Matt Moore + Mike Wallace deep go route | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Matt Moore + Mike Wallace deep go route

N

normaldude

Starter
Joined
Oct 20, 2003
Messages
2,533
Reaction score
609
The most powerful weapon on our roster is the Mike Wallace deep go route.

Tannehill is unable to use that weapon.

Matt Moore might be able to.

If Matt Moore became the starter, then it's certainly possible that Mike Wallace could return to being the homerun terror we paid him to be.
 
Really? You had to start a thread on this? There are other threads that Matt Moore's family and friends have started...Go join one of those.
 
DeathStar said:
Really? You had to start a thread on this? There are other threads that Matt Moore's family and friends have started...Go join one of those.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying that Matt Moore is an overall better QB than Tannehill. If Mike Wallace weren't on this team, I wouldn't bother raising the issue.

But Tannehill might not be the one to unlock our most powerful weapon, which is currently collecting dust, to the tune of $60 million.
 
normaldude said:
The most powerful weapon on our roster is the Mike Wallace deep go route.

Tannehill is unable to use that weapon.

Matt Moore might be able to.

If Matt Moore became the starter, then it's certainly possible that Mike Wallace could return to being the homerun terror we paid him to be.
Click to expand...

If you start Moore over Tannehill, you're giving up on Tannehill. You don't have any young QB's waiting in the wings. You know Moore will never take you anywhere near a SB. Even if Tannehill only has a very small chance to make it, you stick with Tannehill in the hope that he defies the odds. Otherwise, there's no point in playing the season.

You only make this move if you believe Moore gives you a much, much better chance of making the playoffs, and I don't think that's the case. I am, and have been, very concerned about Tannehill, but he still has better than a puncher's shot, given his athletic ability and the new offense.
 
Matt Moore is a career back up for a reason. This is the truth, just lie back and accept it.
 
j-off-her-doll said:
You know Moore will never take you anywhere near a SB.
Click to expand...

Earl Morrall and David Woodley brought their teams to the Super Bowl. So did a supermarket worker named Kurt Warner.

It's ridiculous to think that Ryan Tannehill has Super Bowl pixie dust, while Matt Moore does not. They're both mediocre quarterbacks. But it's certainly possible that Matt Moore is the one who can unlock our most powerful weapon.
 
Please do not compare Earl Morrall to Matt Moore. I like Matt Moore. He's a real good backup. I love his "I DON'T GIVE A **** I'M GOING DEEP" attitude. I love the fact that he can go out and throw a pair of awful picks and just keep slinging it.

But Earl Morrall was the freaking LEAGUE MVP one year in Baltimore.
 
normaldude said:
Earl Morrall and David Woodley brought their teams to the Super Bowl. So did a supermarket worker named Kurt Warner.

It's ridiculous to think that Ryan Tannehill has Super Bowl pixie dust, while Matt Moore does not. They're both mediocre quarterbacks. But it's certainly possible that Matt Moore is the one who can unlock our most powerful weapon.
Click to expand...

The odds of Tannehill making a huge leap in year 3 are better than Moore making a huge leap in year 8. If you're completely done with Tannehill, and you think Moore will lead you to the playoffs, it makes sense to start Moore. But if it's not both, the move makes zero sense.

Philbin can keep his job two ways:

1. Making the playoffs.
2. Tannehill showing huge improvement at the end of the season.

If you're a HC, only Tannehill can satisfy that 2nd requirement. If you think the competition is close, Tannehill starts. Most people would rate Tannehill ahead of Moore.
 
Relax everyone, Marino is now being paid to work for the Fins. He can also be the special advisor to Tannehill's deep ball.
 
The problem is Wallace isn't running a go route, he is running a go, stutter, trip, look back at the wrong time, and not fight for the ball route. Moore's deep ball was against a lesser defense and the receiver after beating the DB at the line ran a smooth straight route. Also just an FYI, while a good throw, it wasn't a great throw as it should have been more to the outside to get away from the safety. Against a good D with a solid safety, the safety would have had a play on the ball as it faded back towards the middle of the field.
 
normaldude said:
Earl Morrall and David Woodley brought their teams to the Super Bowl. So did a supermarket worker named Kurt Warner.

It's ridiculous to think that Ryan Tannehill has Super Bowl pixie dust, while Matt Moore does not. They're both mediocre quarterbacks. But it's certainly possible that Matt Moore is the one who can unlock our most powerful weapon.
Click to expand...

how is it ridiculous? Ryan tannehill is in his 3rd year. He's improved in his second year, even with a terrible oline. Matt Moore is now in his 8th season and 3rd team. What exactly has he shown in 8 years, to make you think he's capable of doing anything?
 
67Stang said:
The problem is Wallace isn't running a go route, he is running a go, stutter, trip, look back at the wrong time, and not fight for the ball route. Moore's deep ball was against a lesser defense and the receiver after beating the DB at the line ran a smooth straight route. Also just an FYI, while a good throw, it wasn't a great throw as it should have been more to the outside to get away from the safety. Against a good D with a solid safety, the safety would have had a play on the ball as it faded back towards the middle of the field.
Click to expand...

Are you saying that Tannehill throws a better deep ball than Moore, or are you niggling over two plays?
 
j-off-her-doll said:
The odds of Tannehill making a huge leap in year 3 are better than Moore making a huge leap in year 8. If you're completely done with Tannehill, and you think Moore will lead you to the playoffs, it makes sense to start Moore. But if it's not both, the move makes zero sense.
Click to expand...

Just to play devil's advocate here, but a number of QBs have made big leaps in production and efficiency after 6 or more years in the league. I'm specifically thinking of recent guys like Mike Vick, Tom Brady (I know, I know!), Jake Plummer, etc. Guys who were six or seven year veterans who suddenly jump 10 or even 20 points in passer rating. In some cases it was coaching, in other cases surrounding talent, and definitely a lot of it due to growth as a player.

One of the big problems that I personally have with the QB debate is that people just seem to be dead set that so and so is who he is, and can never improve or regress. I think that unless the QB is working with some serious athletic limitations (and I'm specifically thinking of Matt Schaub's dead arm), there is always a reason to think that a QB will get better with experience.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom