Kiper: No more excuses for Tannehill

[JTC111]

That's a valid point, but that leads back to my line of questioning: Was the desired effect of this post to add someone else's perspective, or was it meant to sway the Tannehill supporters? If it was the second option, then this post fails because I don't know of many people who will change their opinion because Mel Kiper thinks that Ryan Tannehill is a disappointment.

I can't speak for the person who posted it, but I doubt there are very many minds that will be swayed due to any single article by any person. Opinions evolve more slowly than that. People watch the games, they read the stat lines, they enter into discussions... all of that factors in and moves the needle in one direction or the other. My guess would be that more minds change after seeing game day performances, although Tannehill is kind of a funny duck. He's capable of delivering a gem on occasion while at the same time he can come out on any given Sunday and lay an odoriferous egg that leaves you shaking your head wondering where's the guy who lit it up last week? Some will be greatly swayed by the gem, but others will be miffed by the inconsistency. Like quarterbacks, fans are a mixed bag too.

 

[PhinsAAA]

I disagree with this. Many of You seem to think that we are trying to absolve Tannehill from any responsibility by bringing up O-Line and Defensive struggles, but that is not the case usually. Most of us freely admit that Tannehill has not played well this season. At the same time, we do try to defend him against the usual suspects who only seem to show up looking for his head on a platter after a terrible performance by adding a little perspective. You have many posters on this site that believe that this is a good football team that is being held back by bad qb play. What we are saying is Yes, Ryan Tannehill has failed to hit open receivers when he has had the chance, but he is not the one being gashed by the opposing team's running game. He is not the one giving up a 58 yard pass to Brandon Marshall on the third play of the game. Ryan Tannehill can't block and he doesn't miss FGs. What we are saying is to stop acting like this team would be on the verge of the playoffs with a different qb. Right now the effort is bad across the board. With the exception of Landry and a couple of others, this entire roster stinks at the moment.

Thank you good post! JTC should read he can't seem to comprehend this it seems


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[FinfanInBuffalo]

No, I agree with the sentiment but there's no way to measure it. Your "1000x" is arbitrary and, imo, exaggerated. I didn't mention that in my previous post because I thought you were simply using an arbitrary number for effect. I didn't think you actually meant to imply that inspiration was quantifiable. For example, it doesn't seem to me that Wes Welker only improved by .1% when he was teamed up with Brady. I know you'll disagree with that, but it's an unwinnable argument because there's no way either of us can prove our opinions are fact; thus, it would be ridiculous to even try. Plus, I've little doubt that the amount one can be inspired varies from person to person, as can the degree to which any given player can inspire others.

You actually think Welker's numbers were better because he was more inspired? Nothing to do with playing with a HOF QB, HOF primary WR, and HOF coach? Nothing to do with playing on a better team? I don't think Welker got faster, stronger, suddenly ran routes better, or caught the ball better simply because Brady was the QB. Did he get more passes thrown to him, under better conditions (e.g. Moss was drawing coverages deep)? Absolutely. Were the passes likely more accurate? Very likely.

I'll concede that some players are better leaders than others. Some maybe even more inspirational. It is my opinion that is insignificant compared to playing with better teammates under more favorable conditions.

In short, (back to the original premise), I don't think players elevate the play of others to any significant degree. It is simply that a better player makes the team collectively better because they are better.

Good debate, though. Cheers.

 

[JTC111]

Thank you good post! JTC should read he can't seem to comprehend this it seems

You make too many assumptions about me. Just because I criticize the guy for his flaws doesn't mean I think he's our biggest issue. I've said several times in different threads that RT isn't our biggest problem. I also recently wrote an explanation as to why I think the contract extension Miami signed him to was the right move.

But just so we're clear on where I stand...
I think RT has some major flaws that make him a less than ideal quarterback. In no particular order they are, a lack of pocket awareness, an inability to hit wide open receivers deep, poor throws on timing routes and fades, and inconsistency. He leaves too many points on the board for me to feel confident with him as our quarterback. That said, we had no choice but to resign him, and you'll not find a post by me complaining that we did. Because of this team's overall lack of talent, we just could not afford to spend draft picks looking for a better quarterback than our very average Ryan Tannehill. For good or bad, extending RT was the thing we had to due, not because of his awesome talent, but because in this league you can't toss average away on a whim. Sometimes even average quarterbacks are difficult to come by.

So there it is, Tannehill is not our biggest problem. And despite what you think I may have said, I've never said he's our biggest problem. Currently, our linebackers and our secondary are much bigger problems, with our o-line right behind them. I'd put quarterback at #4 on my list of problems. But the three units I said are bigger problems each require multiple player upgrades ...more than we're likely to accomplish in the next year or two.

So why does the Tannehill stuff come up so often? Because there aren't any threads where fans are defending our secondary, or our linebackers, or our o-line. We all pretty much know those units are abysmal. You love Tannehill and that's fine. I have no issue at all with that. I don't think he's very good. The inconsistency is particularly frustrating. I have no idea why you and a few others seem to take it so personally when someone isn't as enthralled with RT as you are. I guess I don't understand what it is to be that kind of fanboi.

 

[JTC111]

You actually think Welker's numbers were better because he was more inspired? Nothing to do with playing with a HOF QB, HOF primary WR, and HOF coach? Nothing to do with playing on a better team? I don't think Welker got faster, stronger, suddenly ran routes better, or caught the ball better simply because Brady was the QB. Did he get more passes thrown to him, under better conditions (e.g. Moss was drawing coverages deep)? Absolutely. Were the passes likely more accurate? Very likely.

I'll concede that some players are better leaders than others. Some maybe even more inspirational. It is my opinion that is insignificant compared to playing with better teammates under more favorable conditions.

In short, (back to the original premise), I don't think players elevate the play of others to any significant degree. It is simply that a better player makes the team collectively better because they are better.

Good debate, though. Cheers.

I think it's a combination of all those things but I don't discount inspiration as something inconsequential. You know the old conundrum about the chicken and the egg, right? Perhaps Brady is a HoF quarterback BECAUSE of his ability to inspire others. But clearly we're not going to agree on this, and that's okay.

 

[roy_miami]

You make too many assumptions about me. Just because I criticize the guy for his flaws doesn't mean I think he's our biggest issue. I've said several times in different threads that RT isn't our biggest problem. I also recently wrote an explanation as to why I think the contract extension Miami signed him to was the right move.

But just so we're clear on where I stand...
I think RT has some major flaws that make him a less than ideal quarterback. In no particular order they are, a lack of pocket awareness, an inability to hit wide open receivers deep, poor throws on timing routes and fades, and inconsistency. He leaves too many points on the board for me to feel confident with him as our quarterback. That said, we had no choice but to resign him, and you'll not find a post by me complaining that we did. Because of this team's overall lack of talent, we just could not afford to spend draft picks looking for a better quarterback than our very average Ryan Tannehill. For good or bad, extending RT was the thing we had to due, not because of his awesome talent, but because in this league you can't toss average away on a whim. Sometimes even average quarterbacks are difficult to come by.

So there it is, Tannehill is not our biggest problem. And despite what you think I may have said, I've never said he's our biggest problem. Currently, our linebackers and our secondary are much bigger problems, with our o-line right behind them. I'd put quarterback at #4 on my list of problems. But the three units I said are bigger problems each require multiple player upgrades ...more than we're likely to accomplish in the next year or two.

So why does the Tannehill stuff come up so often? Because there aren't any threads where fans are defending our secondary, or our linebackers, or our o-line. We all pretty much know those units are abysmal. You love Tannehill and that's fine. I have no issue at all with that. I don't think he's very good. The inconsistency is particularly frustrating. I have no idea why you and a few others seem to take it so personally when someone isn't as enthralled with RT as you are. I guess I don't understand what it is to be that kind of fanboi.

Its pretty rare that a coach comes in and has success with an existing QB after the previous staff was fired, and that includes semi-elite QBs like Romo and Rivers. Mora getting fired leaving Peyton Manning for Dungy is the only example I can think of. Tannehill is no Romo or Rivers and the team is more than a few pieces away from competing. I say rip the band-aid off and trade him, like what the Broncos did with Cutler.

 

[JTC111]

Its pretty rare that a coach comes in and has success with an existing QB after the previous staff was fired, and that includes semi-elite QBs like Romo and Rivers. Mora getting fired leaving Peyton Manning for Dungy is the only example I can think of. Tannehill is no Romo or Rivers and the team is more than a few pieces away from competing. I say rip the band-aid off and trade him, like what the Broncos did with Cutler.

I'm not so sure he's all that tradable unless we can find a team that really loves him and believes his ceiling is much higher than we've seen thus far. Unless we find that team, we probably don't get enough for him to make trading him a net gain for us. Whether for good or bad, we're married to him until we get to a talent level where we can afford to spend a decent draft pick on a quarterback. Right now, we have too many more pressing needs. If we're going to become competitive again, we're going to need to spend our high draft picks on other positions. We have an average quarterback but we're sub-average is too many places.

 

[Krateness]

I'm not so sure he's all that tradable unless we can find a team that really loves him and believes his ceiling is much higher than we've seen thus far. Unless we find that team, we probably don't get enough for him to make trading him a net gain for us. Whether for good or bad, we're married to him until we get to a talent level where we can afford to spend a decent draft pick on a quarterback. Right now, we have too many more pressing needs. If we're going to become competitive again, we're going to need to spend our high draft picks on other positions. We have an average quarterback but we're sub-average is too many places.

Isn't it amazing how someone's story is completely rewritten in just four games?

Smdh...

 

[The Goat]

Its pretty rare that a coach comes in and has success with an existing QB after the previous staff was fired, and that includes semi-elite QBs like Romo and Rivers. Mora getting fired leaving Peyton Manning for Dungy is the only example I can think of. Tannehill is no Romo or Rivers and the team is more than a few pieces away from competing. I say rip the band-aid off and trade him, like what the Broncos did with Cutler.

Shula
Levy
Shanahan
McCarthy
Dungy
Coryell
Gibbs

 

[JTC111]

Isn't it amazing how someone's story is completely rewritten in just four games?

Smdh...

I'm not writing RT's story; I'm writing my opinion. And it's not an opinion formed over four games, it's an opinion formed over three seasons and four games. You really should give more thought to your posts.

 

[Krateness]

I'm not writing RT's story; I'm writing my opinion. And it's not an opinion formed over four games, it's an opinion formed over three seasons and four games. You really should give more thought to your posts.

That's hilarious and contradictory. I like to think I give more thoughts than most do. I mean, strictly speaking, Tannehill has done nothing that should lead to people thinking that he couldn't be traded right now. Let alone should be. I'm just still curious as to why anyone thinks that bringing in a new QB with a new coach is going to solve all the other issues existing in this team? I mean seriously? And people think I should put more thoughts to what I post. Yes, lets continue what we've been doing. Plugging and chugging until we find that guy who can play to the level to overcome all of our other shortcomings. Then once that player eventually gets hurt do to our line still being in shambles, perhaps we can revisit this topic and look for the next player to plug into the equation, forever keeping that revolving door swinging...

The correct answer, in case anyone is wondering, is to fix the line before you show Tannehill the door. Otherwise you let a QB walk that you can't even come close to effectively evaluating plus the next guy that comes in is going to be running for his life all the same...

That is why I say

 

[roy_miami]

That's hilarious and contradictory. I like to think I give more thoughts than most do. I mean, strictly speaking, Tannehill has done nothing that should lead to people thinking that he couldn't be traded right now. Let alone should be. I'm just still curious as to why anyone thinks that bringing in a new QB with a new coach is going to solve all the other issues existing in this team? I mean seriously? And people think I should put more thoughts to what I post. Yes, lets continue what we've been doing. Plugging and chugging until we find that guy who can play to the level to overcome all of our other shortcomings. Then once that player eventually gets hurt do to our line still being in shambles, perhaps we can revisit this topic and look for the next player to plug into the equation, forever keeping that revolving door swinging...

The correct answer, in case anyone is wondering, is to fix the line before you show Tannehill the door. Otherwise you let a QB walk that you can't even come close to effectively evaluating plus the next guy that comes in is going to be running for his life all the same...

That is why I say

Maybe you can't properly judge the o-line until we fix the QB?

 

[Vaark]

Maybe you can't evaluate the QB until you properly fix the head coaching. Hopefully we've taken the first step on the journey to determine why a top 12QB could implode so quickly.

 

[JTC111]

I'm just still curious as to why anyone thinks that bringing in a new QB with a new coach is going to solve all the other issues existing in this team? I mean seriously? And people think I should put more thoughts to what I post. Yes, lets continue what we've been doing. Plugging and chugging until we find that guy who can play to the level to overcome all of our other shortcomings. Then once that player eventually gets hurt do to our line still being in shambles, perhaps we can revisit this topic and look for the next player to plug into the equation, forever keeping that revolving door swinging...

The correct answer, in case anyone is wondering, is to fix the line before you show Tannehill the door. Otherwise you let a QB walk that you can't even come close to effectively evaluating plus the next guy that comes in is going to be running for his life all the same...

That is why I say

It really does get a bit tiresome to constantly have to correct people as to what I've actually said. Can you show me a single post where I've said we should get rid of Tannehill?

 

[FinfanInBuffalo]

But just so we're clear on where I stand...
I think RT has some major flaws that make him a less than ideal quarterback. In no particular order they are, a lack of pocket awareness, an inability to hit wide open receivers deep, poor throws on timing routes and fades, and inconsistency. He leaves too many points on the board for me to feel confident with him as our quarterback.

Here is my problem with posts like this. They make absolute claims on intermittent problems and they offer no comparison to other QBs. The implication of these posts are:

1. Tannehill never hit a deep pass, which we know is not true.
2. Tannehill never senses pressure and escapes, which we know is not true.
3. etc.

This particular post lumps fades and timing routes together. Tannehill, IMO, has no problem with timing routes. Fades have not been good this year, but has many have pointed out, fades are a very low percentage throw.

He is called inconsistent a lot, but that claim is almost never (like this one) supported by stats or any kind of comparison to how inconsistent other QBs are. When a post defending Tannehill points out that many of the preferred QBs on this forum have some the exact same issues (supported by facts and professionally written articles), they are ignored.

My other beef is the number of times that detractors of Tannehill claim that he "needs everything to be perfect to succeed". A ridiculous statement because things weren't perfect last season and he performed very well.

I have admitted in several posts that Tannehill has not played as well this season as he played last season. I see no reason to think he cannot get back to last seasons level of play and that level of play was 10-15 in the league under below average circumstances.

Finally, there are several other young QBs playing below their levels from previous years, and I get the impression that none of the detractors feel they should be replaced.