There's only 1 thing keeping Philbin from naming Tannehill the starter

[Pappy13]

You've read all the articles. It's nearly unanimous that if Garrard can't be the starter on day 1 the nod should go to Tannehill. Moore has not been any better than Tannehill in pre-season and Tannehill is getting better each day whereas Moore is the same Moore that he was last year. Tannehill is the future, Moore is not. Miami is not going to be a contender this year without something amazing happening like the QB having a Marino like performance and there's no indication that any of the QB's can do that especially with the WR's that we have, at least Marino had Duper and Clayton.

So what's the hold up? Why doesn't Philbin just name him the starter already? Well I have a theory on that (you knew that I would). It's just a tiny little thing. Nothing big. It's just his word. You see Philbin said that it would be an open competition. That everyone would get a chance and that whomever played the best would get the start. Well Philbin can't go back on his word now, not without losing a lot of credibility with players. He HAS to let this thing play out as far as possible now. I think if Philbin had to make the decision today, it would be an easy one, it would HAVE to be Tannehill, but Philbin doesn't have to make the decision today so he's giving Moore and/or Garrard every possible chance to change his mind. That's smart. That's the right thing to do. That's what he SAID he would do.

But let's get real now. The chances that Garrard can start week 1 are very slim. He may not even be physically ready to play week 1 let alone have had enough time to knock the rust off enough after not practicing for a couple weeks to play. I think the best he can hope for now is that he's still on the roster come week 1.

Moore had his chance. He got an unexpected start in pre-season game 1 when Garrard suddenly went down. He was supposed to have been a gamer. This was his chance to show everyone that practice is not really who he is and he didn't capitalize on it. He didn't play bad mind you, but he didn't show anything in the game that he hasn't shown in practice. To make matters worse, Tannehill got moved up to 2nd string and did take advantage of the extra playing time he got.

So unless something really dramatically changes over the next week or 2, despite what Philbin is saying and I don't fault him for sticking to his guns and saying that it's still up in the air but realistically the choice is obvious, the choice HAS to be Tannehill.

That's just my opinion, I could be wrong.

[Doc-phin]

I don't disagree with you necessarilly, but there are a couple of things I would like to add.

After I finally got the chance to watch the preseason game, I realized we didn't really suck like I thought we did.  Matt Moore looked just fine.  The only bad play I recall him having was when he should have audibled out of a run up the middle.  Otherwise he was accurate, had good footwork and awareness and seemed to be in solid control.  Tannehill played with and against lessor players and did well, so lets keep that in mind.  He had better starting position most of the time and had a few 50/50 balls that his receivers came down with that might have been interceptions against better talent.  Tannehill threw a bad ball on 4th and goal that wasn't even to a receiver with a realistic chance to score.  His scrambling ability was nothing to write home about and he still looks to the sideline while behind center to get his adjustments (like in college).

Please understand me, I am not trashing Tannehill!  I was happy overall with what I saw.  He was accurate most of the time.  He seems to know the plays well.  He looked comfortable in the pocket.  He did a good job of leading his receivers on a few of the plays.  So there was some good stuff out there.

I just want to be careful about annointing him the starter just yet.  He still needs some time against starting corners and safeties.  He still needs time against starting pass rushers and identifying the rush.  But overall he is doing a nice job and some degree of optomism is justified.

[MikeO]

If Matt Moore is starting Week 1 then he is the cock roach who won't die. They tried replacing him with Manning and Flynn. Didn't happen obviously. They drafted Ryan Tannehill, but Moore would have either beat him out or they would be waiting for Tannehill to develop. They bring in Garrard and he gets hurt (are we sure Moore didn't hire Tonya Harding..lol).

Bottom line is Miami has done everything humanly possible to NOT have Matt Moore start Week 1 this year and he still might end up with the gig. lol, it's amazing. The guy is like a bad penny! Just won't go away!

[Pappy13]

Tannehill played with and against lessor players and did well, so lets keep that in mind.

Noted, so when/if Tannehill gets a shot with the 1's and doesn't do as well as Moore then keep that in mind as well. I'm not sure I really buy into that logic, just pointing out the same is true in reverse if we go that route.

He had better starting position most of the time and had a few 50/50 balls that his receivers came down with that might have been interceptions against better talent.

I don't recall seeing that.

Tannehill threw a bad ball on 4th and goal that wasn't even to a receiver with a realistic chance to score.

Which drive? The one that was initially called a TD on 2nd down and then was reversed? On that 4th down and goal, he threw it late which gave the CB a chance to bat it down, but it was a good throw. If it's not batted down I think it's caught. It wasn't a bad throw, the timing was just a bit off. There was another throw that I recall where he threw it into the ground, that was a bad throw, but I don't think that was on 4th and goal and on that play he had an open receiver he just threw it into the ground, so it was to a receiver with a good chance to score, he just hurried it.

His scrambling ability was nothing to write home about...

I think he only scrambled once that I recall and picked up about 4 yards I think. His running ability is fine.

and he still looks to the sideline while behind center to get his adjustments (like in college).

Not sure I'm seeing that either? Maybe that's how he's supposed to be doing it? He does have the same offensive coordinator now with Miami that he did in college, you realize that right?

I think you are being quite a bit tougher on Tannehill then you are on Moore. Moore never got the ball anywhere close to the endzone (albeit he didn't have as many chances as Tannehill I don't believe), but Tannehill got the ball down to the goal line twice I believe and nearly had another TD if Wallace holds onto a catchable ball. The ball by the way was thrown where it needed to be thrown, down and away from the defender and Wallace needs to make that catch. I wouldn't classify it as a drop as it was a tough catch because the defender was on him, but it was catchable.

The TD that Tannehill did throw was a thing of beauty. A perfect strike to a guy coming across the middle from like 20 yards out.

[Doc-phin]

Which drive? The one that was initially called a TD on 2nd down and then was reversed? On that 4th down and goal, he threw it late which gave the CB a chance to bat it down, but it was a good throw. If it's not batted down I think it's caught. It wasn't a bad throw, the timing was just a bit off. There was another throw that I recall where he threw it into the ground, that was a bad throw, but I don't think that was on 4th and goal and on that play he had an open receiver he just threw it into the ground, so it was to a receiver with a good chance to score, he just hurried it. 

It is possible it was third down, but there was an out route to Tannehill's left.  I think it may have been the running back coming out of the backfield.  Tannehill threw it high and too far outside. 

think he only scrambled once that I recall and picked up about 4 yards I think. His running ability is fine.

I think he ran twice.  One time he only got back to the line of scrimmage.  I thought he looked a little slower than I expected.

Not sure I'm seeing that either? Maybe that's how he's supposed to be doing it? He does have the same offensive coordinator now with Miami that he did in college, you realize that right?

I did see this.  Not saying it was every play, but it did happen a couple of times.

I think you are being quite a bit tougher on Tannehill then you are on Moore. Moore never got the ball anywhere close to the endzone (albeit he didn't have as many chances as Tannehill I don't believe), but Tannehill got the ball down to the goal line twice I believe and nearly had another TD if Wallace holds onto a catchable ball.

I am not trying to be tough on Tannehill, but Moore looked good.  If Johnson hadn't of blown his play, I am sure Moore could have gotten a score of his own.  And like I said, Tannehill did have better starting position.  He went 3 and out to start and special teams got the fumble recovery.  Then he got a few good returns to work with and a few defensive penalties to help.  It doesn't mean Tannehill didn't have some nice throws and reads because he did.  I thought he played well.  I just want to see a little more before we throw him to the wolves.

I answered in bold.  But really, I don't want to defend my viewpoint any more.  I thought Tannehill did a solid job and I don't want to come across as negative on him.  I just think he needs a little more time and nothing about Moore's game concerned me.

[Pappy13]

^^I checked the box scores, he ran only once and gained 5 yards. I hope you're not expecting Cam Newton, he moves just fine.

The play that you are thinking of he had to throw the ball where he did or it would have been picked off. The defender got his hands on it, if he throws the ball just a tad more to the inside it's a pick 6. The throw was fine, the reason the play didn't work is because the reciever, it was Clay by the way, was open earlier in the route but Tannehill didn't deliver the ball in time, so he had to throw it wider than he wanted to and keep it away from the defender. The throw was fine, the timing was bad. It's that whole game speed thing that he needs to work on. Things happen quicker in the NFL, so he wasn't quite ready to deliver the ball when Clay broke open and then had to throw it wider than the play was designed to go, but Clay was open and it could have been a TD if the timing was right and he didn't have to throw it as wide as he did. Edit: I went back and watched that play again and the timing was off because Tannehill doubled clutched the throw. It appears that he felt just a little pressure up the middle when he was about to throw and brought the ball back down and then had to reload and throw and by that time the play wasn't there anymore. He had no reason to double clutch it like that as the defense wasn't that close, but it wasn't the throw that was bad it was his pocket awareness that failed him there.

I'm not saying you didn't see him look to the sidelines, I'm just saying that I'm not sure why he's doing it or whether it's supposed to work that way or not. I think you are assuming a lot. I haven't heard one peep out of anyone that he needs to work on his adjustments. He knows the offense better than Moore by most everyone's account.

Starting position for both QB's:
Moore 18 Mia, 21 Mia, 47 TB. Total: 3 Possesions, 2 poor field position, 1 excellent.
Tannehill 13 Mia, 48 TB, 30 Mia, 31 Mia Total: 4 Possesions, 1 poor field position, 2 average, 1 excellent.

Somebody can figure out what that average starting pos is for both QB's, it's not nearly as big as you think it is, maybe like 10 yards difference between the 2 guys. Moore got into scoring position on 1 out of 3 chances (only when he had excellent field position). Tannehill got into scoring position on 3 out of 4 chances, once when he had excellent field position and twice when it was from his own 30. Edit: I went back and did the math and it turns out that's nearly identical average starting field position between the 2 QB's, less than a yard difference.

That's exactly what I'm talking about as being more critical on Tannehill than Moore, if you are gonna say that Moore would have had a chance to score if Johnson catches that pass, then you have to give Tanehill 2 TD's instead of 1 because Wallace dropped a would be TD and that 4th and goal play would have never happened. He still well outplayed Moore any way you slice it. Now if you want to say that Tannehill did that against the 2's, then that's fine you are absolutely correct, but then if Moore goes against the 2's and gets a couple TD's and Tannehill throws a pick against the 1's in the next game then you gotta call that a wash because it would be the exact same outcome as the 1st pre-season game only in reverse for the 2 QB's. You willing to concede that?

Nothing concerned you about Moore's performance? What about the pick when they were in scoring position? At least that must be a little concerning, no?

[Dolphin-UK]

If Tannehill is the better QB, and you are certain he's not going to get (a) destroyed physically by a leaky OL/weak run game or (b) destroyed mentally by being forced to play when he's not able to adjust (i.e. he is confident enough to take his licks) then play him.

If you cannot do points a or b above then even if he is the better QB you have to start Moore for a few games, if nothing else then to lower the expectations for the season because as soon as you name Tannehill the starter in week 1, the binary Dolphins fans are going to have us as playoff contenders and potential AFC champions.

[EKnight]

No one with any sense whatsoever has Miami over .500 no matter who the QB is. -EK

[MikeO]

If Tannehill is the better QB, and you are certain he's not going to get (a) destroyed physically by a leaky OL/weak run game or (b) destroyed mentally by being forced to play when he's not able to adjust (i.e. he is confident enough to take his licks) then play him.

If you cannot do points a or b above then even if he is the better QB you have to start Moore for a few games, if nothing else then to lower the expectations for the season because as soon as you name Tannehill the starter in week 1, the binary Dolphins fans are going to have us as playoff contenders and potential AFC champions.

Dolphins fans are gonna have hope before the start of the season no matter who the QB is. And they should!! In this league it doesn't matter what preseason power rankings, predictions, or the so called "experts" predict. There is always reason for hope. We saw a 1-15 team go 11-5 with a noodle arm QB and a terrible head coach. Not to mention a team with a far worse WR corp than we have currently!  Nobody in their right mind had the Giants winning the super bowl last year, hell nobody had them in the playoffs everyone anointed Philly from the NFC East and had it as "Romo's breakout season." Not to mention the Giants GM Jerry Reese was beat up more in the press than Ireland has been for his moves last year cause he let everyone walk and nobody understood why. Who had Cincy in the playoffs last year or who predicted Andy Dalton to lead that team there? Name 1 person? You can't! Every expert had them as a joke cause they didn't bring back their starting WR's or Carson Palmer. They were the butt of the NFL jokes until the games started being played. Then every "expert" and "power ranking" writer had egg on their face!

Point is, these preseason power rankings are totally worthless (line your bird cage or pick up your dog crap with them, not worth the paper they are written on). What these "experts" predict is worthless. ESPN and their cast of a million analysts are worthless. I heard Herm Edwards the other day predicting game outcome for games in November! (no joke!) These guys can't pick the winners the morning of games now Herm is predicting them 5 months out!

Whether Tannehill, Garrard, or Moore Week 1 the fans will have hope before Week 1 of the playoffs. Now by week 2 or 3 the hope might be gone like it was last year. But no matter who the QB is fans will have hope. Starting Tannehill Week 1 won't give fans any more or less hope. If he is the best guy, play him. If he isn't, don't. I think it's really just that simple. And the season will play out as it will play out. Playing or Not playing someone based on "preseason power rankings" or what "expectations are or will be if so and so is out there" is not a reason to make roster decisions!

[Doc-phin]

^^I checked the box scores, he ran only once and gained 5 yards. I hope you're not expecting Cam Newton, he moves just fine.

The run that only got to the line of scrimmage may not have counted.

The play that you are thinking of he had to throw the ball where he did or it would have been picked off. The defender got his hands on it, if he throws the ball just a tad more to the inside it's a pick 6.

It was 4th down and it wouldn't have been a TD either way.

I'm not saying you didn't see him look to the sidelines, I'm just saying that I'm not sure why he's doing it or whether it's supposed to work that way or not. I think you are assuming a lot. I haven't heard one peep out of anyone that he needs to work on his adjustments. He knows the offense better than Moore by most everyone's account.

You are right, it is an assumption.  But the way he stepped back and looked over to the sideline it looked just like what I see in college.  It only happened a couple of times though.  No big deal this early on.

Starting position for both QB's:
Moore 18 Mia, 21 Mia, 47 TB. Total: 3 Possesions, 2 poor field position, 1 excellent.
Tannehill 13 Mia, 48 TB, 30 Mia, 31 Mia Total: 4 Possesions, 1 poor field position, 2 average, 1 excellent.

Tannehill's start on the 13 resulted in a 3 and out.  Then he got the good field position on the fumble recovery.  These numbers don't seem to contradict me all that much.  Again, not a big deal.

That's exactly what I'm talking about as being more critical on Tannehill than Moore, if you are gonna say that Moore would have had a chance to score if Johnson catches that pass, then you have to give Tanehill 2 TD's instead of 1 because Wallace dropped a would be TD and that 4th and goal play would have never happened.

He threw that ball a little low to put it all on Wallace.  But you are right, it was still catchable.

Nothing concerned you about Moore's performance? What about the pick when they were in scoring position? At least that must be a little concerning, no?

The interesting thing is I didn't get to see that play.  I think something went wrong with my TV.  My understanding is that the ball was tipped.  At least that is what the commentator said.

Again, Tannehill did a good job.  But I feel that the performance is being a bit overstated.  Once he goes into that #1 spot, there is no turning back.  We have a veteran (or two) who aren't performing poorly, so why rush it?

Sorry, but I am low on time right now and won't be able to go into this any further.