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

Ryan Tannehill

Discussion in 'Other NFL' started by bbqpitlover, Oct 16, 2019.

Ryan Tannehill is...

  1. A terrible QB

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  2. A below average QB

    4 vote(s)
    5.7%
  3. An average QB

    7 vote(s)
    10.0%
  4. An above average QB

    39 vote(s)
    55.7%
  5. An elite QB

    16 vote(s)
    22.9%
  6. The GOAT.

    4 vote(s)
    5.7%
  1. The_Dark_Knight

    The_Dark_Knight Defender of the Truth

    11,815
    10,319
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Rockledge, FL
    LMAO....Damned autocorrect!!!

    PERENNIAL damn it!!! LMAO
     
    Pauly and resnor like this.
  2. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,327
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Hahaha!!

    I chuckled.
     
  3. Etrius24

    Etrius24 Well-Known Member

    682
    685
    93
    Mar 4, 2020

    We call that the taint in Canada.... Taint *******, Taint *****
     
  4. Etrius24

    Etrius24 Well-Known Member

    682
    685
    93
    Mar 4, 2020
    We also call it the cuzzif

    Cuzz if it wasn't there, her guts would fall out.
     
  5. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,696
    3,743
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    I agree with you. Tannehill will only get into the HoF with multiple SB rings. The only reason I brought up the HoF is another poster who has repeatedly implied that failing to repeat a 117ish passer rating in future seasons will be proof he is mediocre.
     
    resnor likes this.
  6. Etrius24

    Etrius24 Well-Known Member

    682
    685
    93
    Mar 4, 2020
    Pauly

    There are a few paths to the hall.... A full season where he has a rating of 117 with 35 touchdowns 10 picks 4300 yards.... 8 rushing touchdowns... Where the Titans win their division and get to the Superbowl... He has a legit shot at winning an MVP

    Win an MVP and your hall of fame chances skyrocket.
    Ditto for a Superbowl

    I do not think he ever wins a MVP... It would be cool if he did... Guy's head would explode! But over the next 7 years I think he does throw 200 touchdowns and in terms of yards and touchdowns he is at the same place statistically that Eli Manning is. Only he will have half of the interceptions... His QB rating will be 12-15 points higher... and his completion percentage will be 5 or 6 points higher.

    With those numbers a superbowl ring would get him in. All of his peripheral numbers would be head and shoulders above those of Eli Manning.

    But let's pause for a second... Tannehill has to stay healthy until he is 39.... A lot can happen between now and then
     
    resnor likes this.
  7. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Yeah, I'm not that much of a simpleton. Apparently I sound that way to people who can't understand what I'm saying, however. As I've said repeatedly, the best QBs vary from season to season at a level significantly higher than the mediocre ones.

    The problem you have here is that Tannehill has six seasons of variation at the mediocre level, and only one at a much higher level. It's going to take a while before someone can make the case that his career overall involved variation at a level significantly higher than mediocre.

    And again, right now Vegas's prediction of that beginning to occur in 2020 are not good, as his league MVP odds are at the mediocre level (and even behind Derrick Henry's). So when there are stakes involved, the prevailing belief is at odds with the beliefs of the Tannehill proponents here. You all are functioning within your own little world.
     
  8. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    LOL. "Where there are stakes involved".....

    How about the stakes involved for an NFL franchise? The Titans have huge stakes. Forbes estimates the value of the Titans at $2.15 billion. Those are some pretty big stakes. The Titans have the most to lose or gain. Their opinion should count more than anyone else's. Yet, you ignore it because it runs counter to your narrative. They paid Tannehill to be their franchise QB. Period. That should have been the end of the discussion, but sadly, it was not. You continue to raise irrelevant issues because that is all you have left.
     
    resnor likes this.
  9. AGuyNamedAlex

    AGuyNamedAlex Well-Known Member

    3,582
    2,579
    113
    Sep 12, 2015
    I dont think anyone disagrees that he needs to keep performing to be considered an elite QB going forward.

    That said, at times it sounds like you're discrediting his season that has already occurred and saying it has nothing to do with his own ability.

    The reasonable stance for everyone here, not just you, is to admit he had a stellar season and to see what the future brings, because the past isnt going to tell you that with 100% certainty and neither will the 2019 season already in the books.
     
    Pauly likes this.
  10. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    I was speaking of the stakes that could be involved for people like us. In other words, when the stakes go beyond meaningless banter on a message board and people like us have the opportunity to stake something of value on the issue, the prevailing belief is that Tannehill's 2020 season will be mediocre.

    We have no idea what the Tennessee Titans were thinking in terms of their beliefs about Tannehill in relation to the alternatives they perceived were available. They could very well believe he's going to have a mediocre season in 2020 and believe his contract is worth that in relation to the alternatives available, given his knowledge of their system, familiarity with surrounding players, etc.

    What we do know is that when there is the opportunity for crowdsourcing -- i.e., Vegas betting -- you all here are in your own little world in terms of your beliefs about Tannehill's abilities and whether they will be expressed in 2020.
     
  11. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    That's been my stance all along here. Whether the 2019 season is a reflection of his ability hinges on the future, because again, there are QBs who had only one great season among otherwise unremarkable careers. There is no way for only one season to tell us whether Tannehill is any different from them.
     
  12. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,327
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    All along, you've always ignored three good seasons that Tannehill has had. You've acted like he should have been an elite QB right from his first start. You've ignored the coaching garbage. You've ignored the crappy teams.

    You don't see it as important that as soon as he was in a decent situation, his numbers went through the roof.

    Instead, you continue to hold on to numbers in Miami.

    It's weird.
     
  13. The_Dark_Knight

    The_Dark_Knight Defender of the Truth

    11,815
    10,319
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Rockledge, FL
    I'm kind of torn on what I'm about to say. While I truly respect all who have been elected to the Hall of Fame, I can't help but feel that most of the inductees are the result of a popularity contest. I mean, let's truly think about it. Why is it that Player X can be incredible at his position and not get inducted while Player Y who is equally talented does?

    Junior Seau was an incredible linebacker and gets inducted.
    Zach Thomas was an incredible linebacker does not.

    Jim Kelly and Fran Tarkenton get inducted into the Hall of Fame with zero Super bowl victories but there's question and doubt that Eli manning will, despite 2 Super Bowl victories...against the New England Patriots.

    Talent alone doesn't seem to warrant induction. There are so many linemen that should be inducted that aren't. Even the greatest punter of all time, Ray Guy...the Oakland Raider punter who is credited with the term "hang time" took 28 years to finally receive the honor.

    I truly feel that in order to be guaranteed induction into the Hall of Fame in the modern era, you have to fit into the following criteria.
    -You have to be a high profile skill set player
    -You have to be on a consistent winning team
    -You have to be on a popular team
    -You yourself have to be popular
    -You have to set some sort of record

    I hate saying it, but it just FEELS to me that's the criteria. I could very well be wrong. This is just my personal opinion.
     
    resnor likes this.
  14. AGuyNamedAlex

    AGuyNamedAlex Well-Known Member

    3,582
    2,579
    113
    Sep 12, 2015
    I would agree with that basically 100%.

    As far as I can say, and take it with a grain of salt, Tannehill always had a few fairly decent stretches even with us. He never put it together completely here for whatever reason and it was time for both parties to move on.

    Now hes put together that full season and my only interest is in whether or not he can do it again. I'm not willing to make a bet either way based off the information available.
     
    resnor likes this.
  15. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    And you were speaking nonsense. The betting odds don't predict whether a player will have a mediocre season. They are current betting odds for MVP, nothing more. Anything else is pure speculation, driven by your narrative.

    But you do know what thousands of people are thinking when betting? Sure.....

    They signed Tannehill instead of numerous other options and paid him in the top 10.

    Speaking of own little worlds....

    LOL.......

    It is comical that you would place more importance in the opinions of unknown bettors than the Titans themselves. But, this fits in perfectly with your insistence on ignoring the play of the field in favor of your fantasy world of stats.

    This betting odds fascination is ridiculous and not worth the discussion.
     
    Irishman and resnor like this.
  16. The_Dark_Knight

    The_Dark_Knight Defender of the Truth

    11,815
    10,319
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Rockledge, FL
    I personally feel HALF of Tannehill's problem in Miami was the defense. They either couldn't hold onto a lead, or couldn't stop opposing offenses to get the ball back in the offense's hands to give Tannehill another shot.

    The other half was such an anemic offense. If I never see another WR bubble screen again, it'll be too soon.
     
    AGuyNamedAlex and resnor like this.
  17. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Actually, your initial stance was that he wouldn't play in 2019, then it was that he wouldn't be better in 2019, then it was that he wouldn't lead the Titans to the playoffs in 2019, then it was that he wouldn't win a playoff game in 2019..... Your opening 8 words in this post are a flat out lie and you know it. So, stop. Just stop.

    Nobody can predict the future with certainty. They base their opinions on what they have seen before and then project what may happen.

    Prior to and throughout the 2019 season, you had that same opportunity. Your predictions FAILED MISERABLY. Every person you have spent the last 7 months arguing with was far more accurate in their prediction than you.
     
    Irishman, resnor and The_Dark_Knight like this.
  18. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    And that wasn't even a full season. He started 10 games. That's 62.5% of a season. Not even two-thirds of a season.

    And that's smart in my opinion. However, if Vegas had Patrick Mahomes's league MVP odds at +8000, you'd be smart to make a bet on him.
     
  19. The_Dark_Knight

    The_Dark_Knight Defender of the Truth

    11,815
    10,319
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Rockledge, FL
    This is what happens when you approach something...anything with a bias and unable to accept reality. Even the most OBJECTIVE Tannehill naysayers have to admit they were wrong...key word here being OBJECTIVE
     
    Irishman and resnor like this.
  20. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
     
  21. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    In fact what would be interesting here is to commission @cbrad -- if he's willing and able -- to conduct a study on the frequency with which quarterbacks have put together 10-game stretches of similarly elevated play.

    The entire thread here is resting on the finding that Tannehill hadn't done that previously, but there has been no commentary on how infrequent it's been for quarterbacks in general.

    One of my main points here has been that Tannehill's 2019 season doesn't meaningfully distinguish him from QBs like Andy Dalton and Nick Foles, but the number of quarterbacks with only average overall career performance from whom he may be indistinguishable may grow considerably if we reduce the sample size in the comparison to a mere 10 consecutive games of elevated performance.
     
  22. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Why do you ignore the the 500 or so average QBs in the last 50 years that haven't had any elite statistical seasons and instead focus on the two that had a single elite statistical season?
     
    Last edited: Jun 2, 2020
    Pauly likes this.
  23. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Tannehill played in 11 games for that 117.5 rating. Here's the distribution of the 2019-adjusted passer ratings for all 11-game stretches (QB is not required to start the game) since 1978:

    [​IMG]

    Note that the mean is 94 (94.0225) which is higher than the 2019 league average of 90.4. That's because less capable QB's tend not to play in 11 consecutive games in a given season. Oh, and I'm only counting 11-consecutive games within a season.

    Remember that Tannehill's 2019 z-score was 2.55. Relative to all 11-consecutive games since 1978 that z-score goes down to 1.9583, which is still statistically significant since that occurs only 2.51% of the time. So yes what Tannehill did is more likely to occur if you look only at 11-consecutive game distributions, but it's still statistically significant.
     
    Etrius24, Irishman, The Guy and 2 others like this.
  24. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Because we're dealing with a guy who had six previous mediocre seasons. This is also precisely why his Vegas league MVP odds are so poor. Certainly Vegas is looking at his career arc and not just 2019.
     
  25. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    So we've gone from 5.4 of every thousand seasons to 25.1 of every thousand seasons (or, rather, 11-game stretches). It'd be interesting to determine the percentage of those 11-game stretches that were statistically indistinguishable from Tannehill's 2019 and accomplished by QBs who had average careers overall. I suspect we've now gone from just Dalton et al. (i.e., the ones mentioned in the thread) to a good bit bigger number.

    It's amazing it took 8,300+ posts to even consider this possibility, but of course we're dealing largely with people who are Tannehill advocates here.
     
  26. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Hmm.. the question isn't as well defined as you might think. When comparing passer ratings over 11-game stretches (i.e., a single rating over 11 games), each 11 game stretch is a single data point, which means there is no variance associated with any data point. So you can't really ask the question: which other 11-game stretches are statistically indistinguishable from a given one (technically a meaningless question here).

    What that graph shows is how much a given 11-game stretch is likely or is not likely to occur based on random variation alone.

    Now.. if you were to calculate things differently, say take sets of 11 consecutive passer ratings (i.e., not a single passer rating over 11 games), then you could do a t-test for every pair of "set of 11 passer ratings" and get an answer. The problem is that you'd be comparing 11-game stretches, NOT QB's. For example, a QB that plays for 12 consecutive games in a given season will have 2 such 11-game stretches. So we're clearly not comparing QB's at that point.

    So this type of comparison is good for comparing stretches, not QB's.
     
    Irishman and The Guy like this.
  27. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    In other words, of the passer ratings for 11-game stretches that are at the 95th percentile or higher, what percentage were accomplished by QBs with average careers overall?
     
  28. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    The chances are far greater that 2019 isn't an anomaly as evidenced by this:

    1. Since 1990, 19 different QBs have led the league in passer rating, only 2 (Harbaugh, Griese) have not had similar success in other seasons. 17 have had success in multiple seasons.

    2. Of the top 25 single season passer ratings of all time (16 QBs), only 2 (Foles, Plum) didn't have success in multiple seasons.
     
    resnor likes this.
  29. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,327
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Think critically about this, though. Should Tannehill have been anything other than mediocre his first year or two? Raw, unpolished QB, you expected him to play at a high level?? It takes at least three years to judge even more polished QBs that hit the league.

    Now, you throw in 3 bad HCs, and how many failed OCs? Learning a new system basically every other season?

    There is no rational way to use those Miami years as indicative of anything, other than that in awful circumstances, Tannehill was still the best QB we've had, other than Marino.
     
    The_Dark_Knight likes this.
  30. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Ah! this is one of those "databases don't match up, which means I'll have to write a custom program" issues. Let me get back to you on that within a few days at latest. Too many zoom meetings nowadays (including today) so I'll have to parcel out some time for this.

    Good question though.
     
    Irishman and The Guy like this.
  31. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Right, but now we're talking about 11-game stretches, and you can see what that does to the findings here. We're now at 25 such stretches of every thousand instead of 5.4 seasons of every thousand. So we're very likely talking about more than just the QBs you mentioned above.

    The answer to the question I asked in post #8345 is important.
     
  32. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    No, I'm talking about what I asked. You're avoiding the question (and have been for a few days).

    That is enough of an answer for me. Thanks.
     
  33. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,327
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Is it your belief that had Tannehill payed the entire season, his stats would Jager been worse? I find that premise unlikely, and believe that had he played the entire season his stats would have put him squarely in MVP contention.
     
    Etrius24 likes this.
  34. Etrius24

    Etrius24 Well-Known Member

    682
    685
    93
    Mar 4, 2020

    Cbrad this was awesome.

    I wonder if you took the ten games Tannehill started and calculated the exact number of yards touchdowns passer rating etc... I just eyeballed it when I brought the concept up of him having a MVP type season if he played 16 games.
     
  35. Etrius24

    Etrius24 Well-Known Member

    682
    685
    93
    Mar 4, 2020

    That was why I brought this point up.... He was playing fantastic at the end of the season It is not like he only had 10 great games in him
     
    resnor likes this.
  36. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    He had three more games in the playoffs. What was your take on that part of the season?
     
  37. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    He beat two former MVPs while facing two top defenses on the road in the playoffs.
     
    resnor likes this.
  38. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    How exactly did "he" beat them?
     
  39. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Over the 10 games Tannehill started in the 2019 regular season he had a 119.64 rating. If he played 16 games, the extrapolated stats would be: 4,157 yards, 35 TD's and 8 INT's. Efficiency stats we're assuming would stay the same as for those 10 games: 9.62 Y/A and 69.63 comp%, and of course 119.64 passer rating.
     
    Irishman and resnor like this.
  40. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    I'm pretty sure it was by leading the Titans to more points. I understand that you want to score games by pass % or Vegas odds but that is not how the league does it.
     
    Last edited: Jun 2, 2020

Share This Page