Gatr and I may disagree on anything, but not on tebow. I always said that he was grossly mismanaged and he only needed a hc with stones who could believe in him and build a team around him and his strengths. Then we would've had something very interesting.

Its curious someone called tannehill "turnover" because the only thing he does pretty well consistently is protecting the football. Better nickname could be "mr checkdown" or "the masochist". When he was drafted I thought horribly of the pick, no experience, no results to show, only potential.
4 years later I see a guy with all the tools put in a position where he cant succeed. Atrocious OL play and horrible gameplanning. As a consequence he tries to play too safe and doesnt move the chains. He is not Tom brady but he is not horseshit. This season everything we are seeing is a mess, and its tough to see well in a mess. Next season will be decisive for him and we'll see what a new coach can do with him. He was improving until this season when everything fell down from the start. If he performs poorly next year he will likely be traded and we'll go for a new guy in 2017 draft.

As far as general talent goes I give it to project, I was far too optimist. The main problem is the coaching, who has been really bad and put players in all phases of the game in a position where they could only fail (sheppard covering backs 1on1, ageing grimes against top wr with no help,miller either not involved or involved in smituations where my grannie knew he was running the ball,no contingency plan for a Lt injury and you put a ps guy on the blind side....) but there is definitely a problem with the talent level of the team, ezpecially in offensive line and defensive backfield.

projectrracing wrote: Kagemusha wrote: Its curious someone called tannehill "turnover" because the only thing he does pretty well consistently is protecting the football. 11 ints, 10 fumbles, 3 lost this season alone. Because 2 of those fumbles went out of tannehills hands and into the back of the endzone, the opponent got 2 points. So the lost stat column could've been higher.

Starting from the fact that he is having a bad season overall so his numbers are bad in general:

He has a 2:1 td:int ratio, is 12th for interceptions (11 have more and he is tied with Brees-Eli-Carr-Cousins) while he has the 33rd ypa and is 4th for sacks taken. For the fumbles, well, he fumbles because he takes a beating every Sunday. Many of the most sacked quarterbacks have similar fumble/fumble lost numbers.

I dont get the safety argument. Safeties werent due to fumbles, they were mishandled snaps who went out of bounds. Why do you count it as a fumble? Do you know what is a fumble? At least the Patriots snap was fired by Pouncey while Tannehill was looking elsewhere, so I dont know who exactly to blame for it.

We might as well say that interceptions are fumbles lost in the air if you like and say Tannehill has 24 fumbles lost.

Fact is every QB has seasons in which he fumbles more and season in which he fumbles less, it's true that it usually happens more when you are less experienced but it's not a given. For example Stafford has never been fumble prone but in 2013 he fumbled 12 times losing 4. Brady had a 13/5 and a 12/4 season, and he wasnt a rookie neither time.

Of all the possible stats the fumble/fumble loss is the less involved with quarterback ability because when you are blindsided at full speed is extremely hard to hold the ball and the loss of the fumble is more or less matter of luck.

If you like to think T-hill is a turnover machine because he has one more fumble lost than Wilson, please go on.
This season many local sportswriters have criticized T-hill play in every possible way (no leadership, no audible ability, cant read the defense pre or post snap, always takes the sack, doesnt use his mobility, throws short of the first down...) but nobody ever focused on the turnovers.

Interesting Tannehill stats on sacks, ints etc for this season when you break it down by team. He's been fairly consistent to be fair to him, as Kag said, but he's had a handful of poor games in the division (not necessarily his fault, but might have been, don't remember enough about them).

vs BUF - 3 INT, 4 sacks
vs NE - 2 INT, 5 sacks
vs NYJ - 3 INT, 6 sacks

Three tough defenses to play against and it looks like he's struggled. The rest of the season he's only thrown INTs against Dallas and Tennessee.

5 of his 11 INTs so far have also come whilst trailing by 9-16 points, 2 when trailing by more than 16.

4 of them (unsure if any of these 4 are also in the category above or not) have also come on 3rd or 4th down with 9 or more yards to go, so obvious passing down, forcing a pass presumably.

So he's not necessarily an interception monster, he's just not that great a QB... also the coaching sucks (slight tangent but that's not going to help anyone).

Kagemusha wrote: I dont get the safety argument. Safeties weren't due to fumbles, they were mishandled snaps who went out of bounds. Why do you count it as a fumble? Do you know what is a fumble?

The NFL classes them as a fumble. If in your expert opinion you are saying the NFL is incorrect. Then let us all be educated.

Paulo187s stats are helpful in a understanding of the subject matter. Puts things in perspective. One thing I would like to know is how many of his turnovers come in the fourth quarter. Maybe I just remember his turnovers more cos the are when the game is on the line?

I don't care for what sports writers say. I watch games and make my own opinion. I may be wrong, I may be right. It wasn't long ago I was against the gain when calling out Tannehill and the coaching staff. 12-24 months ago. And clearly I was incorrect about the coaching staff... Not!

Anywayz. That is my take on Tannehill. I personally think he needs help. Others think he is good enough as is. For those that think the later. Keep enjoying those mediocre 8-8 seasons.