Tannehill played quite a bit better last year than he did the year before overall even though the OL was much worse. And the one place that the poor OL showed up in his stats besides the sacks was his deep ball. His QBR on passes over 20 yards was quite good in 2012 when Jake Long (who didn't play that well but, was still way better than Martin and Co) was the LT. While it would be simplistic to say it had to do mostly with the poor OL play, it certainly contributed. Wallace's drops and the poor timing of the first year throwing to a speedy receiver also contributed. Having another full off season with Wallace and a hopefully much improved OL should show us what Tannehill is truly capable of.
How can Ryan Tannehill & Mike Wallace take the next step?
- Thread starter number1fin
- Start date
insomnia411
The world is yours
Tannehill needs to seriously get a lot better throwing the deep ball. If he hits those long balls to Wallace we probably beat the Panthers and the Jets.
next-year
MostHated
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2005
- Messages
- 1,239
- Reaction score
- 459
- Age
- 34
Funny how if Tannehill didn't continuously under throw Mike Wallace would have looked like a better FA pickup seeing that he probably would have had another couple hundred yards on the season and at last 3 more touchdowns.
The same could be said about Wallace and his drops.
xXwarXx
☠️ Banned ☠️
Practice..
Where's amendola right now? With Tom Brady.
Where's Wallace? Not with tannehill.
Tannehill might throw and passes, but Wallace cant complain if he's not willing to out the work in. Few receivers just show up to a team and have chemistry with the qb right away, especially in a progressive read system that we had last year.
That system is incredibly hard to learn. That was shermans downfall IMO. That system was to hard to implement for a team just coming together and pretty young.
Where's amendola right now? With Tom Brady.
Where's Wallace? Not with tannehill.
Tannehill might throw and passes, but Wallace cant complain if he's not willing to out the work in. Few receivers just show up to a team and have chemistry with the qb right away, especially in a progressive read system that we had last year.
That system is incredibly hard to learn. That was shermans downfall IMO. That system was to hard to implement for a team just coming together and pretty young.
mega-fin-love
Just trust me
Wallace is def a little bitch when it comes to fighting for balls and not giving up on plays....but it's partly because Tannehill repeatedly under and over threw him and he was frustrated. Tanny has to make those throws
He did?
Tanny splits
Wallace splits
Tanny was 11-for-60 on anything 21+ yards with 2 TD's and 4 INT's ..... Wallace was the recipient of 6 of those completions (36 targets according to PFF). Where was all of this "regularity" hitting the other WR's deep?
The thing with the deep balls that end up hurting are the missed TD conversions, as they are big time momentum shifting plays. Consistently missing them can be deflating to the offense.
Lets not forget the 9 hail marys he threw.
xX - I'm surprised that you thought Sherman's system was incredibly hard to learn. We had zilch complexity in the running game and far too often the play-calling by Sherman was so predictable, the opposing Defense just had a field day. I actually thought the lack of sophistication was a real problem and expect a lot more from Lazor.
What I wanna know is are there any signs or indications that this type of dedication is occurring with these guys?
Or is it just a throw caution to the wind type of deal and that whatever happens, happens?