Ryan Tannhill led us to the playoffs not Matt Moore

Well on one hand this may be gamesmanship on the part of Gase with the injury report. But, these guys are knuckleheads if they don't give the kid ample recovery time. It'll just f- his knee up for the foreseeable future.

 

The ball was thrown and led him right into the defender. Luckily, for us and parker, the defender curled up and avoided the tackle.

 

Not really. It's been shown that RT needs protection, as do all QB's, in order to "be good".

New England: Ajayi-14 yards/ RT 94 passer rating
Cleveland: Ajayi- 28 yards/ RT 94 passer rating
Chargers: Ajayi- 75 yards/ RT 130 passer rating
Rams: Ajayi-77 yards/ RT 89 passer rating
Arizona: Ajayi48 yards/ RT 124 passer rating

 

No, no, no ..... try again.

Look at the space between he and the defenders AFTER HE CAUGHT THE BALL (not to mention he has a blocker ahead) ...... but please continue marginalizing.

 

Actually what Tanny has shown is you must reduce the amount of attempts he has (will finish with career lows regardless of the injury), plus the THREAT of an actual run game and a competent O-line.

What QB wouldn't need these things though? Unless of course they're elite, in which case they don't always need perfect surroundings.

 

You can keep showing incomplete frames of the play, but it still doesn't make you correct. The video I posted shows the truth. I'm not marginalizing anything. It wasn't a bad throw, but it was a TD because, and ONLY because, the defender curled up. Not because of ball placement.

 

I never said the ball placement was the sole reason for the TD. You on the other hand keep crapping on all of his throws, completely understating what he did out there - especially as far as recognition in the 2nd half.

It would be one thing if defenders were draped all over DVP and he made a circus play like we see with runningbacks. However, Moore led him perfectly on a drag route with SPACE BETWEEN multiple defenders. DVP then turned on the jets, with two defenders late on the play taking bad angles getting shed like crumbs.

This is what they call teamwork.

 

In regards to the D.Williams catch that he turned up field for 44 yards - now that is throw where Moore is locked onto Williams and Gilmore sees it all the way ..... but he's playing back in a zone so there's no way for him to jump the route. His recognition enables him to get up on Williams quickly.

Williams was mostly responsible for that turning into a big play.

 

Man, this thread keeps getting crazier. No, I didn't say RT would have thrown 4 TDs against the Jets. I said we would have won. But given that Moore had never thrown four TD passes in a game before, I wouldn't rule Tannehill doing it out against the jets that night.

 

C'mon guys.. this isn't difficult. Tannehill helped us win 8 of 10 and Moore helped us win the other 2.

And I think it's equally unfair to take away Moore's contribution from the Buffalo game as it is Tannehill's from the Rams game. Both played terrible for long stretches of those games, but what they did do right led to crucial TD's. Can't just dismiss that because someone on the defense missed a tackle etc.. that's all part of the game!

 

I wrote from the beginning that we are lucky to have Moore. He's a gamer and he's doing what he's supposed to be doing. My only point in this debate is he's not as good as RT. He's completed 31 passes in 3 games. Yes, his passer rating is really good, but it's skewed because he's played so little. His passer rating is better than anyone playing QB not named Matt Ryan. I'm not going to call that lineman from KC the best QB ever because his one and only pass was a TD against the Broncos...after all, his passer rating is 158, right? lol

 

Dude!! That play with Dontari Poe was AWESOME!! It's like rubbing salt in the wound of a SB champ.

In any case, I think most agree Tannehill > Moore based on the 2 games so far. I'll change my opinion if Moore plays lights out in games to come of course, but right now I think most people see Moore as a competent backup to Tannehill. Having said that, I do hope Moore plays lights out and way outperforms Tannehill or any other QB! I want that SB dammit!

 

The overarching point is that tannehill doesn't move the needle

 

Still Tanny >>> Moore

 

OK so how about this...his average yearly salary = $19.25M, Average yearly salary for top 32 QB contracts = $19.8M. He's out-performing his contract.

There sure is a difference.

 

Tannehill had been beating blitzes quite a bit this year too, and was like the #1 under pressure QB in the NFL.

Stop trying to confuse the narrative with fact.

 

Talk about twisting facts and then your post saying how it is true LOOOOL Tannehill lovers. Tannnehill had a 39QBR vs. the browns - Ajayi was still splitting carries just like the NE game. The team had 115 yards rushing vs. cleveland, but RyGuy still managed two picks against that team.

 

Last year people complained that Tannehill threw too much because we would abandon the run game. This year, Tannehill throws a little less, because we actually run the ball, and that's now an indictment of Tannehill? Even though he had been having a great season, and the team was winning.

Oh, and Tannehill is bad against blitzes (ROFL), and Moore gives the team a better chance to win.

Crazy pills.

 

39 QBR? Who the **** pays attention to that bull**** stat, besides the mouth breathers at ESPN?

Save it...most moronic pile of crap I've seen today, and that's saying something.

 

btw.. to the question of how many passing attempts Matt Moore (or any QB) should have before we can start comparing their passer rating to other starting QB's, this is a graph of all passer ratings by attempts over a season the past 9 years (2007-2015):
https://i.imgsafe.org/438a70c024.png

You can start to compare passer ratings when attempts are different once the variance (how much the data varies vertically) is approximately the same, and it looks like that means QB's with 150+ attempts are roughly comparable. Matt Moore has 53 attempts right now, so let's see what his passer rating is after he gets closer to 150 attempts.

btw.. the QB at far right in that graph is Matthew Stafford with a single-season high record 727 attempts in 2012!!

 

Or we could simply compare career numbers.

You guys keep acting like Matt Moore is some sort of unknown quantity.

 

You can definitely do that, but I would make sure to adjust stats for era first if you do. That is.. note that for example average league-wide passer rating in 2007 (first year for Moore) is 80.9 while it was 88.4 last year. So I'd personally have a problem with just a raw (unadjusted) career passer rating comparison unless they were over roughly the same years.

 

Ryan has always produced better on average under pressure than without pressure. Is he as calm and cool as Moore when under siege? No. but he has been beating blitzes for years now.

 

You're over-simplifying those situations.

The "threat" of Ajayi keeps defenses honest. If it were Damien Williams out there - Tanny would be facing different defensive looks. So there's a mixture of good execution, as well as benefiting from one of the league's better backs.

 

Yeah, I just don't think we need to see anything more from him. We already have all the data we need. How he finishes this season doesn't change his career averages a whole lot, probably.

 

Anybody with eyeballs knew they needed to cut down Tannehill's attempts considerably ...... 582 attempts/year was absolute madness. His efficiency is a function of talent, Gase's playcalling, and a run-focused attack. I personally mentioned multiple times this is what I wanted to see if we were to stay with him as our starting QB because trying to turn him into Aaron Rodgers was pointless.

Finishing the season with divisional road games and a couple of non-division playoff contenders was an important barometer given the playoffs were on the line.

It's just too bad he got hurt.

 

He beats blitzes with his arm, instead of his legs.

The the majority of his career when he's forced to move around is when the difficulties start for him - due to lacking a natural feel in the pocket. Gase was helping him to improve that a bit this year.

 

Yep. Throwing at that rate is not a recipe for success unless you are like 3 guys on the planet.

We finally have the ingredients in place to be a 12 win football team and division champs in 2017.

 

Yeah, if it were up to me Moore never would have been signed in the first place. He shouldn't have been allowed to hang around through the Philbin regime and it should have been a huge no brainer for Gase to get new guy to groom. Had we been looking in the thirdish round we might have snagged Dak.

 

You are going to be sadly disapppinted if you are expecting 12 wins next year. Tannehill will be back and the schedule won't be the easiest in the NFL again

 

Agreed.

And to me this is why his long term value as our QB is evident. He has been through the worst of the worst from a situational standpoint. And now he has all those experiences under his belt and because of that football must seem so much more easier to him now.

In football (and life) you can go through some horrible **** and become much better for it, it's called overcoming things and not feeling sorry for yourself and pounding it in to your own head that its "not my fault". Those people fail in life in general much less at QB in the NFL. In 2017 Ryan will likely cement the "made it" role, and we should be proud of him for having the mentality to do that.

The perfect example of this again is Tim Couch, he really believed that nothing was his fault...he was broken emotionally and took on the poor me attitude. He didn't last in this league despite having all the tools you could want in a QB. Because he was a mental midget.

 

I was referring to Moore with regards to knowing what he is, and career numbers probably not changing much. I would really like to see Tannehill play in those sorts of games under Gase.

 

I dont know man...I would usually agree but a guy who believes nothing is his fault and his anus is golden just became our president soooo.

 

One can adjust for strength of schedule by finding the best-fitting line between wins our opponents have on the x-axis and whether we won or lost that game (represented by 1 or 0) on the y-axis. Wherever that line crosses the 8 wins point on the x-axis tells you what to expect given an average strength of schedule.

Turns out the Dolphins would be expected to win just a tad over 8 games with an average strength of schedule, given our games this season. How we end the season changes the result though: if we beat the Pats we'll have performed as a 9-win team on average, if we lose we're a bit better than a 7 win team with average strength of schedule.

 

I'll go against my "don't feed the trolls" policy one last time, just for you.

Besides the Cheatriots playing Houston where we played Tennessee (basically a push), and the Cheatriots playing Denver when we played San Diego (tougher game for NE), the schedules were identical.

That the only reason they have 13 wins?

There is currently, ZERO way of knowing how tough next year's schedule will be. At the beginning of this season, this year's schedule looked a TON tougher than it ended up. Arizona was favored to represent the NFC in the Super Bowl. The Stej were a 10-6 team. The Jills were on the brink of the playoffs, and expected by several to make the playoffs. The Bengals were a very good team. As of now, next year's schedule looks harder than this year's, but it's impossible to tell. Anybody who's watched more than one year of football knows this...yet I have to repeat this every year, and it proves true every time.

Edit: And even if we lose the Cheatriots game, we'll be tied for the best home record in the AFC...WITH said Cheaters.

 

I'd probably settle for 11 wins and that you don't come back!.. yeesh, time to change the broken record already
I tend to trust Gase knows what he is doing.. you?, not so much

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Whether you agree or not I think both sides are presenting their cases in a respectful fashion..except 1

 

I understand "why" you think that, so I won't attempt to debate you on it.

From my perspective - yes he's been in the league 9 years but he's only appeared in 45 games (started 27). Starting QB's generally don't hit their primes until year 5 and beyond. I believe under better coaching conditions his career trajectory could have been different, as well as his performance.