Lamar gets franchise tagged - able to negotiate with other teams now

[big2033]

2 minutes ago, AussieTitanFan08 said:

 

 

This is what most people with common sense have been saying. It's not about the money, he deserves a big contract, it's the compensation.

[FireInTheHole]

I hope the Colts trade for Lamar. It would bode well for the Titans. 

[ctm]

It's also the guaranteed salary and the injury risk.

[oldschool]

11 minutes ago, ctm said:

It's also the guaranteed salary and the injury risk.

 

Its the combination of the two in my opinion. I have to think there at least a few teams that would offer Jackson the same contract the Ravens did with 130M+ guaranteed but doing that plus giving up two picks is a hard pill to swallow for a player like Jackson.

[Thrill]

2 hours ago, Mythos27 said:

None of this is correct though. Tannehill helped put the Titans up by 14 early in the game. 2 TDs and no picks isn't just fine. It's good. Had he put up 300 yards instead of 88 you'd be saying it's good too and that's because you over-value volume stats like passing yards. It's the same reason you are still claiming Lamar was "solid" even after I pointed out he was responsible for one TD but 3 turnovers and completed 52% of his passes. That's not solid, it's terrible and he lost them that game. His turnover helped the Titans established an early lead that allowed them to pound Henry the rest of game. Your analysis of that game is off. Lamar was better in the game they beat us but that was on the back of his running; his passing that day was pedestrian as was Tannehill's to be honest.

 

If you want to make the argument that Tannehill has overall been "meh" in the playoffs during his tenure, you'll get no argument from me. It's one of my criticisms of him. But to say that he has been awful and yet somehow Lamar has been not only better but actually good just flies in the face of the facts. If Lamar was what you think he is, he wouldn't be in the situation he is with the Ravens. He's a young, NFL MVP and yet they're willing to lose him. Ask yourself why without deflecting to Tannehill. 

 

Edit: I forgot to add that the one game I do think Tannehill was bad in was the Bengals game. Overall though, I'd say he's been closer to meh than bad. 

It’s not over valuing passing yards when he only completed 7 passes. He played about a quarter of football and Derrick Henry won them the game.

[BudsOilers]

3 minutes ago, oldschool said:

 

Its the combination of the two in my opinion. I have to think there at least a few teams that would offer Jackson the same contract the Ravens did with 130M+ guaranteed but doing that plus giving up two picks is a hard pill to swallow for a player like Jackson.

 

Add in the production.  He's never come close to 2019 since then.  Hard to pay him with production getting worse/injuries more common.  The dumb fuck should have taken the Ravens offer last offseason.

 

[Mythos27]

2 minutes ago, Thrill said:

It’s not over valuing passing yards when he only completed 7 passes. He played about a quarter of football and Derrick Henry won them the game.

You are most definitely over-valuing passing yards. You just said a guy that threw for 1 TD 2 completed 52% of his passes and had 3 turnovers was "solid". Henry certainly helped win the game, but Tannehill and the passing game set the table. We saw what happens when the passing game can't get going early when we lost to them in the playoffs the year after. The only playoff games I would say Henry definitely carried us were the Patriots game and the Chiefs game back when Mariota was still QB. He had a monster day vs the Ravens no doubt but he didn't carry us because he didn't have to.  

[BudsOilers]

7 minutes ago, Mythos27 said:

You are most definitely over-valuing passing yards. You just said a guy that threw for 1 TD 2 completed 52% of his passes and had 3 turnovers was "solid". Henry certainly helped win the game, but Tannehill and the passing game set the table. We saw what happens when the passing game can't get going early when we lost to them in the playoffs the year after. The only playoff games I would say Henry definitely carried us were the Patriots game and the Chiefs game back when Mariota was still QB. He had a monster day vs the Ravens no doubt but he didn't carry us because he didn't have to.  

 

The Titans were up 14-0 largely from the passing game.  Tannehill had 2 TD on 6-10 passing for 79 yards and a 124 passer rating at HT.  Henry had 11 carries for 56 yards at HT.

 

It was 14-6 when Henry busted hthe 66 yard run and they scored 2 plays later to go up 21-6.   They got a TO on the next Bal possession and Tannehill scored a running TD to ice it at 28-6.

 

Tannehill clearly was the better QB in that game.  Laughable to claim otherwise unless you're just a moron.

[DecepticonShawn2]

6 minutes ago, BudsOilers said:

 

The Titans were up 14-0 largely from the passing game.  Tannehill had 2 TD on 6-10 passing for 79 yards and a 124 passer rating at HT.  Henry had 11 carries for 56 yards at HT.

 

It was 14-6 when Henry busted hthe 66 yard run and they scored 2 plays later to go up 21-6.   They got a TO on the next Bal possession and Tannehill scored a running TD to ice it at 28-6.

 

Tannehill clearly was the better QB in that game.  Laughable to claim otherwise unless you're just a moron.

The play before the Henry jump pass TD to Corey Davis, Tannehill threw an easy pass right into a wide open Darius Jennings in the end zone that hit him square in his hands which he of course dropped. If he catches that pass Tannehill would have been responsible for every td in that game but yeah he played like shit is what morons keep running with. 

[Mythos27]

It's discussions like these that are disheartening because IMO Thrill is a solid poster. Them volume stats though. 

[Thrill]

3 hours ago, Mythos27 said:

It's discussions like these that are disheartening because IMO Thrill is a solid poster. Them volume stats though. 

Love you dawg! I don’t even care about volume stats and realize it wasn’t the best angle to take. I feel like I just get put in a position where no one wants to argue any counter points to the three posters here with 20,000+ posts who troll the board all day. So I get ganged up on and have to argue three different people at once. By the end of it they’re arguing something totally different than what we started with and calling me a retard for not keeping up with the ever-moving goalpost. 
 

I think there is a huge contingent of this board who’s generally far less gung-ho about Tannehill over other QB options but don’t speak up because it’s too exhausting to fight with 3 or 4 dudes who enjoy nothing more than to talk shit to you. 

[animatormike]

12 minutes ago, Thrill said:

Love you dawg! I don’t even care about volume stats and realize it wasn’t the best angle to take. I feel like I just get put in a position where no one wants to argue any counter points to the three posters here with 20,000+ posts who troll the board all day. So I get ganged up on and have to argue three different people at once. By the end of it they’re arguing something totally different than what we started with and calling me a retard for not keeping up with the ever-moving goalpost. 
 

I think there is a huge contingent of this board who’s generally far less gung-ho about Tannehill over other QB options but don’t speak up because it’s too exhausting to fight with 3 or 4 dudes who enjoy nothing more than to talk shit to you. 

What a tard.

[BudsOilers]

There's no goal post moving here.  Tannehill is a better QB than Lamar Jackson since he's been a Titan.   The 4 year comparison of production shows this.  Same for the 3 year view and 2 year view.  The All 22 also shows this.  Why?  Because the main role of a QB is to pass the ball.  If you think otherwise, yes you are wrong and may be a retard.

 

You might ask yourself why Tannehill, being so bad, got two big contract extensions, whereas Lamar has yet to get one even though he could have been extended as early as 2021 just like Buffalo did with Josh Allen.  

 

I'll say it - Lamar Jackson might be the most overrated player in the NFL from fans and the media.  He may also be one of the dumbest players in the NFL for not hiring an agent and botching his only chance at a pay day.

[IsntLifeFunny]

5 hours ago, BudsOilers said:

 

They just were fucked.  Bad luck.

I'd rather be fucked with someone who can attempt a pass than someone who can't. Once the Eagles realized he couldn't throw it was pointless to have him on the field. 

[rns90]

10 hours ago, OILERMAN said:

 

He played well minus the turnover

 

What's bad for the Eagles is they stayed almost completely healthy, had the easiest schedule of all time, including two super easy playoff games and got the perfect game from Hurts, and still lost. 

 

They may never get there again. 

 

I agree with this.  The road is always tougher the next year for the Super Bowl loser and you have to figure a few of these teams will stay healthy/rise up and challenge them (Rams and Saints, as a couple of random loser teams which may turn their season around).

 

Plus I think their secondary is getting old.