Good quarterbacking is innate.

[mrbunglez]

so by your point of view, why was tannehill better than ryan this year?

i thought that there is more to the team than 1 player, maybe ryan had a better year, but other ppl on his team did not step up?

matt ryan should not get all the blame for only getting 4 wins this year according to you, there is a lot more to a team than 1 player.

i saw them both play, and almost every team in the nfls record correlates to how the qb plays.

matt ryan did not have a great year by any means, and he was a big reason they were 4-12. he was not the matt ryan i was used to seeing. look at the ravens. flacco was terrible this year, that is why baltimore was not so good this year.

peyton manning was awesome this year, that is why denver was awesome, tom brady was pretty good this year, especially considering all the weapons he lost, 12-4, a team like the panthers had not gotten good qb play on a consistent basis the past 2 years from newton, and when he finally has a good year, carolina wins the division and gets a 1st round bye. its very simple, good qb play= success.

---------- Post added at 09:48 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:47 PM ----------



u werent right, i am 31.

The Matt Ryan references are for WV. Don't get me wrong I'm sure he's a nice guy, but his pedestal worship for the guy (which doesn't seem warranted in the least) is crazy especially when he flip flops on the team he roots for QB.

 

[AZStryker]

Ryan Tannehill is going to be your starting quarterback in 2014. Love him or hate him, he's getting another year.

Gonna be a brutal offseason on this board.

No truer words have ever been spoken! It's going to be 8 months of the pro and anti Tannehill facets going round and round about the same god damn things.

 

[Awsi Dooger]

The Jets did nothing amazing today. They struggled to put up a late 20 points. Our quarterback got stuck at 7. And this was 7 points despite no excuses via heavy sack numbers. I'm struggling to remember one sack. Yet it equated to 7 points. That's the issue I always have with the Happy Adjustment crew. They'll look at sack numbers, or anything negative, and allow wild compensation, always in Tannehill's favor. Two or three extra touchdowns, if not for those rotten sacks. Or the rotten coordinator. Meanwhile, Tannehill trots along with the same blank expression and fails to dent the scoreboard.

I've never seen so much benefit of a doubt attached to so few points.

Tannehill has no reservoir. There have been desperate claims in that regard, that he's well thought of within the league and could survive a bad performance today. No such nonsense. He's now defined by a 39-7 deficit against Thad Lewis and Geno Smith in December, with everything at stake.

I continue to worry that his high water mark is maybe 12th in the league. I just don't like the unusual resumes, the guys who have never been great at any level and it requires a major happy adjustment to pretend they will be great somewhere down the line. The guys who knock stats go that route. The stats are more revealing and legitimate than their deflective nonsense.

The tape lies all the time when you are seeing what you want to see, and not what is actually there.

 

[BGtoKNfor6]

so by your point of view, why was tannehill better than ryan this year?

i thought that there is more to the team than 1 player, maybe ryan had a better year, but other ppl on his team did not step up?

matt ryan should not get all the blame for only getting 4 wins this year according to you, there is a lot more to a team than 1 player.

i saw them both play, and almost every team in the nfls record correlates to how the qb plays.

matt ryan did not have a great year by any means, and he was a big reason they were 4-12. he was not the matt ryan i was used to seeing. look at the ravens. flacco was terrible this year, that is why baltimore was not so good this year.

peyton manning was awesome this year, that is why denver was awesome, tom brady was pretty good this year, especially considering all the weapons he lost, 12-4, a team like the panthers had not gotten good qb play on a consistent basis the past 2 years from newton, and when he finally has a good year, carolina wins the division and gets a 1st round bye. its very simple, good qb play= success.

---------- Post added at 09:48 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:47 PM ----------



u werent right, i am 31.

---------- Post added at 09:49 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:48 PM ----------



look at the 3 games before those 2, u just pick n choose what games and stats you want that favor your argument? a lot of people here do that...

Your argument holds water during the regular season and that only. Ask Marino, Moon, Kelly, Fouts, Tarkenton, and a slew of others how important the supporting cast is....A good qb allows you to hopefully garner a solid supporting cast but it just isn't as easy as pro bowl qb = success unless your success guage only goes to "making the playoffs".

 

[PerfectFinz72]

The issue in my opinion is Tannehill would be much better and further along in his development if he was able to hit the deep ball to wallace like it needs to be. People will tell you that his deep ball is in line with the league average but they fail to understand that that number is pure bs from the standpoint it doesn't take ball placement into account. It doesn't take into account which balls should have been an easy touchdown. It also doesn't take into account the ability of the wideout to bail out his qb.

If Tannehill hits 40% of his deep throws to a wide open wallace, we are in the playoffs, this thread won't be made and he has 30 td's this year about about 6 less interceptions. If he can fix this issue, he will make the jump to the next level as his short to intermediate game is pretty solid. He can be a starting qb but if he doesn't clean up that part of this game then hel will need to have the right supporting cast, and he will remain a 15-20 qb.

If he hit more deep passes then sure you could say they'd be in the playoffs (and yes it's not good at all and something he better improve on). But you could say that about other aspects of the team too. If hartline didn't have all the drops in buffalo or Matthews the big drop today what would have happened? Same with the defense not getting off the field on 3rd and longs. Sturgis missing FGs. Wheeler stupid personal fouls against TB and Buffalo that really hurt the team. I know it's easy to blame Tannehill I just think it should be pointed out how other players could step up too.

 

[mrbunglez]

The Jets did nothing amazing today. They struggled to put up a late 20 points. Our quarterback got stuck at 7. And this was 7 points despite no excuses via heavy sack numbers. I'm struggling to remember one sack. Yet it equated to 7 points. That's the issue I always have with the Happy Adjustment crew. They'll look at sack numbers, or anything negative, and allow wild compensation, always in Tannehill's favor. Two or three extra touchdowns, if not for those rotten sacks. Or the rotten coordinator. Meanwhile, Tannehill trots along with the same blank expression and fails to dent the scoreboard.

I've never seen so much benefit of a doubt attached to so few points.

Tannehill has no reservoir. There have been desperate claims in that regard, that he's well thought of within the league and could survive a bad performance today. No such nonsense. He's now defined by a 39-7 deficit against Thad Lewis and Geno Smith in December, with everything at stake.

I continue to worry that his high water mark is maybe 12th in the league. I just don't like the unusual resumes, the guys who have never been great at any level and it requires a major happy adjustment to pretend they will be great somewhere down the line. The guys who knock stats go that route. The stats are more revealing and legitimate than their deflective nonsense.

The tape lies all the time when you are seeing what you want to see, and not what is actually there.

How's this stat? He threw for over 4000 yards boost up his TD ratio and yardage from last year, and all this behind a porous Oline the whole year. Yeah he didn't bring us to the promised land, but He's got 1 more year to prove it in my eyes.

 

[Ilovemyfins4eva]

The Matt Ryan references are for WV. Don't get me wrong I'm sure he's a nice guy, but his pedestal worship for the guy (which doesn't seem warranted in the least) is crazy especially when he flip flops on the team he roots for QB.

the reason why wv loves matt ryan , or at least i think y, is because he wanted us to draft him in 08, and truthfully we should have as it was a no brainer.

we were a team that had not had a franchise qb in 7 seasons since marino retired, and we needed a qb and we draft long over ryan, what a joke

 

[WVDolphan]

The Jets did nothing amazing today. They struggled to put up a late 20 points. Our quarterback got stuck at 7. And this was 7 points despite no excuses via heavy sack numbers. I'm struggling to remember one sack. Yet it equated to 7 points. That's the issue I always have with the Happy Adjustment crew. They'll look at sack numbers, or anything negative, and allow wild compensation, always in Tannehill's favor. Two or three extra touchdowns, if not for those rotten sacks. Or the rotten coordinator. Meanwhile, Tannehill trots along with the same blank expression and fails to dent the scoreboard.

I've never seen so much benefit of a doubt attached to so few points.

Tannehill has no reservoir. There have been desperate claims in that regard, that he's well thought of within the league and could survive a bad performance today. No such nonsense. He's now defined by a 39-7 deficit against Thad Lewis and Geno Smith in December, with everything at stake.

I continue to worry that his high water mark is maybe 12th in the league. I just don't like the unusual resumes, the guys who have never been great at any level and it requires a major happy adjustment to pretend they will be great somewhere down the line. The guys who knock stats go that route. The stats are more revealing and legitimate than their deflective nonsense.

The tape lies all the time when you are seeing what you want to see, and not what is actually there.

Awsi just got real.

 

[mrbunglez]

the reason why wv loves matt ryan , or at least i think y, is because he wanted us to draft him in 08, and truthfully we should have as it was a no brainer.

we were a team that had not had a franchise qb in 7 seasons since marino retired, and we needed a qb and we draft long over ryan, what a joke

But if you go by what Matt Ryan did in College which some posters here do, it shows how he couldnt win the big games.
I'm not saying he's garbage, but I never got the hype of Matt Ryan.

 

[BGtoKNfor6]

If he hit more deep passes then sure you could say they'd be in the playoffs (and yes it's not good at all and something he better improve on). But you could say that about other aspects of the team too. If hartline didn't have all the drops in buffalo or Matthews the big drop today what would have happened? Same with the defense not getting off the field on 3rd and longs. Sturgis missing FGs. Wheeler stupid personal fouls against TB and Buffalo that really hurt the team. I know it's easy to blame Tannehill I just think it should be pointed out how other players could step up too.

I am talking about Tannehill only. Look around for my other thread on how I feel about the defense. I realize this team isn't any better off than it was 2 years ago in many key places.

 

[mrbunglez]

I'm not defending Tannehill, he did play like garbage today, I don't blame him for the bills game last weekend. But I see more positives in his game this season than last season and he showed he can hang in the NFL.

 

[Keonxl]

Oh that Buffalo game was his fault? Where he was getting hit every time and receivers were dropping passes?

Just curious what you think about Nick Foles. He was drafted behind tanny and is lighting it up. Why are Miami qbs the only ones who need 10 years to develop?

 

[ForksPhin]

Just curious what you think about Nick Foles. He was drafted behind tanny and is lighting it up. Why are Miami qbs the only ones who need 10 years to develop?

Foles actually has a good, innovative head coach. Just saying.

 

[67Stang]

Change Ryan's to Chad's and Im sure you made this same statement a few years ago.

Typical ignorant response. Why don't you go type another 20 paragraph look at me post. Matt Moore was impressive last week, don't you think? At least Tannehill has a come from behind win (actually several). How is that Matt Ryan Superbowl prediction going, since you like to bring up the past?

 

[deviltawk]

He is middle of the pack. Just as good as Flacco or Ryan. He will be our QB next year. I'm not saying he's a top 5 QB but an offensive line and a run game won't hurt....