PFF Predicting the Future for Henry and Tannehill

[Titans279]

The Titans were 1-3 when Tannehill threw 30 or more passes this year.

[OILERMAN]

PFF is exactly right........

 

If you build this team the right way you extend Tannehill and you'd let Henry walk. Henry could be replaced pretty easily and if Tannehill didn't drop off the offense wouldn't skip a beat. I know fans fall in love with RBs and Henry is exciting but the facts are getting a RB is easy. 

 

The ideal way would be to load up on defense and add a quality RB, two if they let Henry walk. 

[ctm]

2 hours ago, OILERMAN said:

PFF is exactly right........

 

If you build this team the right way you extend Tannehill and you'd let Henry walk. Henry could be replaced pretty easily and if Tannehill didn't drop off the offense wouldn't skip a beat. I know fans fall in love with RBs and Henry is exciting but the facts are getting a RB is easy. 

 

The ideal way would be to load up on defense and add a quality RB, two if they let Henry walk. 

 

I see it only slightly different.

 

You can't exactly replace what Henry does, but...….if the team was forced to draft either a QB or a RB @#29, would the drop off be greater at replacing RT or Henry?  It's a no-brainer answer.  The drop off would be much, much greater replacing RT.

[Nash]

I'm for signing Tanne..and getting a little better oline for pass protection..whether that includes Conklin or not , I'm just not sure

 

[OILERMAN]

37 minutes ago, ctm said:

 

I see it only slightly different.

 

You can't exactly replace what Henry does, but...….

The article explains, you can 100% replace what he did 

[oldschool]

16 hours ago, reo said:

 

so... yes.

 

Careful about getting polarized in these arguments.

 

He didn't overthrow Firkser. Firkser slowed up.

[oldschool]

8 hours ago, Titans279 said:

The Titans were 1-3 when Tannehill threw 30 or more passes this year.

 

Ask yourself why. Hint: when teams get behind they have to throw. useless stat.

[oldschool]

8 hours ago, IsntLifeFunny said:

He’s right though in terms of that specific play. It lost us the game in definite terms. He’s looking at 9 rushers all within one yard of the LOS versus 7 blockers. Henry was stonewalled and it led to a holding call. A TO is a terrible option there, but it isn’t nearly as bad as actually following through with that play. 

 

The lack of understanding of what Tannehill is and why he had a great year is mind blowing. From my point of view he had two bad plays against the Chiefs. The short hooped throw to Brown and not checking out of the run against goal line in the 3rd quarter. Other than that he made plays an moved the ball like he had all year long. I don't know if its sustainable but one thing that is promising is that he's way more accurate than anyone realized. Ball placement was incredible all year long.

[RisingTitanFan]

Tannehill was too good to move on from.  If your bench mark is "The QB better make the Superbowl or he sucks and he is gone" you are going to be a really bad team for a really long time.    Thank god some of you aren't making the final decision.

 

If he takes a team friendly deal you lock him up.  Its going to take a few years anyway to know for sure that he is or isn't the answer (unless you win the Superbowl next year).  Give yourself some outs in the later years coupled with some major incentives if he delivers.  The guy is reasonable, and WANTS to prove he is as good as he played this year.

[scine09]

9 hours ago, titanruss said:

 

You think that is sustainable? It isn’t. 

 

It’s also extremely schemed... Goff-esque season but with legs. 

Many are on the fence still and should be. He proved He can’t win when Henry doesn’t have a big game 4 times. 
 

Does it mean that won’t change? No of course not. But there’s history of failure before here and he hit a streak in a scheme that fits him well. Maybe he can be that guy... and I’m sure we will re-sign him. 
 

.. but of course there’s going to be people not convinced. Especially after mariota and the exact same arguments but from the other side. 
 

 

Huh?  Teams lose in the NFL.  Those losses were not on him.  Not even close.

[reo]

1 hour ago, Nash said:

I'm for signing Tanne..and getting a little better oline for pass protection..whether that includes Conklin or not , I'm just not sure

 

 

I don't want to touch the OL unless it means a new center to groom. We've got plenty of talent there. They need to gel and to keep improving. In order to replace Conklin, you'd have to spend in FA or spend in draft capital (probably a 1st) and I'd much rather spend both on improving this team somewhere else. I think a 1st round pick at corner that could play in the slot and compete outside would improve this team much more than maybe a slight improvement at RT. A good pass rusher in the 1st would improve this team more as well.

 

I'm not a fan of creating holes in the roster by not resigning our guys just to have to use a high draft pick to fill that hole we just created.

[StephenIsLegend]

17 hours ago, Righteous said:

No, you are trying to overlook his shortcomings.  

 

Every game winning drive is not in the fourth quarter.  I heard J. Winston say in a high scoring game when he was at FSU that he had to keep scoring until the defense got a stop.  That was his job as the QB.  I’ve also heard the defense from Miami tell the offense to give them 17 points and that’s all they needed to win.  That’s how football works.  The defense gave Tannehill the ball back with the score 17-21.  It was his chance to deliver.  So as you said, in a goal line defense in the middle of the field, he failed to audible into something different.  No as simple as you make it out to seem.  If he audibles there and makes a big play, it picks up the offense...it picks up the defense, it swings momentum back to our side, it make it a little harder for Andy Reid to breathe...that was potentially the game winning drive.  

 

But instead Tannehill fail to audible and he failed the defense.  And you know, his failure on that drive took the life out of all of us.  You are right, of course Tannehill should have known the D wouldn’t be able to contain Mahomes all day and he would have had to reward every stop with a score.   Instead he handed the ball to Henry because he knows and I know that he is not that guy.  I want that guy at QB.  Do you think Brady misses that chance for a big play?  Tannehill was covered up for the entire playoffs.  Yeah, so it is obvious that we don’t look at football the same.

You sound like a fucking retard with this post. 

[BudsOilers]

10 hours ago, Oiler FANatic said:

I laugh at all of the posters here who think that Tannehill is something truly special in the same way that Derrick Henry is. 

 

It's not even about that.  A good QB (and I consider Tannehill good not great) is worth more in terms of winning that a great RB.  The Mariota/Tannehill change was a prime example of this.

 

You can replace Henry's productivity with a couple of backs fairly easily - not as exciting mind you - but look at SF for example.  RB by committee.  Good QB's are much harder to find and the Titans completely lucked into one.

[japan]

8 minutes ago, BudAdams said:

 

It's not even about that.  A good QB (and I consider Tannehill good not great) is worth more in terms of winning that a great RB.  The Mariota/Tannehill change was a prime example of this.

 

You can replace Henry's productivity with a couple of backs fairly easily - not as exciting mind you - but look at SF for example.  RB by committee.  Good QB's are much harder to find and the Titans completely lucked into one.

Anyone arguing otherwise on this needs their head examined.

[BudsOilers]

10 hours ago, titanruss said:

You think that is sustainable? It isn’t. 

 

It’s also extremely schemed... Goff-esque season but with legs. 

Many are on the fence still and should be. He proved He can’t win when Henry doesn’t have a big game 4 times. 
 

Does it mean that won’t change? No of course not. But there’s history of failure before here and he hit a streak in a scheme that fits him well. Maybe he can be that guy... and I’m sure we will re-sign him. 
 

.. but of course there’s going to be people not convinced. Especially after mariota and the exact same arguments but from the other side.

 

I don't expect Tannehill to produce an offense with the level of red zone efficiency they had.  I also expect some down tick in passer rating and YPA.  Saying that, he's got a cannon arm, mobility, and throws accurate balls.  He has flaws - his pocket presence and ball protection in the pocket is average to poor. 

 

The real issue is that Tannehill has this predetermined bias against him like he's Case Keenum when in fact he was the 8th overall pick in the 2012 draft.  Ironically, he's exactly what everyone hoped Mariota would be - mobile, accurate, productive.

 

The Titans are not getting an elite QB.  Brady is no longer one at 43 nor is Brees, Rivers, etc.  The Titans had a chance at one elite QB in this regime and we just played him.  At least we have Corey Davis.......

 

People are getting caught up in the contract numbers - RT is going to get paid just like guys such as Stafford, Garrapolo, Goff, etc. did.  Someone will probably shell out big money for Brady too hoping it's 2010 instead of 2020.