Winning the Division and Being Successful Hinges on One Player. Who is it?

And? I actually agree with a lot of Key's initial post. I don't agree that Moore is a superstar just as I don't agree that Garop is. Because of that,Key very clearly and very succinctly makes the case for Moore to be a superstar, so I think it's far to see if he considers Garop as one based on the same criteria.

 

Believe it or not, I had him on there...stared at it for a few minutes with Brady right beside him...and then deleted it. I couldn't make a list that included half the names as Patriot quarterbacks. To me, that's more of a nod to their special man in the booth than it is quarterback ability....and we were talking about quarterbacks, after all.

Garoppolo having four great games doesn't minimize what Moore did at all though- he still outperformed 30+ quarterbacks in the league during his stretch including some definite future HOF names.

It is what it is...3 and a half solid games...but it pisses me off when we hear six years of banter about Tannehill's ability, and then people trash Moore when he did amazing under the circumstances. That's being delusional.

 

That's it. He's not addressing the initial point just like you aren't.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Any argument can be made but I don't see how one can make a decent argument for that claim.

Honestly the only way I see it is if Parker matches Julio Jones and Tannehill matches Matt Ryan, in which case all the credit will be given to Parker.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

And there you go- where did I say either of those things? It didn't happen.

I like Tannehill as our QB1...a lot. I also love Matt Moore. And do you want to know a secret? It's okay to appreciate two players at the same position on your team's roster. Some would say that if you have to bash one to make the other look good, then you're compensating for something.

In this case, that something is easy- Moore with a 105.6 rating on 2016. I'm sorry if his solid play offended your Tanne-loving mind but I promise, having one of the best backups in the league...a guy that outperforms most starters...is a very good thing. Don't hate because I appreciate!

 

SMH...versatile? Ok. Best? Problems for defense.

 

And? It is perfectly acceptable for a conversation to be organic. It's also perfectly acceptable to discuss a smaller point made from a bigger one.

 

Okay, just don't complain later that every thread becomes a Tannehill thread.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I never said best. You did. I said lynchpin.

 

Two things:

1. I never complained about that.
2. I'll do as I please.

 

Then you'll be a hypocrite if you do.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Dude. Re-watch Moore's games. He didn't play like a superstar. I mean he was NOTICEABLY worse than Tannehill who no one is assigning superstar status to. He had the first game where he snuck up on them and another where Ajayi went bananas and he didn't need to throw any balls. When we needed him against the Pats he stunk it up and the Steelers were whooping on him and the fumbles. I like Moore but I was expecting a lot better performance out of him then we got. I'm hoping we don't need a backup again but if we do, I'm nervous....

 

Dafuq? Seriously what are you talking about?

 

Let me make this very simple so I don't have the usual suspects pouncing all over everything I say.

Right before we signed Tannehill to his current contract, think about what we could've signed Moore to for the same amount of seasons.

Do you feel we've gotten a good value out of Tannehill's contract? Isn't it possible we would've had a better ROI paying the difference in salary to other positions and trading Tannehill for draft picks?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

yes. dear god no.

Do you have amnesia since Marino retired?

 

I was born in 1992. I don't see how we got a great return on investment. I wanted Kuechly, but when we came at the crossroads where Tannehill was due a new contract, I wanted to trade him for picks, keep Moore for way less, invest in other positions and keep drafting QBs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Well, I took the bait. I'm done with talking Tannehill. Somebody make another thread if you want to talk about it so badly.

Edit: made another thread for anybody interested so we don't continue to derail this one.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Garop knew he was starting tho, no? Didn't he split starter reps with Brady heading in?

He did very well. But that's still different than Moore. Who's dream of holding a clipboard for millions of dollars was briefly interrupted.

 

big part of it Bk..one of the team goals made this year is to go undefeated at home, lets home the fans get the memo.

 

its so hard to pinpoint or blame whats going on when it comes to injuries..I will say that when I watched Puloka talk for about 15 mins I wasn't impressed based on a very surface level interview.

 

Regarding injuries what happened to all that talk about sports science etc

 

Soccer is different from American football (they're trying to import stuff from soccer).. who would've guessed eh?

 

I wonder if there's a problem between taking the data and applying it to actual flesh and blood athletes, in a meaningful way. If Deej is right and our S&C coach is chucklehead, then he may not be using the data at all.

 

Right. And you said, "yeah, no". Lol.

 

the sports science stuff isn't really gonna prevent a majority of injuries, its about understanding their genetic makeup so they can design a nutritional program for the individual, and to take cardiac output info and either push or curb their workout to try and maximize their stamina..

If you want to prevent injuries you have to assess the players weaknesses of course, in their bodies, and train accordingly to strengthen..

I also think that a good strength and conditioning coach should be able assess the anatomy of the body and be able to project at what weight and muscle ratio that body would best be suited relative to the players position and relative to how that specific body moves.

I believe dion Jordans training resume is on this coaches clock..and he fu$$ed that sh$$ up big time..

no way should a coach tell a strength coach at what weight they want their players, it should be flipped, and if it isn't there is disfunction in that dept.

 

I've always said that I love MM. He's the best back-up QB in the league.

 

I never said you were one of those people...

 

I still don't get who you're thinking about in regards to these "other" positions? Who have the Dolphins failed to get because of a lack of money?

 

If RT is who you say he is, what "picks" would we have got for him?

 

Those reps for Garop might have got him a little closer to MM's experience, but he's still faaaaaaaaar behind. And Moore takes a lot of reps during pre-season too.

 

Think about all the positions we had turnover in because of the contract we gave to Tannehill.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

First of all, I wanted Kuechly, but if he was worth that contract to other teams, surely we could've gotten close to the value of our original number 8 overall pick. That doesn't mean #8 overall.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

There has been zero players Miami let go because of Tannehill's contract.

 

What about Charles Clay? We probably could've extended Vernon before his value spiked out of nowhere. Starks? Miller? We could've picked up Sean Smith again. All of this is just off the top of my head.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

They did not value Charles Clay at $7 million a year. Vernon was traded because he did not fit the long term plan. Starks as well. Same with Sean Smith. Miller was not extended because Tannenbaum does not value runningbacks to $7 million.

Tannehill did not even have a big salary until last season.

off of the top of your head, none of the players would have been kept if Tannehill was paid $2 million a year.

EDIT: Plus if you were going to go with a moneyball approach, you wouldn't just do it with a quarterback. Only player that might have been kept is Vernon.

 

Yeah but GMs have to plan in advance. Just because Tannehill's contract didn't include big money until last season doesn't mean it wouldn't have coincided with Miller's, Smith's, Clay's or Vernon's.

I disagree, I think if anything Miller should've been kept. Could you imagine him in combination with Ajayi? But you likely could've kept both had our GM pulled the trigger at the right time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

While you disagree with Miller, Tannenbaum does not agree. He was the one who made the decision. Tannehill's contract did not stop Miller from being taken.

You are making a huge jump in conclusion. Vernon Davis was gotten rid of because of his attitude, not his contract. Sean Smith was not seen as good enough or fit the scheme at the time. They has Charles Clay valued at around $5 million a year and did not see him as an $8 million a year player, and Suh's contract got in the way of that signing.

You cannot just take any big contract and assume Tannehill's contract is the reason why Miami did not match it. Mostly because Clay and Smith were replaced by players making about the same, Grime's had a pretty big contract as well. In fact, the only player who was not replaced by a player with a similar contract was Lamar Miller, and there was plenty of cap space to keep him around.

There have been zero players who were not signed due to Tannehill's contract. Well maybe a Ryan Fitzpatrick type quarterback.

 

Tannenbaum is the one who extended Tannehill, of course he had to undervalue Miller. What jump in conclusion am I making? I simply wanted the money to be spent in what I believe would've been a more efficient manner.

Simply put, I don't believe Tannehill was worth more than drafting Kuechly, locking up Moore for less, retaining Miller and Smith/Vernon (for example) and developing AJ McCarron. You can come up with other combinations.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk