Does a great RB make Play Action passing better?

[japan]

Big needs to hang it up in this thread.  He's like the anti-vax guy, arguing against the science....

[AJClown]

1 minute ago, logicals said:

For his career, Tannehill has a 122.8 QB rating while running play action. He has an 89.5 QB rating when not running play acton. 

 

For his career, Tannehill’s QB rating drops by over 30 points when not running play action.

 

What more needs to be said about this debate, honestly?

They are going to bring up his 1.5 years to prove the 6 years in Miami was a fluke!

 

Science guys! As if that has anything to do with it.

 

 

[pat]

When a run is called, if the RB is stuffed for a loss that’s pretty much it for play action on that set of downs.  So I guess the QB does depend on the RB to not shit the bed to get play action opportunities.

[OILERMAN]

Big,

 

You're telling everyone to get a reality check about Tannehill and you're the one who said he would suck just like Mariota. 

 

You were amazingly wrong

[big2033]

29 minutes ago, OILERMAN said:

Big,

 

You're telling everyone to get a reality check about Tannehill and you're the one who said he would suck just like Mariota. 

 

You were amazingly wrong

 

I said don't expect much better as before this he had his struggles too.

 

Yes, I'm realistic until the player proves otherwise. Grounded, logical, sometimes to a fault.

 

You and me with Henry ... same thing. You and me with Mariota ... same thing.

[big2033]

23 minutes ago, pat said:

When a run is called, if the RB is stuffed for a loss that’s pretty much it for play action on that set of downs.  So I guess the QB does depend on the RB to not shit the bed to get play action opportunities.

 

There's a million scenarios.

[FinFaninNOVA]

1 hour ago, logicals said:

For his career, Tannehill has a 122.8 QB rating while running play action. He has an 89.5 QB rating when not running play acton. 

 

For his career, Tannehill’s QB rating drops by over 30 points when not running play action.

 

What more needs to be said about this debate, honestly?

What do you think that shows?

[FinFaninNOVA]

56 minutes ago, OILERMAN said:

Big,

 

You're telling everyone to get a reality check about Tannehill and you're the one who said he would suck just like Mariota. 

 

You were amazingly wrong

Certainly not stopping him from being wrong again or is that “wrong still”?

[rns90]

On one side you have all  the board retards, on the other side everyone else.  

[Number9]

3 hours ago, TitanTez said:

You are in a war of words where the wrong will never admit it, why even debate?

This is the most time I have spent in a thread in years.  The debates are about look at me, see what I said.  Yes, a great player is going to make any play they are involved in better, only a person of low intelligence couldn't understand something so simple.  The problem is who said it and people being to dense to understand it may only be 1%-3% difference.  It is now 43 pages over a few inches.  If it was your dick, that would be worth 100 pages.  But on a football field, not so important.

 

But you have idiots in here telling people they are football morons.  It is what it is.

[Number9]

3 hours ago, logicals said:

 

Lol. Maybe in some other alternate reality.

You're barking up the wrong tree.  That statement was for @pat.  That's who you need to see if you want to be straightened out real good about Tannehill and Allen.

 

[StephenIsLegend]

I’m in favor of this thread being locked to save the embarrassment for the retards. Or just keep it open so they can continue to get destroyed. 

[Mythos27]

I continue to be amazed at how they think they're effectively negating empirical data with absolutely 0 data of their own. Some of these guys are actually pretty smart posters. 

[StephenIsLegend]

19 minutes ago, Mythos27 said:

I continue to be amazed at how they think they're effectively negating empirical data with absolutely 0 data of their own. Some of these guys are actually pretty smart posters. 

But, but.. they can’t quantify the heart, or what’s going on in the player’s heads at any given moment! 
 

BUT BUT.. DERRICK HENRY!!

[Mythos27]

8 minutes ago, StephenIsLegend said:

But, but.. they can’t quantify the heart, or what’s going on in the player’s heads at any given moment! 
 

BUT BUT.. DERRICK HENRY!!

I actually think there might be something to the whole psychological factor. As in, is Henry such and freak and such a threat that he can force grown, professional football players to occasionally abandon their defensive responsibilities to the point that it materially affects the passing game. However interesting that question might be though, you have to start from the position that it's likely not the case because the weight of the empirical evidence is on the side of no. You can believe this but given the absence of evidence and the existence or all the contradictory evidence, you can't seriously expect people to agree with you. Now, I'm very much open to new evidence that would actually confirm what we all thought growing up ("gotta run to set up the pass") but if we're being honest that data just doesn't exist. 

 

That said, if there is some psychological factor at play just because we can't literally read their thoughts that doesn't mean it's effect is immeasurable. If I had the time I would seriously go through tons of film to see if I could quantify it.