Rank Tannehill Among Young QB's?

[j-off-her-doll]

How many QB's in NFL history got drafted by a stacked team and started as rookies. Usually rookie QBs only start on bad teams.

Roethlisberger's first two season consisted of 98 QB ratings, YPA of close to 9, records of 15-1 and 11-5, a trip to the conf championship and a SB victory. Everybody who watched that team realized that Ben was acting as a game manager on a run first offense and a dominant defense.

Sound familiar?

You want to rank Wilson ahead of the guy that was better (by your measures) in his first two season and has been to two more SBs (winning one) since his first. Now doesn't that sound absurd?

Quick note on Wilson and Big Ben, I made the comparison earlier in the thread, but Wilson has 800 pass attempts in his first two seasons; Roethlisberger had 563 in his first two seasons. Without factoring in Wilson's rushing, Seattle asked more of Wilson than Pittsburgh did of Roethlisberger. To drive home the point, Wilson has accounted for 57 TD's in his first two seasons - compared to Roethlisberger's accounted for 38 TD's in his first two.

The bigger point, though, is that protecting your young QB - the way that Seattle is - shouldn't discredit his accomplishments. Roethlisberger and Brady are all time greats. For a time (might still hold true), no QB averaged more points per game in the playoffs (in NFL history) than Big Ben. When you look at at the trajectory of Wilson's career, all signs point to continued success and improvement.

The other interesting note is that neither Roethlisberger nor Brady have won a SB since becoming "the" guy (the focal point). When their teams relied on them less, they won 5 SB's combined in 9 seasons. After their teams asked them to be the "focal point," they have 3 SB appearances and zero wins in 14 seasons.

I'd rather win SB's than see my QB throw the ball 500-600 times per season.

No matter how much you attempt to discredit Wilson for going to a stacked (7-9) team, it doesn't change the FACT that his performance has been historic. Big Ben is the closest thing to Wilson, and - as shown above - he was not asked to do nearly as much.

 

[hoops]

Lot of screens? I was BEGGING for screens last year. Tannehill only had ONE 1-step-drop pass all year long. I really grew to dislike Sherman a LOT by the end of the year.

Too many non move athletes on the oline last year to have a very effective screen game...so many limitations with that unit

 

[FinfanInBuffalo]

Quick note on Wilson and Big Ben, I made the comparison earlier in the thread, but Wilson has 800 pass attempts in his first two seasons; Roethlisberger had 563 in his first two seasons. Without factoring in Wilson's rushing, Seattle asked more of Wilson than Pittsburgh did of Roethlisberger. To drive home the point, Wilson has accounted for 57 TD's in his first two seasons - compared to Roethlisberger's accounted for 38 TD's in his first two.

The bigger point, though, is that protecting your young QB - the way that Seattle is - shouldn't discredit his accomplishments. Roethlisberger and Brady are all time greats. For a time (might still hold true), no QB averaged more points per game in the playoffs (in NFL history) than Big Ben. When you look at at the trajectory of Wilson's career, all signs point to continued success and improvement.

The other interesting note is that neither Roethlisberger nor Brady have won a SB since becoming "the" guy (the focal point). When their teams relied on them less, they won 5 SB's combined in 9 seasons. After their teams asked them to be the "focal point," they have 3 SB appearances and zero wins in 14 seasons.

I'd rather win SB's than see my QB throw the ball 500-600 times per season.

No matter how much you attempt to discredit Wilson for going to a stacked (7-9) team, it doesn't change the FACT that his performance has been historic. Big Ben is the closest thing to Wilson, and - as shown above - he was not asked to do nearly as much.

So funny that you would use that qualifier while attempting to discredit people for using the same qualifier with Wilson. Hypocritical much? You bristle at the notion that less was asked of Wilson than other QBs and then point out that less was asked of Roethlisberger in the same post. BTW, Roethlisberger's first two years exceed Wilson's on the most important measures (Wins, playoff success, and YPA).

You actually ranked Wilson higher than Ben (who was more successful) because he played a larger role in the offense. All while claiming that playing a smaller role in the offense shouldn't discredit the accomplishments......... W-----T------F????

As usual with your claims, they are never quite true or consistent. Roethlisberger did win a SB after taking a larger role in the offense. He threw nearly twice as many passes during the season when they won their second SB. While the Pats haven't won the SB since Brady became the dominant QB, they have been to two SBs and two conf championships and there is that little 16-0 thing that they accomplished too. I can't think of anyone that believes Brady and Roethlisberger are not better QBs now than during their first two years. The entire F'n world acknowledges that Tom Brady was a better QB in 2007 than he was in 2001 DESPITE not wining the SB in 2007. Why? Because football is a team game to everyone except the Tannehaters on this site.

Finally, as I have already stated, the FACT that Brady and Roethlisberger went on to assume a larger role doesn't change the FACT that they had a smaller role earlier in their career. It doesn't change the FACT that Wilson has had a smaller role so far in his career. It also doesn't guarantee that Wilson will successfully assume a larger role himself.

 

[j-off-her-doll]

Noting differences is not the same as discrediting.

On the bright side, you're getting your wish.

 

[FinfanInBuffalo]

Noting differences is not the same as discrediting.

On the bright side, you're getting your wish.

This is why I can't stand debating with people who are dishonest or illogical. Twice, in this thread you contradicted yourself on your position simply because of who the position was being applied to. No other reason. Pathetic. You argue exactly like junc does.....

 

[nyjunc]

As has been stated.....the 85 Jets suffered half their sacks in the 5 losses...including 10 in the season opener....not the same situation.

Randall Cunningham was sacked Alot due to his style of quarterbacking...not the same situation.

ok and Ryan had 7 in the Buffalo loss, same type of deal.

The bottom line is Ryan had chances to make plays and win games and he failed. if not for the D keeping them in most games they would have won closer to 4 than 8 and they should have won 10.

 

[BlueFin]

No...not the same deal...the Jets 10 came in week 1 not week 15...clearly Miami's line struggled in all phases consistently all year...Bottom half of the league in rushing and poor pass protect.

The Jet were 12th in the league in 85' in rushing with over 2300 yards......Miami had 1400 in 2013.

The Jets suffered 32 of their sacks in only 5 losses.

So it's not the same, Miami all year struggled running the ball and in pass protect...as well as being bad stopping the run.

The 2013 Dolphins were not a playoff team because they weren't good enough....it's as simple as that.

 

[BlueFin]

And......oh yeah....the 85' Jets were a top defense.

3rd in points allowed....3rd in rushing yards allowed.

So the two teams don't compare.

85' Jets clearly a playoff team...who started poorly in week one and had sack issues in their 5 losses.

13' Dolphins were not.

 

[nyjunc]

No...not the same deal...the Jets 10 came in week 1 not week 15...clearly Miami's line struggled in all phases consistently all year...Bottom half of the league in rushing and poor pass protect.

The Jet were 12th in the league in 85' in rushing with over 2300 yards......Miami had 1400 in 2013.

The Jets suffered 32 of their sacks in only 5 losses.

So it's not the same, Miami all year struggled running the ball and in pass protect...as well as being bad stopping the run.

The 2013 Dolphins were not a playoff team because they weren't good enough....it's as simple as that.

we went over this the other day.

The jets were sacked 7 or more times 3 times(7,7,10), Miami once(7)

The Jets won 2 games where they were sacked 6 and 7 times, 5 sacks was the most allowed in a Miami win


Miami had 7 of their sacks in week 16 being shutout

in 8 losses Miami was sacked 30 times, 3.8 per game. Not an astounding #.

Miami allowed 2 or less sacks in 5 of 16 games, the '85 jets in 5 of 16 games.

Very similar.


You guys abandoned the run game but had the ability to run.

Our yardage #s were greater b/c we ran more.


Our top 2 backs(Freeman Mcneil/Johnny Hector) vs. yours:

NYJ: 439 attempts- 1903 yds, 4.3 YPC
Mia: 286-1115, 3.9 YPC

not that different except for the attempts.

O'Briend was sacked 62 times in 488 attempts. 1 every 7.8 attempts
Ryan 58 in 588 attempts. 1 every 10.1 attempts

 

[nyjunc]

And......oh yeah....the 85' Jets were a top defense.

3rd in points allowed....3rd in rushing yards allowed.

So the two teams don't compare.

85' Jets clearly a playoff team...who started poorly in week one and had sack issues in their 5 losses.

13' Dolphins were not.

our D was 3rd in pts allowed, yours 8th, it was about a 4 PPG difference and considering teams score more now than in 1985 the D's were pretty similar especially since your D almost carried you into postseason.

Both should have been playoff teams, our QB was able to overcome, yours was not.

 

[Digital]

No way...even the Great Tom Brady gets killed behind the pass protect we had last year...if you can't understand that I can't help you.

This wasn't a playoff team last year...attrocious pass protect...couldn't run the ball and couldn't stop the run.

Is that your definition of a playoff team?...Maybe in lala land...not in the NFL.

I don't expect the Tannehill or Dolphin haters to ever get that or admit it.

That's it in a nutshell.

In 2012 we recorded the fewest takeaways in Miami Dolphins history. In fact, in that Indy win where Luck had over a 100 rating we dropped 3 INT's. The ones to Sean Smith and Karlos Dansby were harder to drop than to catch. Either one wins that game. We got rid of both players, replacing them with Brent Grimes (BOOM) and Danell Ellerbe (bust?). The 2013 team fixed that massive problem and produced a decent amount of takeaways.

Our OL was spotty for Tannehill's first year and overall subpar. In 2013 we lost our best OL (Long), best blocking and catching TE (Fasano), best run threat (Bush), and top two TD producers (Bush and Fasano). Our blocking crumbled and Tannehill was behind one of the NFL's 10 worst OL's ever at allowing sacks. They also couldn't open up run lanes without putting in 7 blockers and catching teams off guard.

Now we have a completely new OL. IF this fixes the OL problem like last season's overhaul has fixed the takeaways problem, we are a playoff team. If it doesn't work, we will be hard pressed to make the playoffs.

None of that is because of Tannehill. None of that will change if Tannehill makes the next step up. But, if the OL improves enough to approach an average NFL OL, then Tannehill could very well be the difference maker.

 

[BlueFin]

our D was 3rd in pts allowed, yours 8th, it was about a 4 PPG difference and considering teams score more now than in 1985 the D's were pretty similar especially since your D almost carried you into postseason.

Both should have been playoff teams, our QB was able to overcome, yours was not.

Hello...McFly?

Stopping the run is a key measure of a defense and critical...you do understand that right...your not that football ignorant are you?

85' Jets clear top 10 defense and #3 overall in points and RUSHING YARDS ALLOWED.

The 13' Dolphins were bottom half of the league against the run....period.

Clearly the Jets had a much better defense and run blocking line.

Actually....I would say the Jets QB failed in the playoffs miserably by being one and done....this team was good enough to go farther.

So he didn't get it done in reality.

 

[nyjunc]

Hello...McFly?

Stopping the run is a key measure of a defense and critical...you do understand that right...your not that football ignorant are you?

85' Jets clear top 10 defense and #3 overall in points and RUSHING YARDS ALLOWED.

The 13' Dolphins were bottom half of the league against the run....period.

Clearly the Jets had a much better defense and run blocking line.

Actually....I would say the Jets QB failed in the playoffs miserably by being one and done....this team was good enough to go farther.

So he didn't get it done in reality.

They also faced the 4th fewest rush attempts in the league


The only thing I see that is clear are all the excuses for Ryan, he had a chance to make plays and get his team in the playoffs and he failed. His D did all they could to keep them in the race, they tried to carry him but it was too difficult.

Ken O'Brien was far from a great QB but despite 4 more sacks in 100 LESS attempts he managed to get his team in the playoffs needing 11 wins to do so while Ryan couldn't do it needing 9.

 

[roy_miami]

This debate comparing the 85 Jets team and the 2013 Dolphins team is going to go nowhere. Sacks diminish your chance at success but they don't make it impossible. Had Ryan Tannehill eluded the sack at the end of the first Buffalo game and made a play we win the game and go to the playoffs with 57 sacks. We could have won the Jets game too and been 10-6 with 57 sacks. Each individual sack can affect you chances to win a game and the more you take the higher the odds that they will in fact cost you games. Its kind of like the more unprotected sex you have the likelier you'll get pregnant, but you could get pregnant on the first try or you may get lucky (or unlucky?) and never get pregnant. The number of encounters does not guarantee anything either way.

 

[roy_miami]

Not sure if its true or not but on NFL Netowrk Sapp said the only QB to throw more TD passes than Wilson in his first two seasons was Dan Marino.

:hello:

-historic passer rating stats
-got to be first or second in win percentage
-super bowl victory
-100+ rating in the superbowl
-second all time in TD passes over first 2 years
-two for two in going to the playoffs
-got to be first or second in playoff winning percentage
-18-1 home field record (I think, may be 19-0)

Finfaninbuffalo's reaction: :refuse: