See, now this is rational discussion. Thanks.
And yes, I did. It appeared in 2016 that he was becoming that guy. The Rams game in particular made me confident that he was about to take the next step. He never did, and it sucks.
BUT
Your comparisons are actually pretty relevant to the conversation at hand. You won't find me arguing against Russell Wilson, but he's certainly had a hell of a running game and consistency in the FO in his career. As much as what he does is fantastic, they don't rely on him to do it alone. The Seahawks led the league in rushing percentage last year...by a wide margin.
The other two? Philip Rivers might be the poster child for a QB who should absolutely, positively be viewed as an elite QB, but isn't in some circles. And I think most people would agree that one of the major reasons he isn't? Is because he's had an absolute **** offensive line for most of his career.
He has a sub-500 career in the playoffs. He's led the league in interceptions two out of the last five years. You know where his offensive line ranked in those two years? 29th and 32nd. The three seasons his team has had losing records in the regular season? He was sacked 49, 40, and 36 times...the most in his career. And I like Rivers. But he can't do it by himself, and when his line sucks? It *affects* him. And he doesn't overcome it. The only time he's advanced more than one game in the playoffs? 2007, when he was only sacked 22 times. You look at his stat lines? Average. He had a decent line, and Tomlinson running the ball.
Deshaun Watson? Like him, and another pretty good comparison. A lot of people would try to point to the 2014 Tannehill season as a comparison to the 2018 Watson season in individual performance (it wasn't as good, but it was close), but the one that mirrors it to me is the 2013 season. Sophomore season, and Tannehill got the ever-loving holy **** beaten out of him. So did Watson last year. And no, I don't think that Tannehill has ever shown quite the ceiling that Watson has, but it's not going to matter if they don't start protecting him. The major difference between those two TEAMS? Houston could run the ball and stop the run. Miami couldn't do either.
And what happened to Watson in the playoffs? He was running for his life, he had no protection, the Texans couldn't run, couldn't stop the run, kept getting put in third-and-long situations, and couldn't convert. The Texans were 3-13 on third down, and they got smoked. Sound familiar?
The point of this isn't that I think Tannehill was a better QB than either of them. I don't. But you're arguing that Tannehill's offensive line play shouldn't be considered in his career...that he should have somehow elevated above that, no matter WHAT. That's just crazy. Rivers and Watson are pretty decent examples that you can't win on a regular basis all by yourself. It's not "making excuses." It is what it is. People may very well look at Rivers after his career is done and say "Hell, stop making excuses for the guy. He couldn't get the job done." And that's bull****. Football is the ultimate team sport. Nobody should pretend that Tannehill wasn't flawed, or that he would have been the best QB in the game with a great line. But nobody should pretend that he was set up to succeed, either. He wasn't. He was put in some of the worst situations possible, and his O-Line was a big part of that. He simply wasn't good enough to overcome all of that. Oh well, let's move on to the next Fins QB, and hope this FO isn't the complete cluster that the previous two were.
And not to get off the beaten path too far, but there's another guy in Indy who's had his career pretty drastically affected by poor O-Line play. And if they don't get it together soon, they might be having that exact same conversation about HIM in a few years.
Last edited:
