Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by pumpdogs, Feb 2, 2019.
Man, that Darin is cold...busting on Tannehill like that. Hmm...
Yeah it was predictable we weren’t getting a ham sandwich for the guy..Not good enough.
Exciting that we can move on..
Tough guy, take care..
This comment was pretty funny.
"Trust me, with Tannehill’s pocket presence, he’ll never see this cut coming".
Surprised how much people care about Tannehill's presence on the team considering that it's been stated we're pretty much going to be tanking while looking for the future. What does it matter if Tannehill stays or goes if we don't care about winning next year?
To my mind that 13 million dead space in 2020 is more important.
It just goes to show you.Nobody outside this site ever thought of this guy as a franchise QB.
I haven't even seen any team mates lobbying to keep the guy either..
Clean slate mentality..and if he stays we have to pay him..
If he leaves we have to pay him too.
Maybe it's the clean-slate mentality....
Queue the angry uneducated posters on this site saying "I can't believe they didn't try to get a 2nd round pick for him!"
Wouldn’t have expected a trade to garner that high of a draft pick, but he has had good play when behind a solid offensive line. We should have tried for a 5th or 6th round pick though...try to get something for him.
what?? He’s a proven starter. We could have gotten a first rounder!! WTF is wrong with this organization!!
They tried of course, he’s predictably not worth a draft pick with that contract.
He's due what we guaranteed him plus the money he gets on a new contract? Wow! He should be getting paid pretty decent these next few years.
Lol... according to all his sycophants he was a top ten starting QB that somehow was always let down by (insert excuse).
Dude was a coach killer and I wish him nothing but the worst on his way out to the door for subjecting us to 7 years of his nonsense.
Damn it don't these NFL personnel men know they are missing out on this hidden gem? Give him an a top OL, run game, defense, TE/WR's and coach and you are guaranteed a super bowl appearance.
If the Eagles didn't franchise Foles I could have seen him sign with them and do exactly what Foles did when Wentz gets hurt/flames out.
It's a sad day when our QB is too good to tank with, but too lousy to make the playoffs. I have a feeling he'll be dominant in NE under the Patriot way. But hey, at least we'll get to celebrate him getting laid out on occasion!
Belichick has faced Tannehill 2x a year since 2012, I think Bill is a good enough talent evaluator to take a hard pass there. I'm sure he'd rather draft a QB as oppose to pick up an injury prone one who at his best was slightly above average.
We'll see....Bill has also lost to Tannehill around 50% of the time facing him, and looked downright scared in a few of the games NE won. If you look at all the QB's NE has faced, RT probably has the highest winning percentage (I'm guessing here...but who has won more against NE?).
Nick Foles is staying in Philly (they just announced that he's getting the franchise tag at $20M), so Tannehill will likely be the hottest QB on the market this season. If we don't get a deal inked though and flat out cut him (thereby resetting his contract), I think Belichek jumps at the chance to sign him IF he can get the deal signed before Gase.
All it takes is two teams thinking that Tannehill can do well in their system and that $18 million salary looks good and a 2nd or 3rd looks like a reasonable trade.
Well, we know Gase will want him as a backup and a mentor....so there's one team. LOL, we just need one more to be interested and it's a party!
I agree with this. When you look at situations where Tannehill does well, it’s when (a) everyone does their job on the field and (b) the coaches have done their job and prepared him for what to expect from the opposition.
Where Tannehill does badly it’s when chaos happens or the opposition defenses are throwing unfamiliar looks at him. Even his maligned pocket presence isn’t that bad when he can anticipate where the pressure will come from.
When the Dolphins OL sometimes hold their blocks and sometimes whiff completely is when we’ve seen the worst of Tannehill. When you have a deep threat that runs consistent routes (Kenny Stills) Tannehill is on the money with the deep ball. When the receiver runs whatever they want to (Mike Wallace) he has problems.
So yeah, the New England environment is the type of environment where he can do well consistently.
If you were a GM and you knew a player you wanted was going to get cut why would you ever trade a 2nd or 3rd when you can just wait for him to get cut?
I already explained it.
Tannehill has a .364 win % against NE, active QB's that have a better win % than Tannehill are as follows. (Not including playoffs)
Cam Newton 1.000%
Alex Smith 1.000%
Russel Wilson 1.000%
Drew Brees .600%
Blake Bortles .500%
Sam Bradford .500%
Colin Kaepernick .500%
Marcus Mariota .500%
Matthew Stafford .500%
Big Ben .400%
(a) you believe at least one other team wants the same player; and
(b) you estimate the additional FA cost (over and above the current contract) will exceed the value of the pick you’re willing to give up; and
(c) you assess the alternate players available on the market as significantly inferior.
Your new here so we will let this one go.. since you couldn’t tell I was being sarcastic. However half the board will act excactly as I have stated
Yeah.. when you take sample size into account those results are inconclusive. There's something called a binomial confidence interval, which basically specifies the win% interval for X wins in Y attempts where let's say 95% of the time the true win% will lie in. And when you look at those confidence intervals you get stuff like this:
- For Cam Newton, Alex Smith and Russell Wilson who all have 2-0 regular season records against NE, the 95% confidence interval goes from 0.342 to 1.000, which (barely) includes Tannehill's win%. That means 2-0 is so small a sample size that random variation alone could be entirely responsible for the difference between Tannehill's win% and those 3 QB's.
- Similarly, for Brees' 3-2 record against NE the 95% CI is from 0.231 to 0.882 which again includes Tannehill's win%, etc...
Anyway, just pointing out that when you take sample size into account none of those win percentage differences mean much. They all fall within a range where the differences in win% are consistent with random variation alone being responsible. Doesn't mean that's the case, just that those stats don't make the argument.
Coach killer?? As I recall, when Philbin was shown the door, everyone was saying He wasn’t a great coach...that his success in Green Bay was due to Rodgers.
When Gase was shown the door, and even prior to his showing of the door, many said his success in Denver was attributed to Manning and he was never that great of a coach.
So either Tannehill killed these GREAT coaches we foolishly let go or these coaches were never really any good to begin with...so Tannehill didn’t really kill anything worth keeping.
Which is it?
There's a way to "square the circle" with this coach killer claim.
Neither Philbin nor Gase ever showed they were great coaches. In both cases their reputations were undeservedly enhanced because they coached HoF QB's. What makes Tannehill a "coach killer" is that those no-better-than-average coaches believed they could win with him. In other words, it's because those coaches weren't great that they decided to stick with Tannehill, which ended up costing them their jobs.
This still makes Tannehill a "coach killer" but with a slightly different meaning: it's the coach's fault for sticking with him.
The only asterisk here is that Philbin actually wanted to move away from Tannehill and draft Carr, but Carr isn't proving to be the solution at QB either, so this isn't as big of an asterisk as it would be otherwise (can't just identify the problem.. have to identify the solution).
If Tannehill gets a second chance on a half way decent team he will be just fine, perhaps better than in Miami.
The signal the team is sending to their fans and players is that this season is a lost cause. They want to lose to increase their chances to pick high. This is a horrible signal for fans - how many will go see a game knowing that they won't be trying that hard? Why bother even watching? Has there ever been a team in history that has come out and said we are not going to even bother this season? They know with Tannehill they can win a lot of games and maybe even get to the play offs but why not trade away all good players and start from scratch at this point. If you are going to throw a season away then go all in on it and start again. I am sure that the incoming coach fro NE would not want this to happen. A team should never give up. Never no matter what the cost.
Teams in other leagues have done it quite transparently, and sometimes it works. Best recent example is the Houston Astros. They blatantly tanked with by far the lowest payroll in baseball some years ago, got a bunch of high draft picks (including #1 overall 3 years in a row from 2012-2014 and then the #2 pick in 2015), and then increased their payroll tremendously to finally win the World Series.
It's not easy to do of course. You need to hit on a lot of draft picks. But if that's the reward I'm totally for it. For me the only goal is winning the SB and we haven't done that in 45 years!! So I'll happily follow the team even if it's clear 2019 is meant to be a lost cause.. as long as that's part of the plan and they don't keep tanking in 2020 (enough examples to show turnaround time in football can be quite short).
Could you at least not be so indirect? LOL
All of them at one point or another were enamored with his physical skill set, but failed to realize soon enough what a mental midget he is when it comes to the cerebral part of the game.
Tough as nails. Still won't miss him though. Bye.
My prediction is that there isn’t a team in the league that will sign Tannehill expecting him to be its starter. This is the point at which he will become a backup QB in the NFL.
And if that happens, it should speak volumes to the people who believed that he was only the necessary environment away from becoming great.
What the team probably knows, rather, is that Tannehill puts a fairly low ceiling on what it can accomplish in terms of regular season record and playoff success. In other words, he’s not a quarterback you build around. He’s a quarterback you move on from.
So these coaches essentially committed NFL suicide
I can see a few teams trying him as a starter depending on how their offseason shakes out, though doubtfully as an entrenched starter with no alternatives (like we decided to do).
The Redskins would probably see him as an upgrade from whatever homeless guy they pulled out from in front of their gates. The Jags could take a flyer on him over Eli or Flacco if they don't want to go the rookie route.
Guys just get second chances (unless, y'know, that one dude) and so will he, it's the way the NFL operates. Doubt it will be at his scheduled pay level or a long term deal though.