Jaws rank Tannehill above Fitzpatrick, Sanchez

[Irishfinfan1]

I think it's a combo, our talent has regressed and so has he. He needs to succeed in year 4 regardless of the talent so I am very disappointed w/ his play since early in that Pitt game but the Ol is struggling, we can't run, he's missing key pieces to throw to.

You guys should be excited about tannehill, he has shown flashes and he should get better w/ more experience but there still will be growing pains. I know if he has a stinker on Sunday we'll see threads saying he's a bust. The bottom line is you shouldn't get too high or too low on him, he's developing.

Thanks for that, probably as accurate and sincere as you get. NFL is very hard when you gamble on a QB and he doesn't work out, for the record I would blame the coaching the most, for the first time we actually have coaches that will improve Tannehill, under Henning and co I don't think he would have had a chance.

 

[nyjunc]

And you couldnt use him with the end zone struggles u guys are having. He was productive last year and besides Kerly none of your receiver now are having any better seperation

we aren't really having RZ struggles as much as we are struggling to get to the RZ.

No one said it was a chip shot. The fact that he pushed it left with the distance he needed is proof it was his fault. If the snap was high, or the snapper bobbled it, or the kick was blocked b/c he lost his footing b/c of the wet field, then it isn't his fault.

---------- Post added at 02:37 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:35 PM ----------



This I agree with. It occurs way too often on this site but it's to be expected I guess. There are a lot of new posters on this site as well as ones who are forever negative.

It's not an easy kick though, whether he oushed it, pulled it or whatever it's not an easy kick.

 

[dolpns13]

Ive said this many times. Not sure why people dont understand this concept!

Or how about if his kicker and/or defensive backs did their jobs, the additional exposure to throw subsequent interceptions should have become moot?

 

[Vaark]

If you look at the Percentage of Field Goals Made Leaders per the following link

It's an eye-opener! Aside from Carpenter being way below average, look at the 40-49 and 50plus yard columns, you'll see that for presumably a professional kicker, the expectation of making at least 50% of them is not unreasonable. (Carpenter is 1-4..bracket that against the majority of other kickers and you'll see that these losses are not on RT17 so much as they are on our "idiot kicker"

http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/player/_/stat/kicking/sort/fieldGoalPct

 

[Danny]

what does that matter? those are not easy kicks, you act like you set him up for 30 yarders and he missed. 47,48,51 are certainly makeable but nowhere near a chip shot.

But what I'm trying to say is that if you're going to blame the distance for him missing then fine, but while they were not short distance trys, he had more than enough legs and therefor you can't say he missed cause they were 47,48 and 51. If he had missed short then you can say they were too far and that's why he missed. But that was not the case. 47 and 48 yards are not too far for an NFL kicker including him as he proved by kicking those further than that. He just hooked 2 and pushed the other.You're trying to say that the reason he missed was cause Tanny didn't get the team closer for him to kick shorter FG's. So you're blamking Tanny for the loss but everyone knows it wasn't his fault. Carps needs to make those kicks.BTW, You're one jets fan I don't mind talking to. I think you're a good poster. I just disagree on this one.....lol

Ozzy rules!!

 

[CMD]

I just can't blame Tannehill for only getting Carpenter into range fora 48 yard FG. Once Tannehill got his team there, Sherman decided to call 2 straight throws to the corner of the endzone to Hartline which were obviously incomplete. It was terrible playcalling by Sherman for the lack of field position on the FG kick. And if someone with the leg of Carp struggles with 47 and 48 yard FGs then I don't want him on my team. Especially when he finds a way to miss them all in the 4th.

Also the INT Tannehill threw against Arizona he had an open Hartline deep, he had 2-3 steps on the DB and had an easy catch that might've gone for a TD if it was an accurate pass. It sucks that Tannehill waited so long to get blown up, but it's not like we lost because he threw an errant pass or trusted his arm too much. He got hit while he was passing to an open Hartline that would've been a deep completion.

 

[nyjunc]

40-49 doesn't seperate 40 yarders from 49 yarders so you'd have to dig deeper to give accurate info comparing your guy missing from 47, 48 & 51.

But what I'm trying to say is that if you're going to blame the distance for him missing then fine, but while they were not short distance trys, he had more than enough legs and therefor you can't say he missed cause they were 47,48 and 51. If he had missed short then you can say they were too far and that's why he missed. But that was not the case. 47 and 48 yards are not too far for an NFL kicker including him as he proved by kicking those further than that. He just hooked 2 and pushed the other.You're trying to say that the reason he missed was cause Tanny didn't get the team closer for him to kick shorter FG's. So you're blamking Tanny for the loss but everyone knows it wasn't his fault. Carps needs to make those kicks.BTW, You're one jets fan I don't mind talking to. I think you're a good poster. I just disagree on this one.....lol

Ozzy rules!!

I'm not blamning the distace, I'm saying it's far from a chip shot. It's not an easy kick, it's makeable but difficult. Should he have made one? probably but it wasn't easy and he gave away 3 pts in regulatiopn, tannehill gave away 7. You cannot absolve tannehill from either loss and pin all the blame on the K. They both deserve their share of the blame.

 

[CANDolphan]

I think it's a combo, our talent has regressed and so has he. He needs to succeed in year 4 regardless of the talent so I am very disappointed w/ his play since early in that Pitt game but the Ol is struggling, we can't run, he's missing key pieces to throw to.

You guys should be excited about tannehill, he has shown flashes and he should get better w/ more experience but there still will be growing pains. I know if he has a stinker on Sunday we'll see threads saying he's a bust. The bottom line is you shouldn't get too high or too low on him, he's developing.

This is all incredibly rational and well said. Thank you.

Guys seriously you're sounding like idiotic homers jumping on Carp but not willing to give Tannehill his fair share of the blame. Seriously, stop.

 

[CANDolphan]

there is, he's got no help. At least Tannehill has a run game and his Ol is playing better but again it's very early.

Just read this. You're really stretching. While there were some drops, there were some wide open touchdown opportunities that Sanchez just simply couldn't connect on. Sanchez is playing like hot garbage, and for him, that's more the norm than anything.

Sanchez won't be in New York next season, most likely. His extension was nothing more than a PR move, it didn't really keep him on the team (ie make it harder to cut him for $ reasons) and he's regressing. They've gotta cut him loose.

 

[Vaark]

well the top 20 statistical kickers in the league (per above and including Folk) have missed a grand total of 6 40-50+ yd attempts out of 98 a little over 6%). Carpenter has missed 75% of his attempts so it's not unreasonable to expect better than that.

It's ironic that going in the popular thought was it would be our receivers who let Tannehill down, not our ****ing idiot kicker!

 

[RobertHorry]

Tannehills a rook with a couple of games under his belt and played his position better than those two. Fitz and Sanchez have put both of their teams under many times with no improvements till Week 4 from 1. How can you say Sanchez has played tougher D's then Tanny?? HES A ROOKIE! and his seeing these defense for the first time... lmao

Because he dismantled an Arizona defense that was abused by the rams last night? Or by the raiders who had 3 Terrible corners?

No improvement? You've watched every game of the Bills and Jets to see if they made improvements? Really?

Sanchez has played 2 teams that Are light years ahead of anyone Tannenhill has played so far.

 

[nyjunc]

well the top 20 statistical kickers in the league (per above and including Folk) have missed a grand total of 6 40-50+ yd attempts out of 98 a little over 6%). Carpenter has missed 75% of his attempts so it's not unreasonable to expect better than that.

It's ironic that going in the popular thought was it would be our receivers who let Tannehill down, not our ****ing idiot kicker!

yiou know 40-49 can be a bit misleading, right? his misses were from 47 & 48, that's very different than making one from 40 or 41.

Let's look at all these kickers and their kicks from 40-49

Dawson: 2-2, 42 & 43
Janikowski: 1-1, 43
Bryant: 4-4, ,40, 41 2x, 42
Kaeding: 3-3, 41 2x, 45
Scobee: 3-3, 44, 47 2x
Nugent: 1-1, 47
Gould: 2-2, 43, 45
Suisham: 2-2, 45 2x
Crosby: 2-2, 40, 48

Do I need to continue or do you get the point? only Scobee, Nugent and Crosby made a kick as long as 47 so it looks nice posting 40-49 #s but you have to break them down a little more.

It's easy to blame the K but the O and the QB didn't do enough.

 

[Danny]

but if the ffence has to do it all then why even have a kicker/ He's there to make those kicks and those guys that made all those kicks over 40(41 to 44) what makes you think that's all the could make? They kicked them from the spot the ball was at......are you saying those kicks just barely got over the cross? they could have been good fom 50 for all we know.If you ask Carp he'll be the first one to tell you that he should have made those kicks.

Ozzy rules!!

---------- Post added at 08:23 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:22 PM ----------

btw, Tanny had way over 400 yards passing and he didn't do enough?....lol

Ozzy rules!!

 

[Vaark]

yiou know 40-49 can be a bit misleading, right? his misses were from 47 & 48, that's very different than making one from 40 or 41.

Let's look at all these kickers and their kicks from 40-49

Dawson: 2-2, 42 & 43
Janikowski: 1-1, 43
Bryant: 4-4, ,40, 41 2x, 42
Kaeding: 3-3, 41 2x, 45
Scobee: 3-3, 44, 47 2x
Nugent: 1-1, 47
Gould: 2-2, 43, 45
Suisham: 2-2, 45 2x
Crosby: 2-2, 40, 48

Do I need to continue or do you get the point? only Scobee, Nugent and Crosby made a kick as long as 47 so it looks nice posting 40-49 #s but you have to break them down a little more.


It's easy to blame the K but the O and the QB didn't do enough.

On 50 yarders, the top 25 kickers went 25-29... so it's not unreasonable to expect yours to even hit 50 % of his from 45 yards and up.

The QB never does enough, even Rodgers and Brees in losses, but when they entrust the late game to their DBs and kickers to do what's considered a reasonable job, they have done enough in most cases and the fault lies elsewhere.

 

[nyjunc]

On 50 yarders, the top 25 kickers went 25-29... so it's not unreasonable to expect yours to even hit 50 % of his from 45 yards and up.

The QB never does enough, even Rodgers and Brees in losses, but when they entrust the late game to their DBs and kickers to do what's considered a reasonable job, they have done enough in most cases and the fault lies elsewhere.

I am not blmaing Tannehill but I don't blame the K either. There was a lot of blame to go around and each of those guys shares in the blame. Could carpenter have made at least 1 of his kicks? absolutely, could tannehill have avoided big turnovers? yes. They both played a role in prevented Miami from winning.