View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Tue Jul 29, 2014 10:08 pm



Reply to topic  [ 71 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
 Adam Schefter: Ryan Tannehill may not be the answer at QB 
Author Message
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 12:48 pm
Posts: 5154
Post Re: Adam Schefter: Ryan Tannehill may not be the answer at QB
swerve13 wrote:
he just put a long ball right on the money during the Niner game to Marlon Moore for a perfect drop, but that won't get mentioned.


You mean kind of like how you don't want to talk about his misses?

I mean c'mon man.

_________________
Image


Tue Dec 11, 2012 11:43 am
Profile
Phinfever Blog Writer
Phinfever Blog Writer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 6:43 pm
Posts: 4447
Location: Wellington, FL
Post Re: Adam Schefter: Ryan Tannehill may not be the answer at QB
At the end of the day whats it really matter how he does, or what he turns into. I see nothing right now that leads me to believe change is coming...

Figure if Schefter is right by the end of the 2014 season we will probably start reading about the jet trips to court the next up and coming college coach, or maybe Gruden will come out of the booth......

But for now, and the next season or two I will assume we are all in with this kid. I will continue to hope he is able to overcome it all and come out on top...

_________________
Caveat: These are the opinions of this user, and may differ from your opinion. Please use common sense before taking offense.
Reply may contain sarcasm


Tue Dec 11, 2012 12:12 pm
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 5:59 pm
Posts: 5115
Post Re: Adam Schefter: Ryan Tannehill may not be the answer at QB
swerve13 wrote:
jammer wrote:
IamPZ wrote:
Hell if Tannehill hits a wide open Hartline on two different occasions in that Patriots game, they're going home crying with the Experts questioning if they're for real and we're holding our heads high with playoff hope.


Can't just keep using one game as an example. In other games he has hit the open guy or put the throw in places where the receiver could make the catch. Just like someone can't keep saying the Seattle game defines Tannehill's season because on several other occasions he blew it in the 4th quarter. That was the funny thing about Schefter's comments, he mentioned every bad game down the stretch but omitted the Seattle game.

Look, you can hedge by adding a good back up but its way too soon to start being definitive on the kid. It might take 3-4 years, but lets have the process play out.


he just put a long ball right on the money during the Niner game to Marlon Moore for a perfect drop, but that won't get mentioned.


Or the sure fire touchdown where Hartline let the defender who was laying on the ground trip him up by the shoelaces.

Nobody wants to talk about the difficult situation Tannehill was in against the 49ers (best D in the NFL in my opinion). They don't want to talk about the lack of a run game he had to deal with. They don't want to talk about how Bess and Hartline had mediocre games. They don't want to talk about the inconsistent blocking he had to deal with all day. They just want to complain about his numbers. They just want to whine about how every other rookie in the NFL that isn't wearing a Dolphins jersey seems to be having a magical season and meanwhile Tannehill is going through typical rookie season struggles.


Tue Dec 11, 2012 8:14 pm
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 12:30 am
Posts: 2201
Post Re: Adam Schefter: Ryan Tannehill may not be the answer at QB
Tell me what the excuse was for the Tennessee game again? ....or most of that pathetic stretch against subpar teams....

_________________
Image
Philbin's countenance exudes confidence!
1984 was so long ago...Will there ever be another rainbow?


Tue Dec 11, 2012 8:33 pm
Profile
Phinfever Lead Moderator
Phinfever Lead Moderator

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:04 pm
Posts: 5752
Post Re: Adam Schefter: Ryan Tannehill may not be the answer at QB
Or the sure fire touchdown where Hartline let the defender who was laying on the ground trip him up by the shoelaces.

Or when he hit Bess for a sure TD and the 30 yrd line tripped him up.


Wed Dec 12, 2012 2:37 am
Profile
Phinfever Global Moderator, Design Admin
Phinfever Global Moderator, Design Admin

Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 8:24 am
Posts: 3812
Post Re: Adam Schefter: Ryan Tannehill may not be the answer at QB
wkloiber13 wrote:
The run support is on par???? What are you talking about???? Washington and Seattle have elite 1,200 yard runningbacks on their team. Wilson and RG3 are scrambling quarterbacks. They have an obvious advantage over us in the running game. The only team you can make an arguement is for the Colts, but they're a team that is obviously content to let Luck throw the ball 50+ times a game so he can learn (something I think we should do with Tannehill at least twice before the season is over).

While I do think we have a solid trio of runningbacks who can obviously tote it, we lack the offensive line to consistently open up the rushing lanes for them. Until our offensive line can execute the zone blocking system we'll never be up to par with these other teams (Redskins / Seahawks).

Also, with regards to the passing game. While Fasano is quietly having a nice season, the rest of our receiver corps is far behind these other teams. Our wideouts (Hartline, Bess, Moore) have three touchdowns combined. Every single one of those teams has at least two receivers who have three touchdowns or more by themselves. It's obvious that our wideout group is lacking and very far behind these other teams. We're very thin at the positions. We have a slot wideout (Bess) lined up on the outside on more than half of our plays because we lack a second outside option. You don't see things like that on those other teams. They have three to four clearly established receivers on each of those teams.

Your arguement is very thin in my opinion. Tannehill's situation is extremely different to these other rookie quarterbacks. While he's been able to have a little success this year, it's still clearly obvious that he needs help, especially on the o-line and at receiver.


Sorry but I have to respectfully disagree. Tannehill can scramble too, it's not like he played WR or anything for a few years.

I'm not saying that his supporting cast isn't weak, he needs help, it's obvious, I'm just saying that the supporting cast for these other rookies is nothing lights out like a lot of people make it out to be. Their teams are very much rebuilding as well and are very much searching for that young talent too.

I love Ryan Tannehill, I bought his freakin jersey man, I just think that sometimes you gotta take off the rose colored glasses and look at it for what it is. Right now, at this point in the 2012 NFL season, Tannehill is being outplayed by the other QB's in his class. Will that change? Can that change? Sure as hell can, and I sure as hell hope so...

I personally think a lot of the problem is very much on the coaches too, I'm not just throwing it all on Ryan. Reggie Bush is underutilized, young guys like Matthews and Egnew aren't seeing any time in a blown season, Charles Clay, despite the offensive coordinator openly saying he wants to get him more involved, still isn't involved enough.

We don't have that big WR or that speed WR so we have to compensate. If Reggie isn't in there as a tailback, he should be lined up at WR. There is absolutely no reason that our best player on offense, without argument, should ever be on the bench aside from fatigue. To quote PhinsRock... PERIOD!


Wed Dec 12, 2012 6:57 am
Profile
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 5:10 pm
Posts: 5431
Location: Topsfield, MA
Post Re: Adam Schefter: Ryan Tannehill may not be the answer at QB
IamPZ wrote:
Sorry but I have to respectfully disagree. Tannehill can scramble too, it's not like he played WR or anything for a few years.

I'm not saying that his supporting cast isn't weak, he needs help, it's obvious, I'm just saying that the supporting cast for these other rookies is nothing lights out like a lot of people make it out to be. Their teams are very much rebuilding as well and are very much searching for that young talent too.

I love Ryan Tannehill, I bought his freakin jersey man, I just think that sometimes you gotta take off the rose colored glasses and look at it for what it is. Right now, at this point in the 2012 NFL season, Tannehill is being outplayed by the other QB's in his class. Will that change? Can that change? Sure as hell can, and I sure as hell hope so...

I personally think a lot of the problem is very much on the coaches too, I'm not just throwing it all on Ryan. Reggie Bush is underutilized, young guys like Matthews and Egnew aren't seeing any time in a blown season, Charles Clay, despite the offensive coordinator openly saying he wants to get him more involved, still isn't involved enough.

We don't have that big WR or that speed WR so we have to compensate. If Reggie isn't in there as a tailback, he should be lined up at WR. There is absolutely no reason that our best player on offense, without argument, should ever be on the bench aside from fatigue. To quote PhinsRock... PERIOD!


All good points. Doesn't seem like they have the weapons or the strategy to get this team in a winning position. I personally think they don't want Tannehill scrambling too much for the exact reason Washington went into panic mode this weekend with RG III. We've seen what injuries have done to mobile QBs (Vick, Culpepper etc) and I think they want Ryan developing a pocket presence rather than bad habits that could get him killed. Unfortunately the results haven't been thrilling.


Wed Dec 12, 2012 7:16 am
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 12:48 pm
Posts: 5154
Post Re: Adam Schefter: Ryan Tannehill may not be the answer at QB
jammer wrote:
All good points. Doesn't seem like they have the weapons or the strategy to get this team in a winning position. I personally think they don't want Tannehill scrambling too much for the exact reason Washington went into panic mode this weekend with RG III. We've seen what injuries have done to mobile QBs (Vick, Culpepper etc) and I think they want Ryan developing a pocket presence rather than bad habits that could get him killed. Unfortunately the results haven't been thrilling.


We need designed roll outs, boot legs, plays to move the pocket. The kid throws 20 times better on the move. That's who he is.

_________________
Image


Last edited by Rock Sexton on Wed Dec 12, 2012 8:28 am, edited 1 time in total.



Wed Dec 12, 2012 8:03 am
Profile
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:59 am
Posts: 20612
Location: Miami, FL
Post Re: Adam Schefter: Ryan Tannehill may not be the answer at QB
IamPZ wrote:
I'm just saying that the supporting cast for these other rookies is nothing lights out like a lot of people make it out to be.


But their supporting casts are better, more proven, more experienced. Sure, the Colts don't have worldbeaters on offense, but Reggie Wayne is a future Hall of Famer.

The Redskins don't have one guy that stands out, but they have 4-5 viable receiving options on every play.

The Seahawks don't have a gamebreaker at receiver, but they have two WRs with 7 TDs and tight ends that can make players.

And sorry but the running game is not on par with the Redskins or Seahawks. I hate to be harsh, but you don't know what you're talking about when you say this.

Case and point: Washington has the number ONE ranked running game in the NFL, Seattle number FOUR.

Miami?

Try number NINETEEN.

Where is that on par?

_________________
Image


Wed Dec 12, 2012 8:21 am
Profile
Phinfever Global Moderator, Design Admin
Phinfever Global Moderator, Design Admin

Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 8:24 am
Posts: 3812
Post Re: Adam Schefter: Ryan Tannehill may not be the answer at QB
Rich wrote:
IamPZ wrote:
I'm just saying that the supporting cast for these other rookies is nothing lights out like a lot of people make it out to be.


But their supporting casts are better, more proven, more experienced. Sure, the Colts don't have worldbeaters on offense, but Reggie Wayne is a future Hall of Famer.

The Redskins don't have one guy that stands out, but they have 4-5 viable receiving options on every play.

The Seahawks don't have a gamebreaker at receiver, but they have two WRs with 7 TDs and tight ends that can make players.

And sorry but the running game is not on par with the Redskins or Seahawks. I hate to be harsh, but you don't know what you're talking about when you say this.

Case and point: Washington has the number ONE ranked running game in the NFL, Seattle number FOUR.

Miami?

Try number NINETEEN.

Where is that on par?


They also have their QB's running the ball to add to their stats. Reggie is averaging 4.7 ypc... Lynch and Morris... 4.9.

If we give the ball to Bush then it's on par. Maybe that was a bit of an overstatement to say it's on par with them right now... but with the right utilization we're talking about Bush as a top 5 back and heading to Hawaii.


Wed Dec 12, 2012 8:28 am
Profile
Phinfever Blog Writer - Fridays
Phinfever Blog Writer - Fridays

Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2010 12:52 am
Posts: 5704
Location: Lancaster, PA
Post Re: Adam Schefter: Ryan Tannehill may not be the answer at QB
Rock Sexton wrote:
jammer wrote:
All good points. Doesn't seem like they have the weapons or the strategy to get this team in a winning position. I personally think they don't want Tannehill scrambling too much for the exact reason Washington went into panic mode this weekend with RG III. We've seen what injuries have done to mobile QBs (Vick, Culpepper etc) and I think they want Ryan developing a pocket presence rather than bad habits that could get him killed. Unfortunately the results haven't been thrilling.


We need designed roll outs, boot legs, plays to move the pocket. The kid throws 20 times better on the move. That's who he is.


I really have to question the coaching this year. Philbin/Sherman have left me scratching my head too much this season. I think there's more blame on their heads than on Tannehill. I mean why would you wait 13 weeks to throw the ball to Reggie Bush? Why don't they ever design any plays to go to Rishard Matthews. They do Tanny no favors by making it obvious that the ball is going to either Hartline or Bess every down. Then there was the whole thing with pulling the starters on the final New England drive. At this point I have more faith in Tannehill than I do with Philbin or Sherman.


Wed Dec 12, 2012 10:26 am
Profile
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 5:10 pm
Posts: 5431
Location: Topsfield, MA
Post Re: Adam Schefter: Ryan Tannehill may not be the answer at QB
swerve13 wrote:
Rock Sexton wrote:
jammer wrote:
All good points. Doesn't seem like they have the weapons or the strategy to get this team in a winning position. I personally think they don't want Tannehill scrambling too much for the exact reason Washington went into panic mode this weekend with RG III. We've seen what injuries have done to mobile QBs (Vick, Culpepper etc) and I think they want Ryan developing a pocket presence rather than bad habits that could get him killed. Unfortunately the results haven't been thrilling.


We need designed roll outs, boot legs, plays to move the pocket. The kid throws 20 times better on the move. That's who he is.


I really have to question the coaching this year. Philbin/Sherman have left me scratching my head too much this season. I think there's more blame on their heads than on Tannehill. I mean why would you wait 13 weeks to throw the ball to Reggie Bush? Why don't they ever design any plays to go to Rishard Matthews. They do Tanny no favors by making it obvious that the ball is going to either Hartline or Bess every down. Then there was the whole thing with pulling the starters on the final New England drive. At this point I have more faith in Tannehill than I do with Philbin or Sherman.


I'm getting flashbacks of Henning.

And I agree Rock, his biggest flashes come when he's on the move and chucking it down field. I just don't want him running around like a maniac (cue the Benny Hill music) in some type of spread or option offense where he is getting drilled by defenders.


Wed Dec 12, 2012 12:09 pm
Profile
Snorton Norton
Snorton Norton

Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2010 6:52 pm
Posts: 257
Post Re: Adam Schefter: Ryan Tannehill may not be the answer at QB
phinsfansc wrote:
I would like to see Ryan have more weapons to work with before I would make a definite conclusion on that.

He definitely has room to improve from an accuracy standpoint among other things, but he has shown a lot of promise as well.



True...

But the colts sucked so bad without luck they lost twice to the jags. Now with luck they win. You think that's because of other weapons in that case? But I agree a lot of talent is missing for the whole dolphin team.


Fri Dec 14, 2012 9:49 pm
Profile
Snorton Norton
Snorton Norton

Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2010 6:52 pm
Posts: 257
Post Re: Adam Schefter: Ryan Tannehill may not be the answer at QB
TommyNoleFin wrote:
phinsfansc wrote:
I would like to see Ryan have more weapons to work with before I would make a definite conclusion on that.


Here's your answer. Luck, RGIII, and Wilson all have the weapons on offense they need to make plays. Tanny doesn't. And that's the bottom line.


Without Luck, the colts lost twice to the jags. Where were these weapons you speak of? luck is their weapon.


Fri Dec 14, 2012 9:52 pm
Profile
Phinfever Blog Writer - Fridays
Phinfever Blog Writer - Fridays

Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2010 12:52 am
Posts: 5704
Location: Lancaster, PA
Post Re: Adam Schefter: Ryan Tannehill may not be the answer at QB
Rick wrote:
TommyNoleFin wrote:
phinsfansc wrote:
I would like to see Ryan have more weapons to work with before I would make a definite conclusion on that.


Here's your answer. Luck, RGIII, and Wilson all have the weapons on offense they need to make plays. Tanny doesn't. And that's the bottom line.


Without Luck, the colts lost twice to the jags. Where were these weapons you speak of? luck is their weapon.


Curtis Painter was just that bad. If they had even a Matt Cassell or Christian Ponder type they would have pulled out 5 wins instead of 2. (if Peyton would have played last year they would have won their usual 10 games again.


Fri Dec 14, 2012 10:37 pm
Profile
Phinfever Blog Writer
Phinfever Blog Writer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 6:43 pm
Posts: 4447
Location: Wellington, FL
Post Re: Adam Schefter: Ryan Tannehill may not be the answer at QB
Rick wrote:
TommyNoleFin wrote:
phinsfansc wrote:
I would like to see Ryan have more weapons to work with before I would make a definite conclusion on that.


Here's your answer. Luck, RGIII, and Wilson all have the weapons on offense they need to make plays. Tanny doesn't. And that's the bottom line.


Without Luck, the colts lost twice to the jags. Where were these weapons you speak of? luck is their weapon.


There is a huge talent drop off from Luck to Painter as far as I see it. We do not however, Matt and Ryan were a close race in camp from what I remember, and there was a true comp. I dont think there was any comp in either RGIII or Luck.
It was no secret RT was raw and needed work, thats why I find many of these posts against him to be a bit much. It seems some people had higher expectations than others.

_________________
Caveat: These are the opinions of this user, and may differ from your opinion. Please use common sense before taking offense.
Reply may contain sarcasm


Sat Dec 15, 2012 8:19 am
Profile
2014 Phinfever VIP!
2014 Phinfever VIP!

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 10:17 am
Posts: 3271
Post Re: Adam Schefter: Ryan Tannehill may not be the answer at QB
10acjed wrote:
It was no secret RT was raw and needed work, thats why I find many of these posts against him to be a bit much. It seems some people had higher expectations than others.



What posts against RT?

Do you consider someone who notices his mistakes and points out that he needs to do better as against him or is it other types of posts?

Are there a lot of them?

What constitutes a post against him?


Sat Dec 15, 2012 10:51 am
Profile
Phinfever Global Moderator
Phinfever Global Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 6:53 pm
Posts: 3659
Location: Palm Beach County, Florida
Post Re: Adam Schefter: Ryan Tannehill may not be the answer at QB
AQNOR wrote:
10acjed wrote:
It was no secret RT was raw and needed work, thats why I find many of these posts against him to be a bit much. It seems some people had higher expectations than others.



What posts against RT?

Do you consider someone who notices his mistakes and points out that he needs to do better as against him or is it other types of posts?

Are there a lot of them?

What constitutes a post against him?


someone who notices his mistakes and points out that he needs to do better

_________________
Extend Philbin!
Enough already , this is the best regime in the NFL ...by far!!
2014 Lazor Powered... THE MAKING OF A DYNASTY!!


Sat Dec 15, 2012 8:02 pm
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 5:59 pm
Posts: 5115
Post Re: Adam Schefter: Ryan Tannehill may not be the answer at QB
IamPZ wrote:
wkloiber13 wrote:
The run support is on par???? What are you talking about???? Washington and Seattle have elite 1,200 yard runningbacks on their team. Wilson and RG3 are scrambling quarterbacks. They have an obvious advantage over us in the running game. The only team you can make an arguement is for the Colts, but they're a team that is obviously content to let Luck throw the ball 50+ times a game so he can learn (something I think we should do with Tannehill at least twice before the season is over).

While I do think we have a solid trio of runningbacks who can obviously tote it, we lack the offensive line to consistently open up the rushing lanes for them. Until our offensive line can execute the zone blocking system we'll never be up to par with these other teams (Redskins / Seahawks).

Also, with regards to the passing game. While Fasano is quietly having a nice season, the rest of our receiver corps is far behind these other teams. Our wideouts (Hartline, Bess, Moore) have three touchdowns combined. Every single one of those teams has at least two receivers who have three touchdowns or more by themselves. It's obvious that our wideout group is lacking and very far behind these other teams. We're very thin at the positions. We have a slot wideout (Bess) lined up on the outside on more than half of our plays because we lack a second outside option. You don't see things like that on those other teams. They have three to four clearly established receivers on each of those teams.

Your arguement is very thin in my opinion. Tannehill's situation is extremely different to these other rookie quarterbacks. While he's been able to have a little success this year, it's still clearly obvious that he needs help, especially on the o-line and at receiver.


Sorry but I have to respectfully disagree. Tannehill can scramble too, it's not like he played WR or anything for a few years.

I'm not saying that his supporting cast isn't weak, he needs help, it's obvious, I'm just saying that the supporting cast for these other rookies is nothing lights out like a lot of people make it out to be. Their teams are very much rebuilding as well and are very much searching for that young talent too.

I love Ryan Tannehill, I bought his freakin jersey man, I just think that sometimes you gotta take off the rose colored glasses and look at it for what it is. Right now, at this point in the 2012 NFL season, Tannehill is being outplayed by the other QB's in his class. Will that change? Can that change? Sure as hell can, and I sure as hell hope so...

I personally think a lot of the problem is very much on the coaches too, I'm not just throwing it all on Ryan. Reggie Bush is underutilized, young guys like Matthews and Egnew aren't seeing any time in a blown season, Charles Clay, despite the offensive coordinator openly saying he wants to get him more involved, still isn't involved enough.

We don't have that big WR or that speed WR so we have to compensate. If Reggie isn't in there as a tailback, he should be lined up at WR. There is absolutely no reason that our best player on offense, without argument, should ever be on the bench aside from fatigue. To quote PhinsRock... PERIOD!


The Redskins just proved my point about supporting cast today. They sure didn't miss a beat today with Cousins. I guess their supporting case is pretty good afterall if a backup rookie can step in and put up 30+. Wouldn't you think?


Last edited by wkloiber13 on Sun Dec 16, 2012 4:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.



Sun Dec 16, 2012 4:22 pm
Profile
Phinfever Lead Moderator
Phinfever Lead Moderator

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:04 pm
Posts: 5752
Post Re: Adam Schefter: Ryan Tannehill may not be the answer at QB
The Redskins sure didn't miss a beat today. I guess the supporting case is pretty good in Washington if a backup rookie can step in and put up 30+ points in a winning effort.

If you remember, I wanted Cousins. :ann0y: Yeah, Skins laid it down today. Morris is a stud back.


Sun Dec 16, 2012 4:24 pm
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 5:59 pm
Posts: 5115
Post Re: Adam Schefter: Ryan Tannehill may not be the answer at QB
Makchell wrote:
The Redskins sure didn't miss a beat today. I guess the supporting case is pretty good in Washington if a backup rookie can step in and put up 30+ points in a winning effort.

If you remember, I wanted Cousins. :ann0y: Yeah, Skins laid it down today. Morris is a stud back.


I think it's the system more than it's RG3 or Cousins. They have built a situation in Washington where a rookie quarterback can succeed because they lucked out and landed a stud runningback, and brought in as much talent as possible at widereceiver. While I think our trio of runningbacks are good, our receivers are nowhere near as good as Washington's. Hopefully that will change after the draft.


Sun Dec 16, 2012 4:26 pm
Profile
Phinfever Global Moderator
Phinfever Global Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 6:53 pm
Posts: 3659
Location: Palm Beach County, Florida
Post Re: Adam Schefter: Ryan Tannehill may not be the answer at QB
Holy begeezers .... its the system , cant wait to see what our guy can do when he gets talent around him , its not so much the players , the stats say our guy is better.
Look , I know there are homers here as well as realists but it laughable especially to those of us who have been here just about from the beginning. every year at this time (OK except for 08) we offer excuses why we are a losing team as well the small steps we have to take to be a winning team the following year. We deem out current QB as the savior who will soon be elite & we convince ourselves we are on the right track. This season's schedule was a gift & we still find our self in the same old situation. We make excuses why other rookies are having immediate success , there has to be a reason for this. We always draft & sign free agents with the most upgrade & potential while the comments right after these moves are always "I love this move" Lesser teams have surpassed us & it is time to realize why. i want real wins , signature wins ... i dont want to read that we are on our way because we beat a depleted & awful Jaguar team. We get psyched about moral wins & blame losses on the refs. All traits of being fans of a bad team. We have alot of money & draft picks next season ... pretty pivotal year now that we have "found our next Marino". I just wish I had more confidence in the guys making the decisions , I hope they come thru ... otherwise its will just be business as usual.

_________________
Extend Philbin!
Enough already , this is the best regime in the NFL ...by far!!
2014 Lazor Powered... THE MAKING OF A DYNASTY!!


Sun Dec 16, 2012 5:14 pm
Profile
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 5:10 pm
Posts: 5431
Location: Topsfield, MA
Post Re: Adam Schefter: Ryan Tannehill may not be the answer at QB
Makchell wrote:
The Redskins sure didn't miss a beat today. I guess the supporting case is pretty good in Washington if a backup rookie can step in and put up 30+ points in a winning effort.

If you remember, I wanted Cousins. :ann0y: Yeah, Skins laid it down today. Morris is a stud back.


I think Cousins could be a solid starting QB and was on board with Miami getting him in Rd 2.


Sun Dec 16, 2012 5:17 pm
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend

Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 5:59 pm
Posts: 5115
Post Re: Adam Schefter: Ryan Tannehill may not be the answer at QB
FINesse wrote:
Holy begeezers .... its the system , cant wait to see what our guy can do when he gets talent around him , its not so much the players , the stats say our guy is better.
Look , I know there are homers here as well as realists but it laughable especially to those of us who have been here just about from the beginning. every year at this time (OK except for 08) we offer excuses why we are a losing team as well the small steps we have to take to be a winning team the following year. We deem out current QB as the savior who will soon be elite & we convince ourselves we are on the right track. This season's schedule was a gift & we still find our self in the same old situation. We make excuses why other rookies are having immediate success , there has to be a reason for this. We always draft & sign free agents with the most upgrade & potential while the comments right after these moves are always "I love this move" Lesser teams have surpassed us & it is time to realize why. i want real wins , signature wins ... i dont want to read that we are on our way because we beat a depleted & awful Jaguar team. We get psyched about moral wins & blame losses on the refs. All traits of being fans of a bad team. We have alot of money & draft picks next season ... pretty pivotal year now that we have "found our next Marino". I just wish I had more confidence in the guys making the decisions , I hope they come thru ... otherwise its will just be business as usual.


Our current situation is completely different than years past. We haven't started a rookie quarterback week one ever. I wish people would quit treating Tannehill and this season like it's the same old song and dance. Tannehill isn't another "bandaid" type of quarterback like we've been used to seeing the past decade. He's the first real attempt by our franchise in team history to bring in a high draft pick quarterback and make him the guy from the get go. We're in uncharted territory here. Tannehill is a rookie quarterback who is in the early stages of his career, no more, no less. If you can't see that things are different, then I think that's laughable.


Sun Dec 16, 2012 6:00 pm
Profile
2014 Phinfever VIP!
2014 Phinfever VIP!

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 11:35 am
Posts: 1232
Location: Lakeland, Fl
Post Re: Adam Schefter: Ryan Tannehill may not be the answer at QB
New head coach, new defense, new offense, rookie QB what did you expect this year?????? They have already won 1 more game than I expected them to win for the year and they still have 2 games left.

_________________
Image


Sun Dec 16, 2012 6:34 pm
Profile
Phinfever Blog Writer - Fridays
Phinfever Blog Writer - Fridays

Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2010 12:52 am
Posts: 5704
Location: Lancaster, PA
Post Re: Adam Schefter: Ryan Tannehill may not be the answer at QB
9-7 next year


Sun Dec 16, 2012 8:30 pm
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 12:48 pm
Posts: 5154
Post Re: Adam Schefter: Ryan Tannehill may not be the answer at QB
FINesse wrote:
Holy begeezers .... its the system , cant wait to see what our guy can do when he gets talent around him , its not so much the players , the stats say our guy is better.
Look , I know there are homers here as well as realists but it laughable especially to those of us who have been here just about from the beginning. every year at this time (OK except for 08) we offer excuses why we are a losing team as well the small steps we have to take to be a winning team the following year. We deem out current QB as the savior who will soon be elite & we convince ourselves we are on the right track. This season's schedule was a gift & we still find our self in the same old situation. We make excuses why other rookies are having immediate success , there has to be a reason for this. We always draft & sign free agents with the most upgrade & potential while the comments right after these moves are always "I love this move" Lesser teams have surpassed us & it is time to realize why. i want real wins , signature wins ... i dont want to read that we are on our way because we beat a depleted & awful Jaguar team. We get psyched about moral wins & blame losses on the refs. All traits of being fans of a bad team. We have alot of money & draft picks next season ... pretty pivotal year now that we have "found our next Marino". I just wish I had more confidence in the guys making the decisions , I hope they come thru ... otherwise its will just be business as usual.


Anyone attempting you come up with excuses why those "other" guys are finding sucessess are clowns. Anyone watching Russell Wilson today could see what he does for that team.

_________________
Image


Sun Dec 16, 2012 9:53 pm
Profile
Phinfever Starter
Phinfever Starter

Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2011 5:13 pm
Posts: 233
Post Re: Adam Schefter: Ryan Tannehill may not be the answer at QB
wkloiber13 wrote:
FINesse wrote:
Holy begeezers .... its the system , cant wait to see what our guy can do when he gets talent around him , its not so much the players , the stats say our guy is better.
Look , I know there are homers here as well as realists but it laughable especially to those of us who have been here just about from the beginning. every year at this time (OK except for 08) we offer excuses why we are a losing team as well the small steps we have to take to be a winning team the following year. We deem out current QB as the savior who will soon be elite & we convince ourselves we are on the right track. This season's schedule was a gift & we still find our self in the same old situation. We make excuses why other rookies are having immediate success , there has to be a reason for this. We always draft & sign free agents with the most upgrade & potential while the comments right after these moves are always "I love this move" Lesser teams have surpassed us & it is time to realize why. i want real wins , signature wins ... i dont want to read that we are on our way because we beat a depleted & awful Jaguar team. We get psyched about moral wins & blame losses on the refs. All traits of being fans of a bad team. We have alot of money & draft picks next season ... pretty pivotal year now that we have "found our next Marino". I just wish I had more confidence in the guys making the decisions , I hope they come thru ... otherwise its will just be business as usual.


Our current situation is completely different than years past. We haven't started a rookie quarterback week one ever. I wish people would quit treating Tannehill and this season like it's the same old song and dance. Tannehill isn't another "bandaid" type of quarterback like we've been used to seeing the past decade. He's the first real attempt by our franchise in team history to bring in a high draft pick quarterback and make him the guy from the get go. We're in uncharted territory here. Tannehill is a rookie quarterback who is in the early stages of his career, no more, no less. If you can't see that things are different, then I think that's laughable.


I want to add to this. Luck is just that good. RG3? I'll be curious to see if his second season doesn't go like Cam's. And if his career is marred by injuries.

But as far as Tannehill, goes, we lucked out. The perfect QB for the system Philbin and Sherman are trying to install. It is a system that's going to take more than just one season to start bearing fruit. But I'm estatic. Our offenses could look like the Patriots, in a year or two, having that no huddle, keep the defense off balance, rythem.

Obviously we need more playmakers, and of course that's Irelands job, but he's earned a year or two to try work with Philbin. He was trying to 'buy groceries' for the Parcell's smash mouth style, and now he has to buy for Philbin's.

But, I honestly feel confident we have our QB now...


Mon Dec 17, 2012 12:08 am
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 12:48 pm
Posts: 5154
Post Re: Adam Schefter: Ryan Tannehill may not be the answer at QB
apatos19 wrote:
Our offenses could look like the Patriots, in a year or two, having that no huddle, keep the defense off balance, rythem.


Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh lol

_________________
Image


Mon Dec 17, 2012 12:32 am
Profile
Phinfever Blog Writer - Fridays
Phinfever Blog Writer - Fridays

Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2010 12:52 am
Posts: 5704
Location: Lancaster, PA
Post Re: Adam Schefter: Ryan Tannehill may not be the answer at QB
well i know many here are unsatisfied with the season, but for what it's worth the NFL Gameday final panel all agreed across the board that Miami had a promising season with the first year signal caller. And they liked Philbin's debut year.


Mon Dec 17, 2012 2:51 am
Profile
Phinfever Global Moderator
Phinfever Global Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 6:53 pm
Posts: 3659
Location: Palm Beach County, Florida
Post Re: Adam Schefter: Ryan Tannehill may not be the answer at QB
Look , i like the QB. Do I think we have found our QB of the future ... yes ..... do I think he is the next Marino / Brady / Elway / Manning / etc .... nope. I do think he is our next Schaub , Simms , Cunningham / etc. all QB's who have won without ever being mentioned as elite. And yes I know its early and I can be wrong , but I can also be wrong about the latter part of my point as well.
However the Colts are getting it done with a rookie QB & coach without a whole lot of talents around that him either ... but wait its the system ... again laughable because our coach being the genius he is should be able to implement a working system as well. And whoever said that Luck is just that good better be careful about implying that he is better than Tannehill , that is blasphemy around here to some. After the promising first seasons of Saban & Sparano (Saban finsihed with a winning streak & Sparano had 11 wins) they were granted extended honeymoon periods & we all know how that worked out. There is no more time for that , I refuse to go 9- 7 next season & call it a success because we have a second year coach & QB. I refuse to suck up & kiss anyones butt because they are part of this franchise. I want to win. I want my victories in December , January & February to be on the field & not be when the Jets implode or the Patriots lost in the playoffs or super bowl & we can once again predict their downfall & get giddy over it. I want to win the division because we finally assembled a good team & not because Tom Brady git hurt or retired. I do not want the same GM who has been here all these years while we have used the lack of talent excuse. I am glad however that he finally grew a pair of balls & did draft a QB in the first round , he was the obvious choice & had he had not been taken with current opinion of him at that time he would have been scrutinized even more than he was except by the loyalists here who would be happy with another safe offensive lineman first round pick. I am tired of seeing promise in losing seasons even more than I am tired of losing seasons. I am tired of being on the draft board just after Thanksgiving & seeing what free agents we can overpay for to give us more false hope.
And I am tired for being considered a lesser fan for these opinions.

_________________
Extend Philbin!
Enough already , this is the best regime in the NFL ...by far!!
2014 Lazor Powered... THE MAKING OF A DYNASTY!!


Mon Dec 17, 2012 4:42 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 71 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 10 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007, 2010 phpBB Group.
Designed by Coots & IamPZ - Phinfever.com.