Making a Case for Ryan Tannehill

"mooseguts wrote:

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.

"danmarino wrote:

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

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.

"The_Dark_Knight wrote:

Peyton Manning was indeed a beast but where would Manning be without Dungy?

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.

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.

"mooseguts wrote:

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.

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.

"danmarino wrote:

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

"The_Dark_Knight wrote:

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.

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.

"The Goat wrote:

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.

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.

"Bumrush wrote:

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.

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.

"mooseguts wrote:

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.

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 ass 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.

The only case i would make for Tannehill is a suitcase.. See ya!

"cbrad wrote:

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.

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.

"danmarino wrote:

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.

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/2018/05/18/matt-ryan-ranks-no-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.

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

"adamprez2003 wrote:

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.

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!

"adamprez2003 wrote:

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.

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.

"cbrad wrote:

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!

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

"adamprez2003 wrote:

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

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.

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.

"resnor wrote:

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.

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.

"danmarino wrote:

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

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.

"cbrad wrote:

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.

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

"mooseguts wrote:

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.

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.

"adamprez2003 wrote:

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

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!

"adamprez2003 wrote:

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

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.

"mooseguts wrote:

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.

a franchise QB will get you in the playoffs almost every year as you beat up on inferior competition during the regular season. Unfortunately, in the playoffs its very rare that you can squeeze through without facing a team that has a top defense like the Jaguars, Vikings and Bills have. Even Marino had an offensive line. Remember Dwight Stephenson and company?

"adamprez2003 wrote:

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

Looking at the sack %’s, it is no accident that the OL as a whole plays better w/o Tannehill behind center.

He has been bottom half of the league nearly his whole career......Jay Cutler comes in and all of a sudden HE is the 8th least sacked Qb per dropback??

Na man, that’s not a coincidence. Ryan does his part in getting sacked, he doesn’t have nor ever has had true Qb instincts.

It’s a shame because his physical ability is certainly there. Just lacks the aptitude/feel for the position.

No one should really waste anymore energy defending him as a Qb, he has had some unfortunate situations, but he also has personally not been anything to defend to the death.

Let it go.....let it gooooo