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 Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    All posts about Tannehill's effect on Derrick Henry can be referred to post #8422, where the following was said:

    The impetus for the change in Henry's performance is far less important than the fact that Henry simply possesses the ability to perform in the manner he did.

    What do you suppose would've happened had Tannehill been inserted as the starter midway through the season with Patrick Laird as the starting running back? You think he would've ignited him to exceptional heights as well? You think Patrick Laird would've inspired opposing teams to stack the boxes that Tannehill exploited? You think Patrick Laird would've run in such a way that it limited Tannehill's passing volume to 1.98 standard deviations below the league norm in quarters 1 through 3?
     
  2. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    What do you suppose would've happened if a QB like Mariota had been playing with Henry?

    Oh wait, we actually know this one. It isn't a hypothetical.

    Henry wasn't nearly as effective, and the Titans were 2-4.
     
  3. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Also... You keep clinging to your theory that HENRY limited Tannehill's throws.

    That. Isn't. True. It's been shown to you so many different ways.

    Are you a robot stuck in a faulty logic loop?
     
  4. AGuyNamedAlex

    AGuyNamedAlex Well-Known Member

    3,582
    2,579
    113
    Sep 12, 2015
    I'm not implying the contract makes him good or bad. I'm implying the contract itself was either a good or bad idea by Tennessee.

    I'm just curious if you believe the Titans FO made a mistake based on what realistic options were available to them.

    Players dont exist in a vacuum where we can just select whoever we want. Teams have to make choices. I want to know if you believe they were incorrect and what you would have done to keep the team competitive while acquiring a new QB if you believe they should have taken that route.
     
    resnor likes this.
  5. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    In addition, there were an unusual number of very experienced other choices this year, including Brady, Rivers, Newton, Bridgewater, Winston, Dalton, and LOL Mariota....

    They wisely chose Tannehill.
     
    Irishman and resnor like this.
  6. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    If they believe they can replicate 2019 without any hiccups, they made the right decision. The question we're addressing here is whether Tannehill is dependent on the absence of such hiccups.

    So the question is actually independent of the Titans' decision to re-sign him, because whether they believe they can replicate 2019 without hiccups is immaterial with regard to whether Tannehill's performance is dependent on it. Hell, they could also believe Tannehill's performance is dependent on it. Certainly their use of him in 2019, especially in the playoffs, suggested that.
     
    Last edited: Jun 4, 2020
  7. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Show me the case that's been made for the notion that the limitation in Tannehill's passing volume (1.98 standard deviations below the league norm) in quarters 1 through 3 in the regular season, when the team was accumulating a scoring margin of -1, was due to something other than Derrick Henry.
     
  8. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007

    Henry without Tannehill - 3.6 YPC

    Tannehill without Henry - 133.6 passer rating
     
    Irishman and resnor like this.
  9. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    We have shown you all sorts of things. You disregard them.

    So, no, go reread the thread. It's all been given to you multiple times.

    It's also weasel wording to choose to use quarters 1-3.
     
  10. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    If we included the fourth quarter it would only more strongly support my point, but there would be the huge confound that teams use the run game to protect leads in that part of the game.

    So no, it isn't "weasel wording" to restrict the analysis to quarters 1 through 3. It actually represents greater credibility on my part to engage in an analysis that doesn't unfairly support my own point. It's too bad you appear incapable of thinking about the issue on that level, but unfortunately there's nothing I can do about that.
     
  11. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Still waiting on an answer to this one:
    And how does that explain the discrepancy between performance against stacked boxes and performance against non-stacked boxes?
     
  12. AGuyNamedAlex

    AGuyNamedAlex Well-Known Member

    3,582
    2,579
    113
    Sep 12, 2015
    Right, I'm just entirely stepping away from Tannehill and his individual ability for a moment, my question really wasnt meant to steer that conversation anywhere. Like I said, teans make mistakes and I was just curious about your take on it.

    Just an independent question about how you feel they handled the situation.

    I think you answered it for me though.
     
    The Guy likes this.
  13. rafael

    rafael Well-Known Member

    27,364
    31,261
    113
    Apr 6, 2008
    I don't tend to keep track of who predicted what, but if anybody predicted that Tannehill was unlikely to play much better in Tenn (in a better fitting system) then they were wrong and should just admit that their base assumption that he was an average QB was faulty. It was just a poor QB eval whether based on stats or something else. And if it were me I would also recognize that I needed to change what I was basing my QB evals on.

    It's actually what I personally did many years ago. I searched for some single stat to predict QB success at the next level. I worked as scout for an NFL agent then. My personal conclusion was that some stats can suggest and point to guys you should look at more closely, but the film and specifically, what traits they have that tend to translate to NFL success was a far better predictor.
     
    Irishman and resnor like this.
  14. The_Dark_Knight

    The_Dark_Knight Defender of the Truth

    11,817
    10,321
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Rockledge, FL
    I rarely watch these videos. Too many times it's some sportswriter trying to self engrandize (sp?) but I actually enjoyed the objective breakdown by Sullivan.

    First off, Sullivan admits that statistically it wasn't a great game by Tannehill. The thing I appreciate about that statement is I've often said that numbers and stats don't always tell the full story. The focus of his analysis is the 3 scoring plays; the actual play called, the mechanics of Tannehill, the blocking and the execution of the throws by Tannehill, as well as the touchdown run.

    The 2 touchdown passes were absolutely flawless. On the wheel route to Smith on 3rd and goal, Tannehill puts the ball in a VERY tight window where only the receiver can catch it. It's either going to be a touchdown or an incomplete pass, setting the Titans up for a field goal. In this case however, Smith is able to make a spectacular one handed catch with Tannehill placing the ball exactly where it needed to be. It's this accuracy that makes Tannehill so exceptional; the difficulties of the throws he makes.

    On the 45 yard touchdown pass, the play call in itself shows the aggressiveness of the Titans and the faith in Tannehill to make a big play. After stopping the Ravens on 4th down, instead of grinding the ball on the ground as most teams suspected the Titans would do in the power run game with Henry, the Titans call a play action pass in which Tannehill throws a perfect strike to Raymond for a 45 yard touchdown pass. Tannehill again demonstrates his ability to not only throw the ball accurately, but the air time is incredible! Tannehill is able to set and throw the ball 52 yards in the air. Think about that for a moment. We're not talking about a pass that was thrown for 7 yards that the receiver runs another 45 yards. This was a 52 yard FedEx absolutely positively has to be there overnight aerial strike. As Sullivan points out, the only other time you see balls with that much air is a Hail Mary.

    On the 1 yard touchdown run by Tannehill, everyone seems to let it slip their mind that the man can indeed run the ball. Tannehill makes a split second decision; pitch to Henry or keep it and drive it in. Tannehill chose the latter and was able to drive up the middle for the score, putting the nail in the coffin on Baltimore's great season.

    Many of the Tannehill critics here have argued Tannehill's "mediocrity" or claiming him to be "average". While the "numbers" themselves are far from stellar, 7/14 for 88 yards, 2TD's and a QBR of 109.5 aren't show stopping, one does have to keep in mind that the Titans were playing against the league's 3rd rated defense on the road...after just defeating the league's number 1 rated defense on the road in Foxborough. Quarterbacks that play against elite defenses rarely have stellar statistical numbers. What then truly becomes the most important factor is WHAT that quarterback does when he does have the ball and to use a simple comparative adage with Tannehill, "he shoots, he scores"

    I truly believe with the level of play of the Titans and Tannehill this past season, we're going to talking about Tannehill and the Titans a lot for the foreseeable future. While I am indeed happy for Ryan, I just wish to God we could have kept him here in Miami.
     
    rafael, Irishman, Pauly and 2 others like this.
  15. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    What percentage of QBs in the NFL do you think would play at an elite level if the environment and circumstances around them fit their particular needs perfectly?

    I'm not saying (in this post) that was necessarily the case for Tannehill, so please don't address that. Please just address the question above if you would.
     
  16. The_Dark_Knight

    The_Dark_Knight Defender of the Truth

    11,817
    10,321
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Rockledge, FL
    I think I understand his logic here. Tannehill doesn't have as many throws as other "elite" quarterbacks. Hmmmmm, maybe if Tannehill would quit throwing so many long touchdown passes, he would be able to throw MORE passes to pad those numbers.

    I guess the argument now that makes Tannehill a "bad quarterback" is the fact that he shoots and scores. :lol:
     
    Irishman and resnor like this.
  17. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Let's be honest. Nothing does a good job of predicting success in the NFL from college, not stats not scouts. The percentage of busts among QB's picked high is just way too great to give scouts any credibility either, especially when they so often disagree with each other.

    So while I'm totally fine with someone dismissing stats for evaluation purposes, I won't give scouts credibility either because their record is so poor. However, I will defend the use of stats for assessing career performance in the NFL. There are good arguments for how even imperfect stats like passer rating over time remove a lot of (not all obviously) the important confounding factors to individual performance.
     
    Irishman, Pauly and The Guy like this.
  18. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    You'll have to provide a whole lot more info. You'll need to remove the Mariota games at the very least. What were the frequencies of the two defensive formations? What were the offensive personnel groupings and how did they affect EPA? What were the actual values for the other teams in the league.
     
  19. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Ding, ding, ding.... we have a winner!!!
     
    Irishman and resnor like this.
  20. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    He also completely ignores the fact that in all 4 games where Tannehill attempted more that 30 passes, he had lower passer ratings in the first half (where he threw less frequently) than in the second half (where he threw more frequently). The 2nd half passer ratings were all excellent....... but the more he throws.... LOL
     
    resnor likes this.
  21. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Hey Guy, still waiting for an answer on this.
     
    Irishman and resnor like this.
  22. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Irishman and resnor like this.
  23. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Irishman likes this.
  24. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    resnor and Irishman like this.
  25. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Best passer rating, CPOE, and YPA while under pressure!!!! And a high percentage of throws into tight windows!!!!

    But, but, DERRICK HENRY!!!! LOL.
     
    resnor and Irishman like this.
  26. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Why did you hold the position for 7 years that supporting cast did not matter when evaluating a QB and then switch to the opposite position in 2019?
     
    Irishman and resnor like this.
  27. The_Dark_Knight

    The_Dark_Knight Defender of the Truth

    11,817
    10,321
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Rockledge, FL
    Top rated quarterback in the league under pressure. Imagine that.

    Although in fairness to this rating, Tannehill did have a much better team in Nashville than he did in Miami from coaching staff to receivers
     
    Irishman and resnor like this.
  28. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    That wasn't my position. My position has always been that surroundings account for variation in QBs' performance from season to season, but that the level at which they vary over their careers is a function of their own ability and not their surroundings. That's entirely consistent with my perspective on Tannehill in 2019, in that I believe his surroundings were exceptionally good, at least in terms of his particular needs.
     
  29. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    I agree but it destroys the narrative that Tannehill needs ideal conditions. A QB can achieve a good passer rating under pressure through good play calling. Having the proper hot receiver open on short routes is a common tactic. What is key here is that his CPOE and YPA are the highest at the same time. He was making longer throws to more tightly covered receivers while continuing to be the most efficient.

    The Guy has tried to argue several different ways that Tannehill had it easier than other QBs. This blows that narrative out of the water.
     
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2020
    Irishman and resnor like this.
  30. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    LOL..... what a lie
     
    Irishman likes this.
  31. The_Dark_Knight

    The_Dark_Knight Defender of the Truth

    11,817
    10,321
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Rockledge, FL
    Well his whole argument, that i saw up until he put me ignore was Tannehill played well only because of Derrick Henry.

    I can’t see what he’s arguing now
     
    Irishman likes this.
  32. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    It's weasel wording because we can point to games where Tannehill lead them to early points, and then they salted the game away with a heavy dose of Henry. So looking at quarters 1-3 isn't necessarily telling you anything. It's an arbitrary thing you did, to get the stats you want. If Tannehill throws three tds in the first quarter, and they ride Henry the rest of the game, you'd argue that Henry was the reason they win, because he gets more carries than Tannehill gets throws.

    It's completely stupid, and ignores everything to do with how the game is played.

    The NFL ISN'T Madden where dudes keep throwing bombs when up by multiple scores.
     
    Irishman and Pauly like this.
  33. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    There are two statistics that are relevant there: 1) Tannehill's passing volume in quarters 1 through 3 during his starts was 1.98 standard deviations below the league norm, and 2) they entered the fourth quarter of those games with a cumulative (across all games) scoring margin of -1.

    So if you'd like to counter that with some other kind of data, then go ahead. But you aren't doing that above. You're merely talking theory, and that theory is controverted by the relevant data.
     
  34. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    The simple fact is that he is claiming that having Henry makes his job easier because of teams stacking the box to stop Henry and being able to rely on the run. What he refuses to address is "What does making the job of passing the ball easier mean?" How exactly is it easier? Are the receiver more open? Is there less pass pressure? Is he able to throw without having to move? Is he throwing shorter passes? Is he throwing passes to easier parts of the field? The answer to those questions for Tannehill in 2019 are no, no, no, no, and no.

    It is not that difficult to understand. The league HAS A STAT that covers this EXACT question. It is called expected completion percentage. The Guy had not figured out how to answer that basic question "How was it easier?" He simply avoids the subject and prattles on about passing % and stacked boxes......
     
    Irishman and resnor like this.
  35. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    VOLUME IS NOT RELEVANT.
     
  36. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Again, why pick quarters 1-3? You aren't addressing many before factors.
     
  37. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    He also refused to address why Tannehill's passer rating was lower in the first half than the second in games where he threw the ball over 30 times.
     
    resnor likes this.
  38. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    One possible mechanism of action (that can be neither confirmed nor denied) could simply be that Tannehill functions better mentally when the offensive load on him is limited and shouldered more heavily by another player like Henry. Tannehill may be less an "alpha" player and more a "beta" one, so to speak, and if he's in a system in which he's being asked to be no more than "beta," and the "alpha" player in that system (Henry in this case) is playing extremely well, it might be just what the doctor ordered in terms of allowing Tannehill to function optimally mentally. And if he's functioning optimally mentally, then that would likely postively affect everything he does physically.
     
  39. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    LOL......
     
    resnor likes this.
  40. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Maybe he was mentally better in Tennessee because he didn't have a **** show clown circus of coaches and players around him.

    Questioning the man's manhood now?

    Low, even for you.
     

Share This Page