Making a Case for Ryan Tannehill

"AGuyNamedAlex wrote:

There has to be a pocket to navigate one

He’s had plenty of pockets to navigate out of..

If you really want to see how fu##ed up Ryan Tannehill is in the head watch the rep in the jaguar game where for the first time in five games he actually ran for a small gain..

There is such a delay in his brain, he’s done..

"djphinfan wrote:

Leave Mike Gesicki riding a bike out of this

:chuckle::up:

"djphinfan wrote:

He’s had plenty of pockets to navigate out of..

If you really want to see how fu##ed up Ryan Tannehill is in the head watch the rep in the jaguar game where for the first time in five games he actually ran for a small gain..

There is such a delay in his brain, he’s done..

you realize He's playing on a bum ankle I hope. He simply can't move with any quick reaction anymore. He's a statue now. You have to go back to before his ankle was stepped on to be fair to the guy

Hah to the Tannehill believers why don't you start a petition to save his job and hand it to Ross. I would love to have a hidden cam watching all these clueless Dolphin fans start cracking up!

I need to ask is the Dolphin organization any better since it drafted Tannehill? How many playoff games has he played since being drafted in 2012? I believe history has already closed the case on Tannehill.

"adamprez2003 wrote:

you realize He's playing on a bum ankle I hope. He simply can't move with any quick reaction anymore. He's a statue now. You have to go back to before his ankle was stepped on to be fair to the guy

Prez...alright man, you still believe in the guy..I’m really not sure anything else needs to be said or seen.

"KeyFin wrote:

I mean, I'm so on the fence here. If you swap Dak Prescott and Tannehill, RT likely wins 14 games in Dallas behind that awesome line and falls into consideration for comeback of the year honors. Dak probably wins 9 games in Miami and we'd have the exact same story.....the line sucks and the D is way too inconsistent. If you swapped him with Russell Wilson, then Tannehill's numbers plummet but he still wins 8-9 games with a great D setting the tone. And if you swapped RT with Brady, I think RT becomes Super Bowl MVP as he dominates for a decade.

If we do cut Tannehill, he will be a New England Patriot within hours of being released and he will thrive in their system.

I just don't think the QB is the real problem here....its the protection and the system in general. We're so focused on gimmick plays and outsmarting opponents that we don't just line up and let our talent win. That's 99% on Gase and his play calling and 1% on Tannehill.

Remember, we've lost 4 games this year we were winning in the 4th quarter. We could EASILY be 11-4 right now with a better 4th quarter game plan on both sides of the ball...I just can't pin that on the quarterback. When we run the ball on 3rd and 10 late in the 4th, you'd have to be a moron to think that the QB lost the game....and we've done that repetitively. The real problems are Gase and Burke.

And don't even get me started on how many late 4th quarter drives we've extended on penalties on defense...that's also a sign of weak coaching. 18 months ago most of us would have said Reshad Jones was our favorite player....maybe we should take a hint from the guy and realize that changes need to be made on the sideline.

In my experience, sitting on the fence means you want to take action, but do not know what action to take.

In cases like that you should get off the fence and move to a position where you can analyze the situation without dealing with a lot of uncontrolled emotions; yours or someone else's.

"KeyFin wrote:

I know a lot of you want him gone after this season and honestly, I think I'd prefer moving on as well. But how do you replace a QB with a 99 QBR who currently ranks #11 in the league?

For instance, we were all excited watching Cutler play his first game in Miami as he handled the pocket like a boss. He had that beautiful side-step to evade the rush and buy an extra second...and I instantly fell in love with Jay freaking Cutler. But then we saw the other side of the coin....low effort, poor decisions, etc. and we realized why one of the NFL's strongest arms of all time never became a household name. He didn't have Tannehill's passion, drive or vision.

Along came Ozweiller and I thought the same thing- he's a smart, coachable quarterback that has the entire skill set. There's nothing Oz seems to do badly.....yet he just doesn't have Tannehill's skill, arm strength or talent.

In both cases, all we could think of as a fan base was, "I can't wait for Tannehill to return from injury." After all, he won 6 of 7 before going down in 2016 and he started the year 3-0. His worst game of 2018 was when he re-injured the shoulder and the kid is so tough, he didn't even tell the team about it...he just kept playing in pain. Once he finally got back on the field, he rattled off a few more wins in safe RT form.

I personally don't think Tannehill will ever handle a collapsing pocket correctly and I doubt that he ever manages to crack the elite "top 5" in the league. But folks, Ryan Tannehill is clearly one of the better QB's out there because he's HIGHLY coachable and does everything by the book. His arm strength and talent are off the charts and I think with the right coach (and especially the right line), he's about as elite as you'll find in free agency.

This week we've compared Tannehill to names like Bridgewater and Foles. I honestly don't know if either QB is "better" for Miami....they're definitely not more talented. And that makes me wonder if this is a "grass is greener on the other side" type of scenario where we're ready to let a top talent walk simply because the team is headed for another 8-8 season.

After all, what has Tannehill personally done "wrong" in his last 20 or so starts? He did throw a pick-6 last week on a bad read, and of course he had that horrible two-pick game when he injured the shoulder. But that's definitely not the Tannehill we've come to expect since his accuracy has been excellent this season and he's making nothing but good decisions on 99% of his drop-backs.

Do we wish he was better in the pocket? OMG yes! But when we look back, his only real mistakes over the past three seasons have come on protection breakdowns where he was either running for his life or taking a blind hit in the pocket.

Before you pass final judgement on Ryan Tannehill, I ask you to consider one simple thing- how much does he do unscripted? Because if your answer is "not much", then your problem is really with Gase instead of our quarterback. I'll say it again, Tannehill does EXACTLY what he's told to do on any given down.

Do we wish he was more exciting? YES Do we wish he was more aggressive? YES Those are coaching decisions though, not our quarterback being inept.

The only true negative you can say about Tannehill is that he doesn't handle pressure as well as he should. Are we really willing to let a top-10 QB walk because his 2nd string line has played horrible for the past decade?

On occasion, we've seen rare glimpses of Ryan Tannehill "unchained" where he was told to just go win the game regardless of the costs. Think of his last 3-4 Patriots games where he absolutely balled out...that's the guy you want to replace because the coach doesn't let him play that way more often. Fire the coach...sure....but keep the stud QB one more year under a leader that will let him ball out.

I 100% agree with you that we need a new play-caller in Miami, but I'm just not convinced that there's anyone better to execute for us on the field. So before you decide once and for all to move on from #17, it may be a good time to think about what you're giving up to bring in a new quarterback with less skill and far less discipline.

Folks, Ryan Tannehill is the man....even if his coach treats him like a boy.

For me, I somewhat agree. As a QB, I think hes decent. Can we find a QB as good as him to replace him immediately, it would be a tall task IMO despite me not really care for Tannehill(as an NFL QB, I like the guy). However, there is one huge thing for me. Despite his record over the last some odd games, I dont think he is a winner. He is not the average QB that comes up in the big moments. Hes not the average QB that when the play needs to be made he makes it. Hes not the average QB that when its time to slam the door he does. Hes not the average QB that is GOOD for the team. Hes average in ALL aspects. A statistically average QB that makes big throws are good for the team. A statistically average QB that slides in the pocket and throws for 3 yard check down on 2nd down instead of standing there for a sack are good for their teams. A statistically average QB that breaks the pocket and throws it away in the early downs are good for their teams. A statistically average QB that audibles out of disaster players to pick up any positive yards are good for their teams. He is absolutely none of those. There are far worse QBs for their teams as well. But he is not a lifter.

I am one of those fans, that would be okay with him and Gase back(with other big changes). I wouldnt be happy with it, but I would be okay with it. If Gase is gone, Tannehill needs to be gone too. If Tannehill is gone, so goes Gase for me....

"Irishman wrote:

In my experience, sitting on the fence means you want to take action, but do not know what action to take.

In cases like that you should get off the fence and move to a position where you can analyze the situation without dealing with a lot of uncontrolled emotions; yours or someone else's.

Here's the problem though. We're not dealing with 2 + 2 + x = 6, where we can easily solve for x and have a definite conclusion. There are extreme variables in play-

- Gase and Tannehill are just below .500 for their careers
- The offensive line has been up and down that entire time due to injury
- This season, we're undefeated with all starters playing
- Gase calls very conservative plays with the lead or when slightly behind
- Of Gase's past 2 years, we're undefeated with our starting offensive line on the field
- Of Gase's 3 years, Tannehill has missed a combined 2 years of games
- Of Gase's 3 years, our true WR1 (Parker) has missed almost 80% and showed little in the rest
- Of Gase's 3 years, our best corner Howard has missed over a year of playing time
- Of Gase's 3 years, we've had several other top players out for injury
- In 2017, we lost our bye, lost 10 practices due to the hurricane and traveled more than any other team

Add and subtract as necessary, does that equal a coach that should be fired? I have no way to answer that.

And honestly, we can do the same with Tannehill. Great passer. Great vision. Awesome arm. Very smart. Leads by example, etc. etc. etc. But he's bad in the pocket and inept when his line plays poorly. Note- when others play well, he's great. His only bad games come when someone else messes up. Does this guy deserve to be fired?

For both Gase and RT, I can easily make a case for or against them. It's impossible to ignore injury...but how much do we factor that in? What about beating big teams but losing to weak ones? What about the last second collapses in must-win games? It should all factor in and I don't have the math skills to make them fit neatly for one logical answer.

Unfortunately, that's why I'm still on the fence. Like Ross, I need to see the game today to be closer to a conclusion.

LOL! I need to change my user name to " The Waffler". I am all over the place on this one. :-)

Got my new avatar all picked out:

[ATTACH:full]

[sniff, sniff] WAFFLE!

"KeyFin wrote:

Here's the problem though. We're not dealing with 2 + 2 + x = 6, where we can easily solve for x and have a definite conclusion. There are extreme variables in play-

- Gase and Tannehill are just below .500 for their careers
- The offensive line has been up and down that entire time due to injury
- This season, we're undefeated with all starters playing
- Gase calls very conservative plays with the lead or when slightly behind
- Of Gase's past 2 years, we're undefeated with our starting offensive line on the field
- Of Gase's 3 years, Tannehill has missed a combined 2 years of games
- Of Gase's 3 years, our true WR1 (Parker) has missed almost 80% and showed little in the rest
- Of Gase's 3 years, our best corner Howard has missed over a year of playing time
- Of Gase's 3 years, we've had several other top players out for injury
- In 2017, we lost our bye, lost 10 practices due to the hurricane and traveled more than any other team

Add and subtract as necessary, does that equal a coach that should be fired? I have no way to answer that.

And honestly, we can do the same with Tannehill. Great passer. Great vision. Awesome arm. Very smart. Leads by example, etc. etc. etc. But he's bad in the pocket and inept when his line plays poorly. Note- when others play well, he's great. His only bad games come when someone else messes up. Does this guy deserve to be fired?

For both Gase and RT, I can easily make a case for or against them. It's impossible to ignore injury...but how much do we factor that in? What about beating big teams but losing to weak ones? What about the last second collapses in must-win games? It should all factor in and I don't have the math skills to make them fit neatly for one logical answer.

Unfortunately, that's why I'm still on the fence. Like Ross, I need to see the game today to be closer to a conclusion.

Yeah, but to be fair you shouldn't just list reasons why we should KEEP Gase.

That equation looks different when you realize Gase is the first coach in Dolphins history to go 3 consecutive years with below average performance on both offense and defense. That equation looks different when you look at the how most long-term winning coaches started their careers: most starting a winning streak by year 3, and most HoF coaches started a winning streak by year 2.

Those two stats override all the ones you listed because the goal is to get that long-term winning coach and the goal is to improve our offense and defensive performances. With Gase we only got worse.

"cbrad wrote:

Yeah, but to be fair you shouldn't just list reasons why we should KEEP Gase.

That equation looks different when you realize Gase is the first coach in Dolphins history to go 3 consecutive years with below average performance on both offense and defense. That equation looks different when you look at the how most long-term winning coaches started their careers: most starting a winning streak by year 3, and most HoF coaches started a winning streak by year 2.

Those two stats override all the ones you listed because the goal is to get that long-term winning coach and the goal is to improve our offense and defensive performances. With Gase we only got worse.

No, because those two stats are extremely affected by exactly the case that Keyfin laid out.

"resnor wrote:

No, because those two stats are extremely affected by exactly the case that Keyfin laid out.

How affected? In terms of games lost to injury we're not that bad. You think none of these other coaches dealt with injuries? We're not talking one year here we're talking 3 years. Oh, and one more VERY important thing that affects the argument tremendously in favor of that long-term winning HC stat: most new HC's take over a bottom feeder. Gase actually had it good in taking over an (approx.) 8-8 team.

heres my case for RT

"vmarcilfan75 wrote:

heres my case for RT

Lol!

"cbrad wrote:

Yeah, but to be fair you shouldn't just list reasons why we should KEEP Gase.

That equation looks different when you realize Gase is the first coach in Dolphins history to go 3 consecutive years with below average performance on both offense and defense. That equation looks different when you look at the how most long-term winning coaches started their careers: most starting a winning streak by year 3, and most HoF coaches started a winning streak by year 2.

Those two stats override all the ones you listed because the goal is to get that long-term winning coach and the goal is to improve our offense and defensive performances. With Gase we only got worse.

I don't know if they do though. Again, we were leading many defensive categories by a pretty wide margin the first three weeks of the season- how could you possibly not factor that in? Likewise, we've been down at least 40-60% of our offensive line since that point (up to 100% in one game) plus our QB during almost half that span. We have to compare apples to apples here.

For instance, Indy was 14-2 with Manning, 2-14 without him. The world quickly said "they suck without their QB." Yet in Miami, we say "The backup QB should be good enough....losing RT doesn't matter." Which statement is more likely true? Do we expect every backup to be on Foles level or should we give some leeway when the starter (and his line) goes down?

News flash- everyone says the QB is the most important piece on the field. That's BS though. It's the offensive line...it's always been the offensive line. It's impossible to win without them.

Again, I'm not making an argument for or against anyone. Instead, I'm challenging expectation of what is realistic when your top 5-6 players miss significant playing time. I mean, people here thought we'd win 2-4 games this season and the national media said we'd be dead last in the NFL at the end of the season. You say our offense sucks (30th overall), our defense sucks (30th overall), yet we're about to win our 8th game of the year when perceived better teams aren't hitting that mark. That tells me two very important things-

1) Our team is finding creative ways to win with inferior talent on the field
2) Our coaches are MAXIMIZING the potential of that talent

We can't have it both ways....either we suck like our statistics say (30th overall) and Gase has grossly over-achieved OR the statistics don't tell the whole story. There's also a third option though- we accept that injuries have made a tremendous impact and admit that this is a pretty good team playing short handed.

Again, many of you said we were a 3-win team. How can you be disappointed at 7 wins and one game remaining...especially with the key losses we've had this season? You're screaming "Fire Gase" because we didn't make the playoffs in a year you thought we'd be the league's worst. (not directed at you cBrad, but the board in general)

The problem is people's expectations...not what actually happened.

FYI: For those who have been advocating for Bridgewater, he is starting today for the Saints.

"Surfs Up 99 wrote:

FYI: For those who have been advocating for Bridgewater, he is starting today for the Saints.

I'm going to go record that game now...thanks for reminding me!

"KeyFin wrote:

I don't know if they do though. Again, we were leading many defensive categories by a pretty wide margin the first three weeks of the season- how could you possibly not factor that in? Likewise, we've been down at least 40-60% of our offensive line since that point (up to 100% in one game) plus our QB during almost half that span. We have to compare apples to apples here.

Never cherry pick statistics. We could look at all those other HC's and guaranteed find cases where they had to deal with significant injuries or other serious extenuating factors. For example, should we ignore Belichick's 1995 season with Cleveland where he finished 5-11 because the owner Art Modell announced mid-season they were relocating to Balitmore? Belichick was coming off an 11-5 season with a playoff appearance, was 4-5 at the time, then finished 5-11. Should we make excuses for him?

I could go on. The point is there are tons of extenuating factors that affect win%, and the value of looking at all of NFL history (SB era) is that you get an idea of what the trends are. There is NO evidence our situation was so infinitely worse or even historically bad compared to others. Talk to many other teams' fans and they'll complain THEY have it historically bad in terms of injuries. In almost every case it's just myopic vision of looking only at your team and not at any others.

So this is the correct "apples to apples" comparison you want. NO cherry picking. Go the other route and the only viable apples to apples comparison is that there is never any comparison possible because every team is different.

"KeyFin wrote:

We can't have it both ways....either we suck like our statistics say (30th overall) and Gase has grossly over-achieved OR the statistics don't tell the whole story.

Yes you can have it both ways because both are true. Stats never tell the whole story so that's always true, and it's true that Gase has led this team to dismal offensive and defensive performances, yet his win% is higher than expected given point differential. Still doesn't invalidate the argument for using statistics to judge Gase. Knowing the trends is valuable and it's dangerous to suppose you know how to adjust the trend (or expected value) for a specific case. RARELY can anyone ever do that in fields where statistics are used.

"KeyFin wrote:

Again, many of you said we were a 3-win team. How can you be disappointed at 7 wins and one game remaining...especially with the key losses we've had this season?

Vegas had us at 6.5 wins, I predicted 7-9. Obviously there were some predicting far fewer wins and some with far more. That's generally the case given that the standard deviation between actual and expected historically is about 2 wins, so 95% of the predictions should be between 6.5 +- 2*2 wins, or from 2.5 to 10.5 wins.

That’s where I think stats can be misleading. How many short passs turned into big plays because of our playmakers.

The problem with Ryan is that he shows some promise but doesn’t have the IT factor. When everything is going well around him, he can do well. When it isn’t he struggles. Invariably a QB is going to need to make plays when things break down and help win games. I just don’t see that enough for him to warrant the money or delay finding a better QB

"cbrad wrote:

There is NO evidence our situation was so infinitely worse or even historically bad compared to others. Talk to many other teams' fans and they'll complain THEY have it historically bad in terms of injuries. In almost every case it's just myopic vision of looking only at your team and not at any others.

So this is the correct "apples to apples" comparison you want. NO cherry picking.

I agree. BUT here's the part you're still not calculating for. 30th in offense and defense doesn't equal 7 or 8 wins. Let's try this mathematically to see if it's easier for you to follow.

Baseline- (30th offense) + (30th defense) = .0468 win percentage on the year (let's just call today a tie for now to get 7.5 wins)

Question- what does our win percentage equal if we're 20th in offense and defense? Or even average at 16th? When you look at historical records, you're already looking at an anomaly in the 2018 Miami Dolphins. So I believe it is cherry picking until you can explain how a horrible team on paper wins 8 games...including against some very good playoff teams.

So that's what a qb can do under pressure!

11 out of the 12 likely playoff teams are top 16 in players on injured reserve meaning. We are 20th. Only in Miami do fans demand that we be that 1 out of 12 team and that injuries don't matter

Bye tannehill

Complete joke. Need more examples?