4 sacks...not 9.
0 sacks...not 9.
3 sacks...not 9.
4 sacks...not 9, and this is with the worst o-line in the NFL.
10 sacks...not 9. They ate their Wheaties on Stafford.
2 sacks...not 9.
No...the narrative should be that Tannehill was directly responsible for 3 points in 60 minutes of football.
This is the JAG who MANY people were saying was better than Andrew Luck, they would take Tannehill instead of Luck, and some are actually trying to contrast Tannehill's wretched performance with those of two first ballot HOFers (Brees and Rodgers) and a potential HOFer (Wilson).
This is where reality becomes stranger than fiction....