Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

i liked how brohm threw to guys that WERE COVERED and let the receivers make plays. A play that stands out clearly in my mind is a short slant (only about a 5 yard gainer) but the wide receiver did not have separation but Brohm still completed the pass, i forget who it was to, maybe steve johnson? Brohm seems to have better anticipation.

  • Replies 45
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

Brohm should get the start next game, or at least a good amount of time with the starters. But Trent will get the majority of snaps, unless he stinks it up. Likely he starts the season. If he does, hopefully he plays well and stays healthy. Odds are he won't do both, but here's hoping.

Posted
Look, mate, that's pretty damn lazy on your part.

 

"Look it up". No, YOU look it up before you post this sort of yap.

 

I know this will draw some sort of scintillatingly erudite response from you, and that's fine. Sometimes I like playing with fingerpaint, so go ahead. But just as a matter of board etiquette, don't do crap like that, okay? It's just as easy, or difficult, for you to engage in keystrokes PRIOR to your argument as it is for those who respond to your idiocy.

 

Read my op in this thread, it wasn't me who said Chan announced who his #1 QB was. I was just replying to what was said. Maybe you are the one who needs to read from the beginning before posting.

Posted

I don't know if its some fans emotions or what that are getting in the way of doing a non-biased analysis of how brian brohm played. He honestly did not play good enough to deserve playing with the #1's, so why should he get that chance? Because of this "upside" everyone talks about? The thing with upside is everyone has it, until they do something wrong then its called their downside. And my opinion Brohm is that he has already showed some downsides, in 1 nfl game(atlanta last year) and 9 preseason games he has yet to score a TD. lets Furthermore non-biased writer Tim Graham has already said that what he saw was very mediocre.

 

"Brohm's performance was OK against the Colts' backups. He threw a lot of high-percentage short stuff, completing 14 of 21 attempts for 125 yards with no touchdowns or no interceptions. He had a wonderful chance to throw for his first NFL touchdown right before halftime. The Bills had second-and-goal from the 5, but Brohm misfired on two passes. The Bills kicked a field goal."

 

I bolded the key points. With that OUTSIDE assessment how could one think he deserves to play with the 1st team. Fitz didn't seem to have any problem scoring against Washingtons 2nds and 3rds. Yes brian brohm had some good throws, but in no way do i think he over took fitz as back up or Trent as #1. And therefore i say again what has he done to deserve or earn time with the 1's? it would be counter productive and a waste of time to do so, because then your losing time with developing and getting the #1s set for the regular season. Let him keep playing with the 2s and let him develop there, if he is going to develop at all.

Posted
What exactly did Brohm do that Edwards hasn't done numerous times? He took the safe short stuff, just like Trent, and the Brohm boys are getting turned on. If you switched the names on their performances, Brohm's boys would be complaining about the QB not getting into the endzone & the numerous short throws for completions. They would have blamed Trent for no TD and having to settle for a FG before halftime. If Brohm had that long pass, they would have been anointing him the next Kelly.

Look at the Tim Graham article in another thread for an unbiased opinion of what the QBs did last night.

 

 

I'm drinking what you're drinking. Only thing Brohm has going for him is nobody has seen much of him. Gailey had no allegiance to Edwards, Fitz or Brohm when he came in. They started even went through OTA's, Mini-camps and preseason practices and Edwards was chosen as the fron runner. There is a reason for that. Brohm didn' perform as well.

Posted
Read my op in this thread, it wasn't me who said Chan announced who his #1 QB was. I was just replying to what was said. Maybe you are the one who needs to read from the beginning before posting.

 

Right on target. Thanks for making my point.

 

To your statement:

 

"Look it up..."

×
×
  • Create New...