Skip Bayless on Tannehill

"The handful of Ryan apologists make themselves feel better about watching him play poorly by taking superior QBs and trying to put an emphasis on the bad games not realizing that those guys are accomplished QBs as opposed to a guy who quite frankly has had more subpar games than above par."

"Ryan is who he is and can still be a solid QB in this league as long as the other pieces are in place, I think it's clear to most of us that he will never be a QB that makes people around him better. But he's making a truck load of $$....so it seems we are married to him for a while which isn't the worst thing in the world if we get some good protection and WRs who can take these short passes and get some YAC."

"For me it's been a moment of clarity for Ryan, I accept what he is....and I'm not mad he is our QB but I also have no delusions he is anywhere near the football player Luck or Wilson is."

"Fin-O wrote:

I mean, you're right about Mel...dude is wrong ALOT. But it seems when it comes to any negativity on Tanny many posters just choose to discredit the source, and there are a lot of them.

Well, I can't speak for them. But as for me, it's very hard for me to take criticism from certain people seriously. And considering that the biggest four detractors of Tannehill this week is Stephen "SCREAMING MAKES ME SOUND IMPORTANT" Smith, Skip "I'm only here to make Smith seem more knowledgeable and spit out pseudo-wisdom" Bayless, Mel "I'll gladly hand shine your jock strap!" Kiper, and whoever "leaked" a walkthrough incident that was blown so far out of proportion, I think they tend to discredit themselves.

And FTR, when I said "certain people", I didn't mean posters. I meant certain people in sports media.

"Fin D wrote:

"The handful of Ryan apologists make themselves feel better about watching him play poorly by taking superior QBs and trying to put an emphasis on the bad games not realizing that those guys are accomplished QBs as opposed to a guy who quite frankly has had more subpar games than above par."

"Ryan is who he is and can still be a solid QB in this league as long as the other pieces are in place, I think it's clear to most of us that he will never be a QB that makes people around him better. But he's making a truck load of $$....so it seems we are married to him for a while which isn't the worst thing in the world if we get some good protection and WRs who can take these short passes and get some YAC."

"For me it's been a moment of clarity for Ryan, I accept what he is....and I'm not mad he is our QB but I also have no delusions he is anywhere near the football player Luck or Wilson is."

I know i was bashing Ryan...when the truth hurts that is the only way out

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

"Sceeto wrote:

Is this serious? Wilson has been to two SBs and won one. Luck went to an AFC championship, etc, etc. ,,,and they are actually being compared? This is ridiculous and I have been a huge Tanne supporter, but this is such a stupid argument. It's widely accepted that QB is the most important position on the team and yet it's his great teams that made Wilson great? ...and just a weak division made Luck seem better than he is? Ahhhh!!!! Go watch Wilson in college and you will see that he was a great all around QB just like he has been to this point in his career. Why must some knock these QBs in order to show their love and support of Tanne? Not directed at you personally A4E, but this whole debate has become such a massive circle jerk. I don't know. Have at it.

The argument has never been who is, or is not, better. The argument is that Wilson has had a ton of support that Tannehill could only fantasize about, and Luck hasn't been drastically better, and struggles with some of the same stuff that Tannehill is criticized for around here.

"resnor wrote:

DJ, I'm pointing out, simply, that Wilson had a ton of help from his TEAM. Why do you want to deny that? Wilson has amazing escapability, I've compared him to Barry Sanders. But to act like Wilson is the sole reason they went to the playoffs is silly.

res, hes an uncoventional qb..your comparing him to a strict pocket passer, you cant compare stats..they get things done differently..there are throws at certain times that ive seen wilson throw that i havent with ryan, there is certainly runs and big play scrambles one has made that the other does not.

"Aqua4Ever04 wrote:

I use all data points when formulating an opinion, Deej. He's praised for his heroics late in games, and rightfully so, but I see a lot of bad reads and throws from him too. Very, very over rated player. Same with Russell Wilson.

And Russell Wilson is like three months younger than Tannehill and Luck is one year younger. You're reaching on that one.

revisit in 5 years.

"Aqua4Ever04 wrote:

Boy that Matt Hasselbeck just wins games. The Colts clearly only win because of Luck.

lol, betting against andrew luck... thats a good one trav, man I wish we could make a real bet on that doozy.

Andrew luck could of beaten the sorry texans with one hand...

If there is a draft 2maro, he goes #2 overall behind rogers...thats the bottom line, because its very easy to see that hes just going thru an ebb in the flow.

"resnor wrote:

The argument has never been who is, or is not, better. The argument is that Wilson has had a ton of support that Tannehill could only fantasize about, and Luck hasn't been drastically better, and struggles with some of the same stuff that Tannehill is criticized for around here.

Yes it certainly has become about who is better and it has been a big circle jerk. On one hand, people acknowledge that the QB is the most important position on the team and then say that the team is the reason Wilson has been to two SBs. I think you can see things from an individual play by play basis. Again, in order to praise Tanne, why must people try to put down and diminish these other QBs? I think it is a ridiculous argument, but like I said, if entertains you, have at it. Compare him to Marino who also didn't have a good supporting cast. The numbers are getting there. :pointlol: ..or compare him to Tom "I like having sex with little farm animals" Brady. He's had success without having big all-pro names. Again, I've been a big Tanne supporter. but this is ridiculous.

Discrediting Wilson, because of the stout defense and commitment to the run (Lynch wasn't all that great in 2013) is starting to look like a coping mechanism. Arguing Tannehill would have the same success in Seattle is ludacris.

Seattle's Oline has been just as bad, and at times worse, than what Tannehill plays behind. Look at the receiving options he has. Doug Baldwin as your #1? No TE? Wallace as poor of a fit as he was here was light years better than anyone they've had.

People want to talk about Seattle's defense, or the run game (of which he is a huge part of by the way), but then forget to mention the 2nd highest QB rating of all time. He's 121 passes from that, and as long as he doesn't sh** the bed, he'll be in 2nd above Romo and Peyton Manning.

If you put Tannehill on that team that'd be worse. If you put Wilson on our team we'd be better. Super Bowl better? No. But better.

Acting like Wilson's run game, and defense that allowed 16 points on average want a large part of their success is ridiculous. Has zero to do with which QB is better.

"Sceeto wrote:

Yes it certainly has become about who is better and it has been a big circle jerk. On one hand, people acknowledge that the QB is the most important position on the team and then say that the team is the reason Wilson has been to two SBs. I think you can see things from an individual play by play basis. Again, in order to praise Tanne, why must people try to put down and diminish these other QBs? I think it is a ridiculous argument, but like I said, if entertains you, have at it. Compare him to Marino who also didn't have a good supporting cast. The numbers are getting there. :pointlol: ..or compare him to Tom "I like having sex with little farm animals" Brady. He's had success without having big all-pro names. Again, I've been a big Tanne supporter. but this is ridiculous.

Please don't do this. The way I see it both players know presnap where they are going to throw the ball. The difference is Brady is much better at reading a defense presnap and throwing to the open man from what he sees before the snap. Tanny, I think, can't make good presnap reads and still has his mind made up on who he wants to get the ball. Three yard passes on 3rd and 8 are the result.

Could these events have been averted if greater significance had been afforded to the offensive line and protection for RT?
It probably would have fostered more opportunity for Ryan to remain upright, perhaps he would have found a measurable degree of success, a degree more respectable of his projected curve of improvement, but ultimately to a different outcome?

Penalties still would have broken out in rashes across the field, and the defensive collapse, would have still leaned heavily on the offense early on to carry the load.

Would we even have expected RT to muscle past this?

I still would have preferred this outcome, over moderately improved play from last year, only to have seen those coaches eek out another season of moderate production, to be given yet another go around for less than championship caliber coaching, less than absolute player preparedness, and less than visionary leadership for even one more game.

lol I'm dumbfounded by people who think Luck Wilson and Ryan are in the same league...

I guess if you replaced Michael Jordan with Mitch Richmond the Bulls would have won 6 championships still. :lol:

"atomdomb wrote:

Please don't do this. The way I see it both players know presnap where they are going to throw the ball. The difference is Brady is much better at reading a defense presnap and throwing to the open man from what he sees before the snap. Tanny, I think, can't make good presnap reads and still has his mind made up on who he wants to get the ball. Three yard passes on 3rd and 8 are the result.

I know. You missed the point. Joking flash.

Skip Bayless is not worth the time...clueless

"resnor wrote:

Acting like Wilson's run game, and defense that allowed 16 points on average want a large part of their success is ridiculous. Has zero to do with which QB is better.

Of course it was part of the success. So is the 2nd highest rated QB of all time. And the advantages Wilson had in the passing game was not better, and arguably worse at times, than Tanny's. Seattle's oline has been terrible the past few years. They don't really spend any resources on the receiving options save for Percy Harvin who was injured, and this year Jimmy Graham.

"Aqua4Ever04 wrote:

Boy that Matt Hasselbeck just wins games. The Colts clearly only win because of Luck.

Two games vs. SH*T competition and you want to extrapolate it like that? LOL :pointlol:

"jdang307 wrote:

Of course it was part of the success. So is the 2nd highest rated QB of all time. And the advantages Wilson had in the passing game was not better, and arguably worse at times, than Tanny's. Seattle's oline has been terrible the past few years. They don't really spend any resources on the receiving options save for Percy Harvin who was injured, and this year Jimmy Graham.

He forgets that even with his supporting cast he still has to make the throws and execute on important downs ..... which he's done consistently over his career thus far.

At the end of the day, it is Tannehill who has been getting the benefit of the doubt, since his rookie year, everyone around him has been getting fired or released and he is still here, and at this point, it LITERALLY is EVERYONE (HC Philbin, OC Mike Sherman, GM Jeff Ireland, about 10 to 15 OL, WRs like Wallace, TEs like Clay, RBs) like i said, EVERYONE...

If things dont improve offensively, its only logical and inevitable to think he is next in the chopping block at this point.

"Aqua4Ever04 wrote:

You literally just proved my point for me.

It's what Luck has done for three years now. Everyone gets on Tannehill for his TEAM'S record... Well Luck is 14-12 outside of his own division. And Hasselbeck has proven that pretty much anyone can go out and beat those three teams that Luck is beating up every year.

And before you say that we lost to Jacksonville this year... yeah, we did. We are probably the worst team in the league right now and there's a lot more than just the quarterback contributing to that.

More pundits are starting to question Luck's decision making and whether he's "slightly over-rated" as Rich Eisen phrased it this week. Michael Silver was on ESPN yesterday afternoon saying how he's tired of hearing how Luck carries the Colts. Silver also praised Tannehill's handling of the walk-thru fiasco and questioned Philbin's HC ability and also how weak our defensive guys must be if they got their feelings hurt by the QB barking at them and had to whine to their agents or media...

"jdang307 wrote:

Of course it was part of the success. So is the 2nd highest rated QB of all time. And the advantages Wilson had in the passing game was not better, and arguably worse at times, than Tanny's. Seattle's oline has been terrible the past few years. They don't really spend any resources on the receiving options save for Percy Harvin who was injured, and this year Jimmy Graham.

It's hard to argue that the Seattle coaches haven't been light years better, in gameplanning to win games, potentially at the cost of QB development, in how they've handled Russell Wilson. Give him a great defense, and a very good run game, then have him roll out on most plays. It's been talked about a ton, how rolling him out allows them to maximize his skillset. Tannehill has been coached to stay in the pocket, and attempt to go through progressions.

And I'm not even going to respond to the weapons argument, I mean, really, Tannehill's first year he had Hartline, Bess, and Gibson. Then he was given a speedster who didn't fit the offense AT ALL. By the way, what do that guy's numbers look like this season?? Let me help...his average per catch is a yard lower right now (the lowest of his career), his longest catch is 22 yards, and he has 1 td through 4 games.

"resnor wrote:

It's hard to argue that the Seattle coaches haven't been light years better, in gameplanning to win games, potentially at the cost of QB development, in how they've handled Russell Wilson. Give him a great defense, and a very good run game, then have him roll out on most plays. It's been talked about a ton, how rolling him out allows them to maximize his skillset. Tannehill has been coached to stay in the pocket, and attempt to go through progressions.

And I'm not even going to respond to the weapons argument, I mean, really, Tannehill's first year he had Hartline, Bess, and Gibson. Then he was given a speedster who didn't fit the offense AT ALL. By the way, what do that guy's numbers look like this season?? Let me help...his average per catch is a yard lower right now (the lowest of his career), his longest catch is 22 yards, and he has 1 td through 4 games.

How do you know what went into the game planning for Seattle? Such an over-generalization.

"resnor wrote:

It's hard to argue that the Seattle coaches haven't been light years better, in gameplanning to win games, potentially at the cost of QB development, in how they've handled Russell Wilson. Give him a great defense, and a very good run game, then have him roll out on most plays. It's been talked about a ton, how rolling him out allows them to maximize his skillset. Tannehill has been coached to stay in the pocket, and attempt to go through progressions.

And I'm not even going to respond to the weapons argument, I mean, really, Tannehill's first year he had Hartline, Bess, and Gibson. Then he was given a speedster who didn't fit the offense AT ALL. By the way, what do that guy's numbers look like this season?? Let me help...his average per catch is a yard lower right now (the lowest of his career), his longest catch is 22 yards, and he has 1 td through 4 games.

Tannehill to Wallace produced 114 rating last year.

How is Tannehill doing WITHOUT him this year?

Hartline, Bess and Rishard Mathews too ;)

Doug Baldwin, Kearse, Matthews, Lockette.

Who?

As for roll outs vs not ... I only have 2013 numbers, you know, the super bowl season but:
http://49ers.pressdemocrat.com/russell-wilson-2013-passing-stats-insideoutside-pocket/

INSIDE THE POCKET

322 attempts
213 completions
2,568 yards
20 TDs
5 INTs
66.1 completion percentage
8.0 yards per attempt
6.2 TD percentage
1.6 INT percentage
104.7 passer rating

OUTSIDE OF THE POCKET

153 attempts
87 completions
1,313 yards
9 TDs
4 INTs
56.9 completion percentage
8.6 yards per attempt
5.9 TD percentage
2.6 INT percentage
93.9 passer rating

Look at the small percentage of passes outside the pocket and the numbers are worse. Doesn't support your argument at all.

"jdang307 wrote:

Tannehill to Wallace produced 114 rating last year.

How is Tannehill doing WITHOUT him this year?

Hartline, Bess and Rishard Mathews too ;)

Doug Baldwin, Kearse, Matthews, Lockette.

Who?

As for roll outs vs not ... I only have 2013 numbers, you know, the super bowl season but:
http://49ers.pressdemocrat.com/russell-wilson-2013-passing-stats-insideoutside-pocket/

Look at the small percentage of passes outside the pocket and the numbers are worse. Doesn't support your argument at all.

lol, 4 games? Ok, how's Wallace doing without Tannehill in that same 4 game span? Hartline?