Tannehill is much improved in short passing game in 2nd year

[Fins1971]

so 4 passes over 40 yards in a season and you think he made teams respect the entire field huh...2 of which he converted on...come on 71

never said they respected the whole field. Just stating Pennington was better in his limited opportunities. And his rating was consistent no matter the distance of pass.

Ryan only completed 3 so that is NOT going to make the D defend the whole field either.

The original post was dated back when were were on winning streak and it looked like things were coming together.
I found a positive and wanted everyone to be aware.
I just updated the final games and noticed the glaring regression in deep passes.
Nothing wrong with commenting on 1st post or 2nd. This is a discussion board.

Bottom Line is RT17 won't amount to the QB we need unless he improves his 10 yard plus accuracy.

 

[Shouright]

I'm good. But if I need help being an internet troll, you'll be the first one I call.

Or perhaps you should just focus on balancing the discussion with whatever you have to offer in the way of an objective analysis of Tannehill's performance, since that's what this thread focuses on. That is if you have anything, of course.

Of course if you don't have anything, which I suspect is the case, I suppose it's far easier to take out on me whatever anger you have about the fact that your favorite team's quarterback can't be propped up with anything objective right now.

"If you can't attack the evidence, attack the witness."

 

[Shouright]

i bet you tannehill attempted a whole lot more than 4...no ones gonna respect you vertical if you dont take shots...we just didnt convert...that's the difference...

And I suppose that has nothing to do with Tannehill, correct?

 

[hoops]

never said they respected the whole field. Just stating Pennington was better in his limited opportunities. And his rating was consistent no matter the distance of pass.

Ryan only completed 3 so that is NOT going to make the D defend the whole field either.

The original post was dated back when were were on winning streak and it looked like things were coming together.
I found a positive and wanted everyone to be aware.
I just updated the final games and noticed the glaring regression in deep passes.
Nothing wrong with commenting on 1st post or 2nd. This is a discussion board.

Bottom Line is RT17 won't amount to the QB we need unless he improves his 10 yard plus accuracy.

show me proof in the intermediate range tannehills accuracy is an issue..we all know he missed the deep balls but this offense isn't built around those anyways and we didnt get many vertical ops to begin with cause they didnt trust the protection in anything other than pa...but show me some proof..take the deep balls out of it and give me what you see

 

[rent this space]

Or perhaps you should just focus on balancing the discussion with whatever you have to offer in the way of an objective analysis of Tannehill's performance, since that's what this thread focuses on. That is if you have anything, of course.

Of course if you don't have anything, which I suspect is the case, I suppose it's far easier to take out on me whatever anger you have about the fact that your favorite team's quarterback can't be propped up with anything objective right now.

"If you can't attack the evidence, attack the witness."

he's not the only one to go off topic...

 

[Shouright]

show me proof in the intermediate range tannehills accuracy is an issue..we all know he missed the deep balls but this offense isn't built around those anyways and we didnt get many vertical ops to begin with cause they didnt trust the protection in anything other than pa...but show me some proof..take the deep balls out of it and give me what you see

The problem is that when you're not hitting the deep balls, the short and intermediate accuracy has to be better than normal, and his is not.

You can't "take the deep balls out of it," because they give you part of the context for evaluating his overall game.

 

[Shouright]

he's not the only one to go off topic...

Well, at least that's balanced with about 98% of other posts on my part that provide substantive, topic-related information, as opposed to 0%. :)

 

[Fins1971]

show me proof in the intermediate range tannehills accuracy is an issue.

I did in the Original post, I'm sorry but if you feel 52.6% (70 for 133) with 4 TD's and 7 Ints is good mid range passing (11-20 yards) then you have low standards.

Like you said our offense is based on this type play. And when you only complete 1 of 2 it leaves you in a lot of long 3rd down situation.

 

[tay0365]

For the sake of comparison, Chad Pennington, in 2008, playing for a GM, a head coach, and an offensive coordinator roundly denigrated around here, and with a supporting cast in the passing game consisting of Ted Ginn, Greg Camarillo, Anthony Fasano, and David Martin, did the following:

Chad Pennington
310 attempts
234 completions
1880 yards
75% completions
6.06 YPA
6 TDs
2 INTs
94 QB rating

Chad Pennington
132 attempts
72 completions
1252 yards
54.5% completions
9.5 YPA
6 TDs
2 INTs
95.9 QB rating

Chad Pennington
34 attempts
15 completions
521 yards
44% completions
15.3 YPA
7 TDs
3 INTs
93.8 QB rating

Hey!!! Is that the Chad Pennington that was ineffective in the 1st few games, until the coaches put in a gimmick run offense? Where the following year, after the league had caught up to the wildcat, Penny started to again be ineffective, and Chad Henning actually looked better stats wise.

Penny has the highest completion % for a reason, he is very smart, and is very good with the short stuff, but on skill alone, and being able to attack a defense in all areas, he falls very short.

Tannehill is also very smart, far more athletic, and if we go on just ability, will be able to attack defenses far better on all areas far better...he just needs to be given a little more time from his O-line.

 

[hoops]

I did in the Original post, I'm sorry but if you feel 52.6% (70 for 133) with 4 TD's and 7 Ints is good mid range passing (11-20 yards) then you have low standards.

Like you said our offense is based on this type play. And when you only complete 1 of 2 it leaves you in a lot of long 3rd down situation.

where did that 133 attempts league wide shake out??? cause i'm building a counter

 

[Shouright]

Hey!!! Is that the Chad Pennington that was ineffective in the 1st few games, until the coaches put in a gimmick run offense? Where the following year, after the league had caught up to the wildcat, Penny started to again be ineffective, and Chad Henning actually looked better stats wise.

Penny has the highest completion % for a reason, he is very smart, and is very good with the short stuff, but on skill alone, and being able to attack a defense in all areas, he falls very short.

Tannehill is also very smart, far more athletic, and if we go on just ability, will be able to attack defenses far better on all areas far better...he just needs to be given a little more time from his O-line.

I'd suggest you take a better look through Pennington's performance through the course of that season, after the wildcat was installed in the third game, and see how that compares to his performance earlier in his career, with no wildcat. I've already done that myself and posted it elsewhere, so I'm not going to do it again here.

 

[Shouright]

I did in the Original post, I'm sorry but if you feel 52.6% (70 for 133) with 4 TD's and 7 Ints is good mid range passing (11-20 yards) then you have low standards.

Like you said our offense is based on this type play. And when you only complete 1 of 2 it leaves you in a lot of long 3rd down situation.

Not to mention the interception rate (5.3%), which leaves you with losses.

 

[Fins1971]

where did that 133 attempts league wide shake out??? cause i'm building a counter

Looks close to average.

Rivers has 138, brees has 133, Brady has 135

 

[hoops]

wait a minute...this says december 6th...i thought it was new stuff...what the hell

anyways i would argue that the protection concerns did not allow us to work the intermediate portions of the field as much in advantageous situations...case in point how many stop routes or quick outs vs off coverage with mike wallace did we run for a 6 yard completion...had they trusted the protection more despite the off coverage we would have allowed mike wallace to work more down the field and get after even off coverage dbs with intermediate routes etc and just the same with all our wrs...instead we took what was given in the 1 to 10 range primarily in anything other than pa...whenever we got in long downs and distances well of course the odds are gonna drop especially when teams could pin their ears and get after our pass pro

that would be my argument...and i would think wallace ypc would reflect that this year...fully acknowledging that those missed verticals effect that number as well...but working him mostly underneath coverage

it all comes back to protection and the oline pass pro and run blocking reflecting on how we did things...with some of it being oc gameplan and calls as well...

and also some of it being a 2nd year qb sacked and hit more than any qb in football

 

[tay0365]

I'd suggest you take a better look through Pennington's performance through the course of that season, after the wildcat was installed in the third game, and see how that compares to his performance earlier in his career, with no wildcat. I've already done that myself and posted it elsewhere, so I'm not going to do it again here.

Once the wildcat was brought in, the running game got a huge shot in the arm, teams were more concerned in stopping the run, and a hugely smart and accurate QB like Penny took advantage of that, but teams were more scared of getting beat by the run, then the pass.

Tannehill did not have the luxury of an o-line that gave him time to be able to check the field, an RB/TE that could pickup the blitzing LB/DB, or a running game, yet offenses were far more worried with the passing game, and yet more times then not, still could not stop it.

Not bad mouthing Pennington, the guy was one of the best at what he did.....but he was severely limited, and if you are comparing a limited but hugely experienced Pennington to a hugely less experienced but far more talented Tannehill.....then you are just not going to ever get it.