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. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    11,375
    11,392
    113
    Sep 28, 2015
    The words were we should move on from Ryan, no?

    Simple question.

    Are you flip flopping?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  2. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Go read the thread. It's there for you to see.
     
    Fin D likes this.
  3. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Hahahahahahahaha
     
    Fin D likes this.
  4. Bumrush

    Bumrush Stable Genius Club Member

    29,473
    34,332
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    What the hell are you guys arguing about? We are on a six game winning streak, about to face our biggest test of the season with the playoffs on the line.

    Enjoy the ride. Stop debating Tannehill. I was one of the first people to sour on him, and I'm the first to admit I was wrong. Resnor and FinD have been more right than I have, and as I've stated all along, I'd rather be wrong and winning with Tannehill than right and miserable with the team.

    Tannehill has played lights out. He has taken on the personality of Gase. He has limited his turnovers. He has led this team from behind. He has tremendously improved his deep ball over the past 3 seasons. He has shown more mobility. He has continued to get up after getting knocked down repeatedly. He has shown the ability to win in the 4th quarter. He has shown the ability to play without a unicorn line. He is thriving. Most importantly of all, he is the unquestioned leader of the offense. He has earned the respect of every member of the organization. He will be our QB in 2017 and beyond, which is shaping up to be a Super Bowl run if Gase continues to build the culture and defense.

    I've always like Tannehill the human being, but now I like the Tannehill the FRANCHISE QB that has me dreaming once again.
     
  5. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Damn straight, Bumrush!

    Much respect.
     
  6. Bumrush

    Bumrush Stable Genius Club Member

    29,473
    34,332
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    I was in favor of moving on. Heck, I wasn't opposed to starting Matt Moore..

    At the end of the day, we have all been teased by this franchise since Jimmy Johnson arrived. We have had a soft mentality since he departed. Soft on defense. Soft on offense. Caretaking the ball instead of going for the kill. Taking a decade to fix a single aspect of the team like the offensive line. Not drafting 1st round QB's. Playing to lose. Wanny Ball. Fist Pump Ball. Queasy Ball.

    I grew up IDOLIZING Dan Marino. He was my HERO. I would cry after tough losses. I always had hope. Over the years my optimism turned to criticism, which often came to fruition. We've dealt with scrubs like Chambers that would flash All-Pro skills one week and vanish the next three. We've had incredible D's on paper that would fold on every 3rd or 4th down play, especially in the 4th quarter of close games with playoff implications. We've have skill players that we magnified that the rest of the NFL thought were scrubs. We've been snakebitten for so long that it's hard to see the light.

    In that regard, everyone in here that soured on Tanny, or that took a different position on him was coming from a LOGICAL standpoint. The W/L record, the performance on the field, all of it crystallized to create indifference and disillusionment around Tannehill and the team. Those feelings were based on historical facts and LIKELY outcomes.

    Today, I feel like this team is on track. That is why I defended Tannehill during the Rams game and even stated in the gameday thread that if they lost 14-0 I wouldn't judge him for a second. We have the coaching in place, the infastructure, the front office, homefield advantage in the new stadium and host of young talent from Parker to Landry, to Stills, to Ajayi, to Lippett, to McCain, to Howard. We have a coaching staff that maximizes talent. Because of all of this, because of Tannehill's dedication, work ethic, desire to improve and toughness, I am fully behind him and will defend him going forward.
     
  7. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    11,375
    11,392
    113
    Sep 28, 2015

    You do realize he is giving Tanny props for improving and not "always been this guy" right?

    Man, you sure do flip flop a lot.
     
    jdang307 likes this.
  8. danmarino

    danmarino Tua is H1M! Club Member

    15,360
    20,984
    113
    Sep 4, 2014
    Come on Fin-O! You've been an RT hater for as long as I've been here. How many times have you proclaimed that we should get rid of RT or say that he wouldn't be here next season? Too many times to count.

    I'm not saying that you've been 100% wrong, but you've been wrong a lot more than right and rewriting history or revising what you said in the past won't change that fact.

    Now, I've never taken you as a person who WANTED RT to fail in order to be right, but you're sure denying what we've all read from you over the past few years. I am glad to see you saying that RT may be the answer, however.
     
    number21 and resnor like this.
  9. danmarino

    danmarino Tua is H1M! Club Member

    15,360
    20,984
    113
    Sep 4, 2014

    IMO, coaching is ~90% of winning. NFL starters, in reality, are really close in talent. All of them. Coaching is ~90%, ~5% is talent, and ~5% is will/heart/brains.


    I also think you're getting a bad rap. While it's true that you weren't sure if RT could be a franchise QB, you always criticized him rationally and fairly. At least in my eyes.
     
    Pauly and cbrad like this.
  10. danmarino

    danmarino Tua is H1M! Club Member

    15,360
    20,984
    113
    Sep 4, 2014
    I do think RT is the same QB. Minus the ability to play to his ability (coaching) and stay upright (o-line). The RT I've watched these past 6 weeks has been doing the same things he's always done. Albeit he's just more consistent due to the reasons I mentioned.
     
  11. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    11,375
    11,392
    113
    Sep 28, 2015
    There is a big difference in saying "we should get rid of RT" and thinking he wouldn't be here next year. He was playing bad QB. If he would've continued to? He wouldve been a goner.

    And hater is just a typical uninformed description of my true feelings about 17. Just because Ive pounded on the morons who dont have the ability to judge him w/o bias for 5 years doesn't mean I haven't supported him every Sun and told people he played well, when he played well.

    This will be a weekly narrative regardless, if he plays bad vs Baltimore we will have some posters saying he played bad, then we will have the "I'm fat but its not my fault" group blaming everything else BUT him. Likely many of these same people struggle in real life because of the whoa is me and I'm a victim mentality.
     
    dolphin25 likes this.
  12. Two Tacos

    Two Tacos Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    11,121
    5,828
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Most of your points aren't relevant to his argument. Steve Young was a hall of fame QB. Cassel is not, we don't know about grapple, grappalalo, um, the other guy yet.. Scripting plays was not illegal. Video taping practices, and sidelines to steal signals was. Montana's teammates cheating is not the same as Montana cheating and serving a suspension for cheating.

    Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk
     
  13. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Yes, I know what he's been saying, and I know what he's saying in the post.

    You still don't get it, Fin-O. The things you'd been harping on Tannehill for, that made him not the answer, haven't simply mysteriously disappeared, or gone away because Tannehill improved. Much of his improved play is a direct result of oline playing better. Look no further than the drastic difference in rating from the last week that had Thomas and Turner in the lineup, to every week since.
     
    Fin D likes this.
  14. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Ummmm...

    Please tell me you don't have any firearms near your computer desk. ..
     
    number21 and Fin D like this.
  15. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    11,375
    11,392
    113
    Sep 28, 2015
    Nope. My issue was with his pocket presence (much improved) his ability to get outside the pocket and make plays (much improved) his ability to process information fast (vastly improved).

    What you guys dont see is that his OL wasn't good Sunday, his ability to feel the pressure and get outside the pocket limited the sacks. 2015 RT under Joe Philbin is sacked 6 times in that game, we lose and everyone blames the OL.
     
    jdang307 and dolphin25 like this.
  16. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Well, he was calling them both "gamesmanship"...
     
    Fin D likes this.
  17. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    11,375
    11,392
    113
    Sep 28, 2015
    Let me help as you seem to have taken on your mentors lack of ability to comprehend.

    Saying I dont give a damn means I dont let it ruin my day or get my blood pressure up unlike others, commenting on a post is what these boards are for...big difference and I shouldn't have to break it down for you.
     
  18. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    We saw him escape the pocket, etc, etc, etc, his rookie year. It's not something he just figured out. There had to be something else at work...if only we had some clue as to what it was...

    His line was better than with Thomas and Turner.
     
    Fin D likes this.
  19. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    How do you know what the effect of Montana's teammates cheating is vs. Belichick's cheating? Brady won his SB's before his suspension so it's fair game.

    And what does Steve Young being in the HoF mean in your mind? That it was his ability as a QB and not the system or surroundings (the whole point of the argument here) that allowed him to succeed as well as he did? If it's that simple, then why would anyone (not specifically resnor in this case) argue Brady is a product of the system or surroundings? The guy will be a 1st ballot HoF'er.

    Of course my points are relevant.
     
  20. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Ohhh...so when other people ye to get people to admit they're wrong, that's different than when you do it.

    Got it.
     
    Fin D likes this.
  21. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Doesn't give a damn but argues for years.
     
    number21 likes this.
  22. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    11,375
    11,392
    113
    Sep 28, 2015
    Im lost. Your posts make less and less sense by the number.

    You would rather feel like you were "right" in a message board argument than admidt your QB has improved drastically. You wont find anyone outside of this board with this laughable narrative. I feel like many of you are just so insecure you can't do anything else. These "arguments" have meant sooo much to you that you can't say otherwise.....like saying our QB has taken a huge step is an insult or something.

    What will you do if he plays bad Sunday? My guess? NOT hold him accountable. You live in a world consisting of 4-5 guys who the outcome every week is either "man Ryan played great" or "man the OL/WR Coach played bad"
     
  23. Two Tacos

    Two Tacos Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    11,121
    5,828
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    I don't care about the effect of his teammates cheating. If you're going to cheat, be good enough not to get caught. If you get caught, one of the consequences is having everything you accomplished being questioned. My preference would be not to cheat, barring that, don't get caught. Not sure what you're confused by with Young. An elite QB having great results is not the same as an average QB. A better argument would be average QBs having success in a Walsh west coast offence.


    That said Brady is top 10, the cheating means he'll never be top five. My opinion of course.


    Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk
     
    resnor likes this.
  24. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,696
    3,743
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    I honestly don't see a huge difference in pocket awareness. What I see is a huge difference in the effort given by the linemen. In Tanny's first year and this year the OL have been trying to hold their blocks. In the intervening 3 years (bullygate, Thomas, Turner, and Douglas starting, Philbin's dynamic coaching) we had an OL that flat up gave up and whiffed on blocks, leading to opposing pass rushers having unimpeded rushing lanes to the QB. This is reinforced by comparing his stats in the Albert-Pouncey-James starting and finishing stats in 2014-2015 and his stats in the 2016 win streak.
    Yes his pocket presence and footwork have improved, but the big difference has been the effort put in by the OL. Gase was asked about what was the reason for the turnaround this week and he basically said we got rid of the bad habits from the previous few years.

    Tannehill would have been sacked 6+ times against San Fran because guys on the OL would be flat out giving up on blocks, not because Tannehill has suddenly transformed into Russel Wilson. It's much easier to process information quickly when the other 10 guys are where they are supposed to be and doing what they are supposed to. It's easier to roll out of the pocket when that is what your offensive scheme calls for you to do, rather than hang in the pocket which is what Lazor wanted.
     
    cuchulainn, Finster and resnor like this.
  25. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Look.. my issue isn't with your opinion of how good Brady is or how the specific cheating attributed to Belichick affects Brady's place in the pantheon of QB's.

    My issue is solely with your previous post claiming "most of my points aren't relevant" to resnor's argument. That statement could not be further from the truth because every issue I brought up creates a parallel between the perception of Brady and Montana w.r.t cheating and how the QB's surroundings affect their success.

    Montana's teammates cheating affects his ability to win and get in the HoF, just like Belichick's cheating does for Brady. Don't tell me you don't care about the effect of Montana's teammates cheating AND that I'm not bringing up a relevant point when that's about the most directly relevant point I made. Gamesmanship (that opponents claim is illegal even if it technically isn't) is practiced by both Walsh and Belichick, etc.. So the first point resnor brought up about cheating I gave directly relevant responses to.

    As far as the 2nd point he brought up about Brady's replacements doing well.. I brought up Steve Young. You say that's not a valid example because Young is a HoF QB. So? The entire argument of people dissing Brady is that he's just a "system" QB and that he'll be a HoF QB not because he's great but because of his system and surroundings (including the coach). So unless you have a way of demonstrating in which cases a HoF QB is in the HoF because of his own ability vs. the system/surroundings, you can't just presuppose in this debate Young was great independent of the system/surroundings. In other words, my example is a very good one. I hope you understand the logic here.
     
    Last edited: Dec 1, 2016
  26. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    You have such a slippery grasp on what the conversations are around here. If Tannehill plays badly, I'll say it. What I won't do, though, is blame Tannehill for everything bad that happens to the Dolphins. if the offense is bad, there's a very good chance that the entire offense is bad, not just Tannehill.
     
    Fin D likes this.
  27. Rocky Raccoon

    Rocky Raccoon Greasepaint Ghost Staff Member

    30,224
    36,965
    113
    Dec 2, 2007
    Jersey
    Ian Wharton knows what's up. Nails it.

     
    Fin D, rafael, number21 and 1 other person like this.
  28. jdallen1222

    jdallen1222 Well-Known Member

    2,752
    1,373
    113
    May 31, 2013
    Plantation, Fl
    It makes a world of difference when the QB can make 1+ read without getting clobbered.
     
    Fin D and resnor like this.
  29. dolphin25

    dolphin25 Well-Known Member

    6,338
    2,400
    113
    Nov 22, 2014
    It is a shame Cook was injured. It would have been interesting to see what he could have done. And Bo Jackson too.
     
  30. dolphin25

    dolphin25 Well-Known Member

    6,338
    2,400
    113
    Nov 22, 2014
    exactly! Tannehill is now doing things he HAS NOT done the past few years. Lets see if he keeps it up.
     
    Fin-O likes this.
  31. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Yeah.. I looked at Cook's stats and one thing stood out: his 9.4 Y/A in his rookie year (and only year)
    http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/C/CookGr00.htm

    Average Y/A hasn't changed too much over NFL history so you can make direct comparisons across eras, and that 9.4 Y/A puts him at #3 all-time since the NFL merger in 1966 for a single-season Y/A. The only QB's that did better in a single season were Kurt Warner with 9.9 Y/A in 2000 and Chris Chandler with 9.6 Y/A in 1998. That's impressive!

    The only asterisk next to all three is that none of them played the entire season haha! Warner played 11 games in 2000, Chandler played 14, and Cook played 11. Regardless.. that's no easy feat.

    (btw.. Matt Ryan is on track to maybe beat that 9.4 Y/A. He's at 9.3 right now.. guy is playing like he's never played before in his career.. like a statistical anomaly: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/R/RyanMa00.htm )
     
    Last edited: Dec 1, 2016
  32. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,159
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    It's amazing. They want everyone to believe that Tanny was always amazing but it was the oline holding him back. Because the "tannehaters" as we are called didn't really hate Tanny but wanted to see him improve.

    So now the new argument was, did he improve or was it just the oline.

    Ridiculous.
     
    dolphin25 and Fin-O like this.
  33. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    11,375
    11,392
    113
    Sep 28, 2015
    Yes but it sure does make for some solid entertainment. If we didn't have posters like that this place would be kind of boring.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  34. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    No. No one has ever claimed he was "amazing." However, he is world's different when he doesn't have the worst players in the league in three spots of his oline.

    We said he needed some combination of competent coaching, decent oline, decent receivers, ability to audible, commitment to run, etc, and he'd be fine. He has that now, and he's successful and the TEAM is successful...but you guys still want to argue this?

    Craziness.
     
  35. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    btw.. there is some statistical evidence (albeit small sample size) that it's not just the OL and that the QB is better at evading pressure.

    That 6-1 record Tannehill had in 2014-2015 when Pouncey, Albert and James were healthy occurred while he took a total of 17 sacks, so 2.43 sacks per game. The 4 games this year where we had a healthy OL Tannehill took a total of 3 sacks, so 0.75 sacks per game.

    It's a small sample size, but 2.43 is vastly different from 0.75 when talking about average sacks per game, and it suggests the QB is better at evading pressure. We'll see how the stats change as the sample size gets larger.
     
    Fin-O and jdang307 like this.
  36. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,159
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    I posted an article that shows sacks are a very sticky number to the QB implying they are significantly responsible for sack numbers. When QBs switch teams their penchant for taking sacks follow them.

    When a single team starts two different QBs in the same year, sack numbers have almost zero correlation.
     
    dolphin25 likes this.
  37. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Would be interested to see the (near) zero correlation analysis. I just want to see precisely what (and how many QB's) they're comparing.

    But in general you're right that sacks are "sticky" to the QB. The other stat that's sticky to the QB is completion %:
    http://www.pro-football-reference.com/blog/index2ad6.html?p=4152
     
  38. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Ignoring the removal of Thomas and Turner from the line still.
     
  39. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    I'm not the one who created this "condition" of Pouncey, Albert and James being healthy. You guys did (actually Omar Kelly published that). So if that's the "condition", then you can't backtrack later on and say .. oh no you can't lump all games when we had a healthy OL (by those criteria) into one just because you don't like the conclusions (well.. some results you like).

    Also.. I'd be careful about pounding this Thomas and Turner thing too much. You do realize in 2014 they did not both start together. That is, Thomas started games 1-14 while Turner started games 15-16. It's in 2015 that they both started, though Turner was injured for 3 games. And in 2016, Thomas started only 1 game.

    And riddle me this: in 2014 we gave up 46 sacks while in 2015 it was 45. In other words when only one of the two started (mostly the one that was worse: Thomas) we did as well in protection measured by sacks as when both started. No difference.

    Anyway, if you don't like this definition of "healthy OL", then don't use it in the future (including when the stats suit your arguments, like the 10-1 record??). There's actually nothing wrong with conditioning the data the way.. just accept the results.
     
  40. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    You're redefining healthy oline. We're talking about when the starters went down, and we had those two jokers in. So, this season, even without our starters, we didn't have those two guys filling in. The win streak, and Tannehill's great play, both began when those two were fired.
     
    Fin D likes this.

Share This Page