05-27-2015, 12:20 PM
(05-20-2015, 06:04 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: weird then why did the less successful tannenhill just get a decent contract?
Curious, have you watched him play? (Please answer)
The kid had a really nice year. Over 4,000 yards, over 90 QB rating. I'm not sure if you wanted a sincere answer to your question, but I'll attempt to answer it.
You asked why a "less successful" Tannenhill signed a decent contract. I guess first we would have to determine how you define "success" in relation to the QB position. Is it stats, is it team record, is it a combination, is it sitting down an evaluating each and every play, each and every player, and then trying to gauge it?
Fwiw, I'm not sure "success" in and of itself is the primary factor in determining a player's worth. While very important, I think we can label it something else, of find a better choice of words. If player's were signed solely based on success then it would change the market entirely. I think players are signed more based on potential and projected value moving forward. Their previous success helps gauge this, no doubt. But there is more to determining a player's worth moving forward.
Long story short, you pay a player an amount based more so on his current worth, right now, and projected worth in the future than you do on his worth in the past. Tannenhill's contract reflects his current and projected worth more than his worth two years ago. Pretty simple stuff.
Lastly, I'm always amazed people overlook this:
Tannenhill was a project QB coming out of college. He was a converted wide receiver with one year QB experience. His draft position was based way more on potential than results. He was a risk with the physical tools to be a big reward.
Dalton was an extremely experienced QB, who was more "NFL ready" than some of his peers in his draft class. I can even remember someone on out staff mentioning this is as plus, being that we needed someone who was ready to go.
Now I don't want to debate the strategy or merits of either. I only wanted to mention this because of your reply to Bfine. Saying Dalton did better than Tannenhill in years 1-3 is really irrelevant in projecting the value of their respective deals.
I would argue that the fact Tannenhill, a project QB, has posted an 84 rating to start his career, as opposed to Dalton, a NFL ready QB, has posted a 85.2., shows all the more how well Tannenhill has done with limited experience at the position.
Not to mention, since we're looking at W's and L's, we haven't even looked at talent surrounding each player. But that's a whole other story.
Too long didn't read: Tannenhill had a really nice year. Butthurt Dalton fan's attempt tear down other QB's to elevate Andy is rationally debated.
PS You know if Andy were actually good many of you wouldn't have to work so hard at diminishing the accomplishments of some of his peers. His play would speak for itself. But since it's average at best we have to spend ridiculous amount of time debating the likes of Tannenhill, Newton, Alex Smith, Jay Cutler, and every other middling QB, just so a few people can feel better about our middling QB.
