Im sorry tannehill forgive me

L

"phinswolverinesrockets wrote:

My only problem with Tannehill is he refused to run. Now, he's running and unsurprisingly (to me) we're starting to win.

It took 3 years, but we're finally seeing the benefits of drafting a QB with 4.5 speed. Unleash him because that run threat opens up an entire new world of possibilities. Yesterday was beautiful football. It was actually fun to watch an entire game of Phins offensive football. I can't remember the last time I could say that.

Keep the party going. Fins Up.

I think it's a key topic for this topic, mike Sherman didn't not run tannehill, we know this, no matter how hard we shouted from the roof tops, he was stubborn as hell, and the results reflected it, I think it will continue to be a key factor moving forward in terms of our consistency.

"Fin4Ever wrote:

What is the purpose of all the arguing and hate after
a 37-0 beat down of the Chargers and our current 3 game winning streak? I want our team & coaches to continue to keep getting better each and every week and if they do we can and will play great ball against any team. It does not matter who was right or wrong as we are all Dolfans and we should stick together no matter what! Talking down to people is not good for any of us...we have enough hate to deal with from opposing teams fans so let's all stick together and enjoy the ride! Also, I am very happy that Tanny and Marino have such a good working relationship and since their teaming up Tanny has become better at every facet of his game and like many kept saying to give him time in the new system with Lazor and sure enough the kid is balling every week! GO FINS!!!!

The hope is that we can avoid future "Moore should start" type threads when RT has a poor stat game. It's unavoidable (both the poor game and the stupid thread), but maybe a few less posters will fall into the emotional over-reaction.

"Fin D wrote:

No the eye test did not fail. Emotions of the fans overrode the eye test.

I agree with you here, if he goes on to becoming a franchise type Qb it would be the fault of the evaluator for not seeing the potential even during the early process, the fault of the evaluator for not properly Equating the variables into the performance..

"djphinfan wrote:

L
I think it's a key topic for this topic, mike Sherman didn't not run tannehill, we know this, no matter how hard we shouted from the roof tops, he was stubborn as hell, and in hunk the results reflected it, I think it will continue to be a key factor moving forward in terms of our consistency.

I've still never seen any evidence that Sherman prevented him from running. Sherman let him run in college and Sherman called designed runs for him here. Maybe not as much as you or I would have liked, but he did. And I'd still like to see a little more. Sherman may have encouraged him to not bail to quickly because that creates bad habits, but this image fo Tannehill being whipped or beaten for running is nonsense. I think the game has slowed down for Tannehill and he's now more able to evade pressure and take advantage of the improved run blocking. He's also become even better at the read option fakes/exchanges and that has helped too.

"djphinfan wrote:

I agree with you here, if he goes on to becoming a franchise type Qb it would be the fault of the evaluator for not seeing the potential even during the early process, the fault of the evaluator for not properly Equating the variables into the performance..

Its even less clinical than that.

Very few people here are QB evaluators. They are fans. Fans seeing the game refracted through decades long frustration. It colors EVERYTHING. On top of that, we have, as humans, an innate need to make declarations by using false benchmarks (ie, like saying Green Bay will define our season as a must win).

Simply put, there's a bunch of unqualified alpha males who are too emotionally invested to make objective sense of what they are seeing on the field.

"Fineas wrote:

I've still never seen any evidence that Sherman prevented him from running. Sherman let him run in college and Sherman called designed runs for him here. Maybe not as much as you or I would have liked, but he did. And I'd still like to see a little more. Sherman may have encouraged him to not bail to quickly because that creates bad habits, but this image fo Tannehill being whipped or beaten for running is nonsense. I think the game has slowed down for Tannehill and he's now more able to evade pressure and take advantage of the improved run blocking. He's also become even better at the read option fakes/exchanges and that has helped too.

Sherman went as far as to say it....was trying to find the exact quote and will past it when I find it.

"djphinfan wrote:

L
I think it's a key topic for this topic, mike Sherman didn't not run tannehill, we know this, no matter how hard we shouted from the roof tops, he was stubborn as hell, and in hunk the results reflected it, I think it will continue to be a key factor moving forward in terms of our consistency.

You've been another guy to consistently preach about Tanny running to open up the offense. I'm sure you are not shocked either to see the team starting to win convincingly now that they have Tannehill moving. Tannehill's speed is a weapon that maybe 2-3 other teams in the league have at QB. We just needed someone to get in his head and unleash it. That's the main reason why I kept preaching about getting Malzahn to come in here over every other coaching option. He would have Tannehill moving from Day 1. It looks like Lazor has finally gotten the message. It took 3 years, but we're finally starting to see what we've been waiting for. If he keeps using his legs, we're going to be an elite team.

"Fin D wrote:

Its even less clinical than that.

Very few people here are QB evaluators. They are fans. Fans seeing the game refracted through decades long frustration. It colors EVERYTHING. On top of that, we have, as humans, an innate need to make declarations by using false benchmarks (ie, like saying Green Bay will define our season as a must win).

Simply put, there's a bunch of unqualified alpha males who are too emotionally invested to make objective sense for what they are seeing.

Well yeh?

I know just speaking of myself having been around some very good evaluators here for a while now, picked up on things to look for to see a QB is having the game slow down for them. I started to see some of that mostly in the Chicago game, DJ said he saw it in the Oakland game. But ... all the sudden you just see him doing little things that make a HUGE difference.

"KeyFin wrote:

Sure, but when you look at Tannehill's complete career, he's consistently been a bottom 5 quarterback.

Sorry but Tannehill doesn't have a "complete career". He's had 2 years at the START of a career, and your attempt to hold a young, developing QB to the standards of seasoned veterans is just plain silly. Who cares if he was statistically a bottom 5 QB through his first 2 years. If you want your argument to hold water, then you need to demonstrate that his performance was somehow atypical of a first or second year QB.

"KeyFin wrote:

Sure, but when you look at Tannehill's complete career, he's consistently been a bottom 5 quarterback. I agree that the stats often lie and you have to judge on what your eyes see, and the Tannehill proponents have said, "Sure the guy caught the pass, but if it was thrown another yard ahead of him, he wouldn't have had his head taken off in the process." Because like it or not, Tannehill has always been excellent at 3 or 4 throws and avoided dozens of others because of accuracy issues. So saying, "He had a bad game" doesn't cut it when he has six average games, three bad games and then one good one...the goal is always to put your team in a position to win. The good or bad doesn't really matter as much as the W, and for a few years now he has not been the answer.

At the same time, it is impossible not to see the changes he's gone through over the past month...he is literally doing a dozen things that he could never piece together before. From the footwork to going through progressions to planting to throw more accurate passes, the change has been absolutely uncanny. I have no idea if it's just maturity kicking in or feeling comfortable in the pocket...or maybe it's the private lessons from Marino....I have no idea. But the Ryan Tannehill we see on the field today is not the same guy we started this season with. He is clearly evolved into a smart, agile QB who's throwing picture-perfect passes and making all the right reads.

Like I said earlier, this is not the "I told you so" moment that so many Tannehill fans are hoping for. It was one outstanding, league MVP type of afternoon, but it was also only one game after a few pretty good ones. Everyone here hopes that this is the start of a fantastic new trend from Ryan Tannehill, so why try to throw mud and twist things around to say that he's always been a superstar? It's just plain stupid and a tactic to keep the forum divided.

This is where you continue to be wrong on two fronts. Firstly, it is that "I told you so" moment. Secondly, Tannehill supporters weren't running around screaming that Tannehill was the definitive answer destined for the HoF or anything like you're trying to make it seem. We were arguing against you and others who prematurely had your minds made up that he's already a bust or has no future. We argued that it's too soon to ditch him. That's the "I told you so" moment involved, and it's 100% ACCURATE, as Tannehill did indeed prove it was TOO SOON to pull the plug. So just buck up and admit that you were wrong. Buck up and admit that Tannehill's play has been an integral reason for Miami's respectful 5-3 record. Will he ever become an elite QB? Who knows. Only time will tell, however, he's sure as heck shown with certainty that he DOES in fact deserve more time than you and others with a similarly impatient mindset were willing to give him.

"KeyFin wrote:

Umm, every season?

LMAO. 2014 is a season, and Tannehill sure as heck isn't a bottom 5 QB this year on any front. Stop trolling.
I'm minimally inclined when it comes to auto mechanics. Perhaps I should join a car forum and argue with everyone about how an engine should be built. That'd be me imitating you.

"vt_dolfan wrote:

And people wonder why those who have been supporting Tannehill might gloat some....when people make completely innacurate statements like...

"hes been a bottom 5 QB his entire career"

He was 27th (bottom 5), 24th (bottom 9) and 17th this season by ESPN's passer rating. Considering that we were a pass first offense for his first two seasons, that's the stat that ultimately counts. He's a little better in total QBR (still 17th this season) but still, you're not talking about a guy setting the league on fire by any means.

Since we've had this conversation for three years now though and he's looked like a solid quarterback for half of this season, it's no wonder why the pessimists are tired of this constant fight. Because no matter how you spin it, he's choked down the stretch every season so far and proven nothing. So while the pessimists here are trying to give you the benefit of the doubt after a great week, it just doesn't equal the 3 years of dominance that you're trying to spin. It's ridiculous.

I would like to go on record to say that GARDENHEAD never wanted to bench Tannehill. Play out the season with him and see if he can make it work.

Philbin on the other hand....

"rafael wrote:

The hope is that we can avoid future "Moore should start" type threads when RT has a poor stat game. It's unavoidable (both the poor game and the stupid thread), but maybe a few less posters will fall into the emotional over-reaction.

A poor stat game? Let's count real quick. It's December 2013 and we're in the playoff hunt. Tannehill has a great game against New England and we're in the position of "win one of two and you're in."

Week 16- Horrible game.
Week 17 Even more horrible game.
Week 1- Great run game, below average QB game.
Week 2- Horrible game.
Week 3- Horrible game. The "start Moore" chants begin.
Week 4- Very good game. The chants die down.

So people are wrong for complaining about their quarterback after he plays poorly in 5 straight games? If you look around the league, very few QB's stay on the field after completely self-destructing in the playoff stretch and then opening the next season with 3 weak games. Yet if you look at the comments just on this page, he's consistently been one of the best around for years now. Why you guys think you're entitled to "special math" when things don't add up is truly mind-boggling...especially since several of the folks attacking me here started their own "bench tannehill" threads less than a month ago.

"KeyFin wrote:

A poor stat game? Let's count real quick. It's December 2013 and we're in the playoff hunt. Tannehill has a great game against New England and we're in the position of "win one of two and you're in."

Week 16- Horrible game.
Week 17 Even more horrible game.
Week 1- Great run game, below average QB game.
Week 2- Horrible game.
Week 3- Horrible game. The "start Moore" chants begin.
Week 4- Very good game. The chants die down.

No, it's November 2014 and we're in the playoff hunt, and we're in the playoff hunt much in part to Tannehill's play.
Peyton Manning threw 28 INTs his first year. That too has nothing to do with the current price of eggs in China.

So people are wrong for complaining about their quarterback after he plays poorly in 5 straight games? If you look around the league, very few QB's stay on the field after completely self-destructing in the playoff stretch and then opening the next season with 3 weak games. Yet if you look at the comments just on this page, he's consistently been one of the best around for years now. Why you guys think you're entitled to "special math" when things don't add up is truly mind-boggling...especially since several of the folks attacking me here started their own "bench tannehill" threads less than a month ago.

This is so ridiculously false it's not funny. Firstly, Tannehill didn't completely self destruct. You're delusional to think 4 TDs to 2 INTs and not a single QB rating below 70 during his first 3 games is indicative of self-destruction. DE-LUSIONAL. Secondly, You clearly have NOT looked around the league to see what everyone else does with their young QBs; otherwise you wouldn't be making such a patently false and silly statement to begin with.

I've always been and continue to be a Tannehill believer / homer.

That said - let me play devil's advocate.

Some of you seem to forget he was playing at a level equal to this last season. Maybe not quite as fine a performance as the Chargers game, but right up there. Remember the 2nd Patriots game last year?

I say this not to piss on anyone's parade. Or make them not have faith in our young, playing like a superstar QB. I say this to remind everyone he still has to string a complete season together. And hopefully end this season on a high note, and not the way he ended last season against the Bills and Jets.

This board and Dolphin fans in general have been judging him strictly based on his last game, for better and worse. Calling for Matt Moore when he struggles and getting out the "anointing oil" when he has a game like this Sunday. Let's just judge the kid on his whole body of work which is pretty good and getting better.

"MonstBlitz wrote:

I've always been and continue to be a Tannehill believer / homer.

That said - let me play devil's advocate.

Some of you seem to forget he was playing at a level equal to this last season. Maybe not quite as fine a performance as the Chargers game, but right up there. Remember the 2nd Patriots game last year?

I say this not to piss on anyone's parade. Or make them not have faith in our young, playing like a superstar QB. I say this to remind everyone he still has to string a complete season together. And hopefully end this season on a high note, and not the way he ended last season against the Bills and Jets.

to do that he needs an offensive line. he has one this year that is decent. when the offensive line plays poorly so does he. coincidence?

"adamprez2003 wrote:

to do that he needs an offensive line. he has one this year that is decent. when the offensive line plays poorly so does he. coincidence?

He actually played pretty damn good last year behind a terrible offensive line. Again, fans are forgetting he was good last year for a good chunk of the season. Not just these past few games.

"KeyFin wrote:

A poor stat game? Let's count real quick. It's December 2013 and we're in the playoff hunt. Tannehill has a great game against New England and we're in the position of "win one of two and you're in."

Week 16- Horrible game.
Week 17 Even more horrible game.
Week 1- Great run game, below average QB game.
Week 2- Horrible game.
Week 3- Horrible game. The "start Moore" chants begin.
Week 4- Very good game. The chants die down.

So people are wrong for complaining about their quarterback after he plays poorly in 5 straight games? If you look around the league, very few QB's stay on the field after completely self-destructing in the playoff stretch and then opening the next season with 3 weak games. Yet if you look at the comments just on this page, he's consistently been one of the best around for years now. Why you guys think you're entitled to "special math" when things don't add up is truly mind-boggling...especially since several of the folks attacking me here started their own "bench tannehill" threads less than a month ago.

anyone that blamed tannehill after watching our offensive line get thrown around like rag dolls against the bills and chiefs this year shouldnt be commenting on qb play whatsoever. they clearly dont understand the game

"MonstBlitz wrote:

He actually played pretty damn good at times last year behind a terrible offensive line. Again, fans are forgetting he was good at times last year. Not just these past few games.

oh no i agree. he has progressed every year and its now year three...the payoff year and tannahill has paid off. he may look like crap next game but if he does it will almost surely be because the oline cant handle detroits defensive line. anytime the guy gets a game where his pocket is stable, he is just lighting it up

"KeyFin wrote:

He was 27th (bottom 5), 24th (bottom 9) and 17th this season by ESPN's passer rating. Considering that we were a pass first offense for his first two seasons, that's the stat that ultimately counts. He's a little better in total QBR (still 17th this season) but still, you're not talking about a guy setting the league on fire by any means.

Since we've had this conversation for three years now though and he's looked like a solid quarterback for half of this season, it's no wonder why the pessimists are tired of this constant fight. Because no matter how you spin it, he's choked down the stretch every season so far and proven nothing. So while the pessimists here are trying to give you the benefit of the doubt after a great week, it just doesn't equal the 3 years of dominance that you're trying to spin. It's ridiculous.

Key..

I literally have no idea what it is you just said.

he has a 100 plus rating now for last 5 games.. But hey.. Thanks for giving him props on this ONE

Yep, this is what makes these discussions so volatile. One side looks at bad team games, and blames all the issues on Tannehill, and then the other people defend Tannehill, and point out it's a team game, and they get accused of being homers. The Dolphins lost those games last season because the team, AS A WHOLE, sucked ass.

"adamprez2003 wrote:

oh no i agree. he has progressed every year and its now year three...the payoff year and tannahill has paid off. he may look like crap next game but if he does it will almost surely be because the oline cant handle detroits defensive line. anytime the guy gets a game where his pocket is stable, he is just lighting it up

I think we agree for the most part, I'm just not so willing to write him off if the offensive line struggles. I saw several games last season where he got the stuffing sacked out of him and still led 4th quarter winning drives.

"resnor wrote:

Yep, this is what makes these discussions so volatile. One side looks at bad team games, and blames all the issues on Tannehill, and then the other people defend Tannehill, and point out it's a team game, and they get accused of being homers. The Dolphins lost those games last season because the team, AS A WHOLE, sucked ass.

The discussions are volatile because people discuss other posters.

They simply cannot overload RT. He can play well and run the offense up to 35 attempts. He gets into trouble when they have him passing for more and the team loses.
We have a strong oline and when they run balanced gameplan, allow the Oline to get physical from the start, involve all 11, they pretty much dominate.
If Lazor can keep that up, we'll be fine. Otherwise it will be the Bills and Chiefs result.