fansince61 Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 and yet the Bills won. The Bills won because nobody from KC (including Mike Vrabel) can catch a well thrown ball. They also won because KC's rookie coach decided to pull a Mike Mularkey and suprise us by not trying to run against the worst run defense of the last decade. The Bills didn't win because Fitz is an NFL quality quarterback. He seems like a very nice guy, but he's just not any good.
benderbender Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 The Bills you see today are not the Bills that took Brady to wire in week one. By about 15 players on IR
AxelRipper Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 people... isnt trent the one that went 5-0 last year until a concussion put JP in and screwed everything up? he played a few good games at the beginning of the season in that gawd-awful no huddle offense, until again, a concussion. based on his week 1 performance that i had to fight to try to watch at school, he played a damn good game. i say let him try again, and then if he loses then the people who think we can draft a solution to all of our problems will be happy that we're moving up in the world
Maddog69 Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 It's so funny seeing all of the old anti-Losman arguments now used against Trent and the old "well Trent wins more games than JP argument" is one of the best. I love the Bills but always hated how so many people fell in love with Trent because he completed tons of dump offs and I am glad to see that he is finally done playing for Buffalo. I cannot tell you how many of my Sundays he ruined with his wimpiness and passivity. Trent has 0 chance of leading an NFL team. Absolutely 0.
reddogblitz Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 Right, because winning games with Fitz right now accomplishes NOTHING. Great plan, this is why the franchise is where it right now. The season is about evaluating players right now and if we didn't have a coach auditioning for a job we'd be doing that right now. We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one. What you say may have been true in the 80s when the only way to get new players was from the draft or the waiver wire. Nowadays there's free agency. What free agent is going to want to come to a team that's in such disarry they're starting a QB they got from Green Bay's practice squad and benching last year's high price FA to play a 2nd year guy? Or do they want to come to a team that may be building something? Same with coaches we may be looking to hire. Not only that, should we be making our other starters play with one hand tied behind their back while we try out some young guys? Shouldn't we instead put them in the best place so they can learn to win? There'll be a long off season and pre season to evaluate talent.
EC-Bills Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 Fewell can't stand up to TO Right. Fewell is meek and cowardly
John Adams Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 Only the Bills could make their fans suffer the debate of who's better: Fitz or Edwards. Stop the madness. Who cares? They both suck. Fitz is playing with more moxy and heart but has less ability. Trent is a beaten man with a team that has given up on him. I could care less and don't care if either one is here next year.
Alphadawg7 Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 people who dont know about football are the ones who think TE should sit behind Fitz. It's a complete joke to think TE is not the best QB we have. I see Trent as a Joe Flacco type with a good team around him. Buffalo has ruined yet another player. JP and Trent are complete opposites. TE has potential. JP was/is a joke You just call everyone out as not knowing anything about football because they want Trent to sit, then you go and use about the dumbest comparison possible to compare Trent to...and thats Joe Flacco. These two are 100% complete opposites. First, the physical attributes are night and day. Flacco is a big, durable QB with a HUGE arm. This is the polar opposite of Trent. Second, Flacco has already proven to be a great leader on that team, something Trent has never ever been able to become. Third, Flacco plays with a ton of confidence and commands the field...again, something Trent has yet to do. Fourth, Flacco is younger and less experienced and already significantly better and more accomplished than Trent. So, if you are going to call people out for not knowing anything about football, then maybe you should try and compare Trent to a QB that might actually resemble him.
Alphadawg7 Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 Really just want to say that IMO all this talk of Trent vs Fitz is garbage 'cause it's pretty obvious that neither of them can get the job done. Fitz is just about the most inaccurate NFL QB that this observer has ever seen while Trent, well Trent just doesn't seem to have the nerve to get the ball downfield. We need either Brohm (hello Fewell, at least see what he's got once or twice) of draft one that looks like he might be a good one. AT LEAST TRY!!!!!! OMG, is the sky falling? We agree on something finally...and more shocking we agree on something that has something to do with Trent...Quick, someone go buy me a lotto ticket...lmao
shoretalk Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 It is unfair but then again this is professional football. Trent Edwards whose leadership skills and on-field management of the team pushed him beyond JP ... lost it; he lost everything that he showed as potential. It might have been being stuck with a head coach who drummed the no-risk methodology into Trent's head ... it might have been the concussion ... the offensive line ... the Cleveland game ...I don't think TO had anything to do with Trent's total collapse but for whatever reason Trent was afraid to throw more than an 8 yard pass (always on the wrong side of the first down marker). Does he have more talent in him that Mr. Float the ball wherever it might land Fitz? Yes ... Would a TE in his right mind be our best chance against the Patriots? Yes ... Is his career with the Bills finished? Yes ... So on Sunday we will watch a quarterback with guts ... willing to boldly throw the ball ... who just can't get it done. He puts all of his strength into his throws and they still lag. It hurts to watch him release the ball. I am hoping that lightening strikes and our running game and pass defense do enough to win on Sunday ... But just like JP ... TE needs to move on ... and I just wish we could see what our #3 can do before this season is over ... maybe he has guts, leadership ability and the ability to pass down field ... guess we won't find out until next August.
TheChimp Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 Hell, dog, even TRENT doesn't wanna start Trent. Give it up.
cåblelady Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 Edwrds will get booed if he even steps foot on the field after warm ups. He has worn out his welcome and just inst a good quarterback. Yep.
ColdBlueNorth Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 Hmm... dog turds or horse turds for lunch Both QB's suck so why not start the guy I haven't seen?
Delete This Account Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 The Bills won because nobody from KC (including Mike Vrabel) can catch a well thrown ball. They also won because KC's rookie coach decided to pull a Mike Mularkey and suprise us by not trying to run against the worst run defense of the last decade. The Bills didn't win because Fitz is an NFL quality quarterback. He seems like a very nice guy, but he's just not any good. heck, i'm merely pointing out that the Bills have won more games under Fitzpatrick this season. i can't say how Trent would do in these games. but he was given a significant amount of time to show what he's capable of, provided a two-receiver threat offense and eventually showed clear signs of regression, which led to his benching. Fitzpatrick, by comparison, has produced more wins -- managed more games, however you want to put it -- with the same banged-up line and receiving corps. it should also be noted that of the three games in which Buffalo's broken 300 yards total offense (TBay, Jax and Miami) -- and friends, around the NFL, that's not exactly a big number for most teams -- Fitzpatrick has been involved in two fo them. in stating my case, i am not throwing my support behind Fitzpatrick, but merely attempting to objectively answer questions first raised by the original poster. jw
Tasmo Posted December 15, 2009 Posted December 15, 2009 That's funny, I remember a game, what was it Tampa, when TE started airing the ball out because he actually had the time to do it. TE also played an almost perfect game against the Pats and theres no way Fitz pulls that game off. What the heck, just play Trent and let him go out there and get trampled under foot. That boy has no more presence. But what the heck? It wouldn't hurt just to see what he has in the tank after watching from the sidelines like a water boy. Let him step up like a man and get it done. If he doesn't he'll just get trampled. Fun either way...
mabden Posted December 15, 2009 Posted December 15, 2009 I'm not sure giving the guy a chance to throw interceptions or fumble it away is exactly what Fewell had in mind when he wanted Fitzpatrick to make something happen. Fitzpatrick is the WORST professional football player I have ever seen in 20+ years of watching the NFL. To pretend that TE is not infinitely better than this guy is a debacle of the highest magnitude and a flagrant insult to reason and integrity. Dog is right, Trent should be playing right now. It's pretty simple really. If you want him to throw it deep, run all of your receivers on deep routes and let your RBs stay home and block. It would not be that difficult to coach around his trepidation, even with just a modicum of coaching talent. Trent clearly has not performed up to expectations, but you simply cannot pretend that Fitzpatrick is better. Fitzpatrick is possibly the worst player to ever step foot on the field in the NFL. Put Trent back in the god damn game Fewell, you brainless POS. It is your only chance of securing the HC job for next year.
justnzane Posted December 15, 2009 Posted December 15, 2009 I was getting flamed last nite for saying the same exact stuff as dog. I agree that TE is the better QB and should be given the next 2 or 3 games to audition for next season. What they should do is tell TE to look for the 1 on 1's and take a chance if TO or LE is in said position. From there, have him manage the game, which is more his strength at this point. He is a safer option ala Wade Wilson or a younger Jim Harbaugh, which works better with a team that needs to control the ball to succeed.
Cynical Posted December 15, 2009 Posted December 15, 2009 After watching Matt Cassel play the Bills yesterday knowing how much the Chiefs have invested in him and watching our backup QB for a few games, the difference in the Caliber between TE, Fitz and Cassel is obvious in my opinion. Trent Edwards is better then Cassel, he's better then Fitzpatrick, probably better then half the QB's starting in this league. Trent Edwards regressed because we stuck him behind a rookie O-line. Trent Edwards regressed because our coaching at the HC and OC position over the last 5 plus years has been pathetic. Trent Edwards regressed because of a self centered idiot we brought in at the WR position to supposedly help this ball club. Do you think the Steelers are looking for a new QB after losing to the pitiful Browns and giving up 8 sacks. Big Ben is a championship caliber QB coming back from a concussion and you see the results when playing behind a sub par O-line. Judging from our offense yesterday, we now have another defensive minded coach trying to run the offense. Fewell, if you are going to run a ball control, run it down your throat type offense which considering our O-line and youth at the QB position is not such a bad idea, put a QB in that can hit the broad side of a barn. If this is the offense you want to run, Captain Check down is the guy for you. Fitzpatrick fumbles and turns the ball over way to much and its a miracle we even beat the pitiful Chiefs in my opinion. Because of our O-line I really didn't want TE back onto the field this season, but TE can run a conservative offense. He's much more accurate and will not turn the ball over near as much. Ryan Fitzpatrick cannot beat the Pats, but in my opinion Trent Edwards can and he almost proved it once this year already. We should let TE play, Flame away... Andy Kaufman reincarnate.
barbwire Posted December 15, 2009 Posted December 15, 2009 Right. Fewell is meek and cowardly He is meek and cowardly. He can't stand up to AVP or TO. Other people in league see our great 80 yd. Fitz and probably wonder why Edwards isn't playing. Edwards should be playing.
Recommended Posts