I'm not sure either, but we've never seen Tannehill go in and win with a playoff spot in reach and the whole point is talking about how easy it is to beat up on weaker opponents when Tannehill himself has proven its not..
People put the meaningless statistical sheet down and listen to yourself. Think about what your trying to pass off here. Do you really think Gase is an idiot for starting the wrong QB? Please spare yourself the embarrassment of answering that unless it is a resounding NO.
Coaching means everything in football. So first off any QB/team under HC Philbin would have failed miserably. And we did. The team consistently fell on it's face from being unprepared and under-coached.
Also realize that during the first 6-8 games last year the entire offense was learning and adjusting to a new system. It's not just the QB. It's the offense as a whole learning a new system; it's the OL learning new blocking schemes and protection shifts; it's the receivers learning new lingo and route concepts; it's the RB learning how to read their lineman and where their lanes will be; etc. etc. etc.
So when you put numbers in a vaccum and claim that Moore had a better run late in the season than Tannehill and the offense did from earlier in the year, well . . no ****. Once the offense gelled it became easier to replace a single player rather than the entire unit learning on the go to kick off the regular season.
Do yourselves a favor and review Matt Moore's career. You're not going to find some diamond in the rough. What you'll find is a perennial backup and journeyman who really has no business running a high powered offense. Which some somehow have managed to dig up by leaning on irrelevant statistics.