In other words...la, la, la, la, la, la, la....
Why is everybody so quick 2 4get that tannehill was supposed to sit for 2-3 years
- Thread starter phinatic1399
- Start date
In other words...la, la, la, la, la, la, la....
Sure, you could view it that way, or you could view it as my carefully considering the weight to give information based on its level of objectivity and authority. Up to you. :)
Or I could go with the opinion of the coaching staff.... Yes, I think I will agree with the coaching staff over you and Sterling Sharpe.
Until you need to bash them to explain away more poor play from Tannehill.
Wonderful. Sounds like we're done talking, then. :)
russianbear
Club Member
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2011
- Messages
- 5,594
- Reaction score
- 2,017
No one is saying Tannehill hasn't had some poor play this season, no one. WV and Shou, you are both just going to above and beyond measures to continuously convince everyone he sucks. We get it, you don't think he's a good qb. Fine. Great. You guys are like the equivalent of Nyjunc arguing that Sanchez is a talented qb.
When you watch Tannehill this year and last year there are moments of great play and ability, followed by series or moments where you can't believe he could make such a bone headed play. He is a 2nd year QB with less experience than nearly EVERY OTHER QB at the position. As this season goes on there seems to be more and more moments demonstrating his great play and ability, and less boneheaded plays. Whether you guys like it or not there IS statistical progression via yards, TDs, QBR, etc. You can use whatever "correlations" and "avg amount of times pressured" or "sacks when pressured" stats you want, but when I look at HIS stat line, and consider the awful o line play we've had, lack of running game, and injuries....I'm not too concerned about Tannehill. Sorry he isn't elite enough in his 2nd year to impress you.
When you watch Tannehill this year and last year there are moments of great play and ability, followed by series or moments where you can't believe he could make such a bone headed play. He is a 2nd year QB with less experience than nearly EVERY OTHER QB at the position. As this season goes on there seems to be more and more moments demonstrating his great play and ability, and less boneheaded plays. Whether you guys like it or not there IS statistical progression via yards, TDs, QBR, etc. You can use whatever "correlations" and "avg amount of times pressured" or "sacks when pressured" stats you want, but when I look at HIS stat line, and consider the awful o line play we've had, lack of running game, and injuries....I'm not too concerned about Tannehill. Sorry he isn't elite enough in his 2nd year to impress you.
Well, keep in mind that the majority of people here thought Chad Henne was only a "number-one receiver" away from greatness at about the same point in his career. The natural inclination (or said differently, "bias") is to blame other parts of the team for the negative aspects of performance of someone we all know our future hopes are hinging on.
How can we possibly balance that natural inclination? Objective information.
However, I don't care who is convinced by it and who isn't. You're free to believe whatever you want. :)
Too bad you don't have any.
Like I said, you're free to believe whatever you want. :)
Sure, Tannehill plays in a vacuum. He is unaffected by the play of the rest of the players on offense. Poor pass protection, crappy running game, they don't matter. Tannehill should be Peyton Manning right now! wah, wah, wah.
---------- Post added at 10:16 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:15 AM ----------
ditto.
---------- Post added at 10:17 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:16 AM ----------
Nevermind because it is irrelevant. And, stats man, do you have objective information to back this up?
For me it's not the belief that he shouldn't be affected by the rest of the players on offense, but that there is no objective information to support the belief that those other players are performing any worse than average in the league.
Well, we have this, started in August of 2011, well after Henne's second year as a starter:
http://www.finheaven.com/poll.php?pollid=5159&do=showresults
...along with the oft-stated perception at the time, by my recollection, that Henne was only a "number-one receiver" away.
There were 216 responses. I'm sure that is a very small number of the members. I'd be willing to bet that 125 does not represent the majority of posters.
That still doesn't address the fact that what people thought about Henne and how Tannehill is playing are unrelated to each other.
Other than being benched?
How about this:
There are certainly times where Tannehill could get rid of the ball more quickly, but a video breakdown of his pressures and sacks from Weeks 1 through 4 of the 2013 season paints a grim picture for the offensive line.
Tannehill has regularly had far less time in the pocket than he needs to reasonably go through his progressions.
The defenders are often found to be closing in on Tannehill within 2.5 seconds of the snap. That is not nearly enough time to go through progressions.
According to ProFootballFocus.com (subscription required), Tannehill has often been under pressure very quickly after the snap. He's spent 2.5 seconds or less in the pocket on 64.9 percent of his dropbacks, which is the second-highest percentage of such passes in the league.
His 4.3 seconds to scramble on average and 3.6 seconds to be sacked on average are both the sixth fastest in the league in those categories.
As mentioned above, though, it's not about his inability to get the ball out quickly. His 2.28 seconds to attempt a pass on average is the second fastest.
How about this article?
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/film-room/2013/film-room-tannehill-haden
"Tannehill was officially sacked just twice, but his ability was the primary reason why the sack number was so low and why the offense was able to put points on the board. Tannehill, a former wide receiver in college, is quietly a very athletic player who can escape pressure with his feet or throw strikes deep down the field even when throwing from tough body contortions."
"The Dolphins' biggest play of the day showed off Tannehill at his very best. The Bills defense shows a single-high safety look before the snap, but that safety is shaded to one side of the field. This leaves Wallace at the bottom of the screen in single coverage against Stephon Gilmore. Although Gilmore is an excellent man cover cornerback, he is still rusty after missing much of the season recovering from injury.
Even though he has a receiver to that side of the field, Tannehill doesn't look directly at his receiver or at the deep safety. Instead he looks towards the sideline on the opposite side which draws the safety slightly over the hash mark. He looks at the safety and back to the sideline twice before looking back to the other direction for Wallace. Meanwhile, Wallace is struggling to get into his route.
Gilmore initially has excellent coverage by jamming Wallace at the line and then turning so that he is in perfect position to run with him down the field. However, at that point Gilmore’s concentration inexplicably seems to go as he drifts infield while eyeing the quarterback too long. That failure by Gilmore combined with Tannehill's manipulation of the deep safety creates a huge window for Wallace to run into.
While Wallace is getting open, Tannehill is unable to step into the throw because of a defender pushing his blocker into the backfield, and then putting his hand in Tannehill's face as he releases the ball, while his blocker knocks into Tannehill’s feet during his throwing motion. Regardless, Wallace is still given a near-perfect pass to run under as he sprints down the sideline. Plays such as this showed off his poise, but also his athleticism, anticipation, velocity and ball placement."
Last edited by a moderator:
Polls typically don't include a majority of the people whose attitudes they're thought to reflect. Polls are thought to work by sampling what's likely to be true of the larger population, in this case the entire membership of the forum.
Nonetheless, we certainly don't have evidence to indicate that the majority of the forum didn't think Henne would be successful in 2011. If anything, the evidence we do have suggests the opposite.