Why overcomplicate things?

[normaniii]

I would have Bill Lazor study Ryan Tannehill's 2013 game tape and statistics extensively, with the intent of designing an offense that revolves around his strengths while concealing and minimizing his weaknesses, hoping to hell that the 2013 offense itself wasn't designed in that way.

Boooooom! You should send email to All 32 HC's in the league as I bet one hasn't had that theory before.

Please enlighten me on how you would deal with the Offensive line. Maximise their strengths and minimise their weaknesses. Genius!!!

 

[Shouright]

Boooooom! You should send email to All 32 HC's in the league as I bet one hasn't had that theory before.

Please enlighten me on how you would deal with the Offensive line. Maximise their strengths and minimise their weaknesses. Genius!!!

I think our conversation is over, thanks. :)

 

[dlockz]

The only way to maximize potential out of our oline is to basically replace 4 of last year's starters.

 

[normaniii]

The only way to maximize potential out of our oline is to basically replace 4 of last year's starters.

100% agree......which in turn, IMO, will allow RT to also improve, consequently helping Wallace attain more catches & TDs

 

[dlockz]

100% agree......which in turn, IMO, will allow RT to also improve, consequently helping Wallace attain more catches & TDs

Tannehill may or may not improve but at least he was average, our line was putrid rehardless of the people that ignore what their eyes have showed them because PFF says their average.
the majority of our starting ol had negative pff numbers but the same bean counters say they are average

 

[FinfanInBuffalo]

Tannehill may or may not improve but at least he was average, our line was putrid rehardless of the people that ignore what their eyes have showed them because PFF says their average.
the majority of our starting ol had negative pff numbers but the same bean counters say they are average

I think the simple fact is that Tannehill led an average passing offense despite having far below average pass protection, little threat of a running game to keep defenses honest, little creativity on offense to exploit match ups, and no commitment to the run when needed. People are free to interpret what that means about Tannehill's abilities however they wish.

I don't need a bogus correlation analysis to support my opinion. I have 58 sacks, a 26th ranked rushing offense, changes mid season on the OL, and a fired OC to support my opinion.

 

[Shouright]

I think the simple fact is that Tannehill led an average passing offense despite having far below average pass protection, little threat of a running game to keep defenses honest, little creativity on offense to exploit match ups, and no commitment to the run when needed. People are free to interpret what that means about Tannehill's abilities however they wish.

I don't need a bogus correlation analysis to support my opinion. I have 58 sacks, a 26th ranked rushing offense, changes mid season on the OL, and a fired OC to support my opinion.

The problem is that when there's no evidence that Tannehill played better himself when those elements of the team played better themselves, then it doesn't suggest that he's capable of playing any better himself if and when those elements of the team improve in the future.

If you want evidence that Tannehill isn't playing at his ceiling himself, regardless of what the rest of the team is doing, and that his play is being diminished by other facets of the team, then the only way you're going to be able to support that objectively is with data that indicate that he does play better when those other parts of the team play better. Unfortunately those data don't exist at the present time, however.

I want Tannehill to play well just as bad as anybody else, for the sake of this team's welfare in the future, but I'm not going to fool myself into believing his future improvement is some sort of sure thing when the only kind of data-driven evidence in the present that would support that assertion just isn't there.

The team can fire any- and everybody in the front office and on the coaching staff and replace them with geniuses, have five Pro-Bowlers on the offensive line, and trade for Adrian Peterson, and guess what? Tannehill could still be only an average quarterback. There's no evidence in the present to suggest that those sorts of changes would make him play any better than he is currently.