Ryan Tannehill (Oakland @ Mia) "The Good, The Bad and ......

Been waiting for this, thanks Shark.

 

It was well done minus the Bon Jovi.
Nobody is a cowboy riding on a steel horse.

 

Your the best!!! I only could glance at the game in between learning the innervations of the Flexor Digitorum Profundus, Flexor Carpi Ulnaris, Opponens Pollicis, etc, etc lol.

 

ah the brachial plexus et al. good times


on tannehill: I really hope if we continue to throw that curl pattern to Hartline in coming weeks that he gets that ball out faster. The elite QBs will have the ball in the air well before the WR stops and turns around. There were a couple times where if the oakland CB was just a tad better he would have easily picked it (probably for 6). The better corners in the league will be all over that route unless tannehill works on his timing better. Don't be surprised in the next game or two to see one of those routes picked and taken to the house. But it is what it is.

 

thanks, please leave out the music in week 3....nothing beats original commentators

 

i would rather hope our coaching staff will change it to a double move

 

You continue to take what is there. Everyone knows that.
Sherman did a great job exploiting the weakness. In that football game.
There is no reason to think things could be different. You go with what is open. It was open all day.

 

yes it was there, but barely so. I'm not mad they kept going back to it, it was working. What I'm saying is, against a much better Jets secondary I don't see it working nearly as well. And their CBs will be watching a LOT of film this week and saying "hey, they threw that pass a bunch of times, they'll try it again" and start jumping the route with safety coverage over top in case they miss it.

The way to counter this, as Al said, is to make it a double move once you see them trying to jump it.

 

In you look at the throw around 10:45 he does exactly what you say about having the ball out before the break. The only one that was bad honestly was the first throw to Hartline but it had enough zip on it to get in there.

As a side note I love when the announcer says Hartline made a great block. In reality he turned around at an opportune time.

 

That thing wasn't too bad... I just kept getting confused during practical because the axillary artery is right there so there was a bunch of things branching and running everywhere. The practical was horrible, there was no way I could discern what something was and write it down in less than a minute.

On Tannehill I started to notice the same thing... Another thing to note was the number of passes he threw to the outside of the field and quick little outs. I guess he is still uncomfortable about letting it fly in the middle. On the plus side, he is amazing on the run and he did a better job scanning the field and not locking on to his primary WR.

 

I'm not sure Tannehill has a problem throwing to the middle as much as Sherman's offense is filled with out breaking routes. I'd love to see some more quick slants (preferably to Armstrong). Like many have said, someone is gonna get a pick 6 on Tannehill sooner or later. :/

 

That sounds like something Dr Sheldon Cooper would say.

 

You didn't think he'd stay a virgin forever, did ya?

 

The one to Hartline in the end zone was not really good. Granted, his first look seems to be Bush, but his mechanics were pretty bad as he came from his hip pocket on that throw. Very Byron Leftwich. It's not that his decision was bad, it's that his mechanics pretty much negate a good decision AND it throws off the timing. It allowed for the DB to make a play on the ball, therefor, taking away a TD. Glad Miami eventually scored a TD.

I also noticed this: Tannehill has some tendency to hit the ball with his left hand before throwing. This unnecessary movement can cause unwanted results (like the miss on the Hartline TD throw). Again, it throws off the timing a bit, which is a quintessential standard in the West Coast system. He does not do it all of the time, but it might be one of these "bad habits" he picked up along the way. Might be very difficult to get him to stop it with regularity because he probably does not know (though, he is probably aware from looking at film) he does it, especially, at the time of the play. Some of those bad habits are hard to break.

Those little idiosyncracies should come with time, I think (I hope). I noticed his launch point in this game was a little higher in this game on some of his throws.

Also, it is not that he cannot gun it in there (we saw how erratic he can be with passes on Hard Knocks throwing the out route to the barrels), but can he gun it in there with accuracy? I think he has a little bit of an issue with that right now. I think he is more of an athlete than a "natural passer". Plenty of guys have a rifle, but not all can use it with accuracy and timing. That's what separates the good ones from the very good to great ones. Look at some of Eli's passes in the second half against Tampa. He had some lasers in tight coverage. That's tough to do. Some QBs never pick that up with any consistency.

Another little nitpick is that I would like to see him hold the ball a little higher when he is scanning the field. Again, because of the timing, it is quicker to come from the chest/shoulder level than from around the abdomen when loading up for a pass.

All of these little things help Tannehill, but it does not mean he has to do them. If you were to teach a kid how to play QB (from a fundamental standpoint), you would not show the kid film of Brett Favre. You would show the kid Peyton Manning.

So far, it looks like he has a little ways to go, but I like the moxie he brings to the field. He shows that he can get punched in the mouth and come back from it. Some things cannot be coached, and his 'never give up' style is one of them.

 

They did do that late in the Texans game and it worked for a pretty long gainer.

 

Its a good thing Ryan read last weeks article. He got you to remove the ugly!!

I would much rather have ...... over the ugly

 

I don't know the stats but from what I've seen thus far, I don't think there are gonna be problems in the middle of the field..we've already seen some college misconceptions get exploited by this player..#1 thing for me, was touch, lotta questions there, no, he has it, another, trajectory, it's really good, and really catchable,, another, deeb ball accuracy, well, when you have touch and good trajectory, the deep ball be there,and I have seen nothing that would lead me to believe the middle of the field is a weakness..Tannehill can throw an amazing seam route, I've seen him do it on several occasion with great accuracy, trajectory, and touch..those are things I don't worry about anymore.

 

I like the outs and didn't see one throw set up a receiver to take a big hit which can help keep them healthy.

Hartline played this game like a number one receiver.

Lot of positives to not even show Reggie in there.

Thanks LandShark nicely done.

 

The All 22 tape shows that the Raiders engaged in a monstrous amount of coverage disguises and coverage changes. They did everything. Cover Three, Cover One, Two Man, Quarters, QQH, other Combo coverages...and they disguised them more often than not.

At some points, the disguises began to work. They fooled Tannehill. What I liked though was even when they did that and he made a bad decision, he still kept the ball out of reach of an interception.

I can't agree with Colmax about the play to Hartline in the end zone. That was a really keen play by Tannehill. Once he checked off his initial option, he knew he had to manufacture a better angle in order to get the ball to Hartline versus that coverage. Everyone was dropped back in a zone, reading his eyes. I don't know what you call the coverage to be honest as I'm no expert on it but it looked like an umbrella of six or seven vertical zones. The best option he had was to sprint out and create a new angle, get that ball to the front corner against a guy that was sitting in his zone. I don't know if this is true for sure but I don't think QB Coaches are going to kill a guy for looping the football while you're sprinting to your right. Call me crazy, I doubt Zac Taylor said a word about it to him, I doubt he even considered it. The bottom line is Hartline needs to just make a play there. Yes the ball could have been thrown closer to the front pylon but Tannehill was already doing a bunch of good things on that play and it's tough to ask him to throw pinpoint like that on the run.

I feel like tapping the football is talked about way more by us than by coaches and players. It seems to me like everyone's guilty of it. I could pick out probably 5 times or more that Carson Palmer did it too, during that game. It's something you want to work on but it doesn't seem like something that is stressed as very important.

Ryan Tannehill got more antsy in the pocket in this game than I can remember in a while. He wasn't working it as well as I'd want. One particular play stands out. He's fooled by a disguised coverage and starts feeling some pressure from his right side. The right move given two man look would have been to step up into the pocket and throw to Davone Bess over the middle between the two safeties. He didn't feel the pressure right, nor did he read the coverage right, and he ended up smoking a ball to Hartline along the sidelines even though he was doubled by a corner and safety.

 

One thing that impresses me about Hartline is what a great job he does of keeping his body between the ball and the DB. Not all of those completions were in the perfect spot. Hartline made a lot of those plays happen. (That's the opposite of what Nanee does). I think that protects against INTs and increases the odds of PI by the DB. The difference between what Hartline does and what Nanee does is why WR play matters.

 

I loved the touchdown call on the first drive. The full house backfield with tailback and two upbacks drew Matt Shaughnessy into biting hard to the inside because with that kind of strength of the formation, as a defense you're thinking that your strong side players are going to jam up the hole and create hesitation and bad timing, but your weak side guys might have to be the ones to scrape in and get the ball carrier down. So to me the formation made it less likely that Shaughnessy would stay disciplined and pursue Tannehill on the boot action.

But even if Shaughnessy did stay disciplined, the play had Brian Hartline streaking across the end zone on a drag route against man coverage, and Anthony Fasano running counter to the blocking to sneak out the back door along with Ryan Tannehill. It's hard to tell what Fasano was supposed to run as he read the fact that Shaughnessy bit hard and made a great decision to give up on his route and sprint out for what was essentially a cut off block. If Shaughnessy had not bit at all then I think Fasano would have throttled in somewhere and seen if Tannehill could open up his shoulders and hit him. If Shaughnessy had bit slightly but recovered quickly I think Tannehill would have ran until he had the angle to hit Hartline on the drag.

I just thought it was a really good play, all in all.

 

Re-watched the game last night and one thing that kind of jumped out at me that bothered me. Whenever they showed a sideline shot when the D was on the field, Tanny was laughing about something. I'm not talking about once or twice, but I've counted 3 or 4 times AFTER I noticed it the first time. Now I am definately not one of those people who think that they should play the game and STFU, but usualy when they show QBs on the sidelines they are going over pictures of the D formations that were taken in game. I did not see that once. Now, I'm sure they did that and he wasn't giggling the whole time he was on the field. Just pointing out something that stood out to me.

 

I didnt get to watch the full game - so first off - thanks for posting this!

Second - I'm no expert but I liked most of the decisions. One thing I definitely noticed that others have pointed out is those breaking routes to Hartline. Alot of them needed to come just a half second or so sooner. A better corner breaks most of them or runs one back for 6, without a doubt. On the same token, kudos to Hartline for coming down with most of them. I think better corner play from the Raiders and this could have been a very ugly game.

Another thought - I was down on Bess for missing that first down, but after watching it, most of that is on Tannehill, if he gets that ball in front just a bit more Bess can grab that and pick up the extra yard or two for the first down.

That screen to Reggie - abysmal effort from Nannee. That could have been a real nice pickup if he stays on the corner blocking or even pursues to try to get the defender off balance and give Reggie a cut back. I'm sure he'll hear about that in film break downs, as he well should.

Overall though, he played a solid game and thats all you can ask for at this point. Some definite improvement from the first game...just gotta keep working at it and stay patient!

Unrelated: First thing I did in Madden was sign Ocho haha. Something to be said for the imaginary world =P

 

Also the video placed this one play in the "Good" section but really it was a bad play by Tannehill...the boot where he was heavily pursued and threw the ball just before he got to the sidelines. That was intentional grounding. And the way he lobbed out that ball uncontrolled, he's lucky there wasn't someone conveniently placed to try and get it. It was a hesitant, thoughtless decision and it was all in all just a bad idea. The All 22 showed that he had nothing on the play unless he could somehow loop around and throw the ball 40 yards to the opposite field (which would be impossible). This is why Mike Sherman outlined that the down side of the boot actions is essentially you cut off half the field. The Raiders played this well, there was nothing there, and Tannehill should have ACTUALLY thrown the ball away instead of pushing it away behind the line of scrimmage for what should have been a penalty.

There was also a play in the "Bad" section I thought was a nice play by Tannehill. The Raiders again running a lot of disguises, end up with a fire zone. Tannehill leaves the pocket early and knows he's got Bess in man coverage. To me, it's up to Davone to run that route at the right depth to where you've got the 1st down. Tannehill throwns behind him a little and Bess is caught catching the ball and going out before he got the sticks. Tannehill could have done better with the play but it's another instance of him doing a lot of good things on the play and one marginally not great thing, and suddenly it's a bad play for him...and I don't know that I agree at all.

And the 3rd & 8 in the 3rd quarter where Fasano was dropped by McClain before he could get the sticks, I thought the decision was very sound on that play, and the throw was even better. I could be wrong but it looked like QQH on the coverage (I haven't reviewed that play on All 22 yet), and the only other option on the play with single coverage was Legedu Naanee streaking deep in single coverage. Well, that's Legedu Naanee, and this is 3rd & 8. How many times do you see a QB go for a 30 or 40 yard pass on 3rd down and you're thinking damnit, you didn't need to go for it all, just move the sticks. This is one of those situations. You could throw it up to Legedu in single and at best you hope for a pass interference, because you're pretty sure he's not catching that ball...but then there's also a chance it ends up an interception. The right read was Anthony Fasano with Rolando McClain covering him in man. It just so happens Fasano can only marginally win that matchup...he doesn't have it in him to get 8 yards on that play even with a perfect throw. It was still a safer decision and a better percentage chance than hitting Legedu on the play.

That 2nd & 6 at the beginning of the 4th quarter where he throws the slant to Hartline, again seems like the right read to me, on a 2nd & 6. You're aiming there for the easy 3rd & 1 or maybe a conversion. It was man coverage and he read that. Hartline's got to win that and not let the damn ball hit his own shoulder pad. The ball placement looks bad only because the ball actually made it to the shoulder pad but if Hartline had stuck out his hands and grabbed it, it wouldn't have looked like it was placed too far behind him. Not perfection, but not bad by any means on such a bang-bang play.

I think there may have actually been two plays in there where they fooled Ryan Tannehill by not disguising the coverage...which is pretty interesting.

One under-appreciate aspect of what Ryan did this week was use his eyes to keep the defense guessing a lot more and a lot better. I don't know how many noticed, but I certainly did.

 

be careful bro. My ex girlfriend got hepatitis doing that.

 

Great thread..hope we do this every week..the 22 stuff by Ck is about as good as its gonna get for us in terms of a progress report.

There was a report by the announcers that Philbin was working with Tannehill about the eyes during the week.

 

CK, when will your all-22 report be up this week?

 

Tomorrow. That's the plan anyway. May have some video or picture aids this time.

 

I absolutely agree; Hartline should hold onto the ball. Give props to #26 on that play also.

#26 actually has his back and head turned from Hartline at Hartline's break at about the 2:14-2:15 mark. The LB is already committed to Bush. THIS is when the ball should be out of his hand. Instead, Tannehill decides to break out toward the sideline to make the throw. He did not need to do this (or at least not take so many steps). There is already an open window and the DB's body is out of position. He is already on the short-side of the field. There is no need for the break. The DB was allowed to come back into the play after the he does a full damned pirouette! #26 got lucky on this one.

[Since he decided to make the break] Holding the ball high with both hands at shoulder level instead of dropping the ball to tap it would have been more appropriate. Holding the ball in this position (at shoulder level) gets the ball out with less motion. Minimizing the motion saves time and is more efficient. The throw is also off-balance because of that loading up of the ball (or the "tap"). Bad mechanics and fundamentals gives rise to a higher degree of "off" throws. This was not an efficient way of going about this since the decision to break was already made.

The break (with the added steps in his break) and the way the the ball is handled pre-throw were unnecessary; the decisions were mechanically inefficient and fundamentally wrong. We see this play all of the time in the NFL, and better QBs capitalize on these opportunities. It also shows some indecision by Tannehill to not throwing it earlier, and I think the tap concretes that indecision. These things play into the timing and accuracy that Philbin alluded to in his presser.

I will give in that Tannehill had a tough angle, but the throw and window was there. All throws are not easy as an NFL QB. Since he decided to break, if he would have used what I mentioned above, he would have had a higher chance at success and the ball would have gotten there earlier, and that split second counts. Because he does not have top-tier rifle, all of these little things help him. Posters will try to grill me on the arm issue. It is a non-issue. He seems to have plenty of arm to make the necessary NFL throws, but I suspect his accuracy decreases with increased velocity (and not necessarily at increased distances). I can see where a better angle for a green QB with suspect accuracy goes there.

We all can sit here and play Monday Morning QB and break this down, but this play is one that will be seen again, and I hope they get it right the next time.


_____________________________________________


On the tapping; I agree with you, probably every QB is guilty of it. But again, it is an unnecessary motion and sometimes works against a QB with less stripes on his sleeve. He probably is not using it to his advantage like a veteran QB would in some situations, like maybe getting a defender to jump earlier only to throw it once that defender falls, kind of like with a pump fake. But where timing in this offense is key, that 'pop' of the ball may throw off the timing a bit, especially if it is not incorporated in a play during practice. If he does it unconsciously in a game, timing could be off, and the result could be just like the Hartline TD play (in which it played a role). I think it is unnecessary, and something that I do not particularly care for.

 

I must be missing something here due to my phone. I just see one or 2 lines with nothing to click on. As I am replying I see some youtube words in between the quotes but I see nothing about a youtube video or anything to click on while I look at the thread and OP.

 

Yeah, may be a phone thing, or a vid that isn't enabled to play on android or something.

 

I hate that show lol, I don't really understand why it gets so much love. It reminds me of Two and a Half Men (which also is bad) because the writing is so bad and you can see the plots and jokes coming from a mile away.

PS- I have had coitus multiple times with multiple women

 

Glad you mentioned that. I swear I saw Hartline - while lining up before the snap - looking back at Tannehill under center and cracking up. I mean while they were literally lined up before the snap. Maybe I just saw it wrong, but seemed crazy.

I don't necessarily think it is a bad thing - just interesting.

 

That is absolutely not the case. This was an eight man coverage in a condensed space. If he had turned to Brian Hartline and attempted to throw that ball off his drop the corner (who was watching Tannehill the entire time) would have EASILY broken on the ball. You're focusing on the wrong things. You're focusing on his back being turned to Hartline when it doesn't matter because his eyes were fixed on Ryan Tannehill and it's a zone coverage with under-cutting the passing lane a paramount concern. With the angle Tannehill initially had at the snap not only would he stand the risk of getting the ball tipped by the defensive end if he tried to throw the football off three step timing, but the defensive back probably cuts into the passing lane and intercepts the football. Ryan made the right read at the snap and the reason he checked off it was because a defensive tackle pulled off the line and dropped into a zone, making sure ALL EIGHT zones were covered on this play. At that point you have to do something with your athleticism. You have to. You don't challenge eight zones off a three step drop in the tight red area, it's suicide.

Ryan Tannehill did the absolute correct thing pre-snap and post-snap, the only thing he could have done better was place the ball a little closer to the front pylon. However, he was on the run as he threw, and it's a testament to how accurate he normally is on the run that we even think of criticizing that minor point of accuracy on this play.

The mechanics were not bad at all for throwing on the run like this. I don't see any QB Coach out there taking issue with this throw. Have you seen Aaron Rodgers play football lately? He throws the football on the run in exactly this manner all the time, and he is considered the most accurate thrower on the run in the entire NFL.

Disagree. Not even close, to me.

You're right, I do hope that next time it happens, we get it right and Brian Hartline holds onto that ball.

I understand the theory of why the tapping is not good, I'm just saying that given how often and how many QBs I see doing it, it's something that is talked about more than it actually matters. It strikes me as one of those things that us Monday Morning QBs can easily SEE, as opposed to the myriad things that are difficult for us to see, and so because visually it's easy to pick out the mistake we end up harping on it all the time even though it doesn't matter that much.

 

The new "All 22" Review for the Raiders game is up.

http://www.finsnation.com/fins_nati...weekly-all-22-breakdown-raiders-dolphins.html

 

I just saw on Pro Football Focus that Ryan Tannehill is tied for Aaron Rodgers with for their highest accuracy rating under pressure.

 

That has to be because of a similar scheme and similar player.....or coincidence?