Beerball Posted May 22, 2010 Posted May 22, 2010 The board has finally reached a consensus on this subject after many years of arguments. Nice work folks. Survey says: flutie was below average and washed up finally, birds are singing, sun is shining, life is good
The_Philster Posted May 22, 2010 Posted May 22, 2010 The question is would we want the 98 version of him on our roster today, with the dearth of good QBs? Those of you who say no he sukked are absolutely insane. He was an above average QB (with a good arm, the guy was no captain checkdown). He won like we haven't seen since he left, save for the one Bledsoe 9-7 season. The guy was a pro bowler for us for gsake. That was 98....the 99 version of Flutie was way below average...but as far as having a good arm? Maybe in his CFL days, but his lack of arm strength was brought up repeatedly by Jaws and Hodge on NFL Matchup....his lack of arm strength may have been a major reason he didn't throw the ball to Moulds and Reed when they were open in 99...he couldn't get the ball that far
RJ (not THAT RJ) Posted May 22, 2010 Posted May 22, 2010 Yes he fumbled in the first half, but he also put the team in more winning positions throughout the game (see my posts about Eric Mould & Andre Reed costing the Bills 2 TD's). I also remember when the Bills were trailing the Jags in the 4th quarter and Thurman botched the hand off, Flutie tucked in ball in and dove towards the pilon for the winning TD. I'm not saying Flutie was great, but with the terrible O-line we had, a mobile QB is what we needed. No, he did not fumble in the first half. He threw an INT in the end zone, which he did on many occasions when the defense did not let him run around and he was unable to see the field properly. I remember the Jags game too; it is the exception. There was much blame to go around in the Dolphins playoff, but DF carries a big share of it. Why his fans refuse to see that is beyond me. I wanted him to succeed when he played for the team I pull for, but am not blind to his myriad faults.
Jerry Jabber Posted May 22, 2010 Posted May 22, 2010 No, he did not fumble in the first half. He threw an INT in the end zone, which he did on many occasions when the defense did not let him run around and he was unable to see the field properly. I remember the Jags game too; it is the exception. There was much blame to go around in the Dolphins playoff, but DF carries a big share of it. Why his fans refuse to see that is beyond me. I wanted him to succeed when he played for the team I pull for, but am not blind to his myriad faults. Here are the 2 playoff stats for Flutie & Johnson: Flutie: 21 for 36, 360 yards, 1 TD, 1 INT, 2 Fumbles, Sacked 3 Times Johnson: 16 for 22, 131 yards, O TD, O INT, 2 Fumbles, Sacked 6 times. The Titans turned Johnson's turnover (which was deep in Buffalo's terrority) into a touchdown. One of Johnson's sacks was for a safety. There's no denying Flutie had 3 turnovers that game, but what the stats don't show is Moulds fumble (which should have went for a TD if Moulds ran fast & secured the ball) and Reed's personal foul penalty on the goaline. Since instant replay wasn't allowed back then, it's arguable that Reed was in for the TD, but that still gave him no right to hit the ref in the back with the ball and get a 15 yard personal foul penalty. Even though Flutie made mistakes in that game, he still did enough to put the Bills in position to win by passing for 360 yards and putting the ball in Moulds & Reeds hands to get TD's, in which those 2 players majorly screwed up. That's why it's a team game. On the other hand for 58 minutes of the game, Rob Johnson did nothing to put the Bills into a winning position. His fumble costs the Bills 7 points when the Titans capitalized on that turnover, plus cost the Bills another 2 points with one of the 6 sacks of the day being a safety. Johnson had a little over 1/3 of the passing yards that Flutie had compared to the previous year's playoff game. Yes, Johnson stepped up his game on the final drive to put the Bills in FG range, but that wasn't enough. 2 minutes of good play could not erase 58 minutes of bad play. Bottom line, Flutie was an average QB who played with a lot of heart & determination. Johnson had all the physical tools, but never had the drive & determination and could never put all the pieces together to become a franchise QB.
Malazan Posted May 22, 2010 Posted May 22, 2010 What was Madden scores? That is the only objective way to judge talent.
bbillyfootballcoach Posted May 22, 2010 Posted May 22, 2010 For all his "magic," when push comes to shove, he fumbled. End of story. if there ever was an example of the line being responsible, that would be it, running backs arent supposed to fumble, blind sided qb's all fumble. its a normal occurrence, why you dont understand the dynamics of football?, its not that complicated. If a qb fumbles it means he got hit, not that he sucks, qbs who always get hit suck like RJ because they never get rid of the ball because they cant see the route opening up, Fluite almost never took a hit. hardly ever fumbled. you waste my time with your lack of common sense.
bbillyfootballcoach Posted May 22, 2010 Posted May 22, 2010 Coulda, shoulda, woulda ... IF Flutie did not throw a pick ... IF Flutie did not fumble the ball (TWICE) ... Did Moulds and Reeds mistakes hurt the team? Yes. But I find it amazing how the mistakes of 2 (TWO) other players are needed to cover up and gloss over the multiple mistakes made by 1 (ONE) player. thats because the two flutie mistakes were normal par for the course mistakes, while reed and moulds had dumb ass mental show off , ego mistakes. you dont see the difference genius??
Brandon Posted May 23, 2010 Posted May 23, 2010 thats because the two flutie mistakes were normal par for the course mistakes, while reed and moulds had dumb ass mental show off , ego mistakes. you dont see the difference genius?? Sure, it makes perfect sense now. Doug's turnovers don't matter in the same way everyone else's does. You need to petition the NFL about this outrage. Last I checked, they don't give a sh*t why you turned the ball over. They have the audacity to consider a turnover to be a turnover, regardless of whether its a 'normal, par for the course mistake' or a 'dumb ass, mental show off, ego mistake'. Its an unbelievable travesty.
bbillyfootballcoach Posted May 23, 2010 Posted May 23, 2010 Sure, it makes perfect sense now. Doug's turnovers don't matter in the same way everyone else's does. You need to petition the NFL about this outrage. Last I checked, they don't give a sh*t why you turned the ball over. They have the audacity to consider a turnover to be a turnover, regardless of whether its a 'normal, par for the course mistake' or a 'dumb ass, mental show off, ego mistake'. Its an unbelievable travesty. who are "they"?? i care why the ball was turned over, if a guy show boats or hits a ref or doesnt secure the ball, thats a mental error, getting blind sided is the fault of a lineman not the qb, sometimes receivers knock balls up in the air that get picked or run the wrong route. Are those picks the qb,s fault? anyone with half a brain can tell the difference in "why" a turnover occurred. you dont always assign it to the player named for it. Thats for stat purposes but it doesnt matter always "whose" stat it was, you have to look at the whole play.
Cynical Posted May 23, 2010 Posted May 23, 2010 thats because the two flutie mistakes were normal par for the course mistakes, while reed and moulds had dumb ass mental show off , ego mistakes. you dont see the difference genius?? You got one thing right. Flutie coughing up the ball was par for the course ... One other thing. On Flutie's game losing fumble, he wasn't blind sided.
Brandon Posted May 23, 2010 Posted May 23, 2010 who are "they"?? i care why the ball was turned over, if a guy show boats or hits a ref or doesnt secure the ball, thats a mental error, getting blind sided is the fault of a lineman not the qb, sometimes receivers knock balls up in the air that get picked or run the wrong route. Are those picks the qb,s fault? anyone with half a brain can tell the difference in "why" a turnover occurred. you dont always assign it to the player named for it. Thats for stat purposes but it doesnt matter always "whose" stat it was, you have to look at the whole play. Absolutely. Like I said, Doug's turnovers aren't his fault, they're someone else's. Always.
Jerry Jabber Posted May 23, 2010 Posted May 23, 2010 You got one thing right.Flutie coughing up the ball was par for the course ... One other thing. On Flutie's game losing fumble, he wasn't blind sided. Trace Armstrong did not hit Flutie head on. Flutie was in throwing motion when Armstrong's helmet blasted Flutie's right arm (which had the ball), Armstrong was coming in on the right side.
Jerry Jabber Posted May 23, 2010 Posted May 23, 2010 Absolutely. Like I said, Doug's turnovers aren't his fault, they're someone else's. Always. How was Moulds fumble Flutie's fault? How was Reed's personal foul penalty on the goaline Flutie's fault? The INT in the first half was Flutie's fault, but getting blasted helmet first in the throwing arm by Trace Armstrong was the O-line & Thurman Thomas' fault. So Flutie was suppose to block a linemen first himself, then throw the ball?
Brandon Posted May 23, 2010 Posted May 23, 2010 How was Moulds fumble Flutie's fault? How was Reed's personal foul penalty on the goaline Flutie's fault? The INT in the first half was Flutie's fault, but getting blasted helmet first in the throwing arm by Trace Armstrong was the O-line & Thurman Thomas' fault. So Flutie was suppose to block a linemen first himself, then throw the ball? I've never said that Flutie should be blamed for a fumble by Eric Moulds or a penalty committed by Andre Reed. As for that Flutie fumble, however, somehow I doubt you were as generous when someone blew a block that led to Rob Johnson being sacked. I'm not going to say that there's no blame on the part of the guys blocking, but in the end, the player who coughs up the ball has plenty of responsibility as well. My initial argument with the other poster was due to his assertion that there's some real difference between one player's effort mistake and another's boneheaded stupidity. I guess that's somewhat true in a Monday morning QB kind of way, but on gameday, the NFL doesn't make a distinction between the two. A fumble is a fumble. An interception is an interception. It doesn't matter why it happened. The NFL doesn't award you the ball back because you were trying hard when you fumbled the ball away to the opposing team unless your name happens to be Tom Brady.
Cynical Posted May 23, 2010 Posted May 23, 2010 Trace Armstrong did not hit Flutie head on. Flutie was in throwing motion when Armstrong's helmet blasted Flutie's right arm (which had the ball), Armstrong was coming in on the right side. Do I really need to explain "blind side"? He may or may not have seen the guy, but he was not blind sided.
Recommended Posts