Differences In Rosen And Tannenhill? | Page 11 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Differences In Rosen And Tannenhill?

oasis said:
Rosen is smarter and more perceptive. That means he's also potentially more neurotic whereas Tannehill was able to be steadier. Physical abilities aside (Tannehill was the better overall athlete), to me it means Rosen has a long-term higher ceiling in terms of the mental aspects of the game, but also the potential to epically flame-out if things don't go right mentally/emotionally while he's young.
Click to expand...

You want a smart QB?? Here is YOUR guy.......https://www.kezi.com/content/news/Herbert-gets-academic-honor-for-406-GPA-503828581.html

I think a biology major with a 4.06 GPA might be the new challenger to Ryan Fitzpatrick's, smartest player in the NFL, title.
 
As much as I talk bad about thill17.. i give thill17 the edge. Rosen must show me why we spend 2nd rd pick on him. What is so special about Rosen???
 
PhxSunFan34 said:
Completely disagree.
Click to expand...

Can't "completely" disagree. Tannehill does his offensive line no favors. Obviously the talent level at guard was some of the worst in the league during his time here but he usually had good bookend tackles and a good C.

I was watching him last night and not much has changed. When the pocket is clean he is accurate and throws a good ball . . . .but in today's game where teams pass like 75% of the time, the pocket is becoming less of a "clean" thing and you need QBs who can feel out pressure and improvise . . . .and Ryan Tannehill just does not do that well and teams know this and are gonna force more pressure until he show he can deal with it consistently.

2016 he showed improvement in this area and combined with a softer schedule we won 7 out of 8 games. The one physical team in that stretch, Baltimore, dismantled us 38-7.

That is not a coincidence.

With Tennessee he is getting a better overall line but after the injury and multiple rehabs he is taking longer to process what's in front of him. I think we have already seen his ceiling and if Chad Henne can still be a veteran backup, he certainly can fill that role for some years.
 
number1fin said:
Click to expand...

Exactly! For what it’s worth, Rosen already looks better to me just based on the preseason film, not that I’ve seen a lot of Tannehill this preseason but I saw him last night and I don’t miss him at all...
 
Kdawg954 said:
Can't "completely" disagree. Tannehill does his offensive line no favors. Obviously the talent level at guard was some of the worst in the league during his time here but he usually had good bookend tackles and a good C.

I was watching him last night and not much has changed. When the pocket is clean he is accurate and throws a good ball . . . .but in today's game where teams pass like 75% of the time, the pocket is becoming less of a "clean" thing and you need QBs who can feel out pressure and improvise . . . .and Ryan Tannehill just does not do that well and teams know this and are gonna force more pressure until he show he can deal with it consistently.

2016 he showed improvement in this area and combined with a softer schedule we won 7 out of 8 games. The one physical team in that stretch, Baltimore, dismantled us 38-7.

That is not a coincidence.

With Tennessee he is getting a better overall line but after the injury and multiple rehabs he is taking longer to process what's in front of him. I think we have already seen his ceiling and if Chad Henne can still be a veteran backup, he certainly can fill that role for some years.
Click to expand...

Were some sacks on Tannehill? Yes. Were the majority on the OL? Yes.

To say he made the OL look bad is ridiculous.
 
CoryMatthews said:
David Carr had a bad line. Tannehill made his line look terrible. There is a difference.
Click to expand...

ChambersWI said:
Sometimes yes. The OL Ryan's 2nd and 3rd year in the league were as bad as they got. There were also moments throughout where the OL still looked awful. Now last year more than any other year I thought it was coaching related rather than talent (way too many unblocked guys which means that the OL did not know their assignments).

That being said, even as a fan of Tannehill, if you go back and look there were times he did not help the OL out. The one play that sticks out is against Buffalo where Brice Butler won right away and if Tanny did a quick throw Brice may have scored an 80 plus yard TD. But Tanny held the ball long enough for the DB to recover and then nobody was open.

Now let's be clear, outside of his rookie year with Jake and Jerry still on the OL Tanny never had a good OL. And there were a lot of hits over the year that were just players getting beat. But if we go back and look there are also a lot of plays where Tanny did not help the players.

If I had to break down the OL I'd say in Philbin's 4 years the OL issues were talent related. In Gase's 3 years it was more coaching related
Click to expand...

The second post is sensible. The first is blind hatred. There is a difference.
 
PhxSunFan34 said:
Were some sacks on Tannehill? Yes. Were the majority on the OL? Yes.

To say he made the OL look bad is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Yea I don't place full blame on him. It was a combined effort of having a below average OLine, overall a below average offensive coaching staff and a QB who was below average at the intricacies that separate the average/good from the great.

I remember those heated arguments that "If Tannehill was on the Seahawks" and how he was better than Russell Wilson threads . . . . People are kidding themselves if they believe that running game/defense was gonna protect him in becoming some Super Bowl winning QB.

They go 8-8 max. Their Oline was worse than ours in pass protection.
 
CoryMatthews said:
David Carr had a bad line. Tannehill made his line look terrible. There is a difference.
Click to expand...
this. Tannehill has terrible pocket presence, could not process information quickly enough to go through his progressions and if you don't have timing in the pocket nor the ability to look past your first read your ceiling is capped. Like I've said, and I know it rubs guys who have Tannehill jerseys hanging on their walls or worn during game days, the wrong way but...Tannehill isn't a natural QB. He never once showed that he was. He was drafted a dozen picks, if not a full round, too early. The bad lines didn't help. But good QBs can mask bad lines. If the defense is brining the heat and the QB can evade and hurt them, they'll stop doing it. That never happened under Tannehill. He's so bad that he wasn't even under consideration to be a starting QB anywhere once he left. Instead, he's relegated to being a backup. How can that be if I've been so wrong about him all these years and he's a quality QB? In a league desperate for QB play, teams turned to scrubs and rookie QBs over Tannehill. That speaks volumes. Then again, maybe they had poor Guard play and knew it'd be pointless to bring him in?
 
TheWozz said:
Exactly...take Andrew Luck as a great example. He's a good QB that completely overcame bad lines. Why, he'll have another decade of a potential HoF career where his skills made the oline quality completely irrelevant. He just wills..oh, what?!!?!?!?
Click to expand...

giphy.gif
 
I think people are exaggerating a bit on Tannehill. There was a strong stretch of football in 2016 where I honestly thought we had found our guy. I was never really too confident about that until 16 though. I was definitely one who wouldn't have minded seeing if Matt Moore had more success from 13 - 15 (I won't include 12 as Ryan was a rookie and we had no talent, he about met expectations which should have been pretty low). By comparison I was done with Chad Henne on October 4th, 2010. I knew he had no shot right after the MNF game with NE where he played pitch and catch with Rob Ninkovich. Every QB we've seen over the last 7 years, mostly the last 3, (Cutler, Moore, Osweiler, Fitz, and Rosen) do something better than Ryan but even still Ryan is the most consistent QB. Hopefully by the end of 2019 I'll be saying Josh is the most consistent QB, but will that be good enough? Time will tell.

At this point you'd have to be a fool to want Tannehill over Rosen though. I think we know what Ryan is, Rosen still has a chance.
 
39wildman said:
As much as I talk bad about thill17.. i give thill17 the edge. Rosen must show me why we spend 2nd rd pick on him. What is so special about Rosen???
Click to expand...

That's why I respect you, I don't always agree with your opinions but you're fair and call it like you see it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom