Matt Moore staying put
start && end > -1) {
if (start > -1) {
var res = data.substring(start, end);
start = res.indexOf('>') + 1;
res = res.substring(start);
if (res.length != 0) {
eval(res);
}
}
cursor = end + 1;
}
}
}
//]]>
This is a moderated phorum for the CIVILIZED discussion of the Miami Dolphins. In this phorum, there are rules and moderators to make sure you abide by the rules. The moderators for this phorum are JC and Colonel.
2 years 8 million! That's almost as much as Tannehill.
Tannehill's contract....
Signing bonus: $7.653 million
2012 salary: $390,000 base
2013 salary: $480,000 base + $485,841 bonus if he is on the roster the 6th day of training camp
2014 salary: $570,000 base + $971,682 bonus if he is on the roster the 6th day of training camp
2015 salary: $660,000 base + $1.457 million bonus if he is on the roster the 6th day of training camp
berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 4mm per year, that is A LOT for a backup QB.
> Seems we are blowing a lot of our cap wad already
His last deal was 2.5 a year, 4 isn't horrible.. When we needed him last year, he lit up the Jets and played at a high level... When Henne got hurt he played at high level as well. He was going to get more then that elsewhere... Fair deal IMO
-----------------------------------------------------------------
All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Nietzsche
berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 4mm per year, that is A LOT for a backup QB.
> Seems we are blowing a lot of our cap wad already
Not really. It's a pretty small raise over what we paid him last year. We signed Garrard for $3M. Kyle Orton and Jason Campbell got $3.5M. Chad Henne got $3.4M. Any team signing Moore to come in and compete for the starting job would have to have paid him at least $4M. I'd much rather have Moore at $4M as the backup than to be pursuing Jason Campbell for $3M to come in.
montequi Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So, is Devlin gone, then?
This is the Key question. All last year when we were clearly out of everything but a higher draft choice, we should have been giving playing time to Devlin to see if he could be a replacement for Matt Moore.
Moore was injured. So now we sign a person coming off of injury and there may be some hidden "Russell Wilsons" in the draft but we don't know how durable Moore is or how good Devlin is or whether we should use a draft pick to bring in an intriguing prospect for back QB.
This is why I'm always on their back (Ireland that is).
Ireland doesn't control who gets playing time and I think everyone involved thought it was more important to get Tannehill the reps.
Moore was injured? How did that happen?
The coaches liked Devlin but that doesn't mean he was ready to take the field. He is a developmental player. I see no reason to take another one. If they want to try to improve the competition for him they can bring in a guy from someone else's D-squad or sign an undrafted guy.
Wasn't Moore injured early in the year? Or was that the prior year? But even if he was on the bench, still all the more reason, since although his contract was coming up, we knew what he could do, to find out about what Devlin can do.
On Ireland, don't YA think that if you were Ireland, you'd go to Philbin and say,
"Hey Joe. There's always a next April and there's always an end to this season and there's always a next year. In order for me to do my job, I've got to know what to do with the QB situation next year as Matt Moore is in his contract year. Maybe, you ought to find out what this Devlin kid can do."
Moore wasn't injured. Not sure what you are suggesting. That Devlin be elevated to 2d string last year and MM made 3d string? Or that Devlin be made 2d string this year? What would that accomplish? The only way the #2 will play is if RT goes down, in which case the better backup player should be taking over. If you want to boost Devlin's trade value the way to do that is in the preseason (which is how guys like Hasselbeck and Flynn got noticed).
________________________________________________________
The beatings will continue until morale improves.
ChyrenB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> montequi Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > So, is Devlin gone, then?
>
>
> This is the Key question. All last year when we
> were clearly out of everything but a higher draft
> choice, we should have been giving playing time to
> Devlin to see if he could be a replacement for
> Matt Moore.
>
So, we should have taken playing time and experience away from Ryan Tannehill in order to see if Pat Devlin is ready to be a backup?
dolfanmark Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ChyrenB Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > montequi Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > So, is Devlin gone, then?
> >
> >
> > This is the Key question. All last year when
> we
> > were clearly out of everything but a higher
> draft
> > choice, we should have been giving playing time
> to
> > Devlin to see if he could be a replacement for
> > Matt Moore.
> >
>
> So, we should have taken playing time and
> experience away from Ryan Tannehill in order to
> see if Pat Devlin is ready to be a backup?
It makes perfect sense D-mark...........that is if you smoked alot of skunk weed in West Lafeyette back in the 60's............
Moore is worth the money, how many backups can come into a game after injury with next to zero snaps in practice most of that year and win a division game on the road... Yep, that is worth a lot in my book.. If we can't dedicate 4 million of a 126million or so cap towards that insurance, we aren't going to deal with the unknown very well.. Moore is also good support for RT as he was last season... It was a strong move by Ireland IMO...
-----------------------------------------------------------------
All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Nietzsche