I never understand what he is argueing ever either. His opinions and stances are all over the place.

don't kid yourselves, Bess and Hartline are not elite receivers by any stretch. Their numbers were pedestrian before Tannehill started throwing the passes. These guys arent even in the same realm as Julio Jones, Roddy White, Jordy Nelson, Demarius Thomas, Larry Fitzgerald, Reggie Wayne, Calvin Johnson and so-on and so-on....

Hartline has way too many 0 to 2 catch games to ever be considered a #1 WR. His season is inflated by the Arizona game.

Great quarterbacks make receivers look good. These guys are decent, but we lack the punch of elite teams.

smart man Kloiber

Bwahaha he's "great" already. That's precious.

_________________

A one week performance by Clay is a testament to that? Really? So he never misses finding open receivers? What was that triple coverage he threw into in the endzone when he got picked off the 2nd time before we got bailed out on the hit to the head call?

From this thread I've learned that Tanny is already in "great" status and always finds the open man. Why the hell are we 5-6? We should be steam rolling the conference right now.

_________________

Not sure how some people automatically equate yards to talent, when it comes to a WR.....

If they are the only guys being thrown to, I would hope they put up decent stats...

WK gets it. They are good receivers in their respective roles. But those roles on a good offense are as complimentary pieces to your top two threats. Combine that with the fact that you do only have two WRs, and it amazes me that some actual respect this unit.

It's easily bottom 3 in the league, and I challenge somebody to dispute that.

Wait, think about that for a minute. By your admission, they have nobody else besides those two so they should automatically have good numbers. Shouldn't defenses be able to key on the only two receivers we had then, where-by their numbers should be worse?

That is why I'm saying their level of play is better than many give them credit for. As a whole the unit still needs to add a player or two, I'm not denying that element. Sorry, but bottom 3? Not quite.

_________________

Defenses have been stacking the box against the run and playing them man to man outside.

Hartline and Bess win a lot of timing routes on the outside, but D's will take that all day. It doesn't score points our sustain drives consistently, like we've seen over the past....you know....entire season.

Neither make plays after the catch, neither can stretch the field without it being set up by a scripted drive to set it up, neither is of any use in the red zone...

They are solid at what they do, and in Bess's case, very good....but those roles are that of #3 WRs on any respectable offense.

Btw, what has Hartline done the past month? Outside of garbage time against the Titans, he's been shut down.

Wait, all I was reading for the weeks prior to the Seahawk game while Tanny was playing poorly was that teams were backing off because Tanny couldn't beat the zone or flooded coverage.

_________________

The last two weeks prior to Seattle, yes....and look what happened. They played coverage, and nobody got open.

It is pretty clear that the Titans were rushing four and dropping 7 for most of the game and our wideouts had a hard time getting open against that type of defense, but our offensive line also had problems protecting against four rushers.

With better protection and more patience from the QB, those receivers eventually get open. It would also help if the QB "gets them open" with his legs.

Tannehill running against the Seahawks made a huge difference late in the game. Let's see more of that.

_________________

+1

_________________

Even Bess said after the game that Tannehill did a good job of throwing to the open receivers. It's very clear that Tannehill spreads the ball around if possible. He doesn't lock on like your typical rookie. Does he have bonehead moments, yes, but for the most part the kid does a pretty good job spreading it around considering he doesn't have a ton of legitimate targets at his disposal.

Hmm if the piss poor talent is doing good it is because of Tannehill? If Tannehill is doing poor is it because of the piss poor talent?

Who has said we don't need to upgrade the WR position? That is just a made up thing as far as my posts are concerned. Why did you add it except to make a non issue point?

Who is kidding themselves? Please point to the post where I said they are elite receivers. If not why bring it up. This is a non issue concerning my posts.

I know, the line lol Tannehill has already reached great QB status and is making piss poor talent look good.

So are they good or are they piss poor?

They get to have it both ways when it comes to Tanny.



But Tanny's performance in that same game doesn't "inflate" his stats right?

It's funny how you can use one argument against one player, but not the other.

_________________

So are there other positions where yards equal talent? If so is the WR position the only one where that is not true. Are yards any measure of talent at the WR position?

Hartline and Bess aren't. But the unit, compared to the rest of the league, is.

Bess and Hartline are good. The rest are piss poor. Well, strike that. Matthews is a rookie and he looked decent in the one shot he got. I'm going to reserve judgement on him for now. But up until this point he's done very little. Bess is a good slot receiver. Hartline is a good possession receiver. But the rest of the group is below mediocre. We are missing a speedster that can stretch the field and we are missing a big redzone target that can create mismatches in the short field.

So why didn't they put up these types of numbers when Pennington (just applies to Bess), Henne, or Moore were throwing them the ball??? Why has each guy set single game records for yardage and why is each guy on track to break their respective single season records for yardage???

I'll tell you why. First, I'll agree with you that it's not all Tannehill. Despite my belief in the kid I'm not blind that he's a rookie and has his good and bad days. But what we have here is a clear case where two good receivers are finally recognizing their potential because of three things. One, they've got a thin supporting cast that allows them to become the only two viable targets. Two, they're in a receiver friendly system that has tremendous potential to generate yardage through the air. And three, they've got a good young quarterback that understands the system and can sling it. It's that simple.

Bess and Hartline are good, I'm not contesting that. But I won't call them what they aren't, which is great. Each guy has his role, and each guy does it well. But that's it. We've got a solid slot guy and a solid possession guy, but we don't have a speedster or a physical redzone target. Hartline and Bess will never be able to fill those shoes no matter how many yards they get.

watch the games and use your eyes, not the stat sheets.

So your position is that the components of the unit are good but the unit is piss poor? Is this a different position than the one you had on another post where you stated that the weapons on the Phins were piss poor? In that post I don't think there was any mention of units.

Yards are just one component of production. Touchdowns would be another, probably more critical component.

The Dolphins are ranked 31st in passing touchdowns and I would think the lack of playmaking ability at the receiver position plays a huge role in this statistic. Bess and Hartline have one touchdown each for the season. Yes, they are each closing in on 1000 yards, but where are the scores? Where is the consistency from Hartline? One game up, one game down.

And most important of all, where is the explosiveness in the passing game?

_________________

And if Tannehill has good games its because the opposing defense didn't have enough tape on him, the running game took over or he was bailed out by a bad call.

It works both ways here.

Sounds like you mostly want a conversation with yourself. Not sure why you want to include my posts in them.

I am also glad you are not going to call people what, as far as I can tell, no one is asking you to call them. Why you insist on making this a part of your post and include my post in it is, I can only guess, your desire to have a conversation with yourself and are just using unrelated posts to make your points.

Again people are trying to attribute things to my posts which have no bearing on them. Why you insist on doing this I have no idea except maybe to repeat your own thoughts. Which is fine. Why you include my posts in this is baffling.

Thanks for responding to my post by not addressing any of the questions. There seem to be a theme going on of people using my posts as a launching pad to put down their thoughts, that don't have to do with what I am posting.

I hope it is obvious in my post that I did not say that yards is the only measure of talent.

My question is more along the line of getting an answer to a question like ... so if the Phins have 2 WR who have close to 1000 yard seasons does that mean that those 2 Wr have piss poor talent. Because that is how they have been alluded too. If you did not allude to them that way and don't think that is true about them, maybe the post is not for you?

This is why I prefer LG over Samsung, although Sony is right up there as well.

_________________

I quoted what you said and gave what the other side says. Posts get quoted, its not a big deal and not always some shot at the poster.

People need to chill out on the Tannehill topic overall. We've already reached Henne stage 4 battles and the kid only has 10 games under his belt.

I think it is generally understood that when you quote something and then write something after it, it indeed has some bearing on the quoted post.

You did not give the other side of what I said. That is my point. I am not against Tannehill and have not stated the things you said.

Not sure how then you can say you are giving the other side to what I have posted when it is incorrect to do so.

So are you calling for a ban on people discussing Tannehill?

Yards is one indicator, but one that can be misleading with WR's.

For starters whose yardage total will be in the range that Bess and Hartline's will be, TD's and YAC are more important stats. Right now, Hartline produces no after the catch ability at all. Bess does, but not down the field or in chunks. Neither makes plays in the redzone or creates touchdowns for themselves.



When I say the weapons are piss poor, (btw, let's stop using this word, I'm tired of it lol), I don't mean that every single player is a bad player. What I mean is that the supporting cast taken as a whole is a bad one. It's no where near even an average WR/TE unit, in my opinion.

Hartline is a solid guy in his role. So is Bess, and even Fasano...but the role Fasano plays, (or should play), is not that of a #1 TE. Hartline and Bess are possession, 3rd WR's, not starters. Combine that with nobody else at those positions even contributing in the slightest, and I'd classify this as a bad group of players.

When you do get a contribution out of somebody else, (Clay), and the protection actually held up in the 4th quarter, we saw how much better the offense, and Tannehill got.

Ryan has been asked to carry this offense himself way too often, and then gets criticized for not being able to do so against Tennessee and Buffalo. That's why I get a bit frazzled talking about all this. People expect way too much out of a guy that nobody thought would be ready to even play a single snap as a rookie.

I gave exactly the other side. You critiqued someone with those questions and I pointed out what others say about Tannehill catching breaks. No where did I claim YOU said anything about Tannehill. I added something to consider in the overall discussion.

And don't assume I'm calling for ban. But when the same people are butting heads in every thread of whose fault it is or why some success occurred we begin going around in circles that become personal battles. Heck, we even have a name for one side as they are called Tannybots.

This is the problem when topics get to this point. Everyone gets defensive and will do whatever to one up or get the last word. If people chill out more constructive conversation on Tannehill will commence.

lol, that there is right funny.

Point of the matter is ...

This receiving unit is better than people actually anticipated before the start of the year, regardless of what people are doing outside of Bess/Hartline. I mean c'mon I don't think there was soul on this board who thought those two would be close to eclipsing 1,000 yards in the same year. Tannehill has shown flashes of potential and is IMO playing slightly above the rookie learning curve, but he's a game-manager at this fledgling stage. The key to the offense is still the run game and the O-line ...... even with the new fancy WCO being implemented.

I'm hoping a light went on for Charles Clay, that could change the dynamic considerably.

_________________

I did not assume you were calling for a ban I asked a question based on what you posted.

You did not give exactly the other side imo. The opposite of posting about the claim that Hartline and Bess are piss poor players is not Tannehill at least in my opinion. Maybe we will have to agree to disagree about what exactly opposite means.

I was asking questions trying to see if the inconsistencies(imo) of alluding to Bess and Hartline as Piss Poor WR held up under scrutiny. Tannehill just happens to be the QB it could be any QB. They are not primarily about Tannehill. Maybe the chill out needs a look in the mirror. Just because Tannehill name is mentioned it does not mean someone is against him.

Different people are responding to my post about someone alluding to these 2 players as being a piss poor supporting cast on the Phins. You can only quote so many quotes before the site stops letting you do so. If you go back from my original post and follow the whole train of thought between me and that poster maybe it will make more sense.

I think that can be applied to a lot of people.

neither one has any legit size or strength so they're not a factor in the red zone. Neither one can win a jump ball or box out an opposiing defensive back. One is a good slot receiver and the other is a decent #2 receiver. Simple as that. One was a 4th round pick and the other wasnt drafted because they have marginal measurables.