CosmicBills

Winning the Super Bowl is the goal every season. It's all that matters. And if you believe that the key to winning a ring is having an elite QB, then finding one is more important than any other personnel moves. If you think Fitz is one, then no worries. If you think he's just capable of bringing a team to the playoffs but not good enough to bring the whole thing home then you should always be on the lookout for an upgrade. Is there one in this draft? Who knows. But just because this team is not a contender yet doesn't male it foolish to build towards the ultimate goal.

I'm aware! That's why I run away and hide so often.

That's true. But at what cost? I think it'll really hurt the league if the labor strife is prolonged too long. The NBA and MLB still haven't recovered fully.

I'm just a writer -- you know I don't get involved in the PPP world. I got tired of getting beat down by you But ... yes ... ?

Just heard on the Radio the Knicks are back in talks. They might steal Melo from the Nets.

... But then you, the fan, will get substandard football. Why would you ever want that?

Again, this was discussed already in the thread, so go back and take a look. But you're falling back on the team makes the QB. I say that's untrue (which of course is opinion). To put it another way, if you put Fitz on KC this year they don't make the playoffs. If you put Fitz on New Orleans, they don't make the playoffs. If you put Fitz on Green Bay, they certainly don't win the Super Bowl. But if you put any of those QBs on the Bills, they win more than 4 games. That's the point. Fitz is not the problem on the team, but he's not the answer.

I'm not sure where you think I'm saying the Bills have to take a QB at 3 this year. As much as I like the idea of Newton, I'd actually prefer Quinn (right now, that could change as we get closer to the draft). I've said several times that it doesn't matter where you find an elite QB -- just that you have to find one. Whether that be in Round 1 or off the street. There are plenty of elite QBs that have been found outside of round 1. However, as the game has shifted to a pass first league, it's becoming harder for an elite QB to slip past the first round since every scout and every front office is looking for one. Just look at this past season's playoff rosters. Green Bay, Pittsburgh, Baltimore, Indy, Chicago, Atlanta, NYJ and Philly all had 1st round QBs. The vast majority. However, there was still Brady (6th round), MC (forget when he was taken), Brees (2nd) and Dilfer (was he a first? I forget). You can find them anywhere. You just have to find one. And it's far tougher to find an elite QB than any other position. So when you have a chance to get one, no matter where or when, you take it. That's all I'm saying. Um ... there's another way to look at Matt's performance. Which was the way KC looked at it. That he had it. Even at USC he had it. They wanted him enough pick him up and he did lead the Chiefs to the playoffs. So again, you're theory is not as one sided as you think. But thanks for trying.

Wow. You fail to really understand what I'm saying. Instead of over reacting and slamming your head into the same wall over and over again, take a moment and breathe. Digest what's being said. Then comment. It'll help. I promise. Of course you either have it or you don't. You can improve your understanding of the game. You can improve your mechanics and footwork. But if you don't have the physical tools to begin with, you can only go so far. Brady and Warner prove that. They don't disprove it. They didn't get a chance till someone got hurt, and once they did they showed they could play at a very high level. They weren't finely polished. They got better the more they played. But they played well above what Fitz has shown from the start. You say I don't have a clue whether Fitz has it or not. Well that's just not true. Fitz has started 36 games. He's not an unknown. Warner was. Brady was. Again, it has nothing to do with where they were drafted or how they were acquired. It's how they perform on the field. Fitz played well. Not great. Brady and Warner played great out of the gate. Can Fitz get better? Yes. Can he make a 5-10% jump in accuracy? Probably not.

It wasn't a strike for more money. It was a strike to not get our residuals and pay CUT.

:lol: Dr. Horrible! ... unless you're counting NPH.

Yeah -- I'm not sure if he's just doing the pilot or if he's going to be running the show (though on closer inspection it looks like he will be EPing the show). In fact, IMDB lists it as a TV Movie (rather than a series). I'm not sure why. I'm pretty sure the new series is going to take place in LA. At least that was what I heard the other day from some folks who read it (I haven't). But there's no question that Kelley writes excellent female characters -- so it's not a stretch to imagine that he could end up doing something really awesome with this. The director is the exec producer from FNL's too.

Right. They already recast him. It's going to be Mark Ruffalo in the Avenger's movie playing the Hulk. Absolutely! And having Joss Whedon direct the Avengers is going to be insane. In a good way.

She also just did an episode for the show I work on and was terrific. She took some risks with the role, which impressed me. Not that my opinion matters in the least, but I had never seen FNL so I wasn't sure what to expect when she was brought in. I'll be interested to see how the pilot goes. I was hoping Joss Whedon would get to do it. But I guess that dream's over. Something about David E Kelley doing it makes me nervous. Not sure why as I tend to like his writing. It just seems so different from what I associate him with -- which could make it awesome.

With brilliant analysis like "Football was football in 1960 and guess what? Football is still football in 2011", I think that's for the best. Totally messin' with you.

Again, Rypian, Gannon, Hostetler and Theisman all played in a very different NFL where defenses and running backs ruled while passing games were not nearly as prolific due to the rules of the game. Using those guys as examples is silly. The game has changed -- the league wanted to up scoring and passing numbers. They did that by altering the rules that hindered defenses (especially DBs) while tipping the scales in favor of the passing game. Warner is a HOF QB and certainly elite. Ditto with Brady who may be the best QB ever to play the game. It doesn't matter where you find them -- they're elite. If Fitz were elite, no one would care he was a 7th rounder from Harvard. This isn't about drafting a first round QB. It's about the need for a franchise type QB to be added to this roster before they can ever be considered Super Bowl contenders. It's the single most important piece -- more important than any other position on either side of the ball. Right now, that player is not on the roster. That doesn't mean Fitz is bad. Neither No Saint nor myself have once said that Fitz shouldn't be the starter in '11. In fact, quite the opposite. But that doesn't mean he's the answer. He is plagued by his in ability to be consistent with his accuracy. That's a problem. And one that I personally believe cannot be taught. You either have it or you don't. And Fitz doesn't. THAT'S why he'll always be a good QB but not an elite one. And you need an elite QB to have a realistic shot at a Lombardi trophey. Brad Johnson is not a HOF QB but was a pro bowler who happened to play at a very high level through most of his career. Still, for the sake of argument I'll give you him. That still means only one team in ten has a chance to win a Super Bowl without a Franchise QB. Do you really want to bet on those odds as a Bills fan? Especially considering the state of the rest of the team? Honestly. Think about that. You really want to dismiss 10+ years of history and data under these new rules that state, without a shadow of a doubt, that QB is the most important piece of any championship team and care takers are no longer able to win Super Bowls on a regular basis? Now, you happen to believe that the system makes the QB. That's fine. You believe that Drew Brees wouldn't be Drew Brees if he didn't go to the Chargers then the Saints. I think that's a very short sighted view, I'm not trying to change your mind. The fact is that Brees is who he is and Fitz is who he is. And Fitz is a very smart football player who lacks the accuracy (in my opinion) to be anything more than a solid starter. A step or two BELOW Brad Johnson (look at the numbers). With a better cast around him, the Bills will win more games. That's a fact. But with a better cast around him, Fitz still not an elite QB. He's still, at best, Brad Johnson. And at best that gives the Bills a 10% chance of winning a title. Those aren't very good odds.

I have no connection to Marvel, so I'm speaking purely from an outside perspective here, but that's exactly how I understand the project(s) will unfold. Marvel is rolling the dice with these other flicks, tying them together with an extensive Avengers' mythology that will culminate with Captain America: First Avenger. It started in Iron Man 1 (after the credits), was expanded on in the Hulk (the most recent one with a RDJ cameo) and then hit pretty hard in Iron Man 2. But I expect Thor and First Avenger to be very heavy in the Avenger set up department. It's really a bold plan for a new studio like Marvel to attempt. I for one hope it works -- and I'm not really a big comic book guy.

There is where you're not seeing our point. That statement implies that the ONLY difference between Fitz and Brees are their surrounding casts. You imply that if by some miracle of science we were able to go back in time and switch Fitz's career w Brees' and suddenly Fitz is on the Chargers and then the Saints that he'd be just as good as Brees. I think you're wrong. It's not just the supporting cast. It's the talent level that is innate. It can't be taught or learned. Its just there in Brees and not in Fitz. Look at it another way. If that switch was made and Fitz was on the Chargers then the Saints w all the same supporting cast members ... new Orleans, in my opinion, doesn't win the Super Bowl. They might not even make the playoffs ... THAT'S what you're missing or disagreeing with.

I adressed this in a previous post. Yes, you need an elite QB to win a Super Bowl in today's NFL. Without one, you can be a playoff team, maybe make a Super Bowl if you catch a break. But the odds of winning one without an elite QB are slimmer than ever before in the leagues history. 10% according to the past decade (Dilfer did not win a Super Bowl in the last ten years). Again this is opinion, but opinion backed up by the clear history of the past decade. To think otherwise seems silly when you look at the facts. But it's not an absolute by any means. You can hope to get lucky. You can hope to build not just a great defense but one of the best in history. Or you can hope your team finds an elite QB. Frankly it's easier and more realistic to find a QB, ain't it?

Thanks!

Really?? I honestly never knew that. Then what's the difference between that and YPC?

His yards per attempt (the average distance the ball travels before it is caught) was 9 yards. Much higher than Fitz's 6.8. Yards per completion account for RAC yards. Brady throws a lot of screens but let's not exaggerate it. He throws down field a lot too. If he didn't, the YPA would be lower. Unless I'm misreading that stat (which is possible).

Sorry -- the stats don't back that up. Brady was 9.0 YPA (7.5 career) and 12.0 YPC (11.6 career) while hitting 65.9% in 2010. Fitz was 6.8 YPA (6.0 career) and 11.8 YPC (10.5 career) while completing only 57%.

You're totally missing No Saint's point. But that's cool. He's not comparing Fitz to the elite QBs because he thinks Fitz is bad. Quite the opposite. He's comparing them because other people are claiming Fitz is as good as those QBs (or can be) and just needs a better supporting cast. That's folly.

As much as Newton intrigues me (and he does), I think you're probably right. The one thing that could derail that though is Ralph. He still has final say in who gets picked, don't let anyone tell you otherwise. If he really wants a QB, they'll take one. Probably at 3. The underclassmen who could also sneak past Nix's normal stance is Quinn. I fully expect him to have a phenomenal pro-day/combine and shoot right up into the mix in the top 5. And I for one would love to see him in a Bills' uniform next season ... whatever that uniform ends up looking like.