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

It's nice to see you've reduced the game of football down to only being about the QB as if no one else on the field matters, but hey, it's convenient b/c it fits your current argument, right.

 

Hartline & Bess are one of the worst starting pair of receivers the past 20 years, so yes, I do suppose Tannehill suffered worse than the average rookie QB.

 

No. Coming from you and having such an abstract question and answer choices, people feel voting Yes means agreeing with your asinine point of view with regards to Tannehill and his surrounding talent.

That is also the reason why there are only 24 votes. People (like me) would just abstain from voting because the poll and the answers are so abstract, and are just there to serve your narrative and continue you senseless argument.

 

Darn, Drew Brees is seriously OVER PAID considering he led Purdue to a 7-5 record with a 130.5 QBR as a senior! (compared to Tanny's 133.2)

Atlanta must've been STOO-PID for believing Matt Ryan possessed any ability and potential after posting the 61st QBR (127.0) in 2007. They obviously should've drafted Dennis Dixon, the highest rated available passer (161.2).

 

It most certainly does pertain.
You know, it's sadistically enjoyable watching you paint yourself into a corner defending Hart & Bess as a solid starting pair of receivers.

 

The title of this thread seems to allude that is the debate here.

I agree that Tannehill "suffered" one of the lesser offensive supporting casts in the league. I also think that Miami's supporting cast "suffered" from having one of the lesser QBs throwing them the ball. And I think Miami's supporting cast was good enough to get to the playoffs if QB play was better and Luck/Wilson/RG3/Kaepernick would have gotten them there. Would improved supporting cast gotten Miami to the playoffs? Perhaps.

I certainly haven't seen any posts from those making excuses for RT's play concede he was as much a part of the problem to Miami's woes this year as the supporting cast.

Really imo this thread is part of an elongated debate on whether Tannehill is more or less a franchise QB. Seems to me most posters think he is and all that is needed are better weapons. My argument is I haven't seen anything on the field of play college or pros that supports that conclusion.

 

Wow, lookie that--- no Gronkowski and Brady posts a 62.3 QBR with only 13 offensive points. No.fuggin.way. No way. Impossible. This game HAS to be a mistake. Didn't Tom & Bill read any of the ThePhins posts that mention how surrounding talent doesn't affect QB production and that QBs can do it all on their own?

 

you could at least start with aqua

 

thanks for the psych evaluation. Your empty envelop with my payment will shortly be in the mail.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transference

And your thought process...

 

This thread was started by Shouright, so if you assumed people think Tannehill is HoF and that's why shouright is leading this righteous crusader to inform the uninformed, allow me to dispel that notion. The majority acknowledge that Tannehill has much to prove. Our only problem with shouright is his continued insistence that it is all Tannehills fault, and his surrounding cast has none, or very little to do with it. Which is wrong.

I disagree with you on several of your other points. Tannehill was not one of the lesser QBs, simply a rookie; Miami's offensive supporting cast is nowhere near playoff caliber; and neither of the other rookie QBs would have fared significantly better than Tannehill if they were on this team.

I also disagree giving Tannehill as much of the blame and cause of the team's problems as the rest of the offensive cast. He was a part of the problem. He is a rookie and is limited by that. However the bottle-neck was the surrounding talent not Tannehill.

Lastly, you are wrong on your last point as well. This thread is part of an elongated debate perpetrated by Shouright. His debate, and the reason we're here confronting him so vehemently, is that our team would fare no better with superior offensive talent. To him, the bottle-neck is Tannehill, not his weapons. In his eyes, if the Dolphins had Julio Jones, Rody White, and Tony Gonzalez, Tannehill stats would have looked no different. Hence our puzzlement.

 

How can you reply to my monologue?

As for transference, its what you're doing by accusing Phinsational of Availability heuristic.

 

None of us here have ever disagreed in that regard.

 

Just plain silly.

Yep, the 2 interceptions were clearly on the supporting cast. The same supporting cast that was part of putting up 41 points last week and 557 points during the year. What was the difference between last week and this week? The weather, particularly the wind, that affected the QB play and accuracy more than as the supporting cast.

Hmm...Brady with wind = RT without the wind?

And wait, how can Bolden have played so well when he only caught 4 TD passes all year? What, great passes by the QB...that can't be b/c the QB play doesn't really matter. Didn't Joe and John read any of the ThePhins posts that mention QB play doesn't really matter and it is the supporting cast is able to do it all on their own?

 

If only it were true.......

 

Bzzt, fail.
Joe Flacco: 106.3 QBR, 3 TD, 0 INT. Nice try bro.

I guess the wind is the reason Brady's QBR is below 85 w/o Gronk in the lineup this year, eh.

sounds like you're foolishly trying to say Boldin isn't a good receiver. lol. TBH I'm not even sure what the heck you're trying to say you're so all over the place. Do you even know what you're saying?

 

I saw Boldin making plays on the ball in traffic, I didn't see any great throws. Hopefully we will have some wrs who can make those types of plays next year.

Going back to the Denver game, Jacoby outruns the safety and catches a bomb to tie the game. I hope we have guys who can make plays like that next year.

 

Boldin is a good number two, do are Maclin, Cruz, Wallace, Julio Jones, and Jordy Nelson. For all those who think Hartline is a good #2. Or maybe they meant he is #2 as in he is sheeitty.

 

Or Jay Cutler who lead his team to an awesome 5-6 record and had a 126 QBR. The thing with Adam is that he has been creaming Tannehill since game one as the "OBJECTIVE" fan.

 

And when you don't have an answer, ignore the question. And make sure to end posts chock full of drivel with little smiley faces as one would expect from a pre-pubescent girl. Those seem to be two of your favorite tactics, along with insisting that our WRs lack of receiving TDs is an anomaly, when they clearly have no track record of scoring significant amounts of TDs, making the point largely irrelevant. When it comes to defending them, of course. Tannehill- his stats don't suffer because Hartline, Bess and the flavor of the week 3rd WR can't score touchdowns to save their lives, right? And that doesn't reflect his QBR, right? It's stuff like that which makes your threads good for a few cheap laughs.

 

Maybe the most entertaining part is where you think that you've opened people's eyes to the notion that Tannehill needs to improve for the offense to really kick in. Most would consider that obvious. Where you go off the rails and get the waves of responses- which I think is your main goal- is when you spout idiocy such as Tannehill's supporting cast has no marked effect on his QBR, the lame TD production of Hartline/Bess is an anomaly and you don't want to count the added yards they would provide to Tannehill's QBR when in fact their historical track records of TD production are horrid, the absurd notion that it would make little to no difference if he had the Falcons receivers to work with, blah blah blah. Maybe you should watch more of Julio Jones, Roddy White and Tony Gonzalez, who probably scored combined as many or more TDs yesterday than Hartline and Bess did all year. You annoy people with nonsense to get responses, which is fine because your threads are only good for a few laughs anyway.

By the way, if you develop the stones to answer this question which you have repeatedly avoided, please do so: Who would you have chosen first in the draft, and why- Ryan Tannehill or Kellen Moore? Please let us be the judge of whether it is relevant or not and just answer the question, thanks in advance.

 

Sorry Shou...love ya' man, but you gotta let it go...the bottom line is that you can't seem to see any weakness this team has as solely due to Tanny and your perceived weaknesses in his game...right or wrong, you've lost credibility with a lot of folks here...

 

I already answered that, because your viewpoints and how you go about sharing them are amusing. Back to the question: who would you have drafted first, Ryan Tannehill or Kellen Moore. No stones yet?

 

Its worse than that, he's doing it because he thinks there's really people who don't think Tanny can play better. He's basically arguing water is wet. He harps on it and harps on it and harps on it, all the while doing what you said, so when he finally puts up this snarky and passive aggressive thread, people just vote defiantly and he thinks he made some point or another.

The thing is, even if we stopped arguing with him, he'd still be making these threads every other day, because he doesn't want to have a discussion, he wants to lay the groundwork in case he's right in the future. He will necro a thread/post he made in the past if its even close to right to do a "see, I told you so" moment more than anyone here.

 

Since you love statistics so maybe you can explain why the NFL QB rating would have "construct and predictive validity" in your eyes and the college QB rating does not. Good luck.