Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Matt Moore and the preseason...


firstdayfan

Recommended Posts

For some reason or another this guy doesn't seem to turn it on unless it matters. Moore has always been average or worse during the preseason. All he had to do is beat out Josh mccown last year and he couldn't do it. The year before that he went down with an injury against the steelers and was out for the year so he could keep a roster spot. Also, he has never really played well during practice or looked like a star.

But, for some reason when the games coun matt Moore brings his A game. I'm not sure if this preseason is the same or if Moore is as average as many feel he is but I'd put my money on Moore playing at a completely different level come week 1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will admit that MM has not looked sharp. But, I actually want ot see some form of pass protection before I judge his 2010 play. The OLine has been absolutely atrocious so far.

Exactly. I also want to see receivers start getting seperation and catching balls that hit them in their hands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Once he gets Smitty back, both running backs, and better blocking from the o-line, Moore will be fine. Clausen too.

I agree 100%! People are getting all worked up and I think we will be fine. First off our offense is playing without our #1 receiver, #2 running back, starting right tackle and we are not gameplanning for these games at all. Plus the defense has looked very good which is a huge surprise to me because I was a little worried about them. The special teams, without a doubt need some work, but that is what preseason is for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This year has really not been a typical preseason so far. Other than the obvious with Smith out, we have more new starters than we ever have under Fox. They are also approaching it differently. Look for example at how they rotated in receivers, backs, defensive linemen and secondary personnel on Saturday. The emphasis is not to play the starters in order to develop chemistry but to find out who those starters will be. Most years we put out a first team with 1 or 2 new guys at most. They have experience playing together and are just knocking off the rust. This year many guys are getting their only live work with the starters in their career. And we are rotating guys in to see how they do. For example I saw Jarrett in with Clausen late in the third quarter. If Jarrett is going to be the number 2 guy, why would he be in so late. Probably to develop some chemistry with Clausen and also to get some work since some of the first team reps went to Moore and LaFell as well.

Seems to me that where we might be pretty far down the road most years by the third preseason game, we are not nearly that far along this year and might not be that ready to play by Game 1. I initially thought the defense was going to lag this year but it looks just the opposite, the offense might lag even into the season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This year has really not been a typical preseason so far. Other than the obvious with Smith out, we have more new starters than we ever have under Fox. They are also approaching it differently. Look for example at how they rotated in receivers, backs, defensive linemen and secondary personnel on Saturday. The emphasis is not to play the starters in order to develop chemistry but to find out who those starters will be. Most years we put out a first team with 1 or 2 new guys at most. They have experience playing together and are just knocking off the rust. This year many guys are getting their only live work with the starters in their career. And we are rotating guys in to see how they do. For example I saw Jarrett in with Clausen late in the third quarter. If Jarrett is going to be the number 2 guy, why would he be in so late. Probably to develop some chemistry with Clausen and also to get some work since some of the first team reps went to Moore and LaFell as well.

Seems to me that where we might be pretty far down the road most years by the third preseason game, we are not nearly that far along this year and might not be that ready to play by Game 1. I initially thought the defense was going to lag this year but it looks just the opposite, the offense might lag even into the season.

Good point....except for the OLine. I know that Otah is out, but Schwartz got substantial time last season. Their poor play is my biggest concern right now. With an inexperienced QB like Moore, protection is absolutely critical. If the OLine does not step it up, we are in for a very long season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good point....except for the OLine. I know that Otah is out, but Schwartz got substantial time last season. Their poor play is my biggest concern right now. With an inexperienced QB like Moore, protection is absolutely critical. If the OLine does not step it up, we are in for a very long season.

Yeah but you also have to look at the defenses that we have played so far, Jets were #1 and the Ravens were #3 last year. The O-line will be fine, I am more worried about finding someone to return a punt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Not one single pick that is asking me why we drafted a guy in the first place. It was a guy we needed and/or a guy that had certain traits making them stand out. Best of all, I feel everyone we drafted are capable of stepping onto the field this year and have a meaningful role (even Kuwatch on special teams). Obviously, nothing is guaranteed but I'm not seeing any huge flags on guys because they're risky projects or massive overreaches.
    • Here is how Morgan is strategic-He re-signs Scott because he was not going S in round 1--he had the chance, and he did not.  He saw the top of the draft at T and knew none of them would be ready to start day 1, so he signs a veteran to a one-year deal, giving his tackle selection a chance to learn and prepare for what might be LT or RT.  Those two moves suggested, perhaps ironically because they contradict each other, what he was going to do, based on the talent pool.  He never brought in a Robinson replacement at DE/NT, and then moves up to draft one.   I almost wonder if the intent was to draft DT/DE all along at some point, maybe with a trade back, but then Freeling dropped to them.   Of course, we felt that they were looking WR, and wonder if the plan was to draft a WR in round 2 if you traded back in round 1.  However, when Freeling was there, the trade back fell apart.  Then we traded up for Hunter.  We could stick with XL and hope Metchie steps up, so we sat still in round three and took Brazell II, a 1000 yard speedster and perfect Z WR.  What a break. At that time, CB and Center were our biggest needs, and with several possible centers on the board and a good fit for our defense at CB, we grabbed Will Lee III.  Lee and Thornton have people in front of them, but I think Morgan knew we needed a guy who can play the outside and press--and probably step in as Jackson's replacement in 2027.    After making trades to get back into the fifth round, where we grabbed one of the best centers in the draft.  This is significant because we signed Fortner to a one-year deal; maybe Morgan saw what some of us saw--the center position is strong in this draft--on day 3, and day 3 players need a year, in most cases.  Moments later, a safety they had been talking to whose skill set matched what we are looking for in a FS.  As stated, Scott was signed,  but the fact that the Panthers were talking to Wheatley and not Theiemann means that they might have known they were not going FS early, but would need a developmental FS later--which explains why we signed Scott.  So if you pay attention to the one-year, vet deals, you can tell where we planned to sign later-round, developmental players.  What positions did we draft early that did not have 1-year veterans signed in front of them:  DL (Hunter) and WR (I don't count Metchie because I count starting-level players). I would not be surprised to learn later that the plan was DT and WR in rounds 1 and 2--then Freeling fell.  Notice that Freeling--from Mt Pleasant SC, did not come in for a visit.  Most of the other OT candidates had short arms or were certain to be gone. I don't think Freeling was in their plans.  I think a trade back and Hunter and maybe Boston was the vision.  I am guessing that CB was also high on their list.   So in this draft, we got 
    • This is one area I think that is not getting enough exposure in the midst of all the optimism. I like Chuba a great deal from a personal standpoint but he has largely proven nothing on a consistent basis yet. He's had the one season of production but before that most people pegged us as moving on. And last year injuries or not he just did not have that juice. The rest of the guys are completely unproven. I don't see anyone among the group having a game or a handful of games worth of high level production the way Rico Dowdle did last year. And yeah he dropped off and yeah he got an attitude about our incompetent handling of the touches which was honestly justified on his part and he moved on but he did legitimately save our season. That's what it is going to take to seize control of the NFC South. We all know that we will not be passing all over defenses. It is what it is. So who amongst this RB group is capable of doing that? And if we are struggling to run the ball AND pass are we going to revert to making excuses for our coach and QB again? That is definitely getting old.
×
×
  • Create New...