Were Bess & Hartline's Number of TDs an Issue?

Hey Shou, this is what it looks like when a receiver attacks the ball downfield, something that Hartline & Bess do NOT do. Take a mental picture and remember this s*** next time you watch Hartline fall down backwards tripping over his own feet trying to catch a ball that's slightly under-thrown.



By the way, this is a Division 1AA guy.
How shameful is that- a small school kid doing things our 2012 starting receivers couldn't dream of when the ball's in the air.

 

We all know Tannehill was a bad rookie QB and was single-handily dragging down this otherwise capable team.

What we need to do come draft time is just focus on drafting QB. That is the weakest area in our team, and the sole reason we're not playing today.

In fact, I say draft a QB and keep drafting QB, until you can find one that can play to the level of the rest of our players, which is playoff caliber.

Draft QB with all our picks this year. We're bound to hit on one. We're set on the other offensive weapons.

 

Hartline dropped in ypc from 15.7 to 14.6. He also dropped in TD per catch from 1 TD per 35 catches to 1 TD per 74 catches.

Bess improved in ypc from 10.5 to 12.8. He dropped in TD per catch from 1 TD per 17 catches to 1 TD per 61 catches.

Fasano dropped in ypc from 14.1 to 8.1. He dropped in TD per catch from 1 TD per 6.4 catches to 1 TD per 8.2 catches.

So 2 out of 3 dropped in ypc and all dropped in TD per catch ratio. All these players are getting closer to their prime given experience/age, not on the decline. Perhaps the QB has something to do with why their TD per catch decreased. It wasn't like it would have taken a Marino-type effort to improve those ratios. Keep in mind these guys had Henne/Moore throwing to them last year, not a pro-bowl type QB.

 

Hartline has never been a td guy at any level. Also the assumption in this argument is that Hartline and Nelson have very similar skil set.

 

1 TD is 1 TD, which is all Hartline has had each of the past 3 years. Don't blame his lack of scoring ability on the QB. That's ridiculous. You can lead a horse to water..........

And obviously not all "catches" are the same if you're looking at TDs per catch b/c passes caught outside the redzone often require ability on the RECEIVER'S part to get the ball in the endzone. If Hartline can't convert most of those receptions into TDs, that's b/c he's talentless with the ball in his hands. How is this a mystery to you?

 

No, it's driven by the obvious realization that, after 5 & 4 years of watching Bess & Hartline, they are NOT playmakers, nor are they legitimate scoring threats. Tannehill has nothing to do with their inability.

 

Hartline also doubled his catches from last year, and Bess and Fasano also had more catches than last year.

The less YPC can easily be attributed to more catches and a WCO that focuses on a short passing offense.

Also, last year all these players were secondary and tertiary options to Brandon Marshall. This year they are being forced to roles that do no suit them.

Consequently about Brandon Marshall; He dropped from 15 YPC in 2011 to 12.8 YPC in 2012. Cutler must be a lesser QB to Henne/Moore.

 

Uhhhh.... geeee.... perhaps b/c he initially wasn't a starter nor did he need to be with Jennings & Driver on the roster. GB wanted Nelson versed at ALL THREE positions first and foremost which took time, understandably so. What you're saying is nothing like in Miami where Bess & Hartline were the starters. If you want to make a comparison, make it to GB's starters rather than a guy they were developing at the time.

 

How do you not see that proves our point?

You're harping on yards for WRs and the list you gave clearly shows yards from a WR don't mean a thing in terms of a team winning.

Jesus man, look at your argument.

 

What is a mystery is how a QB that was ranked 56th in college last year and 29th in the NFL this year is somehow projected to be an elite QB if only surrounded by all-pro weapons and being put in the same class as the other young QBs that have actually succeeded on the field...in college as well as the NFL.

I am all for Tannehill being legit. I have been a Dolphin fan for 40 years and grew up watching Griese followed by Marino. Perhaps I am different than the typical fan? I actually think a QB should EARN accolades on the field rather than having every excuse imaginable why they don't produce. He is young so maybe he will become legit, but he definitely was NOT this year. So far, I haven't seen what makes Tannehill that much more special than the other 16 QBs that have started since Marino retired. Maybe so many love him b/c he looks like Opie and that is being confused with good QB play?

Why is it such a mystery that a QB should earn the accolades on the field of play?

 

Its been driven by statistical evidence. Its been driven by observational evidence. Its been driven by logic.

You haven't provided a single stat, observation or bit of logic to prove otherwise.

 

How many yards and TDs would Marino put up if I was his WR? The complete and utter denial by you and Shou has reached ******ed levels.

 

A QB that was a WR and had very little actual QB experience.

Also, no one is giving Tannehill anything he hasn't earned. No one is here clamoring that Tannehill is the next Marino and we're set for the next 10 years. However, those of us who can actually see with our own two eyes can actually understand that our offensive talent is borderline average, more likely, way below average. To say otherwise is to attempt to cover the sun with a finger.

That Tannehill's development was bottle-necked by the actual talent on the field is beyond questionable. Only Shouright in his infinite wisdom dares to question the unquestionable. That Tannehill will reach his potential or our expectations, if/when he is provided with suitable talent, that remains to be seen. No one is giving him that which he has not earned, but we are not blind.

 

Yeah, no. If you think Hartline is remotely close in talent to Nelson you're high as a kite, period. All your analysis tells me is you pay more attention to stats than the play on the field (perhaps b/c you're not sure what you're actually watching) and that you'll do everything possible to make excuses for Hartline, even if it's at the expense of scapegoating the best QB prospect we've had since Marino.

If Tannehill was really a hinderance then how the heck do you explain Hartline's 1083 yards? Do you seriously think those yards were in spite of Tannehill, as if he should've had 1300 yards with a "real QB"?

 

We have plenty of evidence that we do know Tannehill was hampered by his surrounding talent.

Yes you do. You are declaring it was all Tannehill and none of it was the surrounding talent in spite of all the evidence to the contrary, and then you turn around and say you don't know. So yes, that stance is unintelligent, because it is contradictory and quite frankly....fanatical.

 

Having s*** for talent at receiver is NOT an excuse. How do you not understand this?

That's kind of a straw argument considering no one is really arguing against that notion. However, it's incredibly hard to earn any accolades on the field if you have a garbage pair of starting receivers, you know- those guys who allow a QB to earn his accolades.

 

No.

 

You question everything regardless of popularity or arguments. When you're right, you pontificate and dig up articles for everyone to bask in your glow. When you're wrong, you join in everyone's rejoicing because that provably means the team is better. Or the articles remain in obscurity.

What a cushioned chair doth thou sit.

 

What a SOLID argument you have made. Reverting to "personal attacks" absolutely sold me. Well done sir!

How could I deny that a QB who finished 56th in QB rating last year as a 5th year senior and led the #8 preseason team to a 7-6 record and out of the top 25 and then ranked #29 in the NFL while leading his team to a 3-6 finish to close out the year after Miami finished 6-3 the season before is in fact an "elite" QB?

Particularly when Tannehill showed such improvement in the second half of the season:
First 8 games...142 comp, 241 att, 58.92%, 7.31 ypa, 5 TD, 6 int, 78.19 QB rating, 4-4 record (includes his terrible first game as a rookie agaisnt Houston with 0 TD, 3 int)
Final 8 games...140 comp, 243 att, 57.61%, 6.30 ypa, 7TD, 7 int, 73.96 QB rating, 3-5 record

I guess I am just the Forrest Gump of football fans that I think a QB should play like an elite player before anointing him one...

 

There's nothing to watch. As long as you keep making **** up and passing it off as fact while touting the couple of times you were right in the past, i will keep challenging you.

 

Who's anointing him? I don't see anyone claiming Tannehill is heading for the HoF.

However, what i do in fact don't see is your concession that he indeed suffered one of the worst offensive supporting casts of the league. Also upon that admission, then we must also admit the negative effect such a cast has on a QBs play.

That Tannehill has much to improve is not the debate here.

 

in order to say Tannehill played like a "typical rookie" you first need to define a handful of variable (like surrounding cast, protection, run support, consistency of protection & run support, etc), which you did not do. Like I said before, it's a cursory argument.

 

That poll is yet another form of manipulation of yours.

If you but include another option like: "Tannehill had his normal rookie struggles, but also was hindered by the severe lack of offensive talent", then you would see a more accurate measure of the pulse of the forum.

But no, creating narratives and controversy is much more enjoyable.

 

I didn't personally attack you. I attacked the level of your denial.

You were against Tannehill from day one, so let's quit pretending your stance was born from how he played this season.

Simple fact of the matter is, he had virtually the same QB rating has Luck. He also had one of the worst #1 WR in every major statistical category that illustrates what a WR does once he has the ball and the QB is no longer involved. Why do you ignore that, unless its because of your denial fueled agenda?