For all you guys who say we cant win because of tannehill

[Yessir]

Adamc13 with the post(s) of the year. Couldn't have said it better myself. Context is everything.

 

[FinaticalFinfan]

Stats are only good when understanding the context in which they are being used.

You are comparing stats against Brady from a different era. How much so? Brady's 86.5 QB rating was the 6th best in 2001. 86.5 would rank 21st this year. Marino has a career 86.4 QB rating.

The NFL in 2004 changed the rules where DBs couldn't as much breath within 5 yards of a WR. Passing puts butts in the seats. As a result we could see a drastic change in passing numbers in one year from 2003 to 2004 as indicated below (through in 2013 as well).

2003: 1 QB over 100 QB rating (McNair 100.4)
2004: 4 QB over 100 QB rating (Manning 121.1, Culpepper 110.9, Brees 104.8, McNabb 104.7)
2013: 7 QB over 100 QB rating (Tannehill not one of them)

2003: 13 QB completed 60% or more of their passes
2004: 19 QB completed 60% or more of their passes
2013: 25 QB completed 60% or more of their passes (Tannehill 22nd at 60.4)

2003: 1 QB 30+ TD passes (Favre 32)
2004: 4 QB 30+ TD passes (Manning 49, Culpepper 39, McNabb 31, Favre 30)
2013: 5 QB 30+ TD passes (including 55 by Manning, Tannehill not one of them)

2003: 10 QBs 7+ YPA
2004: 19 QBs 7+ YPA
2013: 18 QBs 7+ YPA (Tannehill not one of them)

Besides 2001 and 2003 being Brady's 1st and 3rd year starting I question anyone's ability to understand the QB position that doesn't see the non-statistical differences between Brady and Tannehill. Brady has total command of the game. Brady is a MASTER at managing the game. He has no problem to audible to a running play to score a TD. The Patriots were 6th in scoring offense in 2001 running the ball almost 50% (482 pass, 473 rush) of the time and rushing for 15 TDs. Brady has never been about personal numbers. He could easily audible to pad to his passing TD total. That just isn't how Brady plays. To compare Tannehill to Brady is ludicrous.

As for Eli in 2007, you decided to pick out the worst year a QB ever had when their team won a Super Bowl. Only 7 times has a QB led their team to a SB victory and been ranked below the top 10 QBs for that year and you picked the lowest ranked one ever at 24th for that year.

So that is your argument? Pick the worst starting QB to ever lead a team to a SB win and claim "therefor we can win a SB with Tannehill?"

To show how weak the argument posted consider the following:

Since the merger of the two leagues in 1970 there have been 44 Super Bowls. The QB that led his team to a SB victory has finished outside the top 10 in QB rating 7 times! Since, on average there have been roughly 20 starting QBs falling outside of the top 10 each year (22 currently) that means there have been approximately 880 quarterbacks that have NOT been ranked in the top 10. ONLY 7 of those QBs led their team to a Super Bowl...that equates to .8% of QBs not ranked in the top 10 that year have led their team to a Super Bowl win.

Considering Tannehill has finished ranked 27th, 24th and is currently 14th you think it is a good idea to sign him when he hasn't shown there is better than a .8% chance of winning the Super Bowl with him? And we haven't even discussed how poorly Tannehill has played under pressure (college and pros).

BTW...only "3" QBs have finished below 20th when it comes to YPA and led their team to a SB win (74 Bradshaw was 21st, 2000 Dilfer was 21st, and E. Manning was 27th in 2007). No QB has ever ranked 31st in YPA and led their team to a SB victory. In fact, only QB of a losing team has been below 17th in YPA for that year (1982 Wood-Strock was 27th).

So Tannehill fans may want to dismiss his YPA, but that is such an important stat...only 4 QBs in total of the 88 since the merger with a YPA ranking 20th or below that year have even played in the SB. Tannehill is 31st!!!

And the argument is we can win a SB with him...LOL!

You are right...it is an important stat...you are wrong though in the way you are using it. Trying to assess a qbs ability to throw accurately or throw it deep using that stat is really inaccurate. You want to know WHY most SB qbs have high ypa? It's cause they have a good oline and good receivers...duh it's a Super Bowl team.

Eh, you guys can whine and complain about him all ya want...I have watched football since the mid 70's....usually don't leave my chair on Sundays since the late 90s. He has shown me all I need to see these 3 yrs thrown to the wolves in his first yr playing behind an indefensible horrible line, below average to average receivers to throw to, on again off again running game to know that if the problems with the oline get fixed, he will make playing at a high level look easy even with this current crop of wr's.

 

[tay0365]

2003: 1 QB over 100 QB rating (McNair 100.4)
2004: 4 QB over 100 QB rating (Manning 121.1, Culpepper 110.9, Brees 104.8, McNabb 104.7)
2013: 7 QB over 100 QB rating (Tannehill not one of them)

Only 3 more QBs in 2013 then in 2004...not much difference here.

2003: 13 QB completed 60% or more of their passes
2004: 19 QB completed 60% or more of their passes
2013: 25 QB completed 60% or more of their passes (Tannehill 22nd at 60.4)

Only 6 more QB in 2013 then then in 2014...not really a huge difference here either.

2003: 1 QB 30+ TD passes (Favre 32)
2004: 4 QB 30+ TD passes (Manning 49, Culpepper 39, McNabb 31, Favre 30)
2013: 5 QB 30+ TD passes (including 55 by Manning, Tannehill not one of them)

One more QB in 2013 then in 2004, hardly any difference here.

2003: 10 QBs 7+ YPA
2004: 19 QBs 7+ YPA
2013: 18 QBs 7+ YPA (Tannehill not one of them)

There was actually 1 more in 2004 then in 2013...hmm

Basically the difference is not that much where you can bring the "It was another time" argument. Tannehill is in good shape to end up with better numbers then what Brady and Eli Manning had in the beginning of their career, and he's doing it with a far more inferior O-linemen (thanks to injuries), no real go to TE (Thanks to injury), and little time to get the ball to his receivers, so unable to go deep (thanks to injuries)...keep hating though, doing an awesome job. :up:

 

[Sons Of Shula]

The NFL in 2004 changed the rules where DBs couldn't as much breath within 5 yards of a WR.

The NFL did not change any rules concerning the 5 yard illegal chuck rule in 2004. It was modified in '74 from 15 to 10 yards, again in '78 from 10 to 5 yards and hasn't changed since. In the years '04 and '14 it was simply made a point of emphasis and we can all "thank" Peyton Manning for the extra flags and inflated passing numbers.

 

[AdamD13]

Only 3 more QBs in 2013 then in 2004...not much difference here.



Only 6 more QB in 2013 then then in 2014...not really a huge difference here either.



One more QB in 2013 then in 2004, hardly any difference here.




There was actually 1 more in 2004 then in 2013...hmm

Basically the difference is not that much where you can bring the "It was another time" argument. Tannehill is in good shape to end up with better numbers then what Brady and Eli Manning had in the beginning of their career, and he's doing it with a far more inferior O-linemen (thanks to injuries), no real go to TE (Thanks to injury), and little time to get the ball to his receivers, so unable to go deep (thanks to injuries)...keep hating though, doing an awesome job. :up:

You are right, there isn't much difference between 2004 and 2013. It appears you are confused that I was making a point how 2013 is different than 2004. I wasn't. I was demonstrating how 2004 and beyond is a different passing era than 2003 and previous years.

The OP was referring to Brady's stats in 2001 and 2003. I showed the difference between 2003 and 2004 to demonstrate how passing (the enforcement of illegal contact rules beginning in 2004) changed the passing game and how that still holds true today (2013). So comparing RT with Tom Brady in 2001 and 2003 is not a good comparison.

I find it amusing when I am referred to as a "hater" because I don't think we have a legitimate top 10 QB and in my opinion if a team does not have a top 10 QB then they have a problem at the QB position. I consider myself a lover of the Miami Dolphins. They have been my favorite team since 1972.

What I also find interesting is the people that refer to me as a hater because I don't have a man-crush on the QB are usually the ones that are throwing the WR, OL, RB, Defense, HC, OC, GM, and owner under the bus. So who are the real haters? Me, that supports what I see on the field of play with that players stats or the people calling me a hater and usually bashing just about every other player and person within the organization in order to protect their man?

Honestly, it reminds me of when a guy is in a relationship with a not-so-cool girlfriend. And when anyone mentions that she isn't so cool he goes on the attack and makes every excuse for her behavior in order to maintain his state of denial.

But if it helps you to think I am a hater, by all means, be my guest. I want to like RT or whichever QB is starting for Miami. I really do and I like him as a person, he seems decent. But as a player I base my judgments on what I see on the field of play and what I find is the stats back that up.

 

[AdamD13]

The NFL did not change any rules concerning the 5 yard illegal chuck rule in 2004. It was modified in '74 from 15 to 10 yards, again in '78 from 10 to 5 yards and hasn't changed since. In the years '04 and '14 it was simply made a point of emphasis and we can all "thank" Peyton Manning for the extra flags and inflated passing numbers.

You are correct. The Competition Committee's insistence on the enforcement of those rules is what changed in 2004 and the refs actually enforcing it. My bad, I could have been more clear.

 

[Nawledge]

You are right, there isn't much difference between 2004 and 2013. It appears you are confused that I was making a point how 2013 is different than 2004. I wasn't. I was demonstrating how 2004 and beyond is a different passing era than 2003 and previous years.

The OP was referring to Brady's stats in 2001 and 2003. I showed the difference between 2003 and 2004 to demonstrate how passing (the enforcement of illegal contact rules beginning in 2004) changed the passing game and how that still holds true today (2013). So comparing RT with Tom Brady in 2001 and 2003 is not a good comparison.

I find it amusing when I am referred to as a "hater" because I don't think we have a legitimate top 10 QB and in my opinion if a team does not have a top 10 QB then they have a problem at the QB position. I consider myself a lover of the Miami Dolphins. They have been my favorite team since 1972.

What I also find interesting is the people that refer to me as a hater because I don't have a man-crush on the QB are usually the ones that are throwing the WR, OL, RB, Defense, HC, OC, GM, and owner under the bus. So who are the real haters? Me, that supports what I see on the field of play with that players stats or the people calling me a hater and usually bashing just about every other player and person within the organization in order to protect their man?

Honestly, it reminds me of when a guy is in a relationship with a not-so-cool girlfriend. And when anyone mentions that she isn't so cool he goes on the attack and makes every excuse for her behavior in order to maintain his state of denial.

But if it helps you to think I am a hater, by all means, be my guest. I want to like RT or whichever QB is starting for Miami. I really do and I like him as a person, he seems decent. But as a player I base my judgments on what I see on the field of play and what I find is the stats back that up.

I, the op, was posting those numbers to prove the point that nobody gives a **** about ypa except the tannehill hate brigade. Anyone who doesnt have an agenda can see that the o-line has been the main cause of our issues passing the ball. You guys just choose to ignore it and not acknowledge it because it interferes with your agenda. Its as simple as that. Say whatever you want about not being a hater but if you dont acknowledge that the o line has played a huge part in our offensive problems then yea your a hater with an agenda because its clear as ****ing day.

 

[Afmo]

No he does not. This is becoming just stupid now. He isn't perfect obviously, but people need to stop vomiting the same nonsense over and over in your circle jerk of haters club. Please watch the games!! The last 8 games alone even when he has been what you would label "inconsistent", he has still been solid. Stop grading him against Manning and Rodgers.

I'll play your "pick one play to prove my point".....go watch the tape of last weeks game and pay close attention to the TD throw to Hartline. Name me more than 3 other QB's that see that and fit that in that window. It was as elite as a throw gets.

Why the **** not compare him to manning and Rodgers?

It's this bull**** I'm talking about. Accepting mediocrity. Manning and Rodgers are the pinnacle of the position. Everyone shoukd strive for a manning or Rodgers.

 

[miamiron]

Really? Your telling me brady didnt dink,n dunk???

2001- 32(20+)/6(40+)
2002- 37/3
2003- 44/8

Compared to tannehills firat 2 years

2012- 40/3
2013- 46/10

So explain to me how brady wasnt a dink n dunker? Thats all he did when he had welker too. Some of you guys are ridiculous, do you even watch other games? I swear you guys must only watch highlights.

WOW!! Tannehill went from 10 passes of 40+ yards last season to 1 this season

 

[Sirspud]

Yes because he's going to maintain the 31st ranking for the rest if his career. No way will that improve like he has in every other single stat. Now if your argument is against him winning a Super Bowl this year, well nice work. However your own statistical analysis bites you in the ass because it shows dramatic improvement and therefore a likely raise in ypa. So then what??

QB's don't magically improve in some areas. Tannehill has improved his completion percentage and his TD/INT ration by throwing almost all throws that will be easy completions, yet that is directly at the cost of YPA, so there is not going to be a magic improvement in that.