Coaching Hypothetical: RT starts, struggles, Fins down at Half . . . What do u do?

What would you do?


  • Total voters
    101
  • Poll closed .

Kdawg954

My f*ck ups be the perfect mistakes
Finheaven VIP
Joined
Apr 14, 2006
Messages
25,020
Reaction score
8,267
Location
Broward County, FL
when did i ever EVER compare the two? your logic is flawed..
Why would I bench Eli Manning, a 9 year veteran with 2 SB rings for a poor first half when he has proven time and time again over the course of NINE years that he's one of the most capable QB's in the NFL, especially in the 2nd half, particularly the 4th quarter? You are comparing Tannehill to him if you think they deserve to be held to the same standards at the current stages of their career.

Matt Moore is a very capable backup QB, one that built a rapport with most of this team last season and a proven leader . . . if Tannehill for whatever reason laid an egg in the first half, be it still injured or just struggling, if coach Philbin believes Matt Moore gives him a better chance to win the game in the 2nd half, I'd fully support that decision . . . and I'd hope we drafted Ryan Tannehill knowing he had the mental toughness to go thru tough times, including being benched. If something like that would in a sense "ruin" Tannehill, then hell maybe he isn't the QB we all think him to be.

Tannehill no question is the most important piece on this team, but we have 52 other players and coaches that have busted their azz this year and deserve to be put in the best situation to win and a fanbase that pays good money to watch this team in hopes of making the playoffs. I'd want my coach to feel confident in making the decision to put his team in the best position to win this game.
 

icelatte39

Nathaniel
Joined
Jan 3, 2010
Messages
249
Reaction score
3
You play RT. We don't need to shake his confidence like that and we also do not want the media going nuts over it.
 

Phindog

Starter
Joined
Aug 27, 2010
Messages
5,626
Reaction score
1,518
Location
New York
All i Know is Matt Moore is very capable of throwing 3 TD. I havnt seen that from Tanne yet. If he isnt 100% you go with Moore
I kind of agree with you that Moore can throw 3 TD's in a game,but I have seen signs that our rookie QB can do the same.Tanny must being the field general that Philbin wants and Moore must be slightly behind him in a few areas.I think philbin is being honest that there wont be much a drop off when Moore steps in be he philbin obviously saw things we wont ever know for choosing Tanny over Moore.

quoting Brian Hartline "Its nice to know we have two starting quarterbacks."
 

Gonzo

Who dat?
Administrator
Finheaven VIP
Joined
Mar 5, 2004
Messages
31,993
Reaction score
4,618
Age
39
Location
Canada
Under no circumstances other than injury should we pull Tannehill. We make or miss the playoffs with Tannehill. Period.

Matt Moore. He's a great BACKUP QB, but that's all he'll ever be. A great backup/good transitional starter. Enough with the love for backup QBs please. I know it's upsetting for some that we moved on from Fiedler, Henne, Moore, and other champions of mediocrity; but we're heading to a far better place with a real QB. If you don't see it in Tannehill, you don't know what the **** you're looking at. Period.
 

Gonzo

Who dat?
Administrator
Finheaven VIP
Joined
Mar 5, 2004
Messages
31,993
Reaction score
4,618
Age
39
Location
Canada
Why would I bench Eli Manning, a 9 year veteran with 2 SB rings for a poor first half when he has proven time and time again over the course of NINE years that he's one of the most capable QB's in the NFL, especially in the 2nd half, particularly the 4th quarter? You are comparing Tannehill to him if you think they deserve to be held to the same standards at the current stages of their career.

Matt Moore is a very capable backup QB, one that built a rapport with most of this team last season and a proven leader . . . if Tannehill for whatever reason laid an egg in the first half, be it still injured or just struggling, if coach Philbin believes Matt Moore gives him a better chance to win the game in the 2nd half, I'd fully support that decision . . . and I'd hope we drafted Ryan Tannehill knowing he had the mental toughness to go thru tough times, including being benched. If something like that would in a sense "ruin" Tannehill, then hell maybe he isn't the QB we all think him to be.

Tannehill no question is the most important piece on this team, but we have 52 other players and coaches that have busted their azz this year and deserve to be put in the best situation to win and a fanbase that pays good money to watch this team in hopes of making the playoffs. I'd want my coach to feel confident in making the decision to put his team in the best position to win this game.
A weak, **** coach switches out his rookie QB because he's having a bad game. A good coach lets him take his lumps and helps him learn from it in the weeks to come. Luckily, I believe Philbin is the latter.
 

BigNastyDB13

Second String
Joined
Nov 16, 2008
Messages
1,124
Reaction score
10
If Tannehill is hampered by his injury, ie: he can't move and scramble like he normally would then you start Matt Moore. With that said, if they start Tannehill and he's rusty and/or looks to be hampered by his injury then its a no brainer. You put Moore in at half. This is pretty damn close to a must win. You bring Moore in, hope he leads you to a W and you bring Tannehill back next week when he should be healthier. You dont leave Tannehill in because he's your future at the detriment of the team today. Tannehill is the clear #1 so you arent starting a QB controversy. Just doing whats best for the team.
 

tay0365

Super Donator
Finheaven VIP
Joined
May 18, 2004
Messages
13,227
Reaction score
2,640
Location
NJ
Easy and quick answer: Tannehill is your future, unless he is struggling because of physical limitations from his injury, you live or die with Tannehill.
 

Hayden Fox

Is it Sunday yet?
Finheaven VIP
Joined
Jan 5, 2009
Messages
30,987
Reaction score
1,249
I wish I knew how limited or not Tannehill was. I do worry about the fact that it is Tannehill's plant foot.
 

damaster21

PSN: FatalViper
Joined
Jul 27, 2008
Messages
368
Reaction score
34
Location
Biloxi,MS
Maaaan y'all are starting to get under my skin with this wanting to start Moore over Tannehill, or pull Tannehill out of the game if he is struggling crap. Tannehill is developing nicely and you don't pull him out of a game for struggling. It may or may not affect his confidence but we don't need a QB controversy in the middle of the dang season. As WV would say, "Get ****ing real!".
 

BigNastyDB13

Second String
Joined
Nov 16, 2008
Messages
1,124
Reaction score
10
Maaaan y'all are starting to get under my skin with this wanting to start Moore over Tannehill, or pull Tannehill out of the game if he is struggling crap. Tannehill is developing nicely and you don't pull him out of a game for struggling. It may or may not affect his confidence but we don't need a QB controversy in the middle of the dang season. As WV would say, "Get ****ing real!".
Wouldnt be a controversy if you pulled him because he wasnt fully healthy and you made it clear he was the starter once he became fully healthy. Ryan Tannehill's confidence isnt as fragile as some would like to think. Im pretty sure he isnt going to moan and pout and become a ****ty QB based on being pulled at halftime. He's not going to stop developing based on sitting half a game. If he were 100% healthy then sure you leave him in there but its pretty obvious he isnt going to be 100% healthy. Given the choice between having a bad first half and being benched and the Fins winning or having a bad game and the Fins losing, I'm pretty sure RT would take the W. I think he'd feel a lot worse about losing the game for his team than he would being benched for a half because he wasn't healthy enough to get the job done.
 

Abhenne7

Dolphins4lyfe
Joined
Jan 17, 2010
Messages
916
Reaction score
3
Location
Miami, FL
Under no circumstances other than injury should we pull Tannehill. We make or miss the playoffs with Tannehill. Period.

Matt Moore. He's a great BACKUP QB, but that's all he'll ever be. A great backup/good transitional starter. Enough with the love for backup QBs please. I know it's upsetting for some that we moved on from Fiedler, Henne, Moore, and other champions of mediocrity; but we're heading to a far better place with a real QB. If you don't see it in Tannehill, you don't know what the **** you're looking at. Period.
Matt Moore is not a back up. He is a Good Starter and a great leader. Chad henne is backup, and a sh** one too. Tannehills ceiling is obviously far greater, i dont argue that. But Calling Matt moore a backup QB is Ignorant
 

Gonzo

Who dat?
Administrator
Finheaven VIP
Joined
Mar 5, 2004
Messages
31,993
Reaction score
4,618
Age
39
Location
Canada
Matt Moore is not a back up. He is a Good Starter and a great leader. Chad henne is backup, and a sh** one too. Tannehills ceiling is obviously far greater, i dont argue that. But Calling Matt moore a backup QB is Ignorant

Looks like a back up to me. ;)

If he was a good starter, why did we go and draft another? Hell, why weren't teams beating down our doors trying to trade for him? Teams are willing to trade decent picks for far lesser positions, why not a QB?

Look, we know what Matt Moore is. He's a perennial backup/transitional starter. There's nothing wrong with that. It doesn't say he's not a decent QB, it just means he has a limited ceiling that he's already hit and has a given role that he's very good at (backup). No doubt somebody will sign him with the intention to have him COMPETE for the starting position, and he may even start, but he will always be looking over his shoulder at a younger QB that they draft to replace him. That's the transitional part. He's better than a lot of similar types of QBs that are currently starting for their unfortunate teams--Kolb, Cassel, and Sanchez immediately come to mind--but that's not saying much. A lot of teams start QB's like that because they either don't value the most important position in football or they need someone to fill in until they can draft one. We fell in the former category for, what, 10 years? Thank god that ended.

So, there you have it. Matt Moore is a backup QB. A damn good one, but a backup none the less. I would love to resign him as a long-term backup, but that will never happen. He thinks he can be a good starter in this league, and I don't blame him. Best of luck to him when he moves on.
 

Handbanana

Scout Team
Joined
Sep 29, 2012
Messages
125
Reaction score
4
Location
San Diego
This thread is fail. We drafted Tannehill for a reason. If this were even an issue, we would have pulled him during the 3 games that we already lost......smh
 

Abhenne7

Dolphins4lyfe
Joined
Jan 17, 2010
Messages
916
Reaction score
3
Location
Miami, FL

Looks like a back up to me. ;)

If he was a good starter, why did we go and draft another? Hell, why weren't teams beating down our doors trying to trade for him? Teams are willing to trade decent picks for far lesser positions, why not a QB?

Look, we know what Matt Moore is. He's a perennial backup/transitional starter. There's nothing wrong with that. It doesn't say he's not a decent QB, it just means he has a limited ceiling that he's already hit and has a given role that he's very good at (backup). No doubt somebody will sign him with the intention to have him COMPETE for the starting position, and he may even start, but he will always be looking over his shoulder at a younger QB that they draft to replace him. That's the transitional part. He's better than a lot of similar types of QBs that are currently starting for their unfortunate teams--Kolb, Cassel, and Sanchez immediately come to mind--but that's not saying much. A lot of teams start QB's like that because they either don't value the most important position in football or they need someone to fill in until they can draft one. We fell in the former category for, what, 10 years? Thank god that ended.

So, there you have it. Matt Moore is a backup QB. A damn good one, but a backup none the less. I would love to resign him as a long-term backup, but that will never happen. He thinks he can be a good starter in this league, and I don't blame him. Best of luck to him when he moves on.
Dude Matt Moore has been in Sh** teams his whole career. When he was put in in carolina He posted a 98.5 QBR. The Next year He got injured with an even more incompetant panthers team and only played 5 games. That team flat out stunk. He then took the reigns last year and posted a 87.5 QBR. Why Arent teams knocking? Cuz they know theyll get him cheap if he walks, or hey, maybe Ireland has flat out turned them down. Im pretty sure if moore was in the jets in 09 and 10 the wouldve made the superbowl. Matt Moore is a quality starter. Oh And the reason we drafted a QB was because you guys wouldve gone to irelands home and cut the guys head off if he didnt. If This were based on Merits, Moore deserved the starting spot this year. But we decided to go with the rookie and speed up the developement process . I dont have a problem with that. But I have as Much faith in Moore as I do In Tannehill.
 
Top Bottom