japan Posted November 12, 2019 Report Share Posted November 12, 2019 1 hour ago, freakingeek said: From my perspective, it was a business decision that was mutually decided by all parties because of the substantial investment they made as well as the questions about his injuries and how much they have affected his overall play. The decision was also delayed because of questions about the offensive line and how much that impacted MMs production. There were plenty of red flags but as a good business decision, they needed to be sure. It wasn’t a black and white situation. Marcus was also the face of the franchise and represented the organization well off the field. Bottom line is the Titan’s goal is to win games and reality trumped everything else that was being considered. Of course. It was probably decided on before the season. The evidence for JRob not being the guy behind Mariota is significant. On top of not extending him and trading for Tannehill, he also has zero ties to Mariota and was actually with Tampa when they chose someone instead of Mariota. Seems fairly obvious. oldschool, Mythos27, StephenIsLegend, and 1 other 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
japan Posted November 12, 2019 Report Share Posted November 12, 2019 20 minutes ago, big2033 said: This discussion had nothing to do with you it just seems you're still angry because I called you out regarding your unhealthy obsession with backups. Lord help us if Blaine Gabbert is ever back on this team. Mariota sucks, Tannehill is much better, but you're weird obsession with backups on this team is insane. So please, continue to tells us how Ryan Tannehill is better for our team than Patrick Mahomes. Help explain it for all the people who said he outplayed him. Can't wait for your response: What makes Ryan Tannehill better than Patrick Mahomes? He's white, which is pretty important to Joel... rns90, and big2033 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nine Posted November 12, 2019 Report Share Posted November 12, 2019 Very, very teams would have benched an established, incumbent starter to open the season, even if the newcomer had outperformed him in camp/preseason. It might happen with a rookie draft pick; with a recently-acquired veteran backup, it’s virtually unheard of. I don’t blame anyone for giving Marcus an opportunity to solidify himself as the starter....and he had a couple games that were respectable and he played reasonably well. But it quickly became apparent that he was getting worse rather than better...and they had to make a change. Its easy to say in hindsight that it should have happened sooner...but barring injury, and/or an absolutely horrendous start, six weeks is about as quick you’ll ever see an incumbent starting QB benched for a veteran backup. I imagine there have been exceptions in NFL history ...but they’re few and far between. I don’t blame the Titans for holding off on a change that no other NFL would have made. They gave Mariota every opportunity to prove himself...and when all doubt was eliminated they pulled the trigger Thrill, and GLinks 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OILERMAN Posted November 12, 2019 Report Share Posted November 12, 2019 The coaches wanted to go with Tannehill according to Lombardi, which I totally believe since it was so obvious Mariota sucked and can't play. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OILERMAN Posted November 12, 2019 Report Share Posted November 12, 2019 13 minutes ago, nine said: Very, very teams would have benched an established, incumbent starter Its easy to say in hindsight that it should have happened sooner. Yea but we're talking about Mariota with no contract beyond this season and who can't play. It's not hindsight. The whole league knew MM sucked, look at Sando's rankings and anyone else who spoke on the subject with any authority Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
freakingeek Posted November 12, 2019 Report Share Posted November 12, 2019 1 hour ago, BudAdams said: At this point, we do know that the decision makers fucked us. They are likely 7-3 or 8-2 if they had done the right thing for the right reasons. I do think JR had a great deal of input on the decision. I just don't put most of the decision being made on his shoulders. As to whom decided to finally pull the plug, it was obvious to everybody in the universe that Marcus wasn't going miraculously turn the corner and I'm guessing it was a unanimous decision at that point. As far as JR's share, he went so far as to hire AS as OC to provide Mariota with continuity, so yeah, he was pretty heavily invested. We'll never know just how much AAS influenced the process. She seems to take the "hands off" approach most of the time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BudsOilers Posted November 12, 2019 Report Share Posted November 12, 2019 49 minutes ago, japan said: Of course. It was probably decided on before the season. The evidence for JRob not being the guy behind Mariota is significant. On top of not extending him and trading for Tannehill, he also has zero ties to Mariota and was actually with Tampa when they chose someone instead of Mariota. Seems fairly obvious. To act like Robinson didn't have skin in the game for Mariota being successful is nuts. Yeah he didn't draft Mariota but he took the job by outlining the plan to build around him and very much did so. Only this year did he even attempt to have a viable alternative at QB and he made it clear from day 1 of that trade that Tannehill was the clear backup. Robinson also was knee deep in the coaching changes (firing Mularkey, hiring Vrabel and LaFeur) specifically tailored to Mariota. Same with the Smith hire at OC. He was the EVP of Football Operations when he gave him the 5th year option. Hell, the structure of the Tannehill deal indicates that he was coming in as the backup as an upgrade to Gabbert and a hedge against Mariota getting injured again or playing poorly again. AAS has not been a meddling owner. There's no evidence that she's a Jerry Jones as an owner. I'm sure she had an opinion but the messaging from the front office and ownership was precisely the same in the offseason - they wanted Mariota to be the guy. The fact that the team didn't discuss an extension with Mariota shows they were not all in but that applies to AAS just as much as Robinson then. Of course, that was a no brainer. How can you give a huge contract to Mariota based on his production and injury history? There's no evidence of a rift in alignment from AAS and JRobinson. Blaming AAS is the easy button answer because it exonerates the "great" GM who's teams are consistently middle of the pack. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Callidus Posted November 12, 2019 Report Share Posted November 12, 2019 2 hours ago, BudAdams said: I'm sure ownership had input but at the same time I don't know how anyone doesn't think Robinson didn't as well. Every account of AAS involvement is to let the hired people run things and there's evidence of Robinson influencing use of personnel both in the past and under Vrabel. Add in that having Mariota pan out is a huge coup for Robinson. His entire plan since being GM was to build around Mariota. He's changed coaches/schemes and systematically added players to upgrade (on paper) around him. It's logical that he would want to validate the plan/moves before moving on because of the collateral damage - a plan's failure ultimately leads to questions about the planner not to mention it puts solving QB on the front burner whereas the alternative world is that Mariota plays well enough to win games and appease the ownership and fan base. People are clinging to AAS loves Mariota and I cannot help some of that is sexist thinking. I've never said she didn't have a say but it's a big leap to say she dictated he play. It's more plausible to me that Robinson was driving this for the various reasons above. The reality is that the team (GM/coaches) probably thought the Titans would be winning games regardless as opposed to going 2-4 to start. At this point, we do know that the decision makers fucked us. They are likely 7-3 or 8-2 if they had done the right thing for the right reasons. Sexist.... Come on now, no1 thinks she wanted mary 2 make it cause she is a woman. They think that cause she is a owner thinking about business. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Callidus Posted November 12, 2019 Report Share Posted November 12, 2019 (edited) 2 hours ago, big2033 said: This discussion had nothing to do with you it just seems you're still angry because I called you out regarding your unhealthy obsession with backups. Lord help us if Blaine Gabbert is ever back on this team. Mariota sucks, Tannehill is much better, but your weird obsession with backups on this team is insane. So please, continue to tells us how Ryan Tannehill is better for our team than Patrick Mahomes. Help explain it for all the people who said he outplayed him. Can't wait for your response: What makes Ryan Tannehill better than Patrick Mahomes? He is a titan and he is winning games. Im joking i dont think he is better Edited November 12, 2019 by Callidus big2033 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BudsOilers Posted November 12, 2019 Report Share Posted November 12, 2019 19 minutes ago, Callidus said: Sexist.... Come on now, no1 thinks she wanted mary 2 make it cause she is a woman. They think that cause she is a owner thinking about business. I think there are plenty here that dismiss AAS because she's a woman. She was in love with Mularkey too back in the day. Yet she fired him based on Robinson's input. AAS making a proclamation that the team needed to protect the investment in Mariota as a rookie in 2015 is the main basis for her being all in on Mariota. It's easier to blame the owner than it is to question the judgement of the head football guy that by all accounts is allowed to do his job without interference. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nine Posted November 12, 2019 Report Share Posted November 12, 2019 I don’t doubt that the FO and coaches were on the fence about Mariota...but as the incumbent QB and face of the franchise, it was reasonable to give him the benefit of the doubt. Had they replaced Mariota before the season, they likely alienate a significant portion of the fan base and the locker room. “They didn’t even give Marcus a chance to prove himself!” I’m sure there are probably still fans out there who wish Marcus was on the field no matter how poorly he plays....but I doubt anyone in the locker room feels that way. And nobody can say he wasn’t given a fair chance. DrFlamehead 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BudsOilers Posted November 12, 2019 Report Share Posted November 12, 2019 1 minute ago, nine said: I don’t doubt that the FO and coaches were on the fence about Mariota...but as the incumbent QB and face of the franchise, it was reasonable to give him the benefit of the doubt. Had they replaced Mariota before the season, they likely alienate a significant portion of the fan base and the locker room. “They didn’t even give Marcus a chance to prove himself!” I’m sure there are probably still fans out there who wish Marcus was on the field, even as bad as he was....but I doubt anyone in the locker room feels that way. And nobody can say he wasn’t given a fair chance. Of course, the elephant in the room is that Mariota was treated like an elite franchise QB in many ways from day 1 without earning it. From the team, the media, and the fans. He absolutely didn't deserve the benefit of the doubt. The team rightfully should play the best players and Tannehill was better/is better than Mariota. The decision, regardless of the why's, cost them wins. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonboy Posted November 12, 2019 Report Share Posted November 12, 2019 big2033, tgo, and cenj 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsntLifeFunny Posted November 12, 2019 Report Share Posted November 12, 2019 1 hour ago, BudAdams said: I think there are plenty here that dismiss AAS because she's a woman. She was in love with Mularkey too back in the day. Yet she fired him based on Robinson's input. AAS making a proclamation that the team needed to protect the investment in Mariota as a rookie in 2015 is the main basis for her being all in on Mariota. It's easier to blame the owner than it is to question the judgement of the head football guy that by all accounts is allowed to do his job without interference. You keep harping on this. Mariota was a top ten QB in 2016. He was bad in 17, but he was only three years in and we won a playoff game. He gets injured last year and we trade for Tannehill in the offseason. I agree it should have been an open competition, but there’s no point where Robinson could have done more to solidify the position than he already has. The move to get Tannehill looks great. ChemEngr79 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smokes Posted November 12, 2019 Report Share Posted November 12, 2019 Keep in mind at all times it's not just AAS. You have the rest of the clan to consider especially when it's the highest profiled and payed player whom they would have all been invested in from the beginning to the end. The Adams clan are not hurting for an extra bowl of porage, but as a collective they're not the Kahn's or Arthur Blank. Regarding the numbers it's not a shock, said it for some time Mariota's play was David Carr bad and much like when Schuab took over most of all of the deficiency would fade away. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.