How much more time do we give Tannehill to prove he's got "it"?

What'll be interesting here in the near future is to look at how Johnny Manziel plays, and then figure whether the Dolphins should've drafted him this year. They missed Aaron Rodgers in favor of Ronnie Brown, and hopefully they didn't miss a similarly good QB in favor of an offensive lineman.

"TooGoodForDez wrote:

He needs to play at high pace consistently, in rhythm. He is up and down. We know he can do it, we just don't know whether he can do it consistently. Having Albert for full season would have helped. Better balance would have helped this year to make the determination. Those things did not happen. Give him another year.

I think we can win games with Ryan Tannehill.

He might just be that type of QB who will be just short of being considered elite, but will be always in the top 8-12 in the league. I think we should defintely give him more time to develop, and build a team around him to see exactly where his ceiling is. Unless he has a huge season next year, he will not be that expensive to sign long term compared with other QB's.
The plan from then on would be to continue to build around Ryan, and if we have the opportunity to pick up a good QB in future drafts, we do it and hope to have a Philip Rivers/Drew Brees situation. What we should NOT do is let Ryan go and put all of our chips into a guy coming out in the draft who we don't even know if he can be better.

To me he's shown enough to keep him around..unless we can find a better Qb, which isn't going to happen anytime soon. He's good enough to win games and gives us a chance so getting rid of him doesn't make much sense. He's a good Qb. Is he great? No, he may never be, but he is a good Qb and has shown that he can win against good teams when we give him a chance to throw and our defense plays well. Should we draft a backup that can challenge him? I think so. But we shouldn't dump Tannehill, he's shown that he can play in the NFL and with the right team I do think he can win a Superbowl down the road. He's not going to carry us with his arm but I do think we can put the right team around him and we can have a good run that leads to a championship.

"Brasfin wrote:

I think we can win games with Ryan Tannehill.

We don't know that. If we had Albert for full year and better run balance this year, we would be able to tell whether he can be a playmaker when he has consistent rhythm. We know he can play in rhythm, we don't know if he is a playmaker, and his playmaking comes from having consistent good rhythm in this offense. We are just unable to tell that extra part this year.

"vt_dolfan wrote:

I'm not really sure hows he's been inconsistent for awhile now. He's still developing, but he's shown enough to sign him to a long term contact IMO. Tannehill needs to become a bit more of a risk taker, take shots down the field. That kind of stuff can be coached. Physical skills can't be.

I definitely think we should look at a QB maybe in 3 or 4. even if you were positive about 17..you need to have a good QB being developed. We dont really, so need to get that.

I also believe Tanny has shown he is a qb you build around, the deep ball remains a concern and them not calling them at all is a big issue. I am hopeful that is is a combo of Tannehill having to learn a new offense and an inconsistent line with injuries that they pulled back on that part of the O and plan for that development in the spring when they have fixed the Guards

BUT having said that, he was completely inexperienced comoing out, it isnt unreasonable to think that the book may take a little longer to write. Taking a qb at #1 would send the wrong signal IMO when it isnt necessary to send that signal. JMO

Signing Tannehill to a long term contract is doing exactly what Mike Brown, the owner of the Bengals, did last offseason - going full ******. And atleast Dalton has been to a playoff game, yet he still doesnt deserve half that money, Tannehill even less deserves that kinda contract and has done NOTHING to warrant that.

Exercise the fullest extent of his options, whatever they are, and make better use of that money by signing a #1 receiver, tight end and a guard or two. If Tannehill starts succeeeding afterwards, give him an Alex Smith kinda deal.

"TooGoodForDez wrote:

We don't know that. If we had Albert for full year and better run balance this year, we would be able to tell whether he can be a playmaker when he has consistent rhythm. We know he can play in rhythm, we don't know if he is a playmaker, and his playmaking comes from having consistent good rhythm in this offense. We are just unable to tell that extra part this year.

With the limited body for case study of "rhythm" he has had, T-Hill demonstrated play making ability.

We won't know much about any of our guys until we get a real head football coach in here. Tanny has shown he can win a d perform in this league. Our coach has show. He can not get the team up to play in clutch situations. Its been the defense as much (if at all) as its been Tanny. He has Impoved and its silly to keep citing the short passes - use your eyes.

I'm not saying he is or is not the answer - but its time to get a better HC with a fresh pair of eyes to see what they can do to elevate Tanny and then make a decision.

"bigbry wrote:

With the limited body for case study of "rhythm" he has had, T-Hill demonstrated play making ability.

No he has not. There are several problems. At times he does not recognize wide open routes. At times, he throws to wide open routes but the throws are poor, especially when throwing long. Considering he is charged as a QB, with recognizing mismatches, and deciding when to run or pass, he has not done a good job of that consistently, especially in the red zone and down the stretch in games.

"bigbry wrote:

With the limited body for case study of "rhythm" he has had, T-Hill demonstrated play making ability.

And he needs to begin making more plays when his rhythm is disturbed, as well.

Honestly what better options are out there? At least Tannehill has us "in the hunt" for the playoffs for 2 straight seasons. Henne & Moore didn't even come close. One more year I guess.

"scotty_irnbru wrote:

This completely. The constant shuffling isn't building this team. During the off season the debate was who is better? Foles or tannehill. Nobody even thought of debating if kapaernik or rg3 were in that discussion. And looking at it now I'd keep tannehill over all of them. Fins Hipster - you have this aversion to game managers and you see tannehill as one. I looked back at the list of sb champs since 2000. They all had good qbs. In fact you could argue that brady Manning and Rodgers deserve goat consideration. In addition to that though they also had superb talent elsewhere. That's what we lack. The team is talent deficient in a number of areas. You couldn't honestly look at our backs or TE group, our OL or DL or lbs or dbs and say these guys areare a on the best in the league. You could maybe argue the DL but they appear to be crapping the bed the past few weeks. The attempt to put all our success or failure on tannehill ignores everything about this team sport. 22 players plus your special teams. We don't live or die by tannehill. The obvious issue as stated loads of times is who is the pick? Who is the qb at our pick who is gonna transform us into perennial sb champs? The fact that we play against 31 other teams all aiming for the same thing makes it even harder. Build around tannehill. Secure the line and build a run game. When we run we move the ball. It builds in the passing game. Unfortunately we either can't or ar choosing not to. Why Miller doesn't get 25 carries every game is a mystery. He's a good runner. Give him the line and he'll help tannehill. Get a go up and grab it WR to help tannehill. We all saw wallace quit last weekend, we can moan about the deep ball but it's been shown by many people that he throws easily with an acceptable range to every player except wallace. My conclusion, wallace is the issue.

While I won't disagree that Wallace has shown us the catch radius of a toddler lately, I can't agree that he is the entire problem either.

IMO, he is not a traditional #1 wr. At best he is a #2 bubble screen and 9 route guy. Let's go and get a true #1 opposite Wallace. We like to think he is a #1 because that is what his contract dictates (thanks Jeff), but in reality he is not an all route threat.

"Vertical Limit wrote:

Signing Tannehill to a long term contract is doing exactly what Mike Brown, the owner of the Bengals, did last offseason - going full ******. .

Actually, that deal is the exact idea they need to apply to Tannehill, except for less money. Dalton got 6 years and 96 million. Sounds ridiculous, but if you actually look at the details they have set themselves up great. It was only 17 million guaranteed, and almost all of that is being paid off in the first 2 years. After 2015, the dead money is well below the cap hit making him an easy cut if he doesn't live up to the contract. His cap hit doesn't even reach 15mil until 2017 and by that time they can save money cutting him. They were very wise to not give him 15 mil guaranteed for that option when you can get much greater value out of an extension. The 49s did something similar with Kap I believe.

"PhinsMiami wrote:

Honestly what better options are out there? At least Tannehill has us "in the hunt" for the playoffs for 2 straight seasons. Henne & Moore didn't even come close. One more year I guess.

I'm not saying I want Matt Moore to start, but in his last stint as a starter, Matt Moore wasn't significantly worse, overall, than Tannehill. His floor was worse in that he threw interceptions more often and helped the team lose more than Tannehill, but he balanced that more than Tannehill does with explosive plays that help teams win. In other words, he was less of a game manager, but more of a playmaker, and overall I'd say his impact on the team was about the equivalent of Tannehill's. I don't think we should have the perception that Tannehill's current level of play is all that much better than what Moore is capable of. Tannehill may (or may not) have a higher ceiling, or upside, but where he's playing now isn't a whole lot, if at all, better than Moore's most recent body of work as a starter.

"The G Man wrote:

But, what he really needs is a HC that knows what he is doing, and knows how to develop young QB's. So, I think the better question is how much more time do we give Philbin to prove he's got "it"?

Philbin has put Tannehill in the position to prove he has "it" several times just this season alone. Green Bay game if you have "it" you should be able to keep making plays in the clutch. Same goes for the Detroit game, just make one ****ing 5 yard pass or scramble. Denver game now its your turn to engineer the comeback drive. Even in the Jets game a TD would have gone a lot further in increasing our chances to win.

You want to show you have "it" Mr. Tannehill, go out and beat Tom Brady today.

"TooGoodForDez wrote:

No he has not. There are several problems. At times he does not recognize wide open routes. At times, he throws to wide open routes but the throws are poor, especially when throwing long. Considering he is charged as a QB, with recognizing mismatches, and deciding when to run or pass, he has not done a good job of that consistently, especially in the red zone and down the stretch in games.

You have brought another case study into this discussion.

"bigbry wrote:

You have brought another case study into this discussion.

For the case study, refer to Club.

"TooGoodForDez wrote:

For the case study, refer to Club.

Canadian Club....understood!

When I said wallace was the issue I meant more with regard the deep ball than with our overall performance. I agree that wallace would be better suited with a real solid no1 beside him. Hopefully that's landry next year. The biggest issue with the team appears to be coaching. I'm not convinced that Philbin is anything other than just a guy.

"roy_miami wrote:

Philbin has put Tannehill in the position to prove he has "it" several times just this season alone. Green Bay game if you have "it" you should be able to keep making plays in the clutch. Same goes for the Detroit game, just make one ****ing 5 yard pass or scramble. Denver game now its your turn to engineer the comeback drive. Even in the Jets game a TD would have gone a lot further in increasing our chances to win.You want to show you have "it" Mr. Tannehill, go out and beat Tom Brady today.

And there you're talking about games against the QBs with the top three WPAs in the league, whereas Tannehill is 20th in the league, only one spot higher than he was as a rookie.

"scotty_irnbru wrote:

When I said wallace was the issue I meant more with regard the deep ball than with our overall performance. I agree that wallace would be better suited with a real solid no1 beside him. Hopefully that's landry next year. The biggest issue with the team appears to be coaching. I'm not convinced that Philbin is anything other than just a guy.

And that may be true, but using the same logic, I'm not sure how anyone can be convinced, either, that Tannehill would be any better than he is with a different coach. In other words, it's just as likely from our vantage point that Tannehill is "just a guy," and Philbin is being held back by him. Who knows.

Sign him to about an 11-12M contract, use the extra resources to shore up depth and pick up an OG. Ryan will likely never excel a team like a Rodgers or Manning...but those QBs are very difficult to find. So do our best to build a great team around him and let him manage it.

"Limbo wrote:

To try cutting through the stream of 'supporting cast' excuses...I have reservations about him because of issues that he had in college that have yet to be addressed.

IMO, during the draft process there were a few big questions. Namely:
1) Is he a natural leader on/off the field?
2) Why is his YPA so low? (He finished 65th and 67th in the country in this key stat at around 7yds/a.)
3) Why did that 2011 team underachieve by losing that many big games? As a preseason top-10 team, they went 1-5 against ranked opponents, and themselves ended up finishing unranked.

These questions are still legitimate concerns even into his third year in the NFL.

Here's what Mayock said about him, which still applies today:

That said...I want to see him next year under a new HC. You cannot afford to let Philbin stick around in such a key year for the QB decision.

The only reason I care about college is I give him an extra year on the scale because of lack of experience.

None of the threads or comments about Tannehill not being special matter. The important questions is which of the following two choices give the best opportunity to win a conference championship:

1. A team built around Tannehill
2. 5 to 8 years from now with a draft pick 2016 to 2018

I just do not see the Dolphins losing enough games to get a top 3 pick in the draft without a fire sale, and I believe a fire sale would be foolish. I strongly believe sticking with Tannehill is the best available path.

"scotty_irnbru wrote:

This completely. The constant shuffling isn't building this team. During the off season the debate was who is better? Foles or tannehill. Nobody even thought of debating if kapaernik or rg3 were in that discussion. And looking at it now I'd keep tannehill over all of them. Fins Hipster - you have this aversion to game managers and you see tannehill as one. I looked back at the list of sb champs since 2000. They all had good qbs. In fact you could argue that brady Manning and Rodgers deserve goat consideration. In addition to that though they also had superb talent elsewhere. That's what we lack. The team is talent deficient in a number of areas. You couldn't honestly look at our backs or TE group, our OL or DL or lbs or dbs and say these guys areare a on the best in the league. You could maybe argue the DL but they appear to be crapping the bed the past few weeks. The attempt to put all our success or failure on tannehill ignores everything about this team sport. 22 players plus your special teams. We don't live or die by tannehill. The obvious issue as stated loads of times is who is the pick? Who is the qb at our pick who is gonna transform us into perennial sb champs? The fact that we play against 31 other teams all aiming for the same thing makes it even harder. Build around tannehill. Secure the line and build a run game. When we run we move the ball. It builds in the passing game. Unfortunately we either can't or ar choosing not to. Why Miller doesn't get 25 carries every game is a mystery. He's a good runner. Give him the line and he'll help tannehill. Get a go up and grab it WR to help tannehill. We all saw wallace quit last weekend, we can moan about the deep ball but it's been shown by many people that he throws easily with an acceptable range to every player except wallace. My conclusion, wallace is the issue.

The constant shuffling of players? I thought we were left with sub standard players by Ireland? We have had our Qb for several years and his name is Ryan Tannehill. What we still have are glaring holes in our offensive line and lack of NFL caliper depth at every position. We don't run the ball because our blocking sucks. We throw short quick high percentage passes because it's all we are able to do to maintain a block for 2 or 3 seconds before someone is in THills face. We don't throw any type of deep ball because this line is incapable of holding there blocks long enough to let the play develop.

This team is no further along then 3 years ago when Philbin took over. The problem is not the players its the leadership building the "team" or should I say lack of it