There is a complete lack of talent at DB...our pass rush is limited to 1 player....our WR talent/depth is a joke, but yeah, other than that we're loaded with talent.
Rt is a better qb than Moore right now. Translating last year to this year cant be done this isa quickdrop get ball out fast system. Moore was successful when he improvised after plays broke down Tanne lookked better than moore compariing apples to apples & is better qb period IMO
If Moore was the better QB, he would be starting. He couldn't get it done when he had to. End of thread.
Actually that's entirely correct, and if you realize that almost all teams have areas in which they lack adequate talent, then you realize why this team appears to be able to play with any team when it gets adequate QB play. In other words, what you said may seem like it disproves the idea that this team can play with any team when it gets sufficient QB play, but it doesn't.
I think that's a pretty big leap to say that a guy who's going out there and putting up a QB rating of 58 is better than a guy who put up a QB rating of 97 in the last nine regular season games he played, and a rating of 87 in his last full season overall. I don't think the system is that influential. Would Matt Moore play more poorly in this system than he did last year? Probably. Would he play more poorly than Tannehill is right now? Probably not.
Thats thee thing shou you are assuming moore would be aying better w/ no real evidence to back it up. Moores qbr was bettter last yr. Vs. Rt this yr but last qbr assumes he would be same this year but it is a diff yr so it negates thhat argument
IYO based solely on you opinion You ignore moore's 1st 3 games last year, and his games vs ^500 teams last year. I thinnnk it is huge leap to even suggest moore would be better based on anything that hhas been presented as evidennce Your basis ignores that this is much bigger diff in styles than you would want to admit understandably. It makes quantam leaps based on stats while discounts visual evidence thhhat moore looked worse than rt in preseason simply because it was preseason. Thing is it was preseasonn for RT as well. At least is apples to applles comparison, not a complete hyperbole.
LOL!!! And Moore didn't throw a pick 6 last year??? Please dude. Your agenda is showing. Are you related to Moore or something? Moore was TERRIBLE last year vs. good teams. Terrible. 6 turnovers in 3 losses. Very bad.
And i am arguing my opinion based on what i have seen. Like i said before i think it is a good discussion i just disgree with your conclusion, respect it, just disagree
I have no agenda. On the other hand, if you want to say Ryan Tannehill was only a missed field goal away from a win against the Jets, without acknowledging that he was also a pick-six away from a win, then I suggest you're the one with the agenda.
Really I think it's not a leap at all to suggest that a guy who played his last full season in the league with a QB rating of 87 would very likely be playing better than a guy who currently has a QB rating of 58. I mean that to me is just a no-brainer, no offense.
We disagree moore has no evidence that in this system any better than RT. If you lookk at last year manny preddicted moore would be decennt based on 11 preseason where he outplayed henne. Now this preeason he looked llost and his mechanics were horrible, throwing off his back foot way too much which can be attributed to being uncomfortable in the system
You use stats as a be all end all buut the leap you make is that because he had an 87 qbr last year means hhe would this yr. Which cannot be supported. Maybe he woudd but take the visuall evidence and IMO RT shows more
But this isn't true. That pick-6 came at the beginning of the 2nd half I believe. Who knows how the game plays out if he doesn't throw that pick-6. What we do know for a fact, however, is that if Carpenter's kick goes through the uprights the Miami Dolphins are 2-1.
If the visual evidence was as strongly correlated with winning as QB rating, I wouldn't mind going with it. It's not like QB rating is just some meaningless number. It's correlated with wins at 0.78.
Right, but let's not say Ryan Tannehill played the kind of game at quarterback that's associated with winning, and he was blocked in that effort only by a missed field goal. The truth of the matter is that Ryan Tannehill played the kind of game at quarterback that's associated with losing, and the pick-six was a huge part of it.
He played the type of game that gave the Dolphins two 50/50 chances of winning the game. he could have played better, however there is little evidence that Matt Moore would have played better. Especially since you can discount most of last season due to the change in offense.
We'll never know what Matt Moore would've done, but I do know that a QB rating just 10 to 15 points higher would've given this team a much better chance of winning. Now, would you really put money on Matt Moore's not having a QB rating of at least 60 to 65 in that game? Are the odds that against it that you'd bet he'd do worse than that? Honestly. Tell me what you'd put money on. Matt Moore having a QB rating of 60 to 65 or better, or having one worse than 60. Perhaps it isn't a bet you'd take because it could go either way for you, but I can sure tell you what I'd put my money on.
True, however how do you know that Matt Moore's QB rating wouldn't be 10 to 15 points lower? He isn't a good west coast quarterback. At this point of the season I would bet money on Matt Moore having a QB rating less than 60 because I do not think he can do the types of passes that is needed in this offense. He might improve the Dolphins ability to pass over the middle, however he would greatly reduce the ability for quick timing routes. Plus there is a good chance that there would beat least one fumble. I honestly believe if Garrad was healthy Matt Moore would have been traded or if Miami could have gotten a 6th round pick for Moore, he would have been traded even with Garrard not healthy.
and again you keep away from using Moores first 3 games of the Season when MOORE DID AS POOR of a job as THill did his first 3... DId you know that Moore only had games out of the 9 where he did not have a better game than THill against the Raiders (a 91 QBR)??? So Moore had a few games they were just about as bad (in those 9 games) with a 61, a 68 and a 75 QBR... Oh yeah and he had 2 TD and 4 INTs with a pick sic in the frst Jets game (a 41 QBR)...... and did you know that Moore did not get A QBR of at least 50 in this Pre Seaon??? Even Pat Devlin had a few games where he was above a 70 QBR... I know Shou I am grasping at everything... LOL...
*ONE* Horrible throw all day? People need to stop hand waving Tannehill's mistakes. I counted 5 mistakes, glaring mistakes, by Tannehill. He missed a wide open Bess in the endzone. WIDE OPEN. Why? Fixated on his first read. Overly fixated. He threw a terrible deep ball to a wide open Hartline. It was so poor that Hartline had to make a highlight reel catch simply to pull it in. If that ball is anything near on target, youve got yourself a touchdown and a victory. The INT needs no further clarification. It was terrible, absolutely terrible.
The Jets played HORRIBLY. Miami was in a place to win simply because of the Jets ineptitude, not because of Miami's victories.
No I am sorry. He missed it because he was running away from defenders, while looking in an area where he has three players, and doesn't have a bird's eye view of the field.
This is what I mean when I say a better QB performance would've won the game for us convincingly. Mark Sanchez's QB rating was 58, which is so poor it's almost always associated with losing. With how strongly QB rating differential is with winning, it takes an even more poor performance at QB for the other team to lose such a game. On the other hand, even an average to somewhat below-average performance at QB would've won the game. It's not like we would've needed Dan Marino out there to win that game.
Well I'll tell ya what, if we have a QB on the bench who we don't think can do significantly better than a 58 QB rating in a game like that, we should be out shopping for a new backup QB. Hell heaven forbid Tannehill should get hurt, eh?! The guy on the bench certainly doesn't have the confidence of almost anyone in THIS forum!
Matt Moore is not a starting NFL caliber QB, and RT clearly is regardless of his QB rating right now. The differences are obvious when you watch them both.
If Tannehill is the future, no sense in putting it off. That way next year we can see how he does after a year of experience, and hopefully more weapons. (Otherwise Ireland should pack his bags.)
Yeah, an elite QB would definitely destroy the Jets that day, but Matt Moore is not elite. Moore was pretty good last year, but I also saw him lose games for us too. He was a notch above Henne, but he's about even talent-wise with Tannehill, And I'd rather see Tanny out there gaining experience. The Dolphins are in no position to contend just yet with either QB.
are you really going to foolishly micromanage every throw a rookie QB makes? Rookie QBs, more oft than not, lose. Its part of the deal. This team blows regardless of who is QB. You let the kid learn. how are people this dense and reactionary?
So you think you would've needed an elite QB to beat a team whose quarterback had a 58 rating? That's not what simple statistics say.
It takes far less than a sure thing to beat a team whose QB has a 58 rating. Teams whose quarterbacks play that way almost always lose.
Shou if any of us would preach simple statistic, we would have say that Moore wasn't much better than Thill last Sunday against the Jets... Moore against the Jets, with Marshal and Bush last year saw his QBR's of 41 and 61 (last game of the year)... Moore ended the last Season (after 12 starting games) with a 61 QBR against the Jets.... only 3 points more than Thil season averag (THill 58+3 Points=61 (Moore), and 36 points lower than his average in the last 9 games... Moore QBR in the two games against the Jets combined with a 51... 1 TD and 4 INT (1 pick 6)... No to be picky , but Thill went into the Jets game with a 68 QBR... you would have have to use prior statistic to base your claim Shou, and not adding the stats post game... Based on Moore's last stats against the Jets last year... THill had better average QBR stats in his first two games, than Moore had against eithe of the two games he played against the Jets last year... Now that is some simple statistic...
And guess what? If Ryan Tannehill wouldn't have thrown that interception Sunday, his QB rating for the game would've been 61, the same as Matt Moore's against the Jets last year, and three points higher than Mark Sanchez's was in the game Sunday (58). So the QB rating Matt Moore had against the Jets last year could've very well won that game Sunday.
This is a stupid thread. Moore sucks and he proved it on the field. The end, that's all. Pack it up, last one out turn off the lights. Good bye thread....