Tanny is a bust

[Atila]

That perspective discounts the importance of quarterback play in the National Football League.

As strongly as quarterback play is related to winning in this league, you can't have a quarterback who is performing below average on just about every objective measure and call him "the least of your problems."

Until you have a quarterback who is performing at least above average, he is your biggest problem, because until you get that issue sorted out, you will very likely not be competitive in this league.

When your team is mediocre, and your quarterback is playing significantly better than the rest of the team, I'd say he is the least of the problems. In other words, if you put an overall average product around him, you would be able to expect at minimum, above average play.

 

[roy_miami]

To take the passer rating (PR) discussion a little further there is only one guy that has multiple seasons with a PR of 100+ that doesn't have a SB: Phillip Rivers, with 4 seasons of them. Think about that, EVERYBODY (and there are quite a few of them) that has two seasons or more with a PR of 100+ has won the SB except only ONE guy.

Another guy is on pace for a second season with a PR of 100+ and his name is Russel Wilson (maybe a good SB wager based on these findings?), Wilson is already the second youngest to do it for a single season behind only RGIII and would be the youngest in the multiple 100+ seasons club by far. Anybody doubting this kid is a star in the making better wake up and smell the coffee.

 

[FSU Truth]

How to Troll 101....consider this a success...

 

[finfan66]

There is no use in saying Tannehill sucks because there are tons of people on this site drinking the Tannehill Kool Aid! (LOL) I agree with everything you said but it doesn't matter because people will always find something else to blame the loses on. He will be just like Henne in a few years - out of football or a backup!

 

[Dmarino110]

No, but calling a QB in the middle of his second pro football season a bust doesn't make you look like the sharpest tool in the box...

plenty of people had given up on beck in his 1st season...plenty gave up on henne in his 1st as well...

 

[slk018]

Hoops mentioned his "progression" on passing plays. he asked what option as Simms in the "progression" when he was wide open.
If you Tannehill lovers were honest with yourselves you would realize there is no such thing as a "progression" with him!!!! Every single throw is pre determined!! That is why he never sees open receivers, he locks on one WR if not open stares until sack/fumble
But he has the ability to make some great throws, I think he is a good leader...Can he learn?? We will find out

---------- Post added at 08:15 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:13 AM ----------

To take the passer rating (PR) discussion a little further there is only one guy that has multiple seasons with a PR of 100+ that doesn't have a SB: Phillip Rivers, with 4 seasons of them. Think about that, EVERYBODY (and there are quite a few of them) that has two seasons or more with a PR of 100+ has won the SB except only ONE guy.

Another guy is on pace for a second season with a PR of 100+ and his name is Russel Wilson (maybe a good SB wager based on these findings?), Wilson is already the second youngest to do it for a single season behind only RGIII and would be the youngest in the multiple 100+ seasons club by far. Anybody doubting this kid is a star in the making better wake up and smell the coffee.

Stars get bigger in the biggest moments they don't shrink...Tannehill has been better this year in the clutch.. KLast year he was the worst in the league at 4qc

 

[Tureo]

With Luck yes, but RG3 hasn't done anything that made me wow.

You asked for "rating" comparsions, don't change it up now that the other 2012 qbs have close to the same rating in 2nd year..

Now that RG3 lost that running ability he hasn't been the same, 9 INTs and 12 tds..About the same as Tannehill.

I really don't understand why the barometer for our QB is a guy who was on crutched months ago. I just don't get why RT is better than RG3 keeps being mentioned. I would hope our guy would be playing better than a guy that just tore his knee. Can we compare him to someone who isn't limping around on a football field?

 

[packfin]

The 2013 o-line is a bust. Jim Turner is a bust. If this line was better, we wouldn't be having these Tanny is a bust threads..

Amen Zach Attach! When RT has time he is very good. I will admit that his pocket presence has to improve and I think it will. There were a few times vs. Bucs that he could have and should have run for a few yards when the field opened up. His long ball is not great and may never be great, but I still believe he can get the job done with O-Line overhaul. Hey Mike Sherman - roll him out more than once a game !!

 

[Strangeworld]

Guys... he pre determines where he is going PRE snap EVERY f'ing time.... He has zero ability to improvise.

 

[Shouright]

When your team is mediocre, and your quarterback is playing significantly better than the rest of the team, I'd say he is the least of the problems. In other words, if you put an overall average product around him, you would be able to expect at minimum, above average play.

The team's record is slightly below average, and the quarterback play is also below average. There is little difference this year from what I expounded on in this thread last year:

http://www.finheaven.com/showthread.php?330125-The-Talent-Surrounding-Ryan-Tannehill&highlight=

In other words, for the argument that the talent around Ryan Tannehill is worse than Ryan Tannehill himself to make sense, it would need to be supported with the finding that overall team play (i.e., the team's record) is significantly worse than would be expected from Tannehill's performance alone.

But we don't see that. What we see is overall team performance that's expected based on Tannehill's performance alone, meaning that the rest of the team is no worse than the average supporting cast in the NFL.

The QB's performance is driving the bus no more or less for this team than it is for others, suggesting that the cast around the QB is no worse than the average cast in the league.

 

[Avigatorx]

I mentioned this in the Mike Wallace thread and wanted to mention it here as well.

From what I have seen so far this season, in addition to the poor O-line play, Tanny isn't helping matters due to his inaccuracy with the deep ball.

He either doesn't have the arm strength to match Mike Wallace's speed, isn't accurate on the deep throws, or a combination of both. As a result, teams aren't scared of Tanny hitting Wallace for the homerun, and are bringing the house. If Tanny can start hitting Wallace in stride with the deep ball, teams will be more cautious, and you'll see him getting pressured a lot less.

He needs to work on his timing with Wallace and start making teams pay every time Wallace beats his man off the line. If he can't, then we don't have the right guy. I still have faith in Tanny, but I need to see the accurate deep ball before this year is over, or I will have to agree with his detractors.

 

[Shouright]

I should have specified that my hypothesis is based on yearly passer ratings (PR) not career. Also should add that its possible average PR is going up over the years with the new rules but I haven't looked into it.

Dan Marino had 2 individual season of 95+ including 14th highest of all time at 108.9

As for Henne inconclusive doesn't mean you have to wait and see, it simply means you can't draw any conclusions from this particular stat. Also, one season of 95+ or 70- doesn't mark you for your career, it just means you were great that year or you stunk that year, but it is an indication. Two years of 95+ almost certainly means you are an elite QB (Marino) and two years of 70- almost certainly means you suck (Sanchez).

There are a few exceptions but most of the guys that had a passer rating of 95+ multiple times are considered elite QBs.

But my main point is this stat is useless most of the time.

You're essentially making the argument that QB rating is unstable, or subject to significant variation over time within the same quarterback. I'm not sure we should say that. Although there may be single seasons that are significantly different for a quarterback in terms of QB rating, I suspect what you'd find is that, past the developmental period almost all quarterbacks are subject to, there is non-significant variation in QB rating, meaning that it's probably a fairly good measure of a stable ability or set of attributes in the player.

 

[Shouright]

To take the passer rating (PR) discussion a little further there is only one guy that has multiple seasons with a PR of 100+ that doesn't have a SB: Phillip Rivers, with 4 seasons of them. Think about that, EVERYBODY (and there are quite a few of them) that has two seasons or more with a PR of 100+ has won the SB except only ONE guy.

Another guy is on pace for a second season with a PR of 100+ and his name is Russel Wilson (maybe a good SB wager based on these findings?), Wilson is already the second youngest to do it for a single season behind only RGIII and would be the youngest in the multiple 100+ seasons club by far. Anybody doubting this kid is a star in the making better wake up and smell the coffee.

And now you're talking about the correlation between QB rating and winning, which is well supported.

What you have with QB rating IMO is a stable measure of a QB's ability (past the developmental period) that's very strongly associated with winning. Therefore we can use that measure alone to determine how well a quarterback is playing at any given time, and how likely his team is to win based on his performance.

Right now we're seeing below average QB play in terms of QB rating, and below average team performance in terms of team record, which is completely expectable based on the relationship between QB performance and winning. In other words, there is no evidence that the talent surrounding Ryan Tannehill is to blame for the team's performance.

 

[Ben Had]

I really don't understand why the barometer for our QB is a guy who was on crutched months ago. I just don't get why RT is better than RG3 keeps being mentioned. I would hope our guy would be playing better than a guy that just tore his knee. Can we compare him to someone who isn't limping around on a football field?

To start with RG3 isnt limping around the field. RT, Luck and Tannehill will always be compared because of where they were drafted. This year RG3 and RT are pretty much equal in all QB ratings... the fins dont allow RT to run like the skins do RG3.

 

[nyjunc]

way too early to say that, he's shown enough that he can be a decent starter in this league. He's still learning and growing, give him a little time.