That dink and dunk comment was just a barb (which clearly landed) and has nothing to do with the argument at hand...

Yeah it's late sorry, the question is basically if you basically gave Luck someone's career going forward, where do you finally hit the point that you honestly think that Luck, on average, won't have as good of a career? Like if he was going to peak as good as Romo, Brees, or whoever.

I ask because I know a guy from Indy who said today that he would be disappointed if Luck only turned out to be as good as Brees, which I thought was ****ing nuts since it's pretty much impossible to project to QBs on that level regardless of how good they are for their age.

I said there wouldn't be a significant spike in Miami's running game, but hey that's cool

I'm quite familiar with how effective Carolina's offense has been and I've seen their drives stats posted plenty since Cam came into the league. I didn't feel like spending a ton of time dissecting how effective Carolina's offense has been because it's not something I dispute. It's been addressed plenty.

What does Cam do better than Tannehill as a passer? I'd love to hear someone be specific about their skill sets because that was pretty much skipped over aside from a brief mention about Cam's deep ball. Unfortunately the debate just devolved into the 10039481th argument about EPA.

Forgive me for clarifying

Luck should be an all pro at least twice in his career.

Maybe Rivers is the expectation for Luck's path? It's plausible Luck also puts up great efficiency stats but never wins a SB because of his stupid front office and/or head coach.

This is probably SE's biggest blindspot when it comes to NFL analysis. I think when you take out the teams with elite QBs an effective running game is almost essential to offensive success.

If you value being before their time, isn't Johnny Unitas solidly in the top 3?

I can get behind the difference between RT and Scam is smaller than most would think, though I am not ever sure of that as Newton could easily be hamstrung by the staff.

Preferring RT over Scam as a "prospect" seems ridiculous though. Forget the passing stats, he's younger and is not just "athletic" like RT hes proven to be a serious threat when running with the football.

I am guessing there are zero NFL GM's who would trade Scam for RT.

Fortunately, I'm not old enough to have seen Unitas. He probably should be top 3 though based on what the really old folks all say about him. I'm old enough though to have seen all of Marino's career and how different he was compared to anyone else.

LOL @ him Brees is one of the greatest to ever play and in no way does Luck's AVERAGE career surpass Brees actual career. Does this guy know who Drew Brees is?

1) Cam, as mentioned, has thrown a bunch more deep balls. 2) Again with the extremely specific statistics through five games...

Running QBs dictate a different optimal play balance.

As previously mentioned, Cam has an extremely positive effect on the Panthers' running game. Everyone's familiar with and agrees with this part of the value of running quarterbacks. That's not to mention he might be the best short-yardage back of all time himself.

But I don't see why you think % of first downs gained by running vs. passing is particularly relevant here, and I absolutely have no clue why you think "Dolphins gain 76.2% of their first downs passing -> running matters -> Tannehill not to blame". Plenty of QBs have overcome dire running games to play for perfectly productive offenses, probably because they're a lot better than Tannehill.

uh, what? No, it didn't?

Agree with Sublime's post. I'm not low on Tannehill, and I'm sure you've watched him more than I have, so I'm interested to hear your specific thoughts on what he does so well. I think this could be an interesting discussion (or monologue, even) if it went that route. But, to be frank, the position that he's a better asset going forward than Cam, or that Cam has more to prove, is absurd, and so you're kind of grasping at straws to explain away a massive gap in performance that isn't going to be explained away -- and that gap in production is present even with several factors holding Cam back, as well. Cam's a very clear top 5 asset in the league.

Who's the 6th best asset in the league?

Good question. Luck, Rodgers, RW, Cam, Brees top 5? That's without thinking too much about it, open to being swayed. Then RG3/Ryan/Kaep/Peyton?/Tannehill? in some order? RG3 or Ryan or maybe Brees, depending on how much you want to dock him for age, seem reasonable at 6.

Das boot you've cited drive statistics. Teams move the ball via first downs, and the dolphins can't get first downs via running the ball. Pretending that's irrelevant or that doesn't put an obscene amount of pressure on Tannehill is ludicrous. Rofl I'm not comparing Tannehill to Aaron Rodgers or Kurt Warner. The fact that he hasn't taken a horrendous running team to the Super Bowl is not relevant. But lets not pretend that an effective running game doesn't have a significant impact on a QB's performance.

Its not absurd to think Tannehill>Cam as an asset, especially when one QB has shown rapid growth and the other hasn't. I've asked you before, but what exactly does Cam do better than Tannehill? What has Cam improved from year 1 to year 3 iyo?

Wrt deep balls, Cam has thrown 24 passes over 20 yards and completed 7. Tannehill has completed 7 of 16 over 20 yards.

@first paragraph: again, it's not that the structural factors working against Tannehill don't matter at all. It's that QBs have the power to show quite a bit even in bad situations. Thus is their influence over the offense. The drive stats and the individual stats tell the same story. I'm sure Tannehill not in the optimal position to succeed. He just still isn't close to CAM, which is no insult.

Can you point me to examples of QBs who turned out to be very good, but were seriously been held back by a lack of run game? Genuine question. Can't really think of many offhand. Most still show quite a bit. (Not that Tannehill hasn't been decent individually this year, just that I'm not buying the lack of a run game seriously hampering him that much.)

He's a freak athlete who poses unique challenges to defense with his strength, speed, power, and arm. Tannehill is simply a different proposition. Defenses don't need to respect the threat of Tannehill running, whether scrambling or designed, to anywhere close to the level they're forced to respect Cam. Cam also throws an elite deep ball, though apparently that hasn't been effective through 24 attempts this season. Tannehill has good arm strength (though still probably taking Cam on pure throwing power), but hasn't, afaik, shown that same deep ability.

Of course it is when one's rapid growth is from 25th-best QB in the league to something like 17th-best and the other's "plateau" looks something like 8th-best 8th-best 8th-best. Also, you keep ignoring the factors that haven't been in Cam's favor while embracing all that have gone against Tannehill. Newton's head coach is braindead. Newton's new offensive coordinator is an idiot, too, according to Panthers fans/his words/what I've seen. It doesn't seem at all like he's reached his ceiling of performance.

In 5 years:

Luck>>>>>>>>>>>Rustle>>>RGIII>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Ta nny>>>>>>>>>>>>Foles>Cousins>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Kap

Watt deserves some talk by the time you get to that second tier.

edit: nevermind don't really care to debate this

what?

Are you saying that because the fins are forced to lean on Tannehill, that he has more opportunity for success? Like I get that Tannehill throws more, but you're basically throwing out degree of difficulty and the effect of predictable play calling.

I'm not really interested in researching this topic atm, but I can tell you that Rodgers' any/a dropped 2 yards from '11 to '12 after his offensive line and running game fell apart (not a dissimilar situation from Tannehill).


Yes, I've conceded that tannehill doesn't have cam's elite ability to carry the football. Cam's build and his ability to use it effectively when he has the ball in his hands is probably the biggest difference. Their arm strengths otoh are very similar. My eye test tells me Cam has the ~2nd strongest arm behind Stafford and Tannehill is in the next tier with Cutler/Rodgers/Flacco. "Good arm strength" does not do Tannehill justice. Regardless, the value of arm strength diminishes after a QB reaches a certain threshold. He can either make all the throws or he can't, and both of them obv have plenty of arm strength to spare. I do think Tannehill actually uses his arm strength to his advantage much more so than Cam, based on his willingness to attack tight windows. I don't concede that Cam has a better deep ball than Tannehill, though we probably don't have a decent enough sample size to differentiate between the two.

LOL gmafb. I'm well aware he's in that 2nd or 3rd tier of QBs and has been for his entire career. That doesn't mean he can't improve. He's always going to have a high floor because of his running and his effect on his team's running game. But his skill as a passer...his anticipation, his decisiveness, his feel in the pocket. He has plenty he can improve on.

Like you still haven't actually specified something that Cam has improved from year 1 to year 3. I ooh and ahh at his upside just like the rest of SE, but I don't see significant growth in his game.

His coaching certainly hasn't done him any good and it has perhaps stunted his growth, which is $ad because he has perhaps the rarest skill set itl.

if you want i can dig up many many quotes from both of them saying things about players that turned out to be hilariously wrong

1. tannehill

2-9 with 2 interceptions so far against buffalol coming off a bye week.

Lol tweedy

need geno in the title

I'm old enough to have seen Unitas. No QB before 1980(Walsh) deserves to be in the top 5, maybe not even the top 10. Marino is better than Montana. Marino had to throw to two 5'9" receivers. Montana threw to Jerry Rice.

Yes please