Tannehill And Sacks | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Tannehill And Sacks

Billk78

Billk78

Scout Team
Joined
Jul 26, 2006
Messages
2,903
Reaction score
115
Age
46
I'm real excited to be 2-0 so please don't see this as a sky is falling or negative Nancy type post, but something I am curious about.

One thing I wanted to watch closely going into this game was how the O-line would play after the loss of Sitton. So normally with 4 sacks on Tannehill you would assume the pass pro wasn't so good. However, I'm not so sure.

I feel like at least 2 of those sacks were from RT holding the ball too long or not being able to throw it away. Is he trying to play it safe and not throw an INT? Are we trying deep plays so thats why he holds it so long? Or is this (and always has been) a weakness of his?

Or am I wrong and those 4 sacks are indeed on the line? We used a ton of short crossing routes and screens, perhaps to help get the ball out fast.

Anyway, my question to all the resident experts here: Do we have poor pass protection, or is Tannehill just holding the ball too long? Or are the Jets just a tough pass rushing team?
 
any way we can get videos of the 4 sacks?, I also believe there was a 5th but there was a penalty on the jets defense.
 
It’s better to take a sack at times than to try something stupid.
 
NBP81 said:
2 of those I feel were him holding it for too long... But the protection was up and down all game IMO... BUT no OL penalties all game so thats a big plus...
Click to expand...

Fantastic point about no penalties. That was huge. And the Jets had several that put them in some bad spots. May have actually been one of the key stats of the game.
 
I thought the title was Tannehill and snacks and you were going to tell us what Tannehills favorite snacks were or maybe what snacks you eat to watch Tannethrill.

Anyways here's a picture of Doritos.

lays-doritos-3ds-nacho-cheese-corn-snacks-46g.jpg
 
Billk78 said:
Totally agree. But I believe on 2 of the sacks he was already out of the pocket and near the sideline and it wouldve been very easy just to toss it away.
Click to expand...

Only one I remember the he was out of the pocket was the fumble. And he lost it on a pump fake. And that guy was on him so fast I don’t know if he could of safely thrown it away on that one.
 
The loss of Sitton was noticeable, but yes he held the ball too long on some of the sacks. I want to see more of the decisive laser to the tight end on that TD. He got a little more conservative in second half. Did not want to make a big mistake.
 
He did hold the ball too long Sunday. Pocket presence is not something i think he’ll never fully grasp. It’s one of the most uncoachable things in football. You have it or you don’t.

I would like to see Gase call more roll outs for Tannehill though. It was a staple of our offense in 2016 and it seems inexplicably absent in 2018. He throws the ball insanely well rolling out and the threat of tucking and run is very real with RT17. I think this will be an especially good strategy against a Raiders team that will undoubtedly blitz. Gruden’s ego is cracked and he’ll be hunting for sacks Sunday.
 
Last edited:
PBay Fin Fan said:
The loss of Sitton was noticeable, but yes he held the ball too long on some of the sacks. I want to see more of the decisive laser to the tight end on that TD. He got a little more conservative in second half. Did not want to make a big mistake.
Click to expand...

pretty much my take.
 
Billk78 said:
I'm real excited to be 2-0 so please don't see this as a sky is falling or negative Nancy type post, but something I am curious about.

One thing I wanted to watch closely going into this game was how the O-line would play after the loss of Sitton. So normally with 4 sacks on Tannehill you would assume the pass pro wasn't so good. However, I'm not so sure.

I feel like at least 2 of those sacks were from RT holding the ball too long or not being able to throw it away. Is he trying to play it safe and not throw an INT? Are we trying deep plays so thats why he holds it so long? Or is this (and always has been) a weakness of his?

Or am I wrong and those 4 sacks are indeed on the line? We used a ton of short crossing routes and screens, perhaps to help get the ball out fast.

Anyway, my question to all the resident experts here: Do we have poor pass protection, or is Tannehill just holding the ball too long? Or are the Jets just a tough pass rushing team?
Click to expand...

So the Jets having a monster DLine is not one of the choices? Interesting and telling!
 
Billk78 said:
I'm real excited to be 2-0 so please don't see this as a sky is falling or negative Nancy type post, but something I am curious about.

One thing I wanted to watch closely going into this game was how the O-line would play after the loss of Sitton. So normally with 4 sacks on Tannehill you would assume the pass pro wasn't so good. However, I'm not so sure.

I feel like at least 2 of those sacks were from RT holding the ball too long or not being able to throw it away. Is he trying to play it safe and not throw an INT? Are we trying deep plays so thats why he holds it so long? Or is this (and always has been) a weakness of his?

Or am I wrong and those 4 sacks are indeed on the line? We used a ton of short crossing routes and screens, perhaps to help get the ball out fast.

Anyway, my question to all the resident experts here: Do we have poor pass protection, or is Tannehill just holding the ball too long? Or are the Jets just a tough pass rushing team?
Click to expand...

I'm waiting for the all-22 to come out, but I am really certain that some of those were coverage sacks. Our small ass receivers got bodied on the line by Morris Claiborne (top 12 CB per PFF) and Trumaine Johnson.

That first sack is the perfect example of a coverage sack. The offense was in 21 and used the two tight ends to protect on the pass play. I can't remember what the RB did, but I'm almost certain Drake picked up a block, making it max protect. The Jets sent 7 players, but what that meant is that our two boundary WRs were contending with Johnson and Claiborne with safety and LB help. Gesicki whiffing on Adams while Tannehill was buying time really screwed the pooch for us, as our WRs clearly didn't get open or have enough time to get open. Just a broken play across the board and a poor play call (not sure if Tannehill checked into it or not).
 
The Jets front 7 played to shoot the gaps and disrupt early and often, and they did it pretty well, just like last year when we came to the meadowlands. I thought we adjusted well this year and forced them to back off on the constant pressure, and our defense came through for us much better than last year.
Yeah, I do think Tannehill was flustered some by the pressure and the coverages, but all in all we outlasted a physical defense that was bent on shutting us down. Could’ve been better, sure, but it also could’ve been a lot worse.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom