Why You Should Believe in Matt Moore

"Aqua4Ever04 wrote:

Dude who are you and where did you come from? You know your ****.

I've analyzed every throw Tannehill has made this year on the all-22 and I think you're right about that. I commented plenty of times on how I think the optimistic view would be that it's still him getting comfortable in this scheme and developing that rapport with these young receivers.

Because you go back and look at a lot of the work he did with Hartline, Bess, Clay, Gibson, hell even Jabar Gaffney and Marlon Moore, it was a very rhythm centric offense. He would throw before that had even gone into their breaks a lot.

By the way, hit the reply button on the bottom right corner of whichever post you're replying to. It'll quote it so people know who you're talking to.

Jmo here, Hoops is an evaluator of talent, in the purest form, and he's very good at what he does, No BS when it comes to how he delivers the information..it's a unique language that he speaks, and imo we're lucky to have him on the board..

"resnor wrote:

It is factually unfounded to compare Matt Moore to Peyton Manning.

We'll start there.

Sicks mic drop post on the first page just tears it to shreds. the entire OP is a bunch of hyperbole and over-glorification being passed off as fact, as if Keyfin has some inside info or is a mind reader to everyones 'REAL' opinion of Moore.

FFS Tannehill started playing trashy and the fans immediately started the 'We want Moore' chants, reminiscent of the 'We want Orton' chants when Henne was playing like ass, but according to him it had nothing to do with Tannehill, nope. All the fans collectively decided Moore is such a swell guy they are all gunna start chanting this because they just love him so much! it's delusional.

"Deus ex dolphin wrote:

I would happily go along with the idea that Moore is a better QB than Tanny if he wins us a Super Bowl. I might even believe it. :)

"btfu149 wrote:

I'm a big believer in Tannehill, but if Moore wins the Super Bowl and has a late career resurgence a la Rich Gannon, then of course by all means, Moore should start. I just don't find this very likely, but I'd be stoked if it happened.

The SB is 8 weeks from last Sunday ( the sprain )

.......we haven't put Tannehill on IR............:up:

"thetylernator wrote:

On the bright side of things, this is a great career opportunity for Moore. I think he will do well enough to warrant a mid-round pick from a quarterback-needy team this offseason.

Say, the Browns?

Imo, regardless of how successful Moore is the next month of the season, he will choose to stay here in Miami.

"djphinfan wrote:

Imo, regardless of how successful Moore is the next month of the season, he will choose to stay here in Miami.

What does that have to do with us deciding to trade him?

And if QB needy teams havent come for him previously, they sure aren't going to be throwing picks at us for him now.

"dWreck wrote:

What does that have to do with us deciding to trade him?

And if QB needy teams havent come for him previously, they sure aren't going to be throwing picks at us for him now.

Because if he does play well and helps us make the playoffs why would we trade him for a mid round pick?.

"djphinfan wrote:

Because if he does play well and helps us make the playoffs why would we trade him for a mid round pick?.

I agree with you but thats not what you said. You said regardless of how he plays he will 'choose' to stay here, when if we cut or trade him he doesn't exactly have any say in it.

I dont see us getting ANYTHING for him even if he plays well, but that's JMO.

"resnor wrote:

I've seen many posts saying that Tannehill has played very well, and the TEAM has played very well, leading to the record we have.

However, those of you who kept using record to judge the QB should be the ones talking about Tannehill being the savior.

But you're not. Again, moving the goalposts.

Thats because you and your little team have nothing to base your comments on.

You just said "those of you who kept using record to judge the QB" to a guy who has literally never said that...then to follow it up the same ole group of uninformed winners in life think you are making a good post when infact it is you making things up.

You are failing.

Right because if we don't go through the years of garbage to try and dig up quotes, it never happened (Let alone through the multiple accounts of people who have been banned).

Forum logic.

"dWreck wrote:

We already pointed out that that would happen pages ago. Not a very bold proclamation with the way this thread turned out.

If we lose mainly due to Moores poor play how exactly would that be inaccurate? ? ? Tannehill is universes more valuable to us than Moore regardless of how Moore plays. I'm thankful the people who matter know this.

He is solidified as a backup. Period. Guaranteed no matter what happens. So unfortunately for Matt, if he wins and somehow carries us on his back he'll get a big thank you and a smack on the *** and go back to being 2nd string to Tannehill. if we somehow lose mainly due to some kind of horrendous crippling play by him, it would even further prove the importance of Tannehill, which shouldn't even be in question (he'd also probably be gone).

I agree with everything you just wrote.

My point is we have little peons around here (on both sides) who will no doubt over exaggerate either result with the utmost stupidity.

Future Cliffs include...

"Well the Jets suck, of course Matt played well"
"Matt beat the Jets in December, Ryan couldn't do that"
"See how this team sucks w/o Ryan? He is our leader"
"Moore should be our starter in 2017, cut Ryan and sign a LB"

Wanna bet?

"dWreck wrote:

I agree with you but thats not what you said. You said regardless of how he plays he will 'choose' to stay here, when if we cut or trade him he doesn't exactly have any say in it.

I dont see us getting ANYTHING for him even if he plays well, but that's JMO.

Under the premise that he plays pretty well to even good, I believe he will stay and we will not trade him

Your right about if he doesn't play well, we might move on if he doesn't.

"dWreck wrote:

Right because if we don't go through the years of garbage to try and dig up quotes, it never happened (Let alone through the multiple accounts of people who have been banned).

Forum logic.

No matter how you try to spin it, I was just quoted as making comments I never have..and you just followed it up with a "like" I'm not sure who struggles more, the person who wrote the BS or the morons who like it.

I have no issue backing up ANYTHING Ive said, but that was just pure making things up. So goes y'all.

"Fin-O wrote:

I agree with everything you just wrote.

My point is we have little peons around here (on both sides) who will no doubt over exaggerate either result with the utmost stupidity.

Future Cliffs include...

"Well the Jets suck, of course Matt played well"
"Matt beat the Jets in December, Ryan couldn't do that"
"See how this team sucks w/o Ryan? He is our leader"
"Moore should be our starter in 2017, cut Ryan and sign a LB"

Wanna bet?

Don't need to bet. I said that stuff would happen as well. if we go 3-0 there will literally be a thread titled 'time to cut Tannehill' presumably started by Finster, Keyfin, d25 etc.

However one side does have a stronger argument than the other though.

"Fin-O wrote:

No matter how you try to spin it, I was just quoted as making comments I never have..and you just followed it up with a "like" I'm not sure who struggles more, the person who wrote the BS or the morons who like it.

I have no issue backing up ANYTHING Ive said, but that was just pure making things up. So goes y'all.

You're just so misunderstood

"dWreck wrote:

Don't need to bet. I said that stuff would happen as well. if we go 3-0 there will literally be a thread titled 'time to cut Tannehill' presumably started by Finster, Keyfin, d25 etc.

However one side does have a stronger argument than the other though.

So did the other for 4.5 years, soooo

"dWreck wrote:

You're just so misunderstood

Just misquoted....ask me anything and I have no issue telling it. Im a man, I'm 40 (almost)

"Fin-O wrote:

Just misquoted....ask me anything and I have no issue telling it. Im a man, I'm 40 (almost)

anyway, I must say, I feel strangely confident about MM and the team, i don't know exactly why, maybe it is because this team, this year gives some diffrent vibe (or maybe, it is just me drinking the Gase Kool Aid, still in the honeymoon phase)

"Hiruma78 wrote:

anyway, I must say, I feel strangely confident about MM and the team, i don't know exactly why, maybe it is because this team, this year gives some diffrent vibe (or maybe, it is just me drinking the Gase Kool Aid, still in the honeymoon phase)

Props, I thought that would fly over most of the heads.

I know I am new here so there's that, but this is ridiculous. How can somebody with any shred of football knowledge look at what Tannehill does and say he is anything less than a franchise QB?? He has had a garbage supporting cast since he has been in the NFL and still has put up great numbers. Winning is a TEAM event. Can't put that all on the QB, or by that logic you are saying that Cam Newton sucks. Forget that superbowl appearance. Moore is what he is, and over 30 back up with a penchant for turnovers. But every announcer, expert etc. puts Tannehill in the upper echelon of QBs. And these guys are complaining? Maybe they should be Browns fans?

"Dolphins Dad wrote:

I know I am new here so there's that, but this is ridiculous. How can somebody with any shred of football knowledge look at what Tannehill does and say he is anything less than a franchise QB?? He has had a garbage supporting cast since he has been in the NFL and still has put up great numbers. Winning is a TEAM event. Can't put that all on the QB, or by that logic you are saying that Cam Newton sucks. Forget that superbowl appearance. Moore is what he is, and over 30 back up with a penchant for turnovers. But every announcer, expert etc. puts Tannehill in the upper echelon of QBs. And these guys are complaining? Maybe they should be Browns fans?

2 things:

1. Welcome to the site!
2. Put those fools on ignore, cause they will not stop. I finally did it and visiting the site is more enjoyable.

"Dolphins Dad wrote:

I know I am new here so there's that, but this is ridiculous. How can somebody with any shred of football knowledge look at what Tannehill does and say he is anything less than a franchise QB?? He has had a garbage supporting cast since he has been in the NFL and still has put up great numbers. Winning is a TEAM event. Can't put that all on the QB, or by that logic you are saying that Cam Newton sucks. Forget that superbowl appearance. Moore is what he is, and over 30 back up with a penchant for turnovers. But every announcer, expert etc. puts Tannehill in the upper echelon of QBs. And these guys are complaining? Maybe they should be Browns fans?

They do? Since when? This year maybe, but certainly not in the past. He has statistically been average at best even with his "great" numbers.

Go back and read the 1000's of posts on the discussions.

"Fin D wrote:

2 things:

1. Welcome to the site!
2. Put those fools on ignore, cause they will not stop. I finally did it and visiting the site is more enjoyable.

Aww man, nah. They are entitled to their opinions. I am just curious why they feel that way. It makes no sense. We are lucky to have Tannehill. I bet at least 10 teams would love to have him. IMHO.

Thanks for the welcome!

"dolphin25 wrote:

They do? Since when? This year maybe, but certainly not in the past. He has statistically been average at best even with his "great" numbers.

Go back and read the 1000's of posts on the discussions.

Well just this last game they showed a graphic that he was 4th in NFL history with most yards 5 years into career. I think it went Manning, Marino, Matt Ryan and Tannehill. Pretty lofty company. No way you can dispute facts, unless you just ignore them.

"Fin-O wrote:

Props, I thought that would fly over most of the heads.

thanks

(I stop with the stupid gifs, now, I promise)

"Dolphins Dad wrote:

Aww man, nah. They are entitled to their opinions. I am just curious why they feel that way. It makes no sense. We are lucky to have Tannehill. I bet at least 10 teams would love to have him. IMHO.

Thanks for the welcome!

Then you're in for the forum equivalent of a 72 hour road trip with incontinent in laws. Keep ibuprofen near your computer and good luck cause the answers you seek get exceedingly more ridiculous the more you delve.