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

Why the Ryan Tannehill era is over in Miami

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by Finster, Dec 19, 2016.

  1. RealDolphinsFan2

    RealDolphinsFan2 Member

    68
    45
    18
    Oct 26, 2016
    All I can say is rw won one with an all time great d. Ever since that year, the defense/run game/oline has weakened every year due to the cap. I've actually always liked Wilson, even coming out of college due to his ability to not turn the ball over. But in reality due to his physical stature, no one has ever been elite at that height over the course of a career, it's unprecedented. And with Seattle relying on Wilson more and more due to the nature of the salary cap, I won't be surprised at all if he continues to perform at a good, but not elite level like he has this year. Wilson may be better than tannehill, but if so only marginally, unlike many posters on this site have claimed. Im just glad we finally got rid of queasy to unlock tannys potential like ive been hoping for years, notice how he got better after learning a quality system, something Joe never had imo. If Miami didn't take RT then Seattle would have in the draft because Carroll is on record talking about how much he liked Tanny pre draft and he was sitting around 15. Had Miami not drafted RT and Carroll got him in the first like he truly wanted, do u really believe Tanny wouldn't have had a significantly better career up to this point in Seattle than he did with Joe f****** Philbin? I think I know the answer, it's common sense.
     
    Last edited: Dec 23, 2016
  2. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    No you're the one not understanding. Prove to me the projected stats of Suh are insufficient. Sapp's stats look paltry compared to Randle. Want to make an excuse for why Sapp's stats are above some threshold you invented?
     
    RealDolphinsFan2 likes this.
  3. RealDolphinsFan2

    RealDolphinsFan2 Member

    68
    45
    18
    Oct 26, 2016
    I bet you'll be real surprised too when Wilfork gets in, he doesnt have the stats u demand, but anyone who gets football knows what a huge role he's had in the pats dynasty. Like cbrad was trying to tell u QBs get judged on stats more so than dts, Wilfork like suh is a Hof candidate because of his great play. I don't need a single stat to tell u ne doesn't win 4 without Vince, he's a great player and people who actually play and understand football know this. U don't get it. But hey at least were talking about Suh and the Hof, that's the only debate with him unlike the ridiculous claims youve made about his lack of strength in the past lol.
     
    cbrad likes this.
  4. Finster

    Finster Finsterious Finologist

    3,087
    2,038
    113
    Jul 27, 2013
    Just look at the other guys who are not in, that have ACTUAL stats that are better than the projected stats you posted, which are very unlikely to be realized, since Suh is 30, and players tend to get worse as they get older and more beat up.

    The players who maintain their high level all the way through their entire career can be counted on one hand, and they retired early, so to suppose a player will do that is pretty much ridiculous, and even if he did, his numbers would still be worse than players who have not gotten in, so where is your point?

    I haven't invented any threshold, the HoF voters did, they are the guys voting people in, I go by what they have done, like I said, show me a list of players with sub standard stats getting in the HoF, then you will understand that it's THEIR threshold, not mine.
     
  5. Two Tacos

    Two Tacos Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    11,121
    5,828
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Given that all threads in the main forum are eventually Tannehill threads, isn't nice to have a Tannehill thread turn into something else?

    Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk
     
    scotty_irnbru, Fin D and Finster like this.
  6. Finster

    Finster Finsterious Finologist

    3,087
    2,038
    113
    Jul 27, 2013
    You just out here showing your ***, when did I say Wilfork was not getting in? lol, and he is a space eater, he has a different criteria for getting in, I think Wilfork is one of the great DTs of the era, in his prime he was way more impactful than Suh, also feel the same about Ngata.

    Either of these guys getting in would not surprise me, but neither getting in would not surprise me either.
     
  7. RealDolphinsFan2

    RealDolphinsFan2 Member

    68
    45
    18
    Oct 26, 2016
    Suh actually has a better chance of getting in than Wilfork due to his all pro bids and sack numbers. Wilfork will be a close call, imo he should get in but because the threshold is so hi he actually might not. The threshold is very high for dts to get into the Hof, but Suh is an all time great dt. Time will tell who is right, but his play this year certainly doesn't bode well for your case, and the more we win the worse it is for u because people will start to see how much of an impact suh has had on this team. It's the reality, did u not see how we beat sf?
     
    djphinfan likes this.
  8. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Yeah let's try this again. On one hand you say "stats get you in" using Kennedy's 58 sacks as an example, then on the other hand I show it's almost certain Suh will have more sacks than that. OK.. (and this is important).. if the decision was made ONLY on stats Suh's projected stats based on a current HoF DT can't be argued insufficient using your 58 sack example.

    What you're doing is using a NON-stat argument: Kennedy was a "space eater". Like I said before I'm not disagreeing with that. What I'm saying is you don't have a stat-based argument. What you're doing is what in evolutionary biology is called a "just-so story".. for each data point you make up a separate reason for why that crosses a threshold.

    You'd have to make up a just-so story for why Sapp's sacks are paltry compared to Randle yet it crossed the threshold to get in. Probably that would be pointing out Randle was more of a DE/DT getting more opportunities (at least that's where I'd go first). But if one can use non-stat arguments to justify lesser statistical production for getting in the HoF, then how can you prove Suh's stats are insufficient?

    You can't. Like I said.. the best argument for Suh not getting in is good competition and that few DT's get in. I'll give you that, but you don't have a purely stat-based argument for why Suh's projected stats won't get him in.
     
    RealDolphinsFan2 likes this.
  9. RealDolphinsFan2

    RealDolphinsFan2 Member

    68
    45
    18
    Oct 26, 2016
    Damn bro, u smart as fuuuuuuuuuk lol
     
    cbrad likes this.
  10. Finster

    Finster Finsterious Finologist

    3,087
    2,038
    113
    Jul 27, 2013
    This is getting ridiculous, lol, Sapp is 2nd all time in sacks for DTs, what jackalope threshold are you talking about?

    Randle was a DT that played DE in a pinch, like Suh, or Odrick or Starks, but he was an explosive, agile and quick DT that was not lane disciplined and not great vs the run, sound familiar?

    John Randle is the gold standard for Suh type players.
     
  11. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    It's ridiculous in your mind because you're not understanding why you don't have a stats-based argument. There is no separate statistical category for "space eater" in the HoF.

    In any case, if John Randle is the gold standard, then please note he never won DPOY award which you keep saying is necessary for Suh to get in the HoF, once again showing your statistical requirements are arbitrary:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AP_NFL_Defensive_Player_of_the_Year_Award
     
  12. Colmax

    Colmax Well-Known Member

    5,126
    3,241
    113
    Dec 12, 2007
    What "case" does not exist?

    Guys from a perspective team's city make their case for the player(s). That's kind of how it goes.

    The statistics support the nomination, but it's not the end all be all. I think we agree on this. You're making an argument for what reason? For the sake of arguing? It's not even a point of view anymore.

    But to play into your "monster" stat theory, if you mean "atrocious", I'll point to none other than a drunken Broadway Joe Namath.

    Here's a guy who lead the league in TDs exactly ONCE. Here's a guy who's career completion percentage is 50.1%. Here's a guy who has nearly FIFTY more career INTs than TDs. Here's a guy who has more career losses than wins. Here's a guy who tries to kiss a female broadcaster on national television.

    Sorry to break it down to you John Madden style, but you obviously think statistics are the only factor. You say only guys with monster statistics make it into the Hall, yet point to our very own Zach Thomas as an example of a person who isn't in (and he might not get in for a very long time, if ever!).

    Do you even understand YOUR point?

    My point is, sometimes the stats do not paint the entire picture. If a player with the stats of a Drew Brees retires, and is found to be a pedophile a couple of years post-retirement, does he make it?

    Stats support the nomination, but there's more to it than that.
     
    Fin D likes this.
  13. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    111,652
    67,546
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    B
    Yeah I don't flu&& with cbrad, when he talks I just keep quiet, unless I disagree with him..lol.
     
    cbrad likes this.
  14. btfu149

    btfu149 Well-Known Member

    2,160
    900
    113
    Aug 5, 2011
    Indianapolis, IN
    Matt Moore threw bubble screens...
     
  15. PhinFan1968

    PhinFan1968 To 2020, and BEYOND! Club Member

    Lotta short throws out there today...most of 'em sucked.
     
  16. Finster

    Finster Finsterious Finologist

    3,087
    2,038
    113
    Jul 27, 2013
    You do realize that you have made no case for stats not being huge in HoF voting.

    If you think there isn't a different standard for space eating DTs then you clearly don't understand the position, CK getting in with a paltry 58 sacks shows you that, the fact that Wilfork and Ngata will get serious consideration will also prove that out, it is not a stats based position, which is why there are so few in the HoF, you really have to stand out.

    There are exceptions to every rule, Randle is in the HoF because of ridiculous stats, if Suh gets 137.5 sacks, and gets 6 first team all pros, 9 seasons of double digit sacks, 8 in a row, then without any doubt, Suh will get in the HoF, but if he ends up with 70 sacks, he'll need a DPOY, and you can bank on that.
     
  17. Finster

    Finster Finsterious Finologist

    3,087
    2,038
    113
    Jul 27, 2013
    What you didn't research, was what his contemporaries were doing, 50% comp was normal back then, more INTs than TDs was normal back then, Namath was one of the most prolific QBs of HIS ERA, you have to compare him to QBs of his era.

    He also won a SB in a David vs Goliath scenario, any QB that is one of the most prolific of his era, and won a big time SB, is getting in the HoF.

    All your doing is pointing out what I've been saying, you aren't countering it.
     
  18. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    I already agreed with you that there are different standards for space eaters. I also agree that stats are an important factor. What neither I nor anyone else here seems to agree with you on is your claim that Suh is almost unquestionably not a good candidate because he's missing a DPOY or because his stats aren't across the board like Sapp's or Randle's.

    I hope you understand this latest post of yours makes your claim have even less merit because you're now claiming Wilfork and Ngata will get serious consideration as space eaters even though they have FAR fewer sacks than CK (didn't you just awhile ago claim one should see what the required stats are by comparing to current HoF members??). Yet Suh isn't getting serious consideration??
     
  19. Kud_II

    Kud_II Realist Division

    3,662
    1,404
    113
    Oct 15, 2011
    Seneca, SC
    I don't know I think you resign him. Honestly it depends on how Matt Moore finishes the year. The price has to be right for Tannehill. I think his contract was too much last time. With that said he has played quite well during the win streak. I'll be on the fence about it until the season ends. I have been known to be a Tannehill hater in the past but I give him credit this year.
     
  20. Colmax

    Colmax Well-Known Member

    5,126
    3,241
    113
    Dec 12, 2007
    Haha, I know the era and understand the stats for a QB were tempered back then. He was a superstar.

    You made the point of "monster stats" (your quote, correct?) are key to a player getting in. I simply pointed out that maybe Namath got in on notoriety, because, even for the era, he was just 'okay' statwise (and I'm giving him the benefit, because his stats are kind of bad, considering the era).

    I'm simply saying that stats don't always make the Hall. Something of which you are certain.

    I haven't read all of what you had posted (don't have the time), but I'm not incorrect here. Just simply going off of what you posted.

    I'm not responding anymore, btw.

    Please have the last word.
     
    Fin D likes this.
  21. Vinny Fins

    Vinny Fins Feisty Brooklyn dolfan ️‍

    3,797
    2,900
    113
    Oct 26, 2009
    Bklyn
    ive been here a while.

    this may be the worst thread in the history of this forum
     
  22. dWreck

    dWreck formerly dcaf

    5,200
    2,975
    113
    Oct 23, 2011
    Sebring, FL
    Who else is happy to know Tannehill is the unquestioned starter going into '17?

    Kek
     
  23. danmarino

    danmarino Tua is H1M! Club Member

    15,361
    20,989
    113
    Sep 4, 2014
    After this Buffalo game anyone who still thinks Moore is better than RT needs to either stop watching football, or ask their wife to explain the game to him.
     
  24. danmarino

    danmarino Tua is H1M! Club Member

    15,361
    20,989
    113
    Sep 4, 2014

    Isn't trolling against the forum rules?
     
    Fin D likes this.
  25. vt_dolfan

    vt_dolfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    If only because its actually multiple threads all in one.
     
  26. dWreck

    dWreck formerly dcaf

    5,200
    2,975
    113
    Oct 23, 2011
    Sebring, FL
    I call dibs on starting the "Why the Tannehill Era is only beginning" thread.
     
    Dol-Fan Dupree likes this.

Share This Page