Just how important is "clutch", really?

Tim Tebow is 8-2 in 7 points or less games he started, including the playoff starts. One thing I noticed when looking at his stats from pro-football-reference is if you play any snaps at all they include it in the win/loss column, and Tebow had many games where he went in as a wildcat QB. Probably won't matter with the majority of QBs but something to keep in mind

"djphinfan wrote:

I don't understand how you evaluate this situation, I understand matching variables with skillset and projecting production level, but you seem to not be able to distinguish individual skillsets and how they would produce if all parts were equal..

I know what your saying, basically its very difficult to get a read on tannehill because of the poor surrounding variables, but I know I can watch two separate skillsets and discern the differences just based on them, nothing else..

I think after seeing how things have played out since ryan entered the league and what cards he's been dealt he's done a pretty good job, but ultimately the weakness of our team exploited his biggest weakness..we've got to get better at both..Luck has showed me tangible consistent evidence that he doesnt have this weakness..he may throw a bit more ints dealing with it, but he's not gonna be the most sacked qb in the league even if his oline is as poor as ours..

Ryan has done pretty good, and I think he's gonna take a step up in his level of play, myself I will be looking for key attributes from him that don't involve a higher passer rating.

Indy's oline has given up the most pressure the past 4 years (hurries, sacks, hits). Yet Luck's sack numbers are pretty damn good. Indy has given up the most QB hits (225) the past 4 years. The next highest is AZ, with 170.

I would need more info (time to sack, is it because Luck is holding the ball too long, etc.) but it doesn't sound as if Indy's oline has been significantly better than ours. Nor has their run game. Maybe he's had had better coaching (and I know how you feel about Pagano there DJ). Quality of opponents is another factor. But they've had a huge fight between HC and GM, fired their OC. etc. It's not like he's had a stacked team.

"roy_miami wrote:

Tim Tebow is 8-2 in 7 points or less games he started, including the playoff starts. One thing I noticed when looking at his stats from pro-football-reference is if you play any snaps at all they include it in the win/loss column, and Tebow had many games where he went in as a wildcat QB. Probably won't matter with the majority of QBs but something to keep in mind

There's another issue, apart from how they account for partial games.

That sample is basically one season's worth of 0-7 games. Most QBs face around eight 0-7 games a season, sometimes up to 12 or down to 4, mostly in the 6 to 10 game range.

I didn't mention it specifically before but The season to season variance is dramatic and can be huge. That's one of the reasons I had to look at larger long term data sets to find any type of signal.

"jdang307 wrote:

Indy's oline has given up the most pressure the past 4 years (hurries, sacks, hits). Yet Luck's sack numbers are pretty damn good. Indy has given up the most QB hits (225) the past 4 years. The next highest is AZ, with 170.

I would need more info (time to sack, is it because Luck is holding the ball too long, etc.) but it doesn't sound as if Indy's oline has been significantly better than ours. Nor has their run game. Maybe he's had had better coaching (and I know how you feel about Pagano there DJ). Quality of opponents is another factor. But they've had a huge fight between HC and GM, fired their OC. etc. It's not like he's had a stacked team.

Here's the answers

https://www.profootballfocus.com/qbs-in-focus-time-to-throw/

"resnor wrote:

It's fairly ridiculous to argue that, on the whole, Lucks situation has been as bad as Tannehill's. Luck SHOULD have performed better, given how much more complete and polished he was coming out of college. People want to compare their careers thus far, while trying to act like they were equal coming out. They weren't. Tannehill was well behind Luck developmentally coming out of college, and he went to a franchise that has been a complete trainwreck, from top to bottom, for the last four years.

As previously discussed, even if they were equal coming out Luck should have a better passer rating and record simply based on strength of division and average passing defense of the AFC South compared to the AFC East. Over Luck's career the league average has been 87.67. His in division defenses have allowed 90.62. Over Tannehill's career he has had the same league average of 87.67, but his divisional defenses have allowed a passer rating of 83.41. Short version of the math is that Luck's career passer rating should be 2-3 points higher than Tannehill's purely on the strength of the divisions.

"djphinfan wrote:

I don't understand how you evaluate this situation, I understand matching variables with skillset and projecting production level, but you seem to not be able to distinguish individual skillsets and how they would produce if all parts were equal..

I know what your saying, basically its very difficult to get a read on tannehill because of the poor surrounding variables, but I know I can watch two separate skillsets and discern the differences just based on them, nothing else..

I think after seeing how things have played out since ryan entered the league and what cards he's been dealt he's done a pretty good job, but ultimately the weakness of our team exploited his biggest weakness..we've got to get better at both..Luck has showed me tangible consistent evidence that he doesnt have this weakness..he may throw a bit more ints dealing with it, but he's not gonna be the most sacked qb in the league even if his oline is as poor as ours..

Ryan has done pretty good, and I think he's gonna take a step up in his level of play, myself I will be looking for key attributes from him that don't involve a higher passer rating.

Its the same argument you and I have always had Deej, you won't even acknowledge different types of pressure and their impact on the "escapability" of the QB. You don't acknowledge the importance of running the ball or being able to audible. You're not factoring any of that in. You watch a play and if the QB can't scramble away from whatever rush is coming at him you mark it against him.

You say its difficult to get a read on Thill because of the surrounding variables, which is true, but for years you've argued as if you do have a read on him.

So I don't know where the confusion is coming in.

Barry Sanders didn't need a lane to run to. He could create his own. Emmit Smith, OTOH, generally needed a lane of some kind. Didn't have to be big, but it needed to be there. Its the same with QBs escaping the pocket. There has to be lane of some kind for most QBs to escape through. Its not a magic ability to teleport through bodies. There has to be an opening in the pass rush bodies and the oline bodies for a QB to physically step into. Thill, often had pressure up the middle thanks to ****ty guard play, which takes away his room to step forward. With the injuries (and shuffling) to both tackles, he often had the left and right taken from him at the same time. So, logically, when the front, left and right are taken from you, where exactly do you go?

There's also much less room to run when teams can rush only their front four, and can get quick pressure (under three seconds) from multiple angles. Now you're able to have linebackers spy on Tannehill to make sure he isn't running free and getting big yardage.

"Pauly wrote:

Here's the answers

https://www.profootballfocus.com/qbs-in-focus-time-to-throw/

Not really the answers. The time to throw is up to the QB more than the o-line in many cases. If Brady/Rodgers see its a 3 man rush they'll stand there looking for an open receiver for as long as it takes. And Brady/Rivers/Manning seem to have a sense as to when the D is about to come after them and can get rid of it as fast as possible.

So one QB could get rid of it in 1 second or 7 seconds on every drop back for an average of 2.7 seconds. And another QB could get rid of it at 2.7 seconds on 100% of drop backs. So the average time to throw will be exactly the same but how they get to that average is vastly different.

"Fin D wrote:

Its the same argument you and I have always had Deej, you won't even acknowledge different types of pressure and their impact on the "escapability" of the QB. You don't acknowledge the importance of running the ball or being able to audible. You're not factoring any of that in. You watch a play and if the QB can't scramble away from whatever rush is coming at him you mark it against him.

You say its difficult to get a read on Thill because of the surrounding variables, which is true, but for years you've argued as if you do have a read on him.

So I don't know where the confusion is coming in.

Barry Sanders didn't need a lane to run to. He could create his own. Emmit Smith, OTOH, generally needed a lane of some kind. Didn't have to be big, but it needed to be there. Its the same with QBs escaping the pocket. There has to be lane of some kind for most QBs to escape through. Its not a magic ability to teleport through bodies. There has to be an opening in the pass rush bodies and the oline bodies for a QB to physically step into. Thill, often had pressure up the middle thanks to ****ty guard play, which takes away his room to step forward. With the injuries (and shuffling) to both tackles, he often had the left and right taken from him at the same time. So, logically, when the front, left and right are taken from you, where exactly do you go?

I see where we disagree, you think there has to be lanes to scramble effectively, I don't, anticipation of where the pressure is coming from by perpherially watching two things at once {one eye on your oline seeing who's getting beat, one eye down the field} is part of the art.

I do understand how a good run game can take pressure off and reduce the exposure to the weakness, and I do understand how being able to audible can get him out of a bad looking front.

Heres the thing, I think you don't measure the negative impact this weakness has on the team and your not bothered at all that this qb rarely takes off on his own to convert anything..

Of course better protection all around will give him a comfy pocket for which he can use his accurate arm to slice a defense up, my concern is it won't be enough to win it all, I always believe that on the way to a champ a qb has to be able to make plays, I mean the very definition of making a play at the position, which in the context Im talking about is not just with his right arm, making plays by the qb on the way to a champ I believe will come down to the players ability to avoid pressure, be smart and conscious, and make a positive play out of nothing, scrambling and throwing, or scrambling and running.

right now, making a play out of nothing is not his forte, I think it will determine his fate and is why I think its the part of his game he needs to pay attention to the most..

I know we talk about it, but when I read your analysis I dont think your putting enough emphasis on his responsibility to make the team better..

now we know he isn't the most laterally gifted athlete so I get there is some engrained limitation but you cant trust the line all the time, you have to be aware of the pressure, be better..you cant expect just to sit back and win, you have to be versatile in how you win the down.

with good protection I think ryan can win us 10 games and make the playoffs because he's got good arm talent, but I need more from his skill set and brain to win multiple champs..so I'm not interested long term if he cant figure it out..Once I see that conscientious effort to know what it takes to win from his position I will let it go..but at this point I haven't seen consistently enough recognition of when to bail the pocket and rest, or simple take off to convert..

"roy_miami wrote:

Not really the answers. The time to throw is up to the QB more than the o-line in many cases. If Brady/Rodgers see its a 3 man rush they'll stand there looking for an open receiver for as long as it takes. And Brady/Rivers/Manning seem to have a sense as to when the D is about to come after them and can get rid of it as fast as possible.

So one QB could get rid of it in 1 second or 7 seconds on every drop back for an average of 2.7 seconds. And another QB could get rid of it at 2.7 seconds on 100% of drop backs. So the average time to throw will be exactly the same but how they get to that average is vastly different.

That's garbage. There were many times last season that a 3 or 4 man rush was able to get pressure on Tannehill. 3 man rush was not at all a guarantee that Tannehill would have as long as he wanted to sit back and find an open receiver. People seriously don't seen to understand how terrible the oline has been.

"CaribPhin wrote:

That's for a non-statistics thread honestly. That's unquantifiable and I'd say unlikely to even be a factor. NFL players are motivated by personal success as well. The idea that someone is going to potentially lower their future compensation because they don't think a guy is going to throw a TD is sort of ridiculous. I had a boss who I didn't think was the best person for the job. I actually worked harder to make myself more attractive to other employers/departments so I could get out of there faster. Add to that, we KNOW why our O-line has sucked, no need to speculate. Dallas Thomas is trash, Billy Turner isn't that good, Albert was hurt, Pouncey was generally Pouncey, and James was pretty much James.

Now, I think O-line issues are overstated relative to QB play considering a guy like Wilson has had a pretty weak line over his career and the Patriots had a terrible line last season and still made the AFCCG. You want to see Tannehill overcome some of these issues, much like other top flight QB's are able to. There are a lot of variables at play here and each side just focuses on the variables that allow them to blame who they want to blame.

All the talk about how horrible NE's OL was last year was overblown. Football outsiders had their OL ranked 2nd best in run blocking and 18th in pass blocking. If you add in the fact that their offense is based off of the quick, high percentage, short pass to RB's and TE's, or basically running the ball via very short passes, then their oline was perfect for them.

The Dolphins, as an entire team from the HC down was a mess. Expecting anyone, sans maybe the kickers, to play well is asking too much. If you put Rogers or Brady on last year's team I doubt you make the playoffs too.

"Pauly wrote:

Here's the answers

https://www.profootballfocus.com/qbs-in-focus-time-to-throw/

Those don't really answer it.

But it does show the wonkiness and I accuracy of PFF grades.

"resnor wrote:

That's garbage. There were many times last season that a 3 or 4 man rush was able to get pressure on Tannehill. 3 man rush was not at all a guarantee that Tannehill would have as long as he wanted to sit back and find an open receiver. People seriously don't seen to understand how terrible the oline has been.

Even Brady and Rodgers will move around a little to buy time against 3 man rushes, but they don't panic and you notice them looking around to see where the rushers are at points during the play. But thats not the point, the point is "average time to throw" may not tell you anything at all about how well the o-line is playing. Because part of the QBs job is to throw it at the right time, and that time could vary from 1.5 seconds to 15 seconds depending on the situation.

If I were scheming against Tannehill I would almost always rush 3 or 6, because I don't think he's very good at adapting to different pressure situations.

DJ, in all fairness, I don't think any QB has one eye downfield, and one eye watching his line. LOL. So, again, what you're really talking about is anticipation. It's one thing to know that you have a weak spot on the right side, and anticipate that pressure will come from there, so you can plan to react to that. It's something different to have a bad line that routinely allows pressure from multiple spots, and you can't plan how to react. I saw various examples of Tannehill trying to climb pockets, or roll out of pressure, only to get smacked in the middle when he tried to climb, or smacked on the other side when he tried to roll away from pressure. People like to focus on sacks where he didn't roll, but that could easily be a function of Tannehill not moving because he had nowhere to go.

When you have four rushers, then the linebackers can shut down any routes out.

"resnor wrote:

There's also much less room to run when teams can rush only their front four, and can get quick pressure (under three seconds) from multiple angles. Now you're able to have linebackers spy on Tannehill to make sure he isn't running free and getting big yardage.

Alright can not help myself but I have to call the hyperbole police on you....

2014 (Luck was healthy) here are the list of QB's who received the highest amounts of pressure per drop back with no blitz (your front 4 argument)

1.) Matt Ryan was pressured with no blitz a whopping 192 times! (He had 7 Tds and 3 INT)
2.) Carson Palmer 164 times
3.) Andrew Luck 158 times
4.) Eli Manning 151 times
5.) Tom Brady 147 times

Ryan was pressured 129 times good for number 11 on this list. Also note if we break down % then this argument would get even uglier. :shifty:
So who REALLY has to deal with these situations you act like only Ryan has to deal with?

"under three seconds" On these particular plays Ryan averaged 3.43 seconds to throw....good for 12th :shifty:

LB's spying Ryan Tannehill?? Not sure this has ever been their primary assignment. But as you can see I showed you thee situations you keep bringing up and evidence on why imo it is a poor excuse for his shortcomings.

I will never deny Ryan has had garbage coaching and OL play, but some of you just want to exaggerate it enough to call it the "reason why" we are getting subpar play out of the QB position.

Can we all just hold hands and cry to the clouds that "Ryan Tannehill AND his surroundings all need to improve for this team to get better"..its really that simple.

Why did you go with 2014 when I was talking about last season? We keep taking about the oline and coaching because a young, raw QB NEEDS a good oline and good coaching. Literally no one has ever argued that Tannehill is perfect and doesn't need to be better. We've simply argued that laying all the ills and losses of the Miami Dolphins at Tannehill's feet isn't fair or accurate.

I don't understand how you guys think.

Also, I'm super impressed that veteran QBS handled those situations better than a third year QB, who didn't come out of college even close to as NFL ready as those guys.

"resnor wrote:

DJ, in all fairness, I don't think any QB has one eye downfield, and one eye watching his line. LOL. So, again, what you're really talking about is anticipation. It's one thing to know that you have a weak spot on the right side, and anticipate that pressure will come from there, so you can plan to react to that. It's something different to have a bad line that routinely allows pressure from multiple spots, and you can't plan how to react. I saw various examples of Tannehill trying to climb pockets, or roll out of pressure, only to get smacked in the middle when he tried to climb, or smacked on the other side when he tried to roll away from pressure. People like to focus on sacks where he didn't roll, but that could easily be a function of Tannehill not moving because he had nowhere to go.

When you have four rushers, then the linebackers can shut down any routes out.

if you dont think certain qbs can do both, see where the pressure is coming from and make moves accordingly to that pressure while keeping eyes down field, you dont understand the art of the position.

"djphinfan wrote:

if you dont think certain qbs can do both, see where the pressure is coming from and make moves accordingly to that pressure while keeping eyes down field, you dont understand the art of the position.

No, I understand physiology. Literally, your eyes can't be looking two different places. Well, they can, but then you'd have a lazy eye, and that's not a good thing. LOL. I also understand the human brain, and there is literally no such thing as multitasking in the brain. The brain computes one thing at a time. So, some guys might have brains that process faster, and some guys might be better at anticipating, and some guys might be better at both.

But no QB is watching the line with one eye, and watching downfield with the other eye.

"resnor wrote:

Why did you go with 2014 when I was talking about last season? We keep taking about the oline and coaching because a young, raw QB NEEDS a good oline and good coaching. Literally no one has ever argued that Tannehill is perfect and doesn't need to be better. We've simply argued that laying all the ills and losses of the Miami Dolphins at Tannehill's feet isn't fair or accurate.

I don't understand how you guys think.

Also, I'm super impressed that veteran QBS handled those situations better than a third year QB, who didn't come out of college even close to as NFL ready as those guys.

I never said he handled it any better or worse...infact Carson Plamer becomes TERRIBLE in these situations.

I simply was refuting what you keep saying about Ryan facing pressure from the DL's and his time to throw, and no thats not ALL YOURE SAYING in regards to Ryan....you defend him like you conceived him.

Keeps it real and stop making up stuff and these mains may be great once again.

"Fin-O wrote:

Can we all just hold hands and cry to the clouds that "Ryan Tannehill AND his surroundings all need to improve for this team to get better"..its really that simple.

This is true (well almost.. the team will get better if any component improves.. but we need both Tannehill and his surroundings to improve to be a perennial playoff team).

However, I don't think you're thinking through the consequences here. If we all agreed on that, I think this message board would die for lack of debates!

"resnor wrote:

No, I understand physiology. Literally, your eyes can't be looking two different places. Well, they can, but then you'd have a lazy eye, and that's not a good thing. LOL. I also understand the human brain, and there is literally no such thing as multitasking in the brain. The brain computes one thing at a time. So, some guys might have brains that process faster, and some guys might be better at anticipating, and some guys might be better at both.

But no QB is watching the line with one eye, and watching downfield with the other eye.

You're right about the eyes not pointing in different directions for normal people, but that doesn't mean you can't use peripheral vision. In fact, peripheral vision is generally used to help guide future eye movements.

And yes the brain can multi-task. Parallel computing goes on all the time in the brain. Simplest case is different sensory modalities (e.g. vision, hearing, etc..) first processing information separately before anything is combined (that we know from both anatomy and physiology), but this happens within a single sensory modality too. Processing shape and color happens separately from motion (initially at least), and processing "what" something is is separate from "where" (entirely different pathways).

"resnor wrote:

No, I understand physiology. Literally, your eyes can't be looking two different places. Well, they can, but then you'd have a lazy eye, and that's not a good thing. LOL. I also understand the human brain, and there is literally no such thing as multitasking in the brain. The brain computes one thing at a time. So, some guys might have brains that process faster, and some guys might be better at anticipating, and some guys might be better at both.

But no QB is watching the line with one eye, and watching downfield with the other eye.

stop being so literal..I'll make it simple..there are qbs who can see where their protection breaks down and manipulate the pocket while watching whats going on downfield.

tell you a qb who was amazing at making plays multitasking in the pocket..and he wasn't a runner..kurt warner...dude made plays when protection broke down and he never had to cross the los.

Cbrad, the brain absolutely does not do two things at once. For instance try to do math problems while reciting the pledge of allegiance.

DJ, I was kinda of joking with you, hence the LOL in the first post about this, plus me saying you're really talking about anticipation. Which you still are talking about.

"resnor wrote:

Cbrad, the brain absolutely does not do two things at once. For instance try to do math problems while reciting the pledge of allegiance.
.

I can drive a car and have a conversation at the same time. Am I special?