Miami Dolphins Make Ryan Tannehill Risk Even Bigger With No Safety Net | Page 5 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Miami Dolphins Make Ryan Tannehill Risk Even Bigger With No Safety Net

lurking said:
Who at the time do you think we could've picked up to run the offense, please don't say Kap. Because we would have had to change the whole play book to accommodate him.
Click to expand...
As I mentioned, we should have rolled with Moore. Season was done once rt went down, and I think Moore could have brought us as many wins as cutler. And we'd have ten million more. It was a stupid decision on a player who was bad in his prime. What did they expect when bringing him out of the booth?
 
dirkey said:
Because of the comments they made at the time. And they weren't right We were never going to make playoffs so the correct option would have been to go with the qb you have and don't piss 10 mill into the wind on a mercenary
Click to expand...

Sorry, don't agree.
 
Fintastic17 said:
1. How long has it been since Kaepernick played in a game?
2. Keenum, the same one who's starting for the Broncos?
3. How in the hell do you know what McCarron offers?
4. Is that the same Bridgewater who's thrown a total of 2 passes for 0 completions over the last 2 years?

Sound list you got there.
Click to expand...

LOL. Some of the same people who express concern over Tannehill not playing since week 13 2016 trot out suggestions of a QB with 188 career attempts, a QB that hasn't played since the end of the 2015 season, a QB that hasn't played since 2016 and was beaten out by Blaine Gabbert. and a QB they didn't know existed before 2017.
 
dirkey said:
Yeah that's your prerogative. But they simply believed that cutler was a good qb who could win them games. They were completely and utterly wrong. Of that, there's no denial
Click to expand...

When you bring a guy in off the street, you are bringing in a guy you hope doesn't lose you games. If there was a guy out there, they thought could win them games, they'd have signed him before Tannehill went down.
 
FinfanInBuffalo said:
When you bring a guy in off the street, you are bringing in a guy you hope doesn't lose you games. If there was a guy out there, they thought could win them games, they'd have signed him before Tannehill went down.
Click to expand...
Well, they were going against an entire career worth of evidence about cutler in that case at an utterly inflated price.
 
AvogadrosNumber said:
You're missing the point, I prefaced by saying three years of inactivity. It's a ridiculous strategy. They're willing to cut anyone and trade away all pro bowlers below value, but Tannehill is somehow untouchable? We're the only team that does this.

Had we had we invested in a backup Qb the year prior or the year prior, Cutler might never have been brought in.

When Brock Osweiler is forced to come into a game we are going to wonder, what series of dumb moves led us to that?
Click to expand...

What does investing more in a backup QB have to do with Tannehill being "untouchable"?

You're not even close to being correct that Miami is the only team that does "this". The Colts traded for JACOBY BRISSETT because SCOTT TOLZIEN was their backup. I'm sure that there are 2 dozen teams that would be done if their starter goes down.
 
I don't agree that he was better and I definitely don't agree that he was even minimum QB wage better, let alone 10 bloody million.
 
dirkey said:
I don't agree that he was better and I definitely don't agree that he was even minimum QB wage better, let alone 10 bloody million.
Click to expand...

I agree, he wasn't worth the money, but Matt Moore isn't the answer to any question involving a starting QB other than:

Which starting QB would make you sign Jay Cutler out of retirement?

And there are people here who wanted him starting over Tannehill. LOL.
 
FinfanInBuffalo said:
I agree, he wasn't worth the money, but Matt Moore isn't the answer to any question involving a starting QB other than:

Which starting QB would make you sign Jay Cutler out of retirement?

And there are people here who wanted him starting over Tannehill. LOL.
Click to expand...
I completely agree about Moore. I'm speaking totally about our situation though. It was clear cutler wasn't going to be good enough. So wasting the money was stupid.

The more worrying thing is if gase genuinely believed we had a chance with him however. That shows either significant arrogance, or appalling player evaluation skills
 
Wildbill3 said:
You lose your starting qb... you basically write the season off.
Click to expand...

With all due respect, Philadelphia might disagree.

Sometimes you just never know who you have at backup. Bledsoe gets his chest cracked and in comes Brady out of nowhere. Trent Green goes down, in comes the grocery bagger Kurt Warner. Steve Young is trash in TB, but is suddenly a god in SF. Hell, Rich Gannon was a perpetual KC backup, then went to Oakland and was lighting it up.

For all those stories though, there are dozens more that flame out. It’s almost like hitting the lottery. I doubt any of those fans saw those QBs coming, so who knows.
 
Longshot said:
With all due respect, Philadelphia might disagree.

Sometimes you just never know who you have at backup. Bledsoe gets his chest cracked and in comes Brady out of nowhere. Trent Green goes down, in comes the grocery bagger Kurt Warner. Steve Young is trash in TB, but is suddenly a god in SF. Hell, Rich Gannon was a perpetual KC backup, then went to Oakland and was lighting it up.

For all those stories though, there are dozens more that flame out. It’s almost like hitting the lottery. I doubt any of those fans saw those QBs coming, so who knows.
Click to expand...
You can't pull the one outlier in the last decade to disprove my point. before that, i'd have to reach back to brady/bledsoe. Before that... young/montana. hostetler/simms. It's rare enough that my general statement is going to be true the majority of the time.
 
dirkey said:
As I mentioned, we should have rolled with Moore. Season was done once rt went down, and I think Moore could have brought us as many wins as cutler. And we'd have ten million more. It was a stupid decision on a player who was bad in his prime. What did they expect when bringing him out of the booth?
Click to expand...
Moore wouldn't have made it through 4 games.
Where do people come up with these scenarios.
They would have rolled with him if he was anywhere above average.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom