PDA

View Full Version : Dolphins QB Battle


J-Mike88
07-27-2012, 09:09 AM
David Garrard vs. Matt Moore vs. Ryan Tannehill

http://www.sicollection.com/assets/images/dan_marino_300_1.jpg

Which guy do you think is the starter come November?

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/si/2012/images/07/26/dolphins-quarterback.tx.jpg

Caddy
07-27-2012, 09:13 AM
Does it matter?

J-Mike88
07-27-2012, 09:55 AM
Does it matter?
Haha.
It does to Fin fans, and I guess the teams who play them.

K Train
07-27-2012, 10:07 AM
i say they sit tannehill 2 years, let him grow into their guy. If he does, they will know what they have....if he doesnt, they can andy reid some other team into thinking hes their future starting QB.

To me its garrard this year, even though moore got the first team snaps today i think if garrard is healthy he can run that offense in a smooth but not flashy at all kinda way. Reggie bush is gonna lead the league in YFS this year i think, or close to it

vidae
07-27-2012, 10:50 AM
I dunno about TWO years, but I could see Tannehill sitting this year and learning.

Matthew Jones
07-27-2012, 11:04 AM
Rookie quarterbacks almost never sit nowadays, and there's not a very strong argument to be made for sitting quarterbacks because a lot of the most effective passers started as rookies. The only two starting quarterbacks in the last eight years who sat as rookies and ended up developing into franchise quarterbacks were Philip Rivers (who sat behind Drew Brees) and Aaron Rodgers (who sat behind Brett Favre.) Additionally, Jason Campbell was behind Mark Brunell and his recently-signed ($48 million?) contract, while the Titans brought in Matt Hasselbeck. Here's the rest of the list:

Started as rookies:

Eli Manning, Ben Roethlisberger, Alex Smith, Vince Young, Matt Leinart, Jay Cutler, Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco, Matthew Stafford, Mark Sanchez, Josh Freeman, Sam Bradford, Cam Newton, Blaine Gabbert, Christian Ponder

Sat as rookies:

Philip Rivers, J.P. Losman, Aaron Rodgers, Jason Campbell, Brady Quinn, JaMarcus Russell, Tim Tebow, Jake Locker

Giantsfan1080
07-27-2012, 11:07 AM
Eli sat the first 6 or 7 games at least.

Grizzlegom
07-27-2012, 11:07 AM
I'd be surprised if Moore wasn't still the starter at that point in time.

SeanTaylorRIP
07-27-2012, 11:09 AM
I'll go with Moore, Garrard probably should start but he basically now has a stigma of being a "game manager" so I think he is someone who will be pulled so quickly if he can't make plays. Moore has the more active arm although he can easily lead you to the #1 pick.

Matthew Jones
07-27-2012, 11:10 AM
Eli sat the first 6 or 7 games at least.

You're right in observing that not all of the quarterbacks were first-week starters, but the point is that teams want to see their first-round picks on the field as rookies regardless of their perceived readiness as prospects, and that starting rookie quarterbacks isn't really linked with "ruining" a prospect.

K Train
07-27-2012, 11:13 AM
I dunno about TWO years, but I could see Tannehill sitting this year and learning.

i mean fans dont love it, but if you let him sit 2 years and master the game like that he'll be ready then if hes ever going to be ready. With the wage scale they can afford that EASILY and hell if hes their guy in 2 years they can extend him accordingly at starting QB money. I would say sit locker again this year, he showed some excellent things last year imo, if you sit him one more year he could be a beast in his 3rd.

idk i just remember how awful aaron rodgers was once upon a time in spot duty. he looked terrible, was fragile, and just looked lost and then favre leaves and he becomes a true master of the position. What if rodgers was taken by SF and Smith by the packers? who knows, but i tend to think it wouldnt be quite how it is now

K Train
07-27-2012, 11:14 AM
You're right in observing that not all of the quarterbacks were first-week starters, but the point is that teams want to see their first-round picks on the field as rookies regardless of their perceived readiness as prospects, and that starting rookie quarterbacks isn't really linked with "ruining" a prospect.

some QBs are ready to step in as rookies, some arent...i tend to link tannehill in the "isnt" category, but i think he certainly will be in the future

Matthew Jones
07-27-2012, 11:27 AM
some QBs are ready to step in as rookies, some arent...i tend to link tannehill in the "isnt" category, but i think he certainly will be in the future

I kind of answered this in my previous post, but a quarterback's readiness has little to do with whether or not they start as rookies. Many of the quarterbacks who sat as rookies had extensive starting experience in college, whereas "raw" quarterbacks such as Vince Young, Josh Freeman, Cam Newton, and Blaine Gabbert were thrown into the fire quickly.

I'm not arguing that the Dolphins should start Ryan Tannehill, but I am almost positive that he will start for Miami at some point this season because the Dolphins will want to see him on the field. We all know that in many cases, politics (draft position, financial investment, etc.) significantly impact who the starting quarterback of a team is.

vidae
07-27-2012, 11:28 AM
Carson Palmer sat behind Kitna for a year and he was pretty good in the early years there in Cinci.

dolphinfan2k5
07-27-2012, 11:31 AM
I think it'll be Garrard. Won't be Tannehill, that seems pretty certain.

K Train
07-27-2012, 11:31 AM
I kind of answered this in my previous post, but a quarterback's readiness has little to do with whether or not they start as rookies. Many of the quarterbacks who sat as rookies had extensive starting experience in college, whereas "raw" quarterbacks such as Vince Young, Josh Freeman, Cam Newton, and Blaine Gabbert were thrown into the fire quickly.

I'm not arguing that the Dolphins should start Ryan Tannehill, but I am almost positive that he will start for Miami at some point this season because the Dolphins will want to see him on the field. We all know that in many cases, politics (draft position, financial investment, etc.) significantly impact who the starting quarterback of a team is.

all im really saying is they have to pay him what? like 14 million over 4 years? that is tremendous value for a QB for 1 year if he can be a starter, let along over 4. it is much more economical to let guys like locker and tannehill sit than it was with sanchez, bradford, freeman, ect...

onejayhawk
07-27-2012, 11:33 AM
I dont know about the NFL, but Garrard made my roster as a walk on in a 2 QB fantasy league. The Dolphins suits his talents.

J

onejayhawk
07-27-2012, 11:34 AM
I'd be surprised if Moore wasn't still the starter at that point in time.
It would also not surprise me if Moore were not elsewhere by then.

J

Mufasa
07-27-2012, 12:55 PM
Unless it's a unique situation like San Diego with Brees or Green Bay with Favre, I would always start make my first round QB the starter no later than week 6.

jrdrylie
07-27-2012, 02:00 PM
I think Moore starts the season. He wasn't terrible last year. And the opening schedule isn't too bad so there really could go 3-3 to start the season (don't think they will but it's possible). If that happens, he'll remain the starter. But if they start 1-5, they have a bye and I think Tannehill will start after the bye.

Hurricanes25
07-27-2012, 05:34 PM
I think Tannehill needs to sit a year. If I was in charge, I'd start Moore. He does provide a little spark.

But by the end of October, I expect Tannehill to be the starter.

Brodeur
07-27-2012, 05:39 PM
Moore is a perfectly decent QB, he should start. Especially since Tannehill is gonna be bust-tastic.

TACKLE
07-27-2012, 05:49 PM
I understand and support the idea of being patient by sitting your rookie for a year, I just have a hard time buying it when your rookie is the best and most talented QB on your roster. I think that's the case in Miami but they are going to force Tannehill to stay on the bench anyway.

Halsey
07-27-2012, 11:27 PM
I think Tannehill should get a chance to start. Fans and media say year after year after year that every rookie QB should sit, yet many play well as rookies. People have doubts about Tannehill, but that was true of Marino too. Marino was far from a "sure fire" QB prospect.

WCH
07-27-2012, 11:47 PM
I think Tannehill should get a chance to start. Fans and media say year after year after year that every rookie QB should sit, yet many play well as rookies. People have doubts about Tannehill, but that was true of Marino too. Marino was far from a "sure fire" QB prospect.

Those are two completely different situations. In Marino's case, the doubts primarily revolved around the rumors that he was snorting enough coke to kill an elephant.

Halsey
07-27-2012, 11:52 PM
Those are two completely different situations. In Marino's case, the doubts primarily revolved around the rumors that he was snorting enough coke to kill an elephant.

The fact that Marino threw 23 ints to only 17 TDs as a senior at Pitt didn't help.

Brodeur
07-28-2012, 12:03 AM
I think Tannehill should get a chance to start. Fans and media say year after year after year that every rookie QB should sit, yet many play well as rookies. People have doubts about Tannehill, but that was true of Marino too. Marino was far from a "sure fire" QB prospect.

People have doubts about every single QB prospect, so all of them are probably going to be the next Dan Marino.

Rosebud
07-28-2012, 01:22 PM
I actually think Tannenhill will be ready to start this year, but this'll come down to how terrible the team is as I'm sure their hoping Gerrard or Moore can keep them competent and buy Tannenhill time, kinda like Matt Hasselback did for the Tits and Jake Locker.

That said I think the Dolphins will be pretty terrible so they'll probably turn to Ryan Tannenhill in the first half of the season.

Knicks and Bucs
07-28-2012, 06:37 PM
Who cares who wants to play for the ****** dolphins anyways.