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!

     

Could Matt Moore still be our guy?


Snake

Recommended Posts

The forgotten man of the hour is Matt Moore. A guy that ended strong in the 09 season and then fell like a rock in 2010. My question is if we get a real OC and QB coach is it just possible we could have a starting QB there? Or should we just cut our loss with him and hope Pickles and Co can handle the load?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He'd be a great back-up. But you people HAVE to get it through your heads that he's not a franchise QB. Stop accepting mediocrity. We don't have a franchise QB right now and there is no way to get one right now unless we draft a QB in the third and luck out over time. We'll have to wait another year to try, IMO. So we may as well bring in a FA who is better than Jimmy and Matt so we can at least compete.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope we keep him, it's hard to judge him for how he played this year with how our line was blocking, or lack there of, if we don't go after a solid vet then I hope we roll with Moore as the starter next year. Don't forget Clausen only was starting because Moore was hurt and we had nobody better

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well we are getting a new coaching staff and we have to assume that whoever we bring in is automatically going to be better than the below average crap we had before, so why not retain him to compete for the QB spot considering he has a winning record with Jeff Davidson calling the plays on his résumé. Of course we bring someone else in but there isn't much out there that is any better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^Pete Carrol already said he's gong to do everything in his power to keep Hasselbeck. I'm in the Donovan McNabb camp personally. I wouldn't mind giving Matt Moore a chance to come back but I highly doubt he'll out perform a FA and if he does then great.

Only concern is do we know that there is going to be some awesome QB prospect in next years draft. I'm really in the mindset that we're not going to have the #1 pick so Luck in my mind is not going to be a Panther so is holding out for some nameless faceless college standout really the answer?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Competition only makes good players better.

Bring him back, and let him compete.

I think people are scared of having a qb better than clausen, that isn't a household name.

I think people are scared to try something new. Instead they want to hold onto the handful of games he won for us. If we can do better than Moore...we need to do so. Guess what? We can.

Need an OC and a QB Coach first though...then the CBA, before anything happens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think he should get 1 more legit shot with us. Rivera has obviously watched the tape, he knows he's better than Clausen and he knows there's not a lot of options in FA.

Problem with this is

1. He was better but he also was playing in a system he had played in for 4 years. While Jimmy had only been in it for what? A few months. So yeah he would look better.

2. He crap on himself and admitted it. The pressure of being a starting QB got 2 him. The new coaching staff will see that in tapes and interviews as well.

3. I think he not only let down himself but he also may have ruin any faith JR had in him. When JR was talking about bad QB play he wasn't only talking about Jimmy. Matt had a big part in that 2.

I feel JR put alot of faith for this season in Matt building on what he did at the end of last season he didn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Congratulations do they know who the father is?
    • In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
×
×
  • Create New...