Please, none of us is ever gonna agree on the Henne issue. Needs to go. Sorry we didn't get more out of him. Will find better situation some where else.... :/
I am interested in seeing Moore win a close game. That is the main reason Henne has to go and if Moore cant he is not the answer either...
The biggest reason is if you use two high picks on quarterbacks, then you have essentially used one of those high picks on a player that will never help your team. It's a foolish investment overall, and when you draft a young guy high, you have to give him a chance. You are hitching your wagon to that player. With what the college game is producing though, it will not surprise me to see an NFL team in the next few years go to a two quarterback system. The interesting thing here is that Flynn has a career 68.1 passer rating. Matt Moore's career passer rating is 80.8. But there are fans out there that think because he comes from Green Bay, Matt Flynn is better than Matt Moore. I disagree. Matt Moore hasn't been given a chance to do anything in crunch time. Against Dallas, they tried to protect the lead. Same thing against New York. The other wins have been blow outs.
I guess I would argue you don't waste your pick when you draft a 2nd young QB. Mainly because that 2nd young QB is going to have trade value if you don't need him. Two recent examples come to mind is: 1) Kevin Colb (2nd round pick by the Eagles) to Cardinals - "The Philadelphia Eagles have traded Kolb to the Arizona Cardinals for cornerback Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie and a second-round pick in 2012." 2) Matt Schuab (3rd round pick by the Falcons) to Houston - "When the trade is completed, Atlanta and Houston will flip-flop first-round picks in April's draft, and Atlanta will receive Houston's second-round picks in 2007 and 2008" It is a trade off, you don't get a player of value in the short term, but you do give yourself more options in the long term in theory. I think people have raised some good points, and I think the win now era of coaching is a big factor as well. But it's not as cut or dry as you to portray it, in my eyes at least.
Real problem has been Mb, we have not had a good starting Qb who had a 3 or 4 yr run to allow such development to happen. Basically whomever we have drafted was assumed to be the starter. Really funny thing is, there were people screaming for Henne to start over Pennington not to long ago.
Well, FWIW, I agree with you and point to the CFL where 2 Qb rotations are not uncommon, they bring out the #2 guy to run the short ydg stuff. I feel some of the things Sparano and Henning did were simply dummy approaches, both would prefer to pee their pants then to turn Henne loose in any real way. By the time this season rolled around, Sparano tried to reverse course by bringing in Daboll, but it was just to late and the personnel group at Wr was not suited to playing 3 Wr football were elite quickness is at a premium, we had guys more designed to move the chains then to create big plays. Which is pretty much what we saw in Henne's starts, plenty of yds, but no TD results.
One "problem" with your examples is Kolb was selected long after McNabb had solidified himself as a starter, so they weren't really developing two QBs at the same time (no more than the Packers were still developing Favre when they took Rodgers). Had they not signed Vick, Kolb would likely be the starter in Philly right now. I'd say they lucked into being able to trade him (and have someone overpay IMO). I suppose Schaub is a fair example, but again Vick was already the established starter (and star) there in Atlanta by the time they took Schaub (though Vick did miss a lot of time in 2005, and that likely played a part in taking Schaub). So it was a little easier to take him(especially when he was taken at pick 90), as there'd be no controversy. It wasn't like Brees/Rivers where SD wasn't quite sure if Brees was their guy.
First, the examples I picked were to show that it wasn't a waste of a pick because young QB's with potential have trade value in the league. That was the point I was trying to address. You are addressing a different point. And while correct it was already brought up in essence by Padre and discussed in the above posts. Thanks for the reply though.
Late on this response, sorry. Every team tries to protect the lead. Moore had a chance to put Dallas away and couldn't do it. In the first drive of the 4th quarter, the Dolphins had a nice long drive going. A TD here and chances are good they pull it out. With a 2nd and 5 at the Dallas 5 yard line, the next two plays were as follows: The 3rd down play is a TD if Moore makes the pass. Not a gimme, but Hartline was open. Also, they weren't trying to protect the lead, because they didn't have it. They were down 17-16 at the time. They kicked the FG to go up 19-17. After a Dallas punt, Miami gets the ball back again with a chance to ice the game with a few first downs. After a Reggie Bush 1 yard run, Moore takes a sack then throws an incomplete to Bess. And since I was late in this post, it gives me the chance to point out the New England game. Where he had multiple chances (against the worst D in the NFL) and failed yet again the succeed in a close game or "crunch time", as it were.
