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

So in the absence of relying upon any college QB rating, why would you choose Tannehill over Kellen Moore? In other words, what is your basis for choosing Tannehill over Moore?

 

I will be the first to say Shou can annoy the $$##@@#$$%^^& out of me at times, at first it was because I thought he was stubborn pig headed and arrogant. then when emotion was removed, I realize exactly what he is doing. I dont always like his approach and I HOPE that if he gets what he is looking for he will then discuss the other side of the coin which is that the supporting cast needs improved. But what he is IMO trying to get at is how RT's play this years says w/o hesitation, without any doubt that if his play stays constant from last year and teh cast improved, how much better would we be really? Shous point I believe is that he has some issue that would cause problem regardless of the cast and that he needs to improve for the team to improve. I say fair enough.

I think Shou actually thinks RT will improve but he famously will challenge opposite thinking to the point he tries to force you out of your viewpoint and look at things from diff angles. Sometimes the way he does it can be construed as arrogant and stubborn, one sided I am smarter than you. But in the end if we all maybe look at each side maybe we can arrive at a clearer picture

 

Interesting. You wouldn't be saying that bc college QBs play in a wide range of systems, with varying levels of talent around them while facing varying levels if competition, would you?

 

I don't know of a single person who thinks that Tannehill doesn't need to improve, do you? I mean, that's just a given. Just about everyone, however, knows that Tannehill needs more help from a substandard receiving corps, including Steven Ross who recently said that we need our offense and receives to become more explosive.

 

I don't find him annoying at all. He's just wrong.

 

I agree have argued the point with him as well but wont anymore. I have said my peace on it and am done with it

 

And how many of those reasons are applicable in the pros?

 

Wow. That's brilliant. Does your NFL QB rating system that you seem to love so much factor in height as to rating Quarterbacks?

 

No one is saying that. Theyre saying that his production would have increased with better talent around him, not that he'd have magically morphed into Aaron Rodgers.

And you're saying his receivers would were hindered by playing with a QB with a such and such QB rating. Meaning you don't fully understand what a QB rating is.

 

I don't see that as the case at all, and personally I'd swap Tannehill for Wilson right now. But if you refuse to acknowledge the weakness of Tannehill's receiving corps and drum up statistics to invalidate the argument that the WRs are hindering his production- which most of us can plainly see- and make excuses for the WRs lack of TD production when it's clearly not an anomaly, it's par for the course- this is where you lose people. You can't rely solely on statistics and then make excuses for numbers that don't support your argument, it doesn't work that way.

Tannehill clearly needs to improve, and if that's your point I would submit that your point is unnecessary, because his need for improvement is self evident.

 

And you assume that you have a level of brilliance to begin with? Is this where I should attach the head scratching icon?

 

Who has said that? Nothing is guaranteed. We can ascertain that if he had more play makers on offense he would throw for more yardage and have a higher TD percentage, but it doesn't imply that he will be a franchise QB or our long term solution.

He showed flashes of brilliance and also showed flashes of deer in the headlights play.

If that brilliance becomes more of the norm on a consistent basis, then we will know what we are working with. But don't discount the impact that playmakers that can separate, make tough catches in traffic and break a tackle every once in a while.

Also play close attention to how much time Tannehill has in the pocket to playoff teams. Our OL gets bullied around on a consistent basis.

 

This whole argument about surrounding casts for QBs is over.

Flacco is playing the superbowl.

OFFICIALLY. OVER.

/thread.

 

Flacco is deadly accurate on his long balls. But it is equally amazing to see his WR's jump up and get his balls or make tough catches with DB's draped on their backs.

 

gunna have to argue from the HUGE majority of overthrows he produces. Especially over the last 3 games. Deadly accurate when they catch them for him, maybe. :P.

edit: Don't get me wrong, i'm rooting for the ravens and happy for them. But its Flacco. this is the perfect example to disprove this whole argument.

 

If you're really being objective, no one knows how much it would have risen. We're talking about different play calls, personell groups, formations, different defenses, etc. there's no way to calculate that. But I applaud your efforts.

 

If BH had put up the same numbers as VJ (since they had virtually the same amount of catches), Tannehill's QB rating would be 83.47. With that rating no one is questioning Tannehill's future.

 

That is not your point. Your point is that it wouldn't have risen very much. Be honest.

 

I was referring to this statement from you:

"I've never said my brilliance extends to predicting whom to draft from college at QB."

This thread is another from you of marginal value that is getting stretched out way beyond what should be its expiration date. Good for a few chuckles here and there, but if possible next time try to muster up something of substance. You have a half answer for everything, and you prefer Tannehill over Kellen Moore due to "height". That might go a long way in explaining why you choose to look almost exclusively at statistics versus using your own eyes and judgement. Classic, thanks for the laugh.

 

He would also stop doing it if a mod told him that baiting and trolling were against the site TOS.

 

Perhaps I said it wrong...you are so enamored with what you perceive as Tanny being the sole problem on this team that you don't see anyone else's arguments as valid because they aren't saying that Tanny is the end-all problem on this team (as you seem to think)....We all get that you don't see Tanny as being able to improve. We all get that you think that Tanny has caused every problem this team faced last season. Unfortunately, most of us see many other glaring issues with this team. That's not to say that Tanny isn't part of the problem and that he needs to improve, but you seem to want us all to believe that he'll never get any better than he is right now...most of us don't see that. I love your passion, but Tanny is an issue that we don't need to harp on until more time has passed. It's too early for bust or boom messages on this kid...

And seriously, you don't think that the receiving corps was more of an issue than Tanny this season ??

 

Nobody knows. We have been down this route before with Henne.. All we needed was a top dog WR and this offense would explode.. And with Brandon Marshall it still stagnated.

We can infer that a better WR corps would gain more yards after the catch, score more TD's or get more open, but we don't know yet if Tannehill can translate that in to wins and game winning type of performances.

That "IT" factor that QB's either have or don't have. That ability to make that first down throw on 3rd and 20 down 6 with no timeouts. That ability to escape pressure on 4th and 9 and throw a TD. Does a premier WR help in those scenarios? Of course it does to a certain extent, but the truly great QB's improvise and makes this plays to 4th string WR's.. Think of the two WR's that basically won Super Bowls for Eli. Where are they now?

I tend to think that he could - He showed far more than Henne did his second year and is accurate in throwing to WR's in stride. Something Henne struggled with even on short throws. Then again I though Henne was the savior so my opinion is pretty much worthless. I'm done hoping for greatness, I need to see it over the course of a season with it culminating in a playoff game.

 

We have pretty strong statistical, observational & logical evidence, our WRs are below the norm.

 

Of course we do. Nobody is arguing against that.

But... Nobody can claim that this team becomes an immediate playoff contender with Tannehill if we get a WR or two.. Tannehill could have a QB rating over 90 but throw INT's down 3 in the 4th.. Or he could have an All-Pro stretch during a game, only to make a boneheaded throw or throw three straight bad throws.

Having good WR's won't tell us if he the clutch gene that all great QB's have.

Do I think he can develop in to that type of a QB? Hell yes!! I want that more than anything else in the world.

Do I know if he has that ability? History has proven me wrong many times before and I am not ready to make that jump until I see him do it. WR's will help his cause, but ultimately, it will be on him to make the most out of what he has.

Eventually, excuses only delay development. We made excuses for Henne and look where we are 4 years later.

 

There's nothing to contend with.

We lost 5 games by a TD or less. Its flat out ridiculous to think that if Hartline could score a freaking TD we'd have had a better record.

You still till this day REFUSE to acknowledge a completed pass requires 2 people.

 

Yes we can claim it. We were 2 games out of being in real contention for the playoffs. We lost 5 games by a TD or less. This is not rocket science. If Hartline could do anything with the effing ball in his hands besides fall down, there is no reason to think we'd have won some more games and Tannehill's rating would be higher.

I will state again, Vincent Jackson caught 2 less passes, but scored 7 more TDs than Hartline, along with 300 more yards plus more YAC and First downs. That is inarguably an indictment of Hartline.