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

Just how important is "clutch", really?

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by Pauly, May 30, 2016.

  1. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,696
    3,743
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    Take my opinion with a grain of salt because film breakdowns isn't my longsuit.

    It totally does matter that its a play action. The still, as originally posted with comment, suggested that Tannehill has dropped back and is scanning the field and is oblivious to the rusher coming through the middle. It does matter than Tannehill has just turned around after completing a play fake. It does matter that Tannehill turned his head, and saw he had protection before turning around.

    What is Tannehill supposed to do - watch the line constantly and not lift his head downfield? When he does does that he gets crucifies for being bad with the deep ball.
    What extra move can you make when the defender is running free at you at the instant you have set your feet? You can't slide or climb the pocket. If he makes a choice to rely on his feet it has to be a scramble and he is at the complete disadvantage because he has stopped and Wilkinson is unblocked and running straight at him.

    He does try to get a pass out. He gets into his throwing motion, but rather than risk a fumble or interception he chooses to eat the sack.

    Everything in that clip shows me that Tannheill is aware of the situation. There's nothing in it to show Tannehill has tunnel vision and is locked onto his receiver and is unaware of what is happening in what you could optimistically describe as vaguely resembling a pocket.

    Does Tannehill make the optimal decision? Maybe not. But the important things for me:
    1) He looks before he turns around. Wilkinson is blocked at that point.
    2) After he turns around he realises Wilkinson is free at attempts to get the ball out before Wilkinson arrives.
    3) He sees something that tells him his first choice is a bad idea (maybe Wilkinson is coming too quickly or the receiver is covered), so he decides to eat the sack.

    At each point he's aware of the pocket situation and makes a justifiable decision.
    I'm not arguing Tannehill has great pocket presence. What I am saying is that the original presentation of the still is deceitful, I for one was fooled until I looked at the video.
     
    resnor likes this.
  2. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    The bold is the key part I'm disagreeing with. He doesn't in any way make a "justifiable decision" IMO. I've seen more than enough QB's take that extra step to give themselves extra time, or run from onrushing defenders like that, regardless of what the initial play was (sometimes things don't go according to plan). And I'm sure a good coach would point this out to him too.
     
    Finster, dolphin25, roy_miami and 2 others like this.
  3. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    11,375
    11,392
    113
    Sep 28, 2015
    All pocket passers who also are gifted with pocket awareness.
     
    dolphin25 likes this.
  4. Rocky Raccoon

    Rocky Raccoon Greasepaint Ghost Staff Member

    30,224
    36,965
    113
    Dec 2, 2007
    Jersey
    I agree that Tannehill needs to improve his pocket presence and overall awareness.

    However, if you think he's the most sacked QB over the last 4 years simply because he locks onto his first target too long, well, then I don't know what to tell you. We also have 4 years of data telling us the offensive line has been nothing short of poop.

    But, like I've been saying. Ryan still needs to get better in certain areas, and I believe Gase is the right man for the job.
     
    resnor likes this.
  5. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    111,652
    67,546
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    Agreed, its a part of the sh@@ storm
     
  6. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,159
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    The bold is the point. He has to do one or the other, he can't see both at the same time. The great ones do. I can't believe you are defending his decision to stand there like a statue while a rusher is bearing down on him. I know you support the guy no matter what, but don't be so blatant.


    The second screen shot I showed has Tanny at the bottom of his drop, fully turned around, Wilkerson already broke free, and is in his POV. Nothing explains him standing there like a statue while a rusher is coming straight at him except that he didn't see the rusher coming straight at him.

    Serious question? You've never seen a QB take one side step to avoid a sack? That's part of Tanny's problem too. He's a fast straight line athlete. But he's not nimble or have quick feet. Kind of heavy actually (go watch his wide receiver days at A&M).
     
    dolphin25 likes this.
  7. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,696
    3,743
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    Firstly Tannehill didn't stand like a statue. He tried to get a pass off before the sack arrived and then thought better of it.

    Secondly, and more importantly, I not defending Tannehill's decisions on that play. I am criticizing the way that you described the screen cap. The difference between what you describe (Tannehill having tunnel vision because he locks onto receivers) and what that screen snap actually shows (Tannehill looking downfield while he is in the process of turning around after a play action fake) is huge.

    Whether Tannehill could have/should have made better decisions on that play is irrelevant to my criticism of the way you presented that screen snap.
     
    Brasfin, resnor and Fin D like this.
  8. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    111,652
    67,546
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    I just watched it again, your wrong imo sir, he got his head turned around in time to make a move on the player..It was not like once he turned around the defender was in his face, wilkerson was on the 32 and ryan turned his eyes and body to the read at the 25...as the old man in the geico commercial says...''you gotta be quicker than that''

    there was also plenty of room to make a move to either side..

    Its a tough situation, I get it, he's turning his back to the defense briefly, he's got to have the trust in his line to be able to make his read and execute..the play broke down protection wise, but these are the plays that will happen in big games on the road on the way to a champ..gotta make a handful of them every game.
     
    Finster and Pauly like this.
  9. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    111,652
    67,546
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    another reason why i stated I wanted lazor gone after one year, he kept trusting the line and refusing to move ryan right and left, I believe he averaged 1 roll/boot per game..which is unacceptable for a qb who is very deft at going left or right on the move and throwing..inexcusable considering the variables and skill set of the qb....said it a million times, folks kept telling me..blal bah, you cant have him roll to much or it cuts the field off...horsesh##...you get this dude on the move because he's good at it and your nline sucks..twice a half this can be done in the context of an offense.
     
    resnor and Pauly like this.
  10. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,696
    3,743
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    I thought the decision to eat the sack was the bad one. once he's made the decision to throw and not to scramble he has to commit to it. I thought he had the time to get the ball out, even for a throwaway, but not knowing what was happening downfield makes me reluctant to criticize it too harshly.

    It could have been worse too. It could have been a Brett Favre pack pedal and throw a floating balloon for the intercept or a strip fumble if he was hit in the throwing motion.
     
    resnor likes this.
  11. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Yeah, I think that when you take a raw QB, out of college, and give him, what we all agree was bad coaching and a ****ty oline, you get a QB who's indecisive. Throw in the fact that we now know that both Lazor and Philbin were actively trying get rid of him, and you have exacerbated the problem even more.

    See I don't necessarily think the criticisms of Tannehill are bad, just the cynicism about Tannehill is unwarranted.
     
  12. dolphin25

    dolphin25 Well-Known Member

    6,338
    2,400
    113
    Nov 22, 2014
    I think that was Lazors way of saying look this guy just can't get the job done. Lazor didn't think he would have or should have to roll a QB out just so the QB can make a play.
     
    jdang307 likes this.
  13. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Well, Pete Carroll certainly had no problem calling plays that rolled Wilson out, who most claim is light years better than Tannehill. Essentially, Carroll realized the strengths of Wilson, and called plays accordingly. Please tell me that that style of coaching didn't greatly help Wilson's development. So, if a coach is refusing to call plays that cater to his players strengths, and also help to mitigate the shortcomings of other pieces of the offense, then that is a bad coach.
     
    Fin D likes this.
  14. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,696
    3,743
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    Lazor was very reluctant to change anything about his coaching style. There were lots of time when what he was doing worked very well. But when it stumbled he failed to adjust, and IMO blamed the execution/QB rather than do soul searching to see if he should be the one making changes.

    A similar mentality to Ireland in that they both thought they were the smartest guys ever and that they were smarter than the rest of the league.
     
    Fin D and resnor like this.
  15. Rocky Raccoon

    Rocky Raccoon Greasepaint Ghost Staff Member

    30,224
    36,965
    113
    Dec 2, 2007
    Jersey
    Yeah, but that's stupid. If a player excels at a certain area, you utilize that strength. It's common sense, and also why I loved hiring Adam Gase. That isn't just about Tannehill either. It's everyone. Gase and his staff will make sure these guys are put in the best position to succeed.
     
    Fin D and resnor like this.
  16. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    11,375
    11,392
    113
    Sep 28, 2015
    What exactly are Ryans strengths?
     
    jdang307 and dolphin25 like this.
  17. dolphin25

    dolphin25 Well-Known Member

    6,338
    2,400
    113
    Nov 22, 2014
    do you change the entire game plan because 1 player cannot execute it or do you get rid of that player? any other position you get rid of the player; which is what Philpin wanted to do in this case.
     
  18. dolphin25

    dolphin25 Well-Known Member

    6,338
    2,400
    113
    Nov 22, 2014
    say this lack of awareness of Ryans part accounts for 10 sacks a year, where would that rank him as far as being sacked? 10 fewer sacks a year
     
  19. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Still in the top half of the league (just 3 sacks shy of the Top 10).
     
  20. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,159
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    Keep hearing this yet he switched the offense up after game 3 of last year. Shorter passes, rollouts for Tanny. Produced Tanny's best year as a pro so far.

    http://miamiherald.typepad.com/spor...-strength-dolphins-um-defense-heat-notes.html

    Details some of the mid-season changes Lazor made to suit the offense (I'd say Tanny but the TDF will come in and say he made it because of the oline yada yada yada).

    Why didn't he keep up with those changes in 2015? Let's just say Philbin and Lazor got into the DGAF stage. Some publicly known. Like telling the FO (and essentially the whole team) Tanny isn't good and they need Derek Carr.
     
    dolphin25 likes this.
  21. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,159
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    I think that's the problem right there. He was raw, and unproven. It's already hard enough to project experienced college QBs into the NFL. Those who start 3-4 years. But you project a part time starter, who wasn't even prolific in college, raw, and take him 8th? The hit rate on such a projection is even worse. Luckily, he's proven himself at least a middling starter. So he's not a train wreck.

    But we want him to be good. Very good. Dalton year 5 good. What if it takes Tanny 7-9 years to get that good? You waste a decade of the team just waiting for him? We get a good oline this year. What if it goes bad due to injuries and attrition next year? Or the year after?
     
    dolphin25 and roy_miami like this.
  22. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,159
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    He's got a decent floor, not sure of ceiling yet. Pretty accurate short to midrange. Tough. Doesn't make a lot of mistakes.

    He's basically Alex Smith with a strong arm, but can't take full advantage of that arm. Not as football smart as Alex Smith yet, but Smith has played a long time. Good straightline speed (but not quick or nimble). You can design an offense that fits him but it'll be a limited offense.
     
  23. rafael

    rafael Well-Known Member

    27,364
    31,261
    113
    Apr 6, 2008
    IMO Alex Smith with a strong arm would be a great QB.
     
    resnor likes this.
  24. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Tannehill with football smarts would be a franchise QB.

    Up to Gase.. probably only has 1 year to find out though given THill's contract.
     
    dolphin25 and resnor like this.
  25. roy_miami

    roy_miami Well-Known Member

    1,385
    560
    113
    Oct 11, 2013
    You guys don't just want it both ways but every way. Raw QB? Just coach better to make up for it.

    I can play that game too. O-line sucks? Just up your game at QB, eazy peazy.

    Raw QB? Just play more conservatively and run it more, we'll give you a pass on the record if it doesn't work out (yeah right).

    "Tannehill is 7-1 when the line is in tact and healthy, with great stats, there's your proof he can be a great QB with just a mediocre line. Imagine what he would look like without a sucky Lazor calling the plays?" Guess what Lazor's record was when the line was in tact and healthy? Hint: the exact same!!

    If the QB deserves to be cut some slack for being raw then the coaches should get some slack for dealing with a raw QB. If the QB gets credit for the team looking great when the line is healthy then the coaches should also get some credit for the team looking great when the line is healthy. Philbin didn't even have say over who we had for depth on the o-line, let alone Lazor.

    So I don't agree coaching was terrible, it was average. On defense we were the only team to not make the playoffs with a top 10 scoring D in Philbins first 2 seasons. We were 8-6 and the favorite to go to the playoffs after Jon Martin spazzed out. With a raw QB and Hartline as our top weapon. Dam near miraculous to be in that position if you ask me. And on offense during Lazor's tenure the offense was as good as its been since the Marino years. I think Lazor was actually good but when his subordinate became his boss and 'had to think about whether to keep Lazor as OC' during the bye week Lazor didn't handle it well from then on.
     
  26. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    111,652
    67,546
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    fair point..
     
    resnor likes this.
  27. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    111,652
    67,546
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    it sure is stupid and why some of us were *****ing and moaning the whole time last year..I kept count last year..1 roll/boot a game im pretty sure.
     
    Rocky Raccoon and resnor like this.
  28. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Almost none of that makes sense.
     
    resnor likes this.
  29. dolphin25

    dolphin25 Well-Known Member

    6,338
    2,400
    113
    Nov 22, 2014
    I don't know that is really fair to Gase, I don't believe you can teach football smarts. I think you can teach the game, but not all can grasp the total picture.
     
    cbrad likes this.
  30. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    111,652
    67,546
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    hell yeah..
     
    resnor likes this.
  31. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Sure, the coaches would get slack, if they had been preparing Tannehill better. All the information out there doesn't seem to indicate that, though. Even freaking Lazor, who gets defended on here, apparently thought Tannehill sucked, and, then decided to throw it more than anyone in the league. So either Lazor was right, and Tannehill sucks, which makes throwing a ton the absolutely wrong decision (making Lazor a bad OC), or Tannehill doesn't suck, but was ill prepared to deal with the situations he had to deal with (which still makes Lazor a bad OC). Yes, a raw QB, like Tannehill, needed better coaching than he got. You are one of the few arguing that the coaching wasn't a big problem. His freaking QB coach his first two years was only there because he was married to Sherman's daughter. That's great.

    Yes, Lazor's offense worked when all the pieces were there. Lazor was bad because he didn't change anything when he lost his pieces.

    The defense got progressively worse, the past four years. Also, just being the highest scoring defense is meaningless, in and of itself. What if you were the highest scoring defense, but Ajayi gave up the most points per game in the league?
     
    Fin D likes this.
  32. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Oh I didn't mean that if Tannehill doesn't show he's football smart by the end of this season that Gase is fully to blame for that. You're absolutely right that some people are better at learning certain things than others and no one really knows how great Tannehill's ability to learn "football smarts" really is.

    The reason I phrased it that way is because I do NOT think the QB on his own can really correct this. That is, I don't really think Tannehill can just study game film all the time, realize what he has to do, then execute. I think the coach has to help out by creating training programs to gradually change ("shape" is the technical term) Tannehill's behavior.

    And some things I think can be learned by proper training. Knowing when to take off and run I am adamant can be learned because you could simulate situations where you can immediately correct the decision-making (the correction has to be done as quickly as possible after the error). Same thing with practicing evading pressure.

    And one thing that isn't mentioned a lot about "football smarts" that Tannehill also lacks but Brady is just about a grand master at is realizing when the defense is slow to get to its line or get in position and take advantage of it.

    Also.. Brady makes sure his teammates understand the game situation, like "make sure you get out of bounds quickly", etc.. Tannehill doesn't lead in that respect. All these things can in theory be taught, but how quickly a person can learn it? Yeah, no way to tell so you're right about that.

    BUT!! If we see NO improvement in "football smarts", then yeah it's the coach's fault. Every person can improve to some degree on these things even after one training camp.
     
    resnor likes this.
  33. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Then we also have to deduct sacks that were the QBs fault from overall totals of other QBs to see where Tannehill ranks. You can't just discount 10 sacks from Tannehill, and not from any other. For instance, last season, there were at least four other QBs who were responsible for more sacks than Tannehill (forget the stat exactly, was on during a game, someone reposted a screen grab a couple months ago, Wilson was number one).
     
    cbrad and Fin D like this.
  34. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    111,652
    67,546
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    it is why im hard on tannehill, being conscious of when to run is an art, and can be incredibly effective..he shows no awareness of the trait..its never done on purpose and it should be with his speed..also, I dont like that we hardly see any shoulder or pump fakes to manipulate defenders.

    The time I really got discouraged with ryan being good enough to win multiple champs is when I watched him from the endzone against the jets..he really couldnt see what he was doing {was standing in same spot while rush was coming} and did nothing to improve that aspect..

    we need this dude very badly to realize he can hurt teams with his legs and arm..when the lightbulb goes off, we will be good to go, if it never does, we in trouble..jmo.
     
  35. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Yeah I think it's clear Tannehill just isn't a natural at that, so he's almost certainly not going to have a "lightbulb go off" in his head and fix it. Our only hope is a coach that realizes this is a problem and can design good training programs to fix it.

    Like I said though.. he probably only has one year to show good improvement and some of these things aren't easy to learn.
     
  36. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Yeah, and it's another area where the coaching hurt him, I believe. He was coached to stay in the pocket...then Lazor and Philbin started trying to get rid of him...and people wonder why he didn't improvise? When your boss is actively undercutting you, it's probably not the right time to start improvising, and doing things they don't want you doing.
     
  37. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Well I partially disagree with that. Coaching him to stay in the pocket in his early years probably was the right thing to do so he could learn to be a pocket passer. You don't want him to try relying on mobility to such a degree he can't be an effective pocket passer (which is by far the more likely route to success).

    What coaches did in later years was a reflection of their inability to figure out how to improve Tannehill's pocket presence and "football smarts" in general. So there I'd agree coaching ability was lacking (of course no coach is great at everything, so in the end all that matters is did the team make the playoffs and we know how that turned out).
     
    resnor likes this.
  38. Rocky Raccoon

    Rocky Raccoon Greasepaint Ghost Staff Member

    30,224
    36,965
    113
    Dec 2, 2007
    Jersey
    I've said it before, I think Alex Smith is an underrated QB. If Ryan turns out to be that with a better arm, we're in good shape.
     
    Fin-O and dolphin25 like this.
  39. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Yeah, I don't mind that initially he was coached to stay in the pocket. But, I don't think that the situation with Lazor and Philbin was very conducive to Tannehill being successful.
     
    cbrad likes this.
  40. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    111,652
    67,546
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    as is ryan is not as good..yet.
     

Share This Page