I'm not sure how it's come to be but this Miami team drops a whole lot of catchable passes, and has for the last couple years. It's been that way with multiple receivers. We all dislike Wallace letting the ball get to his body, but even sure handed guys are letting the ball hit the turf. I know from playing that there are QBs who throw a heavy/hard ball, and it's an added factor to making the catch. I'm wondering if that's part of the issue with the drops. Tannehill is accurate enough, but if he throws a heavy ball and it's not right in the basket...dropped.
I've been a big supporter of RT, he seems to have all the traits I want in a QB, but if you can't deliver then traits don't mean a thing. I'm starting to mull over looking for another option, and I wonder how the team would respond with Moore. Something has to change. At least this team has shown sparks of good things. Too many self-destructive errors.
We were talking about that in the stadium at halftime yesterday. And some fans came up with a couple of answers. One of the answers was that our receivers are used to under- and overthrows that they are in shock if the ball arrives on target. The other solution was that our receivers love the tough catches they have to make and hope to be part of the ESPN Highlight Reel.
[/sarcasm]
That is of course in good old fun.
On a serious note. I think we are talking too much about the drops. If your QB attempts 43 passes and completes less than half the 3 or 4 drops become a drop in the bucket. The WRs and the OL were the scapegoats of the past two years. But with our OL much improved I do believe Tannehill is becoming severely exposed to his flaws. Mentioning 3 or 4 dropped passed on 43 attempts with a completion rate of 49% is an excuse maker.
Those 3 or 4 dropped passes I will hold at least 5 bad passes which were caught and several incompletions which could have been INTs and two could have been pick 6s. The dropped passes are really nothing we should actually talk about at this point.
People are complaining about the playcalling on offense and I stayed out of these debates so far but playcalling was not horrible. But having the benefit of a whole field in front of me rather than just a limited view on TV I thought I wait the debate a little bit out.
Play calling becomes bad if you go away from a working play to a non working play for no apparent reason. The KC defense was so bad that we could have not only run as we did we could have also put 300 or 400 yards passing on them. Every pass play had open receivers. Everyone of the plays.
I want to go back to one of the plays which I think tells you everything you need to know about the play calling and passing ability (I actually would call it more vision).
There was one play where Tannehill backpedaled and hit Miller on an out for a loss of yardage. Tannehill was somewhat under duress but not severe enough to rush a throw. Miller had two defenders on him. 5 yards down the field on the same sideline was Wallace. All alone. He even raised his hands up. Nobody around him. It would have been a pitch and a catch for 5 or 6 yards with at least 30 yards in YAC because the safety was in the middle of the field. Tannehill must have seen Wallace. There is no way he could have not seen him. Miller was not the primary target. He was the decoy which worked perfectly fine. And if you saw coaches throwing their hats down in frustration after that play you realize it is not play calling that is the issue here.
Another example from the 4th quarter. Tannehill throws a quick out to the left side to Wallace. Wallace had at least 5-10 yards running room. Tannehill shorthops it. The scene afterwards is self explanatory. Wallace walks back to the middle of the field, Tannehill comes towards him and is trying to talk to him. Wallace walks by him and leaves Tannehill standing by the road side like a rejected hitchhiker.
It became a running joke after each pass play to count open receivers.
And while the Sun Sentinel talks about the crowd booing two times (end of half and end of game) they neglect to tell you that Tannehill was booed off the field a couple more times during the game.
It is not the game plan on offense which is a failure. And it is not the drops.
For those who still think that Tannehill is it and prefer to blame Lazor and the receivers they should turn their anger somewhere else: Hickey. He has done something none of us has ever envisioned nor expected. He revamped an entire OL and put a decent product on the field. But it took away the excuses for Tannehill. Right now he is exposed and the flaws some have pointed out over the past couple years are now highlighted. Unless he morphs into a real QB and has a breakout game next week he will not play for us anymore.
KC's defense was as bad as advertised. They gave up 58 points in two games. We just did not take advantage of our open receivers.
