You're right. Like I said, until you rule out the obvious alternative explanation for your data, it's just a merry-go-round where we continually debate something, get no closer to the truth, and accomplish nothing.
It obviously could, but it doesn't absolve the veteran Bess & Hartline's role in it, whom, unlike Tannehill, have less room for improving that aspect of their game considering they're pretty well seasoned and at their ceiling by now (in years 4 & 5).
Well, check Fineas's thread. Right now Bess and Hartline are doing some important things with a rookie QB what other starting tandems are doing only with the league's better veterans. I think you have to adjust your perspective to view Tannehill as the one who has to improve and eventually prove himself, rather than it being the two guys who are performing with him right now like other starting receiving tandems are performing with much better QBs. You seem to have it in your mind that Tannehill is the "proven" guy here who is being held back by his supporting cast, whereas the opposite is true IMO. Right now the team as a whole is playing no worse than the average team with a rookie QB who has performed like Tannehill, and his starting receivers are doing things with him that other starting receivers are doing only with the league's better veteran QBs, despite Tannehill's 73 QB rating.
Well, for one, if we rank 12th in redzone efficiency despite little contribution from Hartline & Bess (including 1 TD between them), then why would you presume Tannehill is the issue once we reach the 40? I also mentioned Bess's inability in the vertical game paired with Hartline's inability in the quick pass game, which has little to do with Tannehill and mostly all to do with their genetics. By default we have Bess starting outside rather than mostly in the slot, and there's no some special algorithm showing how wrong that is. On the outside, Bess has caught 44 of 80 passes his way according to SI.COM. Inside he's caught 12 of 15. It doesn't help a QB, especially a rookie one, when a receiver has to play out of position (which essentially weakens 2 positions b/c our best slot receiver isn't able to play in the slot as often as desired). And on the opposite side of the field you can't statistically show how Hartline's lack of playmaking ability affects the offense's success and thus the QB's passer rating. There's no way to show what our team's & QB's stats would look like if we could throw 20+ more quick passes to Hartline per season if he actually possessed the ability to contribute in that way. There's no statistical way to show how the offense is being held back simply b/c our receivers can't force a defense out of cover 2 which in turn hinders Bush's and our TE's big play ability in the passing game underneath which in turn hinders Tannehill's ability improve his QBR. There's no statistical way to show how easier completions aren't being opened up around the field b/c neither Hartline nor Bess draw extra coverage like legitimate, playmaking receivers do. There's no statistical way to show how Hartline & Bess serving as your primary receivers do little to create mismatches.
Of course Tannehill has to improve; he's a rookie. And no I don't have to adjust my perspective regarding his 2 main receivers. If you think we're immune to upgrading Bess & Hartline with how many combined holes they have in their game as starters then I'm done debating this with you. It's absurd to believe a no-scoring, no-playmaking pair of receivers who offer an inadequate amount of combined downfield ability are more than good enough as a starting pair. All this statistical analysis in attempt to rationalize it is equally useless. There's only so long you personally can continue scapegoating Tannehill for Bess & Hartline's lackluster ability until you have to face the reality that they're much better served in a complementary role and are a liability as a starting tandem. As Tannehill continues developing, your window for excuses will gradually become smaller to non existent.
Well, shou has an advantage. How will we prove Tanny is developing... His QBR may not be able to rise significantly if he is limited by the same receiving options. And if he cannot raise his stats because of his receivers, then his QBR will be used as proof that he himself is the one who is not improving and not good enough. I don't know whether it's Tanny holding them back, them holding Tanny back or both or neither. And that's the point. You can't separate causality with WRs and QBs in this case. One of the reasons QB is hard to assess and why Harbaugh's self-certainty in switching to Kaepernick is admirable.
Good point I guess it'll become evident about whom the professionals (Philbin & Co) believe are holding back whom by what we do in FA and the draft. If we emphasize upgrading WR then the offensive pro, Philbin, will essentially confirm the WR duo is inadequate as a starting pair in his eyes, thus by default the virtual confirmation of them holding Tannehill back. On the other hand, if they feel Tannehill is the one holding the stellar Hartline & Bess back then Philbin will endorse the signing or high draft pick of a QB to supplant Tannehill. And if Hartline is signed in FA for anything less than $5.0 million'ish, it'll be an indication that the entire NFL sees him as not an impact player, with the lower the salary the greater the role of complimentary player than starter.
Actually we do know. Tannehill's QB rating is no better that that of the average rookie, his team as a whole is doing no worse than the average team that has had a rookie QB who performed like Tannehill, and his wide receivers are doing things with him that are done only by receivers with veteran QBs who are playing much better than Tannehill (see Fineas's thread for that). The case is now closed on that particular issue IMO. Contrary to popular belief, the wide receivers are bolstering Tannehill's performance. Tannehill is a rookie QB. There isn't much explaining to do when the average rookie QB's rating is 73, Tannehill's rating is 73, and the average QB rating in the league among veteran QBs is over 85. Now, answer yourself this: if fans in general had to pick one or the other, would there be more of an interest in having Tannehill succeed long-term, or in having the receivers succeed long-term while Tannehill busts? I suspect that bias among fans in general is why the ready-made "rookie QB" explanation is being thrown out the window here, without ruling it out objectively. Phinsational's posts on this are worthless IMO until he's willing to put in the work to see if what he's finding that Bess and Hartline are doing inside the 40 (or inside the 20, or whatever) is something uncommon to rookie QBs. You have to rule out the "rookie QB" explanation for just about everything you're seeing in an offense before you can believe any other explanation with any certainty IMO.
Rookie QBs on average perform so much more poorly than veteran QBs that I presume the rookie QB is the issue until it's proven otherwise. I suspect rookie QBs' performance in condensed areas of the field drops off further from their overall performance significantly more than does the performance of veteran QBs. Now, if you don't believe that, then do the research and present it, and I can promise you that, unlike some other people, my mind is open enough to be changed in response to objective data. This is easy enough to research and present. Simply show that Tannehill's passing inside the 40 or the 20 or whatever drops off significantly more than that of the average rookie QB.
badly worded question... probably as bad as the original idea behind it we have our franchise QB, Head Coach & GM we are within two seasons of a SuperBowl how about we enjoy this Rookie-Season without all the negativity
Right, no one here had a fantasy that Ryan Tannehill would come in here and play much better this year than a typical rookie QB.
If I'm not mistaken, Tannehill has thrown for more yards in one game, more yards in one season and has more wins than Marino in his rookie season. And we still have more games to go! I might be wrong about 1 out of 3 of those, but I know I'm right about 2 out of 3 of those. /end thread
This doesn't make any sense. Tannehill is exceeding my expectations and playing much better than I thought he would if he would start this season.
Since you clicked on this one twice within a half-hour, here's another you may want to visit: http://www.thephins.com/forums/showthread.php?73474-What-Would-the-Dolphins-Record-Be
here is some facts you might want to visit: Marino's rookie stats: comp. pct. 58.4 yards 2210 Tannehill's rookie stats: comp. pct. 59 yards 2373 Of course Marino puts Tannehill to shame on TD's and INT's. But just wait til Tannehill has the talent of the supporting cast that Marino had. And by the way, the assumptions you make about what everyone thinks in your polls, are way off.
