Do you want Ryan Tannehill to start week 1?

[EKnight]

I certainly DID say what it was. He looked down all of his passes last night- badly. He got sacked three times with some lead feet; Moore appears more mobile. Tannehill's reaction to the speed of NFL play is slow. It doesn't matter how well he knows the offense if he can't read the D and get the ball to the open receiver in time- and he can't. Three three and outs last night. Only one drive in the half that ended in a score against the starters. He didn't look any better to me than Moore did last week. Unless he is a clear and obvious upgrade, there's no need to rush him starting, especially with the team having problems at offensive line, wide receiver, and secondary. What benefit comes from throwing him in to captain a 5-11 or 6-10 season? If he's not ready, he's not ready, and from what I've seen he's not. Moore isn't going to play lights out by any means, but unless Tannehill shows he's vastly superior, why rush it? -EK

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

Oh, I don't know 10 years worth of futility? Why wait?

Why do you say 10 years?

If your metric is the last playoff appearance/division win it is only three years of futility.

If you consider anything less than a playoff win than it is 11 years of futility not 10.

And if you are going with the unlitimate metric -- a Superbowl win -- about 30 years.

[EKnight]

1) I never used anything from last night OR last week to come to my opinion. I have said for over a year Matt Moore sucks. I stand by it. Nothing has changed. Therefore I say start Tannehill considering Garrard is hurt currently. Now, if Tannehill throws 3 or 4 INT's next week vs Atlanta, then yeah keep him as the backup and that 3rd perseason game (the important one) might change things for me. But if that doesn't happen next week and he plays like he did last night,  I say start Tannehill. I NEVER USED ANYTHING THAT HAPPENED LAST NIGHT IN A PRESEASON GAME AS A BASIS FOR ANY OPINION I HAVE!


2) Carolina looks great so their TD drives in the first half aren't meaningless but Tannehill's 2nd quarter TD drive is meaningless? Don't understand the logic.  Makes NO sense! A TD drive is a TD drive. Either they all count or all are meaningless. If it's "meaningless" then don't get worked up over the good  OR the bad! Which has been my stance when it comes to preseason football which I have made over and over again. See we actually agree. EVERYTHING is meaningless in these games. There fore time for all Dolphins fans to back off the ledge!

The TD was meaningless because Carolina was already up 17-0, was pulling their starters, and had dominantly shown that Tannehill had no business against first teamers- four batted balls, sacked because of indecision every bit as much as because of the line, and 4-13 on the five other drives makes the TD drive meaningless. If ever week, your QB completes less than 50% of his passes for 200 yards per game and no passing TD's (Tannehill's projected stats for a full game last night), and you're down by 17 before you get on the board because 3 and out is all you can do, the TD's scored at that point will also be meaningless. I know you love Tannehill and were over the moon with the pick, and he may be a great player one day, but he's clearly not ready yet. Nothing he has done has separated him from Moore in the eyes of the coaches (they've flat said they still have no indication of who is starting the season) or any media I've read. In fact, outside of some unrealistic Miami fans, I haven't heard ANYONE raving about how Tannehill has outplayed Moore- from what I've read, it's still a pretty close race, which should be troubling if you're solidly behind Tannehill, since you've said for over a year Moore sucks. -EK

[Pappy13]

Moore isn't going to play lights out by any means, but unless Tannehill shows he's vastly superior, why rush it? -EK

Now Tannehill should be vastly superior to be starting? I'm sorry but almost everyone including Joe Philbin disagrees with you. The QB that gives the Dolphins the best chance to win should be starting and right now that's Tannehill, despite his flaws.

[EKnight]

Really? Philbin disagrees? Funny, because he said after the game that they still had no idea who the starter would be. So, where exactly does he disagree? Depth chart still has Moore ahead of Tannehill. Until that changes, no one "disagrees" with me. Tannehill did not do enough to win the job Friday, despite what you're promoting. From Rotoworld.com:
"Coach Joe Philbin may not name a starting quarterback until after the Dolphins' third preseason game.
Philbin had been planning to name a starter this week. "I don’t know that, to be honest with you," Philbin said after Friday night's preseason loss to Carolina. "I really don't."

So.... How's he disagree with me again? More importantly, even if he starts Ryan 16 games this year, that's besides the point. This thread wasn't "Will Tannehill start?" It was "Do you want Tannehill to start week 1?" I said no. I explained why I felt that way. It's my opinion and it's every bit as valid as yours. And whether he actually DOES start or not is irrespective to that opinion- I still don't want him to for the numerous reasons I've already stated. -EK

[Pappy13]

Really? Philbin disagrees?

Yes, he does. He's already said that whomever gives the Dolphins the best chance to win will start. You may think that Tannehill should be vastly superior to Moore to start, but I don't know of a single person that agrees with you.

[MikeO]

Now Tannehill should be vastly superior to be starting? I'm sorry but almost everyone including Joe Philbin disagrees with you. The QB that gives the Dolphins the best chance to win should be starting and right now that's Tannehill, despite his flaws.

Agree Pappy! All of Tannehill's "flaws" currently of not stepping up in the pocket and locking in on a WR are mistakes every rookie QB makes and very minor issues that will be worked out over time. Easily correctable. Anyone who expected a rookie QB to be damn near perfect in his first every start and 2nd ever NFL game (preseason or not) is just holding an unrealistic expectation. These are very minor things that are easily worked out in time.

Trust me there could be worse flaws to have currently and Tannehill's are common and nothing to be concerned with as of now. The quickest way to fix Tannehill's mistakes is just to keep playing more. Yeah he will have some bad games and bad plays but the payoff in the long-run is worth it. Fixing these mistakes in actual games is the best way to go. Trying to fix it in practice is a longer process once the season starts.

P.S...and saying Tannehill has "lead feet" when he was a college WR for a pretty big program and  a damn good athlete overall is just an incorrect statement to make and just 100% false. Getting sacked because the o-line can't block isn't a sign you have "lead feet"

[MikeO]

I know you love Tannehill and were over the moon with the pick, and he may be a great player one day, but he's clearly not ready yet. Nothing he has done has separated him from Moore in the eyes of the coaches (they've flat said they still have no indication of who is starting the season) or any media I've read. In fact, outside of some unrealistic Miami fans, I haven't heard ANYONE raving about how Tannehill has outplayed Moore- from what I've read, it's still a pretty close race, which should be troubling if you're solidly behind Tannehill, since you've said for over a year Moore sucks. -EK

Once again putting words in my mouth and making stuff up out of thin air. I was NOT over the moon with the pick or cheer-leading for it. I said it a millions times back in April, but I will go for a million and one to set the record straight for the last time. I said I TRUSTED Philbin/Ireland/Sherman when it came to drafting a QB. That if they passed on Tannehill I was fine with that. If they took him I was fine with that also. That's what I said. And there are probably close to 200 posts archived on this site that back it up!  And I was FOR Garrard starting Week 1 until he got hurt. Once again, "OVER THE MOON?" I think not!


Also for Moore to be named the starter shouldn't he at least outplay Tannehill? Cause he hasn't in 2 games in fact all he has done is turn the ball over and NOT lead a touchdown drive. Things Tannehill has done thus far. Now I don't judge preseason results, but if you and others are then you gotta stick by them and the results are obvious that Tannehill HAS outplayed more. No turnovers and 2 TD drives compared to Moore's NO TD drives and 1 INT.

[EKnight]

If he's so clearly outplayed Moore, why is Philbin struggling with naming a starter? Why hasn't he been able to comfortably say, "Ryan's our guy"? The difference between the two is much closer than you think. Once again, you're cherry picking. Against only starters, Tannehill looked like crap Friday night. By the time he led the TD drive, Carolina was up 17 and already subbing. And those sacks? Did you even watch the game? Definitely NOT all on the O line. Tannehill had time to move, time to throw it away, do something other than stand there with lead feet. Philbin saw it him self: "A couple of times there were definitely protection issues,” Philbin said. “Once I thought that he could have stepped up in the pocket and avoided the rush a little better.” And what about getting the ball batted down four times? What about three three and outs to start the game. THAT'S how he outplayed Moore? Face it- neither of them has been very good against the first team so far. You just can't admit that because then you'd have to admit that Tannehill is no better than the QB you deemed to suck for a year now. I love these debates with you though. Preseason games are meaningless when the defense gets torched, but they're completely meaningful when the QB you hope is starting plays well- as long as it's only the part of the game he's playing well in, and not the part of the game he went 4 for 12 or the fact he posted a 60.1 QB rating. -EK

[MikeO]

When did Philbin say he was "struggling to name a starter?"  Maybe he has even picked Moore to be the starter and just wanted to see Tannehill last night vs the first teamers. I don't know. You don't know. Nobody knows! Just because he hasn't told the press anything doesn't mean he is struggling. Want him to tell you the offensive gameplan for Week 1 vs Houston as well? He is playing his hand close to his vest.

By the way starters WERE playing in the 2nd quarter of that game for the Panthers when Tannehill led that TD drive. I am sorry they were. That's a fact. I won't go in circles with you about it. They just were. I don't know what else to say

I said a million times I am NOT judging the QB battle off of preseason games. I have given a bunch of reasons why Tannehill should start mainly to do with where the franchise is heading and the future And IF Garrard's knee heals this week in time for him to play on Friday (doubtful) I stand by that I want HIM starting over Tannehill Week 1. What  I did  said though is "IF SOMEBODY WERE BASING THINGS OFF PRESEASON RESULTS..." like you are and others are, then the data backs up Tannehill  beating out Moore as the numbers back that up. Making your very Anti-Tannehill stance confusing to many of us. That's what I said! I am not using preseason stance but some of you are and if you are then the decision is really very simple honestly based off 2 games.

So you are saying Art Hicks and Jonathan Martin played good last night? WOW! Tannehill's sacks were all on him? WOW! Ok, gonna be civil and let that statement you made speak for itself.

[MikeO]

Longtime NFL writer Pete Prisco of CBS wants Tannehill to start and feels if the Fins don't start him they are making a huge mistake

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/19824612/dolphins-camp-report-philbin-right-man-to-get-miami-back-on-track

Also for the first time in about a decade he said something nice about the Dolphins overall. Maybe there is hope for world peace! lol

[EKnight]

Which numbers back that up though Mike? The reason I believe you're so pro-Tannehill is because you're so convinced he's outplayed Moore to a significant degree. He hasn't. I've brought up the fact that he had three three and outs to start the game. You ignore it. He went 4-12 for the rest of the half. You won't comment on that either. His own coach said one of the sacks was on him. You ignored that. He had four balls tipped at the line in only a half of play, and telegraphed a number of his throws. You ignored that as well. EVERY valid point I made about him that doesn't coincide with your view you ignore. The offense couldn't generate 100 yards in the entire half under him. He simply doesn't react quickly enough to be starting yet. Especially if the o line is going to be such a problem. Do you really want a young QB developing while he's getting killed the entire season (a season the team as a whole will likely not win more than 6 or 7 games?). How does that help anything? Let Moore start the year while the line gets some stability and put Tannehill in after he's had more than a month of practice with NFL players. There's no downside to letting the guy hold a clipboard for a while. There's massive downside to putting him in too soon, especially in a season where the team is expected to finish last in the division again. -EK

[MikeO]

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/sports/football/greg-stoda-miami-dolphins-right-in-accelerating-ry/nRD4k/

Greg Stoda on the start Tannehill train

[Pappy13]

Which numbers back that up though Mike? The reason I believe you're so pro-Tannehill is because you're so convinced he's outplayed Moore to a significant degree. He hasn't. I've brought up the fact that he had three three and outs to start the game. You ignore it. He went 4-12 for the rest of the half. You won't comment on that either. His own coach said one of the sacks was on him. You ignored that. He had four balls tipped at the line in only a half of play, and telegraphed a number of his throws. You ignored that as well. EVERY valid point I made about him that doesn't coincide with your view you ignore.

And vice versa.  Every positive point about Tannehill you ignore. He knows the offense because it's the same one he ran in college. He has a great arm and shows excellent accuracy on the outside throws placing it where only his man can get it. He shows nice anticipation on throws and doesn't wait till the receiver gets open. He's shown a nice touch on the ball on dump offs to the RB's. He throws the ball on the run extremely well. He seems to have a command of the huddle. He's had 3 long drives that were pretty much just him throwing the ball, 2 resulted in TD's and the other would have too if Wallace would have caught a catchable ball in the endzone. He hasn't thrown an interception or fumbled in about 4 quarters of pre-season work. 

I can live with 3 and outs and batted balls because of the above and as he gets more playing time, those things will get ironed out.

[EKnight]

I'm not ignoring them. I think he's a good player with a ton of upside; what he did against second Nd third stringers for Tampa is not impressive though. Posting a 60 QB rating against the starters for Carolina should tell you he's not ready. I just don't get what the rush is to get him in there if we all agree it's a losing season no matter who is under center. -EK