Watching preseason game seattle vs. tennessee. He completed 11 passes for 77 yards. He is really accurate but I didn't see him throw the ball past 15 yards. He may be able to manage a game but not a franchise QB. Hoping Garrard comes back.
A little early to say that. If you're banking on Tannehill, let's wait until he's appeared in regular season games as a starter several times with D.C.'s planning against his weaknesses. The best case scenario now, to be honest, is probably Tannehill #1, moore #2 just for the next two pre-season ga,es, to get Tannehill 1t string bs 1st string experience... then for Garrard to return in time for limited work as the #1 in the final preseason game. Garrard starting the season is still ideal... though we now see with his health that it's almost inevitable that he wouldn;t make it through the year without Tannehill taking over for spells. The other option is to cut Garrard. But I don't like the idea of a Matt Moore offense this season, nor throwing Tannehill into the fire with a half-baked team.
DJ... I know how excited you are about Tannehill, but dude hasnt even seen a 1st team defense in practice, let alone a game. Garrard was our best veteran QB, and looked good in his own right at practice. That was a big loss...
A little early to judge Flynn, decided this after 1 game? Really? If that's the case: our OL won't open holes all season for Bush or other RB's, our Defense won't stop any team on 3rd down and we go 0-16, Moore is dead and Tannehill is our only chance except . . .wait, Tanny hasn't really seen or played against a first string D so we are likely screwed for the season, go 0-16 for Barkley? A bit of an over-reaction methinks.
Why doesn't anyone ever get accused of under-reacting? I guess because people over-react to over-reaction, but under-react to under-reaction.
I don't think it's a matter of banking on anyone, but on being able to rely on someone...This seems to be Garrard's history...every time he gets ready to become consistent, he get's hurt...at this stage in the development of this team, the last thing we needed was for one of the QBs to get hurt. Now, it likely isn't in Garrard's hands any longer...Does anyone really think he's shown enough to be the starter at this point ?? Not I...and if the coaches really think so, they are thinking that on his history, not what he's shown he can do right now... I'm not real comfortable with Tanny yet. Sure, he had a good start, but the 19 college starts will haunt him if we throw him to the wolves now. MMoore, despite having a good half a season last year is clearly (based on the coaches reports, the media reports and even our guys attending practices) behind Garrard and we all know his strengths really are not suited to this style of O... Tanny may get the nod simply because of this arthroscopic surgery, not because he's ready...
Did you watch the game or just look at the box score? He looked really good in the pocket. Started the game 8/8 and ended 11/13. The pick was really bad, he just didn't see the underneath linebacker. The two sacks (one off a bad snap) we're actually smarter plays than trying to put it up and risk having it picked. He also had a really good 14 yard pass to Zach Miller that showed off his arm strength. I'm not saying he's going to be Aaron Rodgers level but I didn't see one single thing in his entire time in the game that would make me "glad Miami didn't get Flynn. Really wondering what it is you saw.
He was the starter in Jax for 4 seasons, and until he was cut in 2011 had been pretty durable. He started 12-16-16-14 games during those seasons.
Man I sure hope Garrard hurries back! We have a chance to win 7-8 games with that guy!!! This team is far from playoff caliber, imo you let them develop together. Tannehill will likely be the starter by the bye week, lets just enjoy the potential progression.
This. Why people are in a hurry to have Garrard come back to win anywhere between 6-8 games? Of course we need to see how Tannehill will do IF he starts this week, but I'm done with stop gaps. If the Dolphins are going to win anywhere between 5-8 games this season, wouldn't you rather see if Tannehill can get it done? Garrard being out until the end of the preseason essentially kills his chance at being starter. It's Moore or Tannehill at this point. Happiest guy? Pat Devlin.
would u say the same about Peyton Manning? he was 4 for 7 with 44 yards and an INT. altough when its all said and done i believe the statement "i am glad we diddnt get flynn" will prove to be true, but pre season game 1 stats shouldnt be the foundation for statements like that. we all know Peyton Manning will take his team to the playoffs.
I'm every bit as comfortable with Moore as I would be with Garrard, when I watched them practice I didn't notice a discernible difference, I liked what I saw out of him in the first preseason game, Moore has some guts and competitive nature that I like, at least enough to carry me to the rookie.. 4 and 2 at the bye or else..
It's not that Nasty, like I said to BK, Moore or Garrard, I don't really see Garrard being some huge upgrade at this stage to feel a great loss, I feel like there is some precedence that is not being taking into account as it pertains to RTs situation, his exp in this offense, his age, and his coaches. now watching him in that first game 3 times now, it's obvious to me that he is not quite reading defenses yet, he's kind of just playing ball and throwing to the spots where he supposed to, and doing a hell of a job doing that, my point is I believe experience is what he needs to expedite the learning curve.. One again, if we can compromise, I give Moore 6 games to produce a 4 and 2 record at the bye, if not, there is no reason to continue sittin RT sit on the bench. I think with all the dynamics in play, the respect the team has for Moore, the RT stuff, the loss of Garrard doesn't move the meter in terms of worrying.
I'd really like to hear from Garrard as to why he didn't get the wear and tear clean up over the past year and a half.??
Maybe he didn't have the surgery in the offseason or after OTAs because he felt no team would have taken a chance on a 34 year old QB with a bad back AND a bad knee
I mean with an offseason as long as he has had, you would think a professional athlete would have already put themselves in vigorous training situations to be able to know how hard the can go, before camp starts.?
Ok? Just because you go through an extensive offseason doesn't mean the issue will pop up any earlier than it did.
yeah I get that, I'm just wondering if there wasn't a bit of neglect or lack of exploratory procedures to detect and prevent untimely occurrences.
Of course Garrard isn't needed. Because he sucks. Tannehill should be the starter regardless. The team has nothing to lose since they're not a good team at all anyways. Might as well play the young guys like Tannehill. Get them much needed game experience, and maybe they show something.
Well, I have to wonder if 2 yrs from now we are looking at Pat Devlin as our own Matt Flynn? I did not think Devlin had the athleticism this offense may require but he showed it vs Tampa the other night and I was impressed with him a little bit.
Which is why Devlin matters to the franchise, let us lose our starter for 4 games, go 0-4 especially in Divisional games and your season is over..we saw this happen all of the time with Sparano. Or season would be over before it began in terms of the Wildcard, lose 3 AFC games to start the yr and you are screwed.
He passed a physical before camp. How could he predict he'd hurt his knee? Sometimes, even for very active people, doing some simple movement can tear loose a small piece of cartilage, that then becomes an irritant and cause swelling.
He actually did pretty well. The gameplan was designed that way. I thought it was crystal clear but I could be wrong.
