Brian Brohm

[ajzepp]

I missed the second half, but from what I did see I'm hopeful. There were a couple of very nice touch passes on screens when pressure was in Brohm's face. Let him play and we'll see. Poise under fire, definite ability to move around and appears to see the field.

I expected negatives given the condition of the line and so little practice time. He's gotten reps with the team for only 3 or 4 practices. Practice squad doesn't run the same offense. I look at other recent rookie qb's and think.....holy crap why can't he step in and have a first game like Sanchez etc... All rookies get smacked around and make bad decisions. Most have the opprutunity to go to training camp and work with the team for several weeks; the playbook for several months.... Brohm has had minimal exposure to the Bills system and minimal opprutunity to work with the offense. So Brohm shows up and with a week's practice gets similar numbers as our 2 former starters. This makes me want to see more. Training camp next year with a later round QB and some free agent like garcia or whatever.

Draft OL, LB and DL in first 3 rounds. Strong O line should support the run game and protect the qb. Strong D to keep the points down and keep us in games. Please get a competent coaching staff! Keep Bobby April, manage field position. Then we will see just what we have. I believe that with a strong O line, strong defense and great special teams play the Bills won't need the next P. Manning or B. Favre to make the playoffs. Then if we find Brohm is truly special we can look to win a playoff game. If not we will have a team that can attract a good FA, or draft in 1st round to add that piece.

Seriously, Kyle Orton is taking a team to the playoffs! Anyone watch him in Chicago? What does Denver have? An o line, a good D and a system that has given any friggin running back that goes there 1000 yards. (ramble complete)

[thebandit27]

I should've known better.

I read the thread title, but I clicked on it anyway.

Shame on me.

 

And now I have no right to get upset at some of you crazy, completely delusional, cling-to-anything-to-convince-yourselves-of-progress uber-fans that are giving Brohm 6's and 7's based on yesterday's game...but I'm doing it anyway.

 

Did any of you watch it? He was brutal. Utterly brutal. He routinely missed targets, made piss-poor decisions, horribly underthrew the one deep ball he attempted, and tried on several occasions to hit a defensive back in stride (before eventually succeeding). 80 percent of the passes he completed went to targets out of the backfield. His QB rating and YPA, the two stats most commonly used to evaluate QB play, were pathetic.

 

He faced--if anything--only slightly more pressure than Matt Ryan, and let it be known that Buffalo's line allowed fewer sacks than Atlanta's. The Falcons stacked the box and practically dared Brohm to beat them, and he never came close.

 

Yes, unfurl the excuses as much as you want. "Buffalo's OL sucks". Great, so did Brohm. "The coaching sucked". Great, so did Brohm. "He only practiced a few times with the starting offense". Is that practice time supposed to teach him how to throw a pass to a receiver? Funny, I didn't notice Chad Henne--the QB that Miami picked exactly one selection before Green Bay picked Brohm, experiencing any difficulty hitting an open WR in his first start (against Buffalo) after 3 days of practice.

 

Look, I'm not condemning Brohm to failure as an NFL QB, but to see some of you crazies actually rating him above average and pining for him to be anything more than a possible 3rd stringer for next season is absolutely ludicrous. And you hinge it all upon evaluating his play with "all things considered". Wow, the ultimate blanket excuse.

 

Well, let me just say that I watched the game. And "all things considered", I'm going to base my opinion off of performance, not some mental fabrication of a game that I wished I would have seen. Face it folks, he looked like a practice squad QB Sunday, nothing more.

 

He gets a 1.5, with the extra 0.5 point coming because he showed a strong arm and wasn't afraid to get rid of the ball.

 

O-line problems or not, this team needs a real QB, and nobody on this roster qualifies.

[All_Pro_Bills]

I thought he faired well given the circumstances, say a 6.5. But IMO, rating Brohm's performance is like critiquing NASCAR driver Jimmy Johnson in a Yugo at the Daytona 500.

[The Big Cat]

I should've known better.

I read the thread title, but I clicked on it anyway.

Shame on me.

 

And now I have no right to get upset at some of you crazy, completely delusional, cling-to-anything-to-convince-yourselves-of-progress uber-fans that are giving Brohm 6's and 7's based on yesterday's game...but I'm doing it anyway.

 

Did any of you watch it? He was brutal. Utterly brutal. He routinely missed targets, made piss-poor decisions, horribly underthrew the one deep ball he attempted, and tried on several occasions to hit a defensive back in stride (before eventually succeeding). 80 percent of the passes he completed went to targets out of the backfield. His QB rating and YPA, the two stats most commonly used to evaluate QB play, were pathetic.

 

He faced--if anything--only slightly more pressure than Matt Ryan, and let it be known that Buffalo's line allowed fewer sacks than Atlanta's. The Falcons stacked the box and practically dared Brohm to beat them, and he never came close.

 

Yes, unfurl the excuses as much as you want. "Buffalo's OL sucks". Great, so did Brohm. "The coaching sucked". Great, so did Brohm. "He only practiced a few times with the starting offense". Is that practice time supposed to teach him how to throw a pass to a receiver? Funny, I didn't notice Chad Henne--the QB that Miami picked exactly one selection before Green Bay picked Brohm, experiencing any difficulty hitting an open WR in his first start (against Buffalo) after 3 days of practice.

 

Look, I'm not condemning Brohm to failure as an NFL QB, but to see some of you crazies actually rating him above average and pining for him to be anything more than a possible 3rd stringer for next season is absolutely ludicrous. And you hinge it all upon evaluating his play with "all things considered". Wow, the ultimate blanket excuse.

 

Well, let me just say that I watched the game. And "all things considered", I'm going to base my opinion off of performance, not some mental fabrication of a game that I wished I would have seen. Face it folks, he looked like a practice squad QB Sunday, nothing more.

 

He gets a 1.5, with the extra 0.5 point coming because he showed a strong arm and wasn't afraid to get rid of the ball.

 

O-line problems or not, this team needs a real QB, and nobody on this roster qualifies.

 

You're right.

 

Everyone else is wrong.

 

Folks, the thread is over, this guy gets and we're all retarded. I hope everyone learned something today.

[thebandit27]

You're right.

 

Everyone else is wrong.

 

Folks, the thread is over, this guy gets and we're all retarded. I hope everyone learned something today.

 

Very cute.

 

Maybe you'll have your way, Big Cat, and Brohm will be annointed starter next year.

 

While we're at it, maybe we can talk Van Pelt out of the headset and back onto the field.

 

Then, all we need to do is dredge up Marques Sullivan to play left tackle and Kenderick Office to fix the pass rush, and look out playoffs, here we come!

 

You're right, Brohm was awesome, I must have been watching a mirage. I can't believe that 31 other teams let this guy languish on a practice squad for 12 weeks!

[Dan]

I should've known better.

I read the thread title, but I clicked on it anyway.

Shame on me.

 

And now I have no right to get upset at some of you crazy, completely delusional, cling-to-anything-to-convince-yourselves-of-progress uber-fans that are giving Brohm 6's and 7's based on yesterday's game...but I'm doing it anyway.

 

Did any of you watch it? He was brutal. Utterly brutal. He routinely missed targets, made piss-poor decisions, horribly underthrew the one deep ball he attempted, and tried on several occasions to hit a defensive back in stride (before eventually succeeding). 80 percent of the passes he completed went to targets out of the backfield. His QB rating and YPA, the two stats most commonly used to evaluate QB play, were pathetic.

 

He faced--if anything--only slightly more pressure than Matt Ryan, and let it be known that Buffalo's line allowed fewer sacks than Atlanta's. The Falcons stacked the box and practically dared Brohm to beat them, and he never came close.

 

Yes, unfurl the excuses as much as you want. "Buffalo's OL sucks". Great, so did Brohm. "The coaching sucked". Great, so did Brohm. "He only practiced a few times with the starting offense". Is that practice time supposed to teach him how to throw a pass to a receiver? Funny, I didn't notice Chad Henne--the QB that Miami picked exactly one selection before Green Bay picked Brohm, experiencing any difficulty hitting an open WR in his first start (against Buffalo) after 3 days of practice.

 

Look, I'm not condemning Brohm to failure as an NFL QB, but to see some of you crazies actually rating him above average and pining for him to be anything more than a possible 3rd stringer for next season is absolutely ludicrous. And you hinge it all upon evaluating his play with "all things considered". Wow, the ultimate blanket excuse.

 

Well, let me just say that I watched the game. And "all things considered", I'm going to base my opinion off of performance, not some mental fabrication of a game that I wished I would have seen. Face it folks, he looked like a practice squad QB Sunday, nothing more.

 

He gets a 1.5, with the extra 0.5 point coming because he showed a strong arm and wasn't afraid to get rid of the ball.

 

O-line problems or not, this team needs a real QB, and nobody on this roster qualifies.

Well, I'm going to guess that you didn't watch the game. Either that or you are indeed basing your opinion off some mental fabrication of a game that you thought you saw.

 

Could you explain how he made all these "piss-poor decisions"? How many times did he not see the guy that was wide open or throw into bad coverage? Certainly he made some poor decisions, but that's to be expected by any young QB. However, by your "brutal" analysis you're implying he made many poor decisions.

 

He actually attempted 2 deep balls. One was underthrown; the first was overthrown. I guess you missed the first deep throw to TO? Both passes, to me, looked likes a QB and WR just not being familiar with one another more than a bad throw. The underthrown ball is something yo see every day, in every game. Typically the WR adjusts his route a little to make an attempt at the ball. TO, IMO, didn't even try; hence, the it looked like a really bad pass when, in reality, is what jsut a sorta bad pass.

 

Why would he even try to hit defensive backs in stride? I considered it a good thing that he didn't throw to too many DBs. And considering he didn't have 4 interceptions nor did he have multiple "near" interceptions, I'd think he did a decent job of avoiding the DBs.

 

80% of his passes went to targets out of the backfield? According to nfl.com, the RBs/FB caught 41.2% of his completions. Now, I didn't run any fancy statistical analyses or anything, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say that 40% is statistically less than 80%, in this case.

 

Perhaps a few posters here are being overly optimistic; however, I'd say you're guilty of just the opposite - being overly pessimistic.

[thebandit27]

Well, I'm going to guess that you didn't watch the game. Either that or you are indeed basing your opinion off some mental fabrication of a game that you thought you saw.

 

Could you explain how he made all these "piss-poor decisions"? How many times did he not see the guy that was wide open or throw into bad coverage? Certainly he made some poor decisions, but that's to be expected by any young QB. However, by your "brutal" analysis you're implying he made many poor decisions.

 

He actually attempted 2 deep balls. One was underthrown; the first was overthrown. I guess you missed the first deep throw to TO? Both passes, to me, looked likes a QB and WR just not being familiar with one another more than a bad throw. The underthrown ball is something yo see every day, in every game. Typically the WR adjusts his route a little to make an attempt at the ball. TO, IMO, didn't even try; hence, the it looked like a really bad pass when, in reality, is what jsut a sorta bad pass.

 

Why would he even try to hit defensive backs in stride? I considered it a good thing that he didn't throw to too many DBs. And considering he didn't have 4 interceptions nor did he have multiple "near" interceptions, I'd think he did a decent job of avoiding the DBs.

 

80% of his passes went to targets out of the backfield? According to nfl.com, the RBs/FB caught 41.2% of his completions. Now, I didn't run any fancy statistical analyses or anything, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say that 40% is statistically less than 80%, in this case.

 

Perhaps a few posters here are being overly optimistic; however, I'd say you're guilty of just the opposite - being overly pessimistic.

 

The only thing I'm guilty of, Dan, is obnoxious levels of sarcasm.

 

I'm aware that a QB isn't supposed to hit DBs in stride, and doing so is NOT a good thing.

I'm also aware that 80% isn't an actual figure, that's called hyperbole...something tells me you knew that.

 

Yes, Brohm made many poor decisions. The ones that I can think of off the top of my head:

 

- His first throw to T.O., who was bracketed by a CB and a safety...no chance on that one.

- 3rd-and-8 on 3rd possession, dumps off to Jackson in the right flat, who'd have to beat 4 defenders for a first down. Replay showed an open Evans on the same side of the field prior to the dump off.

- 2nd quarter, first possession, throws to a well-covered Lee Evans and ends up hitting Coy Wire in the back of the shoulder

- 2nd quarter, 2nd possession, throws to the feet of a well-covered Shawn Nelson on 2nd-and-9. Perhaps you see the point of that throw, but I do not.

 

I supposed that you can blame underthrowing a ball by 5 yards on not knowing the receiver...perhaps he thought that TO was going to run that well-known 40-yard square-in route, while TO himself was thinking that he'd just run the go...guess we'll never know on that one. Either way, even if I were to concede to you that it was "sorta bad" instead of "really bad", is that worthy of some of the praise that the vast majority in this thread heap upon Brohm?

 

I do, however, remember the 1st deep ball, now that you mention it. And if you're going to tell me that throwing the ball 2 yards out of bounds on a go route is a familiarity issue, then I'm afraid I'm going to have to disregard that opinion on account that there's no way that's where that ball is supposed to be thrown.

 

Perhaps I am guilty of being overly-critical, but unlike other posters, I simply call it as I see it. Brohm did absolutely nothing on Sunday to move Buffalo closer to winning that football game. He was lousy, and the fact that many here laud his play is ridiculous, and comes from the same school of thought that makes guys like Steve Johnson and Anthony Hargrove legends of this board, in my opinion.

[FreakPop]

The only thing I'm guilty of, Dan, is obnoxious levels of sarcasm.

 

I'm aware that a QB isn't supposed to hit DBs in stride, and doing so is NOT a good thing.

I'm also aware that 80% isn't an actual figure, that's called hyperbole...something tells me you knew that.

 

Yes, Brohm made many poor decisions. The ones that I can think of off the top of my head:

 

- His first throw to T.O., who was bracketed by a CB and a safety...no chance on that one.

- 3rd-and-8 on 3rd possession, dumps off to Jackson in the right flat, who'd have to beat 4 defenders for a first down. Replay showed an open Evans on the same side of the field prior to the dump off.

- 2nd quarter, first possession, throws to a well-covered Lee Evans and ends up hitting Coy Wire in the back of the shoulder

- 2nd quarter, 2nd possession, throws to the feet of a well-covered Shawn Nelson on 2nd-and-9. Perhaps you see the point of that throw, but I do not.

 

I supposed that you can blame underthrowing a ball by 5 yards on not knowing the receiver...perhaps he thought that TO was going to run that well-known 40-yard square-in route, while TO himself was thinking that he'd just run the go...guess we'll never know on that one. Either way, even if I were to concede to you that it was "sorta bad" instead of "really bad", is that worthy of some of the praise that the vast majority in this thread heap upon Brohm?

 

I do, however, remember the 1st deep ball, now that you mention it. And if you're going to tell me that throwing the ball 2 yards out of bounds on a go route is a familiarity issue, then I'm afraid I'm going to have to disregard that opinion on account that there's no way that's where that ball is supposed to be thrown.

 

Perhaps I am guilty of being overly-critical, but unlike other posters, I simply call it as I see it. Brohm did absolutely nothing on Sunday to move Buffalo closer to winning that football game. He was lousy, and the fact that many here laud his play is ridiculous, and comes from the same school of thought that makes guys like Steve Johnson and Anthony Hargrove legends of this board, in my opinion.

 

 

So given all the "bad" circumstances surrounding Brohm, what were your expectations of him?

 

Sounds to me like you wanted him to perform on the level of a 5 year veteran.

[ajzepp]

He faced--if anything--only slightly more pressure than Matt Ryan, and let it be known that Buffalo's line allowed fewer sacks than Atlanta's.

 

You think maybe that had a little something to do with the fact that he was decisive with the ball? Probably not.

 

I don't know what part of "relatively speaking" you don't understand, but most of us who gave him decent marks are grading him RELATIVE to the situation....the situation being his first start in a real NFL game. I'll echo what Dan said and wonder whether you really watched the game yourself. QBs very rarely come into the league and put up huge numbers. The game is much faster for them than it was in college, and there is an adjustment period. We also run a different offense than what Green Bay runs, and as others have already pointed out endlessly, the guy has only been a Bill for a short period of time.

 

So, given the circumstances all taken together, the kid did fine. Not great, not lousy, but fine. Just like there's no basis to feel confident he's the next Jim Kelly, there's also no basis to believe he's not. Not yet.

[Red Squirrel]

He faced--if anything--only slightly more pressure than Matt Ryan, and let it be known that Buffalo's line allowed fewer sacks than Atlanta's. The Falcons stacked the box and practically dared Brohm to beat them, and he never came close.

 

I tried to make this point 2 hours after the game ended, and didn't get anywhere.

 

Another point: on the deep ball to TO, the announcer, a former QB, jumped all over TO and everyone else has followed. It is a reasonable argument that TO had a shot to prevent the INT; it is unconscionable to not mention that the pass was friggin' horrible. You cannot throw that ball inside and short. If you miss it, it HAS to be long and toward the sideline. Beuerlein is an awful announcer (it seems to take him two tries to correctly identify any non-brandname player), and he led everyone right off the cliff on this one.

 

Now having said that, Brohm was better than a 1.5. Just look at the guy on the Colts to see a 1.5. Come to think of it, we've seen a lot of worse performances against the Bills than what we got out of Brohm.

[thebandit27]

You think maybe that had a little something to do with the fact that he was decisive with the ball? Probably not.

 

I don't know what part of "relatively speaking" you don't understand, but most of us who gave him decent marks are grading him RELATIVE to the situation....the situation being his first start in a real NFL game. I'll echo what Dan said and wonder whether you really watched the game yourself. QBs very rarely come into the league and put up huge numbers. The game is much faster for them than it was in college, and there is an adjustment period. We also run a different offense than what Green Bay runs, and as others have already pointed out endlessly, the guy has only been a Bill for a short period of time.

 

So, given the circumstances all taken together, the kid did fine. Not great, not lousy, but fine. Just like there's no basis to feel confident he's the next Jim Kelly, there's also no basis to believe he's not. Not yet.

 

Your definition of "fine" and mine are 2 completely different things.

 

It is not "fine" to fail to gain a first down in your first 3 possessions, and manage only 11 for an entire game.

It is not "fine" to finally enter your opponents' territory with less than 5 minutes left in the first half.

It is not "fine" to score your only 3 points late in the 3rd quarter of a meaningless game.

It is not "fine" to have a YPA and QB rating lower than those of Jamarcus Russell.

 

As for "relatively speaking", what are you "relating" to? Look, you guys can dress up a lousy performance all you'd like, but it's not going to change the fact that Brohm wasn't good, did nothing to even remotely help the team win, and looked like a practice squad player. He was no better than Keith Null, the no-name practice squad player that started the last 3 games for the Rams. The only difference is that Null took more chances (which resulted in 5 picks to one touchdown).

 

You can tell me all day long about how long it takes a QB to get comfortable and blah blah blah, but like I said, compare him to the guy that was picked one spot ahead of him (Chad Henne). How'd he look in his first NFL action? How'd Brohm look in comparison to Mark Sanchez's first start? Or Matthew Stafford's? Or Matt Ryan's? Or Joe Flacco's? Matter of fact, he paled significantly in comparison to Trent Edwards' first start, and I think most of us are willing to admit that Edwards isn't good enough.

 

As I said, I'm not burying Brohm (a fact that apparently you missed in my last post, based on your note at the end), but to say that he "did fine" is just plain wrong. He didn't do "fine", he did poorly. If you feel differently, back it up with something other than excuses. Like maybe tell me what he did well, because I didn't see it.

[thebandit27]

So given all the "bad" circumstances surrounding Brohm, what were your expectations of him?

 

Sounds to me like you wanted him to perform on the level of a 5 year veteran.

 

Asking him to play better than Jamarcus Russell isn't exactly a lofty expectation.

 

Sounds to me like you're unwilling to admit to excusing his poor play. I'm not saying it's all his fault, never once did I even imply it, but I am saying that he played very, very poorly.

 

Nobody seems to have a convincing argument otherwise, except to say "well, what did you expect?" Umm, I expected him to play poorly, and he did.

[thebandit27]

I tried to make this point 2 hours after the game ended, and didn't get anywhere.

 

Another point: on the deep ball to TO, the announcer, a former QB, jumped all over TO and everyone else has followed. It is a reasonable argument that TO had a shot to prevent the INT; it is unconscionable to not mention that the pass was friggin' horrible. You cannot throw that ball inside and short. If you miss it, it HAS to be long and toward the sideline. Beuerlein is an awful announcer (it seems to take him two tries to correctly identify any non-brandname player), and he led everyone right off the cliff on this one.

 

Now having said that, Brohm was better than a 1.5. Just look at the guy on the Colts to see a 1.5. Come to think of it, we've seen a lot of worse performances against the Bills than what we got out of Brohm.

 

He's only better than a 1.5 under that scenario if you gave Curtis Painter a 1.

 

I don't think Painter's 3 possessions constitute enough to do so...from me, he gets an incomplete.

 

I was told to grade as though Jamarcus Russell was a 1, and Brohm had a very Russell-esque performance. He gets an extra 0.5 for being willing to get rid of the ball under pressure, something that Russell fails to do.

[Flbillsfan#1]

He's only better than a 1.5 under that scenario if you gave Curtis Painter a 1.

 

I don't think Painter's 3 possessions constitute enough to do so...from me, he gets an incomplete.

 

I was told to grade as though Jamarcus Russell was a 1, and Brohm had a very Russell-esque performance. He gets an extra 0.5 for being willing to get rid of the ball under pressure, something that Russell fails to do.

Painter singlehandedly LOST the game for the Colts. If you give Brohm a 1.5 then Painter should get a -3.

[thebandit27]

Painter singlehandedly LOST the game for the Colts. If you give Brohm a 1.5 then Painter should get a -3.

 

No, as I said, Painter gets an incomplete.

 

He played 3 series against the #1 defense in the NFL, that just so happened to be playing for it's playoff life. I find it hard to say that he "single-handedly lost" that game for the Colts, when the team had 2 more possessions and allowed 11 more points subsequent to Painter's fumble. I'd agree that he did nothing to help the team win (same goes for Brohm), and that he was more of a detriment than an asset (again, same can be said of Brohm), but the "single-handedly" stuff is for the birds in my opinion. Last time I checked, you can't get blind-sided by a rush LB if the left tackle adequately blocks him. Should Painter have gotten rid of the ball? Yes, but he's not solely to blame for the sack-fumble, nor is he to blame for the 11-play, 6-minute drive the Colts' defense allowed late in the 4th quarter.

 

Brohm got to face the #23 defense in the game, and had a full week of practice taking the starting reps. He put up 3 points and turned the ball over twice.

 

But hey, before we make this determination, let's wait a week. I'll bet we get to see both of them in action this coming Sunday, and we can decide then if they're equally bad.

 

P.S. The 1.5, as I mentioned already, was based on the suggestion (not mine, by the way), that Jamarcus Russell be used as the model for a 1. Statistically, Brohm fell short of Russell's lofty numbers, but I gave him some extra credit for reasons I already mentioned.

[Red Squirrel]

No, as I said, Painter gets an incomplete.

 

He played 3 series against the #1 defense in the NFL, that just so happened to be playing for it's playoff life. I find it hard to say that he "single-handedly lost" that game for the Colts, when the team had 2 more possessions and allowed 11 more points subsequent to Painter's fumble. I'd agree that he did nothing to help the team win (same goes for Brohm), and that he was more of a detriment than an asset (again, same can be said of Brohm), but the "single-handedly" stuff is for the birds in my opinion. Last time I checked, you can't get blind-sided by a rush LB if the left tackle adequately blocks him. Should Painter have gotten rid of the ball? Yes, but he's not solely to blame for the sack-fumble, nor is he to blame for the 11-play, 6-minute drive the Colts' defense allowed late in the 4th quarter.

 

Brohm got to face the #23 defense in the game, and had a full week of practice taking the starting reps. He put up 3 points and turned the ball over twice.

 

But hey, before we make this determination, let's wait a week. I'll bet we get to see both of them in action this coming Sunday, and we can decide then if they're equally bad.

 

P.S. The 1.5, as I mentioned already, was based on the suggestion (not mine, by the way), that Jamarcus Russell be used as the model for a 1. Statistically, Brohm fell short of Russell's lofty numbers, but I gave him some extra credit for reasons I already mentioned.

 

You've argued well enough that I'll drop my own grade from a 5 to a 4. I didn't see the post suggesting we look at Russell as a 1, so the way I looked at it is how would I grade Edwards or Fitz if they played like that, and then I added a couple points due to circumstances.

 

Honestly, we learned little, other than that the guy didn't poop in his pants.

[ajzepp]

Your definition of "fine" and mine are 2 completely different things.

 

It is not "fine" to fail to gain a first down in your first 3 possessions, and manage only 11 for an entire game.

It is not "fine" to finally enter your opponents' territory with less than 5 minutes left in the first half.

It is not "fine" to score your only 3 points late in the 3rd quarter of a meaningless game.

It is not "fine" to have a YPA and QB rating lower than those of Jamarcus Russell.

 

As for "relatively speaking", what are you "relating" to? Look, you guys can dress up a lousy performance all you'd like, but it's not going to change the fact that Brohm wasn't good, did nothing to even remotely help the team win, and looked like a practice squad player. He was no better than Keith Null, the no-name practice squad player that started the last 3 games for the Rams. The only difference is that Null took more chances (which resulted in 5 picks to one touchdown).

 

You can tell me all day long about how long it takes a QB to get comfortable and blah blah blah, but like I said, compare him to the guy that was picked one spot ahead of him (Chad Henne). How'd he look in his first NFL action? How'd Brohm look in comparison to Mark Sanchez's first start? Or Matthew Stafford's? Or Matt Ryan's? Or Joe Flacco's? Matter of fact, he paled significantly in comparison to Trent Edwards' first start, and I think most of us are willing to admit that Edwards isn't good enough.

 

As I said, I'm not burying Brohm (a fact that apparently you missed in my last post, based on your note at the end), but to say that he "did fine" is just plain wrong. He didn't do "fine", he did poorly. If you feel differently, back it up with something other than excuses. Like maybe tell me what he did well, because I didn't see it.

 

The difference between Brohm and all those other guys you mentioned is a little thing called PREPARATION. Each of them had full training camps, OTAs, etc to learn the playbook, get familiar with their teammates, get comfortable in the offense, etc, etc. Why this point is lost on you, I don't know. A veteran QB can sometimes come to a new team and perform well from the start, but asking a newbie to do that is a tall order.

 

And the only QB you mentioned that's really any sort of real comparison is Henne. Henne played some last year, and he's started nearly every game this year. He's thrown more INTs than TDs, been sacked 24 times, lost three fumbles, and has a QB rating of less than 75. Matthew Stafford completed only 53% of his passes, threw 20 INTs to only 13 TDs, was sacked 24 times and has a rating of 61. These guys were higher picks in the draft and had full offseasons to prepare.

 

Brohm did fine. We need more evidence before we can determine if he's starter material or not.