Tannehils Last 5 (The True Definition of a Franchise QB)

[Padfoot]

Not last week.. Tannehill was the only one of his relative "contemporaries" that faced and beat a winning team.

I meant the head to head comparisons against opponent's QB, but even with this here, there are a number of variables that affect each QB's play, it's just a single week, and the Pats had a ridiculous number of players absent on sunday.

I'm not trying to say Tannehill is bad, and I'm certainly excited to see him improving but let's not anoint him one of the better QBs in the league just yet.

 

[Wildbill3]

I meant the head to head comparisons against opponent's QB, but even with this here, there are a number of variables that affect each QB's play, it's just a single week, and the Pats had a ridiculous number of players absent on sunday.

I'm not trying to say Tannehill is bad, and I'm certainly excited to see him improving but let's not anoint him one of the better QBs in the league just yet.

we had a buncha players absent to, and in the fourth quarter we were marching band aides out there to stop tom brady. Point is, except for game one, no team is ever at full strength, and making excuses for why a team won or lost due to injuries is a cop out and completely minimalizes the play of another team. You don't go into battle with the army you want, you go into battle with the army you have.

 

[Padfoot]

we had a buncha players absent to, and in the fourth quarter we were marching band aides out there to stop tom brady. Point is, except for game one, no team is ever at full strength, and making excuses for why a team won or lost due to injuries is a cop out and completely minimalizes the play of another team. You don't go into battle with the army you want, you go into battle with the army you have.

It's not a cop out at all. If someone is going to claim a win or good stats against a 10-3 team is strong evidence that Tannehill is a great QB, then the team that took the field should be an accurate reflection of that record. That was not the case on Sunday, not even close and especially on the defensive side of the ball.

 

[J. David Wannyheimer]

It's not a cop out at all. If someone is going to claim a win or good stats against a 10-3 team is strong evidence that Tannehill is a great QB, then the team that took the field should be an accurate reflection of that record. That was not the case on Sunday, not even close and especially on the defensive side of the ball.

The Patriots have kept reeling off wins even with a ton of injuries. I'm not sure injuries are really relevant here. We're missing basically four offensive starters and our secondary is like an ER waiting room at this point. We're an 8-6 team even with our injuries, and the Pats are a 10-3 team even with their injuries.

Incidentally, that's also why I don't buy the "Pats are done" nonsense. That's still a very good football team.

 

[hoops]

the pats aren't done...they will adjust...but they can't play a bunch of slot wrs on the boundary like they did vs us and against solid corners expect to get the job done...now depth corners yeah they will torch that stuff we put out there at the end of the game...they need to get some of those size wrs back

pats will adjust...they always do...but there's no lombardi trophy without gronk...that one was the dagger

 

[Padfoot]

The Patriots have kept reeling off wins even with a ton of injuries. I'm not sure injuries are really relevant here. We're missing basically four offensive starters and our secondary is like an ER waiting room at this point. We're an 8-6 team even with our injuries, and the Pats are a 10-3 team even with their injuries.

Incidentally, that's also why I don't buy the "Pats are done" nonsense. That's still a very good football team.

And from a team perspective, I agree with you. I'm only disagreeing with those trying argue that Tannehill's wins or stats against his opposing QBs or relative stats and wins compared to other QBs is a strong indication of relative ability. Also, just to devil's advocate a bit further, having Gibson, Keller, Incognito, & Martin doesn't improve the Dolphins offense nearly to the degree that having Mayo, Wilfork, Kelly, and Wilson improves the Pats defense.

 

[roy_miami]

It's not a cop out at all. If someone is going to claim a win or good stats against a 10-3 team is strong evidence that Tannehill is a great QB, then the team that took the field should be an accurate reflection of that record. That was not the case on Sunday, not even close and especially on the defensive side of the ball.

I don't know about strong evidence but 100+ passer rating in the biggest game of his career against a good team is a good sign. His stats since we got one decent cornfed at LT have looked quite nice, especially considering his lack of experience and the fact that we lost Keller and Gibson.

He's just clearing hurdles for me:
He could have easily been another Gabbert--cleared.
The consistency hurdle--maybe not cleared yet but he hasn't had any disastrous games since the Tennessee game, imo anyway.
Franchise QB type numbers--cleared
Winning record--won't be losing for sure, pretty safe to say we'll get to at least 9 wins.

Still have a few hurdles coming up over the next 2 (hopefully 3) weeks so we'll see. For me, I still have him pegged as a calmer cooler version of Andy Dalton on a much worse team but he's starting to separate and will if we win the next two.

I also think it was reasonable to assume it would take Tannehill more time than the average QB to develop into his own, considering his relative lack of experience and the "help" Ireland provided him his first two seasons, the kid is growing in leaps and bounds.

 

[nick1]

I don't know about strong evidence but 100+ passer rating in the biggest game of his career against a good team is a good sign. His stats since we got one decent cornfed at LT have looked quite nice, especially considering his lack of experience and the fact that we lost Keller and Gibson.

He's just clearing hurdles for me:
He could have easily been another Gabbert--cleared.
The consistency hurdle--maybe not cleared yet but he hasn't had any disastrous games since the Tennessee game, imo anyway.
Franchise QB type numbers--cleared
Winning record--won't be losing for sure, pretty safe to say we'll get to at least 9 wins.

Still have a few hurdles coming up over the next 2 (hopefully 3) weeks so we'll see. For me, I still have him pegged as a calmer cooler version of Andy Dalton on a much worse team but he's starting to separate and will if we win the next two.

I also think it was reasonable to assume it would take Tannehill more time than the average QB to develop into his own, considering his relative lack of experience and the "help" Ireland provided him his first two seasons, the kid is growing in leaps and bounds.

Ireland dropped the ball on the oline and RBs, but imagine our WRs with Gibson, Keller and Bins. yikes so many weapons for a defense to contend with. we wanted playmakers and that is what we have even with 2 key injuries

 

[beanh8er]

I don't know about strong evidence but 100+ passer rating in the biggest game of his career against a good team is a good sign. His stats since we got one decent cornfed at LT have looked quite nice, especially considering his lack of experience and the fact that we lost Keller and Gibson.

He's just clearing hurdles for me:
He could have easily been another Gabbert--cleared.
The consistency hurdle--maybe not cleared yet but he hasn't had any disastrous games since the Tennessee game, imo anyway.
Franchise QB type numbers--cleared
Winning record--won't be losing for sure, pretty safe to say we'll get to at least 9 wins.

Still have a few hurdles coming up over the next 2 (hopefully 3) weeks so we'll see. For me, I still have him pegged as a calmer cooler version of Andy Dalton on a much worse team but he's starting to separate and will if we win the next two.

I also think it was reasonable to assume it would take Tannehill more time than the average QB to develop into his own, considering his relative lack of experience and the "help" Ireland provided him his first two seasons, the kid is growing in leaps and bounds.

Are you saying Tannehill reminds you of Dalton, or that Tannehill's ceiling is Dalton's ceiling? Because I think Tannehill is already better than Dalton. Dalton sucks. He's already at his peak.

 

[roy_miami]

Are you saying Tannehill reminds you of Dalton, or that Tannehill's ceiling is Dalton's ceiling? Because I think Tannehill is already better than Dalton. Dalton sucks. He's already at his peak.

Their games are very similar to this point, which is a win for Tanney being a year behind. Personality wise though I much prefer Tannehill, can't stand Dalton or any QB that wears their emotions on their sleeve like that.

 

[Atila]

Dalton is pretty inaccurate... I'd say Tannehill has much better accuracy on short and intermediate routes. Dalton has AJ Green and still plays inconsistently.

 

[phins_4_ever]

Cincy: After the Bengals kicked a go-ahead field goal with 1:43 remaining, Tannehill led a 9-play, 50-yard drive to set up a game-tying field goal with 11 seconds left, sending the game to overtime. Tannehill was 5-for-7 for 50 yards on final driveAlso, did not turn the ball over all game.

SD: Wasn't as impressive as the other games, but did just enough to win. Led the team to a field goal in the middle of the 4th quarter to take a 4-point lead. That drive can't be understated, as SD would have kicked a game winning field goal on final drive, but had to go for a TD instead, but Rivers' final pass was batted down by Grimes in the end zone to secure the win

NYJ: I admit, his first half was BRUTAL, but he came out in the 2nd half to throw 2 TDs, not that he really had to do anything that game because the Jets are so inept.

PIT: He did throw a pick 6, but ensuing possession, Tannehill leads 7 play, 71-yard drive in 3:13 capped by a TD pass to Hartline (RT is 3-5 for 50 yards on drive). Also, after PIT took early 4th quarter lead, Tannehill completed all 3 of his passes for 25 yards on go ahead TD with 4:39 remaining.

My point is, with all the times you can point to the defense for big plays, you can point to just as many clutch moments for Tannehill. Some games, like vs. San Diego, he does just enough to win, some games, like vs. Pitt, he overcomes adversity to get the W, some games, like vs. NYJ, he doesn't have to do much of anything because the other team can screw up a wet dream, and some games, like vs. New England, he dominates and plays better than a future Hall of Famer.

Why do you even bother with this guy? He thinks that Geno played a good game against the Panthers (53% completion percentage and a pick 6).

 

[phins_4_ever]

you are getting ahead of yourself, we'll see. we have been dominated by an all time great in Brady and Ryan will obviously never be half the QB Brady is so we'll deal w/ it.

a) nobody has ever said that Tannehill will be another Brady
b) it is really none of your concern. You have nothing for QB. Nada. You don't even have half of an AJ Feely or Ray Lucas. Worry about your team.

 

[HarryBagpipe]

a) nobody has ever said that Tannehill will be another Brady
b) it is really none of your concern. You have nothing for QB. Nada. You don't even have half of an AJ Feely or Ray Lucas. Worry about your team.

Read first sentence two posts above.

 

[finfan54]

The Green Bay Offense has arrived. Its only going to get better.