Nice to have a decent veteran QB. Maybe Moore just plays better in a backup role?

Just think how close we came within a Garrard's injury of not only seeing Moore but in not starting RT.

RT is definitely the future but if the playoffs are within reach, Moore may give us a better chance to win now. He looked really good today coming off the bench. Imagine how much better he would be as the starter.

Today's game was more a testament to coaching and preparedness.

Moore = Don Strock. Nice to have a reliable backup, but RT is still our starter.

I think The real deal will be ok...He was standing the whole game which leads me to believe he wasnt hurting much.

The game yesterday was tailor made for Moore. Big lead, running game working, Our D controlling the Jets. In a situation like that where the Jets D was on their heels, play action is effective and Moores experience and smarts can be successful. He is a good backup and we should keep him.

montequi Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Moore = Don Strock. Nice to have a reliable
> backup, but RT is still our starter.


Strock was brilliant, like another coach on the field. I don't think the 20 something Moore with a few season's starting experience on terrible teams and lots of TOs, compares to Strock. But it is good to have someone who has had some success as a starter on this team as the backup

________________________________________________________
The beatings will continue until morale improves.

As it stands now, Indy is not sure of which QB to prepare for. I'm sure Philbin & Co. will keep Tanny's status as fuzzy as possible. Maybe we'll see Devlin start.

berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> montequi Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Moore = Don Strock. Nice to have a reliable
> > backup, but RT is still our starter.
>
>
> Strock was brilliant, like another coach on the
> field. I don't think the 20 something Moore with a
> few season's starting experience on terrible teams
> and lots of TOs, compares to Strock. But it is
> good to have someone who has had some success as a
> starter on this team as the backup

True. Moore doesn't quite get to the level of Strock, but he's the best backup we've had for quite a while.

KB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The game yesterday was tailor made for Moore. Big
> lead, running game working, Our D controlling the
> Jets. In a situation like that where the Jets D
> was on their heels, play action is effective and
> Moores experience and smarts can be successful.
> He is a good backup and we should keep him.

Big lead? 3-0 was the score when Moore took over.

RT was not having a good game before he went down. Two really low passes and missed Fasano WIDE OPEN in the end zone on third down when he threw the corner fade to a covered Hartline.

Moore is more than a capable backup. He can start on several teams right now so keeping him as a backup is probably not an option.

If the objective is to develop Tannehill, playoffs or not, then he's our starter. If the objective is to field the best team right now and make a push for the playoffs, Moore should be starting.

I bet you some king fool will say we won the game because of matt moore.

Moore did great but we won because of special teams.

Im happy for moore and his trade stock has risen from a 6th to about a second rounder...


I love it.

But its nice to have a very capable backup anyways.

Moore had a passer rating of 96, that is pretty good... Tannehill only beat that mark once this year in the game vs the Rams... I still think RT is the starter but Moore played extremely well and his passer rating supports it... When Tannehill went out, the QB play did not decrease that is for sure... Good offensive system and preparation by Moore. Its not like he took alot of snaps with the first team to get ready....

-----------------------------------------------------------------
All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Nietzsche

Although I'd love to see a Tannehill/Luck matchup, I'd give Moore the nod this week.

You'll get two things out of it:

1. RT gets another week of rest.
2. You get to see what Moore can do with this offense.

Moore seemed to call alot less audibles and didn't have as much command of the offense (that's expected coming in cold due to injury) as Tannehill does.

Loved Moore last year, love him this year. He attacks down the field more then Tanny.

I'm ok with Moore playing more.

Nothing against Tanny, very pleased with how he has been playing.

Tanny does probably check into safer plays, but notice we dont score a whole lot with him at QB either

Dolfin and moore passed for 1 td only so i dont see how we score more with moore anyways...


we won yesterday because special teams.

also let's not lose sight of the goal this season. It is to get RT as much experience as possible so we can be making deep runs for the next decade. I see no drop off with RT in there, and it seems clear to me that RT is better running this offense than Moore is even at this point. No way to we think about sitting RT the way he has played. Even if he played a little worse we still keep him in there the rest of the year

________________________________________________________
The beatings will continue until morale improves.

But back to my point. Those of you praising the coaching staff must remember that it was THEIR ORIGINAL DECISION TO GO WITH GARRARD. Had he not been injured, they would NOT have started Tannehill, and we KNOW how good he is and Moore would have been TRADED and we see what a good game manager he is.

The coaching staff was aided by pure providence, not by their smarts.

RT is better. The stats prove it. The leadership skills prove it...

But who cares, Moore played fairly well yesterday and we won. That's all that matter. Moore barely threw 50%, but again, who cares, we won.

---------------------

"When you suck long enough, you get a Hickey"

KB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> ?!?!? Just looking for something to argue about
> brother or are you one of those guys who thought
> we should draft ANOTHER O-lineman ? I meant
> we had a large lead most of the game brought on by
> the defense and special teams. By the time Moore
> got his second possession, we had scored on the
> blocked punt and recovered a fumble from a sack on
> the Jets 30. A pretty good setup for any QB.

No and No. Not looking for something to argue about and not one of those guys talking bout drafting linemen (whatever that means?). Simply correcting your statement about the game being taylor made for Moore b/c we had a big lead.

Aqua&Orange Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> RT is better. The stats prove it. The leadership
> skills prove it...


I think everything you said is up for debate... As I said above Moore finished the game with a 96 passer rating. That is better then RT in 5 of his 6 games... Passer rating is a stat... RT game passer rating and completion percentage prior to getting hurt yesterday, a passer rating of 50.4 with a 40 percent completion percentage... SO there was a distinct difference in play when Moore came in.. Moore also accomplished this without any first team reps or 1/10 preparation RT recieved prior to his games... RT does know the offense better, and makes better reads because of it.
Moore was the teams MVP last year and one of the most liked players on the team, and a guy players rally behind. That being said I dont think you can say RT leadership skills are superior to Moore in the slightest. In fact I would think with Moores experience, he has the edge in leadership... The coaches all raved about Moore's leadership on Hard Knocks if you go back and watch...
All that being said, RT is our future, and should remain the starter for that reason... But I dont buy that RT is superior player to Matt Moore at this point in his short career... I think Matt Moore proved that yesterday...

-----------------------------------------------------------------
All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Nietzsche

The point is not whether RT or Moore is better but that our great and all knowing LEADERSHIP thought Garrard was better!

Wasn't he beaten out at Carolina?

I think the great thing about this team is that its not just one guy. Tennthrill goes down, Moore steps in. You doubleteam Wake, Vernon is gonna step up.

As far as Garrad's injury being lucky for the Dolphins, I can think of two recent examples where pure luck played a vital role in teams getting to the Super Bowl.

1. If Bledsoe doesn't get hurt, we may never have heard of Tom Brady.

2. If Trent Green doesn't suffer a concussion, we may never have heard of Kurt Warner.

Well, SC, many would disagree with your number 1. Most would say that eventually Brady would have out played him and gotten the job as Marino did over a SuperBowl QB, David Woodley.

Now I think you're probably right about Trent Grent and Kurt Warner.

Crowder52 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Aqua&Orange Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > RT is better. The stats prove it. The
> leadership
> > skills prove it...
>
>
> I think everything you said is up for debate...
> As I said above Moore finished the game with a 96
> passer rating. That is better then RT in 5 of his
> 6 games... Passer rating is a stat... RT game
> passer rating and completion percentage prior to
> getting hurt yesterday, a passer rating of 50.4
> with a 40 percent completion percentage... SO
> there was a distinct difference in play when Moore
> came in.. Moore also accomplished this without any
> first team reps or 1/10 preparation RT recieved
> prior to his games... RT does know the offense
> better, and makes better reads because of it.
> Moore was the teams MVP last year and one of the
> most liked players on the team, and a guy players
> rally behind. That being said I dont think you can
> say RT leadership skills are superior to Moore in
> the slightest. In fact I would think with Moores
> experience, he has the edge in leadership... The
> coaches all raved about Moore's leadership on Hard
> Knocks if you go back and watch...
> All that being said, RT is our future, and should
> remain the starter for that reason... But I dont
> buy that RT is superior player to Matt Moore at
> this point in his short career... I think Matt
> Moore proved that yesterday...


You are missing one point. You can take it for whatever you want, but More got to play a whole game with Gaffney.

Tannehill has done what he's done with Bess and Hartline and mostly 2 WR sets.

It wasn't until The ST Louis Game that we even went to a 3rd WR look with Moore to any great extent.

So to a degree, comparing Moore yesterday in an offense where we actually had 4 competent WR's on the field for some plays and 3 for half of them to Tannehill in the first 6 games with 2 WR sets nearly all of the time is not an Apples to Apples comparison.

More played very well. He did his job. I like him.

But he probably isn't even on this roster next year.

Tannehill is the starter.

Even so, I'm not sure that saying that a 6 year veteran with 25 career starts proved that a Rookie with 19 college starts and 6 NFL starts under his belt isn't better than him yet is much of a compliment.

Truth- Moore is a 6 year veteran journeyman who has always played out of the back up role.. Who came in cold and performed a 96 passer rating for us against the Jets... Which happens to be better then Tannehill has done in all but one game.... RT passer rating in his last full game against the Jets 50 rating with a 44 percent completion percentage, similar to his stats when he was knocked out of this game on sunday.... I am not missing any point, RT is our future and starter, and Matt Moore continues to impress when he is given his chances...

-----------------------------------------------------------------
All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Nietzsche



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/29/2012 12:13PM by Crowder52.

Ok, think about this...

Let's say, for arguments sake, that Moore gets the start this week for whatever reason. He throws for 400 yds, 4 TD's, 0 Ints and we win big in Indy.

Now the coaching staff decides that we're going to stick with Moore because we're in a playoff race and he gives us the best shot to win.

Moore plays as well or better than last year, we make it to the AFC championship and lose a close game to Houston (42-45) on a last second FG.

NOW HERE'S THE QUESTION...

Who's the starting QB next year?