1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Making a Case for Ryan Tannehill

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by KeyFin, Dec 27, 2018.

  1. Makados10

    Makados10 Active Member

    283
    146
    43
    Apr 24, 2010
    I think we should keep Tannehill next year and I'm ready to draft a replacement. I don't think those two things are mutually exclusive. We may end up with a worse quarterback, but Ryan is 7 years in and we'll never be a dangerous offense with him. There's too many examples of younger QBs having success in the league to continue investing in Ryan. Time to start playing the lotto and see if we can hit on a QB that'll turn the prospects of the franchise around.
     
    Dolphins1372 likes this.
  2. AGuyNamedAlex

    AGuyNamedAlex Well-Known Member

    908
    844
    93
    Sep 12, 2015
    The thing is, I don't really believe this though I usually do agree with you.

    I've seen Ryan avoid pressure a lot in his career. People talk about a QB feeling the pocket but there is no 6th sense. It's all about anticipating where the pressure will be based on your weaknesses, the play, and the defense.

    Its not possible to anticipate pressure that comes from all angles. I believe PFF only put 1 of 9 sacks on Tannehill against Minny for example.

    When there are free rushers you're just going to lose that play 9 of 10 times regardless of QB.
     
    resnor and Fame like this.
  3. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,091
    2,905
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    I remember reviewing the tape of 2013 or whenever it was Tanny got hit for 60 or so sacks, which is when the “Tanny has bad pocket presence” became an entrenched belief. What I couldn’t believe was the number of times unblocked rushers had a direct line to him. It’s something that we’ve improved on as a team, but I still see Tanny suffering from unblocked rushers coming straigt at him far more than is acceptable. This year you loom at how a supposedly professional OL refuses to pick up stunts.

    I’ll never argue RT has good pocket presence, just that breakdowns in protection allowing unblocked rushers should not count as “poor pocket presence”.
     
  4. AGuyNamedAlex

    AGuyNamedAlex Well-Known Member

    908
    844
    93
    Sep 12, 2015
    Same. I'd never argue Tanny is elite in the pocket or otherwise. I'd just argue he's on the same level as guys like Flacco, Stafford, and so forth I keep seeing thrown around as replacements.

    Edit: Also want to add I think if Tanny had gone in the 2nd round we'd be talking about what a steal and how to protect him. Something about the first round makes people go into elite or nothing mode.

    Im not against finding a better QB I just think it's dumb to regress for the sake of change.
     
    Irishman and resnor like this.
  5. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    5,933
    7,683
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    As I said at the start of the post, I think it's probably time to part ways with RT. I just argued the opposite viewpoint because nobody else was and I have a feeling that he's going to be back either way.

    However, I do 100% believe that Tannehill will be NE's next quarterback and he will be successful there. That's my only real fear.
     
    Irishman and resnor like this.
  6. Surfs Up 99

    Surfs Up 99 Team Flores

    1,592
    1,515
    113
    May 5, 2016
    Yeah, it would totally suck if Tannehill went to NE. I have to give them credit, for the most part their OL can protect Brady and give him time to throw. Must of us agree that Tannehill would thrive if we could do that. Why is it that they can find decent linemen, and we struggle year after year? Their OL coach Dante Scarnecchia must be a miracle worker. I am sure they have had their fair share of injuries and they hardly miss beat. We lose a key guy and everything falls to **** (guys getting beat, missed assignments, etc.).
     
    Irishman, KeyFin and resnor like this.
  7. Fame

    Fame Well-Known Member

    1,076
    1,648
    113
    Mar 20, 2012
    Vero Beach
    Change for the sake of change is just change. No better. No worse.
     
    Irishman, mbsinmisc and resnor like this.
  8. Fame

    Fame Well-Known Member

    1,076
    1,648
    113
    Mar 20, 2012
    Vero Beach
    In addition, our line is so bad that even when there aren't free rushers our linemen get beat so bad that there's instant pressure anyway. There's now way for Tannehill to predict which of his terrible linemen will whiff a block on each play.
     
    Irishman and resnor like this.
  9. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,105
    7,968
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    You don't know that. If you don't change, you're likely to end up .. "no better, no worse". If you do change (for whatever reason) there's a much higher probability you end up better OR worse.

    And unless you want the team to hover around 8 (+-2) wins in perpetuity, we need change! Gotta gamble here, on coach and QB.
     
    Surfs Up 99 likes this.
  10. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,105
    7,968
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    I wouldn't worry about it. Tannehill isn't Brady. Sure he's accurate and can make the throws, but he does NOT have Brady's football intelligence. Most importantly Tannehill processes information MUCH slower than Brady. You're not going to see the elite game management with Tannehill. I predict NE would average 9-10 wins (expected for them given an average QB) rather than the 12 with Brady. 9-10 wins might be enough to get them into the playoffs but they're not getting a 1st round bye and thus no SB.

    Besides Belichick is getting up there in age too. At 66 he's older than most coaches have been in the NFL so I'm fully expecting both Belichick and Brady to retire in the next 2 years. And without Belichick our path to the division title is MUCH easier.
     
    KeyFin and Surfs Up 99 like this.
  11. Dolphins1372

    Dolphins1372 Guest

    I hope tannehill ends up in New England.
    I personally don’t have any confidence in him. Do you think peyton would dare say hike without knowing what the defense was doing. And pointing at rushers he sees making sure they get blocked. More to being a qb than throwing the ball. As i have rooted for tannehill plenty.
     
    KeyFin likes this.
  12. mooseguts

    mooseguts Well-Known Member

    251
    278
    63
    Jan 12, 2018
    Wow 99 QBR that's really impressive but let's dive a bit deeper. Lets compare Tannehill to a rookie QB, a teammate and a relative equal.

    Below are 3rd down stats for the 2018 season.

    Ryan Tannehill--65 3rd down attempts--18 1st downs= 27.7 1st down %--72.9 QBR--5.9 y/a
    Marcus Mariota--97 3rd down attempts--45 1st downs=46.4 1st down %--93.8 QBR--7.4 y/a
    Baker Mayfield--118 3rd down attempts--46 1st downs= 38.9 1st down %--99.1QBR--7.9 y/a
    Brock Osweiler--54 3rd down attempts--23 1st downs= 42.6 1st down %--110.8 QBR--8.7 y/a

    Bonus just to emphasize that a rookie QB on a bad team like the bills converted a higher 3rd down % than our very own Tannehill.

    Josh Allen--86 3rd down attempts--27 1st downs= 31.4 1st down %--39.2 QBR--5.0 y/a

    Fun fact Tannehills 5.9 y/a on 3rd downs is 32nd in the NFL. When you consistently throw it short on 3rd downs it tends to make it difficult to convert those 3rd downs. Also fun fact Tannehill has a 112.8 on 2nd down which is 4th best in the NFL while his 7.9 y/a on 2nd down is 10th best.

    4th QTR

    Tannehill--33 of 57 57.9%, 443 yds, 7.8 y/a 4 TD 4 INT, 76.9 QBR, 11 sacks
    Osweiler--33 of 46 71.7%, 414 yds, 9.0 y/a, 4 TD 0 INT, 128.4 QBR, 5 sacks
    Mayfield--80 of 121 66.1%, 936 yds, 7.7 y/a, 6 TD 3 INT, 95.6 QBR, 2 sacks
    Mariota--44 of 66 66.7%, 498 yds, 7.5 y/a, 3 TD 9 INT, 104.2 QBR, 10 sacks

    Fun fact Tannehill's 76.9 QBR in the 4th QTR is 32nd in the NFL. While his 2nd QTR QBR which is 135.0 is 1st in the NFL. Tannehill imo is the most inconsistent QB in the NFL. Not just game to game but QTR to QTR, down to down, throw to throw. How does a QB have a 58.1 drop in qb rating from the 2nd to the 4th qtr? That's ludicrous! In conclusion Tannehill will never be chill in the 4th qtr, on 3rd downs, in Buffalo and in important games. Time to move on.
     
  13. Fin-O

    Fin-O Initiated Club Member

    9,892
    8,896
    113
    Sep 28, 2015
    Hard to excuse his overall play in key situations no matter who the coach is.

    That being said, I’d rather fire Gase, draft a QB, keep Ryan for a year and hope that guy takes over the reigns in 2020
     
  14. danmarino

    danmarino Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    9,552
    10,259
    113
    Sep 4, 2014

    When a person cherry picks stats they get silly things like Brock Osweiler being a better QB than Mayfield, Mariota, and Tannehill. I mean, you proved that looking at JUST 3rd down attempts is pretty much pointless if you have Brock with a 110 passer rating (I write passer rating because I'm assuming that with the numbers you've shown they are not QBR?) and leading the pack. Sad

    To top it off you ignored Allen's passer rating and decided that because the % was better Rosen somehow played better on 3rd downs with a 39 passer rating. So you're moving the goalposts against yourself in the same post. Sad

    When you're consistently at 3rd and 20 because of false starts, holding, etc it's hard to throw it long. It surprises me how many people can't figure that out.

    You also didn't factor in actual game context in other places. For example, when the Dolphins are behind by 8 or less points RT has a 126 passer rating. When he's behind OVERALL he has a 100 passer rating.

    Oh look, I can do the same thing:

    When Mariota is behind by 8 or less he has a 67 passer rating. RT is a better QB

    When Mahomes is behind by 8 or less he has a 120 passer rating. RT is a better QB

    When Drew Brees is behind by 8 or less he has an 88 passer raring. RT is a better QB



    Work on your stats....Sad
     
    Last edited: Dec 28, 2018
    Irishman, Fame, mbsinmisc and 2 others like this.
  15. The_Dark_Knight

    The_Dark_Knight Defender of the Truth

    8,287
    6,363
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Melbourne, FL
    Peyton Manning was indeed a beast but where would Manning be without Dungy? Or for that matter the running game he had with Marshall Faulk and without Harrison to throw the ball to...or the anchor of that offensive line in Jeff Saturday...do you see where I’m going with this?

    Peyton Manning ALONE was not the end all be all draft pick that brought a championship to Indianapolis. He was the final piece of a puzzle that consisted of many players that made Indy’s offense great.

    Some of you put way too much stock on high draft picks, especially at the quarterback position.
     
    Irishman and resnor like this.
  16. danmarino

    danmarino Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    9,552
    10,259
    113
    Sep 4, 2014

    I agree that it takes a team to win a Super Bowl...Or else Manning would have 10 rings.

    However, he was most certainly a bigger piece to that puzzle and without him I doubt they have half the success they had. I can't think of any other QB, (maybe Rodgers?), that could have carried those Colts the way Manning did. But that's why Manning should be in consideration for the GOAT.
     
  17. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,105
    7,968
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Looking only at 3rd down attempts isn't in itself problematic. In fact, 3rd down conversion% has approximately a 0.5 correlation to win% since 2010 which is relatively high (compare: passer rating over NFL history has a 0.6321 correlation to win% and since 2010 is 0.6705).

    The problem with what mooseguts posted is sample size. I've said this repeatedly but you shouldn't compare passer ratings unless you have about 150 consecutive attempts minimum (and that's really just a minimum). In other words, none of those ratings are reliable and thus the comparison isn't reliable.

    Also, the 99 passer rating isn't as impressive in 2018 as it would have been in past years. This year's league average is 93.2 while last year's was 86.9. So if you're used to ratings from 2013-2017 or so that 99 is more like a 93.
     
  18. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,105
    7,968
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Probably the same. Manning was as close to a field general as you'll find. I really don't think there's a coach stupid enough to NOT trust Peyton. And I think Peyton is like Marino in that he'd make almost any team a consistent playoff team. That's why he's such a great example of a player coming as close to being THE primary reason a bottom feeder became so competitive.
     
    danmarino likes this.
  19. The Goat

    The Goat Junior Member

    34
    27
    18
    Nov 26, 2007
    This franchise has done nothing properly around Ryan Tannehill for nearly six years. There is little reason to believe they will in year seven.

    Ryan Tannehill has not proven he can overcome said shortcomings and win games on his own.

    It's time to move on. I have little doubt Tannehill can be very successful in a system that plays to his strengths and minimizes his limitations.

    But it's time for both parties to move on for everyone's benefit.
     
    Surfs Up 99, danmarino and Fin-O like this.
  20. Surfs Up 99

    Surfs Up 99 Team Flores

    1,592
    1,515
    113
    May 5, 2016
    For me, and I have been saying this, there is more to the story than QBR, IMO. Of that list, who would I rather have? Mayfield, because the dude has a high football IQ, processing things quickly and makes others better therefore the team rallies around him. Our team? They walk off the field and leave Tannehill laying on his backside after he gets sacked due to their ineptness. Nice! Way to look out for each other.
     
    Irishman and Bumrush like this.
  21. Bumrush

    Bumrush Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    21,440
    19,912
    113
    Nov 25, 2007

    That's true Indianapolis tore it up last year when Luck was on IR.

    The QB has no role in how the team performs.

    Peyton Manning, before winning the Super Bowl was consistently deep in to the playoffs. Miami last won a playoff game nearly 20 years ago.

    Having a franchise level QB should be the end all, be all goal for every franchise that wants to be a legitimate playoff contender.

    Ryan Tannehill IS NOT a franchise QB. He is barely serviceable. After 7 years, it's time to move on and attempt to find someone that will do better than Ryan. We will never make a deep playoff run or win a road playoff game with Ryan Tannehill, assuming he can even lead Miami to the playoffs, which he has yet do. If you recall in 2016, Matt Moore won two playoff games late in December, on the road. Something Ryan failed to do when given the chance previously, so you can't even assume Miami makes the playoffs in 2016.

    This idea that Miami doesn't have a solid roster is even more of a reason to move on from Ryan. You guys are essentially looking for a utopian solution where everything falls in to place, nobody gets injured and Ryan has 5 seconds to throw on every drop back. A QB that can evade pressure, convert on third down when the walls are falling around him and extend drives is needed even more. It's a viscous cycle - Offense can't stay on the field and can't sustain long drives, thus losing the TOP battle - Which exposes the D. Which then exposes the offense again. I love the quick strike ability Miami has but it isn't enough. I've seen more game management from Chad Pennington in 2008 than I've seen from Tannehill. Give me a QB that can drive the team down the field on 12 play, 7 minute drives consistently over Ryan's occasional deep throw or quick slants that get taken to the house. Even a scrub like Brock, who is clearly much worse than Ryan managed to convert third downs at a higher rate and managed to put together long drives despite his physical limitations. Oh and Watson is closing in on being sacked 60 TIMES this year and is leading the Texans to the playoffs and came close to securing a bye if not for the defense collapsing on the road against a Philly team playing for their lives. That's a QB i'd want. Someone that gets smacked around all game, on the road, and nearly pulls off a miracle. Ryan has never done that.

    It's time to move on. Moving on from Tannehill is the single best thing this franchise could do this off-season.
     
    Last edited: Dec 28, 2018
    Fin-O, pumpdogs and Dolphins1372 like this.
  22. Bumrush

    Bumrush Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    21,440
    19,912
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    I have doubt that he could. Especially now and especially after the beating his body has taken.

    I hope he winds up in NE, it will be the biggest gift Miami's ever given NE that favors Miami. But I doubt someone with the football acumen of Bellicheck would want him, given that he can't read the field properly, has little anticipation on his throws and doesn't know how to sidestep pressure.
     
  23. The Goat

    The Goat Junior Member

    34
    27
    18
    Nov 26, 2007
    I will disagree with you on a couple of those points. I am of the opinion that one of the last things Tannehaters want (and I am not labeling you as such) is for him to end up in New England. Because if he fails there, fine. Their victory is short-lived. But if the Pats got hold of him and put him in a position to succeed, he could haunt the Dolphins for years.
     
    resnor likes this.
  24. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    5,933
    7,683
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    I don't want to say those stats are misleading since you put a lot of work into that, but I will point out Tannehill has only played about half this season AND got got his *** kicked in about half of those contests. The 4th quarter stats in particular are due to us being behind and teams being able to blitz every down....I think it's more the coverage/pressure that changes than the QB.

    That's why I personally wouldn't mind seeing Tannehill for 16 full games in 2019....but I'd also be okay with moving on.
     
    Irishman and resnor like this.
  25. Dolphins1372

    Dolphins1372 Guest

    Im not scared
     
  26. Dolphin Dundee

    Dolphin Dundee Well-Known Member

    439
    294
    63
    Sep 27, 2015
    The only case i would make for Tannehill is a suitcase.. See ya!
     
  27. danmarino

    danmarino Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    9,552
    10,259
    113
    Sep 4, 2014
    Sure, but 3rd downs % correlation isn't just a QB stat.

    The Colts are first in the league at converting 3rd downs at 49.3% and have just 2 more wins than Miami. The Rams are 8th with a 43.4% conv rate and have 3 more wins than the Colts. The Pats are 12th at 40.5 and have 1 more win than the Colts. Chargers are 15th, Dallas is 17th, Saints are 7th.


    Looking at just 3rd down conversion % when trying to judge a QB is akin to trying to hit a bulls eyes at 100 yards with a shotgun. Nothing but scatter...If it hits at all.
     
    KeyFin and resnor like this.
  28. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,105
    7,968
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Passer rating is also "not just a QB stat" yet with large sample size correlates well with who you'd probably think are the best QB's. Why? Because with large sample size variation in all the other factors that affect passer rating "average out". What makes you think that's not true for 3rd down conversion percentage? The ability to infer overall QB ability from just 3rd down conversion percentage might be weaker than with passer rating (because you're ONLY looking at 3rd downs!) but it's not because it's "not a QB stat" per se.

    I haven't done the calculations independently but according to this site the leaders in 3rd down conversion percentage since 2001 are:
    https://thefalconswire.usatoday.com...o-3-in-third-down-conversion-rate-since-2001/

    1. Ben Roethlisberger
    2. Peyton Manning
    3. Matt Ryan
    4. Drew Brees
    5. Jameis Winston
    6. Aaron Rodgers
    7. Tony Romo
    8. Philip Rivers
    9. Tom Brady

    Other than Jameis Winston, who arguably has too small sample size relative to the others, that's a list of some of the best QB's since 2001!! So yeah it sure looks like all the other factors "average out" and 3rd down conversion% becomes a good "QB stat" with large sample size.
     
    mbsinmisc likes this.
  29. adamprez2003

    adamprez2003 Senior Member

    37,557
    14,775
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    new york ciity
    Since Fiedler the Dolphins spent more than a decade trying to find a QB capable of starting. Now we arent talking about an elite QB we are simply talking about a QB who was capable of being a starter, even lower end. Finally we land Tannehill. whatever you think of him you have to agree a marked improvement over culpepper, harrington, that little midget from BYU who's name escapes me..Even though this took a ridiculously long time it was a bit forgivable in that it is difficult to find a QB

    Since Parcells first year we haven't been able to build an effective oline that can last for more than a season. either injuries or lack of talent have doomed almost every line we have trotted out for ten years. Now what I dont get is there is no outrage here even though building an effective oline is much, much ,much easier than finding a good QB. All you need is the will.

    So now we have Tannehill, a QB at a skill level which it took us ten years plus to find who's one real flaw is he doesn't have the escapability to evade jailbreak pressure.

    It would seem to me that logic would dictate we build an offensive line for him, especially since we already have Tunsil and James at Tackle and simply have to fill the remaining three spots with two solid, not great, guards or center. This is infinitely easier than finding an elite QB who can play at elite levels behind crappy olines.

    Only in Miami would the fans demand we attempt the more difficult option
     
    mbsinmisc likes this.
  30. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,105
    7,968
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Except that statistically it's not easier to build up the rest of the team to SB caliber. It's not just the OL but the defense (though that might require more a change in DC than anything else). Again, only the 2000 Ravens, 2002 Bucs and 2015 Broncos have won the SB in the last 25 years without an elite QB or one that plays elite in big games, neither of which Tannehill is.

    Just think about how many positions you have to get right to go the route you're suggesting. It's statistically easier to find that franchise QB (again, gamble once every 3 years or so for 20 or so years you'll get one) than using those high draft picks shoring up other positions (and there's a failure rate there too!) while keeping an average QB. It's not like we haven't tried your approach. We have!
     
  31. KeyFin

    KeyFin Well-Known Member

    5,933
    7,683
    113
    Nov 1, 2009
    That makes complete sense to me- it just hasn't happened because we've whiffed in free agency. I don't know where Aisata is at or even if he's still an option as a possible 2019 rotational player, but I definitely think we should be line-heavy in the 3rd-7th rounds of the draft. With a great line Tannehill is the guy....without it he's painful to watch.

    If that's the only thing that needs fixing though, it would make a lot more sense than trying to start from scratch all over again.
     
    Irishman and adamprez2003 like this.
  32. adamprez2003

    adamprez2003 Senior Member

    37,557
    14,775
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    new york ciity
    it absolutely is not easier finding a franchise QB than building an oline especially when you already have the two tackle positions filled. We have Kilgore and Sitton returning next year so lets draft their backups. We dont even need to spend a first or 2nd. Lets use two of our picks rounds 3-5 on interior offensive linemen to back up injury prone Kilgore and Sitton. How difficult is that. Hell go crazy and maybe even pick up a mid priced interior lineman in free agency just to add to the depth even more
     
    Irishman likes this.
  33. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,105
    7,968
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Like I said it's not just the OL. At minimum you need a top level defense too, and probably an elite defense given the Ravens, Bucs and Broncos experience. Remember, the goal here is to win the SB. The goal is NOT just to provide Tannehill protection!

    Bringing up Fiedler is useful. When you adjust ratings to 2017 when the league average was 86.9, Fiedler's career rating is 84.87 and Tannehill's is 86.57. That includes both good and bad years and Fiedler had a better surrounding cast, but it does show that the difference between the two over their careers isn't utterly drastic. Consider.. in 2000, 2002 and 2003 we had a top 5 defense (ranked 3, 4 and 3) and in 2002 and 2003 we had Ricky Williams with a fantastic running game. THAT was a solid team EXCEPT at QB, the kind you're suggesting we build. The result? We won more games (9-11 wins showing the effect of the better surrounding cast) yet we won only ONE playoff game.

    And if you're wondering, Fiedler was utterly abysmal in the playoffs. Point is.. it is NOT easy to win with a solid team and mediocre QB. At minimum you need a QB that you can rely on to win big games when necessary. So while it may seem counter-intuitive to say it's easier to build a SB caliber team by gambling on finding that franchise QB, that's what the stats say. And the Fiedler experience shows that this franchise found out first hand how crippling a mediocre QB can be.
     
  34. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    13,201
    7,264
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Except I don't think Fiedler was as good a QB as Tannehill. For instance, I think those Fiedler-led teams win at least one playoff game with Tannehill at QB. Our current team with Fiedler would be terrible.
     
    mbsinmisc and (deleted member) like this.
  35. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,105
    7,968
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Yeah I agree with that. The only year where Fiedler's adjusted rating is similar to Tannehill's best (2014, 2016, 2018) is 2002, and that was with a better surrounding cast (notably defense). So yes I think they would have won a playoff game or two more, but no way do I think we win the conference championship or SB with Tannehill at QB on those otherwise solid 2000-2003 teams. Have to have a QB that shows up at big games for me to believe that.
     
    resnor likes this.
  36. mooseguts

    mooseguts Well-Known Member

    251
    278
    63
    Jan 12, 2018
    Whoa whoa whoa I am in no way saying Osweiler is better than Tannehill because he's not. I'd much rather have Tannehill over Osweiler no questions asked. My post wasn't to declare highest QB rating on 3rd down=best QB, it was to declare the inconsistencies of Tannehill. Which is why I brought up how he has the highest qb rating in the 2nd QTR but such a big drop off in the 4th.

    I brought up Osweiler to simply compare how a QB on the same team has played at least serviceable in the 4th QTR but that does NOT mean I think Osweiler is a superior QB more so that Tannehill is a frustrating QB.

    The most alarming stat is not even his qb rating it's his y/a which is a woeful 5.9 compared to Osweilers 8.7 y/a. If as you say the Dolphins are consistently on 3rd and 20 because of false starts and holding and penalties than how can you justify a 5.9 y/a when clearly we need a whole lot more.

    How is 3rd down and 4th qtr stats cherry picking? Those are key moments in the game, that's when you want to play your best. It's not a coincidence that 7 teams in the top 10 of 3rd down conversions have a winning record.

    Ok since you think Tannehill's numbers are due to consistently being on 3rd and long. How about just going by 3rd and 6 or less. Here you go.

    Ryan Tannehill--25 3rd down attempts--11 1st downs=44.0 1st down %--58.1 QB rating--4.7 y/a
    Osweiler--32 3rd down attempts --15 1st downs=46.9 1st down %--123.3 Qb rating--7.7 y/a
    Mayfield--57 3rd down attempts--31 1st downs=54.4 1st down %--116.5 Qb rating--6.8 y/a
    Mariota--49 3rd down attempts--23 1st downs=47.0 1st down %--68.7 Qb rating--5.8 y/a

    Again look at his y/a compared to Osweiler, that's a QB who is playing it way too safe. He is ranked 31st in y/a on 3rd and 6 or less.
     
  37. adamprez2003

    adamprez2003 Senior Member

    37,557
    14,775
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    new york ciity
    GIGO, Tannehill is much better than Fiedler regardless of what the stats say. Tannehill forces you to play the entire field. With Fiedler we had defenses flooding the short passing lanes. My post was about addressing the oline not the entire team so stay within the lines. But we have already shown that regardless of whether you have an elite or game manager type of QB you need to build a complete team. There are no shortcuts in football. This idea that a franchise QB is all you need is a complete lie
     
    mbsinmisc and resnor like this.
  38. AGuyNamedAlex

    AGuyNamedAlex Well-Known Member

    908
    844
    93
    Sep 12, 2015
    Tannehill had way more attempts without me even having to look. That means his average is less bumped by long plays and less hurt by short plays.

    Didn't we break two huge ones against the Bears? Tannehill had a couple too but that is where point A comes into play.

    I don't care if we replace him or not but I'm just giving my 2 cents there.
     
  39. cbrad

    cbrad . Club Member

    7,105
    7,968
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    lol.. you and GIGO. You refuse to learn what that term means. By now it's really meaningless when you use that term.

    And don't tell me to "stay within the lines" when the goal of a franchise is to win the SB and a large portion of the discussion around "finding a franchise QB" before your post was about which strategy was best for.. winning the SB!
     
  40. mooseguts

    mooseguts Well-Known Member

    251
    278
    63
    Jan 12, 2018
    A franchise QB is not all you need but a franchise QB will keep you competitive a lot longer than anything else. Look at the Bronco's and Seahawks since their defenses fell off. How many division titles, playoff wins, or success have they had. Once you build an elite team or defense you have a 3-5 year window in which the players are in their prime before they become too expensive or they start to decline.
     
    Bumrush likes this.

Share This Page