Schefter: Tannehill may not be the answer for Dolphins

[JTech194]

Defend, Defend, Defend. But Schefter is More Knowledgable then Me and Most All on Finheaven Dude. The Classic argument - he has no weapons/playmakers. But Yet he has missed Throws and Cost us Games. We have Lost 5 of 6 and RT has looked Average since the Start of the Season. By the Way he missed a TD to Bess Yesterday and 2 Last Week to Hartline. He is allowed to be Judged. The NFL is a Win Now. I hope he is the Man, but he has not shown it Yet.

Not Mentioning RG3, Luck, or Wlson. RT is not even in that Conversation But....
Rookie QB's Philadelphia's Nick Foles and Washington's Kirk Cousins two rookie quarterbacks, added their name to the list on Sunday.Tannehill has been in those situations plenty this season - seven games now came down to fourth-quarter performance - and he's only delivered one victory in those critical, career defining situations in the fourth-quarter Dude.

So you don't think having PLAYMAKES at the skill position makes it easier for a QB to have those defining moments? The game where the colts came back from behind I forget the team but it was bout 2 weeks ago. The winning TD was a 5 yard pass to D. Avery that Avery then took about 25 yard for the score. Our receivers don't do that in crunch time, just saying. Even the pass to Bess in the forth quarter of the niners game, Fitgerald, Megatron, Julio Jones etc... make a play on that ball D. Bess is too short and not athletic enough to make a play on that ball. I actually agree with shefter, we don't know yet, but i've seen enough from Tannehill to know that he has the potential to be a franchise QB, cant say that about any other QB We've had here since Marino

 

[DuderinoN703]

If Im not mistaken, he has the Browns at the same or one more win than we have right now and there is more than 1 good team in his division to deal with. We on the other hand have only played the 1 good team in our division once so far. Basically, the Browns schedule was much tougher.

Much tougher? Cleveland has beaten Cincy, San Diego 7-6, Pittsburgh by 6, Oakland by 3, and KC. They've lost to Philly, Cincy, Buffalo, Baltimore, NY Giants, Indy, Baltimore, and Dallas.

 

[WVDolphan]

I'll look for those volumes. I know I have Amazon bookmarked somewhere.

We saw the ability level in preseason. Based on those skills, Tannehill is not making enough wow throws and I don't think he's had one wow game. That should be troubling and I don't see how it's disputed. The league is defensively handicapped yet our quarterback is putting up points like it's 1976. Notice I pick Tampa's year, not ours.

I think he looks like Drew Bledsoe in the pocket, and Danny White when he rolls out or takes off. He's certainly lacking a young Bledsoe's experience and arrogance. Bledsoe had the low delivery and relatively unvaried arc but he'd confidently rifle it.

Too many of Tannehill's deep throws don't allow enough margin for error. He'll have 5 iron loft when 8 or 9 iron is ideal. The throw to Bess was an example.

BTW, the comparisons to legends are indeed inane. Of all the trends in sports analysis I have to say that one baffles me as much as anything. Somebody has a bad game and desperate scrambles are made, to pinpoint struggles from John Elway or Peyton Manning at a similar stage. How is that 1% relevant? They got to be Elway and Manning because they were obvious freak talents from a very young age. That carried over through college and to #1 draft pick status. As Jimmy Johnson always emphasized, you don't treat those players the same. You'd have to be a fool. Yet we've got no trouble pretending the comparisons are valid. I always wonder what price those posters would take, on Tannehill -- for example -- matching Peyton's career? They have no trouble comparing as rookies so what would it take, 3/1 or 5/1? If they take those numbers they are moronic. Yet if they want what they are entitled to, like 50/1 or higher, then how is the initial comparison valid when now you're telling me your guy is 2% the caliber of other one?

Johnny Miller had a great line on Phil Mickelson at Doral a few years ago, regarding Phil's tendency to attempt any risky shot. He said if he caddied for Phil he'd want a buzz collar. That's what is needed around here, whenever somebody attempts one of the simplistic and meaningless comparisons to a legend.

Awsi owning as usual.

Another thing to consider with the ridiculous comparisons.........

When someone points out how Manning or some other QB struggled to win games in year 1, one must remember that the game simply wasnt tailored to offensive success as only far back as 15 years ago. These days, its simply not uncommon for a rookie QB to come in and play well early. The game is made so much easier for the QB to have success, when a guy comes into the league with real talent, he typically performs well right from the start.

Case in point, simply look at the last 5 years.....

Any QB that has managed to stick or will manage to stick, didnt have much difficulty coming right into the league and winning early on. Ryan went 11-5. Luck is going to win 10 games. Wilson will make the playoffs most likely. Even RG3 has his team above .500. Freeman had a great rookie season. Flacco won right away.

Now take a look at the guys who were drafted within the last 7 years or so who are no longer around or if they are around probably shouldnt be. Without looking it up, Id say they struggled to win games early.

So just because John Elway didnt win many games his first year, consider 1983 is not 2012 in the NFL. Marino was one of the very few QBs before the last 5-7 years who had success both statistically and in the W column. Thats because he was the best there ever was. Id hate to think what Marino in his prime could do with todays NFL.

 

[DuderinoN703]

I like Tannehill myself. Yeah his stats aren't eye-popping and aren't on the levels of Luck, Griffin III, or Wilson. Regarding Wilson, here's a tidbit post-draft:

ESPN draft guru Mel Kiper Jr. gave the Seahawks a “C-minus,” which was tied for the lowest grade Kiper handed out. CBSSports.com's Pete Prisco called the selection of Bruce Irvin in the first round “risky” and wondered why the Hawks spent a third round pick on Russell Wilson when they had just signed Matt Flynn. Prisco gave the Seahawks a “C-plus” for the draft.

As a lifelong Dolphins fan, I'm willing to give Tannehill another season (max of 2) to show he can be the guy. The Dolphins, for now, seemed to have missed on Michael Egnew. They don't have a #1 WR who can burn down the field. We're all aware of the Dolphins offensive woes. For once though, if the Dolphins can build around a QB and provide him weapons that will ultimately make the team as a whole better, we need to give them that chance.

I know Ireland doesn't give much of us faith that he will make the right decisions but what can you do?

 

[SkapePhin]

When did Schefter become a talent evaluator?

Last I hear, Schefter was a media guy with good contacts who was able to get inside information. That is his role. He is no more knowledgeable when it comes to talent evaluation than you or I. Would venture to say Schefter hasn't seen more than a few hastily put-together ESPN highlights on Tannehill. I doubt he has analyzed a whole game film on the guy. So why are we even talking about this tidbit? I would say that Schefter's knowledge of Tannehill is even WORSE than the run-of-the-mill FH poster because at least they have seen complete games of Tannehill.

 

[roy_miami]

BTW, the comparisons to legends are indeed inane. Of all the trends in sports analysis I have to say that one baffles me as much as anything. Somebody has a bad game and desperate scrambles are made, to pinpoint struggles from John Elway or Peyton Manning at a similar stage. How is that 1% relevant? They got to be Elway and Manning because they were obvious freak talents from a very young age. That carried over through college and to #1 draft pick status. As Jimmy Johnson always emphasized, you don't treat those players the same. You'd have to be a fool. Yet we've got no trouble pretending the comparisons are valid. I always wonder what price those posters would take, on Tannehill -- for example -- matching Peyton's career? They have no trouble comparing as rookies so what would it take, 3/1 or 5/1? If they take those numbers they are moronic. Yet if they want what they are entitled to, like 50/1 or higher, then how is the initial comparison valid when now you're telling me your guy is 2% the caliber of other one?

Johnny Miller had a great line on Phil Mickelson at Doral a few years ago, regarding Phil's tendency to attempt any risky shot. He said if he caddied for Phil he'd want a buzz collar. That's what is needed around here, whenever somebody attempts one of the simplistic and meaningless comparisons to a legend.

Person A: Tannehill sucks, too many missed throws and not enough come from behind wins. He's trash
Person B: Its too early to tell dude, even Manning sucked as a rookie.

What I find mind numbing is you conclude from that conversation that Person B thinks Tannehill equals Manning, when in reality all he's saying is its too early to tell anything.

The bass ackwards thinking in this thread is quite astounding: The great QB is allowed to have bad throws or a bad rookie season because he's great and was always destined to be great. The unknown rookie is not allowed to have a bad rookie season or bad throws because we don't know anything about him yet.

 

[Ilovemyfins4eva]

Awsi owning as usual.

Another thing to consider with the ridiculous comparisons.........

When someone points out how Manning or some other QB struggled to win games in year 1, one must remember that the game simply wasnt tailored to offensive success as only far back as 15 years ago. These days, its simply not uncommon for a rookie QB to come in and play well early. The game is made so much easier for the QB to have success, when a guy comes into the league with real talent, he typically performs well right from the start.

Case in point, simply look at the last 5 years.....

Any QB that has managed to stick or will manage to stick, didnt have much difficulty coming right into the league and winning early on. Ryan went 11-5. Luck is going to win 10 games. Wilson will make the playoffs most likely. Even RG3 has his team above .500. Freeman had a great rookie season. Flacco won right away.

Now take a look at the guys who were drafted within the last 7 years or so who are no longer around or if they are around probably shouldnt be. Without looking it up, Id say they struggled to win games early.

So just because John Elway didnt win many games his first year, consider 1983 is not 2012 in the NFL. Marino was one of the very few QBs before the last 5-7 years who had success both statistically and in the W column. Thats because he was the best there ever was. Id hate to think what Marino in his prime could do with todays NFL.

agreed man, the comparisons to manning are so comical.

as u pointed out, rookies back in the day,they actually played in an nfl where defenders were allowed to play defense, making it a lot harder to be successful. this day and age, it is almost impossible for a starting qb not do well, be it a rookie or not with the rules in place.

also, i, as i am sure many ppl on here have seen mannings rookie season, and honestly, i see no flashes from tannehill that make me thing he is even close to peyton manning.

when manning went 3-13 with indy in his rookie year, everyone knew he was going to be a star regardless, he showed a ton of flashes.

tannehill has regressed mightily since that colt game in the 2nd half.

now the jury is still out on him as it has only been 13 games, but to bring up manning every time he struggles is comical. why cant people just admit the guy has ****ing sucked since the 2nd half of the colt game?

i am a dolphin fan, i want him to be a star, this franchise has put there future in his hands, if he sucks, we will suck for a long time, if he is a star, this team will turn around. obviously we all want the latter and i am still hopeful it can be, but right now i am a bit worried with how he is regressing, not progressing.

the no talent argument as to why he is playing poor is BS. yes, he does not have a wr the caliber of calvin johnson, we get it, he does not have the most talent surrounding him, but then again he has the same team he had early in the year where he actually was showing great promise of being the future, and his play has just gone south.

rg3 lost his starting tightend fred davis early in year, garcon had been hurt most of year, the skins o line has been banged up, yet he has been able to work with what he has, russell wilson, although i am not sold long term on him yet, he does not exactly have the best weapons in the pass game, but his efficient play is making his wr better.

its time for tannehill to step it up for the final 3 games and give us hope. we play the jags who have the worst rated defense in nfl i believe. no excuse here. if he struggles vs the jags, id be alarmed.

 

[Dmarino110]

I can't disagree with anything he is saying. I remember feeling that RT was a reach in the first round, and that fan pressure dictated that we HAD to draft a QB at that point. I'm not pretending to be some great evaluator, just going on what I read. Unfortunately, spending a first round pick on a QB doesn't guarantee that you get a great QB. Sadly, my confidence that he is "the guy" is really declining. I don't mean to bash him and I hope he turns out to be a great one, but lately he isn't showing me much. At all.

please see Ryan leaf, Tim Couch, Jim Drukenmiller, Cade McNown, Heath Shuler, Akili Smith, JaMarcus Russell, Joey Harrington, Matt Leinart, Rex Grossman, J.P. Losman, David Carr, Brady Quinn...

 

[Canadianfishfan]

He was touted as a work and progress, now everyone wants a savior.

He'll be fine. I blame coaching, playcalling, and anemic running game, and an over all lack of talent.

At least better coaching staffs can coach up to players strengths. or something...

 

[roy_miami]

Awsi owning as usual.

Another thing to consider with the ridiculous comparisons.........

When someone points out how Manning or some other QB struggled to win games in year 1, one must remember that the game simply wasnt tailored to offensive success as only far back as 15 years ago. These days, its simply not uncommon for a rookie QB to come in and play well early. The game is made so much easier for the QB to have success, when a guy comes into the league with real talent, he typically performs well right from the start.

Case in point, simply look at the last 5 years.....

Any QB that has managed to stick or will manage to stick, didnt have much difficulty coming right into the league and winning early on. Ryan went 11-5. Luck is going to win 10 games. Wilson will make the playoffs most likely. Even RG3 has his team above .500. Freeman had a great rookie season. Flacco won right away.

Now take a look at the guys who were drafted within the last 7 years or so who are no longer around or if they are around probably shouldnt be. Without looking it up, Id say they struggled to win games early.

So just because John Elway didnt win many games his first year, consider 1983 is not 2012 in the NFL. Marino was one of the very few QBs before the last 5-7 years who had success both statistically and in the W column. Thats because he was the best there ever was. Id hate to think what Marino in his prime could do with todays NFL.

It certainly seems to be trending that way but then Tebow and Sanchez also had some great records their few years in the league. If I'm not mistaken the 2 latest generation Super Bowl winners were Roethlisberger and Eli Manning, Roethlisberger started winning right out of the gate whereas Manning struggled early on.

With that said no matter how polished QBs get coming out of college or how much success they are able to have in their first years I don't think you'll ever get to the point where you can simply write somebody off for having a bad rookie campaign.

 

[captaineo24]

Schefter is right to an extent, but he's always been a Dolphin hater so I don't even pay attention. Tannehill is raw; the rawest of QB's in the draft. But man, even Kirk Cousins looked better in the short time he was in...my point being the obvious, Tannehill needs talent, it helps to have a 1,000 yard rusher like the Skins do, it helps to have Reggie Wayne, or Marshawn Lynch and Sidney Rice.

Griffin is an athletic freak, Luck is, well...Luck, and Wilson is playing with some talented dudes who took confidence pills after that bogus game vs. the Packers. Nuff said.

 

[Strangeworld]

agreed man, the comparisons to manning are so comical.

as u pointed out, rookies back in the day,they actually played in an nfl where defenders were allowed to play defense, making it a lot harder to be successful. this day and age, it is almost impossible for a starting qb not do well, be it a rookie or not with the rules in place.

also, i, as i am sure many ppl on here have seen mannings rookie season, and honestly, i see no flashes from tannehill that make me thing he is even close to peyton manning.

when manning went 3-13 with indy in his rookie year, everyone knew he was going to be a star regardless, he showed a ton of flashes.

tannehill has regressed mightily since that colt game in the 2nd half.

now the jury is still out on him as it has only been 13 games, but to bring up manning every time he struggles is comical. why cant people just admit the guy has ****ing sucked since the 2nd half of the colt game?

i am a dolphin fan, i want him to be a star, this franchise has put there future in his hands, if he sucks, we will suck for a long time, if he is a star, this team will turn around. obviously we all want the latter and i am still hopeful it can be, but right now i am a bit worried with how he is regressing, not progressing.

the no talent argument as to why he is playing poor is BS. yes, he does not have a wr the caliber of calvin johnson, we get it, he does not have the most talent surrounding him, but then again he has the same team he had early in the year where he actually was showing great promise of being the future, and his play has just gone south.

rg3 lost his starting tightend fred davis early in year, garcon had been hurt most of year, the skins o line has been banged up, yet he has been able to work with what he has, russell wilson, although i am not sold long term on him yet, he does not exactly have the best weapons in the pass game, but his efficient play is making his wr better.

its time for tannehill to step it up for the final 3 games and give us hope. we play the jags who have the worst rated defense in nfl i believe. no excuse here. if he struggles vs the jags, id be alarmed.

Love this post... I happened to be at the game yesterday.

Tanny failed to impress and at no time did I have any confidence that he would bring us back.


Dude is skittish in the pocket, stares his primary read down, cannot look off a safety/pump fake, and has poor accuracy.

Other than that he's on his way to Canton!

 

[Ilovemyfins4eva]

Love this post... I happened to be at the game yesterday.

Tanny failed to impress and at no time did I have any confidence that he would bring us back.


Dude is skittish in the pocket, stares his primary read down, cannot look off a safety/pump fake, and has poor accuracy.

Other than that he's on his way to Canton!

the problem is with most ppl, they just can not admit he has sucked since the 2nd half of the indy game. no one is saying this means he is a lock to be a bad qb in this league, he may very well turn out to be a good qb, but right now he has regressed, not progressed, and that is not what u want to see from your rookie qb as the season drags on. he has not exactly had to play the murderers row of defenses, getting to play the colts, titans, and bills back to back to back, and doing nothing.

also, i do not like to judge a qb on 1 play, but it was very alarming when on 4th and 10 yesterday, he throws a ball away where no one is, rather than forcing something. the 1 thing u can not do as a qb is just throw the ball away in a situation like that. it was not like it was 1st down with 10 minutes to go in the 1st, it was 4th down, u had nothing to lose but forcing something to someone in a white jersey, but instead he elects to throw it away where no one had a chance to do anything.

 

[Rev Kev]

I think you're using the phrase "A Ton" way too loosely, missing one or two open receivers in a game only SEEMS like a ton because they don't get open that much. For a team with true playmakers, one or two missed open receivers would not be categorized as a ton.

How about

Marshawn Lynch: 1,266 yards and 9TD Compared to Reggie Bush: 622 yards 6TD
Sidney Rice 7TD
Ben Tate 7TD

Compared to D. Bess - 1TD
Hartline: 1TD

Bottom line is - Give us Atlanta's group of receivers and TE and we're easily 9-4 do you not agree?

BING! BING! BING! WE HAVE A WINNER~~~ Another Tannehill hater is 0+< on the floor

Schefter showing his brilliant back and forth journalism - grow a pair and stand on your words Adam

It was conceded by 80% of the FH board who thought he should start that he would disappoint - I don't think he will play a faster defense than 9ers and if you want seperation the D has to as much blow an assignment or fall down at the LOS - I am glad he doesn't force his throws and he shows us some running ability. Will he be great hard to sday but to write this crap all day long like people expected him to be even at Weeden's level is mind-blowing

 

[KingNick88]

What's he supposed to do? Act like Cam Newton??