Welcome to FinHeaven Fans Forums! We're glad to have you here. Please feel free to browse the forum. We'd like to invite you to join our community; doing so will enable you to view additional forums and post with our other members.



VIP Members don't see these ads. Join VIP Now

View Poll Results: Do you think Tannehill should've changed the play to a pass?

Voters
98. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    28 28.57%
  • No

    70 71.43%
Page 29 of 32 FirstFirst ... 242526272829303132 LastLast
Results 281 to 290 of 314

Thread: The Fumble: Tannehill Checked Out of a Run Play

  1. -281
    Shouright's Avatar
    FinHeaven Elite

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    May 2004
    Posts:
    15,064
    vCash:
    1543
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by Zounds View Post
    wtf....why do you think the base play was audibled to a pass??? because it has a higher chance of being successful against that particular front. A pass was the higher probability play, hence the audible.
    It may have had a higher probability of being successful against that particular defensive front, but it also brought with it the risk of the kind of event that could turn the tide in the game, which is what happened. By contrast, a run might've been less successful against the defensive front, but it would've been far less risky in terms of producing a result that could change the game.

    This is why teams have no problem running their running back into an impenetrable wall of defenders when they're trying to run out the clock. They're willing to exchange "failure" in terms of gaining any yardage for the minimization of risk and the depletion of the clock. This is all pretty simple. We've seen it a million times.

    Now, you could argue that the team wasn't yet trying to kill the clock, and I would say that was a mistake on its part at the time. They sure should have been trying to kill the clock IMO, with a 72% chance of winning the game.
    Quote Quote  

  2. -282
    Zounds's Avatar
    Starter

    Status:
    Online
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Jan 2005
    Posts:
    6,898
    vCash:
    14562
    Loc:
    Orlando
    Thanks / No Thanks
    1972 Dolphins Logo
    Quote Originally Posted by shouright View Post
    It may have had a higher probability of being successful against that particular defensive front, but it also brought with it the risk of the kind of event that could turn the tide in the game, which is what happened. By contrast, a run might've been less successful against the defensive front, but it would've been far less risky in terms of producing a result that could change the game.
    Ok now you are just guessing....and now you aren't even talking about the probability of the play being a success, you are changing to the probability of not fumbling. There's a difference. Always changing what you mean when posters shoot holes in your fringe theories.

    Quote Originally Posted by shouright View Post
    This is why teams have no problem running their running back into an impenetrable wall of defenders when they're trying to run out the clock.
    If you actually watched football, you would know that teams do have a problem with running into the backs of an impenetrable wall of defenders when THERE ARE STILL 3 MINUTES LEFT and you are only winning by 2 points.
    Quote Quote  

  3. -283
    Shouright's Avatar
    FinHeaven Elite

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    May 2004
    Posts:
    15,064
    vCash:
    1543
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by Zounds View Post
    Ok now you are just guessing....and now you aren't even talking about the probability of the play being a success, you are changing to the probability of not fumbling. There's a difference. Always changing what you mean when posters shoot holes in your fringe theories.

    If you actually watched football, you would know that teams do have a problem with running into the backs of an impenetrable wall of defenders when THERE ARE STILL 3 MINUTES LEFT and you are only winning by 2 points.
    I suspect you and I are pretty much always going to disagree about everything, and that's fine.
    Quote Quote  

  4. -284
    LandShark13's Avatar
    FinHeaven VIP

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Sep 2009
    Posts:
    1,573
    vCash:
    262
    Loc:
    Miami
    Thanks / No Thanks
    2013 Dolphins LogoMike Wallace 11Cam Wake 91Tannehill 17
    Quote Originally Posted by shouright View Post
    Actually when a single play makes the probability of winning plummet from 72% to 33%, and a great number of different kinds of plays probably would've done nothing of the sort, I think it's pretty proper to question the call itself, rather than the execution of the call.
    Well then if that's what you think then it just makes me feel all that much better about what I think.
    Quote Quote  

  5. -285
    finomenal's Avatar
    Perennial All-Pro

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Jan 2009
    Posts:
    2,528
    vCash:
    1617
    Loc:
    Fort Lauderdale, FL
    Thanks / No Thanks
    I don't play the result. You either trust your QB and allow him to audible or you don't. You either play aggressively or you don't. Tannehill played aggressively against Atlanta in the final drive. If he played aggressively in that last drive against Atlanta and threw a pick, would it have been a bad move? Hell no. I don't like seeing my team playing scared. We've seen way too much of that. Sparano & Wannstache would've run the ball and punted and they got ripped heavily for it. Seems like a lot of posters want to have it both ways.
    Quote Quote  

  6. -286
    sharp's Avatar
    Scout Team

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Apr 2005
    Posts:
    3,335
    vCash:
    2590
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by shouright View Post
    It may have had a higher probability of being successful against that particular defensive front, but it also brought with it the risk of the kind of event that could turn the tide in the game, which is what happened. By contrast, a run might've been less successful against the defensive front, but it would've been far less risky in terms of producing a result that could change the game.

    This is why teams have no problem running their running back into an impenetrable wall of defenders when they're trying to run out the clock. They're willing to exchange "failure" in terms of gaining any yardage for the minimization of risk and the depletion of the clock. This is all pretty simple. We've seen it a million times.

    Now, you could argue that the team wasn't yet trying to kill the clock, and I would say that was a mistake on its part at the time. They sure should have been trying to kill the clock IMO, with a 72% chance of winning the game.

    The only reason I wanted to run in that situation is because we had a positive gain on 1st and had been running well all day for the first time all season.

    But i do not normally agree with play it safe run run run, punt lose game. How many times have we seen playing it safe fail for the dolphins?

    And to people complaining about ball security, I agree tannehill overall needs to not fumble as much. But in this specific instance, he was hit within a second, no one sees that rusher or holds onto that ball. Clabo's fault plain and simple, no one elses. Can't whiff on a guy 1 yard in front of you.

    (On Miami sports teams being popular)

    -“That’s not competition,” LeBron said. “That’s like you rooting for your family members. That’s not competition at all. It would be great to have him, but we’ll see.”

    305
    Quote Quote  

  7. -287
    Shouright's Avatar
    FinHeaven Elite

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    May 2004
    Posts:
    15,064
    vCash:
    1543
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by LandShark13 View Post
    Well then if that's what you think then it just makes me feel all that much better about what I think.
    That's probably for the better. Only cult leaders care about influencing others' minds, and in the end all they have is a group of people around them who are flimsy enough about what they believe to have their minds influenced, which is really no accomplishment at all. Good to hear you're quite bit sturdier than that.
    Quote Quote  

  8. -288
    Shouright's Avatar
    FinHeaven Elite

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    May 2004
    Posts:
    15,064
    vCash:
    1543
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by sharp View Post
    The only reason I wanted to run in that situation is because we had a positive gain on 1st and had been running well all day for the first time all season.

    But i do not normally agree with play it safe run run run, punt lose game. How many times have we seen playing it safe fail for the dolphins?
    And to people complaining about ball security, I agree tannehill overall needs to not fumble as much. But in this specific instance, he was hit within a second, no one sees that rusher or holds onto that ball. Clabo's fault plain and simple, no one elses. Can't whiff on a guy 1 yard in front of you.
    Well I suspect we're selectively remembering the times it's failed at the expense of the times it hasn't. Again, the team had a 72% probability of winning at the time, meaning Buffalo had quite an uphill battle ahead of itself to win the game as it stood. Instead of making them win the game, however, we gave it to them.
    Quote Quote  

  9. -289
    Shouright's Avatar
    FinHeaven Elite

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    May 2004
    Posts:
    15,064
    vCash:
    1543
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by finomenal View Post
    I don't play the result. You either trust your QB and allow him to audible or you don't. You either play aggressively or you don't. Tannehill played aggressively against Atlanta in the final drive. If he played aggressively in that last drive against Atlanta and threw a pick, would it have been a bad move? Hell no. I don't like seeing my team playing scared. We've seen way too much of that. Sparano & Wannstache would've run the ball and punted and they got ripped heavily for it. Seems like a lot of posters want to have it both ways.
    You're right. No, because the Dolphins were only 41% likely to win that game at the beginning of that drive. Tannehill had to be aggressive to overcome the likelihood with which Atlanta was going to win that game.

    However, at the time he fumbled against Buffalo, the probability was quite different, in that the Dolphins were at the time 72% likely to win the game.

    In fact, had the Dolphins ran the ball twice, both for zero yards, milked the clock down to the two-minute warning as one would expect (assuming Buffalo didn't use any time-outs), and punted the ball into the end zone, the Dolphins' probability of wining the game would've gone down from 72% to 67%, rather than the 72% to 33% shift that actually happened.

    If Miami had punted and pinned Buffalo back on its own 10, the Dolphins' probability of winning would've gone up, to 75%. Either way, Buffalo still would've been fighting uphill, unlike what it had to do in the real game, where it was pretty much handed to them.
    Quote Quote  

  10. -290
    Phindog's Avatar
    Perennial All-Pro

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Aug 2010
    Posts:
    3,058
    vCash:
    1808
    Loc:
    New York
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Numbers shmumbers!!!
    Quote Quote  

Similar Threads

  1. Tannehill called fumble
    By adammac13 in forum Miami Dolphins Forum
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 09-18-2013, 11:53 PM
  2. The Ryan Tannehill fumble.....? under review
    By dolphans1 in forum Miami Dolphins Forum
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 09-15-2013, 10:40 PM
  3. Ryan Tannehill or Reggie bush fault on the fumble??
    By Porter55 in forum Miami Dolphins Forum
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 12-31-2012, 01:23 PM
  4. Bench Bush for one fumble , why not Tannehill?
    By finfan66 in forum Miami Dolphins Forum
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 11-12-2012, 01:15 AM
  5. Tannehill Checked into the TD Pass Play to Fasano vs the Rams
    By foozool13 in forum Miami Dolphins Forum
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 10-21-2012, 01:01 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •