If all we did was plug in a Pro Bowl QB to last years team

[BYGD1]

let's just say for the sake of arguement we replaced Trent Edwards with a pro bowl level QB ( like Rivers, Rodgers, Romo or McNabb) ......not an ALL PRO level like (Manning, Brees or Brady)......how many more wins would we have had from last years team if that was the only difference and everything else stayed exactly the same (players, injuries, etc...) ??

 

 

do the exact same thing at Left Tackle,.....plug in a pro bowl level LT (like Roos, Diehl, Long or Gross)....not ALL PRO like Clady or Thomas).

 

 

i know we need BOTH a QB & LT but i would rather have a below average QB with an Pro Bowl LT than a pro Bowl QB with a below average LT. the left tackle helps in both facets of the offense....RUNNING and passing.

 

in another thread someone made a point about how good Fitzpatrick and the bills looked against INDY at the end of the season when he had plenty of protection against indy's second string.

We would have Finished 6-10 with a Back Up QB probably Fitz as Rivers, Rodgers Romo or McNabb would have been broken

[Doc]

Let's see...

 

Bills @ Pats: Trent wasn't horrible in that game, but I have to believe that a Pro Bowl QB would have gotten us into field goal range on that final drive.

 

Cleveland @ Bills: A Pro Bowl QB puts up at least 6 points against the Cleveland D.

 

Bills @ Jags: That was game that the Bills almost won with mediocre play from Fitz.

 

Pats @ Bills: The Bills arguably outplayed the Pats in that game but found a way to lose because of a couple big plays and untimely penalties.

 

Bills @ Jets: Offense was totally inept -- but still had a chance to win until the very end.

 

That is 5 games I count. Not to mention games like the Saints and Texans ones whose outcome may have been different if the offense hadn't put the defense in a bad situation for 3+ quarters.

Bingo.

[Sisyphean Bills]

If your Pro Bowl QB is carted off the field in week 3 or 4 because he has no line and gets broken, it doesn't make much difference at all.

[Buffalo Destroyers!]

16-0

[Rob's House]

The Bills had a Pro bowl LT with a mediocre (at best QB) and they couldn't get past 7-9, how much worse were they without that Pro Bowl LT and a revolving door o-line?

 

Having a LT doesn't do sh*t if the rest of your line sucks.

[Doc]

If your Pro Bowl QB is carted off the field in week 3 or 4 because he has no line and gets broken, it doesn't make much difference at all.

Not all QB's are as injury-prone as Edwards.

[Rob's House]

let's just say for the sake of arguement we replaced Trent Edwards with a pro bowl level QB ( like Rivers, Rodgers, Romo or McNabb) ......not an ALL PRO level like (Manning, Brees or Brady)......how many more wins would we have had from last years team if that was the only difference and everything else stayed exactly the same (players, injuries, etc...) ??

 

Seeing as how Rivers and Romo have always had a strong line, who can say what they'd do with a second and a half to make a decision.

 

As far as McNabb goes, he's never done well when pressured in Philly, not sure why that would be different in Buffalo.

 

And as far as Rogers go, I know it's popular to pretent he dominated behind a 3rd rate Oline, but that's fantasy. He hung in there and lead the league in sacks by a mile. When the pressure got there, he went down, when he had time he made big plays. Once that line came together at mid season, that's when GB started to dominate.

[apuszczalowski]

Having a LT doesn't do sh*t if the rest of your line sucks.

And having a Pro Bowl LT/line doesn't do sh*t if you don't have someone throwing the ball

 

You can argue this forever, But a great QB can make up for a mediocre o-line, but a great o-line isn't going to make a mediocre QB great

[Sisyphean Bills]

Not all QB's are as injury-prone as Edwards.

Jim Kelly wasn't "injury-prone" when he had one of the most dominant OLs in the game in front of him.

[Doc]

Jim Kelly wasn't "injury-prone" when he had one of the most dominant OLs in the game in front of him.

When was Kelly ever injury-prone?

 

And look at a guy like Aaron Rodgers. He's been sacked 84 times the past 2 years. Hasn't missed a start yet.

[DarthICE]

let's just say for the sake of arguement we replaced Trent Edwards with a pro bowl level QB ( like Rivers, Rodgers, Romo or McNabb) ......not an ALL PRO level like (Manning, Brees or Brady)......how many more wins would we have had from last years team if that was the only difference and everything else stayed exactly the same (players, injuries, etc...) ??

 

 

do the exact same thing at Left Tackle,.....plug in a pro bowl level LT (like Roos, Diehl, Long or Gross)....not ALL PRO like Clady or Thomas).

 

 

i know we need BOTH a QB & LT but i would rather have a below average QB with an Pro Bowl LT than a pro Bowl QB with a below average LT. the left tackle helps in both facets of the offense....RUNNING and passing.

 

in another thread someone made a point about how good Fitzpatrick and the bills looked against INDY at the end of the season when he had plenty of protection against indy's second string.

 

I can count 4 EASY maybe 6

 

09/14 @ New England Patriots L 24 - 25

09/27 NEW ORLEANS SAINTS L 7 - 27

10/11 CLEVELAND BROWNS L 3 - 6

11/22 @ Jacksonville Jaguars L 18 - 15

12/03 NEW YORK JETS (Toronto) L 13 - 19

12/20 NEW ENGLAND PATRIOTS L 10 - 17

 

If we had a pro bowl talented QB at the helm we win no less than 4 of those games. Guess what? That is 10-12 wins and maybe the division title.

[Sisyphean Bills]

When was Kelly ever injury-prone?

Kelly got injured several times towards the end of his career and the mounting injuries were a factor in his decision to retire. He was older, but he also was playing behind a much crappier line since the Bills were paying all their money to the stars and let the line fall apart. Who you care to label "injury-prone" or not is simply irrelevant.

[DarthICE]

Jim Kelly wasn't "injury-prone" when he had one of the most dominant OLs in the game in front of him.

 

Really? Huh, against the vikes in 94 ( I was there) he got his knee smashed. I believe it was hurt in the superbowl against the cowboys as well.

 

He was injured behind the 'great' OL that we had. BTW that 'great' OL got its ass whipped 3 out of 4 superbowls.

[Nico]

same record

[Doc]

Kelly got injured several times towards the end of his career and the mounting injuries were a factor in his decision to retire. He was older, but he also was playing behind a much crappier line since the Bills were paying all their money to the stars and let the line fall apart. Who you care to label "injury-prone" or not is simply irrelevant.

It's hardly "irrelevant." Some guys are injury-prone and/or prone to taking more sacks. RJ was injury-prone AND took more sacks behind the same O-line as Flutie. Kelly was not injury-prone, even behind a weaker O-line later in his career. He missed maybe a game a year at most towards the end of his career.

[Alphadawg7]

let's just say for the sake of arguement we replaced Trent Edwards with a pro bowl level QB ( like Rivers, Rodgers, Romo or McNabb) ......not an ALL PRO level like (Manning, Brees or Brady)......how many more wins would we have had from last years team if that was the only difference and everything else stayed exactly the same (players, injuries, etc...) ??

 

 

do the exact same thing at Left Tackle,.....plug in a pro bowl level LT (like Roos, Diehl, Long or Gross)....not ALL PRO like Clady or Thomas).

 

 

i know we need BOTH a QB & LT but i would rather have a below average QB with an Pro Bowl LT than a pro Bowl QB with a below average LT. the left tackle helps in both facets of the offense....RUNNING and passing.

 

in another thread someone made a point about how good Fitzpatrick and the bills looked against INDY at the end of the season when he had plenty of protection against indy's second string.

 

This isnt even a worthy debate...lets be honest here. With a better QB, we EASILY win at least 5 more games. LT upgrade wouldnt have nearly the same impact. If you could say that our QB's played well when given time and took advantage of that, then you might have some validity with the LT. However, our QB's were not good even when given time. Even in week 1 Trents lack of production in the second half and inability to throw to a WR in that game kept the game close enough that NE was able to steal it. With McNabb in there pushing the ball downfield the whole game, using our WR's, and further opening up the running game we would have had a bigger lead and won that game.

 

So, its no secret our OL struggled, especially with injuries to key players like Wood and Butler, but a Pro Bowl LT would not have gotten us to the playoffs last year.

 

You want further proof, the year before we HAD a Pro Bowl LT with the same sorry starting QB going into the season and a terrible backup...guess what, still a losing record and still atrocious play by our QB's even though our line was better and had a Pro Bowl LT.

[Rob's House]

And having a Pro Bowl LT/line doesn't do sh*t if you don't have someone throwing the ball

 

You can argue this forever, But a great QB can make up for a mediocre o-line, but a great o-line isn't going to make a mediocre QB great

 

Tell that to Mark Rypien

[Alphadawg7]

I can count 4 EASY maybe 6

 

09/14 @ New England Patriots L 24 - 25

09/27 NEW ORLEANS SAINTS L 7 - 27

10/11 CLEVELAND BROWNS L 3 - 6

11/22 @ Jacksonville Jaguars L 18 - 15

12/03 NEW YORK JETS (Toronto) L 13 - 19

12/20 NEW ENGLAND PATRIOTS L 10 - 17

 

If we had a pro bowl talented QB at the helm we win no less than 4 of those games. Guess what? That is 10-12 wins and maybe the division title.

 

I cant believe it, but I actually totally agree with this post by you...lol...whats this world coming too...

[papazoid]

obviously there is no perfect answer to building a super bowl winner....and there are always examples or exceptions to make in support of or against any strategy.

 

- in the early 90's the bills had pro bowlers at BOTH , QB (Kelly) and across the O-line (Wolford, Richter,Hull,Davis & Ballard) and STILL lost 4 times in the Super Bowl.....but they were an explosive high scoring machine...because the O-line provided outstanding protection and Kelly had ALOT of time to look all over the field.

 

- "IF" Kelly & Thurman played behind last years (or any recent years) offensive line for their entire careers...NEITHER would be in the HOF.

 

- my earlier point about how Fitz looked in the last INDY game was simply about the difference "protection" means. .... the difference between giving the QB over 5 seconds to throw (1990 bills) versus under 3 seconds (2009 bills) is enormous. in that Indy game everything about the bills stayed exactly the same (all the players).....but because INDY rested their starters, the bills were able to provide better protection allowing Fitz and the team to look great.

 

- Jim McMahon, Doug Williams, Jeff Hostetler, Mark Rypien, Trent Dilfer, Brad Johnson and Eli Manning were all mediocre QB's with great O-lines that won Super Bowls.

 

- THE BIG PICTURE....it comes down to where you "invest" the most of your resources $$$ by position (in the draft or free agency). do you pick "finesse" positions like WR, DB, RB & QB's or do you put your money in "Power" positions like OL, DL & LB.

 

i say you build a power team FIRST and add finesse later.......the bills of the 2000's have drafted almost exclusively "finesse" players with their first round picks (McKelvin, Lynch, Whitner,Parrish, Evans, Losman, McGahee & Clements). Todays game is becoming a QB driven league...so, the ONLY exception to drafting finesse over power is for a franchise QB..... thats why i have previously posted that "IF" Clausen (or Bradford) is there at #9...you take him.....i don't think he will be...and i hope he's not.....because i want the bills to draft a LT........NOT another RB like Spiller.

[Bill from NYC]

obviously there is no perfect answer to building a super bowl winner....and there are always examples or exceptions to make in support of or against any strategy.

 

- in the early 90's the bills had pro bowlers at BOTH , QB (Kelly) and across the O-line (Wolford, Richter,Hull,Davis & Ballard) and STILL lost 4 times in the Super Bowl.....but they were an explosive high scoring machine...because the O-line provided outstanding protection and Kelly had ALOT of time to look all over the field.

 

- "IF" Kelly & Thurman played behind last years (or any recent years) offensive line for their entire careers...NEITHER would be in the HOF.

 

- my earlier point about how Fitz looked in the last INDY game was simply about the difference "protection" means. .... the difference between giving the QB over 5 seconds to throw (1990 bills) versus under 3 seconds (2009 bills) is enormous. in that Indy game everything about the bills stayed exactly the same (all the players).....but because INDY rested their starters, the bills were able to provide better protection allowing Fitz and the team to look great.

 

- Jim McMahon, Doug Williams, Jeff Hostetler, Mark Rypien, Trent Dilfer, Brad Johnson and Eli Manning were all mediocre QB's with great O-lines that won Super Bowls.

 

- THE BIG PICTURE....it comes down to where you "invest" the most of your resources $$$ by position (in the draft or free agency). do you pick "finesse" positions like WR, DB, RB & QB's or do you put your money in "Power" positions like OL, DL & LB.

 

i say you build a power team FIRST and add finesse later.......the bills of the 2000's have drafted almost exclusively "finesse" players with their first round picks (McKelvin, Lynch, Whitner,Parrish, Evans, Losman, McGahee & Clements). Todays game is becoming a QB driven league...so, the ONLY exception to drafting finesse over power is for a franchise QB..... thats why i have previously posted that "IF" Clausen (or Bradford) is there at #9...you take him.....i don't think he will be...and i hope he's not.....because i want the bills to draft a LT........NOT another RB like Spiller.

 

Utterly fantastic post.