Prisco: "After Further Review: Tannehill coming into his own in crunch time"

[Finsfan1984]

Never mind the stats, what do your EYES tell you?

^^^THIS^^^

Didnt ask me, but MY eyes tell me all is well in dolphinland. He is making great strides and will only get better with time. He seems to have the "IT" factor that all the great ones have. Thats what my eyes tell me!!!

 

[Vaark]

Now it's a Dick lebeau D as if that is a vintage Steeler D

as usual the only times you are funny are the times you are trying to be serious.

I was talking facts, that "game winning" drive was a handoff for a long run then a great play by Clay on a short pass. You guys act like Ryan led "the drive II"

TD should have been called back but I bet those 2 hold/PIs in the EZ that weren't called were legal, right?

You are funny(unintentionally of course)

---------- Post added at 03:22 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:22 PM ----------



go back and read the posts while everyone was jumping ship.

The problem w/ the homers here is if I don't say this is the next dynasty and Ryan is the next Brady then I am bashing. it's pretty sad actually.

They have pretty much nailed you on TGG:
1. If Sanchez put up those numbers vs PBurgh and lost you'd have raved about his stats
2. If Sanchez put up those numbers vs PBurgh and won, you'd have raved about his stats
3. If Sanchez loses a game it's because of his poor supporting cast (even blaming the D for allowing an opponent all of 14pts in a loss )
4. If any other QB wins a game, it's because of their supporting cast
5. If any other QB loses a game, it's despite their supporting cast.
6. Rex will end up with 4 out of 5 non-winning seasons (when playing opposing starters) yet it's not his fault due to what he has to work with
7. yet Tannenbaum was a good GM, despite what he gave Rex to work with.

Your excuse-making spin is so recognizable on TGG, I'm just surprised it's taken so long for some to figure you out here. The irony is that you are the biggest homer on both boards .

 

[tay0365]

more lazy "journalism", he talks about how he has done but all the examples are from last week. he was GREAT last week vs. NE, he wasn't the previous weeks against us and Pitt.

LOL...someone's getting upset/nervous that Miami might actually have a franchise QB, while his team is stuck with Geno Smith, Mark Sanchise or maybe Matt Simms.:foundout:

 

[hoops]

i am not a homer...never have been never will be...

 

[mrbunglez]

Most of the throws Brady made on Sunday he "pat the ball". I don't get some of these writers......

 

[Penthos]

Only a completely delusional person (aka Jets fan) could really believe that this body of work:

Mark buttfumble career stats


is comparable to this:

Ryan Tannehill career stats


Mark buttfumble's career highest season rate was in his 3rd year and it was only slightly higher than RT's Rookie Year! In four seasons buttfumble barley threw for as many yards as Tanny's rookie season. Never had a season completion rate as high as RT's rookie year. buttfumble over his career actually has MORE INTERCEPTIONS than TOUCHDOWNS.... He was FRACKING TERRIBLE! How do you not see that?

 

[nyjunc]

They have pretty much nailed you on TGG:
1. If buttfumble put up those numbers vs PBurgh and lost you'd have raved about his stats
2. If buttfumble put up those numbers vs PBurgh and won, you'd have raved about his stats
3. If buttfumble loses a game it's because of his poor supporting cast (even blaming the D for allowing an opponent all of 14pts in a loss )
4. If any other QB wins a game, it's because of their supporting cast
5. If any other QB loses a game, it's despite their supporting cast.
6. Rex will end up with 4 out of 5 non-winning seasons (when playing opposing starters) yet it's not his fault due to what he has to work with
7. yet Tannenbaum was a good GM, despite what he gave Rex to work with.

Your excuse-making spin is so recognizable on TGG, I'm just surprised it's taken so long for some to figure you out here. The irony is that you are the biggest homer on both boards .

since you have all my posts saved, go back and find the ones where I "raved about" Mark's stats.

send me your address, i'll send you a Christmas gift

i am not a homer...never have been never will be...

when it comes to Ryan Bradyhill you are

 

[nyjunc]

Only a completely delusional person (aka Jets fan) could really believe that this body of work:

Mark buttfumble career stats


is comparable to this:

Ryan Tannehill career stats


Mark buttfumble's career highest season rate was in his 3rd year and it was only slightly higher than RT's Rookie Year! In four seasons buttfumble barley threw for as many yards as Tanny's rookie season. Never had a season completion rate as high as RT's rookie year. buttfumble over his career actually has MORE INTERCEPTIONS than TOUCHDOWNS.... He was FRACKING TERRIBLE! How do you not see that?

People that understand the game don't look at blind #s, mark 2010 was significantly better than Ryan 2013. Ryan may end up being better and he's certainly better than mark was last year but he also has more weapons than mark ever had.

 

[ChrisTRD]

So let me get this straight............... We really aren't getting a pic of Ryan dressed as a wizard?

 

[Fin Thirteen]

From my memory, Priscoe has been a Tannehill supporter throughout, so I don't get the cynicism. Could be wrong....

 

[Penthos]

People that understand the game don't look at blind #s, mark 2010 was significantly better than Ryan 2013. Ryan may end up being better and he's certainly better than mark was last year but he also has more weapons than mark ever had.

That is absolutely absurd. In 2010 Sanchez was hot early but was pretty pedestrian to AWFUL the rest of the way. When he's playing well he's was like the poor man's Trent Dilfer when he's playing bad he's just fracking horrible. Tannehill, on the other hand, was good early but struggled a little in a few games (NEVER as bad as Sanchez) and is now playing excellent in December.

 

[dolpns13]

more lazy "journalism", he talks about how he has done but all the examples are from last week. he was GREAT last week vs. NE, he wasn't the previous weeks against us and Pitt.

God it's funny how wrong you can be sometimes. Being biased is one thing, being ignorant is another

 

[Vaark]

 

[Shouright]

Never mind the stats, what do your EYES tell you?

I don't trust my eyes when they're looking at something I desperately want to see (Tannehill's success).

 

[Vaark]

That is absolutely absurd. In 2010 buttfumble was hot early but was pretty pedestrian to AWFUL the rest of the way. When he's playing well he's was like the poor man's Trent Dilfer when he's playing bad he's just fracking horrible. Tannehill, on the other hand, was good early but struggled a little in a few games (NEVER as bad as buttfumble) and is now playing excellent in December.

Actually considering one actually had a 13-3 record, won a division, a conference and made it to the SB, and with their almost identical winning records percentages and throwing stats, while both lost their jobs and are destined to a short shelf life as a hanger-on...buttfumble is a poor man's Rex Grossman.]

My point is that if you're gonna glorify buttfumble in the playoff gift in SD for what you are excoriating Tannehill who actually looked better and did more in the PBurgh win, have ever called buttfumble a top 10QB while at the same time acknowledging he was 27th ranked in the league, would not trade him for any QB outside of maybe the top 5, let alone 2 draft picks, and totally overlook the fact that without Polian's charity, he'd have 1 winning season in 4...... your opinion on any other QB including an envious one of Tannehill should be suspect cuz you've already proved you don't know what the **** you're talking about