Tannehill leads the league in sack yardage lost...99 more than #2 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Tannehill leads the league in sack yardage lost...99 more than #2

just quickly looking at the list it doesn't seem to have much correlation with anything, i mean you have cam newton's and andrew luck's and even aaron rodger's name topping that list with russell wilson making guest appearances....

it seems unusually high this year versus years in the past and i can't tell you as to why, but i'd guess it's a combination of tannehill holding the ball a bit too long at times and the offensive line being porous....we're behind the sticks and scoreboard so often this year that defenses are pinning their ears back....

tannehill is a tough sob i'll tell you that much.
 
russianbear said:
just quickly looking at the list it doesn't seem to have much correlation with anything, i mean you have cam newton's and andrew luck's and even aaron rodger's name topping that list with russell wilson making guest appearances....

it seems unusually high this year versus years in the past and i can't tell you as to why, but i'd guess it's a combination of tannehill holding the ball a bit too long at times and the offensive line being porous....we're behind the sticks and scoreboard so often this year that defenses are pinning their ears back....

tannehill is a tough sob i'll tell you that much.
Click to expand...

when you are behind the sticks as much as we are you take deeper drops...and if you get sacked on them it inflates the yards lost number...not to mention Miami has been so shotgun heavy to date this year...function of the offense and the situational play ie so much being behind the sticks
 
Porous offensive line = deeper drop backs = larger sack yard loss...

It's not rocket science. You try and give yourself more room because that should equal more time. Keyword in that sentence is SHOULD and with this line, it doesn't...
 
Krateness said:
Porous offensive line = deeper drop backs = larger sack yard loss...

It's not rocket science. You try and give yourself more room because that should equal more time. Keyword in that sentence is SHOULD and with this line, it doesn't...
Click to expand...

well the lines part of it but you are taking deeper drops so that the routes can develop to the sticks etc...where the line really comes in is in in the plays prior that put you in that down and distance in the first place...but so does the oc who has been fired because of it

and yes the qb if he tries to bail out and gets run down from behind like he has late in blow out games and sacks contributes to it too obviously
 
That stat doesn't convey enough info to really mean anything.

If there were many DEEP TD passes, or long passes, or intermediate passes, or intermediate TD passes, or critical 3rd down conversions

those would all offset that.

but...

if there are none.... :ponder: :err: :unsure: :shakeno:
 
russianbear said:
just quickly looking at the list it doesn't seem to have much correlation with anything, i mean you have cam newton's and andrew luck's and even aaron rodger's name topping that list with russell wilson making guest appearances.... it seems unusually high this year versus years in the past and i can't tell you as to why, but i'd guess it's a combination of tannehill holding the ball a bit too long at times and the offensive line being porous....we're behind the sticks and scoreboard so often this year that defenses are pinning their ears back.... tannehill is a tough sob i'll tell you that much.
Click to expand...
So what if Newton, Luck and Rodgers are near the top...that doesn't mean the data is nearly the same! Miami is in a category all by itself! Miami is 43% higher than the second team!

---------- Post added at 08:55 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:53 AM ----------
tcdrover said:
That stat doesn't convey enough info to really mean anything.

If there were many DEEP TD passes, or long passes, or intermediate passes, or intermediate TD passes, or critical 3rd down conversions

those would all offset that.

but...

if there are none.... :ponder: :err: :unsure: :shakeno:
Click to expand...

It may not point to the exact contributor, but it does mean a lot! It means we suck in multiple facets...the OL, OC, the QB. Nobody is blameless here!
 
Doesn't the safeties count as sacks too? Tack on another 20+ yards
 
Dr. Phin said:
So what if Newton, Luck and Rodgers are near the top...that doesn't mean the data is nearly the same! Miami is in a category all by itself! Miami is 43% higher than the second team!

---------- Post added at 08:55 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:53 AM ----------



It may not point to the exact contributor, but it does mean a lot! It means we suck in multiple facets...the OL, OC, the QB. Nobody is blameless here!
Click to expand...

if you're looking for stats to demonstrate that we suck, there a lot more obvious and relevant ones than sack yardage lost.....
 
absolutely!! I have not once this season witness T-hill avoid a sack. That is horrible! Especially for a former WR.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom