This actually makes my point. The passer rating increases and drops coincided exactly with Manning arriving/departing, meaning the stat is greatly influenced by the QB play. The way Manning played in 2013 I believe he would have had a good to great passer rating on any team in the league regardless of that teams circumstances, at least 90+ on every team in the league and probably 100+ on the Dolphins.
Of course it is greatly influenced by QB play but it is not a measure of exclusively the QB play. That is the only point that I was making. I am compelled to make that point because of the repeated claims on this site:
<Tannehater> - Tannehill is only an average QB because his QBR is average. Any attempt to compare him to any other young QB is foolish.
<me> - what about Andrew Luck's QBR?
<Tannehater> - well in HIS case his QBR is not indicative of his play.... blah blah blah
While Manning certainly would have been better than Tannehill, I disagree with your belief that Manning would have had a 100+ QBR on the Dolphins. He has posted a 100+ QBR only 5 out of 15 years. IMO, he had better supporting casts every one of the 10 years that he failed to achieve a 100+ QBR. BTW, he has a 71 QBR in his rookie year.....
As far as Luck goes the passer rating stat is just one tool, and for me an 80ish passer rating doesn't mean anything one way or the other. But just like a 87+ passer rating means "he's probably quarterbacking pretty good," so does winning 11 games.
the difference between 81.7 and 87 is splitting hairs.
I believe any of the top QBs in the league would have won 10-12 games on our team the way it was. Your problem is you think that statement is a slight against Tannehill but I actually do understand Tannehill is a second year player and it would be foolish to expect him to play at an Aaron Rodgers or Peyton Manning level.
By top QBs do you mean Brady, Peyton, Brees, and Rodgers only? If you are talking about the top 4 or 5 QBs, I would agree with you, but any more than that, then no, I wouldn't agree.
I'm just dishing out truths as I see them but for some reason in your mind you translate "Russell Wilson played great" to "Ryan Tannehill sucks ass." You're the one with the problem.
That's not what I think at all. What I disagree with is the twisting of the arguments according to the player they are used for or against. There are numerous examples by the "fans" on this site.
Tannehill should be graded on his YPA and QBR. Not so for Luck.
Tannehill should be graded on the team's record. Not so for Newton.
Tannehill should be graded on the inconsistency of his play. Not so for Wilson.
IMO, Tannehill played under the worst conditions of any QB in the league and was not nearly the worst QB.
And for the record the stats are inconclusive so far for me but if Lazor's offense looks for real and Tannehill and a few of our other key players make it through training camp unscathed I will be placing a bet on Miami to win the AFC Championship game at 19-1 odds. And I don't believe I'm one to make foolish bets, with an effective uptempo offense I really believe Miami has a decent shot to go to the SB. So I'm not a "Tannehater," far from it.
Things could not have worked out better for me in 2013, we got rid of Ireland and Sherman while retaining Philbin and the "hot seat" probably reset for Philbin somewhat. I'm not a religious man but I'm hoping it was divine intervention and a sign the future may be bright.
My biggest concern is the possibility of the team giving up on Tannehill before they have put him in a position to succeed. There is pretty much a consensus that he had one of the league's worst receiving corps in his rookie year and the league's worst OL in his second year. That opinion was supported by the team's personnel moves in the two off seasons.
