Ryan Tannehill

"The Guy wrote:

Here again are the z-scores for performance under pressure, accompanied by career passer ratings:

Ben Roethlisberger 1.84; 94.0
Russell Wilson 1.59; 101.2
Aaron Rodgers 0.83; 103.0
Matt Ryan 0.81 ; 94.7
Tom Brady 0.71 ; 97.0
Andrew Luck 0.42; 89.5
Matthew Stafford 0.19; 89.3
Carson Palmer 0.11; 87.
Colin Kaepernick 0.11; 88.9
Ryan Fitzpatrick 0.09; 81.1
Cam Newton -0.35; 86.1
Philip Rivers -0.46; 95.3
Drew Brees -0.59; 98.0
Eli Manning -0.66; 84.1
Alex Smith -0.66; 87.3
Joe Flacco -0.96; 84.1
Andy Dalton -1.32; 87.9
Ryan Tannehill -2.22; 89.1

An analysis of variance reveals that the top five QBs on that list have an average career passer rating of 97.98 (SD = 15.78). The other 13 QBs have an average passer rating of 88.35 (SD = 19.98).

That difference is significant at a 0.00067 level of probability, meaning that the top five QBs on the list have performed significantly better with regard to career passer rating than the other 13.

"The Guy wrote:

The correlation between DVOA and passer rating this year is 0.88, so the findings in the post you quoted should stand.

Yeah as Pauly pointed out you should stay away from DVOA even if it's tempting. FO's raw stats are fine, but stay away from DVOA. And it's not really a question of whether there's a high correlation or not. There's also a high correlation between passer rating and ESPN's QBR. It's a question of correct methodology.

Two other issues: 1) career passer ratings should almost never be used without first adjusting each year, then weighting each adjusted rating by passing attempts to get a weighted average career rating (only exception is if all QB's in the comparison played in the exact same years for similar number of games each year), and 2) ANOVA should be used only when you have a way of categorizing different groups independent of how their ratings (in this case) compare to each other.

That is, you don't want to first compare and then say let's look only at top 5 vs. the rest. That's "cherry picking" so to say. You want to be able to say independent of the ratings that this is group X and this is group Y and THEN use ANOVA.

None of this distracts from your overall point btw.. it's just that the methodology is problematic.

"PhinFan1968 wrote:

This dude's been a broken record for years...just ignore his gibberish...it's a waste of time.

Tannehill had a good game, threw for 2 TDs, ran for 1, had another passing touchdown the TE let him down on, so it counted as an INT. And how many drops? I saw several in the replays.

And that defense couldn't stop a nosebleed...just terrible. Good thing they got the 2 INTs else that woulda been a blowout...WTH was Tannehill thinking, not getting that field goal off, not catching those passes, not stopping Houston from scoring at will...

Titans flat got out-coached/schemed.

I'm glad the Titans outcome is so important here.

Maybe we should replace the Dolphins weekly thread with a Titans one so we can dissect every Tannehill throw, drop, missed assignment and poor coaching call to continue this debate for another 8 years.

The entire 10 decade was this non stop circle-jerk fest, why not make the 20's decade the same!!

"Bumrush wrote:

I'm glad the Titans outcome is so important here.

Maybe we should replace the Dolphins weekly thread with a Titans one so we can dissect every Tannehill throw, drop, missed assignment and poor coaching call to continue this debate for another 8 years.

The entire 10 decade was this non stop circle-jerk fest, why not make the 20's decade the same!!

Only important to the extent it helps our draft pick. And people can talk about whatever the hell they want...don't like it, don't open the thread. Your issue.

"PhinFan1968 wrote:

Only important to the extent it helps our draft pick. And people can talk about whatever the hell they want...don't like it, don't open the thread. Your issue.

Or you could discuss this in the other NFL forum.
Hasn't this debate been beaten down enough? I mean the victory laps taken these past few months have seemingly settled it.

How about discussing Flores transforming this team, Devante Parker's breakout seaaon, the FA additions in the secondary.. the change of culture?

Why the hell is a player no longer on the roster the main subject being discussed all season here? It has no impact on Miami other than exposing how utterly pathetic Gase was. That's all.

"cbrad wrote:

Yeah as Pauly pointed out you should stay away from DVOA even if it's tempting. FO's raw stats are fine, but stay away from DVOA. And it's not really a question of whether there's a high correlation or not. There's also a high correlation between passer rating and ESPN's QBR. It's a question of correct methodology.

Two other issues: 1) career passer ratings should almost never be used without first adjusting each year, then weighting each adjusted rating by passing attempts to get a weighted average career rating (only exception is if all QB's in the comparison played in the exact same years for similar number of games each year), and 2) ANOVA should be used only when you have a way of categorizing different groups independent of how their ratings (in this case) compare to each other.

That is, you don't want to first compare and then say let's look only at top 5 vs. the rest. That's "cherry picking" so to say. You want to be able to say independent of the ratings that this is group X and this is group Y and THEN use ANOVA.

None of this distracts from your overall point btw.. it's just that the methodology is problematic.

Yeah the only reason I did an ANOVA with the top five QBs in the list is because it was in response to a discussion about my original point that the QBs typically considered elite, with the exception of Brees, are clustered at the top of the list (Roethlisberger, Wilson, Rodgers, Ryan, Brady). Then someone responded and said the list was "mixed," hence the ANOVA with the top five compared to the rest as a way of determining that the top five indeed consisted of elite QBs. In other words, the list isn't mixed -- the best QBs are at the top.

Anyway, I think it's clear that what we're looking at there, if DVOA has a shred of validity in measuring QBs' performance, is a list of QBs' relative ability to perform under pressure, and not a list of the kinds of pressure, in terms of relative difficulty level, the QBs experienced.

"cbrad wrote:

Wow.. tough game. Anyway, weekly update: Tannehill's 92.2 rating today gives him a 114.57 rating so far for 2019. His z-score this year is still a very impressive +2.0877. For reference, the average z-score rating for SB winners is about 1.

And not that it's necessary but it's still useful: the t-test shows that the set of 9 games in Tennessee is statistically significant compared to the 88 games in Miami with the probability the two sets of ratings come from the same QB at 0.6%.

Anyway, the next two games will be very telling. Today was almost a must-win game (essentially it was, but not technically). However, the next two basically are given that one is against Houston. So we'll see how Tannehill does to end the season: playoffs or no playoffs?

So you're setting making/not making the playoffs as being on Tannehill? Was today's loss anything to do with Tannehill?

"Bumrush wrote:

I'm glad the Titans outcome is so important here.

Maybe we should replace the Dolphins weekly thread with a Titans one so we can dissect every Tannehill throw, drop, missed assignment and poor coaching call to continue this debate for another 8 years.

The entire 10 decade was this non stop circle-jerk fest, why not make the 20's decade the same!!

Then why are you posting in the thread? The thread is about Tannehill. Don't like it? Don't read it.

"Bumrush wrote:

Or you could discuss this in the other NFL forum.
Hasn't this debate been beaten down enough? I mean the victory laps taken these past few months have seemingly settled it.

How about discussing Flores transforming this team, Devante Parker's breakout seaaon, the FA additions in the secondary.. the change of culture?

Why the hell is a player no longer on the roster the main subject being discussed all season here? It has no impact on Miami other than exposing how utterly pathetic Gase was. That's all.

You could start those threads if you like. I'm sure you'll get some responses.

"resnor wrote:

Then why are you posting in the thread? The thread is about Tannehill. Don't like it? Don't read it.

I have a right to chime in. But you are correct I should avoid even coming to the mains because the rules seemingly don't apply here.

"Bumrush wrote:

Or you could discuss this in the other NFL forum.
Hasn't this debate been beaten down enough? I mean the victory laps taken these past few months have seemingly settled it.

How about discussing Flores transforming this team, Devante Parker's breakout seaaon, the FA additions in the secondary.. the change of culture?

Why the hell is a player no longer on the roster the main subject being discussed all season here? It has no impact on Miami other than exposing how utterly pathetic Gase was. That's all.

The admins left this thread here...take it up with them.

"resnor wrote:

You could start those threads if you like. I'm sure you'll get some responses.

Come to club if you want to read about the Miami Dolphins.

"Bumrush wrote:

Come to club if you want to read about the Miami Dolphins.

Dude...you need to chill the heck out. What is your issue and what crawled up your pant leg and bit your bottom?

The forum is basically dead right now whether you like it or not. It's the same group of 10 of us posting all the time more or less. Why come crap on the conversations and make the site look bad?

"resnor wrote:

So you're setting making/not making the playoffs as being on Tannehill? Was today's loss anything to do with Tannehill?

How Tannehill plays in must-win games is important because he's had a good deal of clunkers in such games. He played fine today, but not good enough to win. Lots of missed passes in the 1st half, much better in the 2nd half. I won't put the INT on him, but overall Watson played better even with two bad INT's (one especially made it a competitive game) and came through when it mattered most.

So yes it absolutely matters. The Titans are a good all round team so it's not like there's a surrounding cast issue. Brees probably has a bigger such issue and New Orleans is up next. Anyway, he's now going up against playoff calibre teams in must-win games and that means you have to step up and win. I mean.. what's the point if you miss the playoffs?

Remember, while it's been shown that Tannehill can play elite for a statistically significant stretch, what hasn't been shown is that he can play at that level in must-win games and whether he can play at a high level across many years (not necessarily this high of course).

"Bumrush wrote:

Come to club if you want to read about the Miami Dolphins.

To be honest, I had a club membership, and found it to be less interesting than the mains while I had it.

I also hear there's plenty of arguing and bickering currently in club.

"AGuyNamedAlex wrote:

Dude...you need to chill the heck out. What is your issue and what crawled up your pant leg and bit your bottom?

The forum is basically dead right now whether you like it or not. It's the same group of 10 of us posting all the time more or less. Why come crap on the conversations and make the site look bad?

I honestly believe that one of the main reasons the mains have slowed down to this point is because of the contentious and constant bickering nature of the Tannehill debate where people on both sides took very rigid position on the issue and then argued the same points over and over again. Anyone that wasn't in line with the current groupthink was mocked for even dissenting.

The Tannehill debate has been beaten in to a pulp - validating old points from 5 years serves no purpose outside of judging previous regimes that aren't even here anymore.

I think everyone is happy about the success be is having and wishes him nothing but the best but it's time to move on - we have a practice squad roster that has exceeded all expectations , a shit ton of draft picks, will be selecting a franchise QB (hopefully this year or next) and a ton of cash.

"cbrad wrote:

How Tannehill plays in must-win games is important because he's had a good deal of clunkers in such games. He played fine today, but not good enough to win. Lots of missed passes in the 1st half, much better in the 2nd half. I won't put the INT on him, but overall Watson played better even with two bad INT's (one especially made it a competitive game) and came through when it mattered most.

So yes it absolutely matters. The Titans are a good all round team so it's not like there's a surrounding cast issue. Brees probably has a bigger such issue and New Orleans is up next. Anyway, he's now going up against playoff calibre teams in must-win games and that means you have to step up and win. I mean.. what's the point if you miss the playoffs?

Remember, while it's been shown that Tannehill can play elite for a statistically significant stretch, what hasn't been shown is that he can play at that level in must-win games and whether he can play at a high level across many years (not necessarily this high of course).

I did not watch most of the Titans game...but I saw him throwing dimes in the 4th...and i plenty of talk off his receivers dropping balls today.

Then you are here taking about Tannehill being at fault.

Hmmmmm

"resnor wrote:

To be honest, I had a club membership, and found it to be less interesting than the mains while I had it.

I also hear there's plenty of arguing and bickering currently in club.

I have essentially stayed away from Club after a massive argument over whether Kyler Murray was like 1 inch too short or not. You think Tannehill arguments are bad? That was on another level. I'll probably post again there sometime but that just put me off tremendously.

"resnor wrote:

I did not watch most of the Titans game...but I saw him throwing dimes in the 4th...and i plenty of talk off his receivers dropping balls today.

Then you are here taking about Tannehill being at fault.

Hmmmmm

I watched the whole game. If you get a chance watch the 1st half. Lots of passes were off mark enough that it was more Tannehill's fault than his receivers even if it was technically a "drop". Yes Watson played better even if their stats show about the same.

"Bumrush wrote:

I honestly believe that one of the main reasons the mains have slowed down to this point is because of the contentious and constant bickering nature of the Tannehill debate where people on both sides took very rigid position on the issue and then argued the same points over and over again. Anyone that wasn't in line with the current groupthink was mocked for even dissenting.

The Tannehill debate has beaten down in to a pulp and that continuing it to validate old points from 5 years serves no purpose outside of judging previous regimes that aren't even here anymore.

I think everyone is happy about the success be is having and wishes him nothing but the best but it's time to move on - we have a practice squad roster that has exceeded all expectations , a **** ton of draft picks,w be selecting a franchise QB (hopefully this year or next) and a ton of cash.

I can basically guarantee you the site is slow because we are a bad team.

I've watched this forum since it was created and split from Finheaven. It started off super tiny and then boomed, since then as the team got worse less and less posters continue to frequent the site.

What we have here are die hard fans, the more casual guys probably feel like they have better things to do than talk about a lost season.

I'd be shocked if anyone saw a thread on Tannehill and was so repulsed by the debate they leave.

"AGuyNamedAlex wrote:

I can basically guarantee you the site is slow because we are a bad team.

I've watched this forum since it was created and split from Finheaven. It started off super tiny and then boomed, since then as the team got worse less and less posters continue to frequent the site.

What we have here are die hard fans, the more casual guys probably feel like they have better things to do than talk about a lost season.

I'd be shocked if anyone saw a thread on Tannehill and was so repulsed by the debate they leave.

Yes that is factor as well.

I'm not talking about today, but it certainly was the case over the past half decade or so.

All good I'll try not to get frustrated with it. You guys are very vested in the debate, I was hot and cold regarding Ryan and while I always loved his grit and was in love with his cannon arm, was pretty ambivilant across the board with him.

He'll likely come back to earth the rest of his career IMO and that's OK - on the right team he may have a decent level of success. I don't think he'll ever be a Super Bowl quality QB unless he is on a fully stacked team but I've been wrong before.

"Bumrush wrote:

Yes that is factor as well.

I'm not talking about today, but it certainly was the case over the past half decade or so.

All good I'll try not to get frustrated with it. You guys are very vested in the debate, I was hot and cold regarding Ryan and while I always loved his grit and was in love with his cannon arm, was pretty ambivilant across the board with him

I do agree toxic debates about him do probably discourage people. Toxic debates in general too.

You do have a good point that yeah, it's probably best suited in the Other NFL forum, but honestly it's one of the most interesting things happening this year.

"cbrad wrote:

How Tannehill plays in must-win games is important because he's had a good deal of clunkers in such games. He played fine today, but not good enough to win. Lots of missed passes in the 1st half, much better in the 2nd half. I won't put the INT on him, but overall Watson played better even with two bad INT's (one especially made it a competitive game) and came through when it mattered most.

So yes it absolutely matters. The Titans are a good all round team so it's not like there's a surrounding cast issue. Brees probably has a bigger such issue and New Orleans is up next. Anyway, he's now going up against playoff calibre teams in must-win games and that means you have to step up and win. I mean.. what's the point if you miss the playoffs?

Remember, while it's been shown that Tannehill can play elite for a statistically significant stretch, what hasn't been shown is that he can play at that level in must-win games and whether he can play at a high level across many years (not necessarily this high of course).

The Titans are area good "all round" team on what basis?

Henry makes make their OL look better than it is in run blocking, but I think they're around NFL average to slightly better. The pass blocking and pass protection has been an issue since before Tannehill took over. Mariota had more more sacks after the same amount of games.

Their secondary is missing several starters as well and that was a huge issue in this game. You saw blown assignments with the secondary that had guys like Stills, Hopkins, and others running free most of the game. With Watson scrambling, the Titan's defense couldn't get off the field.

As for Tannehill, his placement wasn't perfect today, but he was still putting the ball into the receivers hands and watching them drop it or lose the ball going to the ground. The INT was actually a TD he threw to the TE, who took a step and had it knocked out and into the arms of a LB. The was also some selective none PI calls where receivers were being held.

Still, Tannehill threw 2 TDs, ran another TD, and should have had a 4th, which ended up the INT and difference in the game.

"AGuyNamedAlex wrote:

I do agree toxic debates about him do probably discourage people. Toxic debates in general too.

You do have a good point that yeah, it's probably best suited in the Other NFL forum, but honestly it's one of the most interesting things happening this year.

I don't think the debate is toxic at all. There is a lot of good information being shared in my opinion. If someone resorts to a personal attack, there are ways of addressing that as well.

"The Guy wrote:

I don't think the debate is toxic at all. There is a lot of good information being shared in my opinion. If someone resorts to a personal attack, there are ways of addressing that as well.

Oh I dont think its toxic either. I just meant there have been some in the past, not so much this thread, that I could see making people kind of iffy about posting.

"AGuyNamedAlex wrote:

I do agree toxic debates about him do probably discourage people. Toxic debates in general too.

You do have a good point that yeah, it's probably best suited in the Other NFL forum, but honestly it's one of the most interesting things happening this year.

My main frustration was the debate around mediocre outcomes. Some people rightly believe that football has to be judged as a full team sport to evaluate a QB - and rightly so. Others believe that a great QB can elevate a mediocre team - and rightly so. It's a conundrum that is difficult to come to agreement on. I just happen to think that a QB with a losing record over a 6+ year career is not the guy that will likely take you to the promised Land. Others disagree. That's OK.