this just makes me angry at wallace.

 

Wallace is so disappointing.

 

I knew Wallace was going to be a disappointment when we signed him, I tend to browse other teams forums at times and I could see the frustration in Steelers fans when talking about how useless Wallace is, how he takes plays off, doesn't put effort, doesn't give a damn. They were ready to trade him away, they didn't want to re-sign him to an extension. There was a fraction, like 20% that still wanted to keep him cause of his speed but that was it. When I saw 60 million I was like wow, don't see what he has done so far in his career to warrant that amount of money. Even more money than Vincent Jackson, and Vincent Jackson is much better than Wallace at EVERYTHING. Vincent has had a much more productive season so far and he's had Freeman and Glennon throwing the ball to him and has double the yardage as Wallace and 4 times the touchdowns.

 

Based on that, I think Tannehill throws over the middle quite a bit, I don't understand that issue people have?

 

I thought I seen a stat that he throws to the middle like 50-55% of the time. I don't get that criticism either.

 

What criticism? I wasn't aware of any criticism about that.

 

Also, I stand by what I said in my position grades when I said that until Tannehill threw that pick while trying to hit Mike Wallace deep, he was pretty near to flawless.

There were some missed connections prior to that for sure, but I thought some of those back-shoulder misses had as much to do with the receivers as it did Tannehill. There was also the sack-fumble. The sack I don't put on him. The fumble, I do put on him. That was kind of what I was getting at when I said "near" flawless and not just plain flawless.

 

Sometimes I talk about it. He had a few dumpoffs but I only saw two over the middle beyond 10 yards

 

He has 3 middle throws (out of 41 attempts) that go beyond like 5 or 6 yards in this Patriots vid. The play that ended Gibson's season at 1:33, a nice completion to Rishard at 3:36, and a nifty combo/pick play that got Hartline open on a short post (5:48).

I don't know how many times QBs usually throw mid-deeper middle. Just saying there were 3 that I would consider 'not underneath'.

 

Coming out of college it seemed to me that he preferred throwing to the sidelines more than the middle of the field. I looked for that his first year and to be honest, that's what I saw in the first four or five games, but by the end of his first season I wasn't seeing it anymore.

This season he seems to attack all areas of the field.

Also, it depends on where you most reliable receivers are, and if the OC is designing plays that work better in the middle, or sidelines.

 

Someone quoted me in the Ryan tannehill thread saying that


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

 

I'm sorry, but saying he looked flawless, or even great at any point is off-base IMO. He's leaving a lot on the field IMO.

He makes good decisions and he's accurate, but he just doesn't always see whats happening on the field, or he doesn't trust what he's doing.

Good example at 1:14. Thats pretty much a play where Tannehill had a perfect opportunity. I'm not sure if he just isn't reading the coverages, or he's hesitant or doesn't trust it. But definitely a lot of plays left on the field and missed opportunities.

 

The play was 3rd & 7. He opted to move the sticks instead of throwing the football deep to Wallace, who had a deep safety rotating toward him at the snap. The broadcast view of the play may be limited, but you should be able to count only 10 defenders visible, and guess what that 11th defender might be doing if he's so deep that the camera isn't able to capture him.

I don't have a problem with that decision.

 

I'm coming for your throat CK as soon as I can sit down and watch this.

 

That was me. I don't consider dumping it short of the 1st marker for 5-7 yards to be working the middle. 90+ % of the time the play is to the outside and never to the deep middle.

I'll look for stats on it...

 

This declaration before you've even watched the film pretty much tells me a lot of what I need to know about what you're actually going to write when you do get a chance to sit down and watch it.

Talk about forming a conclusion and then fishing for details to support it. You're putting the cart before the horse.

 

I was joking.

 

Right, but the concept dictates that one of the WRs running a vertical route on that side is going to get no help.

The decision in a vacuum isn't problematic. On the spectrum of good to bad, it wasn't bad. But in the context of the totality, its problematic because taking the safest route has become predictable.

 

Also with respect to Tannehill's use of the intermediate middle zone...PFF says 13.1% of his aimed passes have gone into that center square. As a comparison, 12.8% of Tom Brady's passes go into the same area.

 

Sorry. My sarcasm meter has never been particularly good on the internet.

 

Why would you say that?

 

I was going to go the rafi route and say I was coming for your face and your butt but I was afraid you wouldn't get the reference.

 

Honestly my criticism along the lines of what Stringer was talking about has more to do with 1st down, not 3rd down. I think Stringer just picked a bad play to highlight.

I've had a problem all along with Miami's passing work on 1st down. I've written about it before. But a big part of it is the play design. You look at the details of the play, the routes and route combinations being run, the depth of the drop and the blocking, those are plays that are designed to be quick reads and quick hits. They're designed to get the football to players underneath, keep the offense on schedule, and see if the receivers can make a play with the football in their hands.

They're not. Our receivers suck at RAC.

 

THAT I would've gotten, lol.

 

Miami's wide receivers are 5th-worst in the NFL at getting yards after the catch. I'm actually slightly surprised it's not worse than that.

That figure should get better now that Rishard Matthews is subbing in for Brandon Gibson, IMO.

 

The camera is moving fast which makes it difficult to see but there's a Patriots player that is so close to that wide receiver that the wide receiver is literally blocking 90% of his body from view by the camera. Not joking. The guy's in his hip pocket. Good decision to throw that football away.

Is there anything else people want to nitpick? ;)

 

Because theres only one safety on top of them. He can't stay on top of both.

 

Wallace actually did jump for the ball this time... he just mistimed it and didn't attack the ball. He jumped in the same direction as he was running and his momentum carried him out if the play. The defender though made heck of a play. The ball also seemed to hang or float in the air just enough to allow this. Dunno if the wind was a slight factor or not.

You can clearly see that Wallace made some effort though. He just didn't attack it.

 

He can if only one of them is running a vertical. Which was exactly the case on this play.

 

Gibson ran a post and go and Wallace ran a go. They were both going vertical.

 

Blame it on a really, really freaky phenomenon. Seriously I've been space-barring through that play like 7 times now and the guy is shadowing him so closely it's like a scene in a cartoon where a guy is pretending to be another guy's mirror reflection. I'm waiting for the Patriots defender to reach out and honk the receiver's nose then run away.

 

Look again.

 

??? Still looks the same. Gibson takes his step to show a post, but keeps going vertical.

 

Gibson sure is in a funny spot at the end of the play considering he's supposed to be running a vertical route.

 

Hurray, half-assing it. I don't want $60 million dollars worth of half-assing it.

3 catches on 10 targets.

 

He's not running vertical at the end of the play. He's running vertical after he shows the post, which is why the safety stayed on top of him and not on top of Wallace. You can see the safety at the end of the play too.