Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by bbqpitlover, Oct 16, 2019.
Agreed, let's restrict to recent times (since 2000). Nice tight list.
Fairly elite list.
Even that would need to be adjusted. There’s been a good deal of passer rating inflation since 2000.
Look, Shou, we've been having this argument over numerous years and screen names. Everything I've told you has been proven right and every argument you've tried to make has been proven wrong.....at what point do you start to look at your approach and question it?
I don’t know what the first part of your post means, but I don’t think you’re understanding the difference between a quarterback’s needing the stars to align to perform at a franchise or elite level and having them align for a relatively brief period of time (even as long as a season, as in the case of Andy Dalton), and a quarterback who can perform at that level much more consistently, whether the stars are aligned or not, because he’s not as dependent on the alignment of the stars.
Obviously it takes longer than half a season to determine that for any one quarterback.
If your position has been that Ryan Tannehill could play very well for half a season and that we wouldn’t be able to determine the degree to which the surrounding variables responsible for that can be replicated, and we therefore also wouldn’t be able to determine the consistency with which he can replicate his performance, then certainly I agree with you.
If your position has been anything different from that, then my response again is that we need to wait to determine whether it’s correct. It could ultimately be correct, but we don’t know with certainty at this point.
Pay attention because this is very annoying that I have to keep repeating myself.....He didn't need the stars to align, he needed the base minimum of competence from a coaching staff in allowing him to deal with a terrible line, by being allowed to audible and committing to the running game and not forcing him to stay in the pocket. That isn't crazy or bizarre. I get you don't understand it, because Excel doesn't;t have a function to account for common sense but nevertheless....that's what going on here.
Now, I challenge you to answer this question once and for all....what are the ways a team and QB can combat the pass rush?
You keep ignoring it, just like shouright ignored it. Prove you aren't him and answer it.
LOL. Only one of those is older than 2014..... stop.
If the surroundings he needs to perform at this level are relatively easily assembled as you’re implying, then there shouldn’t be much difficulty with his replicating his recent performance in the future.
I’m not saying your position is implausible or inherently incorrect; I’m just saying it takes time to confirm it. You’re not proposing an untenable position; you’re just proposing one that takes time to confirm.
Tell the doc to up those meds.
2 Elites and a Bum
Omg. This is Shouright! I remember these exact same brain numbing stat exercises.
How many games/how long/number off attempts is it going to take for you? And, if you have time, why that number? Tannehill hit Cbrads number of attempts, which was a purely calculated number. So, what are you thinking?
I was getting the feeling...based on all the gymnastics.
Sure, I mean, it has happened once in NFL history before, so sure, no problem.....
Wait shouright? As in shouwrong
I think we have to start by clarifying the question of interest.
Is the question whether Tannehill is a franchise/elite quarterback, and simply having average surroundings will have him play that way consistently? Or is the question whether he was always capable of playing this way for some period of time given the right surroundings, but that he isn't a franchise/elite quarterback?
Is it really?? Once you said that everything started to click into place...
What's that from?
You can only compare them to the competition they played with. Too many variables over time to make any "leveling" of the statistics meaningful. Consider how few QB's statistics are comparable from the 1960-70 eras. That means that those whose statistics are in the same general area were truley exceptional in their playing days!
Wow.. lots of responses in this thread since yesterday! Let me just address 2 comments about stats:
I think it's clear that the view based on prior statistical performance that Tannehill was highly unlikely to ever play at an elite level for an extended stretch was wrong – historically unlikely to occur things do occur sometimes and we're seeing that right now. Whether he can do that over multiple seasons and whether he can do that in win-or-die games however is still not settled.
None of the stats I've posted are misleading once you understand what those stats actually say. And "lying with statistics" is much harder than "lying without statistics". The "lying" part comes from the person, not the stats, and a lot of people lie.
Also.. it's worth noting that while you do have exceptions to the rule, the rule usually is correct, and the ability to quantify the probability of the rule being correct is quite valuable. It's definitely not "irrelevant" in this conversation.
I have to give a gigantic eye roll to whoever uses the “Tannehill needs a perfect environment around him to succeed” line.
It’s a miracle the Dolphins were even consistently average as a team when he was here. The coaches were that god awful.
Don't confuse franchise QB with elite QB.
Eli Manning was a franchise QB
Peyton Manning was a elite QB
both have 2 Superbowls
At this point we really don’t know either way on that. What if it’s the case for example that he needs this particular offensive coordinator, combined with Derek Henry? You wouldn’t necessarily call those surroundings “perfect,” but if either of them leave the team for whatever reason, Tannehill could fall off of a cliff starting the following Sunday.
The question is really whether the particular surroundings he needs are likely to be more or less replicated over the number of seasons needed to establish him as an upper echelon quarterback.
Why do you never argue that he could continue his fine play?
Now, for the 1000th time, I challenge you to answer this question once and for all....what are the ways a team and QB can combat the pass rush?
"Many of those big plays from Sunday, the 91-yarder included, came from play-action. As I mentioned a couple of weeks ago, outside of the Ravens' rushing attack, there's no more devastating weapon in football right now than the Titans' play-action game. Tannehill is completing nearly 80% of his throws off play-action and averaging 14.3 yards per attempt, good for a league-best passer rating of 143.8 over the past eight weeks. This isn't strictly a few big plays, either; his 53.3% first-down rate on those play-action throws is also tops in football. The Titans don't exactly have stud weapons at receiver outside of the impressive rookie Brown, but Tannehill was finding backup tight ends such as MyCole Pruitt and Anthony Firkser for big plays Sunday."
Any truth to the rumors that Dan Campbell told the Titan's what the secret sauce was?
Mike Wallace woulda alligator-armed that 91 yarder, and the board would've blamed Tannehill.
Speed threat who was never a deep threat, and there is a significant difference. Also one of the worst route runners I've ever had the displeasure of watching.
But Wallace runs fast!!!!!!!!!! That's all he needs to do. If the QB can't avoid the pressure with no help from coaches and wait for Wallace to get down field, then throw the ball in such a way that it literally teaches Wallace how to track and catch the ball on the fly, then he ****** sucks!!!!!!!!!!
All the time when it comes to Tannehill.
Hope this Orville Redenbacher doesn’t get cold!
It’s significant that in year 2 when the coaches stopped trying to throw deep to Wallace and used him in a short area that he and Tannehill were a very effective combo (115-120 rating on passes to Wallace iirc).
Tannehill does best on the deep ball when the receiver runs the route as designed, rather than freelancing. Landry whined about not being used as a deep threat, but his route running was too ... idiosyncratic to be an effective deep ball threat with Tannehill. Maybe with a QB like Rothlisberger or Flacco who can adjust their throws to what the receiver is running (as opposed to what they should be running) it could work.
Where did The Shouright Guy go?
This is fun! In a gravel in your underwear kind of way.
You're complicating the issue. I'm not looking to debate past performance, or reasons for it. His stats, and his play are elite this year, so far as that if he continued the same way for the rest of his career (presuming at least 5 more years) he'd go down as one of the all time greats. My understanding is that you don't think he has done enough yet to rule out his play this year as a statistical anomaly in relation to his career. So at what point would you consider his play now his new norm? 7 games as one of the best in the NFL aren't enough, so what is?