Spesh
#freespesh
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2007
- Messages
- 15,619
- Reaction score
- 1,272
Opinions are subjective, thus prone to personal bias. Your dismissal of it simply proves how subjective your post is.
Ryan Tannehill: The Objective Evidence
- Thread starter Shouright
- Start date
Opinions are subjective, thus prone to personal bias. Your dismissal of it simply proves how subjective your post is.
Sure thing. :)
finjim
☠️ Banned ☠️
dlockz
Hall Of Famer
Ryan Tannehill is the 19th ranked passer behind the line that is ranked 32nd in pass protection.
He is ranked about the same as our defense
Mike Wallace is ranked 19th in targets yet 48th in receptions
Hell reggie Bush has more total yards than Mike wallace and Lamar Millr combined
My point is Tannehill is far from the lowpoint of this offense
doughbraz54
Club Member
WELLLLLLL, profootballreference has Stafford higher then Peyton so by reading one article I can clearly see Stafford is the better QB. You can't tell me otherwise. It says it right there.
- Joined
- May 15, 2007
- Messages
- 4,100
- Reaction score
- 925
- Age
- 60
This is a counterpoint to another thread that was started this evening on this board, and started merely to provide balance in our current analysis of Ryan Tannehill.
Click on any column heading on this page:
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2013/passing.htm
...or this one:
http://wp.advancednflstats.com/playerstats.php?pos=QB
...or this one:
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/qb
When we do that, we see that Ryan Tannehill is no better than average in comparison to the league's QBs in almost every category, and in some categories he's worse than average.
Now, that leaves us with only two possible conclusions:
1) The statistics on those pages are meaningless, so the fact that Peyton Manning is at the top of the list in almost every category on each page, for example, actually means nothing, and he somehow isn't really the best quarterback in the league right now, or;
2) The statistics are meaningful, and Ryan Tannehill is playing no better than an average (or slightly worse than average) quarterback right now.
Of course we all have the freedom to choose which of those options we'd like to believe, and individual needs and motivations can often trump objective reality, but realize that our options in perceiving the statistics on those pages are confined to the above two.
[video=youtube;kb7WnB-20uA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kb7WnB-20uA[/video]
Dude seriously, you should seek professional help. Your OCD on this matter is really, really bad.
Trucanes99
Active Roster
OP should not be allowed to put 'objective' and 'evidence' next to each other in the same post or thread title.
Trucanes99
Active Roster
Shouright... did you not see the poll I created about "what's the biggest problem with this team"?
Those stats will show you that, from a sample of 200 fans on this site (pretty damn good sample size, actually), very, very few people actually think Tannehill is the problem with this team. There is hope for this board, after all.
Those stats will show you that, from a sample of 200 fans on this site (pretty damn good sample size, actually), very, very few people actually think Tannehill is the problem with this team. There is hope for this board, after all.
vt_dolfan
E tū iho nei, tū iho nei, hī!
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2004
- Messages
- 2,109
- Reaction score
- 4
- Age
- 53
Soo...
You couldnt just bump one of your other 8 thousand threads with your statistical analysis of why Tannehill is average? You may know numbers..but you sure as hell dont know when to just stop.
Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2
Guys the bottom line is that Tannehill fumble the ball in the last 2 games and we loss those games maybe not all on him but it's part of the problem so who cares about statistics.
Remember you are what your record say you are.
Remember you are what your record say you are.
this needs updating but you get the "objective" gist
footnote: Russell Wilson, despite his exceptional mobility sacked 7X (times) last night with 2 substitute tackles and an otherwise decent OL. He needs to go
this needs updating but you get the "objective" gist
footnote: Russell Wilson, despite his exceptional mobility sacked 7X (times) last night with 2 substitute tackles and an otherwise decent OL. He needs to go
Oh God Why....
Someone has a sickness...
Kencoboy
Starter
I agree with the eyeball test and the stats that Tannehill is just average. The question is why?? Is it because of inexperience?? Coaching?? OL issues?? Receivers?? All have had a part in his averageness (if that's a word). Tannehill is either part of the solution or part of the problem...right now it's tough to make that decision based on what he has to work with, and I at least assume from the flashes I've seen that he is not playing to his level of talent because he is set to fail.
As a very mobile Russell Wilson's 2 sub tackles and resultant 7 Rams defensive sacks underscored last night, give him an average OL line and then do a eval reload. Hell, throw in either a seasoned QB position coach or a cerebral Penny-like QB who actually played in the NFL at a high level instead of someone with no NFL experience, 2 years QB'ing at NB and being Mike Sherman's son in law as his credentials for developing a relatively raw valuable asset also, if one wants to be "objective" instead of agenda-driven about it.
2413fanphins
Active Roster
One of my favorite things to do on a Tuesday morning break, is read another one or two star thread... authored by finheavens shouright.