catch22
New Mexico Fin Fan
Tannys post game, just in.
http://www.miamidolphins.com/multim...nference/bb237da8-9090-40c8-83a2-480ecc468f0a
http://www.miamidolphins.com/multim...nference/bb237da8-9090-40c8-83a2-480ecc468f0a
Tell me again how Tannehill is a bust.
- Thread starter The Goat
- Start date
- Status
Well, as always, I'm happy to consider a better objective case. You got one?
You are assuming I wish to make a case that is directly inverse to yours. I do not, and never have.
Yup. But the amount of pages that thread has shows it isn't just the OP's opinion.
SB Dreamer
☠️ Banned ☠️
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2006
- Messages
- 536
- Reaction score
- 0
Either way it is petty to start deflecting off topic with the use of grammar pointing.
Hey...how about that OL play huh? Looked better today than they have all season with those two losers gone.
Last edited by a moderator:
All I'm saying is that the objective data I'm talking about are what prevent us from declaring him a success right now. Are you saying you agree with that? Because if so, I don't see why there would be a reason to portray that data as being biased by me somehow.
As I said before, the play where he stayed in bounds was at the end of a run after he took off. That is different than dropping back to pass and rolling to the sideline still looking to pass as opposed to knowing he's running.
Fair. I do have it in me to be a #### when I get fired up, and am accused of things that I haven't done.
My bad. To be fair, "reigns" and "reins" isn't the worst confusion in the world.
---------- Post added at 08:21 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:20 PM ----------
No.
What I am saying is that you are not objective in your data selection. You are also in error in stating that I am declaring him a success. I am just sating that he is not a bust.
There's going to be a bell curve-type distribution of perceptions with regard to just about anything concerning the team, and in my experience here those kinds of threads tend to be driven by the small percentage of people at either tail of the distribution, in this case the "Tannehill is a bust" folks versus the "Tannehill is God incarnate" folks.
It's a debate driven by polarized opinions going in, and those opinions get even more polarized as the debate ensues, which fuels it even further.
Nice interview.
I didn't see any point at which he declared himself to be the heir to Marino.
awfulwaffle
☠️ Banned ☠️
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2010
- Messages
- 739
- Reaction score
- 2
Yes, just like how the D gave us plenty of chances earlier this year, but Tanny failed. Best example was last week against the Bucs. You are a troll and should understand football a bit more before you post.
Actually I never said anything about whether you consider him a success. I realize that you're saying he's only not a bust.
And again, I'm happy to consider data selections that people consider to be more objective, although I can't imagine how one would go about finding and selecting variables that are more "objective" (and relevant) than those correlated with winning.
I think your portrayal of what I do would have merit if I selected meaningless variables, i.e., those that have nothing to do with winning, and portrayed Tannehill as performing extremely poorly on the basis of them.
And that can be done, actually, but I haven't done it. I stick with the variables that have the most meaning and relevance in terms of winning, since that's what I want this team to do.
Oh the irony....
But there aren't ANY stats in a team game that can be absolutely attributed to a single player. Every player's performance is affected by the other players on the team.
---------- Post added at 08:39 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:37 PM ----------
Football is a team game. Tannehill hasn't scored any points on his own. Scoring is a team stat.
---------- Post added at 08:40 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:39 PM ----------
He was crowned the heir to Dan Marino when he was drafted.
---------- Post added at 08:41 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:40 PM ----------
No. That's about right.
---------- Post added at 08:44 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:42 PM ----------
Well, as always, I'm happy to consider a better objective case. You got one?
Watch the F'n games..... objectively......
I think if you look here:
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/leaders/pass_rating_career.htm
...you'll find what you consider to be a valid measure of a quarterback's ability, given how strongly the list correlates with the consensus perceptions of the ability of the QBs on it.
Now of course you can go through the list and pick out the exceptions to the rule, such as Shaun Hill and John Elway, but if you're looking at the rule rather than the exceptions to it, I think you'll find that what you're looking at is a valid measure of a QB's ability, given that the QBs widely considered to be "very good" or "great" are at the top of the list, and the ones considered to be worse fall lower on the list, generally speaking.
Now, that measure also happens to be strongly correlated with winning in the NFL. So now what we have is: 1) a measure of a QB's ability, that 2) strongly predicts winning in the NFL.
When you then use that measure to evaluate Ryan Tannehill's performance, you have a powerful tool in my opinion to determine just how well he's playing, in a way that has huge relevance to today's game.
---------- Post added at 07:47 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:45 PM ----------
How will I know whether I'm biased in my subjective impressions?
- Status