Do you happen to have a link, dj?

Personally, I have always liked Jaws and think his QB assessments are solidly evidenced.

 

My only comment here is... I hope JAws is right, I want this guy to be the guy. I want him to be our Tom Brady, but even better. I want to win a Superbowl ASAP with him. Although, I wont lie... I'll settle for a super bowl with anyone at QB for us. He's here, I like him, I want him to be the guy.

 

I gave you the link Deej. Full articles are no bueno :)

 

To go along with that, regarding his 2013 campaign...he was scary close to Marino's numbers (better in some) from Marino's highest sack year 1992 (28 sacks), and Brady's numbers last year in a high sack year (40).

The red zone numbers are my favorite though...you can't deny 'em, they're solid, and we haven't had an endzone attacking QB since.....

 

He is the Anti Chad Henne, and keep in mind on the play action numbers, our Running Game was pretty much non existent

Miller Averaged 44 ypg, Thomas 27 ypg, both had at or below 4 ypc, it was as bad a running game as I've ever seen over a whole season

 

Exactly. All of which gives me plenty optimism in RT going forward. To expound a little on my other post, Marino had an excellent Oline, Brady had a decent Oline and good running game, and RT equaled their numbers without either. I don't see how that can be anything but positive.

 

PFF graded Ryan Tannehill 2nd in the NFL in play action (I believe Aaron Rodgers was #1) with a QB rating of 120. However, Miami ran play action sparingly. I believe Ryan ranked 26th or so in play action attempts. I imagine because we were so poor at running the ball. Or maybe it was just Sherman inclination. Maybe both.

Anyway, good to see Tannehill get some kudos. Excited to see him this year.

 

Impressive company. But I wonder if the stats are a bit skewed simply due to the low number of attempts?

Looking at it from another angle, Tennehill did gain experience sans play-action. Not to give Sherman a pass, but that experience gained by Tannehill without play-action has built a foundation for the betterment of Tannehill, and ultimately, the team.

As you pointed out, along with the unreliable O-line and runningback play, Sherman may have had his hands tied to the point of basically deeming it ill-advised to run PA with any consistency. I wonder if Sherman had better balance with PA while at Texas A&M? If so (AND if Tanny had good numbers with it) maybe the question is answered.

While it was unfortunate Miami could not have been more balanced last year, I truly believe Tannehill has gained invaluable experience because of it.

MY question mark is the new offense. Is Tannehill going down that path of an Alex Smith, Jason Campbell, etc., etc.?

In other words, is he just another first round QB with potential; where the team goes through multiple coordinators trying to find a "fit" for the QB, only to stunt that QB's growth? I think this is a real possibility, regardless of potential. I sure as hell hope this isn't the case....

 

Inside the redzone he was the anti-Henne, which is promising. But between the 20s he wasn't all that different from Henne in some ways. He threw a lot of passes for not that many yards. He was 7th in the League in attempts...but that resulted in only 13th in yards/gm primarily because he was 27th in ypa (6.66). Henne, who many call a checkdown robot, actually had a higher ypa (6.74) in his last full season.

Tannehill struggled to hit big plays this year, and his low ypa is my biggest concern. I think he'll pick it up in a scheme that doesn't emphasize comebacks and sideline-breaking routes so heavily...but I want to see Tannehill actually make those tougher vertical throws or ones where you hit people in stride with room to run.

Trouble is that his ypa in college was also quite low relative to other college QBs. It was 7.1, which was 62nd in the country in 2011. This is the kind of player he has been throughout his years at QB.

Just know that consistent serious playoff or title contention will be very difficult if his ypa stays around where it was this year at 6.66. If he gets it over 7 we'll make the playoffs, imo.

 

I'm not seeing that. I firmly believe that Tannehill will easily become a "good" starting QB in the NFL. The more important question is can he move into the top 10 category? If he's borderline and we end up paying him like a top 10 QB, then that overpayment will strap our salary cap and likely reduce the chances we ever have of making a run at the Super Bowl. It's a tough situation, because if he continues to show growth again this year, you will end up paying him like a top QB regardless of whether he's reached that level or not. It's just too risky to take a chance on another 20 year drought of trying to find a good QB

 

I came here to say his RZ #'s are anti-Henne, good call Pads.

Tannehill needs to take the next step and hit the deep throws that open up the defense underneath for the run and the short passes that keep the clock in our hands, and move down the field. He needs to be a threat anywhere on the field, so the Defense can't cheat. This is a make or break year from RT. I think Lazor brings him out of the middle of the pack towards the top, and us into the playoffs!

 

IMO his YPA numbers in college and in the pros are largely a function of the offense he's been in the whole time. In a west coast system with more slants and other plays designed to hit receivers in space and in stride those numbers should go up. And with Wallace in particular, the timing of the patterns was clearly off. The play would call for two PA fakes before a deep pass and by the time Tannehill looked up Wallace would already be too deep. IIRC Tannehill was pretty good at hitting the other WRs deep and in stride. That is indicative of a specific issue rather than a lack of passing ability. As a passer he shows elite level touch. I just rewatched some of his highlights from last year and he's making some great passes in stride. People don't notice b/c all they remember were the misses to Wallace deep. I have no worries about Tannehill becoming a good QB. IMO he's that already. He just played behind a historically bad OL that the coaches didn't know how to protect. The stats for Tannehill when he had time had him in the top 5. If the coaches can do a better job of mixing up the plays to prevent the D from teeing off, I can easily see him in the top 10 overall.

 

Agreed. I remember several people complaining, "why is he doing play action fakes with no running game?" It didn't matter...it was still very effective. This is one area that could blow up huge with an even average run game.

 

That was Henne at his "best" w/Bline and Marshall and Reggie Bush.

Also have to keep in mind the pressure he faced dictated the ball leaving his hand quickly, not exactly conducive to longer plays with better odds of completing them. We can say what we want about Wallace/Tannehill, reality is the Wr's had to run abrupt routes to keep THill upright.

Add in, the pressure also meant our Rb's were not a factor at all out of the backfield which also lowers his percentages.

 

YPA isn't an individually robust statistic. It's basically a summarization indicator of everything in the offense, kinda like QBR. Naturally, if the entire offense operates better and there's a reliable run game, both these statistics will climb, but much more than the QB's play directly affects them. I ask myself, if we'd had a "good" O line, would this number be around a yard higher? The answer as I see it HAS to be yes...and 1 measly yard more puts them in elite status, based on norms.

 

For many "QB analysis" never gets beyond a team's won/loss record. Even amongst those do engage in actual analysis, most are too blinded by team results to be objective. I find the aforementioned to be far more numerous than the blind fans who see only the good, at least on this board. So the national opinion will be unchanged until the won/loss record changes.

 

I agree. I have the feeling it was more of a "that's what he had to work with" kind of thing. I have to believe Sherman knew in the back of his mind that, albeit this was not the balanced attack for which he had hoped, Tannehill would gain some necessary experience working inside of a less than stellar offensive setting.

For his fourth year of playing highly competitive football as a QB, I am extremely pleased. Do I want more? No doubt about it, but I just hope this new offensive scheme does not stunt his overall growth as a QB. I do think, that while there are guys who can win no matter what, there are guys who can learn how to win. Tannehill may be the latter.

While he did show some moxie in some games, in others, he flat out looked lost. That experience, I think, can benefit him because there are going to be times he is going to have to carry this team on his back, and let's hope his prior experiences of trying to do that (but not always succeeding) can instill some confidence given he's been there.

Forget the stats and all of the grades, my one and only concern will be his (and the other pieces of the offense) growing in this new scheme. While I hope some of his strengths are showcased, I still want to see improvement in other areas of his game.

 

Well it should never be looked at in a vacuum of course, but all statistics, taken together, have meaning. Any single one shouldn't be used as a litmus test, that's all.

A lower YPA with a high completion % tells me the QB is operating in a dink and dunk, or checks down way too often. The film then answers that.

 

The problem is he might play behind another historically bad OL this year.

 

Aye. And one large contributor to the dinks is the 2013 excuse for an OL, along with its residual effect on the run game.

Edit: The most painful part about the YPA being 1 yard short of the top 5'ish, is that would be 588 more yards (he had 588 attempts), and would've put him at about 4500 yards. Gotta be a few wins in there.

 

As fans, for the experts part, we can often be rightfully accused of head in the sand syndrome.

Now from what I saw, Tannehill had a fine season in terms of development and leadership, we did beat how many playoff teams and were 2 missed FG's from making the playoffs. This behind a genuinely atrocious offensive line that pretty much consistently allowed instant penetration.

A "zone blocking" scheme w/o the blocking.

Tannehill's faults revolved around inaccuracy deep down the field, at times poor pocket presence, and a failure to use his athleticism and a propensity to fumble the football. I believe one of the holes in stat monkery of the Qb position is a failure to recognize a fumble even a recovered fumble is a drive stopping play

Instead of Td to Int ration that stat SHOULD be Td to Turnover ratio and it should be weighted to be more damaging later in games

 

His TO's do seem to come in spurts.

 

The difference will (or won't) be the coaching. The OL was bad last year but it was also put into bad situations where the D could tee-off. Just mixing it up to avoid that would make a world of difference.

 

Let's hope so. The head coach is still here. The great mystery this year, to me, is what offense we will end up running.

 

Damn good point and question.

 

100%.

But what's the excuse for local media and Dolphin fans?

 

Low YPA is not a new problem for him. If it was just last season it wouldn't be a big deal. Fact is Tannehill has played four years of quarterback, and EVERY year ranked near the bottom of the rest of the competition in this department. You can make excuses all you want, but this is who he has been ever since he started playing the position. Who would have thought that his YPA would go DOWN when this team added Mike Wallace?

YPA and more specifically an adjusted version of YPA (NY/A) are considered one of if not THE best win predictors among passing metrics: http://www.footballperspective.com/correlating-passing-stats-with-wins/

I'm not trying to trash the guy. Just trying to identify the numbers we should be tracking this season. When you look at his career stats this one sticks out blatantly. All those PFF charts looked great until you saw the dark red area in the YPA category. It has to be improved, simple as that. But it's not easy to improve something that has always been a weakness. I think he will raise that number in a new scheme, but he has four years in the books that speak to the contrary. Like I said, if he gets it above 7 we will be in good shape.

 

Can't forget that those 4 years were with the same offensive system... this is the year we'll find out whether the problem in regards to YPA is really Tannehill or if it was just Sherman.

 

Mystery would be a major improvement, the whole league seemed to know what we were running last year.

 

I don't have the numbers in front of me, but it seemed he had more in the first half of the season, especially fumbles. Has to hold on to the ball.

 

I still contend the YPA statistic is summarization of the offense's performance as a whole, and not singularly indicative of QB performance. One small piece of the puzzle.

Having great PFF individual stats and a low YPA supports it also.