dave mcbride Posted September 27, 2010 Posted September 27, 2010 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/09/27/bills-cut-trent-edwards-cant-stick-to-a-plan-once-again/
Chilly Posted September 27, 2010 Posted September 27, 2010 The only thing I'd argue is that there weren't really any available QBs this off-season that would make a good long-term option for the Bills; well, maybe outside of Sam Bradford. Florio could be 100% right on this one, or it could be that the Bills saw the same thing I did: Outside of Bradford, this wasn't a good year to pick up a franchise QB. We'll see what happens in the next off-season.
dave mcbride Posted September 27, 2010 Author Posted September 27, 2010 Gregg Rosenthal Thanks - missed that. Still, they're kinda one and the same, right?
DrDawkinstein Posted September 27, 2010 Posted September 27, 2010 The only thing I'd argue is that there weren't really any available QBs this off-season that would make a good long-term option for the Bills; well, maybe outside of Sam Bradford. Florio could be 100% right on this one, or it could be that the Bills saw the same thing I did: Outside of Bradford, this wasn't a good year to pick up a franchise QB. We'll see what happens in the next off-season. you, me, the Bills, and a lot of other people. agreed.
Yard Monkey Posted September 27, 2010 Posted September 27, 2010 I don't agree at all. The bills have a long term plan. Figure out who on the roster can't play and get rid of them. In the meantime, I'm positive they are working on finding players to replace...
DrDawkinstein Posted September 27, 2010 Posted September 27, 2010 I don't agree at all. The bills have a long term plan. Figure out who on the roster can't play and get rid of them. In the meantime, I'm positive they are working on finding players to replace... +1 agreed on the long term plan. the "problem" in the media is that nowadays, everything has to be RIGHT NOW. there is NO WAY anyone could rebuild this mess of a franchise in one offseason. Not without putting the team in a bad place in the near future.
transient Posted September 27, 2010 Posted September 27, 2010 This is a reactionary article with absolutely no thought put in to writing it. Who that was available in the offseason would have been better? Who would you have staked the next 3-4 years of a rebuilding process on? Campbell? Thigpen? Troy Smith? The Bills apparently had interest in McNabb, who didn't show similar interest. They took a chance that they could rehab Edwards, and they admitted it when they couldn't... and quickly, no less. If previous regimes had done this, we wouldn't still have had this problem this season, and we would have never had a 4 year Flutie-Johnson QB debate. Their plan was see if one of the current QBs fits the bill, and if not find one next year in a year that might have better QBs available. Bringing in someone who you don't know flat out is better than what's already here is a waste of time.
earthtobrint Posted September 27, 2010 Posted September 27, 2010 (edited) The only thing I'd argue is that there weren't really any available QBs this off-season that would make a good long-term option for the Bills; well, maybe outside of Sam Bradford. Florio could be 100% right on this one, or it could be that the Bills saw the same thing I did: Outside of Bradford, this wasn't a good year to pick up a franchise QB. We'll see what happens in the next off-season. I think this is accurate. However, if management can't find a long-term option out of the quarterbacks of next years draft class, they're a lost cause. Edited September 27, 2010 by earthtobrint
dpberr Posted September 27, 2010 Posted September 27, 2010 The team got rid of an employee that wasn't getting it done. Happens everyday in America. Perform or get cut. Unless you work for the federal government. I appreciate that Nix and Gailey have the fortitude to make tough decisions. PFT will make this a bigger story than it really is for anybody not named Trent Edwards.
GG Posted September 27, 2010 Posted September 27, 2010 I don't agree at all. The bills have a long term plan. Figure out who on the roster can't play and get rid of them. In the meantime, I'm positive they are working on finding players to replace... But the timing is odd. Why give Edwards the majority of snaps in camp & preseason if you think that there's a high probability that he'll be cut? The guy is not a good starting claiber QB. But he is more than an adequate backup. Why not keep him for the year? If you had questions about his abilities, you don't name him the starter, and you probably cut him in August. That's the bizzarro part of the move. It's similar to the cutting of Langston Walker. You cut a perfectly serviceable RT on the last day of camp because he couldn't cut it as a LT? And then you go through a carousel of turnstyles to replace the RT? Maybe there is a plan in there that will begin to emerge. Somehwere.
transient Posted September 27, 2010 Posted September 27, 2010 (edited) But the timing is odd. Why give Edwards the majority of snaps in camp & preseason if you think that there's a high probability that he'll be cut? The guy is not a good starting claiber QB. But he is more than an adequate backup. Why not keep him for the year? If you had questions about his abilities, you don't name him the starter, and you probably cut him in August. That's the bizzarro part of the move. It's similar to the cutting of Langston Walker. You cut a perfectly serviceable RT on the last day of camp because he couldn't cut it as a LT? And then you go through a carousel of turnstyles to replace the RT? Maybe there is a plan in there that will begin to emerge. Somehwere. More snaps aren't going to make Fitz more athletic and he's smart enough to take in the gameplan, so no harm done. I think they were evaluating TE and giving him every chance to succeed, and they saw enough to know he couldn't. Why keep him on the roster in a season that is all about evaluation when the process is over for him? Edited September 27, 2010 by transient
dave mcbride Posted September 27, 2010 Author Posted September 27, 2010 I don't agree at all. The bills have a long term plan. Figure out who on the roster can't play and get rid of them. In the meantime, I'm positive they are working on finding players to replace... I think the point is that they thought they had made the right decision in picking Edwards, but they were flat out wrong. So now they're resetting. Again. But the timing is odd. Why give Edwards the majority of snaps in camp & preseason if you think that there's a high probability that he'll be cut? The guy is not a good starting claiber QB. But he is more than an adequate backup. Why not keep him for the year? If you had questions about his abilities, you don't name him the starter, and you probably cut him in August. That's the bizzarro part of the move. It's similar to the cutting of Langston Walker. You cut a perfectly serviceable RT on the last day of camp because he couldn't cut it as a LT? And then you go through a carousel of turnstyles to replace the RT? Maybe there is a plan in there that will begin to emerge. Somehwere. What's the name of the owner again?
John Cocktosten Posted September 27, 2010 Posted September 27, 2010 "Edwards has shown enough in his brief career for a few teams to take him on as a possible backup. Jacksonville makes some sense." If J'ville picks Trent up the Bills finally will get even for the Rob Johnson heist!
RuntheDamnBall Posted September 27, 2010 Posted September 27, 2010 But the timing is odd. Why give Edwards the majority of snaps in camp & preseason if you think that there's a high probability that he'll be cut? The guy is not a good starting claiber QB. But he is more than an adequate backup. Why not keep him for the year? If you had questions about his abilities, you don't name him the starter, and you probably cut him in August. That's the bizzarro part of the move. It's similar to the cutting of Langston Walker. You cut a perfectly serviceable RT on the last day of camp because he couldn't cut it as a LT? And then you go through a carousel of turnstyles to replace the RT? Maybe there is a plan in there that will begin to emerge. Somehwere. I'm going to indulge in some speculation, so take it for what you will. I think it's perfectly possible that enough of Trent's teammates went behind his back and said to Gailey that they weren't comfortable going forward. Is that admirable? I am not sure. Does it smack of the inmates running the asylum? Maybe. But, it also would suggest that 1) Gailey is a no BS guy when it comes to players who don't perform, and 2) He would listen to his players and wants them to be accountable to one another, and he wants them to have faith in his system. It's a lot easier to do that when the QB isn't putting the brakes on your system on regular season gamedays.
tennesseeboy Posted September 27, 2010 Posted September 27, 2010 The guy is right on point. If there is a "long term plan" one would think that Nix could actually verbalize it. Failing to plan...planning to fail.
Big Turk Posted September 27, 2010 Posted September 27, 2010 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/09/27/bills-cut-trent-edwards-cant-stick-to-a-plan-once-again/ The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. No matter how well Edwards played during the preseason to fool Gailey, no amount of time in there would allow him to look like an NFL QB once the real games started. Thats the problem with Edwards...he fools you..will look like the next coming of Joe Montana and Peyton Manning combined in practice, but will look like the next coming of Rob Johnson combined with JP Losman once the games start for real... Not sure what "plan" they are talking about. Its refreshing for a change to not keep trotting the same guy out there over and over again, knowing he has no prayer of doing anything worthwhile on offense...perhaps there is a plan after all. Determine who can play and who can't, and whoever can't play is getting out the door ASAP...
Like A Mofo Posted September 27, 2010 Posted September 27, 2010 How does releasing Trent, a holdover from the previous regime, suggest that this team has no plan? I guess the same might be said for Andrew Reid in Philly when they benched Kolb after 10 pass attempts, after they let McNabb go via trade because of Kolb and now they are going with Vick? But oh that is right, Reid is winning, so that does not qualify
macaroni Posted September 27, 2010 Posted September 27, 2010 Why keep him on the roster in a season that is all about evaluation when the process is over for him? I would have kept him around to be our backup .... or the backup to our backup. While I do agree with the thought process of T.E. not playing a part in our future, he does know our offense, he was on our roster, and it didn't cost us anything to keep him just in case we needed him. Now if we have a plan on what to do with that spot on the roster we just created to make the team better this season .... then it's a moot point ... but this move just scares me
dave mcbride Posted September 27, 2010 Author Posted September 27, 2010 How does releasing Trent, a holdover from the previous regime, suggest that this team has no plan? I guess the same might be said for Andrew Reid in Philly when they benched Kolb after 10 pass attempts, after they let McNabb go via trade because of Kolb and now they are going with Vick? But oh that is right, Reid is winning, so that does not qualify What do YOU think the plan is? Because I sure as hell don't see one. At least not yet.
Recommended Posts