Levis named the starter moving forward

[Justafan]

1 minute ago, titanruss said:

Henry was a heisman winner. He was the all time record holder in high school. A 2000 yard back in college. No QB made that happen.  
 

He showed a ton of promise early in his career but Mularkey wanted Murray on the field a year too long. Still, he arguably had a better per carry success those first three years than the past three. 
 

The second half of 2018 he had a ton of success and did it on his own. The "Eddie George talk" happened that year and was talked about before Tannehill was even on the team. Those last ~10 games he was possibly the best back in the league and it isn't just the two huge games. There was also the playoffs and a solid to great per carry average in every game but 1.

 

Before Tannehill came into any game in 2019 Henry was averaging nearly 100 total yards and a TD. That's top tier production. 
 

No QB made that happen.

 

Rt came in and was a catalyst. But you could also say "aj came in and was a catalyst" or "Arthur smith came in and was a catalyst"

 

Tannehill has looked nowhere near the same since smith left... and even worse without AJ. 
 

Yet...

Henry is still one of the most productive backs in the league with an outside chance he's still on the team next season. With Levis deep ball pulling the defense back, Henry could be a top 3 all around back and even possibly lead the league in rushing again. 

I get the college accolades but I think if you start examining Heisman winners for NFL production you'll be disappointed.

 

He showed promise but was a disappointment. The EG talk happened because he was underperforming and there were rumors the Team was looking to offload him.

 

The second half of 2018 had two great games, two average games of 80-90 yards, and 4 games of 58, 46, 30, 40 yards.  He failed to break 60 yards a game the entire first half of that season. He was 13th in the league in YPA and there is not a single metric you can find to argue he was the best RB in the league over those 10 games. 

 

In 2019 Henry was averaging 3.5 yards a carry until Tannehill got there. He was not good, no matter what you claim. He got 100 yards on 27 carries. That's not what you want from a productive RB - especially when teams do RBBC across the league if you look at team running efficiency stats - he was bad. 

 

You can't say any of those other players were the catalyst because all of those pieces had time with the offense.  The only thing that changed was Tannehill.  

[reo]

https://atozsports.com/nashville/mike-vrabel-titans-will-levis-ryan-tannehill-decision-news/?fbclid=IwAR2FL6DIj0Tq4B4tI8VafIWk55YPnl56KDZIFE_fe5uqcwtWjA1AMJsP4CU

 

Dude... Vrabel did not want to do this. He was forced into Levis.

 

I think he's done after this season and he knows it. NE rumors might be true.

[Jamalisms]

[Justafan]

9 minutes ago, scine09 said:

I was just providing you an example of a QB who played with a star running back that did absolutely nothing in his time without the star running back.  Like you'd asked for.

 

Yesterday you said you never thought that Tannehill was ever elite.  Yet you talk about him like he was elite at least at some point.  It's why you're grouped with the people who think that Tannehill can do no wrong even though you yourself said that you don't believe he was ever elite.

 

The truth is we'll never know why Henry became what he was late in the 2018 season.  Didn't he have a talk with Eddie George and something seemed to click?  I remember after the NE game there was talk that maybe the Titans would just get rid of him as he seemed to have been on par with David Fluellen at that point.  Fluellen got hurt and a few weeks later something seemed to click.  Maybe his confidence grew?  Maybe he made a subtle change after the talk with George?  Who knows?  Whatever it was, it began before Tannehill became the quarterback.

I don't think Tannehill was elite.  I do think he put up elite numbers but of course he had a lot of help.  What I don't think is that he got carried their kicking and screaming by DH like Big tries to propose. The logic doesn't follow at all.

 

I do thank you for coming up with the example. I certainly hadn't thought of that one, but it has holes - as does every example I can easily come up with - in it from the premise that is being pushed about RBs elevating QBs is all I'm pointing out. 

[big2033]

17 minutes ago, oldschool said:

@Justafan you are wasting your time. He's not interested in debate or review of data points. In his mind Henry is responsible for good QB play and the QB is responsible for bad QB play. 

 

Lol that's BS. I once said Henry is responsible for his bad play too. Ask @Mythos27.

 

I'm consistent and don't play favorites. I think Tannehill simply performs better under a certain style. And probably could have similar success as long as he was on a team that main the run game the focal point.

[big2033]

1 minute ago, Justafan said:

I don't think Tannehill was elite.  I do think he put up elite numbers but of course he had a lot of help.  What I don't think is that he got carried their kicking and screaming by DH like Big tries to propose. The logic doesn't follow at all.

 

I do thank you for coming up with the example. I certainly hadn't thought of that one, but it has holes - as does every example I can easily come up with - in it from the premise that is being pushed about RBs elevating QBs is all I'm pointing out. 

 

LOL I never proposed that ... I think you don't like the way I put things. Which is a theme around here. Don't be too blunt regarding Tannehill or everyone gets defensive.

 

It was probably my tractor, trailer line. Which ironically is something a GM said about him.

Edited November 9, 2023 by big2033

[Justafan]

4 minutes ago, Jamalisms said:

When you're done being a douche, feel free to contribute. 

[Justafan]

2 minutes ago, big2033 said:

 

Lol that's BS. I once said Henry is responsible for his bad play too. Ask @Mythos27.

 

I'm consistent and don't play favorites. I think Tannehill simply performs better under a certain style. And probably could have similar success as long as he was on a team that main the run game the focal point.

I don't disagree with that assessment.  I do think he's best in a PA offense and he's not a guy who can do it all on his own. 

[Justafan]

8 minutes ago, Jamalisms said:

 

If I bet you money that I can beat your car in a race, then try to win by riding my bicycle ... does it mean the racecar in my garage wasn't fast or does it mean I'm an idiot?

I'll bet that if you're not an insulting douche you'll get a better reaction. 

[scine09]

4 minutes ago, Justafan said:

I don't think Tannehill was elite.  I do think he put up elite numbers but of course he had a lot of help.  What I don't think is that he got carried their kicking and screaming by DH like Big tries to propose. The logic doesn't follow at all.

 

I do thank you for coming up with the example. I certainly hadn't thought of that one, but it has holes - as does every example I can easily come up with - in it from the premise that is being pushed about RBs elevating QBs is all I'm pointing out. 

Of course.  The idea that Tannehill carried Henry also has holes.  Honestly depending on what side you fall on you're going to make an argument and there's validity on both sides.  I think Big thinks that Tannehill was solid too.  Where the pushback is coming from is the idea that Tannehill was ever elite.  Am I right @big2033?

[Jamalisms]

6 minutes ago, Justafan said:

... feel free to contribute. 

 

To this travesty of a conversation? No thanks.

 

I'll just snipe at the dumb stuff from the sides, thanks much. Pay attention to the snipes, retort less and reconsider more and you might even learn something about where the arguments fail. Your choice, really.

[oldschool]

1 minute ago, scine09 said:

Of course.  The idea that Tannehill carried Henry also has holes.  Honestly depending on what side you fall on you're going to make an argument and there's validity on both sides.  I think Big thinks that Tannehill was solid too.  Where the pushback is coming from is the idea that Tannehill was ever elite.  Am I right @big2033?

 

any conversation on this topic must start with a baseline of Tannehill played great in 2019 and 2020, top 5 stats wise. If you can't admit that, no point in having the conversation.

[big2033]

2 minutes ago, scine09 said:

Of course.  The idea that Tannehill carried Henry also has holes.  Honestly depending on what side you fall on you're going to make an argument and there's validity on both sides.  I think Big thinks that Tannehill was solid too.  Where the pushback is coming from is the idea that Tannehill was ever elite.  Am I right @big2033?

 

100%. 

[big2033]

Just now, oldschool said:

 

any conversation on this topic must start with a baseline of Tannehill played great in 2019 and 2020, top 5 stats wise. If you can't admit that, no point in having the conversation.

 

And he did play great. 

[titanruss]

From the Jax game in 2018 (you could maybe go back to the NE game to see the slight uptick in production begin) until the game before RT played at all in 2019 ... 11 games including playoffs, Henry had :

 

1157 rush yards, 12 rush TDs. 174 rec yards and 1 rec td... and 6 passing yards. 

 

for... 

 

1337 total yards and 13 tds in 11 games.... Thats over 2000 all purpose yards and 20 TDs across a whole season. 
 

Did the production get even better with RT? Yes! 
 

Did RT "make Henry" into an elite back...  no!

Edited November 9, 2023 by titanruss