thewildrabbit Posted September 13, 2012 Posted September 13, 2012 Don't forget, we are cursed. We are cursed so bad, we turn $100 million into garbage. A curse is the most logical explanation If by cursed you mean that the Bills have an owner that has only been interested in his bottom line, then yea, Bills fans are cursed. That 100 million dollar DE sold a heck of a lot of season tickets, didn't he. Next year the plan is to draft a QB, who will fill the stadium again. NVM the fact that It all comes down to coaching, and the Bills refuse to spend the money on a top coach. Or even when a coach with a proven history of winning wants the Job the owner says he doesn't feel "comfortable" with him. To us fans the bottom line is winning! To the owner of the Buffalo Bills, it has a totally different meaning
8-8 Forever? Posted September 13, 2012 Posted September 13, 2012 Yeah they are right. A week ago they were predicting the Bills would make the playoffs. Apparently none of the shortcomings of the team seemed bad enough back then. . Which way is the wind blowing today? PTR Forget the media. You knew if the bills lost sunday, the "same old Bills" stuff would be everywhere. Just go beat the Chiefs and Browns and all will be well. We really should have invested more resources into qbs, mainly with draft picks. Im would have been ok with Fitz as a stop gap player, but not developing anyone else beyond him is terrible Who?? they would have drafted Cam Newton last year if was available .. he wasn't. Same this year Luck and RGIII... gone. You gonna trade away the future -- 3 one's to get RGIII ?? Probably not. With notable exceptions, top top FAs aren't coming to buffalo...Peyton Manning is not coming to Buffalo to run a college offense... the draft is the only way this team can get better. So when your turn at the draft board comes up and no true NFL QB is there, that's pretty much it for that year. TJackson might be the guy, but not this year. You got what you got when your franchise is in a backwater like Buffalo.
jester43 Posted September 13, 2012 Posted September 13, 2012 (edited) hey cmon we drafted losman and edwards to hold down the qb spot for 10 years! they should both still be here lighting it up! the issue is the same as it's been since ralph fired polian and ran butler out of town...we don't have good enough people hiring and firing coaches and GMs. we don't have gooed enough people evaluating talent. despite the available evidence to the contrary, i got tricked this off-season into thinking that buddy and chan were an exception to this rule...but we all got a cold bucket of water dumped on us last week didn't we? on the other hand there is: the 2010 draft chan trying to "coach up" edwards chan sticking with fitzawful when the whole rest of the nfl has figured out he can't throw deep down the middle. the laughable vince young experiement and subsequent trading a pick for a back up that wasn't ready to dress not dressing a 3rd round wr....which is a position of desparate need...because he's "not ready." after 4 months he's not ready?! wtf! sorry guys...i find them very likable too, but buddy and chan are not capable of bringing us a winner....the fault lies at the top with a man who clearly hasn't been capable of making front office personnel decisions for a very long time. and yes.... no serious search for GM and a constant stream of retread dinosaur coaches = ralph is cheep Edited September 13, 2012 by jester43
Mr. WEO Posted September 13, 2012 Posted September 13, 2012 You gonna trade away the future -- 3 one's to get RGIII ?? Probably not. Actually, it was 2 1's and a 2. But still, why not?? You wouldn't trade Gilmore and next year's 1st round DB and second round backup DT for RG3? You got what you got when your franchise is in a backwater like Buffalo. Yeah, 4 SB's in a row and then 20 years of nothing. They never should have moved the team to Buffalo after that...
Sisyphean Bills Posted September 13, 2012 Posted September 13, 2012 Usa today had Losman behind Phillip Rivers but ahead of Matt Schaub. http://www.usatoday....-scouting_x.htm And this article gives a pretty good idea of what Losmans stock was leading into the draft. http://business.high...ckness-live-arm And this further confirms Losman wasn't really a reach. http://football.abou.../p/jplosman.htm You realize though that every player has his fan club, right? Scouting needs to determine what the player's weaknesses are (all players have those) as well as their strengths. Just because some people got wood over Aaron Maybin's first step should not have erased concerns such as he had the physique of a WR, for example.
mob16151 Posted September 13, 2012 Posted September 13, 2012 You realize though that every player has his fan club, right? Scouting needs to determine what the player's weaknesses are (all players have those) as well as their strengths. Just because some people got wood over Aaron Maybin's first step should not have erased concerns such as he had the physique of a WR, for example. Doesn't make a guy like Maybin or Losman a "reach" though. Bust yes, reach no.
st pete gogolak Posted September 13, 2012 Posted September 13, 2012 Usa today had Losman behind Phillip Rivers but ahead of Matt Schaub. http://www.usatoday....-scouting_x.htm And this article gives a pretty good idea of what Losmans stock was leading into the draft. http://business.high...ckness-live-arm And this further confirms Losman wasn't really a reach. http://football.abou.../p/jplosman.htm No one - but no one - had Losman in the same class as Manning, Rivers or Roethlisberger. Yes, he was pegged to go low first round so he wasn't a "reach". The big mistake was not trading up with JAX to take Roethlisberger. Donahue (I believe) said JAX wasn't interested in trading up but I still don't believe that. They stayed put to draft Reggie Williams???
mob16151 Posted September 13, 2012 Posted September 13, 2012 No one - but no one - had Losman in the same class as Manning, Rivers or Roethlisberger. Yes, he was pegged to go low first round so he wasn't a "reach". The big mistake was not trading up with JAX to take Roethlisberger. Donahue (I believe) said JAX wasn't interested in trading up but I still don't believe that. They stayed put to draft Reggie Williams??? So your agreeing with me.......right? lol
RuntheDamnBall Posted September 13, 2012 Posted September 13, 2012 No one - but no one - had Losman in the same class as Manning, Rivers or Roethlisberger. Yes, he was pegged to go low first round so he wasn't a "reach". The big mistake was not trading up with JAX to take Roethlisberger. Donahue (I believe) said JAX wasn't interested in trading up but I still don't believe that. They stayed put to draft Reggie Williams??? No one had Matt Schaub in their class, either. So? Can you face the fact that Losman may not have ever amounted to anything, but that this coaching staff and front-office was primed to botch just about anyone short of Peyton Manning coming here? They yo-yo'd him on and off the playing field so often that it quickly became clear they had nothing resembling a strategy, and that the FO was not on the same page as the coaches. It was the most CYA bunch I've seen in Bills history.
Bronc24 Posted September 13, 2012 Posted September 13, 2012 Usa today had Losman behind Phillip Rivers but ahead of Matt Schaub. http://www.usatoday....-scouting_x.htm And this article gives a pretty good idea of what Losmans stock was leading into the draft. http://business.high...ckness-live-arm And this further confirms Losman wasn't really a reach. http://football.abou.../p/jplosman.htm Lol. Let's break this down: The USA Today article you reference states this about Losman - "J.P. Losman's career interception rate (2.73%) was lowest in Tulane history." That's it. Those are the only words written about him. What a ringing endorsement! They also had him the fourth ranked QB in his class, which is like being the 4th best looking chick in class. Someone's gotta be fourth. The football heavyweight, www.business.highbeam.com, states Mike Martz likes 10 QB's in the draft, one of them being Losman. It then goes on to state his measurables and that he is ranked fourth. Big effing deal. Finally, your last article, your ace in the hole that "further confirms Losman wasn't really a reach" states: Positives: J.P. Losman has the physical attributes you want in an NFL quarterback. He has good size (6-3, 220) and strength, a very strong arm that can make all the throws including the deep out, and one of the quickest releases in all of college football. Losman has decent agility, and good speed. He also has above average athletic ability. He can make plays with his feet and can throw on the run. He's a fiery competitor, a tough leader and can take a hit. He doesn't get shaken often. Negatives: Losman doesn't set his feet real well, throws off his back foot often causing the ball to sail, and doesn't rotate his hips properly. At Tulane, he played mostly out of the shotgun and will have to adjust to playing under center. He tends to rush his throws at times and will force the pass too often. Sometimes tries to make too much happen by himself. Also needs to work on reading coverages a little better. Projection: Tulane's J.P. Losman has everything NFL scouts look for in a quarterback, but he needs to polish his game a little, especially his footwork. He should be selected anywhere from the late-first to second round of the 2004 NFL Draft. Look at the negatives! That's exactly what I do NOT want from my starting QB! And history has proven he WAS a reach, largely for the reasons your ace-in-the-hole article references. The Bills panicked and it cost us yet again.
benderbender Posted September 14, 2012 Posted September 14, 2012 I have a suggestion. They should post the article in the Bills front office lobby, locker room, training room, all meeting rooms and coaches offices. And... in the lavatories. In the cryptkeeper's office or wherever he naps during the day.
mob16151 Posted September 14, 2012 Posted September 14, 2012 Lol. Let's break this down: The USA Today article you reference states this about Losman - "J.P. Losman's career interception rate (2.73%) was lowest in Tulane history." That's it. Those are the only words written about him. What a ringing endorsement! They also had him the fourth ranked QB in his class, which is like being the 4th best looking chick in class. Someone's gotta be fourth. The football heavyweight, www.business.highbeam.com, states Mike Martz likes 10 QB's in the draft, one of them being Losman. It then goes on to state his measurables and that he is ranked fourth. Big effing deal. Finally, your last article, your ace in the hole that "further confirms Losman wasn't really a reach" states: Positives: J.P. Losman has the physical attributes you want in an NFL quarterback. He has good size (6-3, 220) and strength, a very strong arm that can make all the throws including the deep out, and one of the quickest releases in all of college football. Losman has decent agility, and good speed. He also has above average athletic ability. He can make plays with his feet and can throw on the run. He's a fiery competitor, a tough leader and can take a hit. He doesn't get shaken often. Negatives: Losman doesn't set his feet real well, throws off his back foot often causing the ball to sail, and doesn't rotate his hips properly. At Tulane, he played mostly out of the shotgun and will have to adjust to playing under center. He tends to rush his throws at times and will force the pass too often. Sometimes tries to make too much happen by himself. Also needs to work on reading coverages a little better. Projection: Tulane's J.P. Losman has everything NFL scouts look for in a quarterback, but he needs to polish his game a little, especially his footwork. He should be selected anywhere from the late-first to second round of the 2004 NFL Draft. Look at the negatives! That's exactly what I do NOT want from my starting QB! And history has proven he WAS a reach, largely for the reasons your ace-in-the-hole article references. The Bills panicked and it cost us yet again. And once again you miss this reference He should be selected anywhere from the late-first to second round of the 2004 NFL Draft. Bust yes, reach no.
mattsox Posted September 14, 2012 Posted September 14, 2012 Can't put it any better than TMQ put it today, can you? [/size][/font][/color] Worst Team Ever!!!
first_and_ten Posted September 14, 2012 Posted September 14, 2012 As worried and upset as I am, if they find a way to completely blow out the pats* in week four, all is forgiven.
Bronc24 Posted September 15, 2012 Posted September 15, 2012 And once again you miss this reference He should be selected anywhere from the late-first to second round of the 2004 NFL Draft. Bust yes, reach no. Did not miss it. Reach.
Garion Posted September 15, 2012 Posted September 15, 2012 Retrospectoscope makes analyzing draft picks so much easier Is there anyone in the league who shouldn't have traded up for Rogers? http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/14637364/draft-day-was-well-worth-wait-for-rodgers-packers
Sisyphean Bills Posted September 15, 2012 Posted September 15, 2012 Doesn't make a guy like Maybin or Losman a "reach" though. Bust yes, reach no. I can agree with that. On the other hand, the point of the draft is to build a team by finding the right pieces for your team. So, "acing the exam" and drafting the guys that seem right based on the common consensus isn't the real goal. "Acing the exam" seemed to be what the Modrak era was all about. "Everybody" thought Mike Williams was the best OT prospect. "Everybody" thought JP Losman was a late 1st round talent. "Everybody" thought Aaron Maybin was a 1st round talent. "Everybody" thought McKelvin was the best CB prospect. On the other hand, there was the Donte Whitner pick on which the Bills went against the grain a bit. Ironically perhaps, it could be easily argued that Whitner, though he never lived up to where he was drafted, was the best player of all those listed. So, "the reach" was the best player and the group-think consensus "right picks" were disasters.
KOKBILLS Posted September 15, 2012 Posted September 15, 2012 the issue is the same as it's been since ralph fired polian and ran butler out of town...we don't have good enough people hiring and firing coaches and GMs. we don't have gooed enough people evaluating talent. despite the available evidence to the contrary, i got tricked this off-season into thinking that buddy and chan were an exception to this rule...but we all got a cold bucket of water dumped on us last week didn't we? on the other hand there is: the 2010 draft chan trying to "coach up" edwards chan sticking with fitzawful when the whole rest of the nfl has figured out he can't throw deep down the middle. the laughable vince young experiement and subsequent trading a pick for a back up that wasn't ready to dress not dressing a 3rd round wr....which is a position of desparate need...because he's "not ready." after 4 months he's not ready?! wtf! sorry guys...i find them very likable too, but buddy and chan are not capable of bringing us a winner....the fault lies at the top with a man who clearly hasn't been capable of making front office personnel decisions for a very long time. and yes.... no serious search for GM and a constant stream of retread dinosaur coaches = ralph is cheep I could not argue with any of that even if I wanted to... Sad but true...
Recommended Posts