Orton's Arm Posted July 9, 2012 Posted July 9, 2012 ok we agree enough, but why would you name yourself after a piece of turd? i dont get that. I gave myself this name early in Edwards' career. It, um, seemed like a good idea at the time. "Why remain stuck with a lousy name when you can easily change it?" you might ask. That's a very good question! Maybe part of it's to remind myself that decisions have consequences, and that next time I should look before I leap. But also, part of me wants to hold off on changing my name until the Bills finally acquire The Guy at quarterback. Then I'll change my screen name to commemorate him. What I'm about to write represents the most illogical thinking I've done all month--maybe all year-so bear with me. But if I hold off on changing my name until The Guy appears, that might somehow make it more of an honor for me to name myself after him than if I went changing names all the time. And maybe, the short-term sacrifice of me being stuck with a lousy name like Edwards_Arm might make The Guy a tiny bit more likely to succeed. This way of thinking is very silly, I know!
loserlovers Posted July 9, 2012 Posted July 9, 2012 I gave myself this name early in Edwards' career. It, um, seemed like a good idea at the time. ok then, respect.
Hapless Bills Fan Posted July 9, 2012 Author Posted July 9, 2012 I would agree with this. To expand on what you've written: both Johnson and Losman had very strong arms and quick feet; with Losman's feet a bit quicker than Johnson's. On the other hand, Johnson was much more accurate as a passer than Losman, and better at seeing more than just his #1 target. Johnson could have been a very good quarterback, had it not been for the fact he was extremely weak when it came to anything sack-related. Weak at sensing pressure. Weak at knowing where in the pocket he was supposed to move to, to reduce said pressure. Weak at having a clock in his head. Other than the sacks, Johnson was hands-down a much better quarterback than Losman. "Other than that, Mrs Lincoln, how did you like the play?" Thanks for sharing the background on your screen name. We all have our quirks - fun to hear about them.
Cynical Posted July 9, 2012 Posted July 9, 2012 Mr. Weo mentioned that during 2006, the Bills didn't ask Losman to make many pass attempts. Too bad he didn't really prove it. As I previously replied to him: In 2006, JP threw the ball 212 times in the first 8 games. He threw the ball 217 times in the last games. About same amount or slight increase, but definitely not a decrease. Since passing is only one part of the offense, let's look at rushing. In 2006, the Bills ran the ball 212 times in the first 8 games They ran the ball 208 times in the last games. About the same amount, or a slight decrease, but definitely not an increase. And seemed to do better when they reduced their reliance on the passing game. See above and try again. He's right about that. But that's only one of the two components of the simplification of the Bills' offense which occurred in 2006. An article I'd read a while back described the other. A reporter had interviewed an NFL coach; who'd said that the Bills' schemes and plays were greatly simplified to accommodate Losman's mental limitations. Here's the part I am disputing. Unless this coach was a part of the Bills coaching staff in 2006, or has direct knowledge via someone who was part of the team in 2006, he has no idea why the playbook was set up the way it was. The reason I dispute it I find it really hard to believe Dick Jauron, based on game film from one year where JP ran Mularkey's "Go-Go Gadget" offense and one off season, knew, without question, JP was a mental midget. This includes that everybody on the team was being introduced to a new offensive system before the 2006 season. The same Dick Jauron that spent 2.5 years and fired an OC in the process, beofre he finally realized Trent Edwards was just as big a moron. Sorry. I am not buying it.
Maury Ballstein Posted July 9, 2012 Posted July 9, 2012 This is my official "I can't wait until the season starts" post. We're talking about Trent Edwards people. And I got suckered in too....... Damn. You got me man...... Exactly what I was thinking. Freakin Trent are you kidding me. Just a terrible Qb in all aspects. Here's to Fitzy makin the leap and 11-5 next year w Rb's both tearing it up..... Bold prediction defense sack totals. Dareus 11 Anderson 8 Williams 14 (say what??) Mario 12 Here's to next season Fast forward please. I gave myself this name early in Edwards' career. It, um, seemed like a good idea at the time. "Why remain stuck with a lousy name when you can easily change it?" you might ask. That's a very good question! Maybe part of it's to remind myself that decisions have consequences, and that next time I should look before I leap. But also, part of me wants to hold off on changing my name until the Bills finally acquire The Guy at quarterback. Then I'll change my screen name to commemorate him. What I'm about to write represents the most illogical thinking I've done all month--maybe all year-so bear with me. But if I hold off on changing my name until The Guy appears, that might somehow make it more of an honor for me to name myself after him than if I went changing names all the time. And maybe, the short-term sacrifice of me being stuck with a lousy name like Edwards_Arm might make The Guy a tiny bit more likely to succeed. This way of thinking is very silly, I know! The guy ? I guess we will meet him in 2014.
dr.fishopolis Posted July 9, 2012 Posted July 9, 2012 Immediately after the 2006 draft, Dave Wannestedt said he wouldn't have taken Losman with the last pick of the seventh round. At the time, many on this site criticized him for that remark. Wannestedt has more knowledge of football in his pinky than most people here have, period. This is why he realized that Losman had not proven himself a good pocket passer in college, and was very unlikely to become one in the NFL. Source? I remember him saying this about Eric Moulds in 1996 when Wannstedt was coaching the Bears, and coached Moulds in the Senior Bowl. He could have also said the same thing about Losman, but why? Wannstedt was coaching Pitt at the time, why would they go to him to evaluate another team's draft? All I can find for sources on Moulds are TBD posts (highbeam.com cuts off the article right before the source, and the chicagotribune alludes to Wannstedt not liking Moulds, but doesn't quote it), but I remember him saying it after the draft as well. http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/56704-willis-mcgahee-loves-sandwiches/ http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/146462-spotlight-on-wanny/ http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-22850791.html http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1996-08-30/sports/9608300196_1_kent-hull-miami-dolphins-receiver Anyway, I think we can be agree that Wannstedt was completely wrong about Moulds, regardless of his football knowledge.
Mark Vader Posted July 9, 2012 Posted July 9, 2012 Five pages on Trent Edwards. Bravo I'm amazed by this too. A lot of people really need to move on. Even the Music City Forward Lateral does not get this much spewing. This thread has so much vitriol that it should be moved to PPP. Some people really need to get over themselves, and quickly.
loserlovers Posted July 9, 2012 Posted July 9, 2012 I'm amazed by this too. A lot of people really need to move on. Even the Music City Forward Lateral does not get this much spewing. This thread has so much vitriol that it should be moved to PPP. Some people really need to get over themselves, and quickly. get over ourselves?? sorry to talk about a topic that ruined three years of bills football. who exactly are you to come write in a thread and say we shouldnt be writing here? If you dont think it was significant part of bills football than what should we talk about? how great 2012 will be? maybe but at least were discussing facts, not who we should hypothetically trade and how good were going to be, maybe.
You herd it hear last Posted July 9, 2012 Posted July 9, 2012 I'm amazed by this too. A lot of people really need to move on. Even the Music City Forward Lateral does not get this much spewing. This thread has so much vitriol that it should be moved to PPP. Some people really need to get over themselves, and quickly. I really don't think that's the issue... the Bills need to create some better history to make these stories irrelevant... We just comment on them because we have much more of a knowledge base on them due to our experiences during their time here... Time needs to move on, not the fans. After all, how many "thumbs down" type reactions do you see when somebody posts a highlight film from the glory years?
Hapless Bills Fan Posted July 9, 2012 Author Posted July 9, 2012 (edited) I'm amazed by this too. A lot of people really need to move on. Even the Music City Forward Lateral does not get this much spewing. This thread has so much vitriol that it should be moved to PPP. Some people really need to get over themselves, and quickly. Wow! This is either a Sar Chasm too subtle for me, or it wins the Unintentional Irony award of the off-season. A complaint about a vitriolic thread exhorting "some people to get over themselves quickly"? Seriously? I am impressed by the length of the thread myself. 6 pages, who woulda thunk? Not I when I started the thing. Edited July 9, 2012 by Hopeful
Mark Vader Posted July 10, 2012 Posted July 10, 2012 get over ourselves?? sorry to talk about a topic that ruined three years of bills football. who exactly are you to come write in a thread and say we shouldnt be writing here? If you dont think it was significant part of bills football than what should we talk about? how great 2012 will be? maybe but at least were discussing facts, not who we should hypothetically trade and how good were going to be, maybe. I never said you could not write about it. My point is that we as fans should move on from this. As you said this was three years ago, and what's done is done. What good does it do the Bills now to keep complaining about it? Yes the Bills have had some bad times, even horrific times, and it sucks to think about it. So why not focus on the future instead? Is that such a bad idea? I really don't think that's the issue... the Bills need to create some better history to make these stories irrelevant... We just comment on them because we have much more of a knowledge base on them due to our experiences during their time here... Time needs to move on, not the fans. After all, how many "thumbs down" type reactions do you see when somebody posts a highlight film from the glory years? From what I have witnessed these past couple of season the Bills are trying to make better history. No one can deny that. Why shouldn't the fans move on? Yes, there is a lot of bad history that the Bills have made, but that doesn't mean there is no reason not to have a little optimism.
Mark Vader Posted July 10, 2012 Posted July 10, 2012 Wow! This is either a Sar Chasm too subtle for me, or it wins the Unintentional Irony award of the off-season. A complaint about a vitriolic thread exhorting "some people to get over themselves quickly"? Seriously? I am impressed by the length of the thread myself. 6 pages, who woulda thunk? Not I when I started the thing. It's a combination of both. I know this is a message board, and everyone needs to vent, but seriously, Trent Edwards? Has no one gotten over this subject? You yourself, Hopeful, started this thread to take our minds off of Demetress Bell. Who still cares about Bell?! What's next? The Super Bowl losses? Dick Jauron? Tom Donahoe's draft record? Mike Mularkey? Billy Joe Hobert? Rob Johnson? "Just Give it to 'em"? Aaron Maybin? Marshawn Lynch? Todd Collins? Joe Panos? 0 for the 70's against the Dolphins? Bruce Smith not getting a flu shot? Ronnie Harmon? Gregg Williams? Hank Bullough? Kay Stephenson? There are some things that we as fans have got to let go of eventually.
loserlovers Posted July 10, 2012 Posted July 10, 2012 It's a combination of both. I know this is a message board, and everyone needs to vent, but seriously, Trent Edwards? Pay attention, it says trent edwards "eagle" which is current and newsworthy. The thread is about how most here know he will fail because he never was a good qb. Others here, with the wrong opinion, also say he will suck but blame bills coaching from 6 years ago...or a concussion. As if no one ever had a concussion and played well afterwards. you fit into a third category, criticising us for talking about a topic too "old" so i guess we can only talk about 2012? just so you know you learn form your past not from your future and the past is factual, unless you pervert and make things up like "trent edwards had all the tools...until the arizona game" it seems the FO learned from, maybin,mckelvin and turdwards, and know we have Dareus,Gilmore, and Fitzy. We will ventuntil theres something to actually cheer about.
Nuncha Posted July 10, 2012 Posted July 10, 2012 This was the birth of Trentative - he was never the same after this hit. Would be illegal today.
Hapless Bills Fan Posted July 10, 2012 Author Posted July 10, 2012 It's a combination of both. Er, I don't think that's quite possible. It could have been be sarcastic in a way too subtle for me to grasp, but your other responses make plain you're quite serious. Therefore I award you the Unintentional Irony medal of the 2012 Off-season, for needing to "get over yourself" in a post exhorting others to "get over themselves" You yourself, Hopeful, started this thread to take our minds off of Demetress Bell. Who still cares about Bell?! Er, that would be the guy who started a thread saying he's tired of hearing about Demetress Bell?
thewildrabbit Posted July 10, 2012 Posted July 10, 2012 Ryan Fitzpatrick I wouldn't call a QB who has never even had a winning season in his 7 year career successful, try again.
Coach Tuesday Posted July 10, 2012 Posted July 10, 2012 I wouldn't call a QB who has never even had a winning season in his 7 year career successful, try again. Steve Young. Let me know when you're ready to concede.
Hapless Bills Fan Posted July 10, 2012 Author Posted July 10, 2012 Pay attention, it says trent edwards "eagle" which is current and newsworthy. (.,..) you fit into a third category, criticising us for talking about a topic too "old" so i guess we can only talk about 2012? I thought we were talking about 2012?
thewildrabbit Posted July 10, 2012 Posted July 10, 2012 Five pages on Trent Edwards. Bravo It really is sad that so many fans mostly blame the players for the lost decade 2000-2012. They all love to hate their favorite hated player, JP Losman, Trent Edwards, ( it must be the lousy QB that is the reason for losing, if only we had a franchise guy....right? ) Poz, Whitner, Lynch, Jason Peters, Dem Bell. While a select few blame the head coaches and the GM, or lack of a real GM. Meanwhile the real culprit sits calmly in a different city watching his team make a sweet profit year after year... all the while not caring that his team is at the bottom of the division for 12 straight years. It still amazes me that this owner managed to be the wizard behind the curtain pulling all the strings, and yet all the fans blame everyone but him. Steve Young. Let me know when you're ready to concede. Really, seriously..Steve Young? Steve Young sat on the bench behind Montana (87-90) while being coached up by perhaps the greatest, most innovative, brightest offensive mind the NFL has ever seen in Bill Walsh. get a grip and try again.
San Jose Bills Fan Posted July 10, 2012 Posted July 10, 2012 Okay, I'll add something pertinent to the discussion which relates to the current situation of both the Bills and Trent Edwards: There are people on this message board who believe that Trent Edwards "beat out" Vince Young for a spot on the Eagles roster.
Recommended Posts