Last week I looked at Ryan Tannehill vs SMU, where I felt he had an almost flawless performance and hinted how he could be a good fit for the Washington Redskins. Today, I felt like it was only fair for me to break down a game where he struggled to try and help work out what his floor in the NFL could be. Here's his stat line from the Oklahoma State game: 28 of 47 (59.6% completion), 309 yards, two touchdowns, three interceptions at a rating of 116.1.
Here we have Tannehill dropping back, checking his first read. Also worth noting is the Oklahoma State pass rusher winning the block on Tannehill's blindside.

Tannehill senses the pressure and is forced to move out of the pocket. But he does a good job of keeping his eyes down field, finding his go-to man, Ryan Swope.
Tannehill makes an awkward throw look easy as he goes over the top of the linebacker and right into the numbers of Swope. Very good play from Tannehill.
Here we have a similar situation where Tannehill has to escape the pocket.
Tannehill feels the pressure from his blindside again, and starts to move from the edge pressure.
This is the point Tannehill needs to make a decision. He has done a good job up until this point to extend the play, but now has to decide to either tuck it and run, or throw the ball away.
But Tannehill shows some of his inexperience and gets sacked. A veteran quarterback in the NFL would have make the decision quicker and not taken the sack. It's hard to knock Tannehill, because he does well to extend the play, but he realize that the pressure is coming and that he has to make a decision quicker. That should come with experience.
Next we have one of his touchdown throws. There are good and bad things on this play but it does ultimately result in a touchdown.
Tannehill has a simple two deep safety coverage. He knows Jeff Fuller is running a post route that could find the gap between the safeties.
Here's what I don't like about this throw. Tannehill needs to anticipate his receiver cutting and throw the ball as he cuts rather than wait for him to get open. Fuller is just cutting inside and Tannehill hasn't started his throwing motion. The ball should be out by now, or at least on its way out, in order to get the maximum separation between the receiver and the man covering him.
That being said, Tannehill does manage to put the ball out of the reach of the defender and completes the touchdown pass. He shows good accuracy and arm strength to get the ball where it needs to be.
In contrast, later on in the game, Tannehill shows good anticipation.
Here you can see that his receiver has yet to make the cut, but has started to slow down. Tannehill has begun the throwing motion in anticipation of the receiver making the cut.
The ball is in the air when Fuller sticks his foot in the ground and begins his cut.
As you can see, when Fuller makes the catch, he has four or five yards of separation from the corner, giving him a chance to make a move and get past him. If Tannehill had waited until after the cut to make the throw, the corner would have cover the ground and possibly could have batted down the pass or even intercepted it.
There is a downside to anticipating throws, however. If you aren't fully in sync with a receiver, or if he slips and falls, you can get intercepted easily, like Tannhill's first interception.
Once again, Tannehill anticipates the cut and begins to throw.
The ball is in the air, but Fuller slips and falls to the ground while attempting to make his cut back to the ball. This tells the corner the route and gives him a big chance to jump it.
The corner makes a diving grab and gets the interception, but this one isn't on Tannehill.
Moving onto his next interception.
Here you can see Tannehill is looking for his receiver to make his cut. However the is an edge rusher that is coming unblocked.
This is the point Tannehill should be throwing the ball, as the receiver is making his cut. But the free rusher forces him to step up and disrupts the timing of the play.
The free rusher manages to get an arm on Tannehill, further delaying the throw. This now allows the safety time to close the space created but the cut and allows time for the corner on the outside to drop back.
At this point, Tannehill should either try to recover and look for other targets or just throw the ball away. Instead, he forces an off-balanced throw to a receiver that is now covered.
The corner on the outside had the time to drop back and make the play, but the safety could have equally come away with the ball. This was a forced throw created by pressure that disrupted timing. Tannehill can't afford to try and force throws when the timing has been disrupted, he needs to look for other targets, such as his hot read or just throw the ball away.
Tannehill's third interception was also a bad one.
Tannehill is late on this throw, the receiver is about to make his break, but Tannehill hasn't started the throwing motion.
The ball has just been thrown as the receiver is out of his break. The coverage is very tight.
The throw is then off target. Tannehill appears to have thrown the ball expecting the receiver to take a step or two more before his cut. The corner hardly has to move to make a play on the ball, while the receiver has to dive to try and stop the interception.
The ball gets deflected up in the air and is intercepted by a trailing defender. This is a bad throw with poor timing and into good tight coverage. I expect Tannehill was expecting his receiver to take an extra couple of steps before making his break, but the coverage was tight enough that he should have looked elsewhere.
So overall, an up and down performance from Tannehill in this game. His team lost 29-30 to Oklahoma State, but quite possibly would have won it if Tannehill hadn't forced two bad throws that got intercepted. What do you make of this performance?
Also, props to Aaron Aloysius for providing me the links to the footage on twitter. Go give him a follow.
3 recs | 108 comments
Good post UK
What round would you say this gentleman would go in?
Parks Smith - February 10, 2012
Depends on the injury.
That might hold him back into round two. But I think he’s gonna be one of the Josh Freeman/Joe Flacco guys that are mid to late first rounders.
UkRedskin - February 10, 2012
But you would agree he is a first round talent?
Parks Smith - February 10, 2012
Yeah.
I think so.
UkRedskin - February 10, 2012
I like the first person point of view.
To bring up your Foles point about stepping up (which I didn’t totally agree with) you can see how Tanny (that’s right I said it) steps up in the pocket with pressure.
Parks Smith - February 10, 2012
I wasn't questioning Foles ability to step up in the pocket.
I questioned he consistency with stepping into his throws, because from my point of view, all of his power is coming from his shoulder rather than good footwork.
UkRedskin - February 10, 2012
Nice Post
Could this be the next Cutler?
I would not be upset if the skins traded back a few spots and wound up with Tannehill.
davesomethin - February 10, 2012 via mobile
Not sure he's the next Jay Cutler
But I think he’s a very good fit for the current system.
UkRedskin - February 10, 2012
I doubt he's the next cutler
Doesn’t quite have the arm strength or the awesome personality
mbedner - February 10, 2012
or the diabetes
Parks Smith - February 10, 2012
It's spelled Diabeetus
mbedner - February 10, 2012
Who did I hit?
Bullet Nation in Exile - February 11, 2012
"personality", that's what it's called
I can live w/o Cutlers personality
aFan4Life - February 10, 2012
I'd rather have Russell wilson than Tannehill
iH8dallas - February 10, 2012 via mobile
Really?
Why’s that?
UkRedskin - February 10, 2012
more experience. I think other aside from height he's a big time playmaker.
iH8dallas - February 10, 2012 via mobile
Would you have preferred Tolzien to Tannehill?
Parks Smith - February 10, 2012
There is really nothing stopping us from having both.
mbedner - February 10, 2012
God, that’s almost absurd to say H8. I’m not a hugh fan of Tannehill, but I take him over Wilson as our future.
Tiller56 - February 10, 2012
Great analysis!
Much easier to see the potential in Tannehill when a play is broken down this way.
Jpage0024 - February 10, 2012
Thanks.
Glad you got something out of it.
UkRedskin - February 10, 2012
How does one still have a QB rating of 116.1 with three interceptions?
With that logic, why didn’t Grossman have 158.3 rating during that first Eagles game?
mbedner - February 10, 2012
its different in college
Parks Smith - February 10, 2012
Ah I see.
mbedner - February 10, 2012
Don't ask me how
Parks Smith - February 10, 2012
How?
CJHutch - February 10, 2012
College and Pro passer rating formulas
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passer_rating
Jefferson1935 - February 11, 2012
It seems like he is unintentionally running out of the pocket a lot in these plays
Does anyone get the concern that he is skiddish in the pocket? Sort of like Gabbert?
Alternatively, he could just be extremely good at sensing pressure and I just haven’t watched enough of his games to discern the difference.
mbedner - February 10, 2012
I'm curious... are you basing that on the screenshots above? If so, which ones?
Parks Smith - February 10, 2012
First two plays, but on further review, it looks like LT ends up getting beaten
and the second the tackle is beaten again drawing Tannehill over to the right at which point he still ends up sacked. I just didn’t view the picks good enough the first time.
mbedner - February 10, 2012
Gabbert was skittish because Jacksonville's o-line didn't protect him, not because he played that way in college.
Copious 1 - February 10, 2012
That was a problem that he had even in Mizzou
mbedner - February 10, 2012
I agree
Parks Smith - February 10, 2012
RGIII seems to do the same thing. Both of them have the speed to get away with it.
Jefferson1935 - February 11, 2012
UK, given that you've done all of this research on these QBs
Who do you think we should select?
mbedner - February 10, 2012
I haven't researched all the QB's yet.
But for me, it’s clear Luck is the best QB, RG3 is second, and then there’s the rest. I think Tannehill is the 3rd best QB, but the injury might knock him down during the draft process and guys like Foles or Weeden might jump ahead of him.
UkRedskin - February 10, 2012
I should have said excluding Luck and RG3 since they are the obvious 1 and 2 hahaha
mbedner - February 10, 2012
Christ
Are you in politics?
CJHutch - February 10, 2012
I don't follow the jump you made there lol
mbedner - February 10, 2012
Your question
Now read his response and tell me where he actually answers your question.
Of course, I suppose I should’ve asked if he was in Parliament?
CJHutch - February 10, 2012
I guess I see where you are going with that now,
But it seems like he made a pretty clear list:
1. Luck
2. RG3
3. Tannehill
mbedner - February 10, 2012
And UK seems far to civil to be a member of the British Parliment hahaha
mbedner - February 10, 2012
I remember one night in college stumbling in at 2AM and British parliament popped on the TV
It was probably the most funny thing I’ve ever watched.
Parks Smith - February 10, 2012
I really think if they did that with american politics, voter participation would skyrocket
But that is neither here nor there.
mbedner - February 10, 2012
It actually kind of reminds me of Hogs Haven but just in person
Parks Smith - February 10, 2012
Well, like they say
If you have to explain a joke…..
But I just looked at his answer more as a list of the best guys, not who he thought we should take. For instance, if he thinks we should take one of the first two, then he wants to trade up. If he thinks we should take Tannehill, then he probably wants us to trade down. Seemed to me he didn’t wanna get pigeonholed into a stance on trading the pick, so he gave you the “diplomatic” answer.
Anyway, it’s all in good cheer. Was just messing with the Bloke.
CJHutch - February 10, 2012
Yeah it's hard to get a stance out of some folks around here
It’s like asking my wife where she wants to eat for dinner.
Me: Where do you want to eat dinner?
Wife: I don’t know.
Me: How about Olive Garden.
Wife: Nah.
Me: Jersey Lilies? (local steakhouse)
Wife: Nah.
Me: Well where DO you want to eat?
Wife: I don’t know.
Personally, I can live with trading up for RG3, and I can live with trading back and grabbing Weeden in the 2nd. But I sure as hell don’t want to reach for a QB not named Luck or Griffin at #6. We need a starting QB, and I would prefer to get him in the draft. That limits our options.
willster - February 10, 2012
hahaha. Man I hate that. Biggest lose-lose situation in the world...
Had the same kind of thing happen just the other day but about which hotel my girlfriend wanted to stay at for our trip to Atlantic City this weekend.
mbedner - February 10, 2012
Your in AC this weekend?
Damn, I almost went there myself, albiet not with the wife, but rather with a bunch of guys.
Tiller56 - February 10, 2012
I am going to AC next weekend
side note never take your girlfriend unless you dont plan to gamble
Highspeed30 - February 10, 2012
I play Hold'em when I go
That way if I lose, it’s to another player, not the casino. On a side note, if you guys ever want to go, we should get a trip together this spring sometime. I’d love to come down and meet up with some of the boys from HH.
Tiller56 - February 10, 2012
I play Hold'em too
We should get a HH trip together to go to AC, What casino do you like to go play at?? cash game or Tournament?
Highspeed30 - February 10, 2012
I'll play either
I’m a 1-2, or 2-4 no limit guy, but I’ll play tourney’s too. I’m in. We should plan a trip in April, like 2 weeks before the draft.
Tiller56 - February 10, 2012
That sounds good
maybe put up a post to gauge the interest in going to AC
I like the Borgata, Harrah’s , Tropicana and Taj.
Highspeed30 - February 10, 2012
Make sure there's a post
At least a month in advance. I’ve put together a few of these for car clubs, and it can be a pain to organize, but it’s always amusing.
timith - February 10, 2012
I’m a Borgata fan myself. Email me anytime. We’ll get something going
Tiller56 - February 10, 2012 via mobile
Nice
Im staying at the tropicana.
mbedner - February 10, 2012 via mobile
I like the Trop too
Tiller56 - February 10, 2012
ironically
i get bored after 2 hrs of gambling and ussually hang out in a br. my wife plays black jack ten hrs straight
Redskin44 - February 10, 2012
haha
thta’s awesome. My wife will gamble a bit, but usually only Carr Stud, or 3 Card Poker. Then she want’s to go “hang out” somewhere.
Tiller56 - February 10, 2012
I was supposed to go to a coaches convention this week
but I recently got offered another coaching position at a different school, and have accepted, so, since I haven’t made it official to my old school yet, I felt it would not be best to go, then on tues of next week, say oh, by the way…………..I’m leaving.
Tiller56 - February 10, 2012
may want to have that removed from the
post about your job. You never know who reads this.. just a thought, maybe Im being paranoid
Redskin44 - February 10, 2012
They are mostly Pats and Giants fans up here
and besides a very select few, I didn’t tell people that I write on HH. I didn’t want the players coming on and messing around.
Tiller56 - February 10, 2012
ok cool
forgot you are a CT boy. I was up in old saybrook last weekend for the game. Actually spent some time at mohegan sun efore the game
Redskin44 - February 10, 2012
hells yeah
Mohegan is awesome. What game did you come up for?
Tiller56 - February 10, 2012
A Friend
of mine who lives up there had a sb party. agreed i like mohegan as well. i have not been to foxwoods yet
Redskin44 - February 10, 2012
Foxwoods is ok. They just added a nice addition.
Tiller56 - February 10, 2012 via mobile
Haha.
Very good. I didn’t even realized I hadn’t properly answered the question.
In all honesty, I don’t know who I want yet, which is probably why I gave you my top 3. I’d be happy with any of those 3 guys. I’m not particularly in the ‘Trade up’ or the ‘Trade down’ camp. I think you can make a valid argument to trade up for RG3, and I think you can make an equally valid argument to trade down and potentially grab a Tannehill or maybe a Weeden. At this point in the process, I’m figuring out who I like and who I don’t like, not necessarily who I like/want most.
UkRedskin - February 10, 2012
Very good Gov'nah
Actually, I’m pretty much in the same boat as you. I’ve decided to just put it all in Shanny’s hands. I’ll let him make the decision.
CJHutch - February 10, 2012
I think Tannehill has alot of upside left
Getting bounced around from WR to QB to WR hasn’t helped him but I think it leaves him with a ceiling that I’m not sure anyone can predict. With that said I’m not sure it’s going to make of a much difference because he most likely won’t be ready for a few years depending on who drafts him and how much he gets thrown into the fire right away. I still would love to get him late first or early second.
skinsymets - February 10, 2012
Can we forward these posts to Grossman?
Kevin Ewoldt - February 10, 2012
UK is Grossman
Parks Smith - February 10, 2012
Well, I am part of the...
UkRedskin - February 10, 2012
I'm going to assume that picture is the "unleash the Dragon fan club" patch lol
mbedner - February 10, 2012
Well, apparently that image isn't working.
But yes, it was lol.
UkRedskin - February 10, 2012
thank god
Parks Smith - February 10, 2012
Why do you hate that so much
It’s hilarious everytime
mbedner - February 10, 2012 via mobile
b/c every opposing fanbase comes on here, thinks they are the first ones to ever post and thinks its hilarious
Parks Smith - February 10, 2012
Nice job as always...great stuff.
Kevin Ewoldt - February 10, 2012
Cheers Kevin.
UkRedskin - February 10, 2012
another great piece UK
Steve Shoup - February 10, 2012
Cheers Steve.
UkRedskin - February 10, 2012
Couldn't agree more
These posts have such a professional feel to them, like I’m getting something fans of other teams wouldn’t see on their sites. I really enjoy them (even if I don’t respond much on here.)
timith - February 10, 2012
Ditto
love your stuff, man
Bullet Nation in Exile - February 10, 2012
Thanks
Parks Smith - February 10, 2012
Yes, that goes for you, too
Bullet Nation in Exile - February 11, 2012
Cheers
I like your stuff on Bullets Forever, I just don’t comment over there much because the Wizards are too depressing…
UkRedskin - February 10, 2012
The entire staff
is on Xanax…
Bullet Nation in Exile - February 11, 2012
Nice breakdown UK
Tiller56 - February 10, 2012
Cheers... again lol.
I was expecting the anti-Tannehill argument from you again if I’m honest Tiller.
UkRedskin - February 10, 2012
No
I’m going to stay out of that arguement. People know where I stand, and if they have any questions they can certainly ask me. I think you did a very nice job breaking things down in your post. Great job ; )
Tiller56 - February 10, 2012
Haha
Alright buddy, thanks.
UkRedskin - February 10, 2012
Question for you Tiller:
If everything went wrong at the top of the draft, and we end up with Reiff, would you be upset if Tannehill fell to us in the 2nd round?
timith - February 10, 2012
Prob not. I rather Weeden at this point, but I wouldn’t be too upset. For me, I need to see how this FA plays out, and then ill be a little more objective about our situation.
Tiller56 - February 10, 2012 via mobile
I think I'd prefer Weeden too
I have a feeling that Tanenhill long term won’t be any better than Weeden.
If neither are going to be superstars, but just a solid/average starter, I want the guy who can start quicker.
If he happens to be done in 5 years, that is alright too, because he was only average, and by that point we should have a solid all-around team and can spend a lot to get the best QB available.
tman5 - February 11, 2012
Weeden has his problems too
and I am no way trying to make him out to be perfect. He has a bit of that gunslinger mentality, and tends to trust his arm a little too much. He is however, more polished at this stage of the game, and is used to the dealings and responsibility of being a professional athlete. I do believe we can plug-and-play him, but I do not believe it will be without some growing pains.
Tiller56 - February 11, 2012
Surely he's not perfect
But I think we can start him right away with less issues than Tanenhill.
And if neither is goign to reach superstar level, than im fine with getting someone who will hopefully be an average starter for 5 years.
tman5 - February 11, 2012
With Weeden on board
I would hesitate to draft another highly touted guy in 2013 or 2014. I guess if it went down; 1st – Reiff, 2nd – Weeden, 3rd – Jones, 4th – Criner, 4th – Donnie Fletcher. I may consider the draft to be a success. I’d still want this as my plan C, but I could live with it.
Tiller56 - February 12, 2012
Meant to say:
I wouldn’t hesitate to draft
Tiller56 - February 12, 2012
If I took Weeden
I want want to draft a new QB in like 4-5 years. Have him sit one year.
By that time, hopefully the OL is solid. the WR are talented and young. We already got RBs. Dhall gets replaced by a stud, safeties get fixed, and Fletcher gets replaced.
tman5 - February 12, 2012
That just may work
but don’t forget, it is the Redskins were talking about….LOL
Tiller56 - February 12, 2012
I still would not take him if he fell to the 2nd rd
i would get a guy that i know could possibly start for me by the end of the year, maybe a WR S, CB
Highspeed30 - February 10, 2012
I’m of this mentality too
Tiller56 - February 10, 2012 via mobile
What do you do with the 1.6 pick if the Skins miss out on the trade up for RGIII?
Jefferson1935 - February 11, 2012
I'd definitely take him if he fell to us in the second
I don’t think there is much chance of that though…
I know he needs a lot of work, but he has a bucket load of tools and if he develops like his potential suggests he should, then he could be a legitimate starting QB and a great fit in the Shanahan offense.
The Shanaplan - February 11, 2012
I'll stay away from this guy...
Well for one we are not a team that can develop a young QB at the moment. Basically what I am trying to say is he would fail miserably playing for this team unless we have a ton of patience. Our line is medicore, our recieving targets is nothing special, and the defense is not up to par yet. We need to be decent in those three deparrtments or elite in at least one of them if we want to develop a sorry ass QB. R.Griffin is another story though(obviously in a positive way), but that can be talked about on another day.
The way I look at it is why waste a 2nd or even 3rd round pick on a QB just because he slipped when you can be adding a potential defensive starter for 7+ seasons. Some of you guys take the 2nd and 3rd round picks for granted. I mean great players are not hard to find in those rounds. I trust in Shanahan to make the right decision and to stay away from Tannehill and the other whoulda, shoulda, couldas. (not Luck and Griffin)
DWYCR - February 11, 2012
Tannehill evaluation
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oXDEzCf3C7Y
Guys, I wanted to parley off of some of the things UK said in his post on Tannehill, and of all the Video I have watched, this game vs LSU, is the best measuring stick I have seen to evaluate Tannehill on for two reasons: 1) LSU is the closest defense to an NFL defense that we have in college football 2) Not only the style of play of LSU, but just the calibur of athletes they have(Peterson, Claiborne, and The Honey Badger are all on this team).
Now first, I want to say that this was from Ryan’s junior season, which I believe was better than his senior one.
Eventhough LSU had a pretty solid performance, I see a lot of positives from Tannehill in this game. One thing I like, is that he doesn’t shy away from contact in the pocket. You will notice he is in the shotgun spread formation about 85% of the time, yet he does step up and try to make plays on numerous occasions. He faces a fierce pass rush, yet he maintains good footwork and mechanics in the face of adversity. I also like the 60 series passing game, which in spread terms, is the bootleg passes, which are designed to get the QB outside of the pocket, and throw on the move. I though he had some nice balls on the roll-out; some of which were not caught by the reciever. He did have some arant passes, but most of the balls looked ok.
Now, on the negative side, I noticed that most of the plays are 90 protection, which in terms of a spread, means a three step passing. Now, you may think how can it be 3 step passing when he’s already in the shotgun, so let me explain. Fron the gun, Tannehill recieves the snap, take one “clear step”, his plant step, and then delivers. It is designed for the linemen to hold their block for 3-4 sec, and mostly encompasses short in intermediate routes, with many slants, seams, quick outs, hitches, stops and arrows, mixed in with various bubble screens and flares. My guess is this was done by design, due to the LSU pass rush. It is of the upmost importance, on these type of routes, that the QB can read the defense both pre, and post snap. There is a set rule of progressions a QB must go through in this type of quick set offense, and I see Tannehill mis-reads the defense on quite a few pass attempts in this game. It is very important to look off weakside defenders, and come back to the strong side reciever, but far too often, I see Tannehill lock onto one reciever, and this results in some costly turnovers, and passes being defended.
Another concern is the deep out on the opposite hash. I saw the ball floated a few times, which concerns me a bit. He did make a couple of nice comeback routes, where the ball arrived on time, and with accuracy, but some looked to have too much air under them.
I’ll let you guys decide what you can take away from this. These are just my observations. Like I said, I felt is was worth posting for the reasons mentioned above. In his entire college career, this team is the closest one you’ll see to an NFL calibur D.
Tiller56 - February 12, 2012
Here are the stats from the game
Tannehill – 22 of 35 204 yards 2TD’s, 3 INT’s, long of 21 yards
Tiller56 - February 12, 2012
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Hogs Haven to post a comment.