Would you, right now, trade EJ for Tannehill straight up?

[Gugny]

Topic title.

 

Seeing as Bills fans tend to overrate QB's that we don't see regularly (i.e. Every QB available right now), I would like to know your opinion on a QB we have at least all seen a couple times.

 

Personally, I believe the Phins are a train wreck. I believe that without Tannehill, they don't sniff 4 wins. As such, I would swap them straight up. Tanny has had monster games, outdueled Brady etc. Clearly he's had some stinkers, as shown by that shutout against us. Still, I believe that every single unit on his team is worse than ours, and his offensive line has been putrid.

 

So, who do you got?

I respectfully disagree. I think Tannehill has been the problem with Miami all along. I think Matt Moore is an instant upgrade

 

That said, I would not trade Manuel for Tannehill. For that matter, I wouldn't trade Orton for Tannehill, either.

 

I would, however, trade Orton for Moore in a heartbeat.

[Maddog69]

FireChan - You are picking out a few stats and giving them more importance than others.

I don't care if EJ throws for 4000yds. or a certain # of TDs. I care if the team is winning. I care if he does stupid things to cost us games. And I care if he can win games in the 4th QTR and overtime. He has so far shown me (in 13 starts) That he can run the offense and win games. He doesn't do stupid things that cost us games. He has been able to lead the team to game winning drives on 5 occasions (actually 6 because he did it twice in one game). I'm fine with his development. I don't think Tannehill is better. Our offensive gameplans are different than Miami's. They don't have Spiller and Jackson to run the ball. They throw the ball downfield more. And don't forget how many of Tannehill's yards are in garbage time when they were trying to come back from a big deficit.

 

So far, Tannehill has had more time to establish himself and really hasn't done much. EJ has been fine in his 13 starts. Give him 22 more and see where he compares to Tannehill. Heck, wouldn't it be cool if EJ, Geno and Tannehill all turned into solid NFL QBs and we had a nice division rivalry for the next 10 years? That would be fun.

 

[Dibs]

QBR and passer rating are not the same thing.

 

The stats tell me, that Tanny has put up better season numbers than EJ. Is that wrong? Is 27 TD's worse than 11? Is 3,900 yards worse than 1,900? Is 8-8 with a less talented team worse than 4-6 with better talent?

 

I don't care.

 

You clearly stated that Tannehill's stats are better than EJ's......even going so far as saying that they speak for themselves.

 

You didn't say "Tannehill's ESPN Total QBR(or whatever you want to call it) is better than EJ's....and it speaks for itself(?)"

 

Again.....it is good for the soul....."I was wrong." C'mon, you can do it. I have faith in you.

 

EDIT: btw.....read my sig.

Edited September 24, 2014 by Dibs

[26CornerBlitz]

I don't care.

 

You clearly stated that Tannehill's stats are better than EJ's......even going so far as saying that they speak for themselves.

 

You didn't say "Tannehill's ESPN Total QBR(or whatever you want to call it) is better than EJ's....and it speaks for itself(?)"

 

Again.....it is good for the soul....."I was wrong." C'mon, you can do it. I have faith in you.

 

EDIT: btw.....read my sig.

 

http://youtu.be/WkqgDoo_eZE

[FireChan]

I don't care.

 

You clearly stated that Tannehill's stats are better than EJ's......even going so far as saying that they speak for themselves.

 

You didn't say "Tannehill's ESPN Total QBR(or whatever you want to call it) is better than EJ's....and it speaks for itself(?)"

 

Again.....it is good for the soul....."I was wrong." C'mon, you can do it. I have faith in you.

 

EDIT: btw.....read my sig.

 

So, you don't care that you made a mistake, only that I did? Maybe you should read your sig. WWF doesn't stand for the World Wrestling Federation.

 

I'll admit that I was unclear about the discrepancy between Tanny's percentage stats vs. EJ's. I should have said season stats. That was a mistake, but does not invalidate my point.

 

FireChan - You are picking out a few stats and giving them more importance than others.

I don't care if EJ throws for 4000yds. or a certain # of TDs. I care if the team is winning. I care if he does stupid things to cost us games. And I care if he can win games in the 4th QTR and overtime. He has so far shown me (in 13 starts) That he can run the offense and win games. He doesn't do stupid things that cost us games. He has been able to lead the team to game winning drives on 5 occasions (actually 6 because he did it twice in one game). I'm fine with his development. I don't think Tannehill is better. Our offensive gameplans are different than Miami's. They don't have Spiller and Jackson to run the ball. They throw the ball downfield more. And don't forget how many of Tannehill's yards are in garbage time when they were trying to come back from a big deficit.

 

So far, Tannehill has had more time to establish himself and really hasn't done much. EJ has been fine in his 13 starts. Give him 22 more and see where he compares to Tannehill. Heck, wouldn't it be cool if EJ, Geno and Tannehill all turned into solid NFL QBs and we had a nice division rivalry for the next 10 years? That would be fun.

 

I assumed that EJ's garbage time and Tanny's garbage time were about equal. The only major deficit the Dolphins were in was when they played the Saints.

 

I'll admit I find the 10 point difference in QBR much more substantial than the .1 difference n YPA. I mean, don't you? Do you think Tanny has done more stupid things to cost them games than EJ? Can you show me that? Do you care that Tanny went 8-8 last year, a better winning percentage than EJ with many of the same opponents? That Tanny lost to TB by 3 points, instead of by 20 and throwing 4 picks? Or how Tanny threw for 3 TD's against the Steelers, who rattled EJ all day?

 

Here's my last questions, who has the better team, barring QB? If EJ throws for 24 TD's 3,900 yards, and 17 INT's, would you be fine with his development? Would you say he hasn't proven much?

 

The point of this thread wasn't really to compare Tanny's second year to EJ's first. It devolved that way. I don't believe it's a fair comparison, for obvous reasons. The real heart of the matter was, do you believe that EJ's second year will outperform Tanny's? If so, then you wouldn't do the trade. If not, you would. It was more of a "do you roll the dice with EJ's growth or take Tanny's already apparent growth" question. Personally, I believe EJ has a chance to be better than Tanny. However, I would not bet on that chance, I would take the "safer" bet of Tannehill.

Edited September 24, 2014 by FireChan

[Maddog69]

My thinking on this issue is this.

 

I haven't watched enough of Tannehill to have a definitive opinion about his development. In the games against us, I think he's been bad.

In the games I've seen from EJ (all of his NFL games), I like what I've seen. I would like to see him be more aggressive at times and get more deep throws and more throws to the end zone. But I keep in the back of my mind that he has only started 13 games. Of those, he's had 3-4 stinkers. But he's also looked good at time (very good sometimes). I have no interest in considering trading him for any other teams starter, especially a guy further along in his career that has done little to show that he is any further along in development. Now if we could trade for a stud QB, then yes I'd be all for it. But at this point I am more than happy to stick with EJ and see how he develops. I'm just really sick of all of the bashing and I think I'm going to stay off of TBD for a while. It's not worth the aggravation. Have a good day and GO BILLS!

[Gugny]

If EJ throws for 24 TD's 3,900 yards, and 17 INT's, we're going to the playoffs.

[FireChan]

I respectfully disagree. I think Tannehill has been the problem with Miami all along. I think Matt Moore is an instant upgrade

 

That said, I would not trade Manuel for Tannehill. For that matter, I wouldn't trade Orton for Tannehill, either.

 

I would, however, trade Orton for Moore in a heartbeat.

 

Really? Why is that?

 

My thinking on this issue is this.

 

I haven't watched enough of Tannehill to have a definitive opinion about his development. In the games against us, I think he's been bad.

In the games I've seen from EJ (all of his NFL games), I like what I've seen. I would like to see him be more aggressive at times and get more deep throws and more throws to the end zone. But I keep in the back of my mind that he has only started 13 games. Of those, he's had 3-4 stinkers. But he's also looked good at time (very good sometimes). I have no interest in considering trading him for any other teams starter, especially a guy further along in his career that has done little to show that he is any further along in development. Now if we could trade for a stud QB, then yes I'd be all for it. But at this point I am more than happy to stick with EJ and see how he develops. I'm just really sick of all of the bashing and I think I'm going to stay off of TBD for a while. It's not worth the aggravation. Have a good day and GO BILLS!

 

This wasn't a bashing thread, I made it long before the season, let alone the Chargers game. As I reiterated earlier, it's an "odds," thread. Don't go!

[Dibs]

 

So, you don't care that you made a mistake, only that I did? Maybe you should read your sig. WWF doesn't stand for the World Wrestling Federation.

 

I'll admit that I was unclear about the discrepancy between Tanny's percentage stats vs. EJ's. I should have said season stats. That was a mistake, but does not invalidate my point.

......

 

:lol: No. I don't care about quibbling over what one should call ESPN's Total QBR. Call it what you like, it doesn't change the fact that you were wrong,

 

One more chance. You stated Tannehill's stats speak for themselves when compared to EJ's. They don't! EJ's stats are better. Tannehill has had better Total QBR......but that isn't what you wrote.

 

C'mon. It's cathartic. Say it with me. "I" "was" "wrong."

[FireChan]

:lol: No. I don't care about quibbling over what one should call ESPN's Total QBR. Call it what you like, it doesn't change the fact that you were wrong,

 

One more chance. You stated Tannehill's stats speak for themselves when compared to EJ's. They don't! EJ's stats are better. Tannehill has had better Total QBR......but that isn't what you wrote.

 

C'mon. It's cathartic. Say it with me. "I" "was" "wrong."

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_Quarterback_Rating

 

abbreviated as total QBR or simply QBR

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passer_rating

 

You can't just make stuff up and hope you are right. There is an entire internet out there ready to prove you wrong when you do that.

 

Anyway, I just said I was mistaken. "I should have said season stats. That was a mistake, but does not invalidate my point."

 

Are you done with the childish antics yet?

[Maddog69]

I thought I was wrong once. But I wasn't. LOL.

 

[johnwalter]

why would you not put a poll on a thread like this?

[Dibs]

http://en.wikipedia....rterback_Rating

 

abbreviated as total QBR or simply QBR

 

http://en.wikipedia....i/Passer_rating

 

You can't just make stuff up and hope you are right. There is an entire internet out there ready to prove you wrong when you do that.

 

Anyway, I just said I was mistaken. "I should have said season stats. That was a mistake, but does not invalidate my point."

 

Are you done with the childish antics yet?

 

Okay....I'll quibble over irrelevancies. Before 2011 there was no Total QBR. The passer rating was referred to as QBR. ESPN themselves call it Total QBR because when it was first introduced they needed to differentiate it from QBR. The passer rating link you gave states "also known as QB Rating".

 

Having used the term for many a decade(regularly reading the QBR stats in Pro Football Weekly magazine), I am not going to adjust an old standard.......particularly if the only place that has the new "QBR" themselves call it Total QBR.

 

 

 

"You should have said season stats"???

 

NO! You should have said QBR(or Total QBR or whatever). You however said stats. EJ has the better stats. You were wrong.

 

 

Edited September 24, 2014 by Dibs

[FireChan]

Okay....I'll quibble over irrelevancies. Before 2011 there was no Total QBR. The passer rating was referred to as QBR. ESPN themselves call it Total QBR because when it was first introduced they needed to differentiate it from QBR. The passer rating link you gave states "also known as QB Rating".

 

Having used the term for many a decade(regularly reading the QBR stats in Pro Football Weekly magazine), I am not going to adjust an old standard.......particularly if the only place that has the new "QBR" themselves call it Total QBR.

 

 

 

"You should have said season stats"???

 

NO! You should have said QBR(or Total QBR or whatever). You however said stats. EJ has the better stats. You were wrong.

 

 

 

You know who else refused to adjust to a new standard? Opponents of Brown v. Board of Education. Please report to over 20 years for reform therapy.

Edited September 24, 2014 by FireChan

[Dibs]

You know who else refused to adjust to a new standard? Opponents of Brown v. Board of Education. Please report to Over 20 years for counseling.

 

Does what we call the rating(QBR, Total QBR, etc) effect the fact that you claimed something that was incorrect? Nope, it doesn't.

 

You called me childish earlier for harping on this......and I agree. I am being childish. Why don't you be an adult and admit you made an error?

[FireChan]

Does what we call the rating(QBR, Total QBR, etc) effect the fact that you claimed something that was incorrect? Nope, it doesn't.

 

You called me childish earlier for harping on this......and I agree. I am being childish. Why don't you be an adult and admit you made an error?

 

Because two wrongs make a right?

 

The correct word is affect, by the way.

Edited September 24, 2014 by FireChan

[Dibs]

http://youtu.be/WkqgDoo_eZE

 

Because two wrongs make a right?

 

The correct word is affect, by the way.

 

 

Because two wrongs make a right?

 

The correct word is affect, by the way.

 

You are right. I used the incorrect word. I was wrong.

 

See how easy it is?

 

(Two wrongs don't make a right? Huh???)

[FireChan]

 

 

 

 

 

You are right. I used the incorrect word. I was wrong.

 

See how easy it is?

 

(Two wrongs don't make a right? Huh???)

 

That was the joke.

 

I said I was mistaken. I thought Tanny was better in all of his stats. He wasn't. I should have said season total stats. I don't know why you continue.

Edited September 24, 2014 by FireChan

[Gugny]

Really? Why is that?

 

I'm just not sold on the guy, that's all. I know he had a decent year last year and a not-horrible year the year before. It's just a hunch. I don't believe he's going to be good in the long-term.

[Dibs]

That was the joke.

 

I said I was mistaken. I thought Tanny was better in all of his stats. He wasn't. I should have said season total stats. I don't know why you continue.

 

There you go. Welcome back to the conversation.