Luck, Griffin, & Wilson vs. Tannehill & Weeden: An Objective Analysis (Part I) | Page 3 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Luck, Griffin, & Wilson vs. Tannehill & Weeden: An Objective Analysis (Part I)

I have not even read the original post to this thread, but based on the author....and the title of the thread I GUARANTEE you that it is riddled with stats to point out (and no doubt is said in the post) that Tannehill is "average".
 
LoneStarPhin said:
Can you explain to me how you know what they were "asked" to run???? Looks more like you just analyzed what they actually threw or did not.

There is a big difference between the two. There are a dozen variables every play that dictate how the play comes out- including audibles, coverage, line protection, quality of snaps, first down position, game situation/scores, etc....

If a guy is asked to throw it deep and offense is more designed to throw deep, but he continually checks down, are you concluding he was asked to do less and he performed it very capably? Just not sure how you reconcile that.
Click to expand...
I think that's a good clarification, but I also think it amounts to a distinction without a difference in terms of the above analysis, in that regardless of what these QBs were asked to run, they ended up passing the ball more or less aggressively (or conservatively) in terms of downfield throws.

So yes, while it may be true that Andrew Luck may not have been asked to throw the ball downfield any more often than the other QBs, the fact remains that when you evaluate his performance last year, you should certainly in my opinion take into account that he did throw the ball downfield far more often, and therefore his "degree of difficulty," if you will, was greater than that of the other QBs above.

---------- Post added at 12:25 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:24 PM ----------
Sarnics13 said:
I have not even read the original post to this thread, but based on the author....and the title of the thread I GUARANTEE you that it is riddled with stats to point out (and no doubt is said in the post) that Tannehill is "average".
Click to expand...
Like I said in another thread, it's a great "mental shortcut" to simply be able to cast aside any and all information based simply on who's providing it! :lol: ;)
 
shouright said:
Like I said in another thread, it's a great "mental shortcut" to simply be able to cast aside any and all information based simply on who's providing it! :lol: ;)
Click to expand...

No it's called a forgone conclusion based simply on who's providing it. but if a mental shortcut is what it needs to be to cast aside particular peoples agenda that is being CONSTANTLY brought up, because it gets old.....then I am the King almighty of mental shortcuts.
 
Sarnics13 said:
No it's called a forgone conclusion based simply on who's providing it. but if a mental shortcut is what it needs to be to cast aside particular peoples agenda that is being CONSTANTLY brought up, because it gets old.....then I am the King almighty of mental shortcuts.
Click to expand...
Well if you've gotten the message that Tannehill is indeed currently about average in just about every way, then I agree, you can probably cast aside a great deal of what I say regarding Tannehill without missing a beat. :up:

Stay tuned, however, because if he increases or decreases significantly from average, I'll be telling you all about that, too, and you won't want to miss that, I'm sure. ;)
 
The Colts have really stopped running the ball since Reggie Wayne's injury against Denver. That's been one of the most glaring developments of the season, even if few are talking about it. After Wayne's injury they have had games with 14, 14, 15 and 12 rushes. That's a terrible way to manage a game plan around Andrew Luck, who thrived in college with such a physical and persistent running game. He took advantage of underneath routes and wide open tight ends partially due to the opponent forced to respect the running game. The Colts are similarly most effective when the running game is used early, even if those plays don't gain any yards.

It's not so much that Luck has declined after Wayne's injury, as that the scheme and lack of balance have worked against him. Based on his offense in college and the types of throws he's always defaulted to, he's not the guy to be back there in a shotgun winging it 40 times per game. Last year the Colts had some low rushing attempt games early in the season but then got away from it, once Arians took over.

Arians is a sharper guy and better coach than Pagano, if you want a blunt summary.
 
shouright said:
Well if you've gotten the message that Tannehill is indeed currently about average in just about every way, then I agree, you can probably cast aside a great deal of what I say regarding Tannehill without missing a beat. :up:

Stay tuned, however, because if he increases or decreases significantly from average, I'll be telling you all about that, too, and you won't want to miss that, I'm sure. ;)
Click to expand...

shouright the almighty king of qb evaluation. line up the stats that work for you, and point out where tannehill stands. who needs to even watch the games?

none of your stats or threads are predictive, but im curious as to YOUR opinion of how tannehill will develop down the road. do you do that sort of stuff?
 
I think the ability of elite veteran qb's to sustain drives is also a contributing factor to some of this.
 
Wow- there was so much wrong with your logic right off the bat that I did not waste a lot of time with the rest. I think I agree with Sarnics above. And it's hardly a "mental shortcut" discarding the message from an unworthy messenger.

On to more worthy posts!
 
LoneStarPhin said:
Wow- there was so much wrong with your logic right off the bat that I did not waste a lot of time with the rest. I think I agree with Sarnics above. And it's hardly a "mental shortcut" discarding the message from an unworthy messenger.

On to more worthy posts!
Click to expand...
Enjoy! :up:
 
By the way, when and if you ever realize how good Tannehill is, please don't claim that you were some seer who recognized how average he was originally and now he's great, and here's the stats why. In reality, you were just one of the people who failed to recognize what most did before you.
 
russianbear said:
shouright the almighty king of qb evaluation. line up the stats that work for you, and point out where tannehill stands. who needs to even watch the games?

none of your stats or threads are predictive, but im curious as to YOUR opinion of how tannehill will develop down the road. do you do that sort of stuff?
Click to expand...

http://www.finheaven.com/showthread...ill-Going-to-Become-a-Franchise-QB&highlight=

http://www.finheaven.com/showthread...g-to-Become-a-Franchise-QB-Part-II&highlight=
 
It's true that the stats aren't necessarily predictive. They are simply a superior method of evaluation than virtually every subjective measure. It's not much different than index funds defeating managed funds. The more decisions are made, the further from the truth.

And once the sample size is large enough, the numbers almost predict themselves. Tannehill was 7.0 YPA in his first season at starter at Texas A&M, then 7.1 as a senior. He's followed that with 6.8 and 6.8 (so far) in his two NFL seasons. That's why I always emphasize it's dangerous to predict greatness when greatness has never surfaced previously. Russell Wilson has managed 8 yards per attempt or higher for three different teams since 2009.
 
Well ****, I can't wait to make spend another first round draft pick on a QB with the highest YPA. SUPER BOWL HERE WE COME!!

(Please recognize my sarcasm in it's most profound form)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom