Youre not alone, Nate Burleson thinks we have the best "triplets" in the NFL right now
Him having time to get healthy and practice with tanny will be the deciding factor. Either he is a dedicated number 2 or he is an underachieving number 1 (at this point).
Triplets has been done...hoping we have a great set of Quadruplets
We need 4 kids for that. Who is #4?
I'm thinking the b****rd child, LEWAN!!!!!
Expectations!
Lewan : "Three years from now, who's the best wide receiver in the league?"
AJ: "Me"
16:35
Lewan : "Three years from now, who's the best wide receiver in the league?"
AJ: "Me"
16:35
That whole pod is good as always.
You've got to love the confidence. One of the main things that I have noticed about our skill positions from Brown to Davis to Smith to Henry, is that we have so many players that can do damage in space and take it to the house. With a stable QB, finally, we have one of the most balanced, dangerous offenses that I can remember.
The other day I statted out Tannehill for the season and did some on the receivers. After spending more time really diving into target volumes, targets that have left the team, and looking at how the yards/catch will total up, I have AJB with:
Targets: 109
Catches: 71
Yards: 1278
TD: 10
I dropped his y/c down to 18, even though he was over 20 during the time Tannehill was at QB. If he keeps that high of a y/c, his season yardage would be closer to 1500. His TD's are based on him having a TD catch rate of 1 every 10 attempts last year, but could fluctuate a little. TD's are finnicky.
One thing that I noticed is that because AJB is so stupidly good, it actually limits Tannehills floor.
I went into the exercise thinking I could just drop RT's yards/attempt down to like 8.0, and everything would work out. I proceeded to stat out Corey, Jonnu, Humphries, and Henry too. I was very conservative with their y/c, dropping all of them from their high efficiency marks last year. But even then, all of the leftover targets and yardage only amounted to ~6 y/c. That's not even remotely possible, because guys like Kalif Raymond and Firkser have much higher numbers than that. Evans would be the only guy that should see around a 6 y/c number, and even he may be higher than that.
So I had to adjust RT's yards/attempt up to make things even logical for the rest of the team. Everyone else's y/c was really low (honestly too low), but I also don't see AJB dropping to like 15 y/c either. He's just too explosive. And even if he does, he should still have over a 1000 yard season.
All this to say, AJB is so stupidly good, RT has no choice but to throw for 4000 yards and 30 TD's.
Targets: 109
Catches: 71
Yards: 1278
TD: 10
I dropped his y/c down to 18, even though he was over 20 during the time Tannehill was at QB. If he keeps that high of a y/c, his season yardage would be closer to 1500. His TD's are based on him having a TD catch rate of 1 every 10 attempts last year, but could fluctuate a little. TD's are finnicky.
One thing that I noticed is that because AJB is so stupidly good, it actually limits Tannehills floor.
I went into the exercise thinking I could just drop RT's yards/attempt down to like 8.0, and everything would work out. I proceeded to stat out Corey, Jonnu, Humphries, and Henry too. I was very conservative with their y/c, dropping all of them from their high efficiency marks last year. But even then, all of the leftover targets and yardage only amounted to ~6 y/c. That's not even remotely possible, because guys like Kalif Raymond and Firkser have much higher numbers than that. Evans would be the only guy that should see around a 6 y/c number, and even he may be higher than that.
So I had to adjust RT's yards/attempt up to make things even logical for the rest of the team. Everyone else's y/c was really low (honestly too low), but I also don't see AJB dropping to like 15 y/c either. He's just too explosive. And even if he does, he should still have over a 1000 yard season.
All this to say, AJB is so stupidly good, RT has no choice but to throw for 4000 yards and 30 TD's.
My favorite part of that group is they are all 6+ 220-250 and run a 4.5 or better. Its a scary group.
I will never forget seeing Jonnu line up at RB against Houston and thinking something looked weird about Derrick, then realizing he was wearing #81, then it dawning on me that Jonnu was at RB.
We have some serious monsters at our skill positions.
I still wonder why that occurred. No trick play. Just a regular run with a TE spelling the RB. Then we didn't see it again. So odd.
Maybe Jonnu just won a bet over DH and the prize was swapping out a play. They shocked the coaches just as much as us. I wonder if we'll see it again. I definitely think we'll see DH throwing again.
Yeah as really it seems the expectations are very high for AJ. As well as the rest of the team. If they want to go to the Super Bowl as the NFL took notice of the Titans again!
It’s a formation and personnel trick play. So if you run a 0 RB personnel package, the D is going to bring out a lighter personnel group to match. But if you have a guy like Jonnu, who’s a Henry clone in terms of size and speed, he breaks things when you put him at tailback.
Basically the D isn’t ready to stop a downhill run from a big tailback in that set.
This is how I thought of it as well the only thing wrong with this exact explanation is he lined up as a rb. If he was at te or wr and motioned to rb that is what you just said.
Not trying to be a d***. Just saying.
I get what you're saying but it isn't Madden... It's not like the D sees the personnel numbers. I'll have to go back and look at it again. You could be right if they see DH running off the field, but you'd think they'd run it again since it worked so well.
lil crazy stat I just checked. Tannehil has 5yrs out of 7 where he has thrown to a WR that has caught recieved atleast 1k. yards. One yr he was probably hurt so didn’t look into that yr so much but other yr he missed, 1 WR had 862 yards and other WR had 758. Good chance Brown is that guy to repeat Atleast 1k yards. He’ll Landry did it with Tanny for multiple years
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
