Brady to Titans Rumors

[socaltitan]

5 minutes ago, smokeater said:

Toxic situation in Miami.  It’s obviously not a toxic situation in NE. We got very lucky. 

Based on what? Adam Gase? It was a new regime that decided not to keep Tannehill. They actually took on most of his salary just to get rid of him in that trade. Tannehill was a mediocre QB for 7 years. He played great at the right time.

Edited February 21, 2020 by socaltitan

[NashvilleNinja]

3 hours ago, BudAdams said:

Brady EPA - the idea that Brady is the version that was the GOAT is far fetched.

 

 

2019 was a very down year for him, but the idea that he's been horrible for the last three years or declining doesn't look to be that accurate looking at that chart. 2018 was down more than 16 and 17, but not by much.

 

Gronk didn't have a huge impact for him in 2018 and he was retired this year. The Patriots have been very active the last couple of years trying to offset the lack/loss of Gronk. Trading for Brandin Cooks, signing Josh Gordon and sticking with him longer than I ever thought they would given how inconsistent his availability has been, getting into somewhat of a bidding war to get Adam Humphries, trying to make things work with Antonio Brown, and then trading for Sanu. Brady could have been falling off the past couple of years but missing a guy like Gronk and having such instability at WR can take its toll. Julian Edleman is decent, but I've always thought he was a poor man's Wes Welker. He's nobody to build an offensive attack around. He's the guy you use to build around somebody else like Gronk. Also, the Patriots RB situation is gag-inducing.

 

I know you and Oman hate the idea of Brady here, but if their offense being inconsistent was as much a function of lack of weapons as any age-related shit from Brady then you'd have to be at least a little hopeful given the fact our offense is much better built than the Patriots. You think Tannehill is great in PA, and he was, but there's reason to think Brady would be even better in PA with Henry in the backfield. And for all of Tanny's superlatives in 2019, he did have a tendency at times to hang on to the ball too long. Brady likely wouldn't.

 

I could see a similar offense to 2019, but there would be the potential for more downfield passing. AJ Brown would continue being great, but maybe Corey Davis could finally find his game here. Also, maybe the Humphries signing won't look so much like wasted money.

[TerryBoats]

5 minutes ago, NashvilleNinja said:

 

2019 was a very down year for him, but the idea that he's been horrible for the last three years or declining doesn't look to be that accurate looking at that chart. 2018 was down more than 16 and 17, but not by much.

 

Gronk didn't have a huge impact for him in 2018 and he was retired this year. The Patriots have been very active the last couple of years trying to offset the lack/loss of Gronk. Trading for Brandin Cooks, signing Josh Gordon and sticking with him longer than I ever thought they would given how inconsistent his availability has been, getting into somewhat of a bidding war to get Adam Humphries, trying to make things work with Antonio Brown, and then trading for Sanu. Brady could have been falling off the past couple of years but missing a guy like Gronk and having such instability at WR can take its toll. Julian Edleman is decent, but I've always thought he was a poor man's Wes Welker. He's nobody to build an offensive attack around. He's the guy you use to build around somebody else like Gronk. Also, the Patriots RB situation is gag-inducing.

 

I know you and Oman hate the idea of Brady here, but if their offense being inconsistent was as much a function of lack of weapons as any age-related shit from Brady then you'd have to be at least a little hopeful given the fact our offense is much better built than the Patriots. You think Tannehill is great in PA, and he was, but there's reason to think Brady would be even better in PA with Henry in the backfield. And for all of Tanny's superlatives in 2019, he did have a tendency at times to hang on to the ball too long. Brady likely wouldn't.

 

I could see a similar offense to 2019, but there would be the potential for more downfield passing. AJ Brown would continue being great, but maybe Corey Davis could finally find his game here. Also, maybe the Humphries signing won't look so much like wasted money.

Tannehill was exponentially better than Brady last year and it had nothing to do with Henry or AJ Brown.  

[NashvilleNinja]

6 minutes ago, abc2330 said:

Tannehill was exponentially better than Brady last year and it had nothing to do with Henry or AJ Brown.  

 

Exponentially = statistically. Statistics can be made to tell whatever story you want to tell.

 

Do you think the Patriots would have performed better with Tannehill than Brady last year?

[TerryBoats]

16 minutes ago, NashvilleNinja said:

 

Exponentially = statistically. Statistics can be made to tell whatever story you want to tell.

 

Do you think the Patriots would have performed better with Tannehill than Brady last year?

Hell yes.  Tannehill exceeded his expected completion % by 8% , most in the league.  That's a completely separate measure from statistics, and instead focused on the probably of the completion taking receiver separation, air yards of the attempt, etc into account.  Brady was -3.1%, even worse than Mariota in this measure.  The offense is very likely a complete dog with Brady, as defenses could once again focus on the run and forcing Brady to make throws that he couldn't last year, and that Tannehill was making with regularity.

Edited February 21, 2020 by abc2330

[BudsOilers]

5 minutes ago, NashvilleNinja said:

 

2019 was a very down year for him, but the idea that he's been horrible for the last three years or declining doesn't look to be that accurate looking at that chart. 2018 was down more than 16 and 17, but not by much.

 

Gronk didn't have a huge impact for him in 2018 and he was retired this year. The Patriots have been very active the last couple of years trying to offset the lack/loss of Gronk. Trading for Brandin Cooks, signing Josh Gordon and sticking with him longer than I ever thought they would given how inconsistent his availability has been, getting into somewhat of a bidding war to get Adam Humphries, trying to make things work with Antonio Brown, and then trading for Sanu. Brady could have been falling off the past couple of years but missing a guy like Gronk and having such instability at WR can take its toll. Julian Edleman is decent, but I've always thought he was a poor man's Wes Welker. He's nobody to build an offensive attack around. He's the guy you use to build around somebody else like Gronk. Also, the Patriots RB situation is gag-inducing.

 

I know you and Oman hate the idea of Brady here, but if their offense being inconsistent was as much a function of lack of weapons as any age-related shit from Brady then you'd have to be at least a little hopeful given the fact our offense is much better built than the Patriots. You think Tannehill is great in PA, and he was, but there's reason to think Brady would be even better in PA with Henry in the backfield. And for all of Tanny's superlatives in 2019, he did have a tendency at times to hang on to the ball too long. Brady likely wouldn't.

 

I could see a similar offense to 2019, but there would be the potential for more downfield passing. AJ Brown would continue being great, but maybe Corey Davis could finally find his game here. Also, maybe the Humphries signing won't look so much like wasted money.

 

I'll make this short and sweet....Aside from never saying Brady was horrible, it comes back to what the reasonable expectations are for 2020 when he's 43.  What Brady has done in NE should mean nothing at this point at least from the Titans perspective.  There are legitimate concerns and there should be.

1. The regression shown in the second half of 2019 for Brady mirrored that of Manning 2014.  The next season was Manning's horrid/final year.
2. Brady will be 43 in August.  The idea that he'll be 2007 Brady or even 2017 Brady is gone.  In fact, everything shows Brady gradually slipping year by year, which makes sense given his age.  The odds of it reversing course, in a new scheme with new players/play caller, is an emotional based thought not really rooted in logic.
3. If NE/BB deems the GOAT to not be worth keeping, that's a huge tell.  Has that guy ever misread these types of things.
4. I have heard the same argument about no weapons as an excuse before many times.  It's almost always the QB.  If you learned ANYTHING from your erroneous support of Pineapple Tebow, it should be this.  Guys like Welker and Edelman were nobodies until Brady made them.  QB's make big money because good ones are not all to plentiful and they run the show on offenses.  It's virtually impossible to have good offenses without good QB play.
5. As for Tannehill and play action, it accounted for 26% of their passes.  Yes, RT can hold the ball too long but with Brady, the end result on a similar situation would likely be a throw away or more dink plays.  The flip side is that Tannehill is a great athlete who can use his mobility to extend plays and run. 

 

The idea of Brady coming here and winning a SB sounds great and I find myself even giving it a slight chance.  Brady and the ex-Pats sticking it to BB.  Then reality sets in.  He's 43,  Tannehill wasn't just better than Brady in 2019.  He was A LOT better.  If JRob and Vrabel do this, it will almost certainly end as a disappointment and it might be way worse than that.

[rns90]

4 minutes ago, BudAdams said:

The idea of Brady coming here and winning a SB sounds great and I find myself even giving it a slight chance.  Brady and the ex-Pats sticking it to BB.  Then reality sets in.  He's 43,  Tannehill wasn't just better than Brady in 2019.  He was A LOT better.  If JRob and Vrabel do this, it will almost certainly end as a disappointment and it might be way worse than that.

I'd normally give this (Brady coming here) very little chance but these are the same guys that thought running out PT for 6 games was a good idea.  Plus you're almost forced to look to draft a qb high this year as well.

[BudsOilers]

I do find it interesting that many of the pro Brady folks were Mariota nut huggers......

[TerryBoats]

1 hour ago, Righteous said:

Why was Tannehill available?  You guys love to talk in circles.

Why were Suh, Landry,Stills, Tunsil, and Fitzpatrick available?  The owner answered this question.  What they were doing wasn't working and they weren't winning, so they blew up a bunch of contracts , got what they could and started over.

Edited February 21, 2020 by abc2330

[tgo]

50 minutes ago, NashvilleNinja said:

 

Exponentially = statistically. Statistics can be made to tell whatever story you want to tell.

 

Do you think the Patriots would have performed better with Tannehill than Brady last year?

 

Absolutely - as long as they adjusted that scheme for him to eliminate or reduce the bevy option routes. 

Edited February 21, 2020 by tgo

[smokeater]

2 hours ago, socaltitan said:

Based on what? Adam Gase? It was a new regime that decided not to keep Tannehill. They actually took on most of his salary just to get rid of him in that trade. Tannehill was a mediocre QB for 7 years. He played great at the right time.

This is why we got so lucky.  The toxicness was simply all the losing going on that caused the regime change. 

[scine09]

You think it's possible that maybe this board overrates Ryan Tannehill?  Yes, he did very well last year.  But if you came to this board and didn't know any better you would think he's among the best QBs in the league.  Which he is not.

[Jonboy]

7 minutes ago, scine09 said:

You think it's possible that maybe this board overrates Ryan Tannehill?  Yes, he did very well last year.  But if you came to this board and didn't know any better you would think he's among the best QBs in the league.  Which he is not.

Statistically, he was among the best. 

[BudsOilers]

2 minutes ago, scine09 said:

You think it's possible that maybe this board overrates Ryan Tannehill?  Yes, he did very well last year.  But if you came to this board and didn't know any better you would think he's among the best QBs in the league.  Which he is not.

 

Possible but it's even more likely that people on here and the media overrate what the 2020 Tom Brady is capable of - whether it's some inane quest for NFL attention, a referendum against Tannehill because of bias or resentment because he destroyed every argument the fan boys used for Mariota, or maybe it's just that most of the posters on here have no clue how to evaluate QB play........

[scine09]

2 minutes ago, Jonboy said:

Statistically, he was among the best. 

I understand that.  And I am for keeping him.  But if you read this board you'd think we're talking about someone on Patrick Mahomes's level.  We're not.

 

I've probably said this 10 times.  If the Titans choose to move on, whether it be for Brady or someone else, there's a reason for it.  They've seen this guy in practice.  They know exactly what he is capable of.  Or at least they have as good an idea as anyone.  If they choose not to re-sign him it's because they think that last year was a mirage and helped out a great deal by the running game and that it came be replicated by someone else.  And that if the running game is shut down that he can't carry the team.

 

I think there are legit arguments on both sides of this.  As well as on Brady.