Cynical Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 It shouldn't be about the players' wants first off... They wanted Jauron as coach because of the soft practices . Good point. Except Jauron was respected by his players (for good or bad). The players do not respect Edwards. Forcing Edwards into the lineup will only cause more strife, and a possible team rebellion. Is the more complicated offense post-Trent or post-Jauron? Because the game where Trent got hurt was when the gameplan shifted a little to include routes over the middle and more senisble gameplanning (still not great, though). Post Trent. AVP mentioned being able to do things like pre-snap motion with the implication being Trent being unable to run an offense with it.
Albany,n.y. Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 I guarantee the reason the Bills grabbed Brohm is that they DON'T want to burn their first round pick on ANY of this year's projected QB draft-darlings - each of them has big question marks, and the Bills have burning needs on both lines as well as linebacker. They're hoping Brohm lives up to his Heisman-candidate days at Louisville, when he was one of the nation's top QBs and projected by at least one draftnik as the overall #1 pick of the '07 draft before he returned to Louisville for his senior year and fell to the 2nd round in the '08 draft. I doubt we'll see him against the Cheatriettes*, but trust me - if he doesn't start, we'll at least see Brohm get significant playing time the last two games. If Brohm doesn't start this season, will you admit you're wrong? I'll admit I'm wrong that the team just took a flyer on the guy and has no intention of starting him if he does start. I just don't believe this team actually believes they can find their QB of the future on anyone's practice squad. Nobody picked up the guy on waivers-even Kevin O'Connell was picked up on waivers (and subsequently traded) while this guy just lingered on GB's practice squad. However, considering this group thought they could replace Jason Peters with a weak 7th round pick, anything is possible. If we get any competent people running the football side by April, Brohm will just be an afterthought-something I think he already is.
ChasBB Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 87 yards passing??? are you sh!ttin me??? Not impressive for sure. However, he sure did deliver a helluva block for his running back -- that WAS impressive.
Marv's Neighbor Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 It's funny how many "Fitzgerald" references there are in this post. I know he hasn't done much to give you a reason to remember his name, but it's Fitzpatrick. If we had a few more fans from S Buffalo, we would know that.
Frit0 Bandit0 Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 87 yards passing??? are you sh!ttin me??? Dudes got skills
Estelle Getty Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 so that is what i just gave birth to? Seriously, anyone who believes that Patrick Fitzryan is an NFL starting QB needs to be questioned. I would say that they should give Edwards a chance to prove himself, with Brohm playing against the Clots in the final week. Ha ha give him a chance
ACerr22 Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 Unless the next coach of the Bills thinks they can resurrect Trent Edwards, or Brohm is the steal of the century, I don't think the Bills next great QB is on this roster. I really like Fitzgerald as a back-up, because he is a good athlete, seems relatively calm under pressure, and does some things well. He makes some dumb decisions, but at least he isn't afraid to be decisive. His cut block on Marshawns' 47 yard run was probably the highlight of the game for me... but do I want to go into the 2010 season knowing that he is the starter? Absolutely not... Really?
reddogblitz Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 Tell me what he did today that warrants him playing next week? Win I am sure will be the answer. Fitz is awful. Brohm or Trent should start the remaining games. I don't think Fitz is very good either. But, he's played in 6 games and of those we've won 4 and lost 2. With Trent we've won 1 and lost 6. Same team. The difference is now we have a QB that has football smarts and is a leader in the huddle. Trent is neither. If Fitz was a decent passer he'd be very good. But, unfortunately he's not. Play the guy that gives us the best chance to win.
Alphadawg7 Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 Unless the next coach of the Bills thinks they can resurrect Trent Edwards, or Brohm is the steal of the century, I don't think the Bills next great QB is on this roster. I really like Fitzgerald as a back-up, because he is a good athlete, seems relatively calm under pressure, and does some things well. He makes some dumb decisions, but at least he isn't afraid to be decisive. His cut block on Marshawns' 47 yard run was probably the highlight of the game for me... but do I want to go into the 2010 season knowing that he is the starter? Absolutely not... Why are people down on Brohm? If he had come out his Jr. year and we moved up to draft him, it would have cost us a MONSTER contract...instead, he slips to the 2nd after his Sr. year where GB steals him as they dont know yet what they have in Rodgers and after watching Alex Smith blow they wanted an insurance policy. Rodgers showed he was the real deal, they loved Flynn and had no reason to dress Brohm who wasnt ready to play yet. So, he got stashed on the practice squad where we got a FIRST ROUND TALENT, in fact, #1 overal pick talent, for next to nothing. This is only the kids second year and he hasnt seen the field. So, what the hell is everyone down on him for or expecting so little for? You think a season and a half of watching Rodgers play has some how tarnished and diminished his skills? In fact, Rodgers success and his grooming there is only encouraging that he has had some good coaching thus far. I just dont get it...this was an absolute steal to get this level of talent for nothing...he may be great, he may suck...only time will tell. But coming out of college, many had him graded higher than Ryan and Flacco and he would have went #1 overall the year before...so until he comes into the NFL and plays some games to show one way or the other, the college scouting reports still say this kid has a big arm, is accurate, a leader, and has major potential...and right now, thats all we really have to go on.
murra Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 So, he got stashed on the practice squad where we got a FIRST ROUND TALENT, in fact, #1 overal pick talent, for next to nothing. You've officially lost it.
catsnbills Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 I am surprised that the obvious has not been presented in this thread. 1) Edwards is infinitely better than Fitz. 2) Wilson fired Jauron, hired Fewell and told him he was coach for 6 weeks and he had better throw the ball to TO. Fewell tells Fitz he is the starter as long as he throws the ball to TO. (what 15 times in his first start). Edwards has not lost this team, he has lost TO. So, who do you side with? Leave it to Buffalo to let a moron like Owens dictate their team chemistry. Bottom line: it was a front office decision and there in lies the problem. If a new GM with football acumen doesn't arrive soon after the season is over - the Bills future is over. The Owens experiment has failed miserably. Get Hardy some PT.
Geno Smith's Arm Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 I can't believe that people think they shouldn't draft a high ranked QB because they need to develop the O-line. You draft the QB, you drafted 2 linemen last year that started (I know Wood is injured-we shall see), you draft some more after the QB, maybe sign a free agent, then that season you have the QB sit and learn. The next draft you might take another lineman and /or sign a free agent. Now you should (if you have made wise decisions) have a decent line and a young QB that is at least partially developed. Any other way, and we have a good line waiting around for a few years for a QB to develop. That's bad planning. Aside from picking up a veteran QB in free agency (I don't know of any good ones that will be avaiable), that's the quickest way to do it.
Buftex Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 If Trent had a pick in the endzone, 87 yrds passing, and a fumble on a sack the board would be calling for him to be benched. Trent should start the remaining games. While I agree, I would like to see Edwards start the rest of the games, you are joking about the stats, right? Trent has had loads of games just like the game Fitzpatrick had today. It did get him benched. There are a few differences. While Fitzpatrick is not pretty to watch, he does make one or two "heads up" plays every game. He isn't afraid of making mistakes the way Trent is... Fitzpatrick is more a of a playmaker, good and bad. Trent went from looking like a serviceable NFL starting QB, to being tentative to the point that he can't make any plays. I really think his problems are more mental than anything else. I would like to see Edwards start, over Fitzpatrick, not because I necessarily think he is that much better than Fitzpatrick, it is only because we have seen him play better football....I have some small hope that Edwards can find his game again. If he can't, so be it...whether the Bills win 5 or 8 games is irrelevent...
Albany,n.y. Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 Why are people down on Brohm? If he had come out his Jr. year and we moved up to draft him, it would have cost us a MONSTER contract...instead, he slips to the 2nd after his Sr. year where GB steals him as they dont know yet what they have in Rodgers and after watching Alex Smith blow they wanted an insurance policy. Rodgers showed he was the real deal, they loved Flynn and had no reason to dress Brohm who wasnt ready to play yet. So, he got stashed on the practice squad where we got a FIRST ROUND TALENT, in fact, #1 overal pick talent, for next to nothing. This is only the kids second year and he hasnt seen the field. So, what the hell is everyone down on him for or expecting so little for? You think a season and a half of watching Rodgers play has some how tarnished and diminished his skills? In fact, Rodgers success and his grooming there is only encouraging that he has had some good coaching thus far. I just dont get it...this was an absolute steal to get this level of talent for nothing...he may be great, he may suck...only time will tell. But coming out of college, many had him graded higher than Ryan and Flacco and he would have went #1 overall the year before...so until he comes into the NFL and plays some games to show one way or the other, the college scouting reports still say this kid has a big arm, is accurate, a leader, and has major potential...and right now, thats all we really have to go on. 2nd round picks don't get stashed on practice squads if they show anything, because when you get waived anyone can claim you & then anyone can sign you off a PS at any time. If anyone thought he was any good, GB would have been able to trade him in preseason if there was no room for him. He was a bust in GB & the Bills took a flyer on a guy who nobody in the NFL views as a possible starting QB.
billsfreak Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 I just love how people are insisting Brohm needs NEEDS to play just so they can evaluate him. Like 3 games is enough to determine if Brohm is a bust or a steal. Brohm is under contract, and will be here next year. The new staff can properly evaluate him starting in the off season. There has to be a reason why he never made it off of the Packers' practice squad, that means that at all time they had 3 quarterbacks better then him. Not too promising, especially for someone drafted as high as he was.
billsfreak Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 I don't think Fitz is very good either. But, he's played in 6 games and of those we've won 4 and lost 2. With Trent we've won 1 and lost 6. Same team. The difference is now we have a QB that has football smarts and is a leader in the huddle. Trent is neither. If Fitz was a decent passer he'd be very good. But, unfortunately he's not. Play the guy that gives us the best chance to win. The games they won with Fitz in, they won in spite of him not because of him. He is pathetic and shouldn't even be on an NFL roster. I have never seen a QB make as many bad decisions in a single game, as he does every single week. Edwards or Losman for that matter, have never played as bad as Fitz has the past two weeks.
justnzane Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 You're absolutely right. You get rid of a quarterback for putrid games week in and week out for about three years. I'm not actually sure how someone can have 23 starts and never manage to amass over 300 yards in a single game. I'm still shocked that this guy, who averaged less than a TD/game still has fans. He's not going to start again though, and despite your attempts to argue for it, in the long run it will matter not, as Edwards seems quite visibly to not be in the Bills' future. If it is a team chemistry thing fine. But if it is performance, it is unfathomable to think that Patrick Fitzryan is a better QB than TE at this point. If they ran an offensive plan like they did this week where they pound the ball with Lynch and Jackson, Edwards is the smarter, safer option. Edwards won't turn it over as much, and will complete more passes. Fitz has shown nothing to be a starter, with several games where he completes less than half of his passes, and throws for under 100 yards.
merlin Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 It's funny how many "Fitzgerald" references there are in this post. I know he hasn't done much to give you a reason to remember his name, but it's Fitzpatrick. I even heard a couple of TV analysts call him "Fitzgerald" yesterday during various highlight shows. Dan Marino was one ... can't remember who the other one was.
justnzane Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 I even heard a couple of TV analysts call him "Fitzgerald" yesterday during various highlight shows. Dan Marino was one ... can't remember who the other one was. I've heard Sharpe and Wilcots say it as well (no suprise)
gobillsinytown Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 I've heard Sharpe and Wilcots say it as well (no suprise) I think there's one thing we can agree on.......Sharpe, Wilcots, Marino = unwatchable.
Recommended Posts