Great Article On Tanny | Page 3 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Great Article On Tanny

Great article.

And that analysis of Miami's receiving corps, Parker included, is spot on.

For the life of me I can't figure out the people who mysteriously think that Parker is a baller, and that he has demonstrated mutiple skill levels on the field. Parkers lowlights of non-caught catchable balls (and some that turn into INTs) seems to come at the most crucial turning points in games. He's made a few plays here and there, to his limited skill set (which on that narrow schema, is definitely good), but as a wholesale threat with ability to separate, accelerate in and out of cuts, and dominat e the red zone? No.

LD
Parker scored 18 TDs last season. On Madden.

One whole Super Bowl loss directly on his quick shoulders, forever replying his college-style readability into eternity. One of the worst plays ever from a classic QB standpoint in Super Bowl history.
Wasn’t that the year the Seahawks had no business being in the Super Bowl because Wilson had 4 interceptions in the title game against the Packers? Imagine how good your defense is if your QB can throw four picks against an Aaron Rodgers team and you still win the ballgame.
 
I don't think turning this into a discussion of Russell Wilson is a good way to discuss an article about Ryan Tannehill. I just thought that one particular play that was cited was a poor example.

On the subject of Ryan Tannehill and elusiveness, though, here's one that was pretty good:



I do think that the overwhelming issue with the Dolphins in terms of giving up sacks between 2011 and early 2016 has been the line and not the quarterbacks. No one will ever convince me that players like Marc Colombo, Tyson Clabo, Jonathan Martin, or Dallas Thomas or Billy Turner were anything short of explosive garbage fires.

When you hit the top of your drop and a rusher - not an unaccounted for rusher, but a guy that has pistol whipped your starting tackle - is launching himself directly into your chest, you're typically going to take a sack. Russell Wilson is pretty much one of a kind when it comes to being able to avoid that ****.
 
I don't think turning this into a discussion of Russell Wilson is a good way to discuss an article about Ryan Tannehill. I just thought that one particular play that was cited was a poor example.

On the subject of Ryan Tannehill and elusiveness, though, here's one that was pretty good:



I do think that the overwhelming issue with the Dolphins in terms of giving up sacks between 2011 and early 2016 has been the line and not the quarterbacks. No one will ever convince me that players like Marc Colombo, Tyson Clabo, Jonathan Martin, or Dallas Thomas or Billy Turner were anything short of explosive garbage fires.

When you hit the top of your drop and a rusher - not an unaccounted for rusher, but a guy that has pistol whipped your starting tackle - is launching himself directly into your chest, you're typically going to take a sack. Russell Wilson is pretty much one of a kind when it comes to being able to avoid that ****.

RW is still getting dinged for 40+ sacks a year for his career. Would likely be 70 + if not for his elusiveness
 
I think you're missing part of the point here:

Even with his supposed recognition of the pressure, take away Wilson's superior elusiveness and that's still a sack. All day.

Even at that, even with his elusiveness, if the Defensive player just comes up with a slightly better catch on his body or clothes, it's still a sack.

I don't think that first clip says all that much greatness on his ability to recognize pressure and deal with it. I think it says more that he's a GREAT backyard QB who has relied on a superior D and simply great overall team talent, and his innate ability to dominate short space on slower defenders.

LD
Parker scored 18 TDs last season. On Madden.


Wasn’t that the year the Seahawks had no business being in the Super Bowl because Wilson had 4 interceptions in the title game against the Packers? Imagine how good your defense is if your QB can throw four picks against an Aaron Rodgers team and you still win the ballgame.

Yep.

Wilson, in all his QB greatness, threw four picks precisely because of the kinds of things I'm talking about.

But because of the amazing talent around him and a fluky onside kick, they advanced. No business winning that game with that QB play. But people still throw up Wilson as some kind of proof that RT17 needs work in this or that area.

Should have been the Packers Super Bowl because of Wilson. As it was, it became the Patriots SB because of Wilson.

Wilson and his pre-set plays and then break it down into backyard scrum style... getting into big trouble if actually having to sit in pocket, make reads, and throw into small windows... exactly the kinds of things that you expect a classic QB to do, and the kinds of things at which RT17 is far better at. Wilson is one of the better read option QBs, no question. And I'd take him on my team, no question.

But picking out Wilson's best point, using that as a hammer to bash RT17 in one area... then picking out a different QB's high point (Luck, etc.), and using that to bash RT17 in another area... Wow.

Defintion of bias right there.

LD

LD
 
On the subject of Ryan Tannehill and elusiveness, though, here's one that was pretty good:


Interesting clip you chose to demonstrate elusiveness. Pouncey was pushed back into Tannehill directly in his line of sight. An elusive QB would not have been touched on that play. It showed Tannehill displayed good balance on that play although I'm guessing the hit wasn't all that physical as he didn't lose his balance when hit by 600+ lbs of force. Tannehill also did a good job of looking down the field as he rolled out against McCullers (6'7, 350+lbs) who looked like a turtle chasing him and Tannehill did a good job of throwing the ball down the field. But elusiveness, really?
 
Sometimes statements are too outlandish to go unchecked.

Other than a career 65-30-1 record, 6 winning seasons out of 6 seasons, 15 4QC, 19 GWD, averaging 303 comp, 472 att, 64%, 3696 yards, 7.8 YPA, 27 TD, 9 int, 98 QB rating in addition to averaging of 96 rushes, 546 yards, 5.7 YPC, 2.7 TD per season what else do you have?

And because I know your kind you'll probably throw out the 8-4 playoff record, 4 4QC, 4 GWD, with 207 comp, 336 att,61.7 comp, 2777 yards, 8.3 YPA, 20 TD, 11 int, 94.1 QB rating, 60 rushes, 354 yards, 5.9 YPC, 2 TD, appearing in 2 Super Bowls and 1 Super Bowl victory.

But other than that, is that it?

Seriously, is that all you got to back up your statement?

Possibly the best part of this entire post is that you did it in a well-thought out thread showing Tannehill’s strengths...and didn’t even mention Tannehill.

Maybe that’s because well thought-out and constructive threads deter haters from using their typical “Tannetrash,” “I’ve hated him since he was drafted,” “LOLz” comments to derail positive narratives about him.
 
Interesting clip you chose to demonstrate elusiveness. Pouncey was pushed back into Tannehill directly in his line of sight. An elusive QB would not have been touched on that play. It showed Tannehill displayed good balance on that play although I'm guessing the hit wasn't all that physical as he didn't lose his balance when hit by 600+ lbs of force. Tannehill also did a good job of looking down the field as he rolled out against McCullers (6'7, 350+lbs) who looked like a turtle chasing him and Tannehill did a good job of throwing the ball down the field. But elusiveness, really?

I take it back.

Let me respond in a manner you’re familiar with. “You don’t think that illustrates elusiveness? LOL get real take off your hater glasses propose to Russell Wilson.”
 
Anyhow, forget about Wilson Luck...

I was going to post this article but I thought it would bring out haters en masse.

Happy to say the overall response has been quite nice :cigar
 
I take it back.

Let me respond in a manner you’re familiar with. “You don’t think that illustrates elusiveness? LOL get real take off your hater glasses propose to Russell Wilson.”
Thanks for the advice Billy. Your shepard must have been a little rough on you today.
 
Agree with most of the article except 2 points...

1) Tanny does not have what I would consider fluid movement in the pocket
2) I don't see Luck as a top 5 QB in the league at this point in his career
 
That article is symbolic of the differences between online journalism now, and when I studied print journalism four decades ago.

I have no idea why a handful of plays are spotlighted in articles like that...the videos. Yet it is ever popular. I see it everywhere. I guess it's like candy...you have to hand some out to keep the kid interested.

Heck, we've already had back and forth debate in this thread regarding those plays, and what they demonstrate. I guess that answers my question.

None of it is valuable, IMO. I can't imagine looking at something from a detail or day to day perspective as opposed to big picture scope. Nothing will lead you in the wrong direction, or lend itself to so many poor evaluations, than keeping an open mind regarding something or someone every day, compared to isolating a handful of formidable variables and holding them as exponentially more instructive than anything else, anything fluid.

I realize few, if any, will argue similarly. Awesome.

The method I describe will lead to being correct far more often than not, with very little effort or second guessing.

Ryan Tannehill is forever described as handicapped by personnel. Meanwhile, there was an early lesson at Texas A&M. His team was preseason ranked #8 in 2011. Tannehill himself was talking about the need to go unbeaten.

https://newsok.com/article/3606028/...-era-start-of-ryan-tannehill-era-for-texas-am

That team went 7-6 despite being favored in all but one game. The six defeats included one blown lead after another...often big leads surrendered.

I'll continue to root for the Dolphins and therefore Tannehill but I'll be shocked if the strange resume and all those early hints prove to be less meaningful than the scattered wow plays and all the fanatical adjustments.
 
Yep.

Wilson, in all his QB greatness, threw four picks precisely because of the kinds of things I'm talking about.

But because of the amazing talent around him and a fluky onside kick, they advanced. No business winning that game with that QB play. But people still throw up Wilson as some kind of proof that RT17 needs work in this or that area.

Should have been the Packers Super Bowl because of Wilson. As it was, it became the Patriots SB because of Wilson.

Wilson and his pre-set plays and then break it down into backyard scrum style... getting into big trouble if actually having to sit in pocket, make reads, and throw into small windows... exactly the kinds of things that you expect a classic QB to do, and the kinds of things at which RT17 is far better at. Wilson is one of the better read option QBs, no question. And I'd take him on my team, no question.

But picking out Wilson's best point, using that as a hammer to bash RT17 in one area... then picking out a different QB's high point (Luck, etc.), and using that to bash RT17 in another area... Wow.

Defintion of bias right there.

LD

LD

Or he threw 4 picks because sometimes QB's have bad half or bad days...no? Otherwise wouldn't his career be littered with 4+ int type games? I seem to remember our very own Marino having a few 4 int's games. To point to his worst day to proclaim you are right in your opinion of him is pretty much the definition of bias right there.

You're right the Seahawks had no business winning a game in which the O-line gave up 5 sacks, but of course if our Oline gave up 5 sacks in a playoff game and we still won the game almost everyone here would hail Tannehill as a hero for over coming such a disaster myself included.

To point to one play and say he's the reason they lost the SB is just silly. Especially one in which the play called has been called the worst in NFL history.
 
."

.....Ryan Tannehill is forever described as handicapped by personnel. Meanwhile, there was an early lesson at Texas A&M. His team was preseason ranked #8 in 2011. Tannehill himself was talking about the need to go unbeaten.....


That team went 7-6 despite being favored in all but one game. The six defeats included one blown lead after another...often big leads surrendered....

Dont talk out of school, Awsi. I lived through that nightmare and it had nothing to do with Tannehill failure or weakness.

It was an indictment of Sherman's over-conservative nature after THill and co. staked a&m to big leads game after game. Ags lost 2 games in OT and 3 other games by 7 total pts. Their only other loss was to #7 OU on the road by 16. Thats basically 6 losses by 23pts.

Sherman would take the ball out of THills hands and go into a shell. the fanbase was driven nuts by Sherman. example punting on Arkansas 40 on 4th and 1 when a&m had them on ropes.

Tannehill put up 404 yards and 35 pts IN THE FIRST HALF against an Arky D that had only surrendered 1 TD in prior 4 games.

Enter Shermans game mgmnt. Ags scored 3pts in 2nd half. He would never go for the kill, and the D would collapse, and he was fired at the end of the season.

You have your opinion, and I just thought others might want some of the facts since you suggest this season was some sort of indictment of THill.

It wasnt, and Sherman knew EXACTLY who he wanted for QB in the next draft.

thanks.
 
Last edited:
Dont talk out of school, Awsi. I lived through that nightmare and it had nothing to do with Tannehill failure or weakness.

It was an indictment of Sherman's over-conservative nature after THill and co. staked a&m to big leads game after game. Ags lost 2 games in OT and 3 other games by 7 total pts. Their only other loss was to #7 OU on the road by 16. Thats basically 6 losses by 23pts.

Sherman would take the ball out of THills hands and go into a shell. the fanbase was driven nuts by Sherman. example punting on Arkansas 40 on 4th and 1 when a&m had them on ropes. He would never go for the kill and he was fired at the end of the season.

You have your opinion; I just thought others might want some of the facts.

thanks.

Ha.

Got 'em.



I was going to point out how completely nonsensical it is to blame a QB for huge blown leads (who put them in the lead in the first place, btw?), but your response was much better.

Regardless, I don't see much of a point in arguing. This one clearly sees himself as a razor blade in a drawer full of butter knives.
 
Back
Top Bottom