Ralph's got QB issues

[Hapless Bills Fan]

Again, Rypian, Gannon, Hostetler and Theisman all played in a very different NFL where defenses and running backs ruled while passing games were not nearly as prolific due to the rules of the game. Using those guys as examples is silly. The game has changed -- the league wanted to up scoring and passing numbers. They did that by altering the rules that hindered defenses (especially DBs) while tipping the scales in favor of the passing game.

 

Gannon played a passing-geared West Coast offense in Oak. He had 4 seasons >3000 yds and one that was >4500 yrs.

 

But pray continue.

 

And at best that gives the Bills a 10% chance of winning a title.

 

90% of statistics are made up

[BADOLBILZ]

I think it's a little bit sh#ty how Ralph has said time and time again how we need a QB to make the playoff. I thinks that a little bit of a slap to Fitz. I know Fitz is not the second coming of Jim Kelly, but I don't unstand how that helps the team in the long run. Ralph should believe what ever he wants, but why announce it over and over. I have a lot of respect for fitz, he not Manning, Brady, or Bree, but he plays hard, has a lot of guts, and at least it's not this constant cycle of 3 and out. Other then maybe flutie, he played better then any other Qb since Jimbo retirement.

 

When it comes to franchise QB's you either have one or you don't.

 

If you don't know, then for all intents and purposes, you don't.

 

Gotta' have one.

 

I've said it here many times, but the Bills could have drafted a QB in round one for each of the past 6-7 years and the team wouldn't be any worse off. Not a bit.

 

Running backs and defensive backs look great on the cover of the May edition of SHOUT! but even if they are great their impact pales in comparison to that of a good QB.

 

And regardless of the Flutie/Johnson nonsense of a decade ago, it's always better to have multiple viable options at the position. Even if it come at the expense of your secondary, or kickoff return game, etc..

 

Ralph is usually wrong, but when it comes to whether or not the Bills have a franchise QB or not....right now they don't, and it's the evaluation now that matters. It Fitzmagic turns into a pumpkin this fall then having Patrick Peterson playing 30 yards away from the football isn't going to make much difference.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

His yards per attempt (the average distance the ball travels before it is caught) was 9 yards. Much higher than Fitz's 6.8. Yards per completion account for RAC yards. Brady throws a lot of screens but let's not exaggerate it. He throws down field a lot too. If he didn't, the YPA would be lower. Unless I'm misreading that stat (which is possible).

 

Greg, respectfully believe you are misreading YPA stat.

 

YPA is the number of yards gained by passing (in the air and RAC) divided by the number of ATTEMPTS, completions and incompletions alike.

 

So a high YPA reflects both yards in the air, RAC, and a high completion percentage.

 

The less common YPC (yards per catch or completion) stat would reflect yards gained by passing (in the air and RAC) divided by the number of completions, and speaks more directly to the distance thrown

 

You might be interested in the YAC for QB (yards after catch for QB) which can be found at linky. Brady is 4th overall in the league behind Rivers and Brees.

Big Ben is way down there, indicating he lives the Bomber life. Fitz is <20 (not too much help from the legs of his receivers).

[NoSaint]

Greg, respectfully believe you are misreading YPA stat.

 

YPA is the number of yards gained by passing (in the air and RAC) divided by the number of ATTEMPTS, completions and incompletions alike.

 

So a high YPA reflects both yards in the air, RAC, and a high completion percentage.

 

The less common YPC (yards per catch or completion) stat would reflect yards gained by passing (in the air and RAC) divided by the number of completions, and speaks more directly to the distance thrown

 

You might be interested in the YAC for QB (yards after catch for QB) which can be found at linky. Brady is 4th overall in the league behind Rivers and Brees.

Big Ben is way down there, indicating he lives the Bomber life. Fitz is <20 (not too much help from the legs of his receivers).

 

And we come full circle to..... No help from receivers, or not hitting them accurately in stride, in locations allowing then to make plays? Chicken or egg? My eyes say fitz is a big part of it. I will give credit though, even if we don't agree, this was a much better post then just putting "but Trent dilfer" or "but the bills suck" - I appreciate the stat and hadn't compared their YAC. It could support either side depending on how you view fitz I think. I do think his receivers are less talented so I won't say it's 100% an accuracy issue, but I think it's a large part.

Edited February 19, 2011 by NoSaint

[JESSEFEFFER]

Regardless of what Fitz is now or what he can or will become in the future, he has a shot in 2011 to define the course of his career. In the history of the NFL there have been many QBs that became decent to great at his current experience level. We might have been witnessing his career light coming on in 2010. Or maybe his ceiling is being just a competent caretaker, as some suggest. I don't claim to know either with certainty so I say it would be wise to keep an open mind.

 

I do know this. If a QB is taken at 3, the economics dictate that they start long before they are ready. Laugh at Flutie/Johnson but a replay is likely. It's Ground Hog's Day all over again. Guys that get 40+ million guaranteed don't sit the bench while they learn. They learn on the job and the play of their teammates suffers as a result. They won't be too patient while waiting for some young QB to put their game together and learn to be a leader. If he proves to be unworthy of his high draft status, that's another 3 years down the drain.

 

Fitz was hit or sacked about 9 times per game. His combination of presnap reads, protection calls, and quick decisions/ releases gave the offense a chance to move the chains. Taking as few sacks as he did was not an accident. It was a deliberate adjustment to his game. He'd do whatever he could to get rid of the ball and avoid a loss. An intentional grounding call is just a spot foul and loss of down (sounds like a sack to me) so why not just get rid of it and see if the referee will allow it? If Fitzpatrick had taken 7 more sacks instead, his comp% hits 60. He was about 10 to 20 sacks short of what would be normal given the number of hits he took. Trading incompletions for sacks HURTS a QB's passer rating (lower comp% and YPA.) There is nothing in the formula that rewards a QB for avoiding sacks.

 

The same is true for getting the ball past the sticks on 3rd and long. It's a lower percentage play but the chances of actually converting it are better. There is not a reward in the passer rating formula for being a risk taker on 3rd and long. As Bills fans we have seen our share of ball holding, afraid to pull the trigger, run out of bounds for a 4 yard loss, dump it off to a stationery receiver on 3rd and long, QB play. I, for one, was sick of it. Fitz played a style of game that made his o-line and receivers look good, certainly not bottom-of-the-barrel as we were lead to believe before season. It's a style that helped his team but hurt his rating.

 

There were two areas of his game that were clearly deficient, IMO. Fumbles on running plays (get the yards but always protect the ball!) and in that 20 yard dead zone that exists between midfield and the high% field goal range. Fitz lead many important, late game drives, that died in this area. It happened so often that I would call it a trend. It's those failures that give his detractors their best ammunition.

[John from Riverside]

So you're saying Trent Dilfer, Mark Rypien, Jeff Hostetler, Jim McMahon, and Doug Williams were elite?

 

 

I think the game has evolved a bit since those guys.....

 

 

The real question that should be asked is whether there is a elite QB (or even a potential elite QB) in this draft......

 

If he is there.....then you take him while you are picking low enough to do it.....if not then you continue putting in impact players at other positions......

 

That really is the task to Nix I think.....IS CAM OR BLAINE a potential elite QB?

[Pilsner]

I think it's a little bit sh#ty how Ralph has said time and time again how we need a QB to make the playoff. I thinks that a little bit of a slap to Fitz. I know Fitz is not the second coming of Jim Kelly, but I don't unstand how that helps the team in the long run. Ralph should believe what ever he wants, but why announce it over and over. I have a lot of respect for fitz, he not Manning, Brady, or Bree, but he plays hard, has a lot of guts, and at least it's not this constant cycle of 3 and out. Other then maybe flutie, he played better then any other Qb since Jimbo retirement.

 

Ralph can say what he wants. He owns the team and it's his prerogative. However, this may be just me (it probably is, but I'm saying it anyhow) Ralph is at a point in age when he can say whatever he wants, whether it be feasible or not. Nix and Gailey are both also gents of an elderly demeanor. Nix is close to the twilight of his career and some might consider Chan close to it too (I do not though. Chan might have another 10+ years considering his determination and frame of mind to form a competitive team. I'm sure he would sock me in the face if he heard me utter the word twilight.)

 

What I'm getting at is... (speculation on my part but in my heart I believe this) Nix and Gailey speak Ralph's language more so than any other in well over a decade...Nix and Gailey (and Whaley too) talk to Ralph and have gotten his confidence... Have convinced him of what really needs to be done to upgrade the team to improve it... But Ralph, being his ripe old age still speaks his mind (which isn't a bad thing, but yet is outspoken about getting a QB whether this said qb is available in this year's draft or not.) I'm just worried that Ralph might blather a bit. If he does, I don't blame him. If and when i'm his age, I expect to have some interesting blathering sessions myself.

 

It can be considered a slap in the face to Fitzy with how Ralph speaks of upgrading the qb position, but Fitz (in my eyes)is even keeled and level headed and he has the presumption to realize he has Gailey's confidence to lead the team. Fitzy is steadfast in this assertion imo. No amount of Ralph's questioning judgement will avert Fitz from leading this team.

 

Fitz is not the second coming of Jim Kelly, but with the proper supporting cast, Fitzy can lead this team to a title if he keeps improving. No one will ever deter him from this thought. Determination alone will not get you everything you want but if you have the right pieces in place to help you, then...things can happen. Gailey's unwavering confidence in Fitzy and Fitzy's desire to succeed (and a continued improvement in play) can nullify Ralph's desire for an upgrade in a qb. Words...what are they? just words...Who really lets words or opinions keep you from accomplishing what you think you really can?

 

Go Bills!!!

Edited February 19, 2011 by Pilsner

[The Senator]

Ralph can say what he wants. He owns the team and it's his prerogative. However, this may be just me (it probably is, but I'm saying it anyhow) Ralph is at a point in age when he can say whatever he wants, whether it be feasible or not. Nix and Gailey are both also gents of an elderly demeanor. Nix is close to the twilight of his career and some might consider Chan close to it too (I do not though. Chan might have another 10+ years considering his determination and frame of mind to form a competitive team. I'm sure he would sock me in the face if he heard me utter the word twilight.)

 

What I'm getting at is... (speculation on my part but in my heart I believe this) Nix and Gailey speak Ralph's language more so than any other in well over a decade...Nix and Gailey (and Whaley too) talk to Ralph and have gotten his confidence... Have convinced him of what really needs to be done to upgrade the team to improve it... But Ralph, being his ripe old age still speaks his mind (which isn't a bad thing, but yet is outspoken about getting a QB whether this said qb is available in this year's draft or not.) I'm just worried that Ralph might blather a bit. If he does, I don't blame him. If and when i'm his age, I expect to have some interesting blathering sessions myself.

 

It can be considered a slap in the face to Fitzy with how Ralph speaks of upgrading the qb position, but Fitz (in my eyes)is even keeled and level headed and he has the presumption to realize he has Gailey's confidence to lead the team. Fitzy is steadfast in this assertion imo. No amount of Ralph's questioning judgement will avert Fitz from leading this team.

 

Fitz is not the second coming of Jim Kelly, but with the proper supporting cast, Fitzy can lead this team to a title if he keeps improving. No one will ever deter him from this thought. Determination alone will not get you everything you want but if you have the right pieces in place to help you, then...things can happen. Gailey's unwavering confidence in Fitzy and Fitzy's desire to succeed (and a continued improvement in play) can nullify Ralph's desire for an upgrade in a qb. Words...what are they? just words...Who really lets words or opinions keep you from accomplishing what you think you really can?

 

Go Bills!!!

I think that 59-year-old Chan Gailey is too much of an ' elderly gent ' to sock you in the nose - he'd get his ' elderly ' 59-year-old pal Dave Wannstache to do it for him!

 

Otherwise, aside from just learning that in seven short years I'll be considered ' elderly ' myself, I agree with and enjoyed your comments...

 

19 and 0 baby!!!

 

GO BILLSSS!!!!

 

Fear the (elderly) 'stache!!!!!

 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

And we come full circle to..... No help from receivers, or not hitting them accurately in stride, in locations allowing then to make plays? Chicken or egg? My eyes say fitz is a big part of it. I will give credit though, even if we don't agree, this was a much better post then just putting "but Trent dilfer" or "but the bills suck" - I appreciate the stat and hadn't compared their YAC. It could support either side depending on how you view fitz I think. I do think his receivers are less talented so I won't say it's 100% an accuracy issue, but I think it's a large part.

 

Hey, NoSaint.

 

I think we would all agree that Fitz is part of the equation.

I think we both would agree that both the quality of the receivers and the quality of the OL impact the QB's completion percentage.

Less time = more incompletions (throw it away vs. take the sack for a loss of yards), more interceptions (wrong page with receivers and don't have time to see it, screw up while throwing it away).

 

Then the question becomes, how big a part is each?

 

We've all seen Tom Brady stand back there with enough time to call Jimmy Johns, get a sandwich delivered, and eat it before throwing. (Well, not quite that much time, but we get the point).

N'Orleans OL suffered this year, and we saw the impact on Brees - 2nd to career high # sacks taken, career high 22 INTs and a drop in completion percentage, 2nd to career high # yds rushing.

Colts OL suffered this year (so did receivers) and while there's less statistical impact on Manning, I could see it when I watched him and yeah, his completion percentage dropped 2.5%.

Point being, if OL play impacts even acknowledged top-of-the-game "franchise" QB, there's reason to think it does impact Fitz too (no, I'm not trying to argue Fitz = Brady or Fitz = Manning).

 

That said, I agree that part of the equation is Fitz - overthrowing or underthrowing receivers sometimes in a "WTF?" manner which makes me wonder if he thinks he's in a Bull Durham remake and Hanggartner just went Costner and told him to "throw at the mascot".

 

Here's the bit that puzzles me. Gailey repeatedly been quoted saying "Fitz has accuracy" and "he can get better". This is the guy who sees all the film, sees all the practices, and has the best opportunity to assess. So what's going on? What does Gailey see or think about those "WTF?" throws?

 

I think there is no option of "draft a QB and let him develop 2-3 years under Fitz". If Fitz plays as well or better next year (last year of his contract) and the Bills draft a promising prospect, I think Fitz will be offered the chance to start elsewhere - lots of teams have worse QBing - and he'll take it even if the Bills match the money but he thinks he'll warm the bench here. (But I don't think the Bills will match, for a backup) And it wouldn't surprise me if the right pieces are there, to see Fitz pull a Gannon somewhere else.

 

I also think sometimes Fitz failures to move the team are "WTF?" play calling from Gailey. If running has been getting you a steady 3.5-4 YPC and you have time, why step 100% away from the run when it could get you close enough to turn a FG from "stretch" to "sure thing"? I have seen this sort of pattern several times.

 

So where does this bring us? Personally I think 98% of us think eventually the Bills need an upgrade at QB to really build a consistently winning team, the question is just when. Gailey says we can go to the playoffs with Fitz, I agree. I fall in the camp of folks who have seen teams waste their "franchise QB" because, while they had a quality NFL starter, they kept drafting QB while failing to put the rest of the pieces that form a winning team in place. I want us to focus on the lines, the D, and a TE, re-sign Fitz next year, and keep watching the draft for "the right guy". I think it seems to escape folks that Kelly was drafted 14th in the 1st round and statistically, the odds of success in QB-choosing are actually pretty similar throughout the 1st round.

 

Likely I'd feel different if I saw a clear winner in this year's QB draft class, but I don't. I'd like to draft a guy who has played for at least 3 years, in a pro-style offense-I think that improves the odds. There goes Gabbert. And Newton. For me. I also don't buy this "oh, he was just a youngster showing poor judgement" crap about Newton and the PC he clearly knew was "hot". I think you get taught character as you're raised, and if you don't have it by your teens it's hard to imbue later especially while you're rewarded with millions of $$$ for being just as you are.

 

But that's just me. We just have to wait and see how the Bills see it.

 

I agree with the chap who posted Bills would have been no worse off if they'd drafted a QB #1 for the last 5 years. Neither would the Bills be a championship team or positioned to become one.

If your drafting sucks big wet dishcloths, the only way to the championship is $$$$$ FA and that's not the Bills MO.

 

I think that 59-year-old Chan Gailey is too much of an ' elderly gent ' to sock you in the nose - he'd get his ' elderly ' 59-year-old pal Dave Wannstache to do it for him!

Fear the (elderly) 'stache!!!!!

 

Great photo of the 'stache. From the facial expression I was actually surprised to scroll down and see him pointing with the index finger.

[BADOLBILZ]

Regardless of what Fitz is now or what he can or will become in the future, he has a shot in 2011 to define the course of his career. In the history of the NFL there have been many QBs that became decent to great at his current experience level. We might have been witnessing his career light coming on in 2010. Or maybe his ceiling is being just a competent caretaker, as some suggest. I don't claim to know either with certainty so I say it would be wise to keep an open mind.

 

I do know this. If a QB is taken at 3, the economics dictate that they start long before they are ready. Laugh at Flutie/Johnson but a replay is likely. It's Ground Hog's Day all over again. Guys that get 40+ million guaranteed don't sit the bench while they learn. They learn on the job and the play of their teammates suffers as a result. They won't be too patient while waiting for some young QB to put their game together and learn to be a leader. If he proves to be unworthy of his high draft status, that's another 3 years down the drain.

 

Fitz was hit or sacked about 9 times per game. His combination of presnap reads, protection calls, and quick decisions/ releases gave the offense a chance to move the chains. Taking as few sacks as he did was not an accident. It was a deliberate adjustment to his game. He'd do whatever he could to get rid of the ball and avoid a loss. An intentional grounding call is just a spot foul and loss of down (sounds like a sack to me) so why not just get rid of it and see if the referee will allow it? If Fitzpatrick had taken 7 more sacks instead, his comp% hits 60. He was about 10 to 20 sacks short of what would be normal given the number of hits he took. Trading incompletions for sacks HURTS a QB's passer rating (lower comp% and YPA.) There is nothing in the formula that rewards a QB for avoiding sacks.

 

The same is true for getting the ball past the sticks on 3rd and long. It's a lower percentage play but the chances of actually converting it are better. There is not a reward in the passer rating formula for being a risk taker on 3rd and long. As Bills fans we have seen our share of ball holding, afraid to pull the trigger, run out of bounds for a 4 yard loss, dump it off to a stationery receiver on 3rd and long, QB play. I, for one, was sick of it. Fitz played a style of game that made his o-line and receivers look good, certainly not bottom-of-the-barrel as we were lead to believe before season. It's a style that helped his team but hurt his rating.

 

There were two areas of his game that were clearly deficient, IMO. Fumbles on running plays (get the yards but always protect the ball!) and in that 20 yard dead zone that exists between midfield and the high% field goal range. Fitz lead many important, late game drives, that died in this area. It happened so often that I would call it a trend. It's those failures that give his detractors their best ammunition.

 

You are way off on the "economics" part of the equation. If the veteran option is considerably better now, then the rookie rides pine. The determining factor is will the team improve under the QB of now so that the QB of the future comes in to a situation where it's easier to succeed in the future. If the answer is no, then the rookie starts and takes his lumps.

 

Philip Rivers and Aaron Rodgers were both first round picks and they rode the pine behind the guys they were drafted specifically to replace. In Rivers case, he was drafted when Drew Brees was still considered a complete bust. Still, he rode pine.

 

Flutie/Johnson means nothing in this case. First of all, that was vet versus vet. Second, that was poorly handled. If were were still worried about controversies we'd be talking about how Freddie or CJ must go because you can't have two good running backs. The Bills, after all, had to trade Travis Henry because they couldn't have he and Willis McGahee sharing carries. A few years later there are more successful teams with rb's sharing carries than there are not. The Bills controversies are more about the Bills being a clueless organization with no foresight or problem solving ability than a cautionary tale about having too much talent.

[JESSEFEFFER]

Selected 24th overall, Rodgers does not apply to my comment.

 

"In August 2005 at age 21, Rodgers agreed to a reported five-year, $7.7 million deal that included $5.4 million in guaranteed money and had the potential to pay him as much as $24.5 million if all incentives and escalators were met." He was cheap enough to be patient with.

 

Rivers is more applicable. He was taken at #4 and he did sit two years.

 

Flutie/Johnson is very applicable. The flawed veteran that can lead the team vs. the younger, unproven, higher paid QB with supposed upside. Why was Flutie benched against the Titans? The pressure to play the higher paid guy will eventually trump any need to play the guy that gives a team the best chance to win. So much so that it will usually happen before they are ready.

[BADOLBILZ]

Selected 24th overall, Rodgers does not apply to my comment.

 

"In August 2005 at age 21, Rodgers agreed to a reported five-year, $7.7 million deal that included $5.4 million in guaranteed money and had the potential to pay him as much as $24.5 million if all incentives and escalators were met." He was cheap enough to be patient with.

 

Rivers is more applicable. He was taken at #4 and he did sit two years.

 

Flutie/Johnson is very applicable. The flawed veteran that can lead the team vs. the younger, unproven, higher paid QB with supposed upside. Why was Flutie benched against the Titans? The pressure to play the higher paid guy will eventually trump any need to play the guy that gives a team the best chance to win. So much so that it will usually happen before they are ready.

 

Look, if you don't have the heart to take a chance on greatness.....then join the Bills of the past 11 years. Flutie/Johnson is not an issue in draft warrooms around the NFL. Really isn't. Get over it already.

 

It amazes me how some Bills fans cling to things that the Bills just mishandled as if they are a cautionary tale for the league to learn from.

[dave mcbride]

Look, if you don't have the heart to take a chance on greatness.....then join the Bills of the past 11 years. Flutie/Johnson is not an issue in draft warrooms around the NFL. Really isn't. Get over it already.

 

It amazes me how some Bills fans cling to things that the Bills just mishandled as if they are a cautionary tale for the league to learn from.

Great comments above. So what do you think of Newton? I predict that the Bills will take him if he's there.

[Dorkington]

OK.... so most Bills fans are both down on Fitzpatrick and the QB draft class of 2011... so what do we do?

[BADOLBILZ]

Great comments above. So what do you think of Newton? I predict that the Bills will take him if he's there.

 

I think his pocket QB play is a complete mystery, but I'm inclined to say he'd be my pick. I've been harping for a long time on the fact that the Bills haven't taken a QB with their very first selection in any draft for the last 50 years, I think it's time and his talent warrants the gamble.

 

Additionally, I like the idea of a big, ultra-mobile QB with a big arm playing for Gailey in the elements in Buffalo. Newton is also cut from a unique mold, he is like a bigger, better version of Vince Young with the throwing motion of a legitimate NFL passer. I see the comparisons to Roethlisberger, but I don't see big Ben ever ripping off a 70 yard TD run. Newton could.

 

One of my biggest concerns about the Bills is that they never lead the way, they always try to copy other teams success and rarely are successful. Newton is the kind of unique talent that other teams might be trying in vain to acquire in the future the way the Bills so often have the past decade or so. If he's there I do think the Bills will take him. Thinking he might go #1 though.

 

OK.... so most Bills fans are both down on Fitzpatrick and the QB draft class of 2011... so what do we do?

 

I'm not down on Fitzpatrick. I think he might be even be a franchise type QB. But we've all been fooled by counterfeit Bills QB's.

 

At one time or another, there was just as much offseason optimism for a young Losman and Edwards. Each such incidence sets the franchise back another few years. I hope Fitzpatrick does become the next Drew Brees. There are far worse things than having your David Rivers backing up your Drew Brees. And if that QB ended up being Newton, he could be incorporated into the gameplan a la Brad Smith as well.

[bobobonators]

For everyone who's so quick to jump on Fitz for not being able to take this team to the super bowl, how about we make the playoffs..Check that, try a WINNING SEASON...first and worry if our QB is good enough for the super bowl after 3-4 years of falling short WITHIN the playoffs. jesus.

 

there's absolutely no doubt in my mind that if we improve this team and add several pieces to the DL/OL over the next two years, Fitz is MORE than good enough to take the Bills to the playoffs..which is more than i can say for any unknown rookie QB. that's all we should be concerned with right now. all of this super bowl talk is insane people.

Edited February 19, 2011 by bobobonators

[Hapless Bills Fan]

For everyone who's so quick to jump on Fitz for not being able to take this team to the super bowl, how about we make the playoffs..Check that, try a WINNING SEASON...first and worry if our QB is good enough for the super bowl after 3-4 years of falling short WITHIN the playoffs. jesus.

 

there's absolutely no doubt in my mind that if we improve this team and add several pieces to the DL/OL over the next two years, Fitz is MORE than good enough to take the Bills to the playoffs..which is more than i can say for any unknown rookie QB. that's all we should be concerned with right now. all of this super bowl talk is insane people.

 

What he said.

[BADOLBILZ]

For everyone who's so quick to jump on Fitz for not being able to take this team to the super bowl, how about we make the playoffs..Check that, try a WINNING SEASON...first and worry if our QB is good enough for the super bowl after 3-4 years of falling short WITHIN the playoffs. jesus.

 

there's absolutely no doubt in my mind that if we improve this team and add several pieces to the DL/OL over the next two years, Fitz is MORE than good enough to take the Bills to the playoffs..which is more than i can say for any unknown rookie QB. that's all we should be concerned with right now. all of this super bowl talk is insane people.

 

I get that some people love Fitzpatrick. The QB is head and shoulders above all other positions in terms of impact. If you don't have a Tom Brady or Peyton Manning type and you have the opportunity to take a franchise caliber QB you take him and don't look back. It's been 50 years since the Bills used their first selection in any draft on a QB. They've made hedged attempts at getting a franchise QB, but they haven't gone all in since Richie Lucas and it shows in their miserable success rate. I like Fitzpatrick, but he's not the first Bills QB with less than great tools that has had people convinced he is the answer.

[CosmicBills]

For everyone who's so quick to jump on Fitz for not being able to take this team to the super bowl, how about we make the playoffs..Check that, try a WINNING SEASON...first and worry if our QB is good enough for the super bowl after 3-4 years of falling short WITHIN the playoffs. jesus.

 

there's absolutely no doubt in my mind that if we improve this team and add several pieces to the DL/OL over the next two years, Fitz is MORE than good enough to take the Bills to the playoffs..which is more than i can say for any unknown rookie QB. that's all we should be concerned with right now. all of this super bowl talk is insane people.

Winning the Super Bowl is the goal every season. It's all that matters. And if you believe that the key to winning a ring is having an elite QB, then finding one is more important than any other personnel moves. If you think Fitz is one, then no worries. If you think he's just capable of bringing a team to the playoffs but not good enough to bring the whole thing home then you should always be on the lookout for an upgrade.

 

Is there one in this draft? Who knows. But just because this team is not a contender yet doesn't male it foolish to build towards the ultimate goal.

[bobobonators]

I get that some people love Fitzpatrick. The QB is head and shoulders above all other positions in terms of impact. If you don't have a Tom Brady or Peyton Manning type and you have the opportunity to take a franchise caliber QB you take him and don't look back. It's been 50 years since the Bills used their first selection in any draft on a QB. They've made hedged attempts at getting a franchise QB, but they haven't gone all in since Richie Lucas and it shows in their miserable success rate. I like Fitzpatrick, but he's not the first Bills QB with less than great tools that has had people convinced he is the answer.

 

JP Losman was drafted 22nd. Next.

 

Depends on what the "answer" is. To me, Fitz is the answer to bringing this team up out of the gutter it's been in for well over the past decade. Fitz is more than good enough, with the right talent around him, to produce winning seasons, which right now, should be our ONLY concern. Before you win the super bowl, you have to make the playoffs. You're so caught up on getting that Super Bowl winning QB in the draft that you're missing the most glaring objective: to simply win football games

 

Right now teams like the Ravens or Falcons should be discussing whether or not they have a QB that's good enough to win the Super Bowl. We don't have that concern yet.

 

Ask yourself this: Did Fitz produce at a high level at his position last year? Yes. Statistically, he was among the top 10 QB's in the NFL (taking into account that he played fewer games). Indisputible. What more do you want from a position? Ah yes, the super bowl. Unfortunately, it's a team game, and our team on a whole, sucks.. If this team continues to develop and we begin to notice that Fitz is holding us back from winning games, then I'll be happy to revisit this conversation again when that point comes. But for now, and the next few years, Fitz is the answer, imo, to turning this franchise around..of course, assuming we add the right pieces around him.

 

Winning the Super Bowl is the goal every season. It's all that matters. And if you believe that the key to winning a ring is having an elite QB, then finding one is more important than any other personnel moves. If you think Fitz is one, then no worries. If you think he's just capable of bringing a team to the playoffs but not good enough to bring the whole thing home then you should always be on the lookout for an upgrade.

 

Is there one in this draft? Who knows. But just because this team is not a contender yet doesn't male it foolish to build towards the ultimate goal.

 

What numbers do you want Fitz to put up? 45td, 5000 yds and 10int? Look at his numbers last year. QB was not the problem..but yet that continues to be everyone's focal point. Building towards the ultimate goal involves much more than just the QB...we're lacking in every other department. How about you discuss that?