January 03, 2008
Moore earns honor
Panthers quarterback Matt Moore was named the NFL's Offensive Rookie of the Month for December. Moore went 2-1 while starting the final three games, completing 62 percent of his passes for 564 yards and three touchdowns. San Francisco's Patrick Willis earned the honor on the defensive side. -- PAT YASINSKAS
Posted by Observer Sports on January 3, 2008 at 04:05 PM | Permalink
Good for him - the kid showed some guts.
Posted by: KCPanther | Jan 3, 2008 5:09:39 PM
Good for him, too bad Beason didnt get it on the other side of the ball!
Posted by: Ben | Jan 3, 2008 5:39:23 PM
How about that Procton
Posted by: owen | Jan 3, 2008 6:26:17 PM
Way to go kid! Hopefully a sign of things to come.
Posted by: JT | Jan 3, 2008 6:29:36 PM
Yeah...he was pretty damned AWESOME when the line blocked for him against Seattle and Tampa Bay's practice squad callups. He did great in the Dallas game when we got eliminated from the playoffs.
Posted by: Michael Procton | Jan 3, 2008 6:30:16 PM
There is just some Fans wont except nothing but PROGRESS,And I dont blame'em,I have Lots of Dallas fans here in my town,and I have to here THAT noise all the time,MUST BE NICE,sure wish we can make the playoffs again. And Why is Seattle in the playoffs all the time?,For a 3rd year in a row.(WOW)!
Posted by: #1 Fan | Jan 3, 2008 6:44:34 PM
I haven't left any wonderful comments on this blog in a while, and I bet all you stupid Panther fans missed me. I'm glad to say that the Panthers will be even wrose in 2008 than they were this season. The Panthers suck, and I'm looking foward to leaving negative comments on this pathetic blog in the upcoming football season. Charlotte is the armpit of NC and the Panthers will go 5-11 in 08.
Posted by: doug | Jan 3, 2008 6:56:28 PM
Some rookie QB's can't even beat the backups. The season records column doesn't show W's & L's against starters versus subs. I only detest at this point that it took so long for the young man to play. It is not to say that the panthers don't have their own issues in other places but one or two bright spots from a bad season gives people something to look forward to next year. I'm glad we have one less skill position to worry about going into the draft. I hope the "brain" trust does not try to draft another QB this year.
Posted by: CEREBRUM | Jan 3, 2008 6:57:33 PM
You have issues "doug".
Posted by: Cat's Fan | Jan 3, 2008 7:03:51 PM
Seattle's always in the playoffs because their division is a disaster. Arizona is constantly that "up-and-coming" team with a chance to make something happen that never does. The Rams have been mediocre at best since they lost to us in the playoffs in '03. And the 49ers? I hope I don't even have to explain.
And as for Moore "not getting a chance to play", the coaching staff certainly knew better than anybody on this blog how ready he was to get that chance.
Posted by: Michael Procton | Jan 3, 2008 7:07:41 PM
doug is lonely and just wants attention. his parents didn't spend much time interacting with him. so he just needs someone to acknowledge he is here. even if it is to say; DOUG YOUR AN ASS!
Posted by: jakeniss | Jan 3, 2008 7:09:50 PM
Moore had the same amount of time to throw as Vinny and Carr, he just has the ABILITY to make things happen and make decisions. It is amazing when folks make the argument that quarterback A struggled because he got no protection and the only reason quarterback B hhad success is because he had good protection.
Posted by: m | Jan 3, 2008 7:42:41 PM
That sounds cute and all, m, but I call bullshit. If you watched the Seattle game and belive Moore had no more time than either Carr or Testaverde, I can't help you; they didn't register a SINGLE PRESSURE! In the TB game, their 5th-stringers were able to manage a grand total of two hurries, and he again looked good. In the only game in which he faced a real pass rush, though (9 hurries and 5 sacks, bringing his totals to 6 sacks on a grand total of 12 hurries on the year, a less than impressive ratio for someone who can "make things happen"), he struggled to complete 50% of his passes and threw a crucial pick when we had a chance to make it a one-possession at halftime. Most any QB good enough to make it into the NFL can look good with protection, and when Moore did well, he had it. No need to deny that he looks bad when he doesn't get protection, but we had better hope the line improves if he's going to be our long-term savior as so many on here suggest.
Posted by: Michael Procton | Jan 3, 2008 8:17:16 PM
Carr looks pathetic when he has protection, either by terrible passes away from steve smith or by holding the ball way too long. Vinny was decent but he just couldn't make the throws consistently. Moore had his hickups but that is expected, yes he struggled against the best team in the NFC, but then again not alot of qb's have had great success against Dallas. And no of course Moore did not face Tampas starters the entire game, but that is out of his control, he was asked to go out there and win a game and he did that, something Carr quite couldnt do often enought. Hopefully you can tell that I'm not advocating Moore as a starter or even a qb of the future but the guy did well enought to get this team two wins in three games and thats about all you can ask for out of an undrafted qb facing three playoff teams.
Posted by: m | Jan 3, 2008 8:24:58 PM
Michael your bad language shows your lack of intelligence and low self esteem Moore showed he is capable of being the backup next year and with more experience maybe the QB of the future 2 years from now/
Posted by: owen | Jan 3, 2008 8:29:15 PM
Moore didn't face all of Tampa's starters for ANY of the game. Sure, he can't control that, but it still must be considered in evaluating his performance.
Posted by: Michael Procton | Jan 3, 2008 8:53:49 PM
Exactly, there was never a time where all of Tampa's starters played, buhe still went up against guys who were starters. It wasnt like he was up against the 3rd stringers for 60 minutes. Yes it is considered in evaluating his performance. Also, you came down on Moore for throwing a pick against the top team in the conference while we were 1 game out of the playoffs. I'm not disputing that, but had Carr and Vinny not lost to non-playoff teams such as New Orleans and Atlanta they would not be in that position. I'm comparing his performance up against the alternatives on our roster, he cannot measure up to Jake but he is absolutely better than Carr, and based on what we've seen better than Basenez.
Posted by: m | Jan 3, 2008 9:14:52 PM
Michael Procton, go get em boy. You still got it. Are you by chance on the Observer payroll? I bet a lot of attention to this blog has come because of you. Nice work!
Doug, I remember you, just the same way I remember that dog turd that was on the bottom of my shoe. Take your bitter, teeny peenie self to another site and go pull the wings off of someone else's flies. This is like a family, we can squabble with each other but we don't need some outsider from Florida of all places coming in here bashing us. Stick to your child porn habit, you worthless hump.
Posted by: Willy | Jan 3, 2008 9:16:22 PM
As soon as I saw this article on Panthers.com I knew Pat YasTinskas was going to post something on it. I haven't even bothered to read it but I'm sure it insinuates that the coaches botched it up. Why are he and Scott (couldn't be more) Fowler the only ones bashing the Panther coaching staff? They are the ones that started it and they are the ones that are still doing it! Hmmmmm... can you say HACKS!!!
Posted by: SYRPIS | Jan 3, 2008 9:24:01 PM
Just read his Cowher propaganda. Of course he's going to mention Willis too. I guess Beason was a flop... not to mention the extra draft picks, lower cap figure (Panthers were cap strapped after all) that they got out of the deal. I'm really getting sick of these hacks. And for those of you who might say where I'm getting this from... why else would he mentiion Willis on this post??? How else is it related... after all, he did criticize Fox for not drafting him. Give me a break, for crying out loud. Maybe Pat should fill the Atlanta head coaching job and take some of you jokers with him. Then let's see who the real losers are!!
Posted by: SYRPIS | Jan 3, 2008 9:27:29 PM
Michael you are a genius. You need to take a break get a date occasionally your left and right hand do not qualify as a date relax
Posted by: sam | Jan 3, 2008 9:31:28 PM
You can try to qualify it all you want to, Moore showed incredible poise, ability to make good reads, quick release, good arm, mobility, toughness and all while wearing no gloves. It is a good accomplishment, and reflects well on the Panthers, so be proud of the kid.
Perhaps, since you like the status quo so much, the will add a mascot to Sir Purr next year, Syr Pis.
Posted by: Perfect Killing Machine | Jan 3, 2008 9:33:15 PM
Proctologist, you really are such a dick. You don't know WTF you are talking about....EVER! Why the hard-on for Moore? Are you Jake's lover....or Carr's? I have a feeling you are some kind of closet molester....or teacher. Which is it? Both? You act lke you are right about everything you post, but yet, I have yet to see you make one valid point...all season! It is kind of fun, reading all of your asinine posts, though, I must admit! Do it while you can, I'm sure the crime scene investigators will catch up to you soon enough!
Posted by: billy | Jan 4, 2008 12:46:03 AM
In Pat's worst surprise of 2007, he was totally off by putting that on Julius Peppers. The worst surprise of 2007 was David Carr's performance. Other than sacks, Julius Peppers had a good season. They dropped him in coverage a lot to make up for the poor safety coverage and that took away his opportunities to get at the quarterback. Once again, YASINSKAS is wrong.
Posted by: Brainaic | Jan 4, 2008 8:04:17 AM
Personally I don't think the Carr debacle was that big of a surprise. He sucked in Texas and sucked in the preseason with the Panthers....anyone could see it coming. True, he was worse than awful, but it wasn't nearly the surprise that Peppers lackluster performance was. I have to disagree that he "had a good season" despite the lack of sacks. He was rarely ever double teamed and could not beat average to below average offenisive lineman from our opponents. It got to the point where teams were actually running right at him...that is NOT the Peppers we all used to know.
Posted by: TC | Jan 4, 2008 10:04:44 AM
Post a comment