Comparables To Tannehill

So Carson, do you believe that Buffalo Bills owning the Dolphins was all on Dan Marino? I mean all I ever hear is the lack of running game and Tom Olivadatti were to blame.

Birdmond wrote:So I guess you guys aren't Dan Marino fans.  How many times did Marino dominate at Buffalo when it counted?  So, just to be clear, you're all saying those games were Marino's fault.  

Huh?  I'm not sure how you made that jump.  Marino is one of the greatest QBs of all time, and Tannehill is a mediocre-at-best QB that has yet to post a winning season...there's really not a comparison.  Marino won division titles and playoff games, and is #5 all-time on the QB regular season wins list. Tannehill can't even lead his team to 9 wins!

Those 1980s/90s Dolphins team lost big games despite Dan Marino, not because of him.  Hell, I remember games where he led the offense to 30 or 40 points and still lost! Tannehill isn't worthy to be mentioned in the same sentence as Marino - they might as well be in different galaxies.

As Carson said, I don't think the Dolphins recent failures are all on Tannehill either.  But facts are facts, and Tannehill has led his team to an average of less than 9 points a game in the only 4 important games he's played in.  (I'm defining "important" as games the Phins needed to win to make the playoffs.)

Well of course Tannehill's not Marino, but I get where Bird is coming from, and he's not saying that Tannehill is Marino.

You only see true greatness on your team very rarely, which is why the Colts getting Luck after Manning is so fucking annoying. My hopes for Tannehill is that he can be a Top 10 QB, which I believe he has the skills to do. Essentially, he has to move up like four slots to get into the Top 10? I forget the exact ranking, and I don't have enough coffee to be motivated enough to just go look at NFL.com stats.

He's all we've got too, there's nothing else there. Literally, there's nothing. So, unless we stink this season and get into position to draft high, it's Tannehill. Of course, Tannenbaum will be running the ship next year and he does enjoy giving away picks to move up in the 1st round.

We'll see. I'm expecting a damn good season from Tannehill. I'd really like to see, however, how he'd do with a line that wasn't terrible. When he did have a half-assed line last year, he played very solid football. When Alberts went out, it all started to collapse.

Obviously I'm not comparing Marino to Tannehill. I'm saying excuses are excuses, regardless of talent. It's pretty straight forward. Either Olivadattii was an excuse or he wasn't. Just like either Philbin and the OL are an excuse or they are not. And BTW, when did Marino shred Buffalo's D when they were in their prime? Especially at Buffalo, when it was cold, another "excuse".

So JMP and Carson, do you think Belichick could win with Tannehill? I'd wager that if Tanehill were drafted by NE, and obviously Brady wasn't there, Tannehill would have 3 division titles.

Birdmond wrote:Obviously I'm not comparing Marino to Tannehill.  I'm saying excuses are excuses, regardless of talent.   It's pretty straight forward. Either Olivadattii was an excuse or he wasn't.   Just like either Philbin and the OL are an excuse or they are not.   And BTW, when did Marino shred Buffalo's D when they were in their prime?  Especially at Buffalo, when it was cold, another "excuse".

Not straight forward at all. Marino was the best player on his team year after year - he's the sole reason the Dolphins were in the hunt every single season. Tannehill has never been the best player on his team, and he's never sniffed the playoffs or even had a winning season. There's simply no comparison, on any level. It's not fair to Tannehill or Marino.

Marino led the Dolphins to 34 points in the playoffs at Buffalo on 1990...more points than Tannehill's team scored total in his 4 important games. But that's beside the point...you're comparing Marino losing to one of the greatest teams of all-time with Tannehill losing to the hapless Bills and Jets??? Come on, man, that's just not similar at all.

Birdmond wrote:So JMP and Carson, do you think Belichick could win with Tannehill?  I'd wager that if Tanehill were drafted by NE, and obviously Brady wasn't there, Tannehill would have 3 division titles.  

No, I don't think Belichick would win with Tannehill. Brady is clutch and dominates in crucial moments. Tannehill folds in crucial moments. Tannehill would have gotten Belichick fired long ago, IMO.

The only reason Brady is so dominate during the clutch is because Belicheat know how to work the system. I ready to see what they are like with out having the ability to cheat

Absolutely. No doubt Belichick wins with Tannehill. He won with Matt Cassell.

Bellicheat has the best coached team in the NFL. You can win a lot of gams that way.

Birdmond wrote:Absolutely.  No doubt Belichick wins with Tannehill.  He won  with Matt Cassell.  

"No doubt"? I have plenty of doubt. I don't think Tannehill would do well on the Pats at all. That offense requires a QB that plays smart and makes big plays at crucial times. Tannehill does not always play smart (way too many off-target passes and takes way too many sacks) and he's at his worst in the biggest moments. I think he's been the anti-Belichick QB up to this point in his career. That New England offense isn't 'plug and play' by any means...it takes a certain type of QB to master it, and I don't think Tannehill has that ability.

Really, it's a moot point because Tannehill isn't becoming aPatriot any time soon and we'll never know how he would do playing under BB. But, regardless, Tannehill needs to improve in a lot of areas if the Dolphins are ever going to win with him.

So you're saying Bill Belichick wouldn't make Tannehill a better QB? Did you watch Brady in college? I did. As an Ohio State fan we wanted no part of Drew Henson but loved it when Brady played. So Belichick had nothing to do with Brady's success?

Birdmond wrote:So you're saying Bill Belichick wouldn't make Tannehill a better QB?  Did you watch Brady in college?  I did.  As an Ohio State fan we wanted no part of Drew Henson but loved it when Brady played.  So Belichick had nothing to do with Brady's success?  

He had everything to do with Brady's success. Brady was trash in college and that why he went so low in the draft. Cheating helps a lot but for the fact that Patriots won so many superbowl with Brady is because of Belicheat

Birdmond wrote:So you're saying Bill Belichick wouldn't make Tannehill a better QB?  Did you watch Brady in college?  I did.  As an Ohio State fan we wanted no part of Drew Henson but loved it when Brady played.  So Belichick had nothing to do with Brady's success?  

I don't know that Belichick would make Tannehill a better QB. Belichick is a defensive coach, and I don't know how much input he has into a QB's development. I give more credit to Charlie Weis, who established the Patriots offensive system years ago that they still use (more or less) today, and Josh McDaniels, who runs that offense like a well-oiled machine.

I don't care what Brady did in college, or what Tannehill did in college - it's meaningless. But since you mentioned it, Brady led Michigan to a bunch of 4th quarter comebacks, and he had a come-from behind victory against Ohio State in '99...so I guess as a Buckeyes fan you should be careful what you wish for! LOL Anyway, what is relevant to this discussion is that Brady is simply better than Tannehill...period. It's not close. Brady is smarter, works harder, elevates the level of play of those around him, and plays big in the biggest situations....his intangibles are off the charts. Tannehill is so far below him, that it's not funny. Maybe one day Tannehill will close the gap, but that day is not today.

Talking about Brady is leaving me deflated. Tannehill is working this off season to improve. He's improved every year. He has had limited offensive weapons and a poor line to work behind. He may never be Tom Brady but there's only five QB's in any year that are game changers. After that you need a good system of offensive and defensive players to win a super bowl. Aaron Rodgers might be the best of the current QB's but even he is having a hard time getting to the championship game. Andrew Luck got shellacked in the playoffs. He needs more. Drew Brees is a bum based off his record last year.

CarsonChris wrote:Talking about Brady is leaving me deflated.

CarsonChris wrote:Tannehill is working this off season to improve. He's improved every year. He has had limited offensive weapons and a poor line to work behind. He may never be Tom Brady but there's only five QB's in any year that are game changers.   After that you need a good system of offensive and defensive players to win a super bowl. Aaron Rodgers might be the best of the current QB's but even he is having a hard time getting to the championship game.  Andrew Luck got shellacked in the playoffs. He needs more. Drew Brees is a bum based off his record last year.

Only one QB each year can win the Super Bowl. The fact that Brady, Rodgers, Luck and Brees (and Marino before them) don't always make it to the Super Bowl takes nothing away from how great and dominant they are. I know we all want everything Miami Dolphins to be the best, but the fact is that Tannehill is far below those guys. We can make all the excuses we want and blame everyone except Tannehill, but the fact is he's been a mediocre QB so far and he has yet to lead his team to a winning season...key word being "lead". When Tannehill shows the leadership and skill to carry the Phins both to and through the playoffs, maybe we can mention his name alongside those great QBs. Until then, he'll get lumped in with the Daltons and Alex Smiths of the world (both of whom have actually made the playoffs, by the way).

I get it - the Phins have coaching issues and talent issues. No arguments. But so far, Tannehill has been part of the problem and not part of the solution IMO. Great QBs have a way of making everything around them look better. Here's hoping Tannehill grows into that type of player.

I am officially amazed this thread has gone on this long, both chronologically and page-wise

I also officially agree with everything Jmp has said. Carry on, boys

Well yeah, we need something to talk about. Most boards are dead this time of year. Heck I'm not sure if I agree with my own posts. LOL. It's just fun.

Birdmond wrote:Well yeah, we need something to talk about.  Most boards are dead this time of year.   Heck I'm not sure if I agree with my own posts.  LOL.   It's just fun.

I agree...anything that gets a discussion going in the dead of the offseason !

RIP thread. It was good while it lasted. (Sighs.)

DolFan 316 wrote:RIP thread. It was good while it lasted. (Sighs.)

Easy to bring it back to life...just type "Tannehill is a top 10 QB", and I'll be sure to take the bait!