Anyone here think Foles is better than Tannehill?

[FinfanInBuffalo]

Wentz had a good rookie year and even if he wasn't top 10 as a rookie I think mostly everybody would give the 2nd over all pick some time to see if he can be top 10.

Foles is a backup so I don't think anyone expect to have a top 10 QB as a backup same as keenum.

Smith isn't top 10 and his replacement was drafted and Smith is gone.

If Bortles remains the starter its only for continuity purposes because you can bet if they have a shot at a Drew Brees or Cousins, they would happily cut Bortles if the cap allows it.

Mariota had a good rookie and sophomore season and a bad 3rd year so no reason to give up on him yet after only 1 bad year out of 3.

All are good points but are contrary to what the "draft a QB every year" crowd blathers on about. Here are some other QBs that are not top 10 and haven't been replaced:

Flacco, Dalton, Palmer, Newton, E.Manning, etc. etc. etc.

What about Derek Carr? One winning season out of three. Should the Raiders draft his replacement?

Simply look at the numbers. 22 QBs every year are not in the top 10 (BTW, some of those are veterans that need a successor). Let's say half are young and the team is still waiting. That means 11 teams (or more) are looking to draft a QB early every year to find that elusive top 10 QB. It doesn't happen because it makes no sense.

 

[FinfanInBuffalo]

Good points superphin.

Interesting that KC has the fortitude to draft Smiths replacement even though Smith had put up some great numbers and won a lot of games. No one would argue KCs supporting cast is far better than Miamis yet KC knows it needs more out of their QB even with a solid team.

When Miami is in a position to stand pat on the rest of the roster, I'd happily entertain options at QB, especially when the QB just finished his 11th year.

 

[FinfanInBuffalo]

I give Tannehill most of the credit for his 2016 play. He carried the team with his defense giving up 20+ points and the rushing game being sporadic and inconsistent.

With that said while Tannehill had a good stretch in 2014 and 2015 with a healthy Oline the defense gave up 14ppg in those 7 games. I'd give them more credit for those wins. For reference the Vikinga had the #1 scoring defense this year gave up 15.75ppg. While Case Keenum played good and had stretches similar to Tannehill no-one would ever say that he's the reason they won.

Keenum had a very good year. When the Dolphins field the #1 defense and the #7 running game at the same time I'd expect Tannehill to put up excellent numbers.

A large part of the reason that the Dolphins allowed 14 ppg in those games was because the offense was playing so well. The running game and passing game were both efficient. That is the frustrating part of the OL. If they can just be consistently average, the skill position players can do their jobs.

 

[FinfanInBuffalo]

Yes and I just compared RT post OL changes to Matt Moore post OL changes. You know, when "Tannehills numbers crushed Moore in every single way. No contest"

Moore was good in limited duty. Happens all the time. Obviously Gase didn't feel Moore could sustain it, otherwise he wouldn't have signed Cutler. He was proven correct. Why would you keep ignoring that?

 

[Travis34]

Is anyone else still wondering how 4 receiving td’s is better than 10 td in a season?

 

[Third Eye]

Is anyone else still wondering how 4 receiving td’s is better than 10 td in a season?

Yes we all know RT made Mike Wallaces career. We know this! Give it a rest

 

[Third Eye]

Moore was good in limited duty. Happens all the time. Obviously Gase didn't feel Moore could sustain it, otherwise he wouldn't have signed Cutler. He was proven correct. Why would you keep ignoring that?

First it's RT unquestionably outplayed Moore by a long shot in 2016, then it's limited duty reasoning. Which is it? 2017 as I said was 2017 and everyone knows Moore is not a long term solution.

All I know is this is more of an indictment on Gase and the front office than Matt Moore. If I was ownership, and the trifecta of Gase Tannenbaum and Grier came to me the second week of August asking for 10M more after the starter went down on an already shaky ACL, I would go ballistic. They should've had their contingency plan ready.

 

[Third Eye]

Moore was good in limited duty. Happens all the time. Obviously Gase didn't feel Moore could sustain it, otherwise he wouldn't have signed Cutler. He was proven correct. Why would you keep ignoring that?

Who is to say if Moore was given the reigns in August after RT went down what would've happened. Gase did not handle the whole situation well if you ask me. Starting with a panic 10M signing of Jay Cutler. Clearly did not commit to Moore even though Moore was only viable option in camp and one hanging ligament away from being the starter.

This was completely mismanaged in 2017.

Who is to say if Gase had committed to Moore for one season (he was the backup so it makes sense) and signed a veteran stopgap to be the number two for about 1/10th of Cutler, and actually gameplanned to Moore's strengths who knows. It certainly would've been no worse than what we had with Cutler. Remember teammates don't even care for Cutler and he seemingly is not a strong leader. I for one think players respond to Moore a bit.

Yes Moore's numbers in 2017 were poor but we can start down the excuses road for this if we choose. Some of this is surely on Moore as well.

 

[dolphintodd]

to answer the OP "yes".

 

[fansinceGWilson]

Who is to say if Moore was given the reigns in August after RT went down what would've happened. Gase did not handle the whole situation well if you ask me. Starting with a panic 10M signing of Jay Cutler. Clearly did not commit to Moore even though Moore was only viable option in camp and one hanging ligament away from being the starter.

This was completely mismanaged in 2017.

Who is to say if Gase had committed to Moore for one season (he was the backup so it makes sense) and signed a veteran stopgap to be the number two for about 1/10th of Cutler, and actually gameplanned to Moore's strengths who knows. It certainly would've been no worse than what we had with Cutler. Remember teammates don't even care for Cutler and he seemingly is not a strong leader. I for one think players respond to Moore a bit.

Yes Moore's numbers in 2017 were poor but we can start down the excuses road for this if we choose. Some of this is surely on Moore as well.

Full disclosure; I was willing to roll with MM and save the $10mm cap. No reasonable person thought Cutler was going to get Miami to the playoffs. And that's coming from a guy who doesn't think MM is a capable #2.

That said, I think this past season shows what Gase thinks of MM. The time has come - move on. He's good for a half or a game and a half. Every team needs a backup who can play through a lengthy absence of the #1. Miami has no such option. As for the Foles/Tannehill debate, all longtimers can name a list of QBs who flashed, got big bucks, and, well, sucked. And far more frequently than those who get the chance and show they are more than average. TO me the debate is 'not enough data.'

 

[Third Eye]

When Miami is in a position to stand pat on the rest of the roster, I'd happily entertain options at QB, especially when the QB just finished his 11th year.

So when the Fins finally build the supporting cast, you will THEN be willing to draft the replacement? I thought we just need the supporting cast so RT can take us to the promised land. Which is it? Because we've been waiting for the supporting cast for longer than RTs tenure.

 

[fansinceGWilson]

So when the Fins finally build the supporting cast, you will THEN be willing to draft the replacement? I thought we just need the supporting cast so RT can take us to the promised land. Which is it? Because we've been waiting for the supporting cast for longer than RTs tenure.

Which I take to mean Tannehill can't be THE problem.. I agree. QB can be upgraded, but QB isn't the deepest hole.

 

[FinfanInBuffalo]

So when the Fins finally build the supporting cast, you will THEN be willing to draft the replacement? I thought we just need the supporting cast so RT can take us to the promised land. Which is it? Because we've been waiting for the supporting cast for longer than RTs tenure.

My preference is to build the supporting cast with Tannehill since he has proven that he is good enough. Simple. Stop blaming Tannehill for the failure of others. Unless, as I have asked numerous times, you can point out the former teammates that were wrongly cut. Still waiting for that.

 

[FinfanInBuffalo]

Which I take to mean Tannehill can't be THE problem.. I agree. QB can be upgraded, but QB isn't the deepest hole.

You would think it would be easy for people to understand. In addition, the doubters act like Tannehill was terrible before 2016, he wasn't. Not even close. 2014 was a very good season in terrible circumstances. 2013 was so bad it should have ruined him (and has ruined other QBs), it didn't.

 

[FinfanInBuffalo]

First it's RT unquestionably outplayed Moore by a long shot in 2016, then it's limited duty reasoning. Which is it? 2017 as I said was 2017 and everyone knows Moore is not a long term solution.

Both. Tannehill did it for much longer (a 8 games vs 3), had a better winning % in the 8 game stretch, and was responsible for more yards per game and a higher completion %. Moore ran a much more limited offense than Tannehill because he is not nearly as good. Gase managed the situation well. He clearly understood that the future of the team was Tannehill not Moore. Not sure why you are having trouble understanding that.