Tannehill on a shorter leash for 2014 | Page 7 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Tannehill on a shorter leash for 2014

This makes sense. Philbin's obviously just taking a tougher form of motivation, but maybe Tannehill needs it. He does have to improve to become the QB we need him to be. Moore is of course not going to start unless the train goes flying off the tracks next year.
 
If Philbin is serious about competition then he will bring in a QB for competition, not rely on some guy who got beat out 2 years ago by a rookie with limited experience.

RT17 is the now and the future. Continue to build the offense around him'
 
This article makes no sense. So after evaluating qb's you have Tannehill beating out Moore both years but if he falters all of a sudden you go to your lesser qb. Pure genius
 
OnDaChainWax said:
Why would one block a poster? Isn't the point of a forum to have all different kinds of posts/posters from terrible to incredible to satisfying to annoying? And ive read terrible posts from incredible posters, vice versa. If you want to read all flowers all of the time without an iota of originality, here you go:

http://www.miamidolphins.com
Click to expand...

It's called reporting without the virus of opinion. I enjoy reading facts and then forming my own opinion on the matters. It's how journalism is supposed to be. There used to be opinion columns aside from true journalism. Now it's all about the ego of the individual reporter. ESPN, etc., ... No thanks, I'm intelligent enough to form my own opinions.
 
dlockz said:
This article makes no sense. So after evaluating qb's you have Tannehill beating out Moore both years but if he falters all of a sudden you go to your lesser qb. Pure genius
Click to expand...
Well, you might have Tannehill "beating out" Moore largely on the basis of hypothetical potential and the need to get him game experience, and it might just be time for him to put up or sit down at this point.
 
Gravity said:
Well, you might have Tannehill "beating out" Moore largely on the basis of hypothetical potential and the need to get him game experience, and it might just be time for him to put up or sit down at this point.
Click to expand...

Can something be hypothetical if it's an actual thing teams use to decide who to sign and\or draft?
 
Valandui said:
It is a reality that this "hypothetical" is used by all 32 teams.
Click to expand...
Sure, but the decision of whether Tannehill starts over Moore can still be based largely on potential that may never be realized. Teams put lots of their eggs in the basket of a young QB based on potential all the time and often times pay for it in the end.
 
Gravity said:
Sure, but the decision of whether Tannehill starts over Moore can still be based largely on potential that may never be realized. Teams put lots of their eggs in the basket of a young QB based on potential all the time and often times pay for it in the end.
Click to expand...

Or reap the rewards in the end.
 
Gravity said:
Well, you might have Tannehill "beating out" Moore largely on the basis of hypothetical potential and the need to get him game experience, and it might just be time for him to put up or sit down at this point.
Click to expand...

That would be pure speculation on your part. No evidence that they started a rookie qb just because of potential. In fact David Garrard was originally number one on depth chart. There was no need to rush Tannehill to starting. The coaches chose Tannehill over Moore and anything else beyond that is playing a game.
 
Gravity said:
Sure, and until either of those outcomes happens, it's a hypothetical.
Click to expand...

A hypothetical that teams feel confident enough about quantifying that they universally use it.
 
There obviously not cutting moore considering how much philbin likes him
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom