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
    The arguments he makes are utterly nauseating...in so much how dizzy I get from all of the spinning. If he doesn’t like Tannehill, so be it but if he’s going to say Tannehill’s just an average to below average quarterback, it would be nice if he stuck with the theorem he believes illustrates it. He’s constantly moving the goal posts each and every time his current theory is debunked and inevitably goes right back to previously debunked theories.

    His low volume versus high volume as a measuring stick I personally debunked when I showed teams with high volume quarterback play typically have losing records

    Then he tried the winning teams run the ball more only after obtaining leads and are just running out the clock. That I also debunked illustrating many many games in which teams consistently ran the ball, even while trailing.

    Then came the Henry was the main offensive weapon in Tennessee’s arsenal. That was bebunked when someone was able to illustrate Henry’s performance was mediocre with Mariotta under center. The offense was no different with Tannehill under center; Tannehill was just that much better.

    Then it changed to the claim the Tannehill’s supporting cast was no different in Tennessee than it was in Miami. This was just a desperate plea as anyone with half a brain cell knows the Dolphins were at the bottom of the barrel in any and all measured statistics on every side of the ball.

    His “arguments” are like the directions on a shampoo bottle...”wash, rinse, repeat”. Sooner or later you have to get out of the shower.
     
    FinFaninBuffalo and resnor like this.
  2. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    ...but they don't play better individually under those conditions, and that's what we're looking at here -- individual performance, not team records. Quarterbacks with lower passing frequencies play better individually, regardless of team record.

    The correlation between win percentage and rushing frequency was 0.19 in quarters 1 through 3 in 2019. Try again.

    Henry's performance in yards per carry (efficiency, which is what was strongly correlated with Tannehill's performance, game-by-game in 2019) wasn't significantly different with Tannehill than it was in 2018 and in 2019 pre-Tannehill, combined. Henry didn't perform better with Tannehill than he did pre-Tannehill. Again, try again.

    Then that ought to be demonstrated empirically fairly easily, yet it hasn't been.

    You're a guy here who has a personal dogma about how the league functions that continually persists in the face of cogent evidence to the contrary. @cbrad has gone over with you many times the relationship between running the ball and winning in the NFL, yet your pet belief persists. Your post above is no different. You just don't digest information and evidence -- it bounces off of you like it didn't happen.
     
  3. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,327
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    What stats do I need? How many QBs go through that many head coaches and offensive coordinators in 5 years? This isn't something that requires in depth study. How many teams feature offensive players that simply wash out of the league after being traded? Same for their coaches, actually. That just isn't the norm. I don't have to get crazy stats to say that.
     
    AGuyNamedAlex likes this.
  4. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Yeah I won't be doing the work needed to support your point, but suffice to to say that a cursory exploration reveals that you need to do it to make the point convincing.

    Take the teams in the league that made the playoffs sparingly from 2012 to 2018, and look at their numbers of head coaches during that period.

    Jacksonville Jaguars: 3 playoff games, 3 head coaches
    Arizona Cardinals: 3 playoff games, 3 head coaches
    Detroit Lions: 2 playoff games, 3 head coaches
    Chicago Bears: 2 playoff games, 4 head coaches
    Buffalo Bills: 1 playoff game, 5 head coaches
    Oakland Raiders: 1 playoff game, 4 head coaches
    New York Giants: 1 playoff game, 4 head coaches
    Cleveland Browns: 0 playoff games, 5 head coaches
    Tampa Bay: 0 playoff games, 3 head coaches
    LA Rams: 4 playoff games, 4 head coaches
    Miami Dolphins: 1 playoff game, 3 head coaches

    So, at least 34% of the league -- a third of it -- has featured teams with head coaching turnover not unlike the Dolphins 2012-2018. We aren't talking about a rare event here. 1 in 3 teams was not unlike the Dolphins 2012-2018.
     
  5. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,327
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Gimme a break. We're talking about whether that environment supports good QB play. Of those teams you posted, Stafford is about the only QB who played extensively for the team, and he was by no means consistent, or even anything special. Again, IDGAF about results, which is what you always revert to. That list of teams actually supports my premise: turnover in coaching is a hindrance to good QB play, especially for developing QBs, which many of those teams consistently featured.
     
  6. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Or the poor QB play associated with those teams (including the Dolphins) was a large part of their losing and their coaching turnover, in a league that revolves largely around the passing game and quarterback play.

    You haven't made your case.
     
  7. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,327
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Except, at least in Miami, almost all of those coaches are no longer employed in the league, but the QB is.
     
    Sceeto likes this.
  8. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Yeah, give us the rundown on the fates of the QBs and coaches associated with that list. Do some work here.

    Remember, this is your point we're talking about here. Do some work to support it. So far I've done more work than you on it, while you sit back and comment.
     
  9. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    I have debunked more of his theories than I can count.
     
  10. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,327
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    No, wrong again. It is YOUR assertion that Miami was average and no different than other teams. It's YOUR assertion that the terrible coaches and players washing out after leaving is common. So it's up to YOU to show that what occurred in MiamI is actually very common, which is YOUR assertion. I'm not going through your list to prove your point. I'm completely fine with saying that the situation in Miami hindered Tannehill's development. Significantly.
     
  11. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    So then what is your assertion regarding Miami 2012-2018? Nothing? You haven't one?

    What you don't seem to get is that you are asserting that something was different from the league norm, not me. Therefore it's up to you to support that.

    I haven't asked anybody here to go out and gather the evidence that Tannehill's passing frequency in 2019 was well below the league norm, or that his performance was far more strongly correlated than the league norm with that of his running back. I've gone out and gathered that evidence and presented it myself, in support of my position. Now here you are asserting a position, unwilling to do any work associated with it.

    I'm completely fine with your saying that as well. I'm also completely fine with saying that it's your opinion, unsupported by any evidence, and it's therefore a weak position.
     
  12. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,327
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    My position is that Tannehill had bad coaches, who washed out of the league after being fired by Miami. Poor coaching hindered the development, and undercut any confidence, that a young, developing QB had. Learning a new offense ever other season further hindered development, plus negatively impact the offense as a whole.

    And I don't care whether other teams have the same problem or not.

    Also, we've gone over this numerous times. You know my position.
     
  13. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Wonderful. So you're content in saying it's your position, unsupported by any evidence, and I'm content in saying your position is therefore weak.
     
  14. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,327
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    You can say whatever you want. My proof of Miami is the complete lack of success of coaches/players who left.

    Your response was to give me a list of teams with multiple coaches, who also had bad QB play. You did not, however, say whether those coaches went to other teams, or washed out of the league.
     
  15. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    And you still have no idea how that compares to the league norm in terms of either 1) the number of coaches and players who left, or 2) their level of subsequent success. For all you (and we) know, the Dolphins were better than the league norm in those areas during that period.

    In other words, you have proof of nothing. You're simply putting a microscope on a single team, without any comparison to the league as a whole, and then concluding the team was significantly worse than the league norm. That's not how positions are supported with evidence.

    Contrast that with what I've done throughout this thread with regard to my two main points: 1) Tannehill's passing frequency was extremely low in 2019 -- that was supported with the finding that his passing volume in quarters 1 through 3 during his starts was 1.98 standard deviations below the league norm; and 2) Tannehill's performance was correlated with that of his running back -- that was supported with the finding that the correlation (0.64) between Tannehill's passer rating and Derrick Henry's yards per carry, game-by-game, was more than two standard deviations above the league average. These were findings that were supported as being well different from league norms.

    Notice a difference?
     
  16. The_Dark_Knight

    The_Dark_Knight Defender of the Truth

    11,815
    10,319
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Rockledge, FL
    No no no, Dan Marino was actually a female. Prove me wrong.

    Gotta love it when someone makes an assertion with nothing to back it and then tells you to prove them wrong
     
    resnor likes this.
  17. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    And you both have it backwards. The assertion being made (by resnor, not me) is that the Dolphins 2012-2018 were significantly different from the league norm. That is the assertion that needs to be supported.

    The only reason you both think it needs no support is because you've agreed about it, but agreement by people isn't support. Agreement by people doesn't make an assertion a "fact" whose refutation then needs support. It's still simply a personal opinion that more than one person believes, with no empirical support. How do we know you aren't both wrong?

    Have some humility folks. We aren't establishing "facts" here via agreement among us. We're nobodies on a message board.
     
  18. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    11,375
    11,392
    113
    Sep 28, 2015
    So.

    How does everyone think Tannehill will do this year? Asking for a friend.
     
    FinFaninBuffalo likes this.
  19. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,327
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    NO. I HAVE NEVER SAID THEY WERE DIFFERENT FROM THE NORM. I simply stated what happened during Tannehill's tenure in Miami. YOU believe that to be normal for the rest of the league. If you'd like to show me that successful QBs and offenses routinely have new offensive systems every other year, along with switching head coaches every year or two, feel free.

    You are consistently misrepresenting my position, and then complaining when I won't do the work to disprove your theory.
     
  20. Triggercut

    Triggercut Well-Known Member

    717
    388
    63
    Aug 12, 2011
     
  21. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Then what is your position regarding the difference in Tannehill’s performance between Miami and Tennessee? That his surroundings went from poor to average, or from average to exceptionally good?

    No, my position is that the nature of his surroundings in Miami is unknown.
     
  22. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,327
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    I think the coaching environment in Tennessee is much better than it was in Miami.

    And we know that the coaching environment in Miami was terrible.
     
  23. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    So then that's your position, that the coaching environment in Miami was significantly below the league norm.

    Now, how do we know the coaching environment in Miami was significantly below the league norm?
     
  24. Cashvillesent

    Cashvillesent A female Tannehill fan

    770
    641
    93
    Dec 8, 2019
    What are your expecations from Ryan this year?

    What does he need to do for you to believe he is a franchise QB?
     
  25. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,327
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Nope. Nice try. Just because I believe that Tennessee has better coaching than Miami, does not equal me saying that Miami coaching was below league norm. Further, given that we often see the same teams in the playoffs, perhaps league norm is bad coaching. I don't know, nor do I need to research it. What I DO know, is that Miami had bad coaching, given that almost all those coaches that were fired are not in the league anymore. Bad coaching impedes development, irrespective of what any other team may or may not have gone through.
     
  26. Cashvillesent

    Cashvillesent A female Tannehill fan

    770
    641
    93
    Dec 8, 2019
    Not only does Tennessee have the better coaching staff, but I also think Tennessee 4 year GM has done a much better job at building the team than any other NFL team the last 4 years. Rememeber he is the one that had to build a franchise with Mariota..... he has completetly turned that roster around after so many failed GMs in the past for them.
     
    resnor likes this.
  27. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Your definition of "bad" coaching has no empirical support. You have no idea how the nature of the coaching turnover in Miami compares to the league norm. It's entirely possible Tannehill was the recipient of good coaching in Miami, compared to the league norm. You're simply unwilling to do the work to explore the issue and support it empirically.

    And that's certainly fine. We have varying degrees of willingness to put forth effort in support of our points. But just realize that your point is inherently weak because it involves nothing more than a personal opinion. And so the position that Tannehill was the recipient of "better" coaching in Tennessee is also weak, because it's contingent on a comparison with the coaching in Miami, whose quality is unknown.
     
  28. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    My prediction is that his performance in terms of season passer rating will be non-significantly different from his career passer rating with Miami.
     
  29. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,327
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Sure. Coaches getting fired and being no longer employed in the league is definitely a sign that Tannehill got good coaching. LMAO. If the coaches were good, they would still be employed in the NFL. There really is no need for any in depth analysis or study of other teams.

    I don't really know why I continue to try to have this conversation with, when you clearly aren't discussing in good faith.
     
    FinFaninBuffalo likes this.
  30. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Your analysis of the longevity of coaches in the NFL as a function of their own talent is so impoverished that you can't possibly say anything about the Miami Dolphins 2012-2018 in that regard with any reliability.

    This is where you acknowledge that you're working with a personal opinion and recognize its limits, rather than saying anything about my "faith." When you've done some work to support your point, we can talk about my "faith."
     
  31. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    ?? Wait a second. You've been saying for years they were below average. In fact, you said that in this thread 2 days ago in post #9107 (I would've pointed this out earlier except for not following this argument intently).
    https://www.thephins.com/threads/titans-to-start-ryan-tannehill.94693/page-228#post-3291825
    Statistically, the Dolphins were actually close to average in most things during Tannehill's tenure except OL (which is hard to measure statistically), though not in every year of course (i.e., average across his 6 years playing).

    Win% was average, average tenure of NFL coaches is just over 4 years so what Tannehill went through turnover-wise (with HC's) is average, defense (by points allowed) was top 10 in 2 years, tad below average in 3 and bottom of the barrel in 1, running game (Y/A) was actually top 10 in 4 of Tannehill's 6 years (and 2nd best in the NFL in 2014), and our WR weren't well below league norm IMO talent wise (e.g., Wallace, Landry and Hartline is actually decent; same if you replace Wallace with Stills).

    Look we've been "average" in most things for way too long (including QB, at least in Miami w.r.t. Tannehill). That's why we've had an average record for so long.
     
  32. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,327
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Tannehill had 3 HCs in five years, correct? How is that average?
     
  33. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    He had Philbin from 2012 through part of 2015, Campbell for 12 games in 2015, and Gase from 2016 to 2018. Seven years and two permanent coaches, with one interim coach. There was no permanent head coach who was so bad that he was fired before the customary duration in the league (as compared to Freddie Kitchens, for example, who was just fired after one year with the Browns and Baker Mayfield).
     
  34. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,327
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    So neither of the permanent head coaches lasted 4 seasons, and he had five different OCs from 2012-2018. Joe Philbin was fired 4 games into the 2015 season.
     
  35. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Good question. It's actually close to 50/50 whether over 7 years you'd have 2 or 3 different HC's. The distribution of NFL HC tenure is highly skewed as you can see below:
    [​IMG]

    A simulation of 100,000 trials where on each trial you have A) 2 randomly drawn values, and B) 3 randomly drawn values from that distribution resulted in 6,952 cases from A where the sum was 7 years, while it was 6,451 cases from B where the sum was 7 years. In other words, nearly identical.

    And that's a bit of an overestimate for case A anyway because coaching half a season is being counted as 1 season.

    So in summary, there's about an equal chance over 7 years to have 2 HC's or 3 HC's. And we have to use 7 years here because you can't have a discontinuity in there with that graph (i.e., 2017 season).
     
    The Guy likes this.
  36. AGuyNamedAlex

    AGuyNamedAlex Well-Known Member

    3,582
    2,579
    113
    Sep 12, 2015
    You're more or less making the implication that only QB play drives a team. I'm not sure how you can make that statement and believe Henry drives the Titans offense.

    If it were only the QB why would a team ever fire a HC under any circumstances? Obviously they only need a new QB.
     
    resnor likes this.
  37. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,327
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Just saying, the average tenure is 4 years. Neither head coach for Miami in that span made it four years, and Philbin was fired after the first for games of his fourth year. That to me says that they were below average for tenure.
     
  38. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Here are the cumulative passer ratings for every team in the league for the past four years, which nowadays is typically the largest period of time a head coach will get to prove himself before being fired:

    https://www.pro-football-reference....rature_gtlt=lt&c5val=1.0&order_by=pass_rating

    Note that the top six teams in the league in cumulative passer rating haven't made a head coaching change during that period. Not surprisingly, the top six teams in the league in passer rating in any given year are the ones likely to have a record associated with a playoff berth (at least 10-6), on the basis of passer rating alone (i.e., with all else equal).

    Of the remaining 26 teams in the league, only Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, and Baltimore (9% of them) haven't made head coaching changes during that period, and those teams have head coaches who have previously won a Super Bowl (Mike Tomlin, Doug Pederson, and John Harbaugh).

    So, in order to survive as a head coach beyond the customary time frame (four years) in the present-day NFL, one must either 1) have a quarterback associated with a top passing offense in the league, which is almost always if not always attributable largely to the quarterback's ability, or 2) have won a Super Bowl previously.
     
  39. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,327
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    I really disagree that having a potent offense is based mostly aground the QBs individual ability. The great QBs often are on the field with great receivers and tight ends.
     
  40. The_Dark_Knight

    The_Dark_Knight Defender of the Truth

    11,815
    10,319
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Rockledge, FL
    I would go even more basic than that...great quarterbacks have a great offensive line to allow them to make the plays they do.
     
    resnor likes this.

Share This Page