on deep balls in years past even when they were bad throws....and at the same time an unbiased person doing a deep ball study said Tannehill was a top 10 accurate deep ball passer, something failed along the way.

The short version is that the 5 or so "Tannelovers" in this forum said it was a team problem all along and more people seem to be starting to agree.

 

Every human on the planet has the same issue. Every animal on the planet has the same issue. Judging change of depth is always harder than judging lateral changes.

How many times have you wanted to Turn across traffic and misjudged the gap between oncoming cars because one car was going faster or slower than you expected?

 

Thats why you throw the ball when he first has his man beat, Wallace is still somewhat at an angle at that point.

Yes, Big Ben is a better QB so I'm not putting this up as proof of that. Notice, Wallace goes to raise his hand to ask for the ball but puts it down immediately because the ball is already on its way. That's where I hope Tanny can get to with Stills.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-fantasy/09000d5d82366a57/Roethlisberger-hits-Wallace-for-95-yard-TD

 

I`m not disagreeing with the examples. I was disagreeing with the generalization in the article that paints it as a specific problem Tannehill has. All QBs from little league through to the NFL find it easier to hit a post route than a go route.

 

Again, Tannehill isn't throwing in a vacuum. You can't simply forget about the oline, and the lack of confidence that he would have time to make throws, or be able to step into throws. Not being confident in the pocket (or lack of pocket) makes for an indecisive QB, always second guessing himself.

 

Big Ben played with TERRIBLE olines. Made some, and won some super bowls. Yes he had a fantastic defense but his numbers were out of this world. The 2nd worst adjusted sack rate in the NFL, with one of the best at evading sacks. Those lines were horrible. Big Ben was running for his life. Wilson has had a worse oline than us at times. We can quibble about who has a worst oline, but both are at the bottom of the league. If it's a lack of confidence than that sounds like a personal problem. Big Ben and Wilson have them in SPADES.

If you want to say that Ryan is not as good as those two, and needs more help than those two, then okay, I wont disagree with you. We're 100% in agreement.

 

Yes, even with bad olines, Rapistberger still had good defenses, often a good run game, and good coaching. In other words, he did have help in other areas that Tannehill did not. Again, though, there are plenty of people who want to argue about Ben as an all-time great. So, to try to attack Tannehill, we compare him to someone who excels at beating broken plays. Great.

Frankly, Wilson has benefitted greatly from a scheme that catered to his skill set, which you unequivocally cannot argue that Tannehill had the same benefit.

 

Not attacking. Appropriately evaluating and placing him.

I dunno. Before this past year, when people were crowning Tannehill and afraid to lose Lazor, all we heard was how he was bad 3 games into Lazor's scheme, and how both Lazor adjusted and Tannehill acclimated to this scheme that was fantastic because it was tailored to Tanny's strengths. Of course we got rid of Wallace, because he was the problem. Drafted Parker, who is QB friendly.

So I'd say, 2014 was Tannehill friendly for sure. At the end of the day, Tanny really isn't as good, and needs a little more help. So we can agree on that.

 

I think Lazor was good...and then seemingly teams adjusted to his playcalling, and he didn't change...except to abandon the run and throw even more. I soured on Lazor when his playcalling seemed completely disconnected from the team that he was calling them for.

 

I think Lazor did a good job of designing schemes and game plans. Some of his play design was downright beautiful. But he was like Philbin and he got queasy when he was behind, and his playcalling suffered. You have to remember that there was an 8 or 10 game stretch in 2014 when Kevin Coyle's D was superb which coincided with the rise of Lazor and Tannehill. Then Rex Ryan showed Coyle couldn't stop the run then and that's when the offense started stuttering too because they weren't playing from ahead so often.

Then in 2015 Coyle keeps the same scheme, which worked well in the pre season, but when games were played and our opponents game planned us they exposed the schematic deficiencies. Lazor kept his playcalling tendencies when behind, which allowed opposing defenses to sit on the passing game all the time. And since Philbin trusted his co-ordinators and didn't do anything to address these problems exposed in 2014 in the off-season ... well we saw what happened.

I think that if the defense had played the way it was predicted to in 2015 (dominant top 5 or top 3) and Lazor was playcalling from mostly ahead on the scoreboard he'd be a head coach on another team now.

 

That's fair.

There is more to it than that. We now know after the season was over, Philbin wanted to replace Tannehill in the offseason. Pounded the table for Derek Carr. Don't think for a second this didn't permeate through the clubhouse I'm sure it did.

Remember, before we even know about Philbin and Carr, there was the report the staff didn't think Tannehill was the guy, while the FO was behind him. This was when Campbell was coach. From Philbin, to Lazor, to Campbell, I'm sure the feeling was, Tanny isn't the guy who can run our offense.

I would argue, Philbin and Lazor were in the f**k it stage. It is what it is.

 

Again, I don't care if Philbin wanted to replace Tannehill. I don't hold his opinion in very high regard. Given the laundry list of questionable decisions, by both Philbin and Lazor, their desire to replace Tannehill is even more suspect.

 

I'm telling you that to further add to your observation Lazor was good year 1, and bad year 2. Not to argue they were right. I never argue they were right. But to explain why it seemed they threw in the towel year 2. Because they did. They didn't want Tanny and said eff it, we're going to throw it 100 times a game! F you FO.