JohnC

He is aware that he needs to alter his style of play. But it is so ingrained in him (using athleticism) instead of reading plays and going through progressions that he is struggling with playing the more conventional style of game. He is like a right handed person required to now do things with his left hand. At this point It is too unnatural and disorienting. The Shanahans tried to work with him but he was resistant to their tutelage. So what happened is that they allowed this diva to do his thing knowing that this hardheaded prima donna was going to fail because of his own stubborness. This former supremely confident player is panicking over his inability to execute the simple plays. In hindsight the worst thing that happened to him was that he had success in his rookie season without working on the fundamental and mental side of the game. Now that he is in his third year he has not mastered the basics of the game (footwork, progressions, pocket awareness etc) because he was too full of himself to listen to what the coaches were trying to teach him about the pro game. Shanahan is an old school hard nosed coach who knows how to coach qbs. RGIII is a narcisstic Diva who spent more time establishing his brand rather than working on his game. Although he tries to demonstrate his bravado in reality he is very insecure and can't take criticisms very well. His teammates are getting tired of his act, his coaches are tired of his act and the fans are tired of his act. He is a player with immense talents. But until he gets his act together and is willing to put in the time and effort to work on his very unpolished game he will be another afterthought bust. There are many questions about EJ's game. But with him you are dealing with someone who is mature and has a very good work ethic. If he doesn't succeed it won't be because he didn't put in the effort and wasn't receptive to coaching.

A day or so ago he was on WGR the Murphy Show. Matt Bowen is a good analyst and is excellent on the radio. He is smart and very articulate. He does his homework and his responses demonstrate it.

No, he would bounce off and watch from the ground Gronk go in for the TD.

I live in the MD/DC area so I am familiar with him. He didn't work out because he simply couldn't tackle. There are only so many times that you can implore him to wrap up and make the basic play. He just couldn't do it. In college you can level people and draw oohs and aaahs. But in the pros if you miss the tackle in the open field you hurt your team. Being a physical talent doesn't necessarily translate into being a good football player.

The obvious reason why many fans are willing to accept decent qb is that they find subpar qb play lasting a generation is distasteful to watch .It is a sad commentary on this frachise when the standard of play is so low that an average level of play is a major leap forward. Orton's level of play in the KC and Miami games regressed. Two very winnable games were lost opportunities because an average qb played below his average talent level. I don't believe the Bills will be using a high draft pick on a qb in the next draft, especially since they gave up a first round pick in the move up for Watkins. In my opinion the Bills need to get the best free agent qb in the market (assuming that he is better than Orton) as a bridge qb and then bide their time until they are in a position to acquire their long-term qb in the draft. Hoyer is a heady qb who falls in the average talent range. He is a good example that an at best solid qb can at least stabililze the position and offense and allow your team to compete. In watching the first half of the Pats/Colts game it is starkly clear that when you watch NFL games with elie qbs playing you understand that it is simply a different game. Throws made on a regular basis in those games don't exist in games played by the Bills.

Why do you think that Carr would be on the market? I would definitely be interested in him. But I just don't see even the mercurial Raiders being foolish enough to prematurely quit on him. With respect to their desperate qb situation they are obviusly in a bind. It is a mess that they themselves created. Missing on EJ is not simply a singular mistake. It is a mistake that has set this franchise back.

Why do you presume to know what the so-called heated discussion was about? Who outside of the organization really knows if Whaley insisted on acquiring Orton or Marrone demanded a better backup option to the erratic young qb? What is lost here is that intense personnel disagreements among the staff are normal and not unusual. Why is it so surprising that a GM and a HC would have different opinions on the qb issue, assuming that was the contentious issue? I'm inclined to believe that Whaley is more committed to EJ than Marrone is because Whaley was instrumental in his selection while Marrone is more committed to getting immediate wins. What is a fact of the NFL environment is that as losses mount and expectations are not met tensions will rise throughout the organization. In my view changing staff will not change the outcome so much as acquiring a competent qb that can play at a higher level than is currently being played. In my opinion if the qb play would have been above average the last two games could have been wins. Then the perception of the team and the dynamic of the season would have dramatically changed for the better.

It's understood that it is not easy finding a good qb through the draft or through free agency.However, what does it say about an organization that for a generatiion can't find a reasonable long-term franchise qb to replace Jim Kelly? The Bills have made attempts to come up with an adequate answer for the most important position with little success. Trent Edwards, Losman, Bledsoe, Fitz, EJ, Orton etc., etc. None of those qbs worked out. So what! You have to keep being aggressive and keep making it an organizational priority to find your franchise qb. If you can't find a good prospect that is satisfactory then a reasonable approach for a temporary solution is to find an adequate "bridge" qb from the market. Veteran qbs such as Hoyer or Palmer (on his downside) aren't premier qbs but they are still good enough to allow your team to compete. When you accept such llimited qbs as Fitz and Orton to be your starting qbs you are basically forfeiting your playoff chances. This organization can't give up on their search for a quality qb. They have to be committed to do the one thing that is most important in making a franchise a successful franchise. The status quo is not acceptable. Turning over the coaching staff is not a solution. This staff has faults as most staffs do. But until there is a decent qb taking the staff they can't be fairly judged.

They have failed here for the simple reason that they have had less talent to work with. There is no doubt that this franchise has not been staffed with top shelf coaches. What up and coming coach would want to join this long term failed franchise if there were other options. Collectively our talent level has ranked in the vicinity of the lower third. It doesn't matter how smart and innovative your OC is. If your qb can't competently execute the plays, especially the pass plays, then you are going to have more failures than successes. When you have pedestrian qbs such as Fitz, Kolb, Thad Lewis, Tuel and EJ what's in your playbook really doesn't matter. Talent trumps everything. No coach is going to elevate the play of a pedestrian qb to the point that it will make a significant difference. Gilbride was harshly criticized as an OC when he was with the Bills. He wasn't the main problem with our lagging offense because he demonstrated that he can run a successful offense and be part of a SB winning operation with a good qb. Unless the standard of qb play is elevated to the level of being average the Bills will continue to be out of the running before Thanksgiving arrives. When your team has been out of the playoffs for 15 consecutive years and has a losing record for 9 out of ten years and the same problematic qb issue is not fixed then there should be no surprise that the same outcome continues to happen again, and again, and again!

He won a SB with the Giants because he had a good qb. It doesn't matter who your OC is or what your philosophical approach is. If you don't have an adequate qb you r offense will be ineffective. When your organization relies on qbs such as Kolb, Fitz, Tuel, Orton and a very young and ill-equipped qb such as EJ the outcome is predictable. This team is not going anywhere meaningful until there is a credible player taking the snaps. This year is another squandered season among a generation of wasted seasons because the caliber of our starting qb is insufficient. And the beat goes on!

If you want to make Hackett hack it you need a qb that can make plays. Orton is regressing to his natural level of mediocrity. His molasses feet don't help much in extending plays either. No change in the organization or coaching staff is going to be as meaningful as having a quality qb taking the snaps. Until that glaring issue of qb capability is addressed little esle matters. The criticisms that Marrone is receiving for his cautious nature is valid but none of that is relevant if he had a qb that had a strong enough arm that could consistently connect with the receivers. On a couple of occasions Watkins was behind his coverage for potential plays that would change the dynamic of this low scoring game. The passes were not only not made they weren't even considered by the limited qb. The futility of this franchise continues and won't be altered until this organization finds a reasonable option at the most important position on the field. Cleveland got a "solid" bridge qb who stabilized the position and allowed that franchise to be a competitive team. The Cardinals went out and got the now injured Palmer on the downside of his career to change the fortunes of a struggling desert franchise. Philadelphia picked up a scorned NY qb in Sanchez and invigorated him by coaching him up to the point that he will be an appealing qb in next year's free agent market. What does our dinosaur organization do to staff the qb positon? They scour the waiver wire and make puny trades to bring in the Thad Lewis caliber of qbs off of the garbage heap. This lame organization was so desperate after witnessing their prized qb prospect be so inaccuarate and befuddled that they aggressively pursued a below average retread qb who preferred being retired and ensconced in his recliner rather than work out prior to the season. How pathetic of a reach is it for this laughable organization to pursue someone who was so disinterested in the profession he walked away from? For this very much ridiculed franchise it's obvious that the standard isn't excellence. But when you can't even identify and acquire a qb for a generatiion that is slightly above mediocre then what hope is there? It's embarrassing and pathetic!

Orton is playing at an Orton level. He is what he is: adequate. He is a heady game manager type qb who when he is in rhythm is effective. He is a very immobile qb who when he has to throw while moving is not very effective. In general I thought he had a poor game. There were some critical drops (Wood most egregious/hit him in the breadbasket) and some tough penalties (the Chandler miniscule push off) that changed the flow of the game against the Bills. I don't want to give the impression that I don't like Orton. He salvaged the season when he took over for the unready young qb. But if you want to have a serious team you have to have a top third qb in order to be able to compete for anything serious. If you don't have that caliber of qb the margin for error is very small, as demonstrated in yesterday's game. It was very apparent in this game that Watkins was hindered by his groin issue. He simply didn't have the explosion in this game that he usually has. Jackson also was hampered with the groin problem. I don't see either of these two players at a peak level going into the Miami game. What surprised me in this game, especially in the second half was that the OL was creating lanes that both backs took advantage of by decisively hitting the holes. That is one positive coming out of this game. If Brown wouldn't have fumbled away the game he would have been the offensive player of the game.

Your response is predictable: It's the fans fault. You are entitled to your opinion and the approach you take when discussing the Bills. You are a very loyal fan who invests a lot of time and effort in supporting the team. So I give you a lot of credit in that respect. But the tenor of your respons is always the same. What you don't understand is that critics of the team and aspects of the team are not disloyal. Your inability to tolerate a different reaction to the team and its performances is somethng that most participants on this board are well aware of. Again, I give you credit for your loyalty and I respect your investment in the team (money, time and travel) but your responses to different attitudes toward the games are not always appreciated by people who have different views. I don't want you to take my response as a personal attack. It is not meant to be. It is simply my observation regarding your characterizations of other opinions.

This was a game of two evenly matched teams. The difference in the game was Brown and McKelvin's fumbles. We lost a TD with Brown's fumble and we gave them a TD with McKelvin's fumble. There were few innovative plays called from either sideline. It was a close to the vest type game for both teams. Both HCs took the same conservative approach for their respective teams. The main problem for the Bills had little to do with the conservative nature of the offense. Taking a conservative approach was not an imprudent way to manage this game. The bottom line is that there were two major miscues (turnovers) that were most responsible for the outcome. It's frustrating but it's the reality of this game. Marrone wasn't outcoached by Reid and Reid wasn't outcoached by Marrone. The winning and losing margin was due to critical mistakes made by the Bills and KC's ability to capitalize on those excruciating turnovers.

If a player performs at an elite level the organization will have to pay him at the going rate. How else are you going to do it? Wish that the player plays at a mediocre level so you can pay him accordingly? Most teams have only a handful of top tier players. Because of the salary cap you can't keep all your good players. That cap casualty situation applies to all teams. The smart organizations prepare for such scenarios by drafting well so that the players that you are forced to let go due to cap considerations can be replaced by younger and cheaper players. By not drafting well you end up in situations where you are forced to spend in the free agent market more than you should for a mediocre player such as OG Chris Williams. Because the guard position was staffed at such an abysmal level the organization spent way too much on another mediocre talent. How does that get you ahead?

I have a different take on drafting guards. If there is a high end guard such as Mangold, Mankins or Steve Hutchison I would have no qualms selecting a high ranking guard with a first round selection. Once you do that you don't have to worry about that position for another decade. Instead of going the revolving door route every year and overpaying for a free agent vet why not get the position stabilized and then move on to address the other needs. The Steelers used first round draft choices for DeCastro and Pouncy. I don't think that they were set back with their emphasis on investing in the interior line. The argument is often made that you can find quality guards at a lower round. That same argument can be made for every position, including the qb position. In a prior post you made the point that first round picks were wasted on Cooper and Warmack who have struggled. The mistake was due to poor evaluations, not the lack of importance of the guard position. High draft mistakes are made on all positions, not just the guard positions. I remember when during Levy's stint as a make believe GM he paid a hefty price for two mediocre linemen, Dockery and Langston Walker. If the team drafted well they wouldn't have to try to compensate for their poor player evaluations with over priced free agents.

It's understandable that a player prefers playing for a coach he is comfortable with. It is also understandable that a player prefers playing in one part of the country over another. In cases like that it's not unreasonble to pay a premium to retain that player. From a player standpoint there is a clear recognition that it is a business and it is his livelihood with short career span. Paying a competent player a little more than you want is much better than going cheap and playing an incompetent player who is so consistently overwhelmed that it has a negative effect on the whole line. The Bills gave out a generous contract to Williams, a player who struggled on multiple teams. Even before he was hurt his level of play was not very laudable. I can't say for sure but odds are that Rinehart would have stayed if the money disparity between the Chargers (or any other team) would have been meaningful. On our line the problem isn't so much about having average players it is having players (mostly)at the guard positions that are weak links that get so exploited that it hinders what the offense can do. Coaches have different philosophies. Marrone prefers big bulky linemen over light and athletic linemen. He favors the power straight ahead blocking scheme. That is why the run play calling repertoire is limited to an inside running game. The offensive linemen he has on the roster are incapable of proficiently executing screen passes and sweep plays. The system that is in place is a system where Spiller's elite skills are not suited for.

Why was Chad Rinehart let go last year? He was a modestly priced player. He was certainly not an elite player but he was a competent player. He got a lot of playing time with San Diego. He gets dispatched and Colin Brown was kept. Brown was arguably the worst offensive lineman in the league. It's baffling!

John Guy was with the Bills as the pro scout when the Bills signed OG Derek Dockery and RT Langston Walker. They gave these two very average players all-star salaries. During that period of time the Bills played hardball with Jason Peters, our best lineman, when he wanted an upgrade in salary. The contract negotiations became so contentious that the Bills eventually traded Peters to the Eagles who immediately signed him to a sizeable contract that our organizational steadfastly refused to give him. He is the Eagles best lineman and has played at an all-star level. To make things even more ridiculous when Peters left he was replaced on the left side by Langston Walker, a behemoth lineman who had slow feet. Walker was never suited to play on the left side. He even publicly stated that he was not equipped for the left side because it required attributes of athleticism and quickness, certainly traits that he didn't possess. When he predictably failed as a LT he was replaced. Littman and the finance boys had a policy that they don't pay starter money to backups. So he was sent packing. When all was said and done not only did the Bills not improve their miserable OL they made it even worse. The same type of scenario played out for Hangartner. He signed a good contract with the Bills but after some time he was replaced as a starter at center. He was a versatile player who could also play both guard positions. A valuable commodity. Again, the finance wolfs enforced their rule that they don't pay non-starters starter money. So he ended being released leaving the team with little in reserve when one of the interior lineman got hurt. As it turned out that is exactly what happened. The finance boys enforced their money rules despite the fact that the team was still very much under the cap. The bottom line was that although the team was bad for a generation financial discipline was maintained. Mission accomplished!

Why does a Blaine Gabbert type player get drafted in the first round? Because an organization acts out of desperation rather than taking a strategic view of building a roster. In the long run thinking strategically rather than tactically always works out better When you are in a panic mode to address a critical need more often than not you end up sabotaging yourself in getting better. The irony is that Nix had more than enough opportunities to address the qb issue prior to his last draft. Other franchises prospered on the qb prospects that he passed on. If the organization was in such a desperate situation it was because of their many miscalculations from their prior drafts.

Many people are arguing that they Bills needed to draft a qb with a high round pick in the 2013 draft. Most analysts stated that the 2013 qb class was mediocre. So why dip into the mediocre pool to find your qb of the future? There were other options. In fact the very late Orton acquisition is a testament to going with the bridge qb and continue with your search for a long-term franchise qb. EJ was benched by a coach determined to not allow this team waste another year mired in mediocrity due to inadequate qb play. He had no other choice but to go with the veteran qb who gave him the best chance to succeed. The developmental qb that the Bills selected is in the position where he should have been all along, as a multi-year prospect. If that is the case then wouldn't it have been better to wait for another draft class or two and get a qb who is more highly rated and who has a better chance to become a franchise qb? In my opinion Carr and Bridgewater were better prospects than EJ. Both are more accurate passers. In the few games that I watched Bridgewater there is no doubt in my mind that not only is he a better passer but he has more presence as a qb running an offense. Only time will tell whether EJ will develop into what many hoped for. Buf after watching hm in this relatively short time span it is evident (to me) that his level of accuracy and his mechanics are too erratic for a league that requires impeccable accuracy and strong fundamentals in one's mechanics to succeed at that very challenging position. I know it irritates some people to hear the same mantra but it is a mistake to overreach to draft for a need at the expense of passing on higher rated and more talented players. Without a doubt the Bills overreached with the selection of EJ. Anyone who has watched him even at this very early stage has to be troubled by what they have seen so far.

Kiko was a well known prospect that had a second round grade. He was one of the top defensive players in the highly rated PAC conference. He was not a surprise pick who was taken higher than he should have been taken. I respectfully disagree with you that EJ was a better prospect than Grappolo. If both players were in the same draft most organizations would have taken Grappolo.

Belichick drafted a qb in the second round this year that is a better prospect than the qb we drafted in the first round last year. That doesn't make him a genius but it does demonstrate why certain franchises succeed more than others.

You and many others are missing the point. If the organization was determined to draft a qb in 2013 they should have drafted a qb in the vicinity of where they were ranked. Manuel was a developmental type prospect (as it is very evident for everyone to see) who was drafted way above his value. In addition, why did the Bills have to draft a qb in the first round when the talent level of that year's draft class was clearly below the first round level? Instead of over-drafting a qb they could have found a second tier veteran qb as a bridge qb until another draft when they could have drafted a first round value qb?

Yes, it is very much getting value at a draft position. No I would not have been happy drafting Kiko in the first round becausewe we were able to get him in the second round. Kiko was a second round value player who got drafted where he should have been drafted. The mistake was using a first round pick on a developmental qb who could have been taken in a lower round. If the team was so enamored with EJ and determined to get him they should have traded down again (if they could) in the first round and taken EJ at a lower point and then get an extra pick from the second trade down. You keep missing the point. Kiko was a terrific value pick in the second round. The pick used for EJ in the first round should have been used for a first round graded player. The Bills had plenty of needs. Getting a player ranked in the area where EJ was picked would have been the best approach to take. Again, the strategy is simple. Don't overreach for needs. Draft talent in the vicinity where they are ranked. That did not happen in last year's draft. In my opinion it was a mistake.