Is Ryan Tannehill Going to Become a Franchise QB? | Page 4 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Is Ryan Tannehill Going to Become a Franchise QB?

This is not as clear as some will make it out to be.

Farve, Brees and Warner all have won Super Bowls but none of those guys was a 'franchise QB' until a few years into their careers.

More than anything else, I think the fact that his College Head Coach is his OC and his QB coach is also here combined with the fact that Ireland just got extended and Philbin being so tight with Sherman
leads me to believe that he will get EVERY possible chance for the next 5 years to make that progression.

If he doesn't get injured I see him as being our Franchise QB. This is not to say that he will ever be better than Luck or Russell though. :err:
 
I define a franchise QB as a QB that even with a bad supporting cast, can take a team to the playoffs like Marino did year after year. I don't believe Drew Brees can do that.
 
Birdmond said:
I answered the question. Get over it. I consider Brady, Rodgers and Manning franchise QB's and as of now that's it. My opinion, if you don't like it don't read my post.
Click to expand...
If you use too restrictive a definition of franchise QB, then you're likely to have too little variation among the play of those QBs as rookies to find anything significantly predictive of it.
 
shouright said:
If you use too restrictive a definition of franchise QB, then you're likely to have too little variation among the play of those QBs as rookies to find anything significantly predictive of it.
Click to expand...

I did not know you were the franchise quarterback definer i had to listen to.
 
shouright said:
If you use too restrictive a definition of franchise QB, then you're likely to have too little variation among the play of those QBs as rookies to find anything significantly predictive of it.
Click to expand...

Okay then I'm a franchise QB! You crack me up. Give me the exact definition since I am not aloud to have my own. LMAO
 
Birdmond said:
Okay then I'm a franchise QB! You crack me up. Give me the exact definition since I am not aloud to have my own. LMAO
Click to expand...
Anybody's certainly allowed to have his own definition, but my point is that I think you'd be hard-pressed to find objective data that distinguishes your very small group of "franchise QBs" from the QBs that other folks would consider "franchise" as well.

In essence you'd be creating a "distinction without a difference," as they say.
 
PALMA said:
I love the stats, I'm a scientist at Standord so I can relate to reading out meaningful numbers in a sea of data. However I can't shake off 0 points against the Pats Week 17. Tannehill has many wonderful tools, but has a long ways to go. He'll have a career in the NFL for a long time. But I suspect his best years won't come till a few seasons in when he's finally mastered the finer points of NFL quarterbacking. Whether those years will be with us remains to be seen, he's being measured against greatness, Andrew Luck.
Click to expand...

Tannehill 19 NFL games 19 College QB games,the finer points arent that far down the road.

Luck 1
Tannehill 1
 
I just think barring any injuries, we won't need to find another starting QB for years to come. That works for me.
 
dolpns13 said:
This statistical analysis deems a franchise QB as having a 79.8 QBR. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
If you adjusted that to whatever QB rating you preferred, you'd find that the same variables are predictive.
 
dolpns13 said:
Kind of like adjusting a season prediction after the games have already been played?
Click to expand...

But that's subject to what YOU define a franchise QB to be. I don't agree with his definition of a franchise QB, but the numbers don't lie and the analysis is good.

Is Eli Manning a franchise QB? His career rating is a mere 82.4. I certainly don't consider him among the elite because his base level of play isn't near what his peak performance has been. Basically, he's normally just a good QB. Nevertheless, there are droves of people out there who would call him a franchise QB, and I think that messes with shouright's interpretation of the numbers. Frankly, that definition should include a rating of 90 or above, and Josh Freeman never had any business being crowned a franchise QB.
 
IMO a franchise QB is one who makes a team's front office feel like it has the QB position addressed for the foreseeable future and doesn't need to address it with a different player. At the time this analysis was done, Josh Freeman was considered that kind of player in my view, as were the other QBs deemed "franchise" in the original post.
 
FishTank said:
But that's subject to what YOU define a franchise QB to be. I don't agree with his definition of a franchise QB, but the numbers don't lie and the analysis is good.

Is Eli Manning a franchise QB? His career rating is a mere 82.4. I certainly don't consider him among the elite because his base level of play isn't near what his peak performance has been. Basically, he's normally just a good QB. Nevertheless, there are droves of people out there who would call him a franchise QB, and I think that messes with shouright's interpretation of the numbers. Frankly, that definition should include a rating of 90 or above, and Josh Freeman never had any business being crowned a franchise QB.
Click to expand...
Franchise QB determination is poorly defined at best, and completely objective at it's worst.

If I had to start with my personal idea what a franchise QB is, it's when you have a QB and he performs at a level that wins games on a consistent basis. Second, if you have a franchise QB, you can't imagine trading him for anyone but maybe one of the other franchise guys. For instance, if you had manning, the only other QB you might trade him for is rogers or brady, (and admit it, if you're trading him for rogers, it's because of the age, not the performance.) Right now, Tannehill is getting close to the point I wouldn't take another QB for him, but I admit, fanship aside, Luck, manning, brady, rogers, Ryan are they guys I'd take If I had to trade.
 
Football is a little harder analyze statistically than say baseball, which has a much larger sample size. In baseball, it's easier to identify when players are playing over their head in short bursts or when a guy is playing well without the results to show for it. In football, I think you have to measure performance strictly in context. That's not to say that the stats can't show you something your eyes didn't catch yet.

I like Wildbill3's definition of a franchise QB, especially the part about trading. Take Eli Manning for example. I could fathom dealing Eli for Peyton, Brady, Rogers, or Brees. That's probably more true a couple of years ago than today.

As for Tannehill and Andrew Luck, Ryan has approached that point where I would be hesitant to do that particular deal. Luck has been consistently good this year, but I wonder if he has plateaued. I have seen more of Tannehill, though, and so my natural bias is to prefer what I'm familiar with. It'd probably be the same case the other way if we had Andrew Luck. Right now, it's a lateral move.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom