Wow, just like old times, especially in that your "evidence" is crap as usual.
Another Take on the Offensive Line, Ryan Tannehill, and Sacks in 2013
- Thread starter Shouright
- Start date
Wow, just like old times, especially in that your "evidence" is crap as usual.
"If your evidence gets attacked, block everyone but those who agree with you" 
enigmatics
Go get me a juice box!
I don't "feel" anything in regards to this. There's no emotionally vested interest in this discussion, so I don't need to "disregard" you or needlessly put you on ignore.
Yet in your emotionless state you can detect me spitting hot venom? Nice trick. Do us both a favor and put me on ignore, I have zero interest in your opinions from what little I've seen so far.
enigmatics
Go get me a juice box!
By maintaining a level of composure on my own part doesn't make your inability to any less obvious. You were just barking about Gravity trying to antagonize people and yet here you are trying to antagonize. Do as you say not as you do?
If you're referring to your level of douchery spiked with a lack of knowledge of the subject at hand, so be it.
enigmatics
Go get me a juice box!
More par for the course I see.
You assume too much and you didn't answer the question.
Nobody denies that. According to PFF, of the 58 sacks this year, 41 were the fault of the OL and 17 were the fault of the QB. I have not made a single post denying the 17. Not one.
The Angry Denier and Tannehater labels are in direct response to the long standing Happy Adjuster and Henehill labels.
One of the biggest douche bags in the group has a photo of the team's QB picking his nose in his sig and you want to call out those defending Tannehill? You're funny.
He also posts claims that sacks don't matter in an effort to pin all of the offenses issues on the QB. Running game doesn't matter either.
Actually he asked you to put him on ignore. That's the opposite of attention seeking.
enigmatics
Go get me a juice box!
C'mon man. It's a childish comment. We've exchanged all but 2 posts before he decided it needed to be taken to that level. I mean talk about hasty.
I've seen you call people that who have never once uttered those words.
...and yet when it comes to watching actual visual evidence, which shoot all of your stat threads to ****, you simply ignore it. Kind of hard to have a legitimate discussion/disagreement with a poster who thinks the evidence they make up is far superior to what is proven on film. And dont give me that bull **** about people seeing only what they want to see. An honest man with integrity can easily watch the film and see who is to blame. But based on the threads you post in which you arent willing to show your work, and your own admission that you cant watch film without bias, we know with you that isnt the case.
If someone brings up an argument that seems beyond reasonable fairness....they can expect the kind of response he got here.
No one is arguing Ryan Tannehill is a finished product or that his pocket awareness is where it needs to be.
But is it fair to level all the blame on him for the 58 sacks? Was he sacked anywhere near that number in 2012 when he had a more complete line?
Is it fair to level all the blame on him with the drama and loss of 3 starters from 2012? I don't think so.
If anything, the degradation of the line in 2013 as well as the overall pass protect hindered the progression of Ryan Tannehill and we should be talking about what kind of numbers Tannehill might have posted with a better line. But no, it always has to be negative doesn't it? We need to constantly beat down out team. I for one get tired of it.
enigmatics
Go get me a juice box!
Gravity didn't blame him for 58 sacks. He assigned responsibility for the difference in expected sacks vs. the end result based on the statistics. The discussion revolves around his pocket presence would I personally think needs a lot of work.
We definitely can talk about what he "might've" posted with a higher quality of O-line. It's a legitimate discussion, one which is far more anecdotal than anything. I know I want to see what he looks like with it. I remember Grav did try to extrapolate what he might look like using statistics when he did have a clean pocket.
While there aren't people claiming Tanny is a finished product, there certainly are a suspect amount of people who feel as if he could do no wrong. We've been down this road a million times with our QB's here. It seems like since Tanny was drafted higher than any of them he's sudden above reproach in that regard.
Personally, I'm a show me guy. Don't sit there and feed me the words "potential" and "ability". His body of work is inconsistent, as is that of the team.
You still didn't answer my original question. Why the repetitive nonsense threads that has been debated ad nauseam already? I have personally supplied numerous links to articles that refute all of his arguments. They are independent, and professionally published. Despite that, he claims that pro-Tannehill arguments are all based on biased opinions of Dolphins fans. He knows he is lying and does it to get a rise out of people. He has repeatedly made false claims that hoops took positions on Henne that just aren't true and he knows it.
He misrepresents stats, refuses to supply his backup data to a poster who politely asked if he could review it. His use of stats has been criticized by several posters much more knowledgeable than he is.
I could go on and on but you get the point.