If you think about it, he wouldn't get nearly the attention he does on GG as he does here for his skewed opposing views. Trolls like to eat.
The Question of Ryan Tannehill - Bill Barnwell
- Thread starter JackFinfan
- Start date
If you think about it, he wouldn't get nearly the attention he does on GG as he does here for his skewed opposing views. Trolls like to eat.
I don't seek attention, my posts demand attention. No matter what board I am on I get attention, again not b/c I seek it but b/c I am knowledgeable and a good poster.
Again, anyone starting made it through college catching balls just fine. If you're open and the QB sees you instead of doing a happy feet dance and then throwing into triple coverage, you'll catch first downs and TDs. That's strictly on Sanchez. Tannehill took 4th and 5th rounders and turned them into productive receivers; You're blaming the receiving corp for Sanchez making them look bad. There's a difference.
As mentioned before, Tannenbaum ignored Terry Bradway's pleas to trade up in the third for Wilson or take him in the second instead of Hill. If Wilson was on that '12 team, with an OL better than his at Seattle, comparable receiving, a respectable 1900 yard running game and his own skillset, it could have as easily been 10-6 as 6-10 Tannehill had no OL protection, no RB protection, no effective TE blocking since Keller which provided Fasano's offensive component but not his blocking) went down, and lost his safety blanket Gibson. Hell in the last game he even lost Hartline! What you think are better weapons is a wide end who runs sloppy routes, can't hold on to balls and doesnt fight either to catch them or break up interceptions, a 4th rounder who Tannehill turned into a 2 time 1000 yarder, Clay a 6th rounder who came into his own because Tannehill helped make look good, Hartline a 4th rounder who did little before Tannehill and Matthews a 7th rounder. If they are to be considered better weapons than what Sanchez had to work with in '12, it's because one QB was capable of making them better and the other bringing them down. And running game? in '12 the jets rushed for 1900, in '13 the fins rushed for 1450.
So if you consider the Fins having better weapons, attribute it to Tannehill and Ireland; if you think the jets had worse weapons attribute it to Sanchez and Tannenbaum.
we averaged 3.8 YPC in 2012, Miami averaged 4.1 YPC last year. no QB could have succeeded w/ our 2012 offense. you guys spent a ton to upgrade the weapons, we had Chaz Schilens starting, you had Mike Wallace. when mark had talent around him he was good and he won, when he had the worst talent in the league he was awful and they still were a playoff contender in dec but they had their only losing season.
maralieus
Lets get those balls deep!!
I'd bet that is probably the major change that he made in Foles last season. Let's hope he can with Tanny too!
where's th'fish
Scout Team
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2006
- Messages
- 2,749
- Reaction score
- 1,156
I'm not fluent in Junc'esse, but here's what it sound like you're saying: "It's not relevant whether they suck or not, but they didn't suck because Jerry is going to start for the Giants so that means they must have played well and even if they suck now it's irrelevant because six months ago, I don't know, I guess they were younger or something just clicked, anyway they couldn't have played badly because they beat New England and were talking about the chance of going to the playoffs and nobody gets excited about going to the playoffs or beats New England if their line sucks, just doesn't happen, and besides having bad players is just an excuse, or maybe having good players is the excuse, I'm not sure, and if they're good it's irrelevant that you get rid of them, because how credible is your excuse if you keep them? Nobody would believe it for a second!"
mark was never good, he was okay one year despite being ranked 28th and Westhoff acknowledging that he was a passenger on that bus, that's the year before he lost the final 3 games to teams with losing records when facing them where with even 8 wins, not one of them was against a winning team 0-4). And that 3.8ypc is more on the terrible QB doing the happy feet dance who after 4 years can't read a defense for ****, and either throws into triple coverage missing the open man or tosses it quickly nearby to the first receiver, namely the TE that he sees without going through his progressions.
or not... What team replaces 4 of 5 starters on a "pretty good" OL? WTF?
This is exactly right. Why the F would the Dolphins have used a first round draft pick on a RT and spent a boat load of money on a LT and brought in 3 guards to compete for starting spots if the last group was pretty good? Is junc implying that the rest of the roster is SOOOOOOOO GOOD that we can tweak the already pretty good parts of the team?
Really, the idiocy is just mind boggling.
serious question- did he make that change or did Chip Kelly?
all that matters is your Ol was good the 2nd half, no one was complaining about them prior to those last 2 games.
here's a quote from you on 11/17:
http://www.finheaven.com/showthread.php?347598-Sam-Brenner&p=1064883298&highlight=#post1064883298
so you don't think the OL was much better now but you did then?
you can complain all you want but the OL didn't throw an INT for TD against Buf and another RZ INT, the OL didn't throw 3 INts and lead the O to 7 pts against us, the OL didn't cost you the TB game and others. The OL obviously was not very good and I don't blame Ryan for everything but I think he had chances to succeed even w/ the OL issues and he failed. AGAIN, I am not burying Ryan forever. He has the opportunity to be a good one but he failed last year when he had a chance to get them to postseason.
SSnowman
Starter
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2005
- Messages
- 1,603
- Reaction score
- 10
We're not talking about who lost the game. We're talking about o-line quality. As mentioned, 7 sacks in one game is not quality OL play. Try to keep up.
junc can type until his fingers fall off. Doesn't matter. Every NFL team tries to improve each off season. They focus on the areas needing the most improvement. Miami is in the process of replacing every offensive lineman on the roster except Pouncey. Case closed. Only an idiot or troll would continue arguing the other side.......
I challenged junc to a bet at the end of last season, before any moves had been made that Miami would replace 4 of their starters on the OL. He, of course, chickened out. He is smart enough to know when he is blowing smoke. He didn't have the balls to back up his claim that the OL was pretty good when he had the chance.
you are great at deflecting, one has nothing to do w/ the other. 3 starters were guaranteed to be gone due to the scandal, another was very old. This has nothing to do w/ whether the OL played well the 2nd half of the year.