This will be painful to watch!
- Thread starter number1fin
- Start date
You said roughly 50/50. How is 24 1/2 roughly 50/50? How can a QB be responsible for half a sack?
What a completely untrue statement. The OL was talked about being awful at the Bye Week when he was sacked 24 times in 5 games.
the bye week came after game 5. you won 3 in a row in Dec and were in great shape to make the playoffs, non one was whining about the OL at that point. The only talk about it was bullygate but the OL the 2nd half of the season played pretty well.
truedolfan57
Active Roster
down the stretch? you mean after he was sacked over 50 times? The oline was never good. Like i said, if they made the playoffs, they got no help from the oline.
SiScotty83
Practice Squad
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2012
- Messages
- 229
- Reaction score
- 3
The crux with Tannehill is basically those last two games at Buffalo and the Jets. For me, it isn't. We shouldn't have been in that situation in the first place. Off the top of my head, I think we blew the Tampa game, the Carolina game was stolen off us, we could (maybe should) have beaten Baltimore and I truly believe our D completely gave away the Pats game. That's three/four victories that change Tannehill's season and the perspective we currently look through.
Despite that, we are left with the Buffalo and Jets games.
Now, Buffalo for me is just a terrible, horrendous match up for Miami. Their defensive rush and ability to create pressure against our decidedly bad OL is a recipe for disaster. You need a running game to stop their rush and we just don't have it. That must go in Tannehill's favour. Leaving him in the pocket to pick apart their secondary whilst their pass rush goes at our OL without a run game was, with hindsight, never going to work. I didn't count but how many sacks/fumbles/pressures did they put on our offense ? Geez, I bet it's a heck of a lot. So, in a nutshell, I'm okay with not blaming Tannehill here. He's really left to be a Lone Ranger against that D.
The Jets was different. We'd beaten them once where we ran the damn ball straight at them. We tired their line to the point where their D was done and Tannehill could drop back without the same pressure. He picked them off with ease, Smith was forced to pass and our DL made him look silly. That Jets game was the only time I felt our run game was even mildly effective all year. For whatever reason, we went away from that the second time. We went pass happy straight away and they managed to pressure us consistently. Smith was allowed to play a balanced offense because they controlled the game. Tannehill was poor in this one but I'm more blaming the coaching for that Jets game. I thought our plan against the Jets was poor and lacked intelligence. You had to give that Jets DL and rush respect. You had to be balanced and play patient football. We didn't and we paid the price.
So, yeah I think Tannehill could have done much better at times but mainly, the Bills are just an awful match up for any team without a viable run game whilst the final Jets game was awful all around, from the coaching to the execution.
Despite that, we are left with the Buffalo and Jets games.
Now, Buffalo for me is just a terrible, horrendous match up for Miami. Their defensive rush and ability to create pressure against our decidedly bad OL is a recipe for disaster. You need a running game to stop their rush and we just don't have it. That must go in Tannehill's favour. Leaving him in the pocket to pick apart their secondary whilst their pass rush goes at our OL without a run game was, with hindsight, never going to work. I didn't count but how many sacks/fumbles/pressures did they put on our offense ? Geez, I bet it's a heck of a lot. So, in a nutshell, I'm okay with not blaming Tannehill here. He's really left to be a Lone Ranger against that D.
The Jets was different. We'd beaten them once where we ran the damn ball straight at them. We tired their line to the point where their D was done and Tannehill could drop back without the same pressure. He picked them off with ease, Smith was forced to pass and our DL made him look silly. That Jets game was the only time I felt our run game was even mildly effective all year. For whatever reason, we went away from that the second time. We went pass happy straight away and they managed to pressure us consistently. Smith was allowed to play a balanced offense because they controlled the game. Tannehill was poor in this one but I'm more blaming the coaching for that Jets game. I thought our plan against the Jets was poor and lacked intelligence. You had to give that Jets DL and rush respect. You had to be balanced and play patient football. We didn't and we paid the price.
So, yeah I think Tannehill could have done much better at times but mainly, the Bills are just an awful match up for any team without a viable run game whilst the final Jets game was awful all around, from the coaching to the execution.
Denver with 19
N.O. with 33
but somehow we would have less than 15 with that QB and OC combo? That doesn't even make sense. Obviously Peyton is light years ahead of RT, but to pin 33 of the sacks on him is absurd.
Tannehill vs buttfumble: Accusing vs Excusing!
a) disingenuous; b) hypocritical; c) as objective in agenda as are Fox and MSNBC; d)Trollsmanship; e)all of the above????
a) disingenuous; b) hypocritical; c) as objective in agenda as are Fox and MSNBC; d)Trollsmanship; e)all of the above????
hoops
Tua time!
yeah like you...:rotfl1:
Leave us alone then. Go talk to your Jets friends at GG. I'm sure there's a ton of people there who are experts at the game of football there.
hoops
Tua time!
he stepped right into that one...
P
psfign
again, you only come here to troll. you dont come here to 'debate'. Obvious is obvious.
Boom goes any argument that buttfumble, having lost 13 of his lat 19 and with only 1 non-charity winning season out of 4... would have done better than Geno, let alone taken the '13 Fins to the playoffs. On that worst of buttfumble 7min video.. I counted about 95% of the mistakes, gifting points to the opposition etc were entirely on that 3 year QB.
I'd go to Michael Lohan, Billy Ray Cyrus and Jeremy Bieber for parenting guidance before some "Superfans" for impartial QB evaluations. :idk:
I'd go to Michael Lohan, Billy Ray Cyrus and Jeremy Bieber for parenting guidance before some "Superfans" for impartial QB evaluations. :idk:
You know what they say, "it's better to keep you mouth shut and let people think you are a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt". To bad Junc has opened his mouth more than 27,000 times on this site removing all doubt. It really says something about a person's football IQ when the team he supports fan web page thinks just as bad as or less of his posts/opinion regarding football acumen than that of a division rivals.