Has Geno Smith passed R. Tannehill ?

[Pachyderm_Wave]

Compare Ryan Tannehill through year 2 with Geno Smith through year 2, looking at the same criteria of "putting points on the board and turning the ball over." Ryan Tannehill was still demonstrably better at those things after year 2 than Geno Smith is after his year two.

Now you want to change the criteria. Suddenly let's segue into dropped interceptions. Okay, well Geno had what, two? three? on his last drive against the Bears alone.

You can keep shifting the goalposts, or you can accept that the original premise of the thread -- that Geno Smith has surpassed Ryan Tannehill -- doesn't stand up to even the most remote scrutiny.




So when confronted with evidence that he has been rude, the perfect gentleman's response is to inform all parties present that he doesn't particularly care? Got it.

The point is that Tannehill through his first 2 seasons was NOT significantly better than Geno Smith through his first 2 years.

Tannehill's first 2 seasons he averaged a 59.3 % in completions, had a combined 39 TD's with 30 INT's, and averaged 6.8 yards/attempt.

Geno Smith's first 2 seasons he averaged 57.5 % in completions, had a combined 32 TD's with 34 INT's, and averaged 6.9 yards/attempt.

The main difference is Ryan Tannehill had 18 fumbles through his first 2 seasons. Geno Smith only 8.

Tannehill should be ahead of him at the moment, but that was never really my point. My point is that through their first 2 seasons, there wasn't much difference. They've both played bad enough to be benched. Tannehill like most quarterbacks, hit a crossroads in his career during year 3 and had to go one way or the other. Perhaps the final game of year 2 for Geno Smith was his turning point. We don't know yet.

This will be ironed out in the years to come. Either way, I laughed until my sides hurt last Sunday watching what Geno Smith was doing... knowing people like you were clawing your eyeballs out. And no doubt, thinking about this very thread.



As for the "whiff" post. This is the last time I'm going to address you on it. That post has been sitting there for 3 years and nobody is concerned with it but you. Even though it had nothing to do with you in the first place. My posting style or tone is mine. It's not going to change. If it bothers your pretentious, thought policing ways, it's not my problem. It's a you problem.

 

[Pachyderm_Wave]

Ted, I respect your informed opinion, but even the best broadcast in no "transmission zones" from time to time.

Funny you should criticize Tannehill for folding in the clutch considering that a QB you've long championed put up a total of 24 2nd half points going back 6 games to the ACC championship; who's demonstrated that whether in postseason and now in season, no 20 or 21pt halftime lead is safe with him under center and from a stats standpoint, ranks 140 out of 140 playoff winning percentage for QBs with at least 1 postseason win. Of course, one can rationalize away poor performances attributing them to bad OLs, unreliable defenses, injuries, bad coaching, etc. Well then welcome to Tannehill's world but without the 2 elite receivers, never having the GOAT TE, outstanding RBs in their prime etc. But win or lose, can you really rationalize away 2 pick 6's and no TDs scored in yet another "win or go home" situation? And then there's the Detroit game.

I don't think there's a more knowledgeable football guy on this site than you Ted. Kudos for nailing both the James and Landry picks for what they're worth. But no one's infallible and certainly at the time of the 09 draft, you couldn't have known that Melt's disappearing act in the second half of the ACC VT championship game (after beating them in season when it didn't mean as much) would be a portent of things to come. However, at this point, when we're talking about choking and choking genes, it's hard to call out Tannehill without paying the same tribute to Melty. :idk:

You and I disagreed who to draft in 09, soon after you joined the site. At that point I didnt realize how astute you were, considering you just another Melt fanboy. I was of course wrong about that and wrong about Long.. but in retrospect, I think you would have to now agree that trading up or down for Flacco, the true gem of that draft who actually knows how to rise to the occasion and win, would have been far and away the best decision that year.

Vaark-

The truth on M. Ryan is, and always was somewhere in the middle of all your criticism of him, and the praise he's earned as a pro bowl caliber quarterback.

The truth is always found somewhere in the middle. I only tried to explain the failed logic regarding passing on M. Ryan.

You can't criticize M. Ryan that harshly, and not criticize Tannehill or any other QB just as harshly and keep it real. That's all I'm saying.

 

[J. David Wannyheimer]

Either way, I laughed until my sides hurt last Sunday watching what Geno Smith was doing... knowing people like you were clawing your eyeballs out. And no doubt, thinking about this very thread.

Tannehill had a lousy rookie year. In fact, after his rookie year, I thought he had bust potential. Too many turnovers, hardly any touchdowns. But his year two was a lot better than Geno's year two, despite what was going on with the team. His level of play was indeed measurably better than Geno's play in year two.

As for what happened on Sunday? I've been publicly rooting for the team to lose the last 2 games. I don't want the Jets to have the chance to draft Jameis Winston or Marcus Mariota. I'd prefer that they be stuck with Gen0.

As for the "whiff" post. This is the last time I'm going to address you on it. That post has been sitting there for 3 years and nobody is concerned with it but you. Even though it had nothing to do with you in the first place. My posting style or tone is mine. It's not going to change. If it bothers your pretentious, thought policing ways, it's not my problem. It's a you problem.

I'm not trying to 'police your thoughts.' I'm just pointing out that if you want to come in and claim the moral high ground for what a polite, wonderful gentleman you are, you should probably start acting like one. No shame in admitting that you are down here wallowing in the mud with the rest of us slobs.

 

[The New Guy]

The point is that Tannehill through his first 2 seasons was NOT significantly better than Geno Smith through his first 2 years.

Tannehill's first 2 seasons he averaged a 59.3 % in completions, had a combined 39 TD's with 30 INT's, and averaged 6.8 yards/attempt.

Geno Smith's first 2 seasons he averaged 57.5 % in completions, had a combined 32 TD's with 34 INT's, and averaged 6.9 yards/attempt.

The main difference is Ryan Tannehill had 18 fumbles through his first 2 seasons. Geno Smith only 8.

Tannehill should be ahead of him at the moment, but that was never really my point. My point is that through their first 2 seasons, there wasn't much difference. They've both played bad enough to be benched. Tannehill like most quarterbacks, hit a crossroads in his career during year 3 and had to go one way or the other. Perhaps the final game of year 2 for Geno Smith was his turning point. We don't know yet.

This will be ironed out in the years to come. Either way, I laughed until my sides hurt last Sunday watching what Geno Smith was doing... knowing people like you were clawing your eyeballs out. And no doubt, thinking about this very thread.



As for the "whiff" post. This is the last time I'm going to address you on it. That post has been sitting there for 3 years and nobody is concerned with it but you. Even though it had nothing to do with you in the first place. My posting style or tone is mine. It's not going to change. If it bothers your pretentious, thought policing ways, it's not my problem. It's a you problem.

You lost me on the first sentence. And I haven't crowned Tannehill yet.

 

[J. David Wannyheimer]

You lost me on the first sentence. And I haven't crowned Tannehill yet.

There's an unusual disconnect in this thread. Most people feel that Geno Smith has been a bad quarterback in his first two seasons. Ryan Tannehill was viewed as one of the NFL's worst quarterbacks in his first season, and most people felt he was an average player in his second season. Most people feel he is above average or good in his third season. Now, because there's no way to say who is right or wrong, this is all well and good. However, statistically, you just can't make the case that Geno Smith is a better player right now, or a better player at a comparative stage in his career (i.e. after year 2 as a pro). You can't even point to advanced analytics to make the case that Geno is the better player, because the analytics say he's almost as bad as Ryan Lindley right now.

I respect people who are willing to have unpopular opinions, and I honestly don't even mind Slimm's opinion on this one. He likes what he sees in Geno and he doesn't like what he sees in Tannehill. That's fine and I don't really take exception to that. But he's failing to produce a coherent argument -- essentially arguing against his own established criteria -- and then doubling down on it. If he were to say "I think Geno Smith does X, Y, and Z better on film" then that would be a reasonable argument we could respect. But when the argument starts with "Ryan Tannehill is a sack taker" and shifts to "Ryan Tannehill isn't as good at putting points on the board" and then shifts to "Ryan Tannehill fumbles too much," as all of these arguments are shown to be provably false, we are just wagging our tails.

Geno Smith may some day become a better quarterback than Ryan Tannehill, but I've yet to see a single honest and compelling argument that he's even as good as Ryan was at the end of his second year. And ultimately, I am much more scared of the Jets with Jameis Winston or even Matt Moore than I am of the Jets with Geno Smith.

 

[Ben Had]

The point is that Tannehill through his first 2 seasons was NOT significantly better than Geno Smith through his first 2 years. /QUOTE]

You lost me too...

 

[Pachyderm_Wave]

There's an unusual disconnect in this thread. Most people feel that Geno Smith has been a bad quarterback in his first two seasons. Ryan Tannehill was viewed as one of the NFL's worst quarterbacks in his first season, and most people felt he was an average player in his second season. Most people feel he is above average or good in his third season. Now, because there's no way to say who is right or wrong, this is all well and good. However, statistically, you just can't make the case that Geno Smith is a better player right now, or a better player at a comparative stage in his career (i.e. after year 2 as a pro). You can't even point to advanced analytics to make the case that Geno is the better player, because the analytics say he's almost as bad as Ryan Lindley right now.

I respect people who are willing to have unpopular opinions, and I honestly don't even mind Slimm's opinion on this one. He likes what he sees in Geno and he doesn't like what he sees in Tannehill. That's fine and I don't really take exception to that. But he's failing to produce a coherent argument -- essentially arguing against his own established criteria -- and then doubling down on it. If he were to say "I think Geno Smith does X, Y, and Z better on film" then that would be a reasonable argument we could respect. But when the argument starts with "Ryan Tannehill is a sack taker" and shifts to "Ryan Tannehill isn't as good at putting points on the board" and then shifts to "Ryan Tannehill fumbles too much," as all of these arguments are shown to be provably false, we are just wagging our tails.

Geno Smith may some day become a better quarterback than Ryan Tannehill, but I've yet to see a single honest and compelling argument that he's even as good as Ryan was at the end of his second year. And ultimately, I am much more scared of the Jets with Jameis Winston or even Matt Moore than I am of the Jets with Geno Smith.

I've already explained some of the things I see with Geno Smith on film that I like and don't like. I've already done it in this thread a long time ago.

Even if you go back to the game against the Bills where he was benched after throwing 3 consecutive INT's. I disagreed with his head coach that the INT's where anywhere near as bad as he talked them up to be. Only one of those INT's would I have credited to the quarterback.... the one that sailed high of his intended target.

The other two he had identified where the single coverage was pre-snap. He knew he had one-on-one coverage and took a shot downfield just like he was supposed to do. The throws weren't off. The DB's just outplayed the receivers for the football. The receivers did absolutely nothing to make an effort to catch those passes, or even prevent the DB from catching 'em. Those receivers are getting paid too.

Tannehill is fine, but I don't like his feel for the game. His situational feel is just brutal sometimes. He displayed these tendancies plenty in college, and it's just part of what he is. It's why he leaves plays on the field. He looks like a kid who's been overcoached to an extent by Mike Sherman early in his development. I could go on and on...

But here's the point, neither one of 'em are anything special to this point. I think they both have about the same chance to end up average to above average quarterbacks when it's all said and done. The main area where Tannehill is ahead of Geno Smith is in game management, due to the different styles of coaching both received. That's the difference in Mike Sherman's WCO and Dana Holgorsen's Air Raid Attack. They're built on a completely different set of fundamentals and mentalities. Geno just needs good coaching on how to manage the game better without taking away his ability to make plays. Rex Ryan can't provide that for any quarterback. I respect the hell out of Rex Ryan's ability to coach defense, but he needs to go to a place where there's already an established QB in order to be successful. He's not going to develope one, or provide the resources necessary to develope one on his offensive staff.

 

[J. David Wannyheimer]

Even though I think you are being way too generous with Geno and way too critical with Ryan, I would agree that Geno has suffered from poor coaching and a marginal surrounding cast that has not done him a lot of favors. That said, I think the same excuses can be made for Ryan Tannehill. Interceptions thrown because a receiver didn't even make an effort for the football is also something we've seen with Brian Hartline and Mike Wallace (mostly in 2013) quite a bit in Ryan's tenure. I also think that having Mike Sherman's son-in-law as the QB coach with no qualifications is a situation in which Tannehill has been set up to fail just as much as Geno has been screwed with Rex and Marty bungling the show.

But I just can't entertain the argument that Geno is a better player than Ryan Tannehill is right now, or was at the end of 2013. There's too much evidence to the contrary from too many directions.

 

[DuderinoN703]

Geno didn't pass him but once again was the MUCH better QB week 17 at Miami, this year the game was meaningless but still badly outplayed him once again and showed what Ryan is missing by connecting on all those downfield passes. if Ryan could even show the threat of being able to throw it downfield he could become a pretty good QB in this league and it takes that O to a new level.

QB's need their teams to help get the win. Smith had the game of his life and his defense made a ton of plays b/c Miami's OL stinks. The Dolphins defense has regressed a ton the last 1/4 of the season too. Smith's game was a complete anomaly.

 

[hoops]

I've already explained some of the things I see with Geno Smith on film that I like and don't like. I've already done it in this thread a long time ago.

Even if you go back to the game against the Bills where he was benched after throwing 3 consecutive INT's. I disagreed with his head coach that the INT's where anywhere near as bad as he talked them up to be. Only one of those INT's would I have credited to the quarterback.... the one that sailed high of his intended target.

The other two he had identified where the single coverage was pre-snap. He knew he had one-on-one coverage and took a shot downfield just like he was supposed to do. The throws weren't off. The DB's just outplayed the receivers for the football. The receivers did absolutely nothing to make an effort to catch those passes, or even prevent the DB from catching 'em. Those receivers are getting paid too.

Tannehill is fine, but I don't like his feel for the game. His situational feel is just brutal sometimes. He displayed these tendancies plenty in college, and it's just part of what he is. It's why he leaves plays on the field. He looks like a kid who's been overcoached to an extent by Mike Sherman early in his development. I could go on and on...

But here's the point, neither one of 'em are anything special to this point. I think they both have about the same chance to end up average to above average quarterbacks when it's all said and done. The main area where Tannehill is ahead of Geno Smith is in game management, due to the different styles of coaching both received. That's the difference in Mike Sherman's WCO and Dana Holgorsen's Air Raid Attack. They're built on a completely different set of fundamentals and mentalities. Geno just needs good coaching on how to manage the game better without taking away his ability to make plays. Rex Ryan can't provide that for any quarterback. I respect the hell out of Rex Ryan's ability to coach defense, but he needs to go to a place where there's already an established QB in order to be successful. He's not going to develope one, or provide the resources necessary to develope one on his offensive staff.

now see this is something that i can see as a legitimate criticism and something that i have been banking on will improve with more time and reps at qb...that he will become more natural...i guess i keep going back to the only 2 years as a starter in college and now 3 years a pro in a now new offensive system...in other words i dont think his career can be labeled that way at this time

 

[phintim]

I've already explained some of the things I see with Geno Smith on film that I like and don't like. I've already done it in this thread a long time ago.

Even if you go back to the game against the Bills where he was benched after throwing 3 consecutive INT's. I disagreed with his head coach that the INT's where anywhere near as bad as he talked them up to be. Only one of those INT's would I have credited to the quarterback.... the one that sailed high of his intended target.

The other two he had identified where the single coverage was pre-snap. He knew he had one-on-one coverage and took a shot downfield just like he was supposed to do. The throws weren't off. The DB's just outplayed the receivers for the football. The receivers did absolutely nothing to make an effort to catch those passes, or even prevent the DB from catching 'em. Those receivers are getting paid too.

Tannehill is fine, but I don't like his feel for the game. His situational feel is just brutal sometimes. He displayed these tendancies plenty in college, and it's just part of what he is. It's why he leaves plays on the field. He looks like a kid who's been overcoached to an extent by Mike Sherman early in his development. I could go on and on...

But here's the point, neither one of 'em are anything special to this point. I think they both have about the same chance to end up average to above average quarterbacks when it's all said and done. The main area where Tannehill is ahead of Geno Smith is in game management, due to the different styles of coaching both received. That's the difference in Mike Sherman's WCO and Dana Holgorsen's Air Raid Attack. They're built on a completely different set of fundamentals and mentalities. Geno just needs good coaching on how to manage the game better without taking away his ability to make plays. Rex Ryan can't provide that for any quarterback. I respect the hell out of Rex Ryan's ability to coach defense, but he needs to go to a place where there's already an established QB in order to be successful. He's not going to develope one, or provide the resources necessary to develope one on his offensive staff.

Slimm I had been sitting on the fence this year on RT hoping Hoops was correct and you and CK were incorrect on your assessment of RT's abilities. My opinion has always been its hard to expect the same coach/QB to win at the NFL level when they could not manage it at the college level. So when Sherman was canned last year it was very important to see what we had with Ryan T.. The point you brought up that its the system that improving RT has a point but there is the other side of the coin where Ryan Ts foot work has improved, along with his ability to run with ball. The 2nd half of this season his decision making seemed much improved also compared to years past. Now with that being said we can praise the system or maybe it has been the Sherman system that was holding him back all this time. "Lets face it when Sherman left Texas AM the team did great the very next year" Ok the back half of this year Ryann T decision making became much more consistent than it has in the past which is a sign of the needle pointing up would you not agree? As far as Geno's great game against us at the end of the year while embarrassing you have a coach loosing his team with Wallace benching himself on the offensive side of the ball and a crippled secondary with Finningan and Wilson helping out Geno. Excuses sure but factual. Hey what is your opinion of this Tannebaum hire by the way? Thanks

 

[nyjunc]

QB's need their teams to help get the win. Smith had the game of his life and his defense made a ton of plays b/c Miami's OL stinks. The Dolphins defense has regressed a ton the last 1/4 of the season too. Smith's game was a complete anomaly.

defense made plays or the QB couldn't make plays? opposing QBs were making plays against our D all year. we made Kyle Orton look like an all pro.

In the 1st half Ryan played well, this was the first time he had played well against our D but in the 2nd half he disappeared. It was a meaningless game, not much to take out of it either way but Geno was the best QB on the field that day as he was week 17 of 2013 in the biggest game of Ryan's career.

 

[FinfanInBuffalo]

defense made plays or the QB couldn't make plays? opposing QBs were making plays against our D all year. we made Kyle Orton look like an all pro.

In the 1st half Ryan played well, this was the first time he had played well against our D but in the 2nd half he disappeared. It was a meaningless game, not much to take out of it either way but Geno was the best QB on the field that day as he was week 17 of 2013 in the biggest game of Ryan's career.

I pray that the Jests bring Geno back as the starter next year and for the next 10 years.

 

[nyjunc]

you should pray for the folks who had loved ones lose their lives in the terrorist attacks today, pray for those who are homeless/hungry, pray for the police officers murdered, pray for peace. It's sad you would pray to see another football team lose.

 

[FinfanInBuffalo]

you should pray for the folks who had loved ones lose their lives in the terrorist attacks today, pray for those who are homeless/hungry, pray for the police officers murdered, pray for peace. It's sad you would pray to see another football team lose.

WTF does any of that have to do with Dolphins football?