The Argument: Matt Moore vs Jimmy Clausen
by LittleKing on Oct 20, 2010 11:52 AM EDT
in Panther Player & Position Reviews
Email
Print
John Fox, through a short press statement, name Matt Moore the starter this past Monday. Whether we like it or not, this is the direction we are heading. We can debate if this is the right decision until pigs fly, but on game day, we will all be pulling for the Panthers, our Panthers. If they win or lose, it will be as a team. It takes a lot more than the QB for a team to win.
At this point in the season what do we know, here are the facts that are undisputable.
Fact 1: Panthers are 0-5
Fact 2: Matt Moore stats have been terrible this year
Fact 3: Jimmy Clausen stats have been terrible this year
When discussing how we exactly arrived at this point and how we should proceed becomes a bit gray. There was the offseason purge that we have theories as to why it happened, offensive line issues, WR injuries, bad play calling, and bad execution. Trying to pin the sole reason we are at 0-5 on the QB's is a big mistake. On Monday we had an extremely long debate about this going around and around but during the discussion BigDavis provided a good summary of the arguments for and against which QB should be starting. These questions are really the starting point on why each person believes a particular QB should start.
Which QB past performance has been better?
Does past performance include 2009 for Moore, and/or college, for Clausen?
Is latest game performance more important than past performance?
Which of the two stands the best chance of becoming a/our franchise QB?
How much can the 0-5 start be directly attributable to the two QBs in question and how much of the situation was caused by: Management decisions; Play calling; Poor blocking; Poor receiving; Poor coaching in general
So how do you answer these questions? My take after the jump...
Which QB's past performance has been better? Does past performance include 2009 for Moore, and/or college, for Clausen?
|
Matt Moore at Oregon State |
||||||||||
|
YEAR |
CMP |
ATT |
YDS |
CMP% |
YPA |
LNG |
TD |
INT |
SACK |
RAT |
|
2005 |
211 |
355 |
2711 |
59.4 |
7.64 |
63 |
11 |
19 |
27 |
123.11 |
|
2006 |
229 |
378 |
3022 |
60.6 |
8.00 |
80 |
18 |
7 |
33 |
139.75 |
|
Jimmy Clausen at Notre Dame |
||||||||||
|
YEAR |
CMP |
ATT |
YDS |
CMP% |
YPA |
LNG |
TD |
INT |
SACK |
RAT |
|
2007 |
138 |
245 |
1254 |
56.3 |
5.12 |
44 |
7 |
6 |
35 |
103.85 |
|
2008 |
268 |
440 |
3172 |
60.9 |
7.21 |
69 |
25 |
17 |
21 |
132.49 |
|
2009 |
289 |
425 |
3722 |
68.0 |
8.76 |
88 |
28 |
4 |
24 |
161.43 |
|
Year |
Player |
G |
Att |
Comp |
Pct |
Att/G |
Yds |
Avg |
Yds/G |
TD |
TD% |
Int |
Int% |
Lng |
20+ |
40+ |
Sck |
SckY |
Rate |
|
2009 |
Matt Moore |
7 |
138 |
85 |
61.6 |
19.7 |
1,053 |
7.6 |
150.4 |
8 |
5.8 |
2 |
1.4 |
66 |
14 |
6 |
9 |
78 |
98.5 |
|
2008 |
Matt Moore |
0 |
-- |
-- |
-- |
0.0 |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
0.0 |
|
2007 |
Matt Moore |
9 |
111 |
63 |
56.8 |
12.3 |
730 |
6.6 |
81.1 |
3 |
2.7 |
5 |
4.5 |
57 |
7 |
4 |
6 |
40 |
67.0 |
|
TOTAL |
19 |
308 |
173 |
56.2 |
16.2 |
2,125 |
6.9 |
111.8 |
13 |
4.2 |
13 |
4.2 |
66 |
26 |
10 |
23 |
177 |
74.1 |
|
I think everyone can agree that college performance has less meaning than NFL performance. There have been plenty of college QB that have failed in the NFL. However, at some point every team is looking for new quarterback and has to decide if they want to go with an unproven rookie or unproven veteran over the long haul. The typical line of thought is for any rookie to be brought along slowly but in reality it's extremely hard for any team to actually pull off. There is usually a reason a team drafts a rookie QB, because the current one hasn't fulfilled expectations or, if they have a proven vet, they are on the downside of their careers. The grass is always looks greener on the other side of the fence when it comes to NFL quarterbacks and most fans don't have the patience to find out, everyone thinks the other guy can do a better job. Take Armanti Edwards, I have no idea if he would be a quality NFL quarterback, nobody, not even the diehard Edwards fans know this. Sure many speculate he would, but the fact remains we don't know, yet many are calling for him to be our QB despite the fact he was drafted to play WR. Heck even the Observers poll had Pike in the lead on who should start. Bottom line you have to give a player time and giving a quarterback only start a few games is not enough to accurately judge a QB.
With that said you can't ignore a players history, it has to be considered. Based purely off history at this point Moore should be starting, he had the stats last year and the wins, but this isn't the end of the argument.
Is latest game performance more important than past performance?
|
Passing |
Rushing |
Sacks |
|||||||||||||||
|
G |
Rating |
Comp |
Att |
Pct |
Yds |
Y/G |
Y/A |
TD |
INT |
Rush |
Yds |
Y/G |
Avg |
TD |
Sack |
YdsL |
|
|
2010 - Matt Moore |
3 |
33.3 |
25 |
59 |
42.4 |
342 |
114 |
5.8 |
2 |
6 |
3 |
17 |
5.7 |
5.7 |
0 |
8 |
59 |
|
2010 - Jimmy Clausen |
5 |
52.2 |
43 |
91 |
47.3 |
454 |
90.8 |
5 |
1 |
3 |
11 |
21 |
4.2 |
1.9 |
0 |
9 |
55 |
The argument isn't over because Moore had two horrible games raising the question, does current performance trump past performance? The Giants game was a mess with Moore throwing into triple coverage multiple times and being picked off in the red zone. When it comes down to pure QB rating Clausen clearly has the edge for this season (33.3 vs 52.2). However, I do think we were more successful in moving the ball under Moore than under Clausen overall. Take our first down stats as example; you're not going to win if you can't move the ball.
|
Game |
Panthers 1st down |
Panthers 3rd down Eff |
Opp 1st downs |
Opp 3rd down Eff |
|
Panthers vs Giants |
14 |
47% |
21 |
36% |
|
Panthers vs Bucs |
16 |
37% |
14 |
43% |
|
Panthers vs Bengals |
17 |
18% |
21 |
29% |
|
Panthers vs Saints |
10 |
33% |
27 |
57% |
|
Panthers vs Bears |
8 |
17% |
13 |
20% |
Also, consider turnovers, Clausen has less int but also has more fumbles. Sure not all the fumbles were lost, but they did lose yardage again putting us in 2nd and long and 3rd and long situations. I'm sure there are stats that show that Clausen has been more effective well (interception ratio), but combined with past performance Moore appears to have the edge.
Which of the two stands the best chance of becoming a/our franchise QB?
Beside all the stats that can be listed, this is the one area were personal opinion really shines and the most of the debates stems. Moore has been in the league for four years and if he's going to be a QB in this league this is this last chance to prove it. If Clausen's performance wasn't so horrible as well it would be an easy answer but alas he had to put up some really horrible games. Because Clausen is so new to the league, he has a higher ceiling than Moore. However, the league has been littered by quarterbacks that had loads of potential but failed to perform. But if you are going to draft a rookie QB as your first pick in the draft (even if Clausen was a 2nd round), at some point he will have to get his chance to prove he is the franchise QB we are looking for. Based on the thought that Moore has shown everything he's is going to, Clausen easily should be the starter because future potential.
How much can the 0-5 start be directly attributable to the two QBs in question and how much of the situation was caused by: Management decisions; Play calling; Poor blocking; Poor receiving; Poor coaching in general
All of the these items definitely play a role, yet as Vince Lombard would say football is the perfect team game except for one glaring imbalance---the quarterback was too important.
There is no doubt the Panthers have talent on the offense despite the number of players that were release or not resigned during the offense. However, when a defense put 8-9 or sometimes 10 in the box with no regard to the passing game the running game is going to have issues. Stop the run and stop the Panthers is currently the league motto. We often question the play calling but in 2008 the same coaching staff was able win out of similar play calling, so do the results fall to failed execution?
I think the biggest disappointment is the performance of the offensive line which affects both the passing and running game. However, when looking at the running game not having a proven WR that can block has also been a problem. How much does no Moose and no Hoover play into the running game issues.
Then finally do all of these issues just fall on the coaching staff for not being able to coach their players. These is no simple answer to this, yet both QB's have had to deal with the same OL, play calling, and receivers, it really becomes more of a wash between the two. The thing that really muddies the water is when you see Sam Bradford and Colt McCoy come out and play decently, heck better than decent considering their situation.
Finally, the answer to "Who should be starting for the Panthers" comes down to which of the above questions you put more weight behind. Currently, I feel Moore gives a better chance to win now, while Clausen is more likely to be the future of the franchise (as being a rookie he has more upside). Combine this with the questions above and we ultimately get the reasons why each one of us has a different opinion of which QB should be named the starter. I've tried to take a fairly objective look at the situation but I have no doubt some of my bias has filtered in.
As far as my personal feelings, I don't mind Moore getting another opportunity. It was his team starting the season and in my personal opinion felt there was better production overall out of the team when he was playing. In addition, I think Clausen could benefit from sitting out a few more games to watch and learn. How do you balance a season that is now about the future with the desire to still make each game competitive? Personally I don't think Fox is making a selfish move, his resume has already been built over the course of his career. Fox is a competitor and wants to win, just like everyone on the team wants to win, and the fans want them to win. Clausen will get his chance, but this is Moore's final opportunity to prove, not just to us, but to the league that he should stay around. While I'm not going hold my breath, I would love to see the Matt Moore from 2009.
With all of that said, when it come to game day, it doesn't matter who is starting and I think the best attitude to take is, as our resident optimist James said on Monday, "I'll support whoever is starting." It's about the Panthers not an individual.
Go PANTHERS!!!
151 comments
|
3 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Great article LK
It’s really a “You say potato” argument where really for every pro you can say about either Moore or Clausen you can find an equivalent con.
I agree with everything you’ve said, except for one statement:
I do think we were more successful in moving the ball under Moore than under Clausen overall.
We have only one metric that can objectively evaluate how can offense moves as a whole in relation to the ability of the defense faced and that is DVOA. According to the Panthers DVOA stats (per football outsiders)
With Moore starting under center: -53.7%
With Clausen starting under center: -40.3%
Both make us worst in the NFL, but from a purely DVOA perspective the 2010 offense is moving better with Clausen under center than with Moore. Hopefully Moore is lights out this weekend and that changes, but for now it says Clausen under center = a better moving offense.
Cat Scratch Reader's resident optimist.
Their performance is really close (which isn't saying much)
They also have a rating specifically for QB’s called DYAR and YAR: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/qb
The simple version: DYAR means a quarterback with more total value. DVOA means a quarterback with more value per play( Further Explained Here: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/info/methods#dyar)
DYAR YAR
Matt Moore: -249 -304
Clausen: -306 -321
Both players are at the bottom of the list. So in reality both have been bad. BTW, the DVOA rating on that page is -70.6% for Moore and -60.0% for Clausen. So Clausen does rank higher still in DVOA on this page as well (although both bottom of the chart). (not sure why the diff in your DVOA and the one on this page).
Also consider:
Moore: 23 possessions, 5 scores, 5 trips into redzone, 11 drives over 5 plays, 6 int, 2 fum lost
Clausen: 37 possessions, 5 scores, 4 trips into redzone, 11 drives over 5 plays, 3 int, 2 fum lost
Either way, its very close but I still believe we have been slightly (albeit very slightly) better with Moore in. Just my opinion.
If you really want to do something, you will find a way. If you don't, you will find an excuse.
I dont think you can count
those stats of Moore since a lot of his playing time has come within the last minutes of games that were already lost. Remember in 2007 he was brought in with like 2 minutes left down by like 25 points. Thats no chance for a qb to buiild a stat. Even this year he hasnt had 2 full games, he was pulled in his second game. You said you didnt knwo how many fumbles Clausen lost, he has 3 ints, & 6 fumbles, 3 of them were lost, so the turnovers are the same for both players, only Clausen had the potential for 3 more in the other fumbles. I read a lot of people saying Moore is a 4 year vet, but look at the 4 years. He has started 10 games in 4 years. Clausen started that many last year in college. Granted college isnt nfl, he still had the full game time in them, while Moore was sitting on the bench. And of course we all read about how Clausen was supposed to know the Panthers offense style coming out of college. I am like many of you, will support them both when they play but i feel Moore never got a fair chance this year, you cant judge a qb from a game and a half. I know his 3 ints in the redzone sucked, but other than that he did a pretty good job. He made some nice passes that were dropped & some that were called back for penalties. Maybe now the receivers have a little more experience & they work well with him.
To me, honestly, I look at choosing QB's like this:
Would you rather…
a) be beaten to death with a baseball bat, and have your remains scattered over a trash heap in an impoverished 3rd world country
or…
b) be stabbed to death with a wooden cooking spoon, and have your remains scattered over a trash heap in an impoverished 3rd world country
The point is, it really doesn’t matter any more who our starting QB is. The problems with this team’s inability to score points go way beyond who is under center.
So Matt Moore is starting this Sunday. Good for Moore. The only thing this really means is that Team Moore will be happy, and Team Clausen will be sad.
We have an offensive line that couldn’t block a pee-wee football defense, an offensive coordinator who has no comprehension skills or a scintilla of ability to change a game plan to meet the ebb and flow of a given game, a head coach who doesn’t give a rat’s ass and can’t wait to get on the next bus out of town, an owner who won’t spend a dime to get decent free agent help, and a fan base who can’t stop arguing amongst themselves over who the starting quarterback should be (as if either one of them will really make a difference).
You could put Peyton Freaking Manning under center, and he wouldn’t be able to fix the problems this team has on offense. Until we get a RT who can block, Davidson the Incompetent is fired, and Fox is replaced with a coach who actually gives a damn about THIS Carolina Panthers team, we will continue to suck. I hate to be so negative, but it’s the truth, and the truth hurts. But, when you’re 5 games into the year and your punter is a real candidate for team MVP, you have more problems than who the quarterback is.
We’re still going to struggle to score points, and we will still be in danger of losing to the 49ers this weekend, even though they suck too.
As our esteemed head coach would say: It is what it is.
*LK, please don’t think I’m hating on your article, because I’m not. You did a damn fine job in writing it.
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
Yes, I do. Really.
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
So you think
he doesnt care about winning a game but he cares what you think about him? That really doesnt make much sense.
The best way to make people think you care
is to try & win. which is exactly what i think he is doing.
He doesn't give a damn what we think of him...
But he does care what Jerry Jones, Randy Lerner, Steve Tisch, and John Mara think of him.
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
Dont you think if he wanted to impress them
he would be trying to win? Again your arguement isnt making much sense.
Fox was counting on Moore
to carry him this year. After 1.5 games, he gives up on Moore and looks for a spark from Clausen. He then gets Moore back when Clausen has a stinker.
He is just desperate for a “spark”. He is not trying to win.
make up your mind
does he want a win to impress people or does he not give a rats ass & just wants out?
He is desperate to impress people
so he is messing around and not doing what’s best for the team.
This was in reply to him not
giving a rats ass. When you say he is trying to impress, that means he is giving a rats ass.
He gives a rat's ass about himself, and his next coaching job.
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
One more comment then im dropping the Fox chat topic for now
I believe every coach cares. None of them want to lose. Just like the players out on the field want to win. None of them, players or coaches want a loss on their records.
I disagree with that.
I think Fox just doesn’t care. We can agree to disagree, though — no harm no foul.
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
Fair enough
Personally I like Fox a lot and don’t blame him too much. He is been put in a pretty difficult position – these are conditions that most coaches would not accept.
But some of his decisions he has made fly in the face of what we expect from Fox.
Agreed!
I do like Fox. And in my awesome opinion, he may have been dealt a deflating blow with the axing of many experienced vets… including Fox’s favorite, Jake Delhomme.
Think of it this way… How much enthusiasm can you have for your job, when upper management makes a few calls you may not have liked? Yes, he’s a HC of a pro football team. You have to work with what you have. But, I kind of feel he was put in a position to fail. This is all speculation, but Fox is still an unstable, emotional human like the rest of us.
And Davidson is a douche… (he’s a big problem)
by SwankTheTank on Oct 20, 2010 2:27 PM EDT up reply actions
He is trying to save face b/c the Clausen move blew up in his face
All he has to say is “look what JR gave me to work with” if the team doesn’t win, so he doesn’t care about winning.
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
I'm not having it both ways.
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
The only thing that should've happened this offseason...
Should’ve been replacing Davidson’s ass… Ta hell with “The Great Veteran Purge” of 2010. Ohhhhhhh wait, but then JR wouldn’t get to live extravagantly next season(when it ends up happening).
I can’t really blame Fox for not caring…
by SwankTheTank on Oct 20, 2010 2:38 PM EDT up reply actions
BTW i did agree with some of your post
But 1 more think i have to disagree with is that Peyton Manning definitely would make a difference. Doesnt he make a lot of the play calls for the Colts?
Not as big as you would think
Peyton would still be on his back often with this o-line, as he’s less mobile than any of the guys we have. He still would be dealing with dropped passes and bad routes by young receivers still learning the speed and nuance of the game. Would he audible out of run plays facing 8, 9 in the box… probably. Would they work given what we have…maybe…still think we would be 0-5.
It seems like they never run short plays
when opponents stack the box, i think a Manning would audible the quick slants to get rid of the ball faster & some screens. I have no idea why the Panthers dont run more screen plays.
I agree
but you still have to factor in who he’s throwing to, and our guys have had a propensity for dropping balls, or being in the wrong place.
Hes not throwing to high draft picks in Indy.
Collie was a 4th round pick, while Garcon was a 6th round pick.
A WR can make a QB look better (ex: Steve Smith with Delhomme)
but a QB can make WRs look really good.
"The game of life is a lot like football. You have to tackle your problems, block your fears, and score your points when you get the opportunity." - Lewis Grizzard
by ThePanthers! on Oct 20, 2010 4:20 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Understand
but they are not dropping his passes on a consistent basis. I don’t care where you got drafted, it’s what you are doing between the white lines on sundays that counts.
His top two receivers are Wayne and Clark.
Everyone else makes plays because Manning is so good and the D worries about the aforementioned players so much.
"Nah, you look like Elijah Wood." - danmerqury
Actually, Austin Collie has better stats than Clark.
He has 100 less yards than Wayne but 4 more TD’s. Im not arguing that our receivers are just as good as Indy’s because they’re not but I am saying that if we had Peyton Manning we would be 4-1 or 5-0. He doesnt have the run game or the defense he would have here.
Having him would also fix some of the o-line problems. He studies so much film and he has so much experience that he can figure out what routes will kill the D. He knows when the D is blitzing and he knows how to audible. He makes quicker decisions and not as many ints.
Just Saying, if we had a future hall of fame QB especially one that has a legitimate argument for the best ever, our offense would not be having anywhere near the amount of trouble we’ve had. Plus our D would also benefit from a good offense. Actually any other offense in the league would probably help our defense.
"The game of life is a lot like football. You have to tackle your problems, block your fears, and score your points when you get the opportunity." - Lewis Grizzard
by ThePanthers! on Oct 20, 2010 8:27 PM EDT up reply actions
Collie is open because Wayne and Clark demand so much attention.
"Nah, you look like Elijah Wood." - danmerqury
+ a bunch
Our receiving corps is more on line talent wise with Indy’s, than Moore or Clasuen are in line talent wise with Peyton Manning.
Manning would make our rookies look like real pros. Well maybe not LaFell. Butters is butters.
I have no idea why the Panthers dont run more screen plays.
See Davidson, Jeff.
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
Because Davidson is a moron.
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
I see no reason not to be. :-)
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
A better question...
Why did we hire a guy with a crap portfolio that worked as an OL coach/OC(promoted from a firing of Maurice Carthon) for a crappy team??
by SwankTheTank on Oct 20, 2010 2:32 PM EDT up reply actions
Manning wouldn't make a difference.
Manning can’t make the RT block, and Manning can’t make up for the receivers being unable to catch (notably LaFell).
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
He cares about Moore?
They guy he waited 11 games to start last year?
The guy he trotted out despite the concussion against TB?
Not so sure. He just does things like changing QBs to look like he is trying.
There's Also this thought
Moore may not be here, and the team is giving him the opportunity to build film and portfolio for other teams, and Clausen gets the opportunity to heal up, and be alive for the next season, whether next year if there’s a season, or the next. He’s looked at as the long term potential starter. If Moore can get production outside of all of the other factors that need help with this team, the Panthers may give him a harder look for another few years in the mix. If he doesn’t look that good, good luck with your other opportunities elsewhere.
Also wouldn't be surprised
if Moore has the reigns for 3 or 4 games, and Clausen gets re-instated to finish out the season.
All this covert speculation is hilarious, "Maybe the Chinease have mind control over Fox."
Umm, Fox believes….truly believes that Matt Moore gives the Carolina Panthers a better chance of winning Sunday at home against the 49ers on October 24th, 2010.
That is all.
"If you ask Jets' CB Darrelle Revis, there is no one who is harder to cover one-on-one than Steve Smith. That has to mean something coming from last year's runner-up for Defensive Player of the Year."
I think you mean the Chinese.
If you’re going to insult others, at least do it correctly.
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
Insult?
How am I insulting anyone? Spelling errors happen…my sincere apologies to any CHINESE people who were offended by the content of that comment.
Really, dude?
A little worked up about this QB change? Seems like someone hacked your profile.
"If you ask Jets' CB Darrelle Revis, there is no one who is harder to cover one-on-one than Steve Smith. That has to mean something coming from last year's runner-up for Defensive Player of the Year."
And no, I'm not worked up about the QB change.
I’m worked up about the fact that it won’t make a difference one way or the other as to who the QB is, because the problems with this football team span far greater than the man under center, and I expect better from the coaching staff than what I’ve been given as a fan.
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
Well, you are right about that.
I really did not even read half the comments on this thread, so “all the covert speculation” was more of a statement blanketing all of Panther nation, not specifically and only you (maybe I should have clarified that).
I’m not the guy who thinks he’s smarter than everyone else, or laughs at people, or thinks his poop don’t stink (nor have I ever used hair product or popped my collar), but you’d be hard-pressed to sell me anything other than Fox is desperately trying to win—and feels Matt gives them a better chance on Sunday.
I mean, the guy was so desperate to win after only 7 quarters, he blew up the whole offseason and preseason plan, and put in the rookie. If that doesn’t scream that Fox is trying, then I’m not sure what does.
Fox could not come to work, sit there and pout, respond “whatever” when addressed by Marty, Danny, or Jerry, and expect to not get fired with cause (and therefore not paid). They are adults and professionals. Fox can’t not care, and he could not fool anyone all the time if his intention was to pretend that he didn’t care.
James Anderson, on WFMZ yesterday, when asked if he felt the coaching staff had ‘checked out’ said something like, “you still see the fire, the hurt, the pain. You see coach Fox’s car hasn’t moved when you come in in the morning.”
Don’t accuse him of not caring unless you know him better than his players, co-worker, and boss…it’s just kind of kicking him when he’s down.
"If you ask Jets' CB Darrelle Revis, there is no one who is harder to cover one-on-one than Steve Smith. That has to mean something coming from last year's runner-up for Defensive Player of the Year."
by ERL on Oct 20, 2010 1:33 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Agreed
If you really want to do something, you will find a way. If you don't, you will find an excuse.
Like he believed in Delhomme
“offers us the best chance to win on sunday” got kinda old then, hope it doesn’t resurface this year…
Right now
it’s looking like Delhomme gave them the best chance to win. How can you look at the performance of the 2 qbs this season & make any kind of arguement that he was wrong about that? My guess is that in practices last season, Moore played like he has this season.
That beloved phrase is not unique to John Fox or the Panthers. Everyone uses it. It is a coaches responsibility to use their own opinion of who gives them the best chance to win.
Besides, why would Fox care about developing a QB for the future?
"If you ask Jets' CB Darrelle Revis, there is no one who is harder to cover one-on-one than Steve Smith. That has to mean something coming from last year's runner-up for Defensive Player of the Year."
As I said previously, I now don't have any inclination to find a stream for this game on Sunday.
"Nah, you look like Elijah Wood." - danmerqury
It's not the winning or the losing that bothers me. It's the ridiculous personnel decisions.
Moore is terrible and has no future here. Why is he the starting QB?
"Nah, you look like Elijah Wood." - danmerqury
What makes you think Moore has no future?
His 6-4 record? (that 2 of the losses were this year with rookie receivers & poor blocking)
The guy has had a total of 10 starts divided into 4 seasons, thats basically a rookie. I just dont see the reasoning for slamming him & saying you dont want to watch them because of him.
While you wait...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nh33bGAxl58
"If you ask Jets' CB Darrelle Revis, there is no one who is harder to cover one-on-one than Steve Smith. That has to mean something coming from last year's runner-up for Defensive Player of the Year."
Oldham said 'no future here'
I completely agree.
I’ll happy eat my words if I’m wrong, but given Moore is in the last year of his deal with a new head coach and coaching staff on the way I think the chances of Matt Moore remaining a Carolina Panther are right up there with a snowball’s chance in hell.
Even if Moore comes out and has 11 games with a rating over 100 and makes the Pro-Bowl I don’t see him staying because there will be teams like Seattle who are looking for a QB of the future and can guarantee him a starting job without anyone of note looking over his shoulder.
I think there is a chance Moore has a future, I just don’t see it with the Panthers.
Cat Scratch Reader's resident optimist.
Ok that makes a little more sense then
I wasnt seeing the “here” part for some reason. But still to say he is terrible, is kinda jumping the gun a little bit.
If Marty Hurney is making the personnel decisions,
then the new coaching staff will not have any bearing on whether Moore is resigned. We can’t separate Fox from the personnel decisions, and then automatically assume that a new coach would be given that executive power.
Not sure what Jimmy has shown that would allow Hurney to discard Moore so certainly, to be frank.
"If you ask Jets' CB Darrelle Revis, there is no one who is harder to cover one-on-one than Steve Smith. That has to mean something coming from last year's runner-up for Defensive Player of the Year."
Nobody separated Fox from the personnel decisions until 2010
I don’t think anyone has postulated that Fox wasn’t heavily involved in the decisions up to this season.
The reason we’re changing our tune is that this season is the first time Fox is distancing himself from the personnel decisions of the team, and this is likely because it’s Hurney’s job to put the roster together not just for Fox in 2010, but for whoever comes in 2011 and beyond.
I think if Hurney was that smitten with Moore they would have given him a front loaded extension now, rather than wait until there’s potentially a new CBA and salary cap.
Cat Scratch Reader's resident optimist.
Well, nobody is getting a contract during the season
so Moore would still be on the last year of his deal regardless of how he/the team was playing, or regardless of Marty’s smitten level.
Point is, if the new coaching staff is calling the shots, Clausen is not much more secure than Moore.
"If you ask Jets' CB Darrelle Revis, there is no one who is harder to cover one-on-one than Steve Smith. That has to mean something coming from last year's runner-up for Defensive Player of the Year."
By 'now' I should have said 'the offseason'
Clausen’s only more secure because he’s locked up for another 4 years.
I’m not saying he’ll absolutely be the starter next year, because we’re just as likely to have a new coach draft someone or get a veteran… but I can 100% guarantee Clausen will be on the roster next year regardless, I think I can only give Moore a 5% chance.
Cat Scratch Reader's resident optimist.
True!
I don’t think Hurney would piss away all the dough in Clausen’s deal just to be accommodating to a new coaching staff.
We did that once already.. :)
by SwankTheTank on Oct 20, 2010 2:57 PM EDT up reply actions
You would think not, but history says he might
See Jake Delhomme.
"If you ask Jets' CB Darrelle Revis, there is no one who is harder to cover one-on-one than Steve Smith. That has to mean something coming from last year's runner-up for Defensive Player of the Year."
Which you were reffering too above
with the “We did that once already”….touche
"If you ask Jets' CB Darrelle Revis, there is no one who is harder to cover one-on-one than Steve Smith. That has to mean something coming from last year's runner-up for Defensive Player of the Year."
Hurney can only do what JR's "Panther ration" will allow him.
Hehe! I think it’s clear I’m not very happy with the upper management side of the organization. I think my bias is showing… :)
by SwankTheTank on Oct 20, 2010 2:55 PM EDT up reply actions
“You think you could do better? Guess you got the recipe for how to turn poop into…”
"If you ask Jets' CB Darrelle Revis, there is no one who is harder to cover one-on-one than Steve Smith. That has to mean something coming from last year's runner-up for Defensive Player of the Year."
Than that moron? Yes, with his experience in the game.
He gets out coached every week.
"Nah, you look like Elijah Wood." - danmerqury
Give Fox the Offensive playbook and let us see...
He’s not know as a crazy offensive genius… he can’t be worse than Davidson. Hell, the “Ask Madden” option on a damned video game would provide better play calling than what Davidson has mustered.
by SwankTheTank on Oct 20, 2010 2:49 PM EDT up reply actions
Not an argument...
He does outcoached. And I type words and don’t finish them… Hahahah!
by SwankTheTank on Oct 20, 2010 2:52 PM EDT up reply actions
God, you're a hater.
Man won 4 of 5 games he started last year, and had a total of 2 bad quarters the first 2 games this year, and suffered a concussion.
Cut him some slack. I’m sure he’s had a lot of nice things to say about you.
Two bad quarters? Two bad games followed up by a 2 interception cameo two weeks ago.
"Nah, you look like Elijah Wood." - danmerqury
One doesn't count, it was a hail mary pass
Those INT’s shouldn’t even be counted in the QB’s stat line, because it’s a 99% guarantee that the pass will either be intercepted or batted down.
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
This goes back to exactly the point of the post
You obviously put the majority of the decision on which QB to play based on most recent performance with little regard to historical performance. Biddavis prefers to weigh past performance higher than current performance (I would then assume with the thought that if he could play well before, he could do so again);.
If you really want to do something, you will find a way. If you don't, you will find an excuse.
He has shown that ability, yes.
And thus far, Clausen has not.
And though OldhamA has apparently not bothered to read my detailed posts on the subject, I showed that only one quarter of the opener vs the Giants was poorly played by Moore (indeed the second quarter was his finest, with the 0:33 50 yard march for the go-ahead TD pass with 9 seconds left in the half, to regain our previously lost lead.
The “cameo” last game was glibly termed ‘terrible’ by the press, but it wasn’t at all. As bwsmith pointed out above, the Hail Mary was a fluke INT, and the previous one counted against Moore that game was the inability of Edwards to catch the quick slant. Every other pass he threw in that last drive was sharp and on target.
This kid has consistently gotten short shrift by fans and the press alike, since so many are enamored (without any visible evidence) by Clausen. It’s as if they want Moore to fail, so they can get their boy in there before he’s ready. Every positive thing Moore has done is discounted. Well, let’s see how he does against San Fran this weekend.
The "cameo" last game was glibly termed ‘terrible’ by the press, but it wasn’t at all. As bwsmith pointed out above, the Hail Mary was a fluke INT, and the previous one counted against Moore that game was the inability of Edwards to catch the quick slant. Every other pass he threw in that last drive was sharp and on target.
I mostly agree with this, but herein lies the problem: People are willing to make excuses for the INT that hit Edwards, but the same people aren’t willing to hang the same burden of blame on Schwartz for letting Peppers through on Clausen’s INT? Doesn’t really seem fair.
From where I sit both the Peppers INT and the INT that hit Edwards are in part due to the QB, and in part due to another player.
Furthermore, people are ready to say “The reason Moore was so bad weeks 1 and 2 was due to the players around him not performing” yet never a mention of LaFell four easy drops in reference to Clausen’s Chicago game. Is the supposition that Clausen’s supporting cast in his three starts (one sans Steve Smith) were drastically better than the team Moore had?
If not, we need to be consistent in how we label the QB play if we’re willing to hang poor play on other offensive players.
Cat Scratch Reader's resident optimist.
Oh, I agree that Clausen suffered every bit as much as Moore from poor play from his blockers and receivers.
No QB without a patch over one eye, and/or a pegleg (arrgh, matey!) could assemble the laughably atrocious stats that our guys have – without a lot of help from his teammates.
My preference for Moore stems from his experience, what he was able to do last year (showing he CAN do it well), his release (much faster and more decisive), and his ability to hold onto the ball when nobody’s hitting him.
The INT and sack figures both have been saddled with count against their stat evaluations, but in neither case does it accurately tell how effective they could be if pocket protected and blessed with receivers who could catch better. (And then there’s the totally WTF play-calling, but we all know about that!)
On the fumbles, since I think the temperature has cooled slightly
Do you really believe Clausen is fumbling because of his hand size?
I really don’t think that’s the issue, because he didn’t have the prevalence of these problems at ND. I think Clausen’s fumbled snaps stem from thinking too much- like a WR concentrating on what he’s going to do after the catch instead of focusing on just catching the ball first.
Cat Scratch Reader's resident optimist.
Nah, just joking about the little bitty hands.
I have no idea where the problem originates – but he’s got one.
That 11 yd loss I described from last week’s game was really distressing to watch. Looked like a hot potato.
I think they're just slight mechanical issues
Based on what we heard about Rip Scherer messing with Delhomme last year I’m not confident he’s the guy to be teaching young QBs anything.
I don’t want that to be confused as ’Scherer’s instruction is making Clausen fumble’ but rather that I don’t know if he has a good enough skill set to teach these guys how to fix things.
Given that Mike McCoy instructed Jake and turned him into a probowler, and now is aiding the development of Kyle Orton in Denver who is tearing it up I have a feeling that Rip Scherer’s skills are spotty at best. Furthermore, the Denver coaching staff was highly critical of Brady Quinn’s mechanics when they traded for him essentially saying he needed to be retrained and had bad habits. Any guesses who had Quinn as a his first two years? That’s right… Rip Scherer.
Clausen definitely has issues, but I think it’s a ‘speed of the game’ issue rather than any deep rooted mechanical one.
Cat Scratch Reader's resident optimist.
My opinion
you are probably correct on the speed of the game issues- the fumbles seem to be of the “get outta here fast” mentality… he wants to get as far from that crappy line as possible, and a few times the ball just didn’t go with him…
His hand size is 9"
Not “little bitty” but a bit undersized compared to most NFL quarterbacks. The average for an NFL is QB is 9.5" from what I’ve read. I also don’t think hand size is the issue. Michael Vick (for comparison) had an 8" measurement at his combine and I don’t recall him having fumbling issues coming into the league.
It’s a weird problem, that’s for sure. I’d chalk it up to too much going on upstairs and not really focusing on the snap like he should be.
You cant compare
a ball hitting a receivers hand & bouncing into the defense to be intercepted to a ball that didnt make it anywhere near a receiver. True Peppers was let through but Clausen should have been able to see Peppers there & not thrown it at him. Thats not really a good comparrison.
Peppers used his cloak of invisibility to shield himself....
It’s another one of those “intangibles” he has that can’t be defined with meaningless statistics to prove his worth. :-)
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
Closely affiliated with the "Cone of Silence" that Fox descends beneath.
(Maxwell Smart reference)
If Moore’s pass was perfectly thrown I might agree, but it wasn’t. Part of the blame is on Armanti, part is on Matt.
With the Edwards pass 99% of the time that’s going to be an incomplete pass, similarly 99% of the time that ball is batted at the LoS by Peppers and is an incomplete pass.
Sure, Clausen probably shouldn’t have attempted the pass… by Moore shouldn’t have hit AE in the upper thigh.
Cat Scratch Reader's resident optimist.
by James Dator on Oct 21, 2010 11:03 AM EDT up reply actions
2 inaccuracies in this statement
First, the pass by Moore was 100% accurate. On timing routes, which I tried to show your buddy ace, the QB has to throw to the spot where the receiver is SUPPOSED to be. Had Armanti ran the route correctly, the pass would have hit him right at the bottom of the numbers.
If you’ll notice, the separation between the red route and the purple route, that difference in where he was supposed to be and where he was caused the pass to be inaccurate.
Second, even though the pass was where it was, 90% of the time it would still be caught, not 99% of the time would it be incomplete. Not only did AE run the route poorly, he turned his head upfield before securing the ball. You could see on the replay at the time, he looked upfield, a real WR that has been one his entire career would still catch that 90% of the time. (LaFell is the 10% who would have still proabably dropped it). This isn’t a slam against Armanti, thats why rookie receivers, especially project receivers, shouldnt be on the field except for the 2% who come out that already have the skills to suceed. We didn’t draft any of that 2%. That minute difference in route running and concentration caused the INT. But it was from a player who should never be on the field in the first place. But, unfortunately, you gotta play who ya got.
The only problem with the Clausen pass is that he tried to get too cute and look off the route by looking left at the snap, then turned to throw the WR screen. That split second wasted was the difference in Peppers having his feet under him and being in the air. If he catches the ball and immediately turns and throws the pass, its a completion. But yes, I agree that pass is incomplete after the tip more often than an INT, just a freak play by a freakish athlete.
Knee jerk reaction - adj. 1. an immediate unthinking emotional reaction produced by an event or statement to which the reacting person is highly sensitive. 2. a facilitator of long threads on Cat Scratch Reader and similar blogs.
I disagree with your diagram
I’ve watched the video about 50 times here on NFL.com (starting 1:12 in) and while I think one could argue he was slightly out of position, I do not agree that it was the difference between hitting him between the numbers and hitting him on the thigh.
It the play called was a dig, and he ran a slant… I would agree 100% but not on just the angle of his slant.
Cat Scratch Reader's resident optimist.
We're beating this particular play to death.
The point is, it was an INT for Moore that could’ve easily been a catch. It’s not like the ones he threw vs the Giants, that were into coverage, and inadvisable.
You must agree that the media summary of Moore’s ‘cameo’ in the last game was overwrought. When they say something like, “…but then Moore came in and threw 2 INTs,” it’s rather misleading as to his efffectiveness.
I wholly agree that Moore was made to seem worse than he was.
However, I believe the same thing about Clausen.
I honestly believe to do a fair comparison you need to take away both of Moore’s INTs (one for the hail mary, and one for a freak occurrence), and take away Clausen’s INT (freak occurrence) and give him four completions that hit LaFell’s hands (any receiver in the league should have gotten them).
Without re-crunching the numbers I believe this puts Moore around a 75 QB rating and Clausen at around 68. I think this is more accurate of both their performances in the game.
Cat Scratch Reader's resident optimist.
Yeah, I went from one to another one.
Got the exact response I expected.
Knee jerk reaction - adj. 1. an immediate unthinking emotional reaction produced by an event or statement to which the reacting person is highly sensitive. 2. a facilitator of long threads on Cat Scratch Reader and similar blogs.
Part of debates is understanding not everyone is going to share your view.
You think you’re right, that’s fine. I (and others) happen to disagree with you. To say Moore isn’t at fault for the INT isn’t true, but neither is it true to say he is solely to blame for it. The truth is somewhere in the middle.
Hopefully the only picks we’re talking about tomorrow are Smith’s, but we’ll see. I found myself cautiously optimistic this morning. Although honestly I’m more interested in how the O-Line will look than how Moore plays. I really believe the biggest problem isn’t our QB.
Nice post.......
I agree with your conclusions and highly approve of your photo choice. Matter of fact I think, until the Panthers win a game, all threads should include a photo of a Top Cat in lieu of a player photo.
by paydirt16 on Oct 20, 2010 1:21 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Now they will win this Sunday, just out of spite. :-)
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
that's funny
I actually did lol.
If you really want to do something, you will find a way. If you don't, you will find an excuse.
I'm also on the verge of labeling Otah a bust...
We put a lot of eggs in his basket and have payed a price. No doubt he’s a beast…when healthy, But his durability is in serious question. We sacrificed line depth and it’s biting us in the ass.
He's not a bust, he's been too productive for that.
He’s just frustrating at this point.
"Nah, you look like Elijah Wood." - danmerqury
2011-2018
If Otah can come back at 100% next season, instead of rushing back into this gunfight armed with a toothpick, then I’m fine with it. If he can solidify a tackle spot for 8-9 years then he is far from a bust. Whether he can stay healthy remains to be seen, like you say, but he has a much better chance to stay healthy if he is given a chance to fully heal right now.
"If you ask Jets' CB Darrelle Revis, there is no one who is harder to cover one-on-one than Steve Smith. That has to mean something coming from last year's runner-up for Defensive Player of the Year."
Speaking about bad management...
Pay Jake big bucks then release him? Wow! That brings Hurney’s stock way down…even if he drafts fairly well.
Everyone takes calculated gambles, and some of them blow up in our faces.
But yeah, that one was a calculated gamble that only he would have made.
"If you ask Jets' CB Darrelle Revis, there is no one who is harder to cover one-on-one than Steve Smith. That has to mean something coming from last year's runner-up for Defensive Player of the Year."
The Jake thing IMHO was...
a decision based on an emotional need to underscore the team’s support after a terrible season more so than a calculated gamble.
Maybe it was Richardson
trying to make all the people, that said Fox stuck with Delhomme out of loyalty, happy. The way i see it now is Fox really thought Delhomme gave them the best chance to win, nothing to do with loyalty. And i was 1 of the people saying that was my only problem with Fox back then.
They really should have
brought Moose back for 1 more season since its uncapped. He would have been a stable second receiver & could have helped the rookies. That would have helped not only the receivers but the qbs also. & he was a good blocker.
GREAT ARTICLE !
Enjoyed all your stats on both Clausen and Moore – not a whole lot to get excited about with either one of them.
You mentioned Pike and Edwards as the “other” QBs. With our season the shape its in I would like to see each one of them get a shot for at least a quarter – who knows?? Like you said we don’t know how either one of them would perform under NFL conditions, and won’t til they get a shot at it.
Until the O line shows at least some ability to pass block, a “pocket” QB is between a rock and a hard place. We need a “roll out” QB, be it Pike, Edwards, or some one else to take the pressure off, at least to a degree.
At this juncture ANYTHING is worth, at least, a try.
Jim
Problem now is that Schwartz is on the right side.
That doesn’t exactly offer the QB an unimpeded view of the field.
My Girlfriend's Reaction
So, I tell my g/f that Steve Smith is practicing this week and here is her response. “Great, they place a QB (Clausen) in there without anyone that can catch the ball and place a QB (Moore) who can’t throw the ball in there with someone who can catch the ball?!” HAHA Couldn’t argue with that.
Who threw the 2 TD passes to Smith this year?
I’ll bet if Clausen were named the starter this week, Smith wouldn’t be in such a hurry to get back.
Or do you forget the frantic “Hurry Up!” signs he was giving Clausen, as yet another play wasn’t being relayed to the line in time? Smitty wasn’t making those gestures to the sidelines.
With regard to Moore and Smith
Smith’s been limited in his contributions this year, though most of them came with Moore under center. Smith had eight catches for 141 yards and two touchdowns in the first two games but just five receptions for 33 yards with rookie Jimmy Clausen at the helm.
Read more: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2010/10/21/1776256/steve-smiths-back-in-the-game.html#ixzz12zZKFM2j
Nonsensical
We asked each other what the hell you are trying to say? “What Clausen did with Smith for the 2 games he played with him in?” Is that a riddle? Then she said, “what’s their passer rating and why are guys trying to talk trash to a female online?” My answer, “some guys do anything to inflate their ego.” Sad, sad day for you my friend.
by David Threatt on Oct 20, 2010 9:17 PM EDT up reply actions
And some guys use their wife to speak for them when they have no clue.
The question was pretty obvious. The question was, While Clausen was qb, what did he do with Smith on the field? Moore scored tds with him, Clausen didnt. Pretty simple maybe you & her can discuss it now that you know the question.
Here maybe i can ask it more simple for the simple minded.
What did Clausen do with Smith while Smith was playing in the games that Clausen was playing in? Like i said, Moore scored 2 tds with Smith in a game and a half, Clausen had Smith for more time & didnt score any with Smith. Is that simple enough for you/her?
Obvious question? Really?
“What Clausen did with Smith for the 2 games he played with him in?” At what point is that obvious? It’s the most grammatically incorrect sentence I’ve ever read. It reads like a riddle. If you want to go trolling you’re in the wrong place, The Charlotte Observer is where you should be.
by David Threatt on Oct 21, 2010 6:45 PM EDT up reply actions
Here is another question you can ask her
Why does she ask “why are guys trying to talk trash to a female online” like women are not worthy of a debate? Is a woman less capable of explaining her reasoning than a man is? No one was talking trash but asking a simple question. & how did it inflate anyones ego? And still i say Clausen had Smith in the game for about 2 full games, and didnt score a td with him. Moore had Smith for a game and a half and scored 2 tds with him.
Ok, I think I've figured out why the Panthers are struggling.
The players are getting out hustled and out disciplined
The coaches are getting out coached
Our OC is being outsmarted by their DC
Our defense is being exhausted by our offenses inefficiency
Jeff Otah can’t recover from surgery, thwarting the right side of our O-Line
Our receivers not named Steve Smith (And somewhat David Gettis) have lost there hands and replaced them with bricks smeared in butter.
And, above everything else, it seems our players have lost the will to play…
by Thaddeus_Griffin on Oct 20, 2010 6:51 PM EDT reply actions
Tell that to the defense thats busting their asses out there every week.
“And, above everything else, it seems our players have lost the will to play…”
bricks smeared in butter .... I like that
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
The 'bricks in butter" is way graphic!
One I had never heard before, but will long remember.
My bad
I meant offense has lost it’s will to play, I argue with everyone on how ferocious or D is
by Thaddeus_Griffin on Oct 20, 2010 10:53 PM EDT up reply actions
Fox should have been in Hurney’s office after the second game…
“Marty, got a sec?”
“Sure John, what’s up?”
“You’ve GOT to get me some bodies for the right side of the O-line. With Otah out until the end of Nov, Schwartz doing his best impersonation of a turnstile, and MacBern not able to block a chicken, I need some bodies or else we’ll go 0-5.”
“Well, I don’t know John, I think you’ve got some great potential on the O-line and they’ll be fine. You just need to coach them up. JR’s said no money and that means you’re stuck with what you’ve got. You know my saying… “It is what it is.” Deal with it."
Fox climbs over Hurney’s desk, grabs his lapels and pulls him close. “GET me some depth for the right side NOW!”
“Well, it just so happens that we’re bringing in some OT’s today to give them a look. Any names in particular you’re looking for?”
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Cat Scratch Reader
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Report: Tebow sends cease and desist letter to maker of Jesus-y Jets T-shirts
- Joe McKnight says too much McDonald’s helped him gain 16 pounds in offseason
- Nick Mangold says goodbye to some chest hair on ‘Late Night with Jimmy Fallon’
- Saints will honor suspended Sean Payton with empty chairs
- Junior Seau’s home burglarized just days after his death
