Tanny "King of the" Hill- Should he be the future?

[dtait93]

4 minutes ago, TitanSS said:

You all think this is Henry's team, but this is Ryan Tannehill's team and that's not changing.

It’s really not lol. It was Henry breaking down the locker room to end the season and it was Henry who Vrabel was lauding to the media as the leader. That could change next season, but as it stands now it’s Henry’s team.

[TitanRedd]

28 minutes ago, titans0021 said:

I watched Brady play poorly the entire second half. He has no arm, he’s late on throws, he can’t push the ball downfield, he can’t run the boots that help keep the edge defender honest and free up all of our outside zone runs. He also won’t have an elite RB, because why would we possibly retain Henry to play in Brady’s system? This isn’t Manning in his first year in Denver, it’s Manning in his last year in Denver.

Oh don’t get me wrong I want Tannehill to remain a Titan I just hope his price isn’t too high, I know that signing brady means change of system, I rather we resign Tannehill & hire someone to help art figure out the passing game 

[TitanSS]

2 hours ago, dtait93 said:

It’s really not lol. It was Henry breaking down the locker room to end the season and it was Henry who Vrabel was lauding to the media as the leader. That could change next season, but as it stands now it’s Henry’s team.

It was Henry because he was coming off a 195 yard game where he set a record for 3 games over 180 yards in a row. Generally whoever gets the game ball does the break downs after the game.

Vrabel doesn't go out there with a message to give the media. They asked a question about Henry as a leader. There was also talk about Tannehill as a leader in the same week.

Without Tannehill we're a team with a losing record. It's his team and he's the single most important person on it for the near future or until he regresses. No other person on this team contributes nearly as much toward us winning as he does simply because he's the QB.

[dtait93]

4 minutes ago, TitanSS said:

It's his team and he's the single most important person on it for the near future or until he regresses. No other person on this team contributes nearly as much toward us winning as he does simply because he's the QB.

He may be the most important moving forward, but there's literally nothing to undoubtedly declare he's the leader over Henry as things stand right now.

[TitanSS]

5 minutes ago, dtait93 said:

He may be the most important moving forward, but there's literally nothing to undoubtedly declare he's the leader over Henry as things stand right now.

Until the last few weeks we had barely heard Henry say anything. Tannehill is calling the plays in the huddle, getting people lined up right, making sure they run the right routes, making adjustments at the LOS, and the single most important player on the roster.

If the front office/coaches see it as Henry's team, that's a problem

Edited January 22, 2020 by TitanSS

[KingTitan]

5 minutes ago, TitanSS said:

Until the last few weeks we had barely heard Henry say anything. Tannehill is calling the plays in the huddle, getting people lined up right, making sure they run the right routes, making adjustments at the LOS, and the single most important player on the roster.

If the front office/coaches see it as Henry's team, that's a problem

Don't know evidence from the past says Henry was leading most of the breakdown huddles in locker room. Seems like he was the voice in training camp saying "Why not Us?" 

Henry seems to have been a leader and its just now people are paying attention to it. 

It's different eras, but imagine us cutting Eddie George after the '99 run. He wouldn't be the Titan legend as he was. 

Lol but going back and looking at the numbers, seems like he proved your case a little.

[dtait93]

1 minute ago, TitanSS said:

Until the last few weeks we had barely heard Henry say anything. Tannehill is calling the plays in the huddle, getting people lined up right, making sure they run the right routes, making adjustments at the LOS, and the single most important player on the roster.

If the front office/coaches see it as Henry's team, that's a problem

And yet it was Henry who carried us to our 2 playoff victories. When Henry was out/hobbled Tannehill couldn't get the job done against Houston or NO. When Tannehill was asked to carry the load against Carolina he flopped.

When NE game planned to stop Tannehill, he could barely do anything. When Baltimore game planned to stop Henry, he blew the brakes off of them.

[TitanSS]

4 minutes ago, dtait93 said:

And yet it was Henry who carried us to our 2 playoff victories. When Henry was out/hobbled Tannehill couldn't get the job done against Houston or NO. When Tannehill was asked to carry the load against Carolina he flopped.

When NE game planned to stop Tannehill, he could barely do anything. When Baltimore game planned to stop Henry, he blew the brakes off of them.

The defense carried us to our win against NE. No one did anything in the second half. 

And Henry got all the credit for the Ravens game, but it was just as much Tannehill getting us out to that lead so we could just run it over and over. We were leading 14-0 and Henry had like 29 yards. And both of their offensive perfomances were really set up by the defense as all of our points came off a true turnover or turnover on downs. The defense carried the first two games.

Henry had 69 yards in the most important game of the season after the coaching staff blew the game playing the prevent offense with Henry before the end of the first half.

The team had Henry and was 2-4 until Tannehill lead us to the playoffs. And without fluke plays against the Texans and Saints we might have beat both, but go on and see how close Henry gets to beating them without Tannehill. Insert Mariota back in there with a healthy Henry and we get the snot beat out of us in each game.

Henry is nowhere near as valuable.

[KingTitan]

Someone mentioned a story  that could be compared to Tanny in a way is Case Keenum.

5 years in the league and then went to Vikings a posted a career year. 3500 yards passing 22 TDs 7 Ints. 

Thoughts?

 

[TitanSS]

3 minutes ago, KingTitan said:

Someone mentioned a story  that could be compared to Tanny in a way is Case Keenum.

5 years in the league and then went to Vikings a posted a career year. 3500 yards passing 22 TDs 7 Ints. 

Thoughts?

 

If Tannehill had played a full season it would have been the 4th time in his career he threw for over 3900 yards. He threw 12 INTs in 2 of those years, 17 in one, and this year would have been on pace for 8. Keenum had toped 1.8k once in his career prior to that season, so I don't think it's a good comparison.

Definitely his best year, but it's not like he hadn't shown promising signs before. I would expect him to regress to a point, but I'd take 4100 yards, 27 TDs and 12 INTs like he had in year 3.

 

[dtait93]

1 hour ago, TitanSS said:

The defense carried us to our win against NE. No one did anything in the second half. 

And Henry got all the credit for the Ravens game, but it was just as much Tannehill getting us out to that lead so we could just run it over and over. We were leading 14-0 and Henry had like 29 yards. And both of their offensive perfomances were really set up by the defense as all of our points came off a true turnover or turnover on downs. The defense carried the first two games.

Henry had 69 yards in the most important game of the season after the coaching staff blew the game playing the prevent offense with Henry before the end of the first half.

The team had Henry and was 2-4 until Tannehill lead us to the playoffs. And without fluke plays against the Texans and Saints we might have beat both, but go on and see how close Henry gets to beating them without Tannehill. Insert Mariota back in there with a healthy Henry and we get the snot beat out of us in each game.

Henry is nowhere near as valuable.

Offensively it was Henry who was the catalyst in both playoff victories...it's literally not even a debate. Again, NE game planned to shut down Tannehill and he couldn't even break 100 yards, while Baltimore game planned to shut down Henry and he blew the brakes off of them. Offensively it was Henry who did most of the heavy lifting to get us our first TD against Baltimore so I'm not giving Tannehill equal credit for that game at all especially when it was the Henry show for the final 3 quarters.

Against KC he had 69 yards because he only got 3 carries in the second half. We had to go to Tannehill because we needed to score quickly. Our offense centered around Tannehill passing in the second half went punt, punt, TD (would have been turnover on downs if not for the successful fake punt), downs. He threw for 28 yards between the start of the 3rd quarter and the fake punt with 6 minutes to go in the 4th. He was extremely below average during the entirety of the playoffs with a few splash in each game.

The team went 2-4 because Mariota was terrible. That and a myriad of other issues - Lewan's 4 game suspension, Lewan and Saffold's lack of chemistry on the left side because of said suspension, Nate Davis getting destroyed every weekend until he got his feet underneath him by mid-late season, Arthur Smith being a novice play caller and coordinator, and Vrabel's terrible decision making early in the season. It's literally stupid to just say, "oh well we had Henry and look we still sucked at 2-4!!" without looking at everything else that led us to that terrible start.

All of those things coming together coupled with the Tannehill entering the scene is what turned the season around. It wasn't just Tannehill himself. Hell if you replaced Mariota with Andy Dalton we probably still finish with a decent record. That's how bad Mariota was. Love the guy but he flat out sucked.

Edited January 22, 2020 by dtait93

[ragevsuall17]

12 hours ago, dtait93 said:

Do we really think Tannehill is going to get 26m+ on the open market with so many other options available?

Brady, Manning, Rivers, Keenum, Bridgewater (or Brees?), Prescott, Mariota, Winston. 

He might be. Who in that group is better than Tanny right now... Honestly? Prescott maybe (I'm not a fan of his at all), but he'll probably get tagged. Manning is done, and Keenum/Bridgewater are journeymen backups. RT already showed he's a better fit in this offense than Mariota. That leaves an elderly Brady and River (Brees potentially as well), and Winston who has talent but is a horrible decision maker. Cam and Stafford would be good options, but I'm also not willing to part with a 1st for either, even the 29th pick. We need that pick for D.

It's arguable that after what Tannehill showed the past 3 months, he's the top qb in the FA market. That doesn't mean he's a 30M qb, although the qb market says otherwise. 

The appeal of Brady is his willingness to take less money, which has been the case at least in the past... But maybe no longer the case, if his recent quotes re: being underpaid are indicative of his current state of mind. 

But... If Tanny thinks of himself as a 30+M qb... And I can get Brady at 20M or under, I'm really considering Brady. That almost ensures I'm bringing Henry back, without sacrificing Conklin if he's my top internal target. Brady won a SB last year with the 5th ranked rushing offense, so it's not like he can't make it work in an offense with a strong running game. He also won the SB in 2016 with Blount leading a 7th ranked rushing offense. 

Our offense would change... But I think Henry would be the best RB Brady has played with... he can make it work and use it to his advantage. He may not have the roll out ability of RT, but he's got a quick trigger and can scan the field quickly, so he'll still be able to keep the D honest that way. I'll say again, the biggest negative is he doesn't have the arm to stretch defenses vertically, but he can stretch them across the field through 20 yards (a limitation that RT has). 

Resigning RT at 30+M endangers bringing Henry back... And as staunch (and correct) the argument that QB is so much more important than RB, we don't know what Tanny has without Henry behind him. He's better than Brady now and for the next 2 years... The question is: is RT 10M better than Brady and/or is he and a replacement/rookie RB better than Brady/Henry over the next 2 year SB window? This argument is moot if Brady sees himself as 25+M or if RT is willing to sign back at ~25M (not talking AAV here, talking more about actual money paid out and cap hits through 2-3 seasons). 

It's a tough position, a lot of ifs and a lot of moving pieces. JRob will be criticized either way he goes. 

JRob doesn't strike me as this type of GM, but while bringing Brady may alienate a few hardcore fans, it may increase the bottom line, as more Fairweather fans may but season tickets/PSLs, and we may get a few more prime time (marketable) games. Brady jerseys would probably also be top 5 in sales. Marketability 101, even if it yields Randy Moss/Andre Johnson results. 

[TitanSS]

8 hours ago, dtait93 said:

Offensively it was Henry who was the catalyst in both playoff victories...it's literally not even a debate. Again, NE game planned to shut down Tannehill and he couldn't even break 100 yards, while Baltimore game planned to shut down Henry and he blew the brakes off of them. Offensively it was Henry who did most of the heavy lifting to get us our first TD against Baltimore so I'm not giving Tannehill equal credit for that game at all especially when it was the Henry show for the final 3 quarters.

Against KC he had 69 yards because he only got 3 carries in the second half. We had to go to Tannehill because we needed to score quickly. Our offense centered around Tannehill passing in the second half went punt, punt, TD (would have been turnover on downs if not for the successful fake punt), downs. He threw for 28 yards between the start of the 3rd quarter and the fake punt with 6 minutes to go in the 4th. He was extremely below average during the entirety of the playoffs with a few splash in each game.

The team went 2-4 because Mariota was terrible. That and a myriad of other issues - Lewan's 4 game suspension, Lewan and Saffold's lack of chemistry on the left side because of said suspension, Nate Davis getting destroyed every weekend until he got his feet underneath him by mid-late season, Arthur Smith being a novice play caller and coordinator, and Vrabel's terrible decision making early in the season. It's literally stupid to just say, "oh well we had Henry and look we still sucked at 2-4!!" without looking at everything else that led us to that terrible start.

All of those things coming together coupled with the Tannehill entering the scene is what turned the season around. It wasn't just Tannehill himself. Hell if you replaced Mariota with Andy Dalton we probably still finish with a decent record. That's how bad Mariota was. Love the guy but he flat out sucked.

The NE and Baltimore games had nothing to do with Tannehill not being able to do anything. He simply was taken out of the gameplan save for 3rd and long. He had some costly mistakes as well.

On offense we simply wanted to drain clock and he just kept handing it off in each of the two wins.

But that is irrelevant. No on one offense is as responsible for the first two wins as our defense was. The only reason Henry can rack up 34 carries is because of them. The media blew up about Henry because we handed it off a thousand times but the defense won those games.

Henry had 3.6 YPC against KC. He was basically eliminated from that game regardless of what carries he had. When the defense played awful our star player did nothing in the biggest game of the season. It's not his fault, they stacked the box. We should have been passing more and then run when we get more favorable fronts.

Edited January 22, 2020 by TitanSS

[ragevsuall17]

8 hours ago, dtait93 said:

Offensively it was Henry who was the catalyst in both playoff victories...it's literally not even a debate.

Definitely. We saw what a 14-0 lead in the 1st meant without Henry. Yeah, we ended with 150 rushing yards against the Saints, but 50 of those cam from AJ on one of those early scores. The offense couldn't keep up against the Saints in the 2nd half... With only one drive over 50 yards after the 1st. We also lost the Top battle, and gave up 5 sacks. The RBs averaged 3.8 ypc on 24 carries. Someone tell me Henry doesn't change the outcome. 

[TitanSS]

1 minute ago, ragevsuall17 said:

Definitely. We saw what a 14-0 lead in the 1st meant without Henry. Yeah, we ended with 150 rushing yards against the Saints, but 50 of those cam from AJ on one of those early scores. The offense couldn't keep up against the Saints in the 2nd half... With only one drive over 50 yards after the 1st. We also lost the Top battle, and gave up 5 sacks. The RBs averaged 3.8 ypc on 24 carries. Someone tell me Henry doesn't change the outcome. 

Henry probably doesn't change the outcome of a loss, but he is certainly better than the practice squad players we have on the roster behind him.