Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by phinatic1399, Aug 14, 2012.
I agree. Lets just commit to the future and get the ball rolling. They have with Luck, Newton, and RG3.
Whats the rush? Let him hold a clipboard for a couple games. Moore may not be a seasoned vet, but he has experience and the rookie can learn something from him.
The gap between the two is too close to not start Tennehill.
james walker must have been a db...got a nice back pedal
"Miami will win 5-6 games this year"
Rinse. Repeat. **** off.
For the first time in a while I took off my aqua and orange sunglasses and see the team for what it is. We are not a playoff contending team no matter who starts at QB. I just can't fathom us getting a wild card spot with the teams we have to compete against in the AFC to get that spot. We are not better than the Broncos, Bengals, Steelers, Ravens, Raiders, Chargers, hell we might not even be better than the Bills and the Jets, and the Jets look ****ing pathetic this year.
With that being said the only benefit Tannehill gets if he sits out is that he gets to watch Moore play. That isn't much of a benefit considering Tannehill probably knows this offense better than Moore already. Moore is decent and all, but having Tannehill on the sidelines watching Moore play won't help him adjust to the speed of the game or read Defensive packages first hand as if he was standing behind center.
It would be a diservice to start Moore because he will have the "future of the organization" waiting in the ranks for him to screw up. If we do end up playing Moore, when would it be the appropriate time to replace him with Tannehill? When he fails? If he loses games? How many games does he have to lose? Does the coaching staff just arbitrarily pick a date when Moore no longer should start and play Tannehill for the rest of the season?
Rookeis have been able to come into the NFL and make an impact immediately. Play him, let him get the experience, he will benefit, and the team and organization will benefit much more in the long term than sitting him behind another patented Dolphin's stop-gap dead-end lame-duck QB.
I disagree. He should start if he earns it.
imo i think tanny should start when the OL gels a lil bit more than they have because putting tanny out there and letting him get killed isnt going to help his stats or help him with the confidence that he could have if the OL was a lil bit more solid ,imo we dont need to put our franchise QB into a bad sisuation when we dont have to , i say if our OL is gelled by the reg season and if tanny keeps makin progress than let tanny take over and lead this team to the promise land.
James Walker is one of the worst writers on ESPN. I stopped reading when I saw his name.
Start Tannehill if he earns it dont sit him just because hes a rookie. We know what we're gona get w/ Moore. Id like to see Ryan get the nod and see what he has..Peyton MAnning once said start a rookie qb if you believe hes the future its the best way to learn instead of sitting on the bench. Moore is a glorified Tyler Thigpen..lol
We should have a better picture by the end of the pre season.
If anyone thinks we have a better chance to win with Matt Moore they're nuts
Jason, when you wrote about waiting for the offensive line to gel more before starting RT, that got me wondering just how we did last year in protecting the QB. I knew we didn't do well, but i did not realize how bad :tubes:. We allowed 52 sacks last year according to ESPN's team stats for 2011 (see link below). Only Arizona and St. Louis did worse, but not by much. That's very worrisome. However, I also noticed that some of the worst and the best teams in the NFL last year were well represented at both ends of the spectrum. The best performance preventing sacks was by the Bills, and we all know how well they did last year. The Niners and the Bears were two of the better teams last year, but we allowed only a few more sacks than they did. And the Steelers were only a few better than they were.
So, although allowing a lot of sacks is NOT helping the team perform to its potential, it doesn't prevent a team from playing well in a season. Also consider this: the very best performance against allowing sacks last year in the NFL STILL allowed 23 sacks of their QB. For a season, that means we allowed only a little more than one more sack per game. Therefore, don't you think that we aren't really risking RT's psychological well being, or his physical health, much more with a weak offensive line? He's NOT really going to "get killed," as you say. And this is all assuming we haven't improved our offensive line by a few sack's worth already. I think these are things the staff will have to consider in deciding whether to let RT start if he proves he's ready.
i say start him for regular season, but dont tell anyone.
Cart meet Horse ... I'll leave it to the two of you to determine your order.
It sounded like he had a good practice today. He's going to make it an easy decision for the coaches.
If he continues practicing and playing the way he has, he should start. People are worried if he starts to early he will look like Blain Gabbert, Tannehill is way better. Like everyone one says, were not a playoff team, so why not let the future start now.
He hasn't even been a quarterback for more than a season in his career, no need to rush the future. Let him sit a year, and develop.. If the apple aint ripe, don't pick it.
my only fear starting Tanney - can our Oline can offer any pass pro - without the run game? My fear is what happened to David Carr - because I sense RG3 he is going to be like David Carr - running for his life - I don't see thebenefit Tanney running for his life if the WRs can't get open (and they aren't too consistent) and I doubt our Secondary is even average - so this is telling - Tanney will hold onto the ball hopinga WR will get open (you cant be expecting him to throw guys open every play)
rev kev, take a look Pete Pricso's interview on Finsiders (please see link above). Prisco says the primary reason David Carr failed was not his offensive line. While Carr did get beat up, he also didn't put in the work to make it as a quality starter in the NFL. Also, please see my previous reply to this thread about allowed sacks statistics last year in the NFL. There's some interesting information in it that might change your mind a little bit concerning the shell shock concern for rookie QBs.