Ryan Tannehill

"AGuyNamedAlex wrote:

I think the issue is you cant just run through QB until you have an absolutely elite player.

Not many of those guys exist. How many have even been drafted in the last 20 years that reached a level so elite they can single handedly carry a team?

The reality is you kind of have to attempt to build with what you have. NFL GM didnt get their jobs because they are idiots.

There has to be some reason teams tend to stick with "above average" for a good while before starting over.

That's certainly a good point, and I think the league is in flux with regard to how it's dealing with the fact that 1) the player that league success revolves around is 2) scarce. I think we're going to see tanking become far more common, for example, though that personnel strategy isn't yet widely accepted or practiced.

"The Guy wrote:

That's certainly a good point, and I think the league is in flux with regard to how it's dealing with the fact that 1) the player that league success revolves around is 2) scarce. I think we're going to see tanking become far more common, for example, though that personnel strategy isn't yet widely accepted or practiced.

After posting I started to think part of that may be pressure to win and keep your job. It's hard as a GM to justify tanking for as long as it takes to land an elite QB which could be quite a while considering most drafts dont have one of that level.

Yes a long term goal of the Superbowl is great, but even a perennial playoff team is putting extra value and revenue into the Franchise/Owners pocket.

So looking at it from the perspective of a GM, for the sake of my job maybe I cant use that strategy. Of course if the owner is down for it, sure, but still.

Yeah, no one wants career suicide.

"Mcduffie81 wrote:

This is exactly what “The Guy” is doing. He thinks he’s onto something so he keeps harping on it.

Teams scoring 35+ points in the playoffs, since 1990, win over 90% of the time. But Tannehill, all by his lonesome, is supposed to overcome and carry his team to a win...or he's average.

Makes sense.

"KeyFin wrote:

I think it's pretty tough to bet against KC in this one. San Fran is a solid team and I like Jimmy G a lot...should be a good game.

I don’t. Give me San Fran. The legit run game and defense.

I will take the risk that the San Fran d travels in this one. And there is risk there cause I don’t think they are quite as formidable on the road.

"AGuyNamedAlex wrote:

I think the issue is you cant just run through QB until you have an absolutely elite player.

Not many of those guys exist. How many have even been drafted in the last 20 years that reached a level so elite they can single handedly carry a team?

The reality is you kind of have to attempt to build with what you have. NFL GM didnt get their jobs because they are idiots.

There has to be some reason teams tend to stick with "above average" for a good while before starting over.

Who are the QBs in the league who indisputably can carry a team?
- Mahomes
- Wilson
- Brees
- Rodgers

The jury is out on Lamar Jackson.
Some people argue that Brady is a “system QB” in that he performs at his best when he has smart disciplined offensive team mates who do their job.
Cam Newton can do it, but doesn’t do it reliably.

I won't go through the rest of the list, but it is fair to say that on a good day most of the QBs in the league can carry their team, but there are only 4 QBs most people will agree can carry an inferior team with a degree of regularity (with a small asterisk against Mahomes because he hasn’t been on an inferior team yet so he hasn’t had to do it)

when you consider that quality starting QBs are now regularly playing 15+ year careers you are looking at one “can carry his team” QBs entering the league every 4 or 5 years on average. Unless you actually have one of those QBs already that means you are competing with about 28 other teams to identify and draft such a QB.

Saying that you should identify and draft such a QB ignores
1) They are hard to identify. Everyone in the NFL had a chance to draft Brees in the first round and passed. Everyone in the NFL had 2 chances to draft Wilson and passed. 23 teams had a chance to draft Rodgers and passed. Mahomes was “only” the number 10 pick, pretty well every team had the opportunity to trade up to take him if they believed in him, yet only the Chiefs did.
2) If you do find one you may not be in a position to draft him.
3) If you do draft him his career may be derailed by bad coaching/injury as shown by Brees in San Diego.

What happens if you are not one of the 4 or 5 franchises without such a QB? Rolling over and playing dead until you find “the guy” isn’t a good approach. Build a solid team with good coaches and make do with the QB you have is what 80% of the NFL has to do.

I’m not sure Mahomes can be put in that category yet. I think it could be headed there but umm that damn kc scheme on offense is top shelf and there is a real effect that kelce primary and hill secondary have on defenses.

We gonna learn a few more things after the super bowl. Once that front 4 shows up for the 9ers.

"Hoops wrote:

I’m not sure Mahomes can be put in that category yet. I think it could be headed there but umm that damn kc scheme on offense is top shelf and there is a real effect that kelce primary and hill secondary have on defenses.

We gonna learn a few more things after the super bowl. Once that front 4 shows up for the 9ers.

I think it's pretty clear Mahomes is in the category of QB's that can "carry a team". He's already demonstrated that many times, and it's not like he has to win the SB for that to be evident. Marino could "carry a team" and never won the SB.

lol.. the modern day Marino meets SF again in the SB.

btw.. you guys heard of the KC fan 'Bad Luck Chuck'? Every KC playoff game he's gone to (and stayed in the stadium) since he started going in 2017 they've lost, every one he didn't go to they've won, and a video he tweeted of himself leaving the stadium during the Houston game to help the team when KC was down 21-0 went viral because KC stormed back to win once he left lol. Well.. he just came out and said he's going to Miami for the SB, though it's not yet clear if he'll be in the stadium itself.

Mahomes is great, and that SF defense is really good.. but there might be another factor to consider here lol.

Even Mariota knows whats up.. after the loss he tells Tannehill "you ll be back here again"

Nothing but respect. Mariota has always been a class guy. Hopefully he does good in a diff team.

"PhinFan1968 wrote:

I'd go you one better, and say Mahomes is the only QB with the talent to win regardless, but looking at his arsenal of targets, it's not hard to understand why...he's a supreme talent, with the right players to throw to.

Brady's done. His defense carried him this year...and when his defense regressed, they went 4-5, including playoffs.

No no no, remember what he shall not be named essentially said? Mahomes did it all by himself. He had no...

Running game
Powerhouse offensive line
Elite receivers
Powerhouse defense

Mahomes did it ALLLLLLL by himself! Hill and Kelce are just straight up garbage average receivers/TE

"Hoops wrote:

I’m not sure Mahomes can be put in that category yet. I think it could be headed there but umm that damn kc scheme on offense is top shelf and there is a real effect that kelce primary and hill secondary have on defenses.

We gonna learn a few more things after the super bowl. Once that front 4 shows up for the 9ers.

Mahomes isnt going to have it easy as he did against the TEN defense where he had all the time in the world to throw. That 9ers defense is deadly.

This is going to be a fun game. Cant wait to see how Mahomes performs against a defense like this

"Cashvillesent wrote:

Mahomes isnt going to have it easy as he did against the TEN defense where he had all the time in the world to throw. That 9ers defense is deadly.

This is going to be a fun game. Cant wait to see how Mahomes performs against a defense like this

Here's what happened when Mahomes and the Chiefs faced the two best pass defenses in the league in 2019 in terms of passer rating surrendered -- the Patriots and Ravens. The Patriots were 2.95 z-scores better than league average in passer rating surrendered, and the Ravens were 1.38 z-scores better. Compare that to the 49ers who were only 0.79 z-scores better than league average in passer rating surrendered:

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/201912080nwe.htm

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/201909220kan.htm

The overall passer rating for those games for Mahomes was 106.9.

Now let's take a look at what Jimmy Garoppolo did this year against pass defenses similar to the Chiefs'. The Chiefs were 1.02 z-scores better than league average in passer rating surrendered in 2019 (i.e., they were actually better than the 49ers).

The 49ers played Baltimore (z-score = 1.38), Pittsburgh (1.14), Green Bay twice (0.99), and Seattle twice (0.51). Garoppolo's overall passer rating in those six games was 97.3.

So what we've done here is confine the analysis of Mahomes's performance to the best two pass defenses in the league, while analyzing Garoppolo's performance as a function of a good bit greater variation in the opposing passing defenses he faced.

Nonetheless, Mahomes's overall passer rating in those games was 9.6 points higher than Garoppolo's.

In the past 15 Super Bowls the passer rating differential for the winner has ranged from -43.9 to +45. The first finding of note is that the teams on the positive side of the passer rating differential are 11-4 in those games (73% wins). There have been 13 of those 15 Super Bowls with passer rating differentials in the neighborhood of what might be anticipated between Mahomes and Garoppolo (based on the above). Teams with a passer rating differential of +7 or greater are 9-4 in those games.

So, there is certainly a chance the 49ers can win this game based on Garoppolo and Mahomes's anticipated performance, although they shouldn't be the favorite based on that. The Chiefs should be the favorite if you're basing what to expect in the game on that information alone.

"The_Dark_Knight wrote:

No no no, remember what he shall not be named essentially said? Mahomes did it all by himself. He had no...

Running game
Powerhouse offensive line
Elite receivers
Powerhouse defense

Please point out where that was said.

"cbrad wrote:

btw.. you guys heard of the KC fan 'Bad Luck Chuck'? Every KC playoff game he's gone to (and stayed in the stadium) since he started going in 2017 they've lost, every one he didn't go to they've won, and a video he tweeted of himself leaving the stadium during the Houston game to help the team when KC was down 21-0 went viral because KC stormed back to win once he left lol. Well.. he just came out and said he's going to Miami for the SB, though it's not yet clear if he'll be in the stadium itself.

LOL, I did read about that! Great story...stupid of course...but great story!

"The Guy wrote:

Please point out where that was said.

Its the logical end point of your entire argument going back to 2012.

"Cashvillesent wrote:

Even Mariota knows whats up.. after the loss he tells Tannehill "you ll be back here again"

Nothing but respect between @ryantannehill1 and Marcus Mariota at the end of the @Titans season. #InsideTheNFL TONIGHT 9PM ET/PT on @showtime. pic.twitter.com/hglc0RvG4S

— Inside the NFL (@insidetheNFL) January 21, 2020

Nothing but respect. Mariota has always been a class guy. Hopefully he does good in a diff team.

Props to Mariota and man did Tannehill look disappointed. He will do everything he can to be back. He understands how difficult it is. There are some very good teams competing for this. The Chiefs, Ravens, Patriots, Texans, Bills all have something very positive to build on. Depending on the QB situation, the Steelers and Colts may be back as well and who knows if the Browns will get out of their own way. The Chiefs, in particular, because of the lack of competition in their division my be hosting playoff games for the foreseeable future.

"Fin D wrote:

Its the logical end point of your entire argument going back to 2012.

Let me state my argument and I'll respectfully ask you to restate it the way you understand it so we can determine whether you're hearing it accurately.

The correlation between win percentage and adjusted (to 2019) passer rating differential in the 256 team seasons since 2012 (the timeframe you mentioned) is 0.815. The correlation between point differential and passer rating differential is 0.867.

That means 66% of the variance in win percentage and 75% of the variance in point differential since 2012 in the NFL has been associated with passer rating differential. Obviously that means a great deal of the goal of the game (i.e., winning) revolves around how well teams pass the ball and how well they defend the pass.

One way teams can improve how they perform in that regard is by having one of the league's best quarterbacks, because the league's best quarterbacks vary in their passer ratings from year to year at a level significantly higher than that of the league's poorer quarterbacks. Obviously if your quarterback's passer rating varies from year to year at a higher level, then your team stands a better chance of having a greater passer rating differential.

Teams can also improve their offensive passer ratings by assembling greater talent around the quarterback, but given the finding above with regard to quarterbacks, that approach is unlikely to yield the same degree of improvement in passer rating as would having a better quarterback. This is obviously why teams clamor for quarterbacks more so than for any other offensive or defensive player on the field. The quarterback can increase a team's probability of winning more so than any other player on the field.

Another way teams can improve how they perform with regard to passer rating differential is by better defending against the pass. But like with assembling offensive talent around the quarterback in the effort to increase passer rating differential, that likely requires a conglomeration of defensive players. Acquiring just a single stellar player on defense (an edge rusher for example) is highly unlikely to have as much an effect on passer rating differential as is acquiring a stellar quarterback.

I hope this helps with understanding of why the game revolves around the pass, and why teams stand to help themselves in that area most by acquiring one of the league's best quarterbacks.

None of the above is at all inconsistent with how teams approach the acquisition of personnel in today's game in terms of resources allotted. So either the entire league is doing it wrong, or what I've written above is correct. I'm afraid you'll have to pick one.

"The Guy wrote:

Here's what happened when Mahomes and the Chiefs faced the two best pass defenses in the league in 2019 in terms of passer rating surrendered -- the Patriots and Ravens. The Patriots were 2.95 z-scores better than league average in passer rating surrendered, and the Ravens were 1.38 z-scores better. Compare that to the 49ers who were only 0.79 z-scores better than league average in passer rating surrendered:

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/201912080nwe.htm

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/201909220kan.htm

The overall passer rating for those games for Mahomes was 106.9.

Now let's take a look at what Jimmy Garoppolo did this year against pass defenses similar to the Chiefs'. The Chiefs were 1.02 z-scores better than league average in passer rating surrendered in 2019 (i.e., they were actually better than the 49ers).

The 49ers played Baltimore (z-score = 1.38), Pittsburgh (1.14), Green Bay twice (0.99), and Seattle twice (0.51). Garoppolo's overall passer rating in those six games was 97.3.

So what we've done here is confine the analysis of Mahomes's performance to the best two pass defenses in the league, while analyzing Garoppolo's performance as a function of a good bit greater variation in the opposing passing defenses he faced.

Nonetheless, Mahomes's overall passer rating in those games was 9.6 points higher than Garoppolo's.

In the past 15 Super Bowls the passer rating differential for the winner has ranged from -43.9 to +45. The first finding of note is that the teams on the positive side of the passer rating differential are 11-4 in those games (73% wins). There have been 13 of those 15 Super Bowls with passer rating differentials in the neighborhood of what might be anticipated between Mahomes and Garoppolo (based on the above). Teams with a passer rating differential of +7 or greater are 9-4 in those games.

So, there is certainly a chance the 49ers can win this game based on Garoppolo and Mahomes's anticipated performance, although they shouldn't be the favorite based on that. The Chiefs should be the favorite if you're basing what to expect in the game on that information alone.

I dunno man... I just look at their match ups. Bosa is def having a MVP year, plus they got some studs of LBs, and a secondary that is better than the Titans. This will be a fun game.

"The Guy wrote:

Let me state my argument and I'll respectfully ask you to restate it the way you understand it so we can determine whether you're hearing it accurately.

The correlation between win percentage and adjusted (to 2019) passer rating differential in the 256 team seasons since 2012 (the timeframe you mentioned) is 0.815. The correlation between point differential and passer rating differential is 0.867.

That means 66% of the variance in win percentage and 75% of the variance in point differential since 2012 in the NFL has been associated with passer rating differential. Obviously that means a great deal of the goal of the game (i.e., winning) revolves around how well teams pass the ball and how well they defend the pass.

One way teams can improve how they perform in that regard is by having one of the league's best quarterbacks, because the league's best quarterbacks vary in their passer ratings from year to year at a level significantly higher than that of the league's poorer quarterbacks. Obviously if your quarterback's passer rating varies from year to year at a higher level, then your team stands a better chance of having a greater passer rating differential.

Teams can also improve their offensive passer ratings by assembling greater talent around the quarterback, but given the finding above with regard to quarterbacks, that approach is unlikely to yield the same degree of improvement in passer rating as would having a better quarterback. This is obviously why teams clamor for quarterbacks more so than for any other offensive or defensive player on the field. The quarterback can increase a team's probability of winning more so than any other player on the field.

Another way teams can improve how they perform with regard to passer rating differential is by better defending against the pass. But like with assembling offensive talent around the quarterback in the effort to increase passer rating differential, that likely requires a conglomeration of defensive players. Acquiring just a single stellar player on defense (an edge rusher for example) is highly unlikely to have as much an effect on passer rating differential as is acquiring a stellar quarterback.

I hope this helps with understanding of why the game revolves around the pass, and why teams stand to help themselves in that area most by acquiring one of the league's best quarterbacks.

None of the above is at all inconsistent with how teams approach the acquisition of personnel in today's game in terms of resources allotted. So either the entire league is doing it wrong, or what I've written above is correct. I'm afraid you'll have to pick one.

Which argument do you want me to regurgitate back to you?

- The one, in 2013, where you tried as hard as you are now, to get people to believe, Tannehill was holding Hartline and Bess back?
- The one where you tried to tell everyone the amount of TDs scored by a WR, is irrelevant?
- The one where you tried to tell everyone we cannot know if Tannehill's rookie numbers would have been better with better WR talent than Hartline, Bess and effing Nananee?
- The one where you tried to tell everyone that Tannehill's QB rating would not have gone up if Hartline or Bess had gotten more TDs?
- The one where you claim Thill isn't clutch?
- The one where you claim he sucks in the playoffs?

You literally at one time claimed, Hartline and Bess carried Tannehill in his rookie year. Carried him.

EDIT: Aaaaaaaannnnnnd I'm blocked now.

I loved the Bess/Hartline argumen.

"Fin D wrote:

Which argument do you want me to regurgitate back to you?

- The one, in 2013, where you tried as hard as you are now, to get people to believe, Tannehill was holding Hartline and Bess back?
- The one where you tried to tell everyone the amount of TDs scored by a WR, is irrelevant?
- The one where you tried to tell everyone we cannot know if Tannehill's rookie numbers would have been better with better WR talent than Hartline, Bess and effing Nananee?
- The one where you tried to tell everyone that Tannehill's QB rating would not have gone up if Hartline or Bess had gotten more TDs?
- The one where you claim Thill isn't clutch?
- The one where you claim he sucks in the playoffs?

You literally at one time claimed, Hartline and Bess carried Tannehill in his rookie year. Carried him.

EDIT: Aaaaaaaannnnnnd I'm blocked now.

No joke, the year we had Nananee on our team, I'm playing Madden, I take a friggen knee and he somehow got seriously injured on the boundary.

I was like...wow...hes just as bad here lol

"AGuyNamedAlex wrote:

No joke, the year we had Nananee on our team, I'm playing Madden, I take a friggen knee and he somehow got seriously injured on the boundary.

I was like...wow...hes just as bad here lol

Probably the worst reciever to ever make it to third on a roster.

2012 has to be the worst group if receivers in Dolphin history

"Dol-Fan Dupree wrote:

Probably the worst reciever to ever make it to third on a roster.

2012 has to be the worst group if receivers in Dolphin history

I bet they rank pretty high on worst in the NFL history too.

"Cashvillesent wrote:

Mahomes isnt going to have it easy as he did against the TEN defense where he had all the time in the world to throw. That 9ers defense is deadly.

This is going to be a fun game. Cant wait to see how Mahomes performs against a defense like this

Tennessee pretty well went for 3 man rush and 8 in coverage as their base defense against the Chiefs. I understand why they did that because Mahomes has been deadly against blitzers this year, but Mahomes just kept going through his progressions until he found someone open.

"Fin D wrote:

Which argument do you want me to regurgitate back to you?

- The one, in 2013, where you tried as hard as you are now, to get people to believe, Tannehill was holding Hartline and Bess back?
- The one where you tried to tell everyone the amount of TDs scored by a WR, is irrelevant?
- The one where you tried to tell everyone we cannot know if Tannehill's rookie numbers would have been better with better WR talent than Hartline, Bess and effing Nananee?
- The one where you tried to tell everyone that Tannehill's QB rating would not have gone up if Hartline or Bess had gotten more TDs?
- The one where you claim Thill isn't clutch?
- The one where you claim he sucks in the playoffs?

You literally at one time claimed, Hartline and Bess carried Tannehill in his rookie year. Carried him.

EDIT: Aaaaaaaannnnnnd I'm blocked now.

:sidelol: