If we beat the Titans, do we win the Superbowl in 2000?

[Dr. K]

I personally feel Flutie would of been a better all around QB for the playoffs if heroics were needed, he certainly showed the part all season long to get us there.

 

Not to make an issue of it, since I think we agree that overall DF was the better QB, but Flutie did not show "heroics" all season long to get the Bills to the playoffs. He showed adequate QB play, and in the second half of the season, completely mediocre offensive performance. 19 points per game average, two 31 point performances as highs out of 15 games started (and in one of them the Bills got to 31 points because of a kickoff return for a touchdown.

 

I don't deny that since then we have had less than adequate QB performance for a decade (with some exceptions for brief periods), and that mediocre offensive performance would be a breath of fresh air in the current situation.

 

I happened to look back at the Bills' only winning season in the last decade, under Mike Mularkey whom so many here were eager to run out of town. In the last part of that season, leading up to the ignominious loss to the Steelers in the finale (where the Bills still scored 24 points), these were the scores of the previous six games, all Bills wins: 37-17, 38-9, 42-32, 37-7, 33-17, and 41-7. Four of those were road games.

 

This is they head coach and offensive strategist that everyone denigrated as the "meathead."

[Jerry Jabber]

In 2001, the Chargers drafted Tomlinson, who gave them 1,600 yard rushing and receiving and 10 TD's, and signed Wiley, who gave them 13 sacks. The Bills OTOH had cut Bruce, Andre, and Thurman after the 1999 season, Ted Washington before that season, had to let Wiley walk, and lost Cowart in the first game of that season. That talent during the Flutie-RJ years was far and away the highest during 1998-1999. Again RJ's problem was that he took too many sacks and was injury-prone, while Flutie eventually was figured-out.

 

Excuses, excuses, excuses...

 

Bottom line, Flutie was better than Johnson. Flutie got screwed over in Buffalo. Flutie had the better Win/Loss record compared to Johnson in Buffalo. Flutie was a better leader on the offense compared to Johnson's laxidasical attitude. Flutie made the most out of a lot of broken plays. Flutie knew how to read defenses and make the changes on the line. Flutie was in the NFL a hell of a lot longer than Rob Johnson. Even Rich Eisen from NFL network laughed in disbelief that Rob Johnson was in a quarterback controversey. I'm not saying Flutie was awesome or even great, but he was better than Johnson, Todd Collins and Alex Van Pelt. Flutie worked with the bad O-line we had at that time. Too bad Flutie wasn't 6 or 7 inches taller.

 

Another point, who helped sell the luxury seats? Was it Johnson? No... It was Flutie. So keep making up the excuses, I know you're a Flutie hater.

[Skoobydum]

Not to make an issue of it, since I think we agree that overall DF was the better QB, but Flutie did not show "heroics" all season long to get the Bills to the playoffs. He showed adequate QB play, and in the second half of the season, completely mediocre offensive performance. 19 points per game average, two 31 point performances as highs out of 15 games started (and in one of them the Bills got to 31 points because of a kickoff return for a touchdown.

 

I don't deny that since then we have had less than adequate QB performance for a decade (with some exceptions for brief periods), and that mediocre offensive performance would be a breath of fresh air in the current situation.

 

I happened to look back at the Bills' only winning season in the last decade, under Mike Mularkey whom so many here were eager to run out of town. In the last part of that season, leading up to the ignominious loss to the Steelers in the finale (where the Bills still scored 24 points), these were the scores of the previous six games, all Bills wins: 37-17, 38-9, 42-32, 37-7, 33-17, and 41-7. Four of those were road games.

 

This is they head coach and offensive strategist that everyone denigrated as the "meathead."

 

Well looking back over the past 10 years, we certainly didn't move ahead by getting rid of Mularkey.

[Jerry Jabber]

Not to make an issue of it, since I think we agree that overall DF was the better QB, but Flutie did not show "heroics" all season long to get the Bills to the playoffs. He showed adequate QB play, and in the second half of the season, completely mediocre offensive performance. 19 points per game average, two 31 point performances as highs out of 15 games started (and in one of them the Bills got to 31 points because of a kickoff return for a touchdown.

 

I don't deny that since then we have had less than adequate QB performance for a decade (with some exceptions for brief periods), and that mediocre offensive performance would be a breath of fresh air in the current situation.

 

I happened to look back at the Bills' only winning season in the last decade, under Mike Mularkey whom so many here were eager to run out of town. In the last part of that season, leading up to the ignominious loss to the Steelers in the finale (where the Bills still scored 24 points), these were the scores of the previous six games, all Bills wins: 37-17, 38-9, 42-32, 37-7, 33-17, and 41-7. Four of those were road games.

 

This is they head coach and offensive strategist that everyone denigrated as the "meathead."

 

I liked Mularkey's creativity on offense. My favorite trick play from his time was when Bledsoe went in on a QB sneak and threw it back to Mcgahee, who then ran it in 33 yards for a TD. If Donahoe wasn't an idiot and would have given Bledsoe one more year as starter, who knows how the 2005 would have turned out. I think it would have been better than the 5-11 record between Holcomb & Losman. I'm not syaing Mularkey was a good HC, but he would have been a good OC for us.

[Doc]

Excuses, excuses, excuses...

 

Bottom line, Flutie was better than Johnson. Flutie got screwed over in Buffalo. Flutie had the better Win/Loss record compared to Johnson in Buffalo. Flutie was a better leader on the offense compared to Johnson's laxidasical attitude. Flutie made the most out of a lot of broken plays. Flutie knew how to read defenses and make the changes on the line. Flutie was in the NFL a hell of a lot longer than Rob Johnson. Even Rich Eisen from NFL network laughed in disbelief that Rob Johnson was in a quarterback controversey. I'm not saying Flutie was awesome or even great, but he was better than Johnson, Todd Collins and Alex Van Pelt. Flutie worked with the bad O-line we had at that time. Too bad Flutie wasn't 6 or 7 inches taller.

 

Another point, who helped sell the luxury seats? Was it Johnson? No... It was Flutie. So keep making up the excuses, I know you're a Flutie hater.

You mean excuses, excuses, excuses, like Flutie's record in SD being like RJ's record with the Bills from 2000-2001?

 

Flutie was better because he was a gimmick that stayed healthy. His play in 1999 dropped-off significantly when teams learned how to defend him. I agree that if he were 6 or 7 inches taller, or had returned to the NFL about 5 years earlier, we could have gotten a better sense of what he truly was in the NFL. But to say he was better than RJ, when playing on better teams, doesn't say much for either player.

[BillsfaninFl]

So, if we get by Tennessee who held no real higher position than us do we get to and beat St. Louis ? Did we have the firepower to make it all the way and change our destiny at that time?

 

Checked my crystal ball.

No, we would not have won it all that year. But a rip in the spacetime continuum would have occured and "wide right" never would have happened. Instead, we would have won four straight Super Bowls and Buffalo would now be a city of 3 million people. Wait!

That's not a smoky vision in the crystal ball. There's a smudge there. Never mind.

[Skoobydum]

Checked my crystal ball.

No, we would not have won it all that year. But a rip in the spacetime continuum would have occured and "wide right" never would have happened. Instead, we would have won four straight Super Bowls and Buffalo would now be a city of 3 million people. Wait!

That's not a smoky vision in the crystal ball. There's a smudge there. Never mind.

[Arkady Renko]

It is very simple my Bills Fan brothers. Flutie plays...we win. One of Mr. Wilson's worst all time blunders.

 

Not that simple. Who knows what would have happened.

[Doc]

Not that simple. Who knows what would have happened.

Hey, he might have played on ST's on that fateful play. He did have that drop-kick a few years ago...

[K-9]

I liked Mularkey's creativity on offense. My favorite trick play from his time was when Bledsoe went in on a QB sneak and threw it back to Mcgahee, who then ran it in 33 yards for a TD. If Donahoe wasn't an idiot and would have given Bledsoe one more year as starter, who knows how the 2005 would have turned out. I think it would have been better than the 5-11 record between Holcomb & Losman. I'm not syaing Mularkey was a good HC, but he would have been a good OC for us.

 

I agree. TD canning Bledsoe, when EVERYONE on the team wanted him as their QB instead of JP, whom most of the team couldn't stand, fractured the locker room that year. TD's ego got in the way. He was hell bent on starting HIS 1st round QB who wasn't close to being ready and, well, we all saw what happened. Not only did it screw Bledsoe and piss off the team but it ended up hurting JP as well. He NEVER should have been thrust into a position he clearly wasn't ready for.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[mike oxhurtz]

You mean excuses, excuses, excuses, like Flutie's record in SD being like RJ's record with the Bills from 2000-2001?

 

Flutie was better because he was a gimmick that stayed healthy. His play in 1999 dropped-off significantly when teams learned how to defend him. I agree that if he were 6 or 7 inches taller, or had returned to the NFL about 5 years earlier, we could have gotten a better sense of what he truly was in the NFL. But to say he was better than RJ, when playing on better teams, doesn't say much for either player.

 

How was Drew Brees' record before SD drafted Phillip Rivers? Flutie was 8-14 and Brees was 10-17. Maybe the fact that the year before the Bills did their exodus to San Diego, that the Chargers were 1-15 and by far the worst team in the league...you think that might have anything at all to do with Flutie's & Brees' bad win/loss records from 2001-2003? The Chargers were rebuilding from being the worst team in the league in 2000, so it took sometime. Here's another example, before Jim Kelly came to the Bills, the Bills had consecutive 2-14 seasons from 84-85, once Kelly arrived, the Bills finished the 1986 season 4-12. In 1987, the Bills finished 7-9. So, just like the Bills, the Chargers were rebuilding. So comparing Flutie's stats with a rebuilding San Diego team, to Johnson's stats with the Bills when the Bills were a good team for 3 out of the 4 years during Johnson's time is ridiculous.

 

The facts are, Flutie was 21-9 as the Bills starter, while Johnson was 7-11 while they were both on the Bills. That's a 0.7 winning percentage for Flutie and a 0.388 winning percentage for Johnson. In 2001, the offense was supposed to be tailored to Johnson's strengths. I remember hearing on the radio about the new west coast offense that was being installed and that the 2001 Bills were supposed to be better than the 2000 Bills. Johnson went 1-7 as the starter in 2001 and was knocked out again.

[Adam]

How was Drew Brees' record before SD drafted Phillip Rivers? Flutie was 8-14 and Brees was 10-17. Maybe the fact that the year before the Bills did their exodus to San Diego, that the Chargers were 1-15 and by far the worst team in the league...you think that might have anything at all to do with Flutie's & Brees' bad win/loss records from 2001-2003? The Chargers were rebuilding from being the worst team in the league in 2000, so it took sometime. Here's another example, before Jim Kelly came to the Bills, the Bills had consecutive 2-14 seasons from 84-85, once Kelly arrived, the Bills finished the 1986 season 4-12. In 1987, the Bills finished 7-9. So, just like the Bills, the Chargers were rebuilding. So comparing Flutie's stats with a rebuilding San Diego team, to Johnson's stats with the Bills when the Bills were a good team for 3 out of the 4 years during Johnson's time is ridiculous.

 

The facts are, Flutie was 21-9 as the Bills starter, while Johnson was 7-11 while they were both on the Bills. That's a 0.7 winning percentage for Flutie and a 0.388 winning percentage for Johnson. In 2001, the offense was supposed to be tailored to Johnson's strengths. I remember hearing on the radio about the new west coast offense that was being installed and that the 2001 Bills were supposed to be better than the 2000 Bills. Johnson went 1-7 as the starter in 2001 and was knocked out again.

Actually, the FACT is that those records belonged to the teams, not the QB. I am a professional statistician and I can tell you that although there are way too many stats for QBs, wins and losses are not among them.

 

I don't think there is any argument that Flutie was better than Johnson, but Flutie was not screwed by the Bills- this is pro sports and stuff happens.

 

It wouldn't have mattered who was the QB in 2001, with Sullivan and Hulsey on the Oline, the offense was doomed to fail. The defense was also being transitioned and wasn't very good either.

[Skoobydum]

How was Drew Brees' record before SD drafted Phillip Rivers? Flutie was 8-14 and Brees was 10-17. Maybe the fact that the year before the Bills did their exodus to San Diego, that the Chargers were 1-15 and by far the worst team in the league...you think that might have anything at all to do with Flutie's & Brees' bad win/loss records from 2001-2003? The Chargers were rebuilding from being the worst team in the league in 2000, so it took sometime. Here's another example, before Jim Kelly came to the Bills, the Bills had consecutive 2-14 seasons from 84-85, once Kelly arrived, the Bills finished the 1986 season 4-12. In 1987, the Bills finished 7-9. So, just like the Bills, the Chargers were rebuilding. So comparing Flutie's stats with a rebuilding San Diego team, to Johnson's stats with the Bills when the Bills were a good team for 3 out of the 4 years during Johnson's time is ridiculous.

 

The facts are, Flutie was 21-9 as the Bills starter, while Johnson was 7-11 while they were both on the Bills. That's a 0.7 winning percentage for Flutie and a 0.388 winning percentage for Johnson. In 2001, the offense was supposed to be tailored to Johnson's strengths. I remember hearing on the radio about the new west coast offense that was being installed and that the 2001 Bills were supposed to be better than the 2000 Bills. Johnson went 1-7 as the starter in 2001 and was knocked out again.

 

Pretty pegged.

[Doc]

How was Drew Brees' record before SD drafted Phillip Rivers? Flutie was 8-14 and Brees was 10-17. Maybe the fact that the year before the Bills did their exodus to San Diego, that the Chargers were 1-15 and by far the worst team in the league...you think that might have anything at all to do with Flutie's & Brees' bad win/loss records from 2001-2003? The Chargers were rebuilding from being the worst team in the league in 2000, so it took sometime. Here's another example, before Jim Kelly came to the Bills, the Bills had consecutive 2-14 seasons from 84-85, once Kelly arrived, the Bills finished the 1986 season 4-12. In 1987, the Bills finished 7-9. So, just like the Bills, the Chargers were rebuilding. So comparing Flutie's stats with a rebuilding San Diego team, to Johnson's stats with the Bills when the Bills were a good team for 3 out of the 4 years during Johnson's time is ridiculous.

The Bills and Chargers were going in opposite directions. Just because the Bills were a good team in 1998-1999, it doesn't mean that everything stayed the same going into 2001. I already mentioned who the Chargers added in 2001 versus who the Bills lost prior to that. Williams' cutting of Ted Washington, having to let Wiley go, and the loss of Cowart in game 1 essentially killed a defense that was already fading in 2000. Go take a look at who was starting on that defense that year, from game 2 onwards (and as an aside, the funny thing is that if they didn't (barely) beat the Panthers that year, they would have been in position to draft Julius Peppers the following year, instead of Mike Williams).

 

The facts are, Flutie was 21-9 as the Bills starter, while Johnson was 7-11 while they were both on the Bills. That's a 0.7 winning percentage for Flutie and a 0.388 winning percentage for Johnson. In 2001, the offense was supposed to be tailored to Johnson's strengths. I remember hearing on the radio about the new west coast offense that was being installed and that the 2001 Bills were supposed to be better than the 2000 Bills. Johnson went 1-7 as the starter in 2001 and was knocked out again.

If you "just win" in one place, you should "just win" in another. It's funny to hear people slam TO for the Bills' offense last year, as if he's the only guy on offense, much less the QB, who gets too much of the credit when teams win and too much of the blame when they lose.

[mike oxhurtz]

The Bills and Chargers were going in opposite directions. Just because the Bills were a good team in 1998-1999, it doesn't mean that everything stayed the same going into 2001. I already mentioned who the Chargers added in 2001 versus who the Bills lost prior to that. Williams' cutting of Ted Washington, having to let Wiley go, and the loss of Cowart in game 1 essentially killed a defense that was already fading in 2000. Go take a look at who was starting on that defense that year, from game 2 onwards (and as an aside, the funny thing is that if they didn't (barely) beat the Panthers that year, they would have been in position to draft Julius Peppers the following year, instead of Mike Williams).

 

 

If you "just win" in one place, you should "just win" in another. It's funny to hear people slam TO for the Bills' offense last year, as if he's the only guy on offense, much less the QB, who gets too much of the credit when teams win and too much of the blame when they lose.

 

People on here were saying that Kelly was NFL ready when he came to us from the USFL. So if that's the case, then why did the Bills go 4-12 in 86'? Because the Bills were rebuilding, just like the Chargers were. So the Chargers were suppose to go from the absolute worst team in the league to a playoff team in one year...really?! Just because the Dolphins did it, doesn't mean every 1-15 team can do it. It's obvious you're a Flutie hater and are making up every excuse in the world to discredit what he accomplished in Buffalo. I bet you're one of those fans that wanted Kelly to retire the last few years he played as a Bill...how did that work out for ya? Maybe if Kelly had a decent O-line the last few years he played, maybe he could have played for a few more years and played when the Bills had the great defenses in 98-99.

[Jerry Jabber]

People on here were saying that Kelly was NFL ready when he came to us from the USFL. So if that's the case, then why did the Bills go 4-12 in 86'? Because the Bills were rebuilding, just like the Chargers were. So the Chargers were suppose to go from the absolute worst team in the league to a playoff team in one year...really?! Just because the Dolphins did it, doesn't mean every 1-15 team can do it. It's obvious you're a Flutie hater and are making up every excuse in the world to discredit what he accomplished in Buffalo. I bet you're one of those fans that wanted Kelly to retire the last few years he played as a Bill...how did that work out for ya? Maybe if Kelly had a decent O-line the last few years he played, maybe he could have played for a few more years and played when the Bills had the great defenses in 98-99.

 

Mike, like you said, this guy hates Flutie so no matter anyone says, no matter what the stats say, this guy is a Flutie basher. I think between you & I, we've shown that Flutie was a better QB in Buffalo. You've also pointed out that both Flutie & superbowl winning QB Drew Brees had losing records in their 1st 3 years in SD, because SD was rebuilding, but this guy doesn't want to hear that. He just keeps throwing out the "he just wins" crap.

[Jerry Jabber]

Actually, the FACT is that those records belonged to the teams, not the QB. I am a professional statistician and I can tell you that although there are way too many stats for QBs, wins and losses are not among them.

 

I don't think there is any argument that Flutie was better than Johnson, but Flutie was not screwed by the Bills- this is pro sports and stuff happens.

 

It wouldn't have mattered who was the QB in 2001, with Sullivan and Hulsey on the Oline, the offense was doomed to fail. The defense was also being transitioned and wasn't very good either.

 

When you play all 15 games and told you are resting for a meaningless 16th game, then are told that you are not the starter for the playoffs...that is being screwed. It's like driving in a race and being forced to hand over the keys so someone can finish the last lap.

[Doc]

People on here were saying that Kelly was NFL ready when he came to us from the USFL. So if that's the case, then why did the Bills go 4-12 in 86'? Because the Bills were rebuilding, just like the Chargers were. So the Chargers were suppose to go from the absolute worst team in the league to a playoff team in one year...really?! Just because the Dolphins did it, doesn't mean every 1-15 team can do it. It's obvious you're a Flutie hater and are making up every excuse in the world to discredit what he accomplished in Buffalo. I bet you're one of those fans that wanted Kelly to retire the last few years he played as a Bill...how did that work out for ya? Maybe if Kelly had a decent O-line the last few years he played, maybe he could have played for a few more years and played when the Bills had the great defenses in 98-99.

 

Mike, like you said, this guy hates Flutie so no matter anyone says, no matter what the stats say, this guy is a Flutie basher. I think between you & I, we've shown that Flutie was a better QB in Buffalo. You've also pointed out that both Flutie & superbowl winning QB Drew Brees had losing records in their 1st 3 years in SD, because SD was rebuilding, but this guy doesn't want to hear that. He just keeps throwing out the "he just wins" crap.

Oy. He had a better record in Buffalo because he had a better team around him. He wasn't the reason they won, and he wasn't the reason they lost in SD. And he was the better QB in Buffalo because he was durable and RJ wasn't. But again, he wasn't the reason the Bills won.

[mike oxhurtz]

Actually, the FACT is that those records belonged to the teams, not the QB. I am a professional statistician and I can tell you that although there are way too many stats for QBs, wins and losses are not among them.

 

I don't think there is any argument that Flutie was better than Johnson, but Flutie was not screwed by the Bills- this is pro sports and stuff happens.

 

It wouldn't have mattered who was the QB in 2001, with Sullivan and Hulsey on the Oline, the offense was doomed to fail. The defense was also being transitioned and wasn't very good either.

 

So you mean to tell me that the one guy on the team who touches the ball on every single offensive snap has nothing to do with the outcome of the game?

[Adam]

When you play all 15 games and told you are resting for a meaningless 16th game, then are told that you are not the starter for the playoffs...that is being screwed. It's like driving in a race and being forced to hand over the keys so someone can finish the last lap.

The Bills made the decision they thought was best for the organization. Flutie got paid what they were contractually obligated to pay him- he didn't get screwed. The game is bigger than any of the players