Fan in Chicago

Perhaps you did not read the stats I quoted. In 2009, against the same team that we played first this year, Trent threw 3 interceptions and Fitz threw one. We won the game Fitz started and lost the one with Trent at the helm. Against the same team this year, Fitz threw no interceptions but managed less yards and no more than 10 points. Again, we lost. To this latest part, I say yes the first INT was totally Fitz fault but I can use the same excuse you are using for Trent - Nelson could have made a better attempt to catch or break up the INT. I am no fan of Fitz as a long term solution - my point simply is that at this point in their career and with the personnel that the Bills have Fitz is much more likely to keep us competitive. He will keep the opposing defenses honest which allows the coashes (as Jay said in another post) to independently evaluate the rest of the O.

I have defended the FO so far but this move baffles me.

Yes totally agree. Speaking in pseudo scientific terms, you now have one control variable fixed (Fitz positives and negatives are well known and are unlikely to change) so you can evaluate the effects of the other. By next season we will have alchemy perfected

Okay, I will play. As we are comparing performances this year versus last, let us see what happened with the Dolphins Game 4 2009: Bills @ Dolphins L 10-38 Trent Edwards: 14/26-192- 1 TD-3 INTs, Rating = 51.0 Game 12 2009: Dolphins @ Bills W 31-14 Fitz: 17/26-246-1 TD-1 INT, Rating 92.8 I would say Advantage Fitz, wouldn't you ? Now in 2010 Game 1 2010: Dolphins @ Bills L 10-15 Trent Edwards: 18/34-139-1 TD-0 INT, Rating 73.0 Again we score the same number of points with TE at the helm, at home this time. Throws for less yards and yes improves on turnovers. But looking at the stats above tells you Fitz performed better than TE in 2009. So where does your contention that Trent would have played better against the Pats* last week hold water ?

battered wife syndrome ?

Who is Fred ? Adalius Thomas

He won't take a plane, cos it has to touchdown

Me too but it is confirmed - I got a text that Levi Brown is signed to the 53 man roster

I sure hope you are joking but it doesn't sound like you are. Why would this be poetic justice ? Do you feel the Bills wronged him in some way ? He replaced JP who the organization thought was inadequate. Eventually his contract was not renewed. Boo friggin hoo. Now the same happens to Trent - the real games start and he rapidly regresses showing perhaps the worst QB play in the NFL over the first two games. Coach benches him, sees what can be done with a perennial backup (Fitz) and knows he will never again start Trent - cans him. Whats wrong ? Why would you wish an opposing QB shreds your team ? To prove you were right ? Are you a Bills fan ?

Yep2

Well written post, Bill. I concur with your assessment of what transpired but I too struggle with why it happened. My take is that RJ just had the physical tools and coaching would not have changed what he was missing. This is contrary to what happened with JP and Trent. I think both suffered from having too many coaches, put into the fray well before they were ready and had a woeful OL. Without these factors to hinder them, I think either of them would have been adequate QBs for us and a good coach would have covered up their inadequacies (slow thinking for JP and gun-shy nature of Trent). I suppose we should take this argument back to when Todd Collins was drafted. Perhaps we should have developed him better and we wouldn't have been in this absolute disaster of a QB situation since Kelly. I am in favor of drafting a QB high a few years before your franchise QB is spent. As an example, I would think both the Pats* and Colts ought to be thinking replacements in the next 2 drafts. Groom a new one for 2-3 years when Brady and Manning are close to retirement. Which is what we should have done 2-3 years before the end of Kelly's career

So which move of the current regime is the equivalent of cutting off your arm (as your analogy implies) ?

I would call it being decisive. Chan, the QB savior, probably saw there was nothing to salvage here and probably infuriated that the promise of the pre-season went up in smoke in a matter of 2 games to the point where it became difficult to evaluate the rest of the personnel on offense. Holding on to Trent would serve no purpose and probably drag the organization down.

Didn't know Arizona had a beach

And somewhere JP Losman snickers with a Molson EX in hand.

I was thinking the Pats* but they kick our rears without inside information as it is so don't know why any divisional rival would even bother.

Methinks it was not 'just a hunch' unless its on your back and you are from Notre Dame.

Me too. Its official.

Wow ! That will be stunning if true.

I suppose the original title and lack of new thought deserved its own thread. Just don't know why.

Not if the armchair GMs frequenting this board trade Evans to Minnesota.

I don't see any new news here. Speculation and some analysis about why it makes sense. Also, no justification or support about said 'talks intensifying'.

Your statement may be true in more ways than one. One thing that stood out to me in the Green Bay game is how Trent was sitting by himself and Steve Johnson was moping after the first INT. A leader would have gone up to SJ and boosted him up. He just does not appear to rally the troops or inspire confidence in him.

I suppose Gailey was up all night watching game tape. He must have seen a recurring and irreversible pattern in Trent's play that forced him to bench TE so early in the season.

Saved me the trouble of a reply, Beer. It is immaterial where we pick irrespective of the quality of the scouting department. A good scouting group can ensure years of lower picks after a string of good early picks.