Tannehill and Wallace | Page 7 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Tannehill and Wallace

lurking said:
What on earth are you talking about, Tanny was running for his life, did you not see VW on his a$$ interrupting that timing thing you speak of. Wallace caught the ball but got lazy and didn't drag or stab the landing.
Click to expand...
I acknowledged that - I'm saying in general I think he waits too long to let it fly which is why the deep balls are often late. I was giving him a bit of a pass on this play though a guy w a quick release would have hit that earlier and for six.
 
royalshank said:
I acknowledged that - I'm saying in general I think he waits too long to let it fly which is why the deep balls are often late. I was giving him a bit of a pass on this play though a guy w a quick release would have hit that earlier and for six.
Click to expand...

Again what are you talking about. Wallace wasn't even out of his break when VW was on his a$$, and if you think he could have put up an easy lob before the break revis would have never bit on that double move. Use your head.could the pass been thrown better.yes. BUT Wallace should have had his feet in bounds.
 
dolpns13 said:
So with that being said, IYO it is the OLmens fault if a RB runs through a small hole and gets the ball stripped.

---------- Post added at 08:39 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:37 AM ----------




No, passing and running are two different things.

The RB has control of the bar from the handoff (assuming that goes correctly).

The analogy you are trying to make with the RB would be this:

Is it the QB's fault if the placement of the ball on the handoff is too high or too low and causes a fumble.
And the answer is yes.


the entire point of the argument is about ball placement. Proper placement at the handoff from the QB helps prevent fumbles because it allows the runner to keep his eyes ahead, and ensur ethe ball is tucked in.

Poor placement from the QB on the handoff would make the RB look down & take time to correct the mis-placement, leaving him vulnerable to a hit he is not ready for.

Ball placement on the pass is the same thing, and as I said earlier:
Because of the ball placement, even though wallace had control, it took him too long to be able to look up field at the defenders coming becuase he was still trying to correct for the pass behind him. Had the pass been in front his eyes would have been on the defenders and fumble unlikely too happen.

With that being said not all passes will be perfect, and WR need to adjust to a non-perfectly thrown ball. My response is really just saying that RT didn't leave Wallace in the best position NOT to fumble, or drop the ball.
Click to expand...
 
Joe Rose asked Philbin about it this morning on the radio.

Philbin said the throw could have been better ("six inches outside"), that the effort on the catch could have been better, and that the pass protection could have been better to help the QB make a better throw.

:idk:
 
The great QBS understand trajectory, accuracy, touch, situations... Bad to average qbs just throw the ball to the WR. Remember Henne how he would throw the ball with no touch and just bullets. No matter if the WR was open or covered or in the flat he would throw the ball hard and fast, giving the WR a difficult ball to catch...the great Qbs ala, brees, rogers, brady, peyton.. know how to throw the ball efficient with the right touch and accuracy when the play is there.. Theres absolutely no need to through the ball hard when your wr is wide open all by himself... the qb has to know about the defense too.. you can't lead your wr with your eyes then throw the ball behind the wr.. your putting the guy in a tough spot and risking injury... you can't just look at it black and white.. just throw the ball and catch.. yeah if its just you and the wr out there but tannehill has to understand ball placement.. he throws the intermediate routes well...but he is inaccurate when it comes to placing the ball where it needs to be...its not always about the WR. now wallace missed a few passes off his hands that inexcusable.. but that fumble would not have happened if the ball was in front of wallace..and the sideline pass to wallace would have been complete if it was in bounds...you have to know your personnel.. wallace is not calvin johnson. Is it too much to ask of tannehill to throw the ball accurately now?
 
Those saying its wallace's fault is somehow not accepting the fact that the balls thrown are inaccurate...tannehill is a professional he deserves the same criticisms as wallace..not just wallace alone.. criticize wallace on the passes that bounce off his hands that he should catch.. not the ones ur asking the guy because he makes a lot of money to spin 180 to catch a pass and some how magically continue running and hold onto the ball after being lit up by a defender...or expecting a super fast wr to reach out of bounds to catch a ball and tap two feet...its doable but it can be made much easier if tannehill was better at it.

---------- Post added at 02:26 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:25 PM ----------

No one talks about the pass wallace grabbed in the end zone between 2 defenders one being revis.. i believe the wr next to him was more open than wallace.. the pass was forced but accurate enuff to fight for.. super risky but wallace deserves some credit... or was that all tannehill?
 
I'm sorry, but the people who do nothing but apologize for Mike Wallace's inconsistent play are just as bad as the people who apologize for every mistake of the quarterback.

Quite frankly, it's embarrassing.
 
and yes people have talked about the TD for wallace, but in other threads. We arent talking about that play here, so it is irrelevant.
 
napsndreds said:
No one talks about the pass wallace grabbed in the end zone between 2 defenders one being revis.. i believe the wr next to him was more open than wallace.. the pass was forced but accurate enuff to fight for.. super risky but wallace deserves some credit... or was that all tannehill?
Click to expand...

That wasn't a bad read. That was an aggressive read and throw. And as you witnessed, it paid off, as the receiver caught the ball for a touchdown. People have talked about that. QB made a very aggressive throw and his receiver made a great play to score a touchdown. Kudos to Wallace for that.

But you know what NOBODY is talking about? Mike Wallace fumbled twice in that game. Not just the one he lost, but the one that went out of bounds. But that wasn't Mike's fault either, right? Mike gets paid 17 million dollars to get behind Revis, but apparently he doesn't get paid 17 million dollars to hold on to the ****ing football. Not his job, man.
 
J. David Wannyheimer said:
I'm sorry, but the people who do nothing but apologize for Mike Wallace's inconsistent play are just as bad as the people who apologize for every mistake of the quarterback.

Quite frankly, it's embarrassing.
Click to expand...

The point is Mike Wallace at this point in his career (not to mention his demeanor) isn't about to change his stripes. So it's not about apologizing for him as he's clearly a flawed receiver. It's about accepting WHO he is and expecting our QB to adjust to him.

I mean isn't it a touch of lunacy to sit there week in and week out throwing our hands up in the air wondering why Wallace didn't do something that he's shown he's simply not capable of doing? Really? People are that shocked?

Seems like some want deflect away from what the common sense answer is: Wouldn't it be more realistic to expect our young, "developing" QB to learn to play to the strengths of the skill players around him? Wouldn't that be easier than asking the flawed Mike Wallace to be something he's not?

Of course, I could be crazy. Let's just keep forcing the ball to Wallace in spots he's is terrible with ..... because it's worked up to this point right?
 
"We know Mike Wallace can't catch the football with his hands, loses focus and gives up on plays, isn't particularly good at keeping his feet in-bounds, and apparently is fumble prone, too. That's just who he is. QB's fault for throwing him the football."

That's funny, because I don't even think Mike Wallace is a bad football player. I think he is going to be a great player for us this season. But it's absolutely bizarre that people would try to defend him by saying that he can't do pretty basic things and therefore we shouldn't expect him to.
 
J. David Wannyheimer said:
"We know Mike Wallace can't catch the football with his hands, loses focus and gives up on plays, isn't particularly good at keeping his feet in-bounds, and apparently is fumble prone, too. That's just who he is. QB's fault for throwing him the football."

That's funny, because I don't even think Mike Wallace is a bad football player. I think he is going to be a great player for us this season. But it's absolutely bizarre that people would try to defend him by saying that he can't do pretty basic things and therefore we shouldn't expect him to.
Click to expand...

which WR had a better day? wallace had 7 catches for 81 yards and a td, and we ran the ball a lot.
 
napsndreds said:
which WR had a better day? wallace had 7 catches for 81 yards and a td, and we ran the ball a lot.
Click to expand...

Okay, so you're saying that because the gameplan was to target Wallace that this somehow absolves him of some drops and fumbles? Just checking.

This is such a weird conversation for me because I actually like the guy. I think he has started to show some real fire and passion, and I can live with his faults. I hope we keep him here for the remainder of his contract. I think he will earn it.

But come on, dude. You want accountability on the QB, and outside of 1-2 guys who are knee-jerk defensive about #17, you are getting it. Why would you then act the exact same way about #11? Charles Clay and Dion Sims both had bad drops. I think you'd agree those plays were on them, and not the QB, right? Why not the same for Wallace?
 
J. David Wannyheimer said:
Joe Rose asked Philbin about it this morning on the radio.

Philbin said the throw could have been better ("six inches outside"), that the effort on the catch could have been better, and that the pass protection could have been better to help the QB make a better throw.

:idk:
Click to expand...

six inches outside.... from 40 yards away... :lol: jesus christ, Wallace has a tiny catch radius.
 
J. David Wannyheimer said:
Okay, so you're saying that because the gameplan was to target Wallace that this somehow absolves him of some drops and fumbles? Just checking.

This is such a weird conversation for me because I actually like the guy. I think he has started to show some real fire and passion, and I can live with his faults. I hope we keep him here for the remainder of his contract. I think he will earn it.

But come on, dude. You want accountability on the QB, and outside of 1-2 guys who are knee-jerk defensive about #17, you are getting it. Why would you then act the exact same way about #11? Charles Clay and Dion Sims both had bad drops. I think you'd agree those plays were on them, and not the QB, right? Why not the same for Wallace?
Click to expand...

that sideline pass would have made sport center how amazing the catch would have been.. Its like a 10 percent chance of making that catch.. yet its a fail by wallace. wallace isn't known for amazing catches, he's known for his speed and getting open. he's open on every play. get him the ball and put it where it needs to be and I'm good..and for the most part tannehill does except on the deep routes..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom