Alphadawg7 Posted November 17, 2010 Posted November 17, 2010 I must not have watched the same Baltimore game as you did. It was Shawn Nelson's fumble that gave Baltimore the lead for good, not Fitz's picks. Yes, you must not have watched the same game or have that classic TSW infliction called "selective memory" because we lost the lead for good in the 3rd quarter after Balt scored on both of Fitz's INT's. We later tied the game, but never led again. Balt never again trailed in that game after scoring on both INT's in the 3rd quarter.
Wayne Cubed Posted November 17, 2010 Posted November 17, 2010 I'm sorry, but I find the numbers used to make your claim arbitrary, at best. Well of course they are arbitrary, there is no stat for missed wide open receivers. The closest stat we have is comp %. Which for the past 4 games, the games when some fans fell in love with fitz, his completion percentsge was around 57%, as already stated in this thread. But you can sit there and say you havent noticed the missed receivers or errant throws.
Chandemonium Posted November 17, 2010 Posted November 17, 2010 Yes, you must not have watched the same game or have that classic TSW infliction called "selective memory" because we lost the lead for good in the 3rd quarter after Balt scored on both of Fitz's INT's. We later tied the game, but never led again. Balt never again trailed in that game after scoring on both INT's in the 3rd quarter. I remember the game just fine. As you just said yourself, we later tied the game. If the game is tied no one has the lead. Therefore, the picks did not give Baltimore the lead for good.
JESSEFEFFER Posted November 17, 2010 Posted November 17, 2010 Seriously...You just don't get it...I really don't give a rats a** what the point is...You can't compare Fitz to Kelly or Manning...It makes you look like you don't understand the intangibles that separate the good from the elite...Granted every elite QB had bad Games...Of coarse they did...But they also have intangibles that CLEARLY separate them from the pack...And since when did anyone around here care what Jerry Sullivan wrote?... And I missed NOTHING the past 40 years of Buffalo Bills Football...You know what we called the people who were backing Reich over Kelly? Idiots...The exact same thing I'm going to say about anyone comparing Fitz to Kelly, Manning, or any other lock 1st Ballot Hall Of Fame QB... I really have nothing against Fitz...But no question I don't believe he's good enough to be the long term future of this Franchise at QB...ESPECIALLY if they get a chance to take an elite Prospect like Luck at #1 Overall...Now if for some reason the Bills don't get the chance to take Luck or Mallet I'm fine with Fitz in the meantime...But I'm not going to swept away by him either...He's not an elite NFL QB...And he probably never will be... This is getting interesting. Yes I can compare his play this year to Kelly's in 1986. Their losses are very similar. Just like I can compare their ages (soon to be 28 for Fitz while Kelly was comparably 14 1/2 months younger. I hold this as an example to refute those convinced the late game failures are evidence of what his future production is to be like. As far as the "immeasurables", he has some going on. I'll start with 99th percentile smart, gutsy, and having the support of the team (he even passed the T.O. test-not easy to do.) He also has no problem standing up and owning his mistakes. Something you'll recall Jim Kelly having a big problem with early in his career. Oops! I just contrasted Fitzpatrick to Kelly. Am I allowed to do that without having my football intelligence questioned?
The Big Cat Posted November 17, 2010 Posted November 17, 2010 Well of course they are arbitrary, there is no stat for missed wide open receivers. The closest stat we have is comp %. Which for the past 4 games, the games when some fans fell in love with fitz, his completion percentsge was around 57%, as already stated in this thread. But you can sit there and say you havent noticed the missed receivers or errant throws. You're right, through all of this I have maintained, forthright, that Fitz makes all the throws, is always on target, and never misses an opportunity to put the ball precisely where it needs to be. That's been my argument from the get go.
flopagamo Posted November 17, 2010 Posted November 17, 2010 Stevie Johnson should be the face of the franchise... Fitz should be the beard of the franchise. Speaking of the face of the franchise... Have the Canucks taken Trent Edwards' banner down from the Rogers Centre yet? I was up in Toronto some months ago and it was still there. Caused me great pain while driving by it.
Alphadawg7 Posted November 17, 2010 Posted November 17, 2010 (edited) I remember the game just fine. As you just said yourself, we later tied the game. If the game is tied no one has the lead. Therefore, the picks did not give Baltimore the lead for good. LMAO...Ok, how about this: Fitz's INT's gave away OUR lead for good...is that better? Edited November 17, 2010 by Alphadawg7
KOKBILLS Posted November 17, 2010 Posted November 17, 2010 This is getting interesting. Yes I can compare his play this year to Kelly's in 1986. Their losses are very similar. Just like I can compare their ages (soon to be 28 for Fitz while Kelly was comparably 14 1/2 months younger. I hold this as an example to refute those convinced the late game failures are evidence of what his future production is to be like. As far as the "immeasurables", he has some going on. I'll start with 99th percentile smart, gutsy, and having the support of the team (he even passed the T.O. test-not easy to do.) He also has no problem standing up and owning his mistakes. Something you'll recall Jim Kelly having a big problem with early in his career. Oops! I just contrasted Fitzpatrick to Kelly. Am I allowed to do that without having my football intelligence questioned? Seriously...As long as you keep making comparisons between the two I personally will always question your Football intelligence...But maybe that's just me... I'm starting to think you're never going to get this...Once Fitz has led some Team to a Super Bowl or two we can open up this conversation again if you like...I get the whole everybody has got to start somewhere argument...But guys like Kelly and Manning did it in High school, College, in Jimbo's case the USFL where he set Passing records, and of coarse in terms of Wins and SB appearances in the NFL...They are VERY special talents that don't come along often, and to me at least, it's insulting them to be compared to Fitz in any way, shape, or form...I completely realize that some may not agree with me on this, and I also realize that Fitz is young enough to still have the chance to prove me wrong...I'm just saying I don't think it's gonna happen, and in a couple years it MAY be debatable who was a better Bills QB, Fitz or Reich...But NEVER Fitz or Kelly...Ever...
Another Point of View Posted November 17, 2010 Posted November 17, 2010 He needs to be better looking then me!
KOKBILLS Posted November 17, 2010 Posted November 17, 2010 Huh? What games are you watching? Getting better? Did you just decide to make that up to make a point or something, because he clearly hasnt gotten "better" since the Balt game. Newsflash, here are his stats since the Balt game: 67-123, 54% comp, 668 yds, 3 TD's, 3 INT's for a QB rating of 68.07 How can anyone say he is "getting better"? Since when is a 1:1 TD:INT ratio, comp 54% of his passes, and a 68 QB rating considered playing very well? He has clearly gotten worse. He also has 5 INT's over his last 4 games and about a dozen would be INT's that defenders dropped over the same span. Its funny how Bills fans want to cling on to that ONE Balt game for dear life as if its the norm. People were going nuts over his "stats" after Balt game because on paper they looked so much better then how he played in the NE, Jets, and Jac game. In all 3 games, he got a late TD at the end of the 4th when the game is mostly out of reach and the D's were playing "bend but dont break" defense. During the rest of each of those games he was largely ineffecitive with the exception of the first half against Jax. You also talk about how he made enough throws to win Balt game and KC game yet completely disregard the throws that led us to a loss. Like the 2 INT's that gave Balt the lead for good. After commanding the first half and taking us to halftime with a lead, he comes out with 2 awful INTs to give Balt the lead for good. Which is also why his stats were so high, because we had to play catchup the rest of the game. In KC, he was completley ineffective almost the whole game, including just 50 yards passing at half time. He should have had a pick 6 on the very first play of the game. In 5 full quarters of play, he still only had 223 yards passing. He had just ONE good drive all game, and that was the late TD to tie the game. As bad as he was prior to that drive, he was even worse after completing just 33% of his passes on the 4 drives that could have won us the game with one INT (inlcuding missing a wide open Spiller by a mile for the win before Lindell missed the FG). Chi he also had 2 more costly INT's, including a terrible one on the final drive to try and win us the game. Is all the blame on him? NO, of course not, its never on just one player. But to say he is getting better and making enough throws to win games is crazy. He makes enough throws to keep us in games, but enough mistakes that makes them hard to win when we should win. Even if you add in the Balt game, his stats over his last 4 games are not very impressive: 96-166, 57% comp, 1050 yards, 7 TD's, 5 INT's with a 78.14 QB rating. Yes, he plays with heart and I love that, and Yes this offense is much better with him then it was with Trent...but just because he is better then Trent ever was does not mean this guy should be our full time starter for the future. I like the guy, but as our eventual backup. Thank You...That's all I can say...Thank You for adding sanity to this conversation...
PromoTheRobot Posted November 17, 2010 Posted November 17, 2010 Well whatever you feel about Fitz you better get used to the beard because he will be the Bills QB the rest of this season and likely the season after, whether we draft the next great hype or not. PTR
Texas Bill Posted November 17, 2010 Posted November 17, 2010 Seriously? Are you trying to compare Fitz to Peyton Manning? I know the overall Football intelligence on this Board has hit an all time low when I see, in the same thread mind you, Fitz favorably compared to Peyton Manning and Jim Kelly... Come on folks...Let's get real...Fitz is playing well...OK...But really? It wasn't a favorable comparison - Manning went 3-13 his first year in Indy. No one thinks Fitz is a franchise QB, just sayin it's too early to tell. And Andrew Luck could be the next Ryan Leaf.
Chandemonium Posted November 17, 2010 Posted November 17, 2010 LMAO...Ok, how about this: Fitz's INT's gave away OUR lead for good...is that better? Yes, that is much better. It may seem like a small difference, but it's the difference between a factually correct statement and a blatant lie.
Dr. Fong Posted November 17, 2010 Posted November 17, 2010 Fitz with a better team around him would definitely be a QB that I could see leading a team to the playoffs. Beyond that I don't know.
Recommended Posts