Mikie2times

Your right, Marv sounds like a guy who will yank a heavily invested player, with less then a year and a half of games, for a player with no experience, or a FA that may or may not exist.

Who may or may not work out. But we will have to spend at least 2 years to find out, which costs us a total of 4 years waiting for QB's to develop.

I hope it’s all positioning. Nevada was the first state to pass legislation to try and permit online gaming. They just couldn't do it with the feds in the way. This move was meant to kill the international books and casinos, which would in turn give LV a monopoly on the American market. This is at least one theory I've read, and the one I hope is true.

So many on here just want to cut, or demote Losman. IMO last weeks game against the Lions was a microcosm of the entire situation. I was at the game; he had very few open options in the passing game. You couldn't see that on TV. He made some plays, a highlight one to Parrish. He made some mistakes by throwing a bad INT. I judged his performance as decent considering all the variables. Just not yet good enough to sell me. What keeps me patient with JP is what you would have to admit if you want him benched or cut. You would be saying we can find a QB that can win with an average to below average supporting cast, now, or by 2007. Who's that guy? Nail, a FA, a draft pick? Consider how unlikely it is we can find a QB that can win in this situation from those choices by 2007. Marv doesn't overreact to fan pressure, and considers the long term effects of a move. You can choose to not support JP, but unless a QB falls in our lap he will be a starter in 2007. Given that I'll choose to support him as the starting QB of my team.

Sorry I saw it's legit from the thread below

If so, crazy.

The Bills are in a hell of a pickle right now. JP's hasn't proven to be the future this year, he needed to do that. At the same time not many QB's in the NFL would be solutions if the majority of the surrounding talent is a problem. Even fewer young QB's would if any at all. That's essentially what his detractors are asking JP to do. From the Bills point of view we tied our hands by investing in JP. It's what always happens when you draft a young QB, and wait to see if he is or isn't the solution. We could replace him next year, but if it's not a FA, his replacement would do equally bad, if not worse. Not an easy decision any way you slice it.

I'm not giving them a pass, just saying myself, and most the online gaming community knows Vegas will always be against online gambling. It's just something I've accepted. None of this make's me thrilled with LV either, but we need to pick the battles we can win. LV's position gained credibility on a national level when Kyl and the Christine groups began painting online gambling as morally wrong. To give you an idea, Kyl compares online gaming with the Crack Cocaine explosion of the 80's. His belief is that we must follow a Reagan like approach to thwart of this epidemic. Without those rosy ideals stamped on the special interests of LV I don't see this going threw.

Thanks for adding to the discussion. If you did I imagine it would go something like this. Since I can't relate to people who are pissed off at this I don't think it matters.

If you adjust sack yards to rush yards then Carson Palmer and Peyton Manning would be better rushers statistically then JP and most of the other scramblers in the league. The reason being they don't take nearly as many sacks. The only other way is to adjust it is from pass yards, and I just don't agree that you should do that. I think it would give you a better picture of teams passing game, but not necessarily a better picture of a players passing game. For example Carson Palmer is under a lot more duress this year then last year, subsequently all his stats have declined dramatically. Taking away the sack yards would only compound things further. If you still hold firm that you should include the stat, we'll just have to agree to disagree on that one.

The offensive line has been known to cause man PMS.

Then Carson Palmer and Peyton Manning are more effective on the ground then JP Losman. You just can't do it that way.

How is this stat obscure? I mean really? A QB can do two things when he drops back, run or pass. The best passers usually don't run as well. The best runners usually don't pass as well. JP's in the middle. Since the NFL doesn't want to include yards rushing in the QB's yards per attempt does it automatically make those yards less important? When JP scrambles for a first down is it not a first down? To me it's more obscure and irrelevant to not include yards a QB rushes for. Yards Per Attempt as a statistic is the most heavily correlated non point related stat to winning % in the NFL. Out of any indivdual player statistic that doesn't involve points it's the most heavily correlated stat to win % in the NFL. You factor in rushing yards as I have, and the correlation is even stronger. Edit* Besides Turnovers Duh

Seems I was right and wrong. It's not subtracted from any individual player, but it is subtracted from the overall net yards, and overall net passing yards.

It really doesn't matter what my answer is because that has nothing to do with the reason for this post. If you must know, I'm not confident he can do that yet. But I do see progress if I don't try and simplify his play into that and that only. It's the equivalent of me asking you if you think the rest of this team is very talented.

I must have missed the part when I said JP was better then those QB's. Maybe my intent was to show an improving QB who is just now is reaching 16 starts.

They actually don't include yardage lost to sacks in any statistic for QB's. Look at last weeks box score. The yards for WR's will add up to JP's passing yard total, and his rushing yards will add up to his rushing total. Sacks yards just disappear, even from the overall game stats.

Sack yardage lost is not considered lost rushing yards to a QB in the NFL, that’s why it wasn't included. Even if it was I still wouldn't dish out sack yardage to a QB because it is a blend of several things. JP's clearly been nailed without much if any reaction time this year. He's also held the ball at times. He's also avoided pressure and made plays that other QB's with bad lines couldn't make. We shouldn't discredit JP because he's capable of making a play when the line breaks down.

If you combine rushing yards in the yards per attempt statistic for QB's, which you should, JP outranks all these guys this year. I wouldn't exactly say the Bills WR's or OL are more talented then most these teams either. This is what you start to see from a guy who's progressing at QB. The yards per attempt increases, the INT's and TD's also increase. The last stage of the normal progression is for the INT's to level off.

Some additional stats to consider with Vick. Yards per attempt is one of the most important statistics a QB has. Excluding rushing yards Vick ranks near the bottom of the league. When you include the rushing stats of all the QB's he ranked 7th his Rookie year with Reeves, 9th in Moras first year, 25th in 05, and 17th in 06.

I can't believe anybody would rather have Losman over Vick right now. I support JP, but he's still an unknown. What evidence does anybody have that he is capable of doing what Vick can do/has done? He's single handedly won games with Atlanta including the one in Buffalo last year. He's gone to the NFC Championship game. No matter how bad he is at reading defenses he's still a very difficult player to defend. As Dawgg pointed out he's in a bad system, if you opened it up it would be to his benefit. Who cares if he can only thrive in the way Daunte could in Minnesota. Daunte had huge numbers a few of those years, they just couldn’t run the ball or play defense. To say you would rather have Vick over JP is not an insult to JP at this point in his career.

I ask not because I think we will have a shot at either, but it would be the classic put up or shut up situation. The people backing high Oline picks would be forced to overlook one hell of a new toy. But Thomas would be the highly regarded LT so many want. You really couldn't go wrong with either player, I just see Johnson as Randy Moss with a good head on his shoulders. It would be just like the Reggie Bush/Mario Williams debate.

I think people changing sides, or turning out when they wouldn't before will make a difference. In a year with strong Republican support it wouldn’t, but they need every last bit of help right now.

The Bill was brought up and rejected on two other occasions. Jon Kyl was the one who introduced it in the first place, and continued to push it for 3 years. Without him this is a dead issue. He was backed by Vegas, which the online gaming community can accept because online gaming is clearly not in their interests. The main backer of Kyl was the Christian fundamentalist groups. If you disagree with my opinion my question is who will come out and vote, or change sides toward Republican because of this bill? Now think of the opposite for Democrats. Before you do that ask yourself when is the last time the government introduced a bill that took away a hobby for more then 20 million people?