The elephant in the room

Its one game, and Moore will head back to the bench when Ryan is healthy. The way it should be.

But to say this team is set up for Moore is a stretch IMO.

There is some evidence for your perspective, in that when the Dolphins faced the Jets earlier in the year, coming off the two, 200+ yard games by Ajayi, the Jets were likely poised to stop the run, and the Jets' run defense was playing much better, Tannehill played much worse against them than Moore did last night, when the Jets were likely similarly playing to stop the run and make Moore beat them.

Obviously there could be situational factors that made one or both teams play differently back then than they did last night, but I don't think we can confirm those like we can the obvious difference in how Tannehill and Moore played in those two games.

If there's a QB controversy, it'll mean that Moore led the team to the playoffs and won game or two or three. I'm down with that.

"Conuficus wrote:

Its one game, and Moore will head back to the bench when Ryan is healthy. The way it should be.

But to say this team is set up for Moore is a stretch IMO.

Why should it be that way if the offense is better with Moore?

"Sloopy wrote:

There is some evidence for your perspective, in that when the Dolphins faced the Jets earlier in the year, coming off the two, 200+ yard games by Ajayi, the Jets were likely poised to stop the run, and the Jets' run defense was playing much better, Tannehill played much worse against them than Moore did last night, when the Jets were likely similarly playing to stop the run and make Moore beat them.

Obviously there could be situational factors that made one or both teams play differently back then than they did last night, but I don't think we can confirm those like we can the obvious difference in how Tannehill and Moore played in those two games.

I was really hoping the D would play to stop the run last night, I knew Moore could beat that. Quite honestly for the most part Gase played right into that calling runs on first and second downs often.

"dolphin25 wrote:

Why should it be that way if the offense is better with Moore?

Because its a classic knee jerk reaction to a small sample size. The offense is not better with more. Realistically, it was simply an efficient game from Moore, that's it. The likelihood of that happening again is low, as it would be with any other QB. Now that there is actual film of him playing for the first time in 5 years we will see how teams approach us.

Also, acting as if the Jets haven't just laid down for the remainder of the season, an the role that played in this teams ability to dominate the game cannot be overlooked. The Jets predominantly are looking forward to ending the season. Other teams may not be in the same position mentally. So, looking at one game as if it is a barometer of things to come is misleading given the mitigating factors that came into play.

Otherwise, one is jumping the gun by a good margin. Buffalo wont lay down the way NY did. They haven't played like that, now maybe they do if they lose today, but until that happens, suggesting the offense is better with Moore after one game is closer to hyperbole than anything else. Not enough to go on to make that statement.

Way too early for this stuff. Not to mention, it's the Jets who are horrid this year. T-Hill is the better QB to me but looking forward to Moore putting up a good argument via amazing play. I don't care if freaking Santa is our QB as long as we win. My only loyalty is to the logo on the helmet.

"Conuficus wrote:

Because its a classic knee jerk reaction to a small sample size. The offense is not better with more. Realistically, it was simply an efficient game from Moore, that's it. The likelihood of that happening again is low, as it would be with any other QB. Now that there is actual film of him playing for the first time in 5 years we will see how teams approach us.

Also, acting as if the Jets haven't just laid down for the remainder of the season, an the role that played in this teams ability to dominate the game cannot be overlooked. The Jets predominantly are looking forward to ending the season. Other teams may not be in the same position mentally. So, looking at one game as if it is a barometer of things to come is misleading given the mitigating factors that came into play.

Otherwise, one is jumping the gun by a good margin. Buffalo wont lay down the way NY did. They haven't played like that, now maybe they do if they lose today, but until that happens, suggesting the offense is better with Moore after one game is closer to hyperbole than anything else. Not enough to go on to make that statement.

This is a very well thought out and sensible post. The issue though is that the rest of the season is also a small sample size.

This is all very similar to the Ohio State team that won the National Championship in 2014, after Braxton Miller and JT Barrett were both hurt during the season. Cardale Jones came in after not playing a down all season, and immediately offset opposing teams' focus on Ohio State's run game (Ezekiel Elliott) by being efficient and hitting on bombs downfield to Devin Smith with his cannon arm (analogous to Moore's style). There were only three games in which he had to do that for them to win the championship, and he did it.

So while I don't think anybody should make a knee-jerk conclusion that the team is better off long-term (next season and beyond) with Moore than with Tannehill on the basis of this small sample of games, I think a good case can be made for continuing to use Moore in the playoffs if he continues to lead the team in this way, even if Tannehill gets healthy enough to start.

"Conuficus wrote:

Because its a classic knee jerk reaction to a small sample size. The offense is not better with more. Realistically, it was simply an efficient game from Moore, that's it. The likelihood of that happening again is low, as it would be with any other QB. Now that there is actual film of him playing for the first time in 5 years we will see how teams approach us.

Also, acting as if the Jets haven't just laid down for the remainder of the season, an the role that played in this teams ability to dominate the game cannot be overlooked. The Jets predominantly are looking forward to ending the season. Other teams may not be in the same position mentally. So, looking at one game as if it is a barometer of things to come is misleading given the mitigating factors that came into play.

Otherwise, one is jumping the gun by a good margin. Buffalo wont lay down the way NY did. They haven't played like that, now maybe they do if they lose today, but until that happens, suggesting the offense is better with Moore after one game is closer to hyperbole than anything else. Not enough to go on to make that statement.

how many games will it take to determine IF the offense is better with Moore? Moore is averaging 20 years a completion, that is insane. I know it won't hold, but after 2 games he has played in is pretty cool.

I know you say the Jets laid down for the season, BUT they just beat the 49ers the game before, Most teams laying down do not win games.

Where in this game did you see the Jets lay down? Did the lay down stopping the run? I don't think so as we could not run all night, not even in the 4th quarter

Matt Moore is too old for there to be a controversy.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

"Rickysabeast wrote:

Way too early for this stuff. Not to mention, it's the Jets who are horrid this year. T-Hill is the better QB to me but looking forward to Moore putting up a good argument via amazing play. I don't care if freaking Santa is our QB as long as we win. My only loyalty is to the logo on the helmet.

The Jets are horrid, but so are the Browns, Rams. and 49ers all teams we barely beat.

"Sloopy wrote:

This is a very well thought out and sensible post. The issue though is that the rest of the season is also a small sample size.

This is all very similar to the Ohio State team that won the National Championship in 2014, after Braxton Miller and JT Barrett were both hurt during the season. Cardale Jones came in after not playing a down all season, and immediately offset opposing teams' focus on Ohio State's run game (Ezekiel Elliott) by being efficient and hitting on bombs downfield to Devin Smith with his cannon arm (analogous to Moore's style). There were only three games in which he had to do that for them to win the championship, and he did it.

So while I don't think anybody should make a knee-jerk conclusion that the team is better off long-term (next season and beyond) with Moore than with Tannehill on the basis of this small sample of games, I think a good case can be made for continuing to use Moore in the playoffs if he continues to lead the team in this way, even if Tannehill gets healthy enough to start.

It would be insane not to use Moore the rest of the season, unless he completely unfolds , which I do not see happening. Why risk injury to Tannehill.

And while 3 games are a sample size these are 3 playoff type games! not just end of the year finish out the year kinda stuff

lol, I was waiting for this, it's hilarious!

fancy words, efficient team, it will be a blast this week! (finally, these 8-9 weeks, aside from the Ravens, were kind of a hard time, I get it), I am looking forward to it!

(no Arnold in the booth, no fucking Miracle yesterday for the Jets)

"dolphin25 wrote:

how many games will it take to determine IF the offense is better with Moore? Moore is averaging 20 years a completion, that is insane. I know it won't hold, but after 2 games he has played in is pretty cool.

I know you say the Jets laid down for the season, BUT they just beat the 49ers the game before, Most teams laying down do not win games.

Where in this game did you see the Jets lay down? Did the lay down stopping the run? I don't think so as we could not run all night, not even in the 4th quarter

Over 1/3 of our rushing yards for the game came in the fourth quarter, see Drake's 15 yard run, Ajayi's 9 yard run; which makes 23 yards out of our 66 yard total. I don't think those two plays alone (and we ran more than 2 times) back up your statement regarding the 4th quarter. And from a statistical standpoint, 13 games would be required for it to be a statistical certainty, as 13 is the minimum standard required for a proof.

Teams that have laid down do win games. Lucky bounces, stupid plays by opposing teams, turnovers etc., all play a part as they do on any given sunday - so trying to make an altruism on the subject simply isn't the best way to go about it. The sun shines on a dogs ass every once in a while regardless of how crappy the dog the actually is. Hence why there have not been many winless seasons in the NFL compared the number of 1 or 2 win seasons for example.

Also saying a team laid down as a group does in no way negate the fact that some players regardless of record will continue to play hard for personal reasons - pride, new contract etc. Such performances can lead teams to victory even though as an overall collective the team did not/does not play hard or well. Again, mitigating factors.

It would be a nice problem to have, but we will need to see how Moore does moving forward. If this thread was started after the final three games with Moore performing well, it would likely have more traction and evidence than it does now. We just have to see, and take into account who we played in what situations. It is what it is.

did you even watch the game and the ducks moore put up? If the jets had a competent defense they could of had at least 5 int's. I prayed for every throw over 10 yards. Punts in this game had less hang time than matt moore passes. If there is a QB controversy it will be matt moore and whoever is behind him.

"Stringer Bell wrote:

Matt Moore is too old for there to be a controversy.

If Moore continues to play this way, what's your opinion on Tannehill's future with the team when you consider his future salary cap hits, what the team could get for him in trade, and who the team could replace him with in the draft?

IMO, it's too early to make a judgement about Moore. It's one game and teams really haven't had time to evaluate him and decide the best way to game plan against him. I know he's a vet and experienced and although there is game tape on him it is five years old. A lot can change in that time frame.

That said, I like how quick he makes decisions. For better or worse he's gonna sling it. He made some great throws last night, but at the same time I can say Tannehill has made some great throws this year, too. My beef about Tannehill is he is more deliberate and holds the ball longer than I wish he would.

Even if Moore wins these last few games and makes the playoffs I don't think there will be a QB controversy, at least in Adam Gase's mind. Maybe the media will try to spin it that way, but it won't be a real QB controversy.

Matt Moore played well and obviously has some traits that Tannehill doesn't have enough of, such as aggressiveness in key situations (though Tannehill is getting better at it). That being said, I think Tannehill is overall the better, more complete QB. He is just a more polished and consistent all-around QB than Moore is, IMO, and more reliable over the course of a season.

Moore is going to have games where he is going to throw 4 TD's as he did last night, but he's also going to have games where he's going to get picked off multiple times, let's hope it doesn't happen this season (or post-season).

Moore is a great stop gap. He's not half the QB Tannehill is. I like Moore. He's a gamer. He's intelligent. He's competitive. He is not, however, anywhere close to RT.

There will be ZERO QB controversy aside from ones fabricated by the Media. Zero. None. Period. Gase knows it, Tannehill knows it and hell Moore probably does to. Enjoy Tannehill starting next year.

Accepting paypal and forum bets. :lol:

"danmarino wrote:

Moore is a great stop gap. He's not half the QB Tannehill is. I like Moore. He's a gamer. He's intelligent. He's competitive. He is not, however, anywhere close to RT.

If Tannehill played the exact same game last night all we'd hear is its 'just the jets' and the 'defense played great'. But since Moore was under center we're superbowl bound with a QB controvery.

Puhhleaaaaaseeeeeeeee.

Some of what I have read about Tannehill has been pretty unfair (not just this thread). He has been aggressive in big situations this year - pass to Parker against Chargers late, 3rd down against 49ers Stills TD, Bills game icer. Was top 1 or 2 in 40+ yard plays, won 7 out of 8 games, and had a slew of throws that were top 10 countdown type pass plays (from a physical standpoint).

I loved what Moore did last night and have always been a fan, but Tannehill isn't Chad Henne.

"dolphin25 wrote:

The Jets are horrid, but so are the Browns, Rams. and 49ers all teams we barely beat.

So criticize Moore the same way you did Tannehill? Don't praise him even a little and just talk about strength of the opponent

I've been a big Matt Moore fan. I've called for him to start in years past. And it's tough to come in and excel after 5 long years on the bench. Not to mention on a short week with a baby born during it!

But the difference in skill was plainly visible last night. Particularly arm strength and accuracy. On a night where the running game struggled, the Jets weren't respecting the QB aspect of the read option whatsoever. You have to with Tannehill and that opens things up.

The Dolphins score at least 40 with Tannehill at the helm last night. Zero controversy IMHO.

Solid game for Moore. Here's to him leading us to the playoffs!