I am a little confused... We now have Tannehill, Moore and Freeman under contract...

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

Well you beat me by one minute. LOL

JoeFootball Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well you beat me by one minute. LOL


LOL.... I guess the Hickey connection... But what is the plan, we can't put him on the practice squad... We are going to carry 3 QBs on our roster or just training camp fodder?

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

Yeah, that makes sense, he could defintely beat out Moore.. I didn't realize Moore's contract was not guaranteed..

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

maybe if freeman plays great in preseason we trade moore for whatever we can get? I am fine with this move. Better than Pat Devlin anyway

________________________________________________________
The beatings will continue until morale improves.

Every team had a shot to get Matt Moore for ZERO draft picks. Why would they now give one up? Unless a rash of injuries happen to QB starters, it's not likely.

This has to be a favor to Freemans agent at an attempt to resurrect his career by showcasing his talents in the pre-season right?

Freeman was not all bad in Tampa 80/67 TD INT ratio. 2012 4k yards 27/17. He just never built off his second year as a starter 26/5 td which was pretty damn good. He could come in and challenge if all the flags are flying in the same direction for him.

He had a better career than moore.

In 2012 Freeman threw for 4,065 yards, 27 Td's and 17 ints.

He has talent but suffered through bad coaching with Schiano, IMO. before that he had Raheem Morris....on bad teams.

dolphaholic Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This has to be a favor to Freemans agent at an
> attempt to resurrect his career by showcasing his
> talents in the pre-season right?


Its a camp body for OTA's and the first part of training camp.

Its possible he could beat out Moore, but only one of them is likely to be on the final roster.

Remember, we like to run two sets of offense and defense in different directions to maximize the number of reps during the period when we have 90 players on the roster. We need 3 QB's to make sure we are always able to do that.

I don't know why everyone is so down on Moore. As I remember, when our starter went down one year, he completely reversed our poor record and came within a breath of leading us into the playoffs.

Chren who d you think is better? moore of freeman?

Moore is one of the bets backups in the nfl signing Freeman who has had some success gives us 2 experienced qbs behind Tanne. I like where we are at the qb position

I'm just talking about the running down of Matt, not saying this was a bad or good move and I know that Moore isn't getting any younger.

i dont hate moore.

Anyways if tannehill goes down the season is over. Doesnt matter if its freeman or moore playing.

In the not too distant past, NFL rosters used to carry 3 QB's on the roster, but I guess with all the QB protection penalties, the injury risk is now rare.

I like this signing, Freeman could be something if he can manage to reprogram his mind away from his past.

Crowder52 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> JoeFootball Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Well you beat me by one minute. LOL
>
>
> LOL.... I guess the Hickey connection... But what
> is the plan, we can't put him on the practice
> squad... We are going to carry 3 QBs on our roster
> or just training camp fodder?

****************************************************

Moore is trade bait if Freeman does well?

Crowder52 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yeah, that makes sense, he could defintely beat
> out Moore.. I didn't realize Moore's contract was
> not guaranteed..

I was wrong. Matt Moore's contract has 1.6 mil fully guaranteed.

JoeFootball Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Crowder52 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Yeah, that makes sense, he could defintely beat
> > out Moore.. I didn't realize Moore's contract
> was
> > not guaranteed..
>
> I was wrong. Matt Moore's contract has 1.6 mil
> fully guaranteed.


Yea, Moore isn't getting cut simply for that fact. They won't flush that money. The signing of Freeman confuses me. It was 1)unneeded and 2)wasteful. What the hell is he going to bring to the team knowing that Moore is set as the #2? Surely we aren't going to carry this guy all season as a #3? Maybe Tanneballs has some wierd idea to trade him out on draft day or something that no one else knows. Very strange move to me.

It's just like the article I read....It gives the lower guys on the roster a good arm to get through camp with...

This regime has placed a higher importance on developing players. This helps tremendously with that instead of some UFA that can't push your WR's.

The more I think about this signing the more I get it, if Freeman does OK picking up the offense, you would have trade bait with either him or Moore late in the pre-season in case a starter goes down on another team, worse case scenario is you cut him (or Moore) before the season starts.