Jason Cole: Dolphins concerned about Tannehill

[enigmatics]

Then what about just being slightly behind Stafford and ben? You're talking 0.2 difference or whatever it was. I mean Tannehill is not that far behind those guys and I'm sure you would say they throw good deep balls. Or you would have before posting the chart at least...

If Stafford is a litmus test, then I hope Tannehill never becomes him. Gets away with a lot when he's got Megatron in the offense.

I'd ideally like to see Tannehill up in that 44-46%, unless we miraculously sprout one of the league's best running games. A guy like P.Manning gets away with his 42% because he's a surgeon everywhere else and they spread people the hell out.

 

[DuderinoN703]

Maybe you are on Ryan Tannehill's payroll Nawledge but I am not. So let me give you some facts, OK? Against Tampa Bay, Tannehill was 9 of 14, 110 yards 0 TDs and put 3 pts on the board. Moore was 13 of 19 158 yds 1 TD and put up 17 pts. Against Dallas, Tannehill was 13 of 21 119 yds 0 TDs. an another 3pts. Moore was 13 of 19 172 yds 1 TD an 22pts on the board. Most people with any level of intelligence would agree that Moore's stats are better, especially with the bottom line which is POINTS ON THE SCOREBOARD!!!

Do you think Moore would have those numbers had he started the preseason games Tannehill did? And do you think Tannehill can't also play well vs. guys who will all mostly be cut by 4 p.m. today?

 

[EvilDylan]

Then what about just being slightly behind Stafford and ben? You're talking 0.2 difference or whatever it was. I mean Tannehill is not that far behind those guys and I'm sure you would say they throw good deep balls. Or you would have before posting the chart at least...

guaranteed that if he understood what the chart was showing then he would have never posted it.

 

[Nawledge]

If Stafford is a litmus test, then I hope Tannehill never becomes him. Gets away with a lot when he's got Megatron in the offense.

I'd ideally like to see Tannehill up in that 44-46%, unless we miraculously sprout one of the league's best running games. A guy like P.Manning gets away with his 42% because he's a surgeon everywhere else and they spread people the hell out.

So I'll ask one more time...what was the point of posting the chart if it means nothing? If Tannehill had Calvin he would prob be at 50%.

 

[enigmatics]

So I'll ask one more time...what was the point of posting the chart if it means nothing? If Tannehill had Calvin he would prob be at 50%.

That could very well be.

But fact remains, he completes it at an average clip (ranked 21st out of 32 NFL starters). So either he has to improve on his own or receivers are needed to help mask his deficiency. Ultimately we NEED to be able to take better opportunity of chunk yardage on those deep balls otherwise coordinators will scheme Tanny and squeeze the short-intermediate area of the field.

 

[FinfanInBuffalo]

So I'll ask one more time...what was the point of posting the chart if it means nothing? If Tannehill had Calvin he would prob be at 50%.

He posted the charts because he read them wrong. They meant everything when (he thought) they showed Tannehill was below average. Now, they don't mean so much.

---------- Post added at 02:39 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:38 PM ----------

That could very well be.

But fact remains, he completes it at an average clip (ranked 21st out of 32 NFL starters). So either he has to improve on his own or receivers are needed to help mask his deficiency.

Or his receiver is the problem.

 

[enigmatics]

He posted the charts because he read them wrong. They meant everything when (he thought) they showed Tannehill was below average. Now, they don't mean so much.

I read the wrong chart. How dare I! You've never screwed up reading anything in your life right?

 

[SSnowman]

He was top 10 in 2012. #9 at 43%. Nobody cared about such a worthless stat until Wallace came around.

 

[enigmatics]

He was top 10 in 2012. #9 at 43%. Nobody cared about such a worthless stat until Wallace came around.

1 year. Can we claim expectancy of future performance after only 16 games?

The truth is somewhere in the middle of 2012 and 2013.

 

[Nawledge]

I read the wrong chart. How dare I! You've never screwed up reading anything in your life right?

It's not that you read it wrong, it's that you didn't read it. You only saw what you wanted to.

 

[nyjunc]

how would you know, didn't that time correspond with your one or both of your bans (not talking about the several threads you were banned from) so stop stalking me.. .. and buttfumble sucked in '11 not even beating 1 winning team .. At least he beat 1 in 12. And if you want to reference quote, you know I got a million of your ridiculous ones that impugn any credibility about QBs.

LOL@"middle of the pack" in his 3rd season vs Tannehill's then obviously "better than middle of the pack" in his 2nd season despite the 29th avg ranked OL that got him injured in the Buffalo game.

Again, either Tannehill underperformed and buttfumble underperformed worse, or buttfumble was "average" and Tannehill was "better than average" Oh and according to the best coach on the field, Mike Westhoff, buttfumble was an incidental passenger on any busses that made it to the postseason whether on their own merits or via charity from Bill Polian and the 14-0 Colts starters. And he was never top ten.. just the "ish" part of it.

just so we are clear, you brought up Mark not me.

I just checked your post history, there is a gap for a few weeks. it's not rocket science but you always deflect your stalking ways.

stop worrying about meaningless rankings. Both mark and Ryan failed to end '11 and '13, the difference was Ryan's D played much better and gave Miami a chance and mark at his worst late in the year led his O to much more points than Ryan.

 

[enigmatics]

It's not that you read it wrong, it's that you didn't read it. You only saw what you wanted to.

I read it wrong. I didn't see the word "rate" as I was looking thru it. I assumed it was about accuracy because that was the word I used as the search parameters when I googled for it.

It's irrelevant though. It doesn't change where Tanny stacks up and why the improvement is necessary.

 

[Nawledge]

I read it wrong. I didn't see the word "rate" as I was looking thru it. I assumed it was about accuracy because that was the word I used as the search parameters when I googled for it.

It's irrelevant though. It doesn't change where Tanny stacks up and why the improvement is necessary.

Actually...based on Tom Brady's percentage it's not really necessary. Playoffs every year yet below average.

 

[Wildbill3]

except you didn't. you provided links but not links saying the things you claimed.

you can fool some, you can't fool me.

some of us maintained the OLine was a problem the entire year, and we were winning despite it's shortcomings. I just didn't bother crying about it game after game because it was too ****ing obvious the oline was a huge problem.

 

[nyjunc]

some of us maintained the OLine was a problem the entire year, and we were winning despite it's shortcomings. I just didn't bother crying about it game after game because it was too ****ing obvious the oline was a huge problem.

I disagree with you. I saw most of the games, your OL the 2nd half was pretty good- at least good enough. I saw an OL dominate our DL twice, no one else did that to us.