Is There Anything Matt Moore Can Do to Change Your Draft Plans?

were not on the same page here, I was simply making making a statement about your comments that you are not a buyer of the '' passing league''...I extended that thought by saying that unless you have yourself an elite QB, you shouldn't be a buyer of that philosophy, you should be all about balance and a great defense...I've seen enough of Moore to know that he is not the kind of QB where I would buy into that passing identity with...You say we need to see him throw more to determine that, I say, I don't need to, my conclusions tell me that if Moore is your QB, then you go balance and defense route, not go loco passing trend.

 

Glad to hear you say that:

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/B/BradTo00.htm

Brady's line from 01:

18 Td's to 12 ints 14 starts 41 sacks 2,900 yds passing 63.9% completions

If MMoore had started 14 games, on a prorated basis, he would not be far off from those numbers including sacks, in fact he would have been sacked less then Brady.

 

Still have to see if he can do it though Deej, I think to many fans are falling into the trap of thinking adding a #1 pick Qb means instant offensive success, when in fact it rarely does and when it does they usually step into a situation with a ton of talent on offense.

4 rs from now, can Moore be better?

I believe he will be, given the opportunity, if he is mirroring Brady's first yr now, who knows what he can do with more experience?

 

It's not just about sacks. It's about overall production when under pressure.

 

Name me 1 close game Matt Moore brought us back or scored late to extend a close lead? All our wins were blowouts and everybody producing. Hard to say that was all the result of Moore. Matt is a guy I do like, but he frankly hasnt shown he can consistently win close games, he flat out hasnt, that is fact. SO to say he can when all the evidence is to the contrary amounts to a leap of faith.


look if say we win 1 more and draft lets say 9th and the top 3 is gone, and thru due diligence there are enough concerns about Jones, weedon and tannehil that make it too risky to take any 1 that high and you cant get up for a top 3 or cant trade down where the risk is palatable, then yes IF there is another difference maker there say by sheer luck Blackmon then yes I could see bypassing a qb and hoping we can get 1 in 2nd that falls hopefully.


But you exhaust all options to get a guy that has elite potential. I think Tannehil can be great if handled correctly, he needs to be groomed as he is raw but he could be an option later in a draft your #1 then maneuver back into late 1 earlier 2 if he falls

And it is the same because we are trying to ressurect the career of a qb that another team gave up on. If MMoore is so great why did Car take Newton? Why did Dallas try to stash him on their practice squad and risk losing him? because while they saw talent they didnt see elite that they couldnt replace. those are all teh qbs we have had since Marino

 

My initial reply would be, hell yeah draft a QB in the 1st round, no matter what.

But upon further review, as Sceeto points out, Kurt Warner is very high on Matt Moore and I know for sure Warner knows more about it than I do. I also heard JP say he didn't take the majority of 1st team reps when Moore missed the time after the Eagle game. So Devlin is in the mix as well.

I'm sure glad I don't have to make this decision.

 

This team isn't built to comeback. that's fine. Many superbowl winning teams are not built to come back. You need an elite QB to come back consistently anyway.

Peyton Manning is a stinker when it comes to coming back in the playoffs. Hence 1 Super bowl in a year he had two stinkers and his Defense carried him (5 fg's against Baltimore to win)

You're Car/newton comparison isn't too valid btw. If Brees was so good why did San Diego take Rivers? Carolina doesn't know what its doing. Dont' forget they took Clausen the year before. So they obviously have issues with identifying QB talent and they lucked into Newton plain and simple by ... having the worst team

If Romo was so good how come nobody picked him. If Brady was so good why he last until the 6th round. These are the same questions you could ask before either Romo or Brady took off like gangbusters. All that matters is what they do on the field.

 

IIRC Jmphin, the Defense has pretty much folded in the close games, we enter the 4th with a lead, offense went conservative, as in run Reggie Bush up the middle twice, conservative, we punted, opponent drove for GW scores.

NYG/Denver/Dallas come to mind in that regard.

Point being, MMoore has not had the opportunity to do so this yr, Sparano pretty much took the ball out of his hands, the wins have been blowouts and such drives were not required.

 

That's a perfect example of past performance not equaling future results. This will be Brees’ 2nd 5,000 yd season and 4th of 4,000 or more since leaving San Diego. In the same time period, Rivers has hit the 4,000 mark for the 2nd time this year.

You just never know for sure.

 

i have no issue with Matt Moore being our QB ... the BACK-UP QB ...

 

I think we would all like to see MM lead a comeback victory and that is my real question. How does he do in a close game?

 

So what? They are two different people who happen to play the same position and went to the same college. How would you like it if in your profession, someone said old Schmolioot is gonna fail because someone else in the same profession had previously failed in similar circumstances? Wouldn't you think you deserved the chance to stand based on your own personal merits, not be labeled as destined to fail because of what someone else did?

 

Matt Moore has already changed my draft plans.
I was ready to draft Andrew Luck. Or Matt Barkley.
If Matt Moore wins one more game we probably aren't getting a great QB prospect in the first round.
He's changed the draft plans. And not in a good way.

 

God damn I get tired of comparisons as an indication of anything worthwhile or an indicator of future results. Moore is Anderson, Moore is Fiedler, Moore is Fitzpatrick, etc etc etc.
How about, Moore is Moore, Anderson is Anderson, Fiedler is Fiedler and Fitzpatrick is Fitzpatrick?

 

Oh I agree, there is a difference between using comparisons based on facts, for example their physical tools, or their statistical comparisons.

However, with Qb's, it really is more about how much they evolve from their baselines, the only way to know how that will break out is by playing them.

For example, a Qb is accurate, or they are not, that tends to stay constant, a jump up is not impossible but a regression rarely happens beyond 2-3% given the same amount of playing time.

This is one of the issues with Matt Moore, two sample sizes in Carolina, with wildly different results, one 56% accuracy, the other over 60%, in Miami he has been over 60% for most of the yr in his first real extended playing time.

This is one of the problems with his prior samples, 2 or 4 games at a stint is not real solid evidence.

The Bears discovered this with Caleb Hanie, who looked great in the NFC Title game, but has been dreadful enough this yr that they dusted off Josh McCown.

 

We had some great individual pass blockers with a few middle of the road starters mixed in. I sure don't recall any full time starters on Marino's lines that I'd call gutter trash as pass blockers. We had a great OL coach many of the Marino years as I recall, in John Sandusky. Feel free to name some names, otherwise it sounds like more of the same revisionist history we heard a couple days ago about Jake Long.

 

Just comparing that they have had similar careers as Tex said, notice I didn't say it would stay that way. But I think its fair to compare the two so far in their careers.

 

The book on Brady is when you get pressure in his face consistently you stand a much better chance of beating him. He gets hit a few times and he isn't quite the same as when he is kept off his butt by his OL. I sure don't recall Brady doing any better when he gets pummeled by the pass rush like Moore has many times this year. You hit Brady as soon as he sets up, like often happens to Moore, his magic quickly seems to wane.
All this talk about Marino and Brady performing at elite levels behind bad lines, while Moore cannot, looks like massaging the truth quite a bit to me. First of all it is a fallacy IMO, to say Marino and Brady ever had to deal with a right side like Colombo and Carey, next to a rookie center. I sure don't remember, but if you do, feel free to name names.

 

Not a thing.

 

I'm just curious to hear the argument but...

Those of you against Matt Moore as THE quarterback for our team, citing the numerous reasons you have, I am curious....

Are those reasons based on the results of his play or the results of Tony Sparano's coaching?

I wonder...if we were to obtain the next Jim Harbaugh if he could do with Matt Moore what Harbaugh did with Smith in San Francisco.

 

Exactly.

 

Honestly Rivers is Bledsoe.... From where I'm at.
Minus the success. LOL

 

From the OP...........but have any of you left the door open for Matt Moore as the team's future?

NO. Not to the extent that we put all of our eggs in that one basket. We HAVE to get a stud QB, or at least try. If MM works out next year, we will be in good position to go forward.

 

If you are including me in that group I would disagree..

GM's don't have the luxury of what your waiting to see, they have to make decisions based on what they see now..not a gm but, what I see now is a good chance because of draft position in the right year, to land a QB that has very high upside..

I believe when you are in that enviable draft position, and you feel what is in the draft has higher upside then what you have at the position, you make the move now to have a chance at greatness later, then, If Moore wants to beat his *** out, then so be it, bring it on, and I'll match'em up head to head as we go...IT's a win win situation Pod, not sure why your so hesitant to spend resources at this particular juncture in our franchises state..

Your over thinking it..The talent of the evaluator matters in this case...Take the risk when you can, cause it might be another 20 years before you get a shot..

All in brother..Like that kinda party.

 

To you it isnt so I respect your opinion

But the analogy is a team that drafts #1 overall has many needs, if they feel the qb they hae has shown elite potential they dont draft a qb JMO, you dont have to agree. Its common sense. Because Brees wasnt living up to that potential he had shown soe flashes but was not progressing. flashes are great but he didnt take that leap until after they drafted rivers, which woke brees up.

Why do people think there are absolutes? Why do you show one or two examples and think you have blown my argument out of the water? Tom Brady was drafted in the 6th rd, should then all 6th rd qbs become elite?

Ireally find this whole argument funny, we are built to come back, you need an elite qb to come back consistently, And? thats muy point Moore isnt elite. Henne plays avg he is called numerous things, people point out the team, others like you say excuses, yet when in teh same breath youmake teh same excuses for Moore cause you cannot discount the argument the only teams he has beaten are teas with porous defenses.

So you can act like my opinion is so stupid all you want. NOONE has shown any imperical evidence that Moore has elite potential

 

Then they shouldn't be involved in the draft if they are hiding under their desks Deej, just go Oakland and only have 5th and 6th rd picks this yr.

NFL doesn't work like that Deej, if you take a Qb with a high pick, he will play, like Gabbert in Jax.

All in is fine for poker Deej, the game ends in the short term, a NFL team is perpetual, GM's don't have that luxury.

My hope is the new HC thinks the way I do, we hire an experienced HC no doubt he will...I hope.

I'd like to see a Carter/Moss situation on Offense, enough talent on the outside that we can plug in any competent veteran Qb and tear the league up.

 

I agree completely. Moore has been awesome. He is making everyone around him better. But, that doesn't mean we ignore the position yet again. Maybe it means we don't "bet the farm" for Luck, but can settle on another guy. There is always that one qb who falls (see Marino and Rodgers) so draft them! But we cannot ignore the position.

 

Moore hasn't played good enough for long enough to stop us from going after elite Qb talent. Are we this far gone as a fanbase that we are excited about a 6-7 win season? Moore is solid, that's it we'd be short sighted and basically setting a new coach up for failure if we ignore the Qb position once again in the draft.

 

After starting 0-7?

Could be wrong, but this is the largest comeback, in terms of wins, from an 0-7 start in NFL history.

 

Considering Padre has compared Moore to Tom Brady's first year in this very thread, I'd say this is something we all do.

The reason the Anderson/Moore comparison is one to consider is because Cleveland did exactly what you are suggesting we do. A guy who had been a marginal NFL QB rose up and had a really nice season, leading cleveland to 10 wins, just missing out on the playoffs. The Browns immediately franchise tag him, stop developing Brady Quinn and give anderson a nice contract extension.

Then with additional starts, Anderson proved to be the margina, spot starter he had typically been, and you see what he continues to do in his career now.

Point being, Cleveland allowed an abberation to compeltely change their plan, and they payed for it. I'm not suggesting that we cut Moore, but you don;t allow this abberation to change your plan to draft a QB. If Moore ends up starting all 16 games next year and elads us to the SB, then obviously you re-evaluate.

But you stick to your plan. You don;t get caught with your pants down, stuck with Moore and a late round prospect. It just leads to another wasted year

 

So let me get this strait just so I Know where you stand, you wanna give Moore the keys and go Blackmon or Floyd?

So going into next year, it could potentially look like.... Moore with Marshall and Floyd on the wings, Dwayne Allen and Fasano as your two tight ends, pick up a Russell wilson a bit later, sign a couple of big free agents for the defense, and compete?

 

I like this plan.....assuming the Top 3 QBs are off the board.

 

And move Clay to FB/HBack, adios Lexxy

Floyd
Marshall
#3 wr DBess
#4 Gates/Prospect

Te
Fasano
Allen

FB/HBack
Clay

As for #2 Qb, not really sure, I do think I'm rather sick of using #2 picks on a Qb, so if our guy isn't there at #1 just pick up a Vet Qb as there will be a slew of them on the mkt this offseason.

I think it would up the explosiveness of the offense, but Gates not doing anything at Wr this yr is a major disappointment so to me, he is very replaceable as that #3/4 Deep Threat/Return man.

 

Get it right, statistically speaking, MMoore's first yr here compares well to Brady's 01 season, save for 1 game, down to the # of times he was sacked.

Are you really trying to compare a 6'6, left handed Qb, with a career completion percentage in the low 50's to Moore?

No escaping inaccuracy in a Qb Schmo, this is why comparisons rarely hold water because the sample is cherry picked, as you are doing, if you look at the whole body of work Anderson has had 2 opportunities to start in the NFL, his numbers pretty much stayed where they are, Moore's numbers are more akin to his 07 4 game stint, Anderson has had 40 starts in the NFL and lo and behold, his numbers top out in 07, he never surpassed it, only stayed below it.

See the cherry picking comment, you are treating Anderson's 07, his best yr, to MMoore entire body of work, that is statistical fallacy, but unsurprising.

For example, Anderson was sacked 14 times in 07, Moore has been sacked 31 times this yr, and yet one attempts to brush both of them?

Dirty secret of the NFL is there are 31 teams with wasted seasons every yr, the key is to be competitive yr after yr.

To help you have some basis:

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/A/AndeDe00.htm

Anderson's "best" season in terms of accuracy he was at 56%, that is by far Moore's worst season in terms of accuracy on a team that went 1-15.

 

How many teams start 0-7? Sorry but winning when there is no pressure is not impressive. Moore hasn't been great, we cannot annoint him franchise Qb status, we still don't have a franchise Qb we keep drafting till we get one. We are also coach shopping they usually want their own guy so I see us drafting a Qb early

 

League history is filled with Matt Moore types who become good winning quarterbacks, some of whom have fairly long careers, like Rich Gannon. However, even if you like Moore, the QB position is a great position to have depth at. If a QB is good enough to be selected when our time is up, draft him. If we are lucky enough to get a "Dan Marino" will take over no matter how competent Matt Moore is.

 

As fine as Moore has been playing, we absolutely can't fall into the trap of thinking he's the guy (even if - ultimately, somehow - he becomes the guy). You think the Bills regret not taking a QB this past April now? How would they like to have Andy Dalton right now? Instead, they are saddled with a Matt Moore type at QB, who showed flashes, but is really not all that stellar.

Even if Moore looks awesome the next two weeks, and brings us back to beat either the Jets or Pats, we still go for the stud next April, and let the chips fall where they may. If we somehow manage to manuever for Luck, he starts day 1, no doubt. Same for Barkley, probably, but as we're seeing now, he may not even be there. RGIII .... maybe he starts day one, not sure. But if we get any of the second-tier good young QBs (Jones, Tanny, Weeden, other), I think you start Moore, and commit to him for at least half the season and see where it goes. If he suddenly becomes Rich Gannon, or something like that, then fantastic for us. We're in a playoff push, and we have multiple talents at QB. If not, we have another guy to give a shot.

 

Spending a high first round pick on depth is tremendously wasteful.

 

You don't have a "franchise" Qb because you draft a Qb with a #1 pick either.

And winning when there is no incentive to do so is quite impressive, whether one realizes it or no.

 

But are we completely sure that Moore at the top gives us that depth at this point? That's the question. Is Moore really competent, or a flash in the pan?