Felt like I was reading about the Phins

[Kdawg954]

Likewise, you can't objectively judge Tannehill until he has OL that hasn't been ranked the last 2 in the league the prior 2 seasons. And your new hero, Tannenbum so far appears clueless when it comes to fixing it aside from putting Dallas Thomas on a weight training regimen.

I'm fine with not being able to objectively judge Tannehill. I realize the injuries to tackle the last 2 years and the subpar guard play has caused issues with the entire offense.

It's a two way street . . . all I am saying is we should not be putting Tannehill in the same breath as Andrew Luck. Just like we shouldn't be putting him in the same breath as Cam Newton or Russell Wilson.

Problem is, it becomes an excuse fest when somebody opposes the idea of watching others do exactly that . . . and then it goes downhill. Sorry, I am a Dolphins fan . . . not a Tannehill fan. If Miami moves on in the future, I completely understand why.

 

[MarinoEqualsGod]

But alas, he doesn't play in the AFCE and plays on a team that does something Miami does not . . . feast on the division.

Dolphins under Tannehill are only .500 against the AFC South. Guess that means nothing though when Luck is like .900 against them.

I'm not even talking about Tannehill or comparing the two QBs, so why bring him up?

All I know is that the Patriots make Luck look like Brandon Weeden.

 

[FinfanInBuffalo]

1. If we were talking about a "top QB", then stats would be justified to enhance the argument.

Fact is, we are talking about a middle of the pack QB, with a losing recod and no playoff appearances . . . which automatically disqualifies him from being placed in the conversation with a QB that matters in the NFL. Is it all his fault that he has a losing record and no playoff appearances . . . no . . . but you can't place him in these type of conversations until it does happen for him.

Once that ever gets understood on here . . . then we can impartially look at his stats and say "ok, not bad . . . maybe Miami should hold onto him for another year as there isn't a definitive better option out there to replace him".

Bull****.

---------- Post added at 04:26 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:25 PM ----------

I'm fine with not being able to objectively judge Tannehill. I realize the injuries to tackle the last 2 years and the subpar guard play has caused issues with the entire offense.

It's a two way street . . . all I am saying is we should not be putting Tannehill in the same breath as Andrew Luck. Just like we shouldn't be putting him in the same breath as Cam Newton or Russell Wilson.

Problem is, it becomes an excuse fest when somebody opposes the idea of watching others do exactly that . . . and then it goes downhill. Sorry, I am a Dolphins fan . . . not a Tannehill fan. If Miami moves on in the future, I completely understand why.

Again. Bull****.

 

[Kdawg954]

I'm not even talking about Tannehill or comparing the two QBs, so why bring him up?

All I know is that the Patriots make Luck look like Brandon Weeden.

Yep, he and the Colts haven't had success against New England . . . . Many teams struggle against them.

 

[fansinceGWilson]

We may agree, but I'm still a little confused. We can use stats when discussing 'top' QBs but not those QBs who AREN'T top QBs?? Nope. Stats are all we have. Even HCs who evaluate QB literally every day eventually give in to the stats.
I'm new here and don't know who espouses any given opinion but there are those who WILL NOT believe the stats if they indicate Tannehill is anything but a poor QB. There are those who excuse average stats because it's someone else's fault. Or 'you can't compare Tannehill to Luck/Marino/PManning.' Yes I can. Saying Tannehill is much worse than PManning in his prime is a comparison. Or an elite QB can carry his team. That myth has been exploded so many times I'd be embarrassed to post it. A LOT of the time? Yes. ALL the time. Myth.
Once more. Tannehill has been average for 4 years. He MAY get to top 10 but no one know. He may retire as an average QB. Doesn't matter. We all know this is Tannehill's put up or shut up season. In Jan '16 his stats will secure him more seasons as Miami's starting QB or relegate him to a backup or another team. Until then, everything is conjecture and opinion. Stating ANYTHING about the next 12 months as absolute is an exercise in denial/delusion.

 

[Kdawg954]

Bull****.

---------- Post added at 04:26 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:25 PM ----------



Again. Bull****.

:bighug:

 

[FinfanInBuffalo]

Facts . . . sure . . . there relevance in regards to Ryan Tannehill being thrown in the position of Andrew Luck and having the same success (and vica/versa) . . . hypothetical. You can't have a factual argument in regards to Ryan Tannehill because he has nothing worth comparing when talking the likes of Andrew Luck, Cam Newton, Russell Wilson and others.

58.1% career completions 7.0 YPA 85.0 Passer rating

61.9% career completions 6.9 YPA 85.2 Passer rating

---------- Post added at 04:32 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:31 PM ----------

I'm not even talking about Tannehill or comparing the two QBs, so why bring him up?

All I know is that the Patriots make Luck look like Brandon Weeden.

Because it is all about the QB and ONLY about the QB.

 

[Kdawg954]

We may agree, but I'm still a little confused. We can use stats when discussing 'top' QBs but not those QBs who AREN'T top QBs?? Nope. Stats are all we have. Even HCs who evaluate QB literally every day eventually give in to the stats.
I'm new here and don't know who espouses any given opinion but there are those who WILL NOT believe the stats if they indicate Tannehill is anything but a poor QB. There are those who excuse average stats because it's someone else's fault. Or 'you can't compare Tannehill to Luck/Marino/PManning.' Yes I can. Saying Tannehill is much worse than PManning in his prime is a comparison. Or an elite QB can carry his team. That myth has been exploded so many times I'd be embarrassed to post it. A LOT of the time? Yes. ALL the time. Myth.
Once more. Tannehill has been average for 4 years. He MAY get to top 10 but no one know. He may retire as an average QB. Doesn't matter. We all know this is Tannehill's put up or shut up season. In Jan '16 his stats will secure him more seasons as Miami's starting QB or relegate him to a backup or another team. Until then, everything is conjecture and opinion. Stating ANYTHING about the next 12 months as absolute is an exercise in denial/delusion.

You are new here, so I welcome you to the TanneDebates . . . it's a program that happens once a month in the offseason while we wait around for the season to begin. You've been introduced to a lion's share of the major players already. As you can tell, I don't love Ryan Tannehill . . . but I support the team doing what they can to give him the best opportunity for success. They've done well enough with the skills and have figured out the tackles/center . . . and have invested in guards, they just have been bad.

Back to your point . . . We can certainly use stats to compare QBs . . . but I don't believe that stats definitively determine what a "top QB" is. To me, the idea that this forum likes to compare Tannehill to Luck, Wilson, Newton and others is just, well, silly . . . and that is where I get fired up.

You are right, he's an average QB, and that is ok . . . but you will find many people will try to convince you that he's "The Chosen One".

 

[FinfanInBuffalo]

You are new here, so I welcome you to the TanneDebates . . . it's a program that happens once a month in the offseason while we wait around for the season to begin. You've been introduced to a lion's share of the major players already. As you can tell, I don't love Ryan Tannehill . . . but I support the team doing what they can to give him the best opportunity for success. They've done well enough with the skills and have figured out the tackles/center . . . and have invested in guards, they just have been bad.

Back to your point . . . We can certainly use stats to compare QBs . . . but I don't believe that stats definitively determine what a "top QB" is. To me, the idea that this forum likes to compare Tannehill to Luck, Wilson, Newton and others is just, well, silly . . . and that is where I get fired up.

You are right, he's an average QB, and that is ok . . . but you will find many people will try to convince you that he's "The Chosen One".

That is because you are blinded by #QBwinz nonsense.

The idea that Tannehill is "no where near" the QBs you listed is bunk, Complete and total bunk.

 

[Kdawg954]

That is because you are blinded by #QBwinz nonsense.

The idea that Tannehill is "no where near" the QBs you listed is bunk, Complete and total bunk.

Yep, and this is where the disagreement comes from.

I mean I wouldn't go as far to say that Newton, Wilson and Luck are on Earth and Tannehill is on Mars . . . but the gap is far enough to where "no where near" suffices in that scenario.

 

[hoops]

We may agree, but I'm still a little confused. We can use stats when discussing 'top' QBs but not those QBs who AREN'T top QBs?? Nope. Stats are all we have. Even HCs who evaluate QB literally every day eventually give in to the stats.
I'm new here and don't know who espouses any given opinion but there are those who WILL NOT believe the stats if they indicate Tannehill is anything but a poor QB. There are those who excuse average stats because it's someone else's fault. Or 'you can't compare Tannehill to Luck/Marino/PManning.' Yes I can. Saying Tannehill is much worse than PManning in his prime is a comparison. Or an elite QB can carry his team. That myth has been exploded so many times I'd be embarrassed to post it. A LOT of the time? Yes. ALL the time. Myth.
Once more. Tannehill has been average for 4 years. He MAY get to top 10 but no one know. He may retire as an average QB. Doesn't matter. We all know this is Tannehill's put up or shut up season. In Jan '16 his stats will secure him more seasons as Miami's starting QB or relegate him to a backup or another team. Until then, everything is conjecture and opinion. Stating ANYTHING about the next 12 months as absolute is an exercise in denial/delusion.

do you back this "average qb" pronouncement with tape study or not? that's all I want to know...I will figure out in time everything else

 

[MarxBrother]

Well, he DOES have a .500 record against teams outside his cupcake division. Luck is 18-18 all-time against teams not in the AFC South. He is 17-2 against that weak division. He's like the reverse-Tannehill.

And Thill's record outside the AFCE is probably better than .500 as his AFCE record is abysmal. My point for starting the thread was to compare the 2 franchises and how they have similar issues in regards to OL, drafting, free agency, idiot owners, sub-par GM/coaching, etc. I will state again, Luck > THill. Not the argument I was trying to make. #QBWINZ (w/other talent).

 

[MarinoEqualsGod]

Yep, he and the Colts haven't had success against New England . . . . Many teams struggle against them.

Since you brought up Tannehill before, he doesn't seem to have much of a problem against them. He has beaten the Patriots in each of the last 3 years.

In Tannehill's last 5 games against the Patriots, he has thrown for 8 TDs and 5 INTs, completing 63.1 percent (125-198) of his passes for 297.2 yards per game. In four of those five games, he threw for over 300 yards.

Andrew Luck on the other hand, in 5 career games vs. New England (including playoffs) has thrown for 9 TDs and 10 INTs, completing 52.6 percent (112-213) of his passes for an average of 281.2 yards per game.

If you can't see which the better quarterback is against that elite team, well then you're beyond help.

 

[FinfanInBuffalo]

Yep, and this is where the disagreement comes from.

I mean I wouldn't go as far to say that Newton, Wilson and Luck are on Earth and Tannehill is on Mars . . . but the gap is far enough to where "no where near" suffices in that scenario.

How about last season with Luck and Tannehill? Luck had a winning % of 29%, Tannehill 38%. That is also a fact that I am sure you will ignore.

 

[Kdawg954]

Since you brought up Tannehill before, he doesn't seem to have much of a problem against them. He has beaten the Patriots in each of the last 3 years.

In Tannehill's last 5 games against the Patriots, he has thrown for 8 TDs and 5 INTs, completing 63.1 percent (125-198) of his passes for 297.2 yards per game. In four of those five games, he threw for over 300 yards.

Andrew Luck on the other hand, in 5 career games vs. New England (including playoffs) has thrown for 9 TDs and 10 INTs, completing 52.6 percent (112-213) of his passes for an average of 281.2 yards per game.

If you can't see which the better quarterback is against that elite team, well then you're beyond help.

I fell for your bait . . . good one.

You take one example of record against a top team, a division team, and use it as glory to compare the two? C'mon dude . . . Tannefenders have so little to hold on to.

What about Luck and the Colts winning @ Denver in 2014 in the AFC playoff divisional round? You know, playing a team when it matters and winning the "big games"?