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. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Well, taking over a game doesn't guarantee a win.

    But, in basketball, one player can most definitely take over a game. When a guy scores 40+ points, and is playing stifling defense, he's taking over a game. Jordan/Kobe/Harden/etc, these guys can dominate a game without any real offensive help from their teammates. They can play defense on the other teams best player, and change the game.

    Football is in no way similar. The QB is ALWAYS dependent on other players doing their job.
     
  2. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Same in basketball. As an offensive player, you're dependent on teammates preventing the other team from just putting all its defenders on you. In other words, you're ALWAYS dependent on other players doing their job. I agree it's less in basketball than in football but both are fundamentally team sports at the highest level (on a playground it sometimes isn't but that's true for flag football too lol).
     
    Irishman likes this.
  3. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Not really the same. Guys like MJ/Kobe/Harden will go through multiple defenders when they want.

    But you're proving my point...if you are going to argue that one guy can't do it in basketball, then it's completely ludicrous to claim that a QB is doing it in the NFL.
     
  4. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    No single basketball player on his own can defeat an entire team. That should be obvious. The difference is only one of degree.

    "Take over games" does not imply there is no dependency on teammates. A single player can "take over games" in both sports even when he's always dependent on teammates. It just means he was the primary reason for the win or outcome (even if it's not a win).
     
    Irishman likes this.
  5. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    A QB did it in the Super Bowl this year. Mahomes took over and won the game. Certainly there were other players involved and he couldn't have done it by himself, but you can't tell me Josh Rosen would've done the same thing under the same circumstances, just because he had the same surrounding players and coaching.
     
  6. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Just stop.
     
  7. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Explain to me how the QB can be primary when the receiver has just as much importance on a passing play.
     
  8. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    An additional point about the above: the league had no film whatsoever of Tom Brady as a professional, and Drew Brees was signed to a long-term contract and immediately anointed the starter in New Orleans. In other words, Brees was clearly sought after as a starter worthy of a long-term investment, and so the league hardly "whiffed" on him.

    Tannehill by contrast was traded with a sixth-round pick for seventh- and fourth-round picks and was signed to a one-year contract that represented a mere 1% of the Titans' salary cap. He was obviously being viewed throughout the league as a backup QB at that point and not as a starter like Brees was in 2006.

    At any rate, I think you'd be hard-pressed to explain how the same film you're touting as providing such glaring evidence of Tannehill's excellence in isolation from his teammates was evaluated by the league's football experts to be so different from how you're portraying it. Again, the far more parsimonious explanation is that the film 2012-2018 doesn't show Tannehill's performance as very good amidst terrible surroundings, and that the surroundings in Tennessee in 2019 were exceptionally good. That explanation, while not foolproof, fits the available data far better.
     
  9. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    So you're saying Josh Rosen would've played the fourth quarter of the Super Bowl just like Mahomes, simply by virtue of Mahomes's surroundings?
     
  10. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    What case have you made for a receiver's being just as important as the QB on a passing play? How do you know the importance isn't let's say (arbitrarily chosen numbers) 80% quarterback 20% receiver?

    Certainly if receivers are "just as important" as QBs, the league would be clamoring for receivers like it does QBs and paying them the same money, but that doesn't happen, does it. Or are you right and the whole league wrong?
     
  11. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Because the QB makes passes to many different receivers. For a single play I'd agree that (on average) similar amounts of credit go to both the QB and WR, but the QB is "equally" involved on all such passing plays while no single WR is.
     
    Irishman likes this.
  12. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Ha, ha, ha...... no film as a professional.... well then, I suppose every draft pick is just some random selection....

    WHERE WAS THE BIDDING WAR FOR BREES? HE DIDN'T EVEN WARRANT A LATE ROUND PICK BEFORE HE WAS LET GO. LOL......

    Tannehill by contrast was traded with a sixth-round pick for seventh- and fourth-round picks and was signed to a one-year contract that represented a mere 1% of the Titans' salary cap. He was obviously being viewed throughout the league as a backup QB at that point and not as a starter like Brees was in 2006.[/QUOTE]

    SD BY CONTRAST GOT NOTHING FOR BREES......

    Sure..... complete coincidence...... LOL.

    You have ZERO data for exceptional surrounding. I have his expected completion percentage......
     
    resnor likes this.
  13. Etrius24

    Etrius24 Well-Known Member

    682
    685
    93
    Mar 4, 2020
    Guy is like a three year old at this point refusing to stop stomping his feet.
     
    resnor and Irishman like this.
  14. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Obviously you're not following the thread well enough to know that the primary point about Tannehill has been debunked, and that the only folks who are behaving in the way you noted above are the ones continuing to attempt to extract greater meaning from his 11 games than is warranted.
     
  15. Etrius24

    Etrius24 Well-Known Member

    682
    685
    93
    Mar 4, 2020
    Obviously I have been following along... I am not however going to lower myself to argue the same proven points on here with you 137 times over and over again.

    If you want to take that as a victory... Have at it. We all see what has been proven and debunked as you put it. You are the one that has come up with a dozen different arguments ( after each one gets destroyed on here you come up with another. ) You are the one moving the goal posts again, and again. When presented with mountains of evidence that disproved claims you have made evidence that is detailed and thorough... Showing that Tannehill's 2019 season not merely good He was playing at an MVP level.
     
    Irishman and resnor like this.
  16. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    I haven't argued against that at any point in the the thread. What I've done are two things: 1) explore whether he was experiencing situational advantages that were perhaps related to his performance at that level, and 2) help determine that his performance wasn't sufficiently distinguishable from that of a critical number of career average QBs who have performed similarly over 11 games in their careers.

    I'm sorry you apparently wanted everyone who participated in the thread to simply regale Tannehill and laud him as having some level of ability you always believed he had, but that is yet to be determined definitively. I'm afraid you'll have to tolerate the uncertainty that still exists in the matter and not take your inability to tolerate it out on the people who are better than you at recognizing it.
     
  17. The_Dark_Knight

    The_Dark_Knight Defender of the Truth

    11,817
    10,321
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Rockledge, FL
    Albert, Asiata, Brendel, Bushrod, Davis, James, Johnson, Kilgore, Larsen, Steen, Sterup, Swanson, Urbik, Young, Tunsil...all either injury prone or elder veterans in the twilight of their careers. Tannehill stood zero chance behind such a make shift line and neither would any of the other “Big 3” I mentioned.

    Anyone who says otherwise really didn’t watch any of the games.
     
    Irishman, FinFaninBuffalo and resnor like this.
  18. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    That last statement is provably false.

    Regardless, you're on record saying repeatedly that you know Tannehill will put up Brees-like numbers for several years from here on out. No sense of uncertainty. You "know what you know" as you said. Well we'll see. Hopefully, once you're proven wrong on that front — if you're right it would be the first time in NFL history that sustained statistically average went to sustained statistically elite, i.e., this is a great test of "statistical analysis" vs. TDK's "understanding" of football — you'll stop with this arrogance of thinking anyone who disagrees with you doesn't "watch games" (provably false) or doesn't "understand football".
     
    Irishman likes this.
  19. AGuyNamedAlex

    AGuyNamedAlex Well-Known Member

    3,582
    2,579
    113
    Sep 12, 2015
    I wont tell you Josh Rosen would have done it.

    I will tell you that there is a world of difference currently between Tannehill and Rosen. So I'm not sure why we are making this comparison. Did I miss something?

    I will say I believe Andy Reid makes every QB look better than they really are with very few exceptions. So I dont know how Tannehill would perform kn that team.
     
    resnor likes this.
  20. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    TL;DR

    I'm smarter than you, you just don't realize it.
     
    FinFaninBuffalo and Irishman like this.
  21. Etrius24

    Etrius24 Well-Known Member

    682
    685
    93
    Mar 4, 2020

    No you have made argument after argument that Tannehill got lucky, or he merely beneffited from Henry. Then when that got disproven you switched the wording upto the perfect situation.

    You keep changing the argument because each time posters on here come well equipped with a plethora of statistics to blow you out of the water. I think I have a handle on the situation. But thank you for trying to change history and explain it another way.
     
    FinFaninBuffalo, resnor and Irishman like this.
  22. Irishman

    Irishman Well-Known Member

    573
    532
    93
    Oct 16, 2017
    High Point, NC
    Winners write the histories, and right now Tannehill is the winner in 2019.

    His play last year speaks for itself and shows what a great QB, RB and teammate this man is. These traits didn't occur overnight; they had always been there.

    No qualifiers are required, yet the ones that do exist only emphasize the extraordinarily high level of excellence that he played at while on the field.

    The fact is that once he walked onto the field, the Titans started to get better then they had been during the first part of the year when he wasn't playing.

    I find it interesting to note that Tannehill credits Adam Gase for helping him become the QB he was during 2019. It's too bad I had to find out about this on a Jets forum!!!
     
    resnor and FinFaninBuffalo like this.
  23. Etrius24

    Etrius24 Well-Known Member

    682
    685
    93
    Mar 4, 2020
    I cannot imagine what gase did to help Tannehill other than be so horrible as a coach that he appreciates every day of his life not having to be around Adam Gase.
     
  24. Irishman

    Irishman Well-Known Member

    573
    532
    93
    Oct 16, 2017
    High Point, NC
    Ask Tannehill why he made that statement, then you will know all you need to know about Adam Gase.
     
  25. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Apparently you aren't following the most basic and relevant finding of the thread: that Tannehill's 11 games in 2019 are indistinguishable from those of too great a number of QBs who accomplished the same thing he did but were career average overall.

    From here on out I'll be talking only about that finding and helping people understand it if they don't already, since that's the only thing of relevance here at this point. Come next season there will be more varied things to talk about.
     
  26. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    The findings that showed that 80% of career average QBs never accomplish that feat?
     
    Last edited: Jun 7, 2020
    Pauly likes this.
  27. The_Dark_Knight

    The_Dark_Knight Defender of the Truth

    11,817
    10,321
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Rockledge, FL
    Well, if my last statement is indeed probably false, I’d like to see how. I didn’t even include offensive linemen prior to Gase’s tenure in Miami, let alone the 2017 season in which Tannehill was our due to his injury. Miami’s offensive line has been a revolving door of failed experiments.

    But as you said, I’m on record with some bold predictions, statements which I stand by so well just have to wait and see...

    My knowledge of football vs your z-scores.
     
  28. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Now this I'll go ahead and chime in on, because again, I'm happy to help people understand the finding. The finding is that of the QBs who have accomplished 11-game stretches at the level of Tannehill's in 2019, 80% of them were above-average QBs, while 20% of them were merely average QBs.

    Now, here's the question: can we use such 11-game stretches as a criterion for determining whether a QB is above-average when you can put all of the ones who've accomplished them in a hat and pull an average QB out of the hat one of every five times you reach into it?

    Of course not. A 20% error rate in that regard is far too high.

    So what did the 11 games really mean in terms of determining Tannehill's ability? Nothing, yet, because 11 such games don't sufficiently distinguish above-average from average QBs.

    Here's perhaps a more experience-near way of understanding it: go to the Colts' message board and make the case that Jim Harbaugh's 11-game stretch in 1995 -- which was statistically indistinguishable from Tannehill's -- made him something other than an average QB overall.

    If that seems like a ridiculous thing to do, then it's just as ridiculous to think we can establish Tannehill's ability level on the basis of 11 games of the same caliber.
     
  29. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    We're in agreement on how bad the OL was. We're not in agreement on the degree to which an elite QB can compensate for that. Obviously none of us knows how things would have turned out, but when Rodgers was playing elite (lately he's fallen off) his ability to create and extend plays was far beyond anything I've ever seen with Tannehill. With Brees you're looking at his ultra quick release and him being a much better passer (based on most observers).

    Only guy I wouldn't be as certain of is Brady. I think he would have done better than Tannehill but I can easily entertain the possibility he wouldn't remain "elite" behind our OL without much imagination. And though you didn't mention him, Wilson is probably the best example of an elite QB where you know he can play really well with a bad OL (according to many OL rankings).

    So yes IMO many (not all necessarily) elite QB's would have made the 2012-2018 Dolphins into a perennial playoff contender.

    Have to at least give you kudos for standing by your predictions. And yes it will be a good test of stats vs. your knowledge of football.
     
    Irishman likes this.
  30. The_Dark_Knight

    The_Dark_Knight Defender of the Truth

    11,817
    10,321
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Rockledge, FL
    You have to remember, I said our team was THAT bad from the top down, including coaches. To think that Brady, Brees or Rodgers could have made our team, running the offenses we had under the coaches calling the plays they did is nearsighted in my opinion.

    Gase’s offensive schemes took TOO long to develop from the snap, hence the many short passes Tannehill threw. With the offensive line unable to block, Brady, Brees and Rodgers would have been throwing the same short passes. Kind of difficult to throw that long ball when the receiver hasn’t even broken into his route and wouldn’t have been where the ball was supposed to be.

    You’re making your comparison based on those quarterbacks running the offensive schemes of their respective teams. You can’t do that. You have to make a top to bottom comparison.

    This is why Tannehill’s going to continue being great. He’s on a team that’s squared away from the top down and has a complete offensive scheme...just as Brady, Brees and Rodgers have been.

    And speaking of Brady, he’s going to wish to God he never left Belichick and New England. He’s about to learn that NFL stands for No Fun League.
     
    resnor likes this.
  31. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Statistically our team wasn't that bad from the top down. I mean first of all we averaged just under 8 wins while Tannehill was here. If it was as bad as you say from top down we would've averaged 4 wins or so. We also had a top 10 defense by points allowed in 2012 and 2013, slightly below average in 2014-2016 and bottom of the barrel afterwards. It wasn't always as bad as what the OL seemed to be. And we had the 2nd best rushing Y/A in the league in 2014! We were also top 10 in rushing Y/A in 2015, 2016 and 2018.

    No it's untenable to suggest everything was as bad as the OL. Just doesn't fit the numbers.

    Both he and Belichick are on a mission to prove they were more important than the other for NE's success. Bad idea, especially for Brady. He should've retired on top. He's got great surrounding pieces but statistically he was already on the decline the last few years, and it's hard for me to see him being elite numbers-wise in the future. Belichick without Brady is also very interesting. They have no QB up there so this is a great way to see the influence of the QB.
     
  32. Etrius24

    Etrius24 Well-Known Member

    682
    685
    93
    Mar 4, 2020
    Brady won a lot of games due to being led by the greatest head coach to ever live. I have always thought Brady was overrated because of this.
     
  33. Etrius24

    Etrius24 Well-Known Member

    682
    685
    93
    Mar 4, 2020
    Brady is now old ... He is surrounded by a ton of talent... But no way the coaching can compare.
     
  34. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Again, I'll ask, why are you using Tannehill's first year or two to bag on him? He was literally raw and unpolished. There was no way Tannehill coming in to the league was going to play like a QB Todd usually see picked at #9.

    But people judged Tannehill on those early years, disregarding that he needed time to develop, and now those same people use those first few years to claim he isn't very good, since he couldn't pay like Brees or Rodgers his first two years in the league.

    It's profoundly short sighted.
     
  35. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Where did I "bag" on Tannehill? I was just pointing out that while I agree with TDK that the OL was consistently bad you can't say that about defense or the running game. Defense was actually good in 2 of those years and the running game was in 4.

    And I already showed you excluding his first two years still leads to average statistical performance in Miami. Excluding his first two years does absolutely nothing to convince me Brees or Rodgers wouldn't have been far better in the same situation. Regardless, you're starting to read into things you shouldn't: that post had nothing to do with Tannehill per se.
     
    Pauly likes this.
  36. The_Dark_Knight

    The_Dark_Knight Defender of the Truth

    11,817
    10,321
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Rockledge, FL
    Again, this is where stats don't tell the whole story. Defensively our team may have been "good" in the stat of points allowed, but we were at or near the bottom of the barrel in yardage allowed. The whole "bend don't break" defensive scheme was an utter failure. Our defense wasn't able to stop opposing offenses from scoring the go ahead TD or FG in the cases where we were ahead...and couldn't stop opposing offenses to at give Tannehill another opportunity. Watch the actual games brad. When you have a team facing 3rd and long and you can't force the punt, numbers and stats don't mean a thing.

    Everything was that bad with the offensive line Brad. The only decent year our OL had was 2016 when we had that incredible 6 game winning streak and squeaked into the playoffs. Other than that? Miami's OL was a self inflicted gunshot wound, putting the team in long yardage situations with a false start or offensive holding, killing any opportunity for a continued drive, particularly with Gase's bubble screen infested playbook.



    At least you and I agree regarding Brady. I do feel Belichick will fair far better without Brady than Brady will without Belichick. Belichick has always had one of the top defenses in the league which always gave Brady more opportunities.
     
    resnor likes this.
  37. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    I'm just saying, arguing that he had decent teams his first two years, is sort of meaningless to the conversation. I agree that the first and probably second year, Brees goes to the playoffs. However, given where Tannehill was developmentally, that's not a strike against him. Tannehill shouldn't even have been starting his first year.

    You say it wasn't about Tannehill, but the entire post is trying to show that the Dolphins weren't that bad, and Tannehill couldn't get it done.

    One of those years the defense was a complete fraud. Had some gaudy stats against some awful teams, but folded against any decent competition. I remember having all these discussions when the games were fresh in our minds, but it was almost 10 years ago now. I'd have to go watch every game again now, which is not something I'm really interested in doing. I know that purely looking at stats isn't going to tell the story though. There were definitely things going on the stats won't show.
     
    Last edited: Jun 8, 2020
  38. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    What people need to realize about the above sort of analysis is that it involves a high potential for error in evaluating the team being watched, because it involves a microscopic view of one team, without a comparison to the rest of the league at such a microscopic level. For all you know, what you're seeing "jump out at you" on the screen is something non-significantly different from normal throughout the league.

    This is why stats are important, and why we can't just rely on what we see going on that "the stats won't show." There has to be a comparison to the league as a whole, and for that stats are necessary.

    Without them, we're left with the impressions of people who are engaging in the sort of singular microscopic analysis I noted above, and who all get together on a message board and "validate" (note the quotes) each other's perceptions. Then we've perhaps established a mutual "reality" (a consensus) that's completely in error.

    This is what was entirely possible as lots of people viewed the 2012-2018 Dolphins with the hope that Tannehill would be "the savior." Loads upon loads of confirmation bias that was "validated" on message boards.
     
  39. The_Dark_Knight

    The_Dark_Knight Defender of the Truth

    11,817
    10,321
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Rockledge, FL
    You know, we keep arguing stats...numbers. And the crux of the arguments being whether or not Tannehill was just "average"...if that. Well I don't think there would be any argument, the Gold Standard when it comes to passing is Marino. He's the measuring stick to what all other quarterbacks are measured. So I was just curious, what if we did a comparison of Marino's first five years in the league versus Tannehill's first five years in the league?

    Dan Marino; 1983-1987; 19,422 yards
    Ryan Tannehill; 2012-2016; 18,455 yards.

    now some will say this isn't a fair comparison because Tannehill only played 13 games in 2016 due to his knee injury...and while this is true, Marino didn't start until week 6 of the '83 season...so the amount of playtime is comparable.

    Then the next argument is, "Marino still threw for more yards". That's true, but as I said, Marino's the Gold Standard. So, what if we compared Tannehill to some of the league's more recent prolific passers?

    Manning; 1998-2002; 20,618
    Brees; 2002-2007; 16,545 (year 2 in SD and year 1 in NO)
    Rodgers; 2008-2012; 21,322 (Rodgers did not get starting nod until Farve's departure)

    Now I'm using yardage because the argument has been that Tannehill has been just average. Well, Tannehill hasn't been just average. When Tannehill has had the ball, he was able to move the ball...
    when his defense would finally allow him a chance to have the ball...
    despite his offensive line putting the team in improbable long yardage situations.

    Tannehill's skills were always there...much like Brees. What was lacking was the complete TEAM to allow those skills to do what they were meant to do...WIN.
     
  40. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    It doesn't matter. They will say you have to adjust for different eras.
     

Share This Page