The Question of Ryan Tannehill - Bill Barnwell

[nyjunc]

Point is...how did his Buffalo beating affect his play against the Jets.

so it happened in the 4th qtr, what about the first 3? what about the first time he faced Buffalo?

did he play against us in week 17? he's evaluated on how he played.

---------- Post added at 01:41 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:40 PM ----------

The guy who bumps threads created months ago to point out where somebody said something incorrect is telling people to grow up.

what thread did I bump from months ago?

 

[nick1]

sorry I can't break it down by the first and 2nd half of the season but I found something pretty neat. it breaks down dropback times. lists how many each QB had in increments of equal to or less then 2 seconds, 2.1 to 2.5 seconds, 2.6 to 3.0 seconds, 3.1 to 3.5 seconds, and 3.6 and over

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2014/06/16/qbs-in-focus-time-to-throw/

 

[Sons Of Shula]

he's not baiting. He's pointing out something some of us had argued last year.

Damn seriously you guys are so old with the buttfumble trolling. Stop talking about mark buttfumble for effin' sakes. We know where the conversation leads ........ Which is nowhere. Grow up. We don't need yet another thread derailed into that subject.

ok ...

 

[nyjunc]

ok ...

View attachment 12683

That is pretty funny but off topic. put it in that other thread.

 

[hoops]

i'm glad barnwell talked about the easier reads and better matchups that philly o creates for nick foles...and the fact that he was smart enough to know that miamis oline and phillys are not in the same zip code

no matter what pff #'s say...

 

[nick1]

I will break it down for easier reading with tannehill

under 2 seconds - 210 dropbacks, 0 sacks, time to pressure 1.66 seconds
2.1-2.5 seconds - 185 dropbacks, 5 sacks, time to pressure 2.03 seconds
2.6-3 seconds - 101 dropbacks, 9 sacks, time to pressure 2.49 seconds
3.1-3.5 seconds - 61 dropbacks, 12 sacks, time to pressure 2.49 seconds
3.6 and over - 94 dropbacks, 29 sacks, time to pressure 2.83 seconds

 

[FinfanInBuffalo]

Do you ever think before you post?

Buffalo sacked him 7 times in week 16.

As has been acknowledged...he didn't get it done against the hapless Jets in week 17, though, it's an arguable point of how beat up he was after the punishment against Buffalo and how that may have affected him physically and mentally.

Not to mention the fact that the Dolphins brought in 6 (Albert, James, Fox, Colledge, Turner, Smith) new linemen to fight for 4 starting spots and fill out backup roles. 3 of the 5 starters at the end of last season are gone and the 4th (Brenner) is not likely to make the team. Clearly the team was not happy with the OL that finished the season.

 

[tay0365]

Except that no where in the article did it say that Miami's OL was "pretty good" in the second half of the season. It does say this though:

But he does put Sanchez in the Problem section, so basically Junc is wrong about his QB, but still way off on Miami's O-line problem last year.

 

[dolphone]

I will break it down for easier reading with tannehill

under 2 seconds - 210 dropbacks, 0 sacks, time to pressure 1.66 seconds
2.1-2.5 seconds - 185 dropbacks, 5 sacks, time to pressure 2.03 seconds
2.6-3 seconds - 101 dropbacks, 9 sacks, time to pressure 2.49 seconds
3.1-3.5 seconds - 61 dropbacks, 12 sacks, time to pressure 2.49 seconds
3.6 and over - 94 dropbacks, 29 sacks, time to pressure 2.83 seconds

29 sacks with over 3.6 seconds? Against 26 *combined* with under 3.5 seconds, that points to the QB...

Are these numbers right?

 

[Sons Of Shula]

That is pretty funny but off topic. put it in that other thread.

Gotcha ...

 

[WVDolphan]

That's the only reason you brought it up, as if to say HAHA I WAS RIGHT GUYS.

And the reason you guys like to deflect is because you can not stand the fact that Junc is correct and has been for a while.

 

[hoops]

there's only 55 sacks on that sacks breakdown missing 3 somewhere so i'd assume those numbers are very wrong

 

[nick1]

29 sacks with over 3.6 seconds? Against 26 *combined* with under 3.5 seconds, that points to the QB...

Are these numbers right?

According to pff. That doesnt add up quite right let me double check my numbers I might not have copied right

 

[Sons Of Shula]

29 sacks with over 3.6 seconds? Against 26 *combined* with under 3.5 seconds, that points to the QB...

Are these numbers right?

This is where stats can be misleading. Just because the sack occurs around 3.5 sec doesn't mean that's the moment he faced the pass rush pressure, just the time of the sack. Very (and quite) possible the line collapsed earlier than that and T-hill was just scrambling for his life before being brought down.

 

[SSnowman]

And the reason you guys like to deflect is because you can not stand the fact that Junc is correct and has been for a while.

If a guy that thinks Sanchez was a good QB and a guy that thought Ireland was a good talent evaluator believe that Tannehill isn't the guy, I'm feeling pretty good about the future.