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

wow. our qb has arived

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by caliphinfan, Nov 20, 2016.

  1. Brasfin

    Brasfin Well-Known Member

    2,435
    1,672
    113
    Apr 27, 2013
    Brazil
    Joe Flacco, Eli Manning, Brad Johnson, Trent Dilfer, you're saying Ryan Tannehill can't be as good as these guys? Having a top 5 QB may be the "surest way" to win a Super Bowl, but until that happens I'm sticking with Tannehill, he can get it done. ;)
     
    number21 and resnor like this.
  2. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    111,648
    67,540
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    hopefully we've been wrong..I'm sure you would agree.
     
    cuchulainn likes this.
  3. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    I think this thread is proof of what a few of us have been saying about the Tannehater crowd.

    Their hate is personal and not based on tape or numbers.

    This is a fact and proven now.
     
    Superself, Hiruma78, number21 and 2 others like this.
  4. jdallen1222

    jdallen1222 Well-Known Member

    2,752
    1,373
    113
    May 31, 2013
    Plantation, Fl
  5. Brasfin

    Brasfin Well-Known Member

    2,435
    1,672
    113
    Apr 27, 2013
    Brazil
    You should post that list of debunked anti-Tannehill arguments again, add "can't put team on his back" and "isn't clutch" to it.
     
  6. brandon27

    brandon27 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    45,652
    19,304
    113
    Dec 3, 2007
    Windsor, ON. CANADA
    That's what I'm saying, but we have some apparently who don't want to admit to seeing it that way today. Regardless of your thoughts on the guy, you should at least be able to admit that if you're being unbiased about it. Plays don't have to be "legendary" for that either.
     
    number21 likes this.
  7. brandon27

    brandon27 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    45,652
    19,304
    113
    Dec 3, 2007
    Windsor, ON. CANADA
    I think your pursuit of an elite QB theory is what's off here. Sure, it's easy to say elite QB's win super bowls. They should. That's why they're considered elite. They're good enough, and have good enough teams and coaches around them to do it on a regular basis. How many of those are there in the league? A very small handful. How often do they come around? Not very often. You make it seem as if we should just draft one every year until we find our own Brady, or Manning. Great idea in theory, but it's not realistic.

    Nobody should be disagreeing that having an elite QB helps win Super Bowls. That should be pretty obvious.

    The hard part is finding one.

    Now, if we want to talk about is now the time to ditch Ryan Tannehill to try yet again to find that magical elite QB? That's a different issue. Sometimes though, your odds might be better to work with what you have, and improve the situation around until that upgrade can be more easily identified. There's only so much you can do with limited resources when dealing with draft picks, free agents, and a salary cap.

    If you sit here and draft a QB every few years and you don't hit on it, you're stuck in the same cycle we've been stuck in since Marino left. Only we've tried it every way possible. Draft early, Draft 2nd round. Free agents. I mean, we've tried it all.

    It's a touchy subject for sure. You can win Super Bowls though with one that isn't elite. It's just a different team building approach in order to do so. Looking at this roster, I'm not so sure we're in the position of trying to draft a QB right now. Especially considering we now have 6 wins on the year, and we're really not going to have a pick early enough to do something about it.

    Realistically, I think what's going to play out this year is a re-structure for Tannehill at this point, and probably a 3rd round guy with lots of upside, or a FA with upside to come in and compete. If we keep winning, it's a no brainer he's here next year. They'd be insane to kick a guy to the curb they're winning with when they have no viable replacement. that being said though, the temptation for an offensive, QB guy like Gase may very well be there to draft and mould one of his own. I still think though, that will come from the later rounds if they find a guy with talent and upside.
     
    smahtaz, number21 and Brasfin like this.
  8. Brasfin

    Brasfin Well-Known Member

    2,435
    1,672
    113
    Apr 27, 2013
    Brazil
    This may happen, but I think now that we may finally have our coach, system and culture set for the next 15-20+ years, it's more likely we ride Tannehill until he retires and draft a high round QB in the back end of RT's career to groom.

    If we don't win the Super Bowl with Tannehill, I have a feeling we'll at least have gotten close to it a couple times. The most important thing for me is that it looks like we'll have the structure set to keep winning even after Tannehill is long gone.
     
  9. rafael

    rafael Well-Known Member

    27,364
    31,261
    113
    Apr 6, 2008
    Gase could also be talking to the posters here who keep coming up with inane reasons to criticize Tannehill or keep calling him an average QB.
     
    Last edited: Nov 21, 2016
  10. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Well.. it's simple math: sticking with a QB means what? maybe 15 years?

    In that time you can probably try out at least 5 starting QB's and try to hit on one. It's not unrealistic at all to think you might hit on an elite QB if you have at least 5 chances, especially if you draft them all in the 1st round.

    In any case, just remember it's hard no matter which direction you go. You stick with an average QB and the "hard part" is building a good enough team around him to win it all. Not easy to do either.
     
  11. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Good thing we have an above average QB.

    The problem had been we've had a below average team with below average coaching.
     
    Ophinerated and smahtaz like this.
  12. rafael

    rafael Well-Known Member

    27,364
    31,261
    113
    Apr 6, 2008
    I doubt Gase would have come here if he thought Tannehill was nothing more than an average QB.
     
    number21, Superself, smahtaz and 2 others like this.
  13. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Yeah, I mean its not like we tried that after Marino left or anything......
     
    number21 and resnor like this.
  14. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    One efficiency metric with Tannehill is now clearly above average: Y/A.

    Still average with overall passer rating. We'll see how things end up because he's clearly been better passer rating wise last 5 games.
     
  15. Brasfin

    Brasfin Well-Known Member

    2,435
    1,672
    113
    Apr 27, 2013
    Brazil
    Nope, but IMO, it's easier than finding an elite top 5 QB... and even then having an elite QB does not mean you'll win a Super Bowl, just ask Marino. You're going to need a pretty good team anyway, regardless of the QB.

    By the way, how do we not know that Tannehill can't be a top 5 QB in the next few years anyway? With a couple of years of Gase's system under his and the offense's belt, a good TE and better depth along the OL how do we not know Tannehill won't put up top 5 QB numbers? Hey, it's possible, a few years back some people were saying he'd never have elite YPA numbers, the stat that supposedly most correlates with winning, and now he's what, top 8 or something?
     
    Superself, number21 and resnor like this.
  16. rafael

    rafael Well-Known Member

    27,364
    31,261
    113
    Apr 6, 2008
    Why would that matter? We all know that many elements other than the QB go into a passer rating so nobody would be so stupid as to claim that Tannehill is average based on stats.
     
    Ophinerated, resnor and Two Tacos like this.
  17. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    It matters because passer rating correlates well with wins, which is what we want. Even without knowing precisely what percentage of passer rating is due to the QB, as long as you assume a not insignificant portion is due to the QB, you're logically left with the conclusion that passer rating is measuring some aspect of QB ability that matters for winning.
     
    Rock Sexton likes this.
  18. iamtiv

    iamtiv Active Member

    177
    84
    28
    Aug 22, 2013
    Tannehill still lacks pocket presence and pocket-awareness, as well as decisive action He flat-out got himself sacked at least once and should've avoided at least one more with an acre in front of him to run if he could've not just fallen down when barely being touched.
    He's a tough guy but he gets distracted by pressure, or the appearance of pressure. The line was struggling for much of the game but they weren't doing as bad as Tannehill made it seem.
    I know the Packers got drummed yesterday, but if you watched the long-form highlight video (from NFL.com) you saw Rogers avoiding pressure constantly and making plays where Tannehill would've been sacked 8 times at least.
    Even though they went on those drives and Tanne made some throws, his performance was Nowhere Near as impressive as what he did the previous week when he put the team on his back. Last week he was making plays. This week he was just making throws.
     
    dolphin25 likes this.
  19. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Gase is the HC regardless of the QB. So you have to assume he'll help any other QB's you draft too.

    Regarding hypotheticals.. we could play that game for any scenario. Also, YPA correlates well with winning (about the same as TD%) but not as much as passer rating does.
     
  20. Brasfin

    Brasfin Well-Known Member

    2,435
    1,672
    113
    Apr 27, 2013
    Brazil
    His passer rating will get there, IMO. We know he takes care of the ball and commits few turnovers. He's also always been pretty good in the red zone and now has the deep pass in his toolbelt, there's no reason to think passer rating won't increase with time.

    I think we can attribute his low passer rating in the first games to the offense finding its groove under Gase and bad OL play. He probably won't have an elite passer rating by the end of the season, but it'll get better I think. Anyway, we can talk about how stats correlate with winning all we want, the important thing is that we actually ARE winning.
     
    resnor and cbrad like this.
  21. rafael

    rafael Well-Known Member

    27,364
    31,261
    113
    Apr 6, 2008
    Of course it correlates with wins. How well a team passes corresponds with a team winning in a passing league. But that doesn't make it a measure of how well the QB is playing. You've admitted that there are other elements and therefore it is completely possible that on any given play it may fail despite the QB doing nothing wrong. Yet you keep citing it as proof positive that Tannehill is average. No wonder Gase questions the evaluation abilities of Tannehill's critics.
     
    Ophinerated, Superself and resnor like this.
  22. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,327
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    It's actually more unreasonable than you think. it's not like the league is chock full of elite QBs, and teams are drafting QBs in the top 10, top 2 rounds, every year.
     
    Ophinerated likes this.
  23. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,327
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Hahahahahahahaha!!!
     
    Ophinerated, Superself and Fin D like this.
  24. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,159
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    Over time, over a period of years, passer rating reflects very well on how the QB plays. Gase is being deferential but he's also being disingenuous. Tanny's 4th Q and deep passing were previously questionable. We all know Tanny changed his deep passing prior to 2015 and looked better last year.

    So he can criticize people who questioned his deep passing, despite the fact he completely changed it prior to last year, but he's in the wrong there. Tanny changed his trajectory completely and it has made all the difference in the world.
     
  25. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,159
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    What are you arguing rafael? That Tannehill has not improved a single iota, and it's just the team around him that improved? Is that what you are arguing? So you're not attributing any of this to Tanny's improvement?
     
    cbrad likes this.
  26. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,159
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    I dunno about top 5 just yet. Tanny has been pretty good these past 5 games, but he's not top 5 material even then. Even after the 5 elders retire (Brady, Ben, Romo, Brees, Rivers) and that's a whiles away, you still have Ryan, Rodgers, Russell, Stafford. Where does Kirk Cousins slot? Andrew Luck? Derek Carr? Marcus Mariota? Dak? Which of the other rookies jump up?

    Ryan is a top 10 once those other 5 old guys finally retire. Ryan has shown much improvement under Gase these past 5 games, at low production rates. But I'm not ready to crown him yet. This year I think he's earned 2017. 2017 do we see that huge jump to a 4.5k/30TD/10INT guy? We'll see.
     
  27. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Tannehill's passer rating over the past few years is evidence he is an average QB. Big difference between evidence and proof. Never claimed "proof positive". Point is, team stats provide information about any individual that influences the team. I actually don't think you understand that logic.
     
  28. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    No I think it's more reasonable than you think. The probability of picking an elite QB and winning the SB with him is low over say a 15 year period, even if you pick one every few years. The probability of winning the SB once within 15 years with the same non-elite QB is also pretty low.

    That's the comparison you need to make, and it's hard for anyone to show which is more likely. Nothing wrong with either strategy.. as long as it succeeds I guess.
     
  29. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Yeah, that's the other side of the coin. If someone wants to persist in arguing it's all the surroundings, then there's no reason whatsoever to not replace the QB with another one. I mean.. it's all the surroundings!
     
  30. rafael

    rafael Well-Known Member

    27,364
    31,261
    113
    Apr 6, 2008
    IMO by far the biggest change is from his surroundings. Tannehill has improved steadily since year two, but they've been incremental improvements rather than huge leaps.
     
    Superself, Hiruma78 and Fin D like this.
  31. rafael

    rafael Well-Known Member

    27,364
    31,261
    113
    Apr 6, 2008
    The ratings for any QB are always related to his surroundings. If he's in a crap situation for years, his rating will be lower.

    And Tannehill's deep passing and 4th qtr passing did not change as much as his protection, the receivers and the passing concepts did. So no, we don't know it all changed. We know his stats changed. Only the people who act like QB rating is based only on the QB pretend like Tannehill is the only thing that changed.
     
    Ophinerated and resnor like this.
  32. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    I don't care about your metrics. They are horse****.
     
    number21 likes this.
  33. rafael

    rafael Well-Known Member

    27,364
    31,261
    113
    Apr 6, 2008
    That's ridiculous. The team with Tannehill has put up average stats despite being in what is arguably the worst QB situation in the league (along with Cleveland) the last 4 years. There's no reason to believe just any QB could have come in and done anywhere near as well.
     
  34. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    You know what else correlates with passer rating? Competent coaching. WRs who catch the ball. No bottom dwelling oline.
     
    Superself and resnor like this.
  35. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    The simple fact of the matter is these people will keep slicing this as thin as they can and still blame Thill.

    Last year alone we were told Thill isn;t the answer because deep balls and Y/A. This year? Above average or league leading and nope still Thill is the problem.
     
  36. rafael

    rafael Well-Known Member

    27,364
    31,261
    113
    Apr 6, 2008
    Well, like Gase said, I'm glad they're not in personnel.
     
  37. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    111,648
    67,540
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    I don't think you have to find an elite QB to build a dynasty, I think you need a good solid QB who can make plays if things aren't going right..I would have confidence that I could build a bad *** team around the QB to make his job so much easier.
     
    cuchulainn and brandon27 like this.
  38. slickj101

    slickj101 Is Water

    15,886
    8,901
    113
    Dec 21, 2007
    NY
    [​IMG]
     
  39. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    I think its just effing insane that a bunch of us have time and again: commit to the run, put not the worst players at their positions on the oline and let Thill audible and he'll be franchise and we'll win.

    6-4 later, that is literally exactly what has happened....and people still want to argue and **** on Thill. Its just bat **** cuckoo bird bananas.
     
    Ophinerated and resnor like this.
  40. slickj101

    slickj101 Is Water

    15,886
    8,901
    113
    Dec 21, 2007
    NY
    None of that is surprising.
     
    Ophinerated and resnor like this.

Share This Page