Fan in San Diego Posted January 3, 2005 Posted January 3, 2005 Because it isn't there is little scheming done in preseason with leads to a "street ball" like game - which obviously plays to the strengths of players like Losman. That says nothing of their teammates and their level of readiness at that time, either. Preseason is like a beta test of a Microsoft OS - think Windows ME. Pretty much the only way to tell if a QB (or really any player) is progressing is to play them 4 or 5 regular season games. A personal problem with your posts? Do I know you? 190930[/snapback] I disagree. When the starters are playing the starters if is a valid yardstick of progress. Yes it is a vanilla playbook, but that is more of a valid test. Since it is vanilla playbook of starters against starters it comes down to execution and since some backups are in, some improvational skills are tested as well.
SilverNRed Posted January 3, 2005 Posted January 3, 2005 POSITIVES: Nice-sized athletic passer with an NFL arm. Quickly sets up in the pocket, has a short, quick delivery and the pass explodes from his hand. Patient, buys time in the pocket and a tough passer that takes a hit in order to get the throw off. Senses pressure, gets outside tackle and easily eludes the rush, making the throw on the move. Looks off the safety and goes to secondary targets, not forcing the issue or making bad choices. Challenges the vertical game and at the same time makes all the throws. Zips the outs into tight coverage, drives the ball downfield, yet also puts touch on passes when required. Makes plays with his legs and has an aggressive running style when he takes off from the pocket. I don't know if JP is the answer next season but the positives sound better than what Bledsoe brings. What *does* Bledsoe bring anyway? He's old? He used to be good? We're either designing an offense next season that minimizes Bledsoe's shortcomings or one that minimizes a rookie QB's shortcomings. Either way we're in trouble. The way I see it, though, a team with Bledsoe as the starting QB will never win the Super Bowl. We saw it again this year - Bledsoe is at his worst when his team needs him the most.
Fezmid Posted January 3, 2005 Posted January 3, 2005 Say What???? If you go by on field performnce... AS YOU STATE... then Shane Matthews wins hands down.... he almost doubled Bledsuck's QB rating. If Bledsuck is the best QB on this team then, with him as a starter" the Bills go no where... For a 12 year vet and a career 76.6 QB rating he is the most over rated QB in the history of the NFL... 190949[/snapback] That's assuming you think QB rating is the most important stat. Keep clawing for something. You'll be first in line saying what a crappy QB JPL is if he doesn't win a Superbowl. CW
Fezmid Posted January 3, 2005 Posted January 3, 2005 The way I see it, though, a team with Bledsoe as the starting QB will never win the Super Bowl. We saw it again this year - Bledsoe is at his worst when his team needs him the most. Geez, you can say that about almost every QB in the league. "The way I see it, though, a team with Culpepper as the starting QB will never win the Super Bowl." "The way I see it, though, a team with Pennington as the starting QB will never win the Super Bowl." "The way I see it, though, a team with Breese as the starting QB will never win the Super Bowl." And guess what? I have a 95% chance of being correct with all three of those statements. CW
VABills Posted January 3, 2005 Author Posted January 3, 2005 Geez, you can say that about almost every QB in the league. "The way I see it, though, a team with Culpepper as the starting QB will never win the Super Bowl." "The way I see it, though, a team with Pennington as the starting QB will never win the Super Bowl." "The way I see it, though, a team with Breese as the starting QB will never win the Super Bowl." And guess what? I have a 95% chance of being correct with all three of those statements. CW 190988[/snapback] You forgot a team with Manning will never win either.
Dan Gross Posted January 3, 2005 Posted January 3, 2005 That's assuming you think QB rating is the most important stat. Keep clawing for something. You'll be first in line saying what a crappy QB JPL is if he doesn't win a Superbowl. CW 190982[/snapback] Yeah, Terry Bradshaw's relative press and 70.9 lifetime QB rating would put him ahead of Bledsoe in the "most over-rated of all time" category, if that's your criteria.
GG Posted January 3, 2005 Posted January 3, 2005 I still stick by my assertion that the management looked at Losman as being a two year "project," that he has great potential due to his raw talent but needed time to "refine" into a pro-level QB. I think the key word "eventually" in that analysis, his availability late in the first round (behind the other 3), the re-do of Bledsoe's contract (and how it was structured), and the fact that Losman could not find his way to the #2 position by year's end (yes, even with injury he should have been able to get there were he the overall package) show that. The Bills, therefore, are "stuck" in the position of continuing with the "devil they know" (depending on whether they look at Bledsoe's performance from the final game in terms of the sacks and turnovers or the "2 minute" drives at the end of each half), or finding a QB that's "good enough" for one year. I think their situation would lead them to keeping Bledsoe as starter for next year, as the market for "one year starting QB's" would be low. Maybe they put the "starting QB job is up for the taking" carrot in front of all 3 QB's, but I don't see this staff working that way. 190905[/snapback] While I generally agree with the main assertion of your post, I also believe that at mid-season, the front office had the same epiphany that most Bledsoe supporters had. I also half imagined Lawyer Milloy smacking Bledsoe in the head at halftime yesterday for laying an egg in the first half. I buy into the belief that JP may not be ready for prime time until 2006, but yesterday's game sealed the verdict that Bledsoe is no longer ready for prime time, either. The decision to draft a project like JP was done with the knowledge that we had an offensive coaching staff that took KORDELL STEWART and TOMMY MADDOX to Hawaii. There was ample reason to think that they could do the same with Bledsoe, while JP learned. But the first half yesterday reminded everyone, again, that in the face of a big game, our big QB folded. This theme was the same in every night time game Bledsoe played in a Bills uniform, and it was the same aginst any good defense the Bills faced this year. Thus, while I imagine the older veterans aren't thrilled about the prospect of going into a season with an unproven QB, I don't imagine they'd be thrilled to go into a season with a QB who's never risen to the challenge in a big game. The JP era began at half time yesterday.
Fezmid Posted January 3, 2005 Posted January 3, 2005 Thus, while I imagine the older veterans aren't thrilled about the prospect of going into a season with an unproven QB, I don't imagine they'd be thrilled to go into a season with a QB who's never risen to the challenge in a big game. And yet he's been to two Superbowls... I think I see what you're saying, but don't throw out the word "never" so casually. CW
SilverNRed Posted January 3, 2005 Posted January 3, 2005 Geez, you can say that about almost every QB in the league. "The way I see it, though, a team with Culpepper as the starting QB will never win the Super Bowl." "The way I see it, though, a team with Pennington as the starting QB will never win the Super Bowl." "The way I see it, though, a team with Breese as the starting QB will never win the Super Bowl." And guess what? I have a 95% chance of being correct with all three of those statements. CW 190988[/snapback] But Culpepper, Pennington, and Brees aren't all on the downside of their careers. Bledsoe has hit his apex and has been in decline for some time now. And I don't need a guy who's going to make amazing plays every game that show up on Sportscenter. Just don't make horrible plays. Bledsoe could've had 4 INTs in the first half and his fumble late in the game basically killed the team (and he wasn't being rushed on his blind side). BTW, I *hate* criticizing Bledsoe. Obviously, we don't really know pro athletes but he seems like one of the real class acts out there. If ever a pro athlete could double as a role model, Bledsoe might be the guy. But I honestly don't think he's the guy if we want to win next season.
GG Posted January 3, 2005 Posted January 3, 2005 And yet he's been to two Superbowls... I think I see what you're saying, but don't throw out the word "never" so casually. CW 191001[/snapback] While I could have made a notation in my post that DB has never risen to the challenge in a big game, as a Buffalo Bill (which is the main point of this debate) you can make a valid argument that he's never risen to the challenge as a Patriot. You could make an argument that he was the reason Pats went to SB after the 1996 season, but I think Parcells & C Martin are a bigger reason. 2001? Bledsoe threw one good pass to Patten, and was lucky Steelers dropped a few more. His playoff stats inlude 6 TDs and 12 INTs in 7 games.
stuckincincy Posted January 3, 2005 Posted January 3, 2005 But Culpepper, Pennington, and Brees aren't all on the downside of their careers. Bledsoe has hit his apex and has been in decline for some time now. And I don't need a guy who's going to make amazing plays every game that show up on Sportscenter. Just don't make horrible plays. Bledsoe could've had 4 INTs in the first half and his fumble late in the game basically killed the team (and he wasn't being rushed on his blind side). BTW, I *hate* criticizing Bledsoe. Obviously, we don't really know pro athletes but he seems like one of the real class acts out there. If ever a pro athlete could double as a role model, Bledsoe might be the guy. But I honestly don't think he's the guy if we want to win next season. 191002[/snapback] I don't mean to shout at you, SnR, but I do tire of folks calling DB a class act. He's been around the proverbial NFL "block", and in 2003, he should have flung his helmet into the stands and revolted against the inanity of GW/KB. He didn't. DB goes along, cashs his very fat checks, chronically underperforms, and now and again makes some alleged heartfelt statement of angst. Like after the PGH loss. Yes, he is a very contrite millionaire thanks to the revenue generated by thousands and thousands who cough up dough some of which ends up in his pockets, in hope of a positive outcome. Whatta guy.
SilverNRed Posted January 3, 2005 Posted January 3, 2005 I don't mean to shout at you, SnR, but I do tire of folks calling DB a class act. He's been around the proverbial NFL "block", and in 2003, he should have flung his helmet into the stands and revolted against the inanity of GW/KB. He didn't. DB goes along, cashs his very fat checks, chronically underperforms, and now and again makes some alleged heartfelt statement of angst. Like after the PGH loss. Yes, he is a very contrite millionaire thanks to the revenue generated by thousands and thousands who cough up dough some of which ends up in his pockets, in hope of a positive outcome. Whatta guy. 191023[/snapback] STOP SHOUTING!! I think he's a class act as a human being, but I can't appreciate him as a football player. Pro sports is full of sociopaths and at least DB seems like a reasonable human being off the field. On the field, well, he's pretty much just as passive and maybe that's the problem.
Alaska Darin Posted January 3, 2005 Posted January 3, 2005 I don't mean to shout at you, SnR, but I do tire of folks calling DB a class act. He's been around the proverbial NFL "block", and in 2003, he should have flung his helmet into the stands and revolted against the inanity of GW/KB. He didn't. DB goes along, cashs his very fat checks, chronically underperforms, and now and again makes some alleged heartfelt statement of angst. Like after the PGH loss. Yes, he is a very contrite millionaire thanks to the revenue generated by thousands and thousands who cough up dough some of which ends up in his pockets, in hope of a positive outcome. Whatta guy. 191023[/snapback] I guess that goes for the other 50+ players who also didn't do the same thing.
Fezmid Posted January 3, 2005 Posted January 3, 2005 While I could have made a notation in my post that DB has never risen to the challenge in a big game, as a Buffalo Bill (which is the main point of this debate) you can make a valid argument that he's never risen to the challenge as a Patriot.You could make an argument that he was the reason Pats went to SB after the 1996 season, but I think Parcells & C Martin are a bigger reason. 2001? Bledsoe threw one good pass to Patten, and was lucky Steelers dropped a few more. His playoff stats inlude 6 TDs and 12 INTs in 7 games. 191022[/snapback] The problem is, people on this board seem to think that Flutie was a godsend, even though his stats sucked. Here's some of his stats from close to full seasons: Year Team G GS Att Comp Pct Yards YPA Lg TD Int Tkld 20+ 40+ Rate 1988 New England Patriots 11 9 179 92 51.4 1150 6.42 80 8 10 11/65 14 2 63.3 1989 New England Patriots 5 3 91 36 39.6 493 5.42 36 2 4 6/52 7 0 46.6 1998 Buffalo Bills 13 10 354 202 57.1 2711 7.66 84 20 11 12/78 36 8 87.4 1999 Buffalo Bills 15 15 478 264 55.2 3171 6.63 54 19 16 26/176 40 7 75.1 2001 San Diego Chargers 16 16 521 294 56.4 3464 6.65 78 15 18 25/168 43 4 72.0 And need I remind everyone of his playoff game against the Dolphins? So what I'm saying is that people need to decide. Is QB rating important? Is "just winning" important? What is it? Because you can't say "Just winning" is important with one breath and then turn around and say "Bledsoe isn't the reason the Patriots went to either Superbowl." But people are doing it constantly here, and it's frustrating. Note: I'm not saying you personally do it. CW
stuckincincy Posted January 3, 2005 Posted January 3, 2005 I guess that goes for the other 50+ players who also didn't do the same thing. 191043[/snapback] It does. But the quaint notion is that the QB is the "leader"...
GG Posted January 3, 2005 Posted January 3, 2005 The problem is, people on this board seem to think that Flutie was a godsend, even though his stats sucked. ......... So what I'm saying is that people need to decide. Is QB rating important? Is "just winning" important? What is it? 191055[/snapback] There is a reason that I avoided QB ratings, because they are largely a statistic of QB's passing efficiency. However, showing TDs and INTs in playoff games gives you a better gauge of performance becuse it gives a glimpse of what the QB does in a high pressure game against top notch competition. The reason I am down on Drew is similar to why I was down on Flutie. Both of their weaknesses are obvious and are easily exploited by top teams. If I was happy about a perennial 9-7 team, with little hope of advancing beyond that, then I'd be happy about our QB situation now. What is really important about a QB's play is how well he is incorporated into the whole offense. While the picture book QB is the image of Brett Favre or John Elway (with Terrell Davis in the backfield), you have to look at how the QB runs the offense and his propensity to not hurt the team should count equally as much as his ability to will a win with one pass. That's why you will see Trent Dilfers & Brad Johnsons having successful post seasons. It is for this reason I have no problem going into next season with JP as the starter because I know the upside of Drew Bledsoe, and we will need to see the result of the JP experiment sooner or later.
Alaska Darin Posted January 3, 2005 Posted January 3, 2005 There is a reason that I avoided QB ratings, because they are largely a statistic of QB's passing efficiency. However, showing TDs and INTs in playoff games gives you a better gauge of performance becuse it gives a glimpse of what the QB does in a high pressure game against top notch competition. The reason I am down on Drew is similar to why I was down on Flutie. Both of their weaknesses are obvious and are easily exploited by top teams. If I was happy about a perennial 9-7 team, with little hope of advancing beyond that, then I'd be happy about our QB situation now. What is really important about a QB's play is how well he is incorporated into the whole offense. While the picture book QB is the image of Brett Favre or John Elway (with Terrell Davis in the backfield), you have to look at how the QB runs the offense and his propensity to not hurt the team should count equally as much as his ability to will a win with one pass. That's why you will see Trent Dilfers & Brad Johnsons having successful post seasons. It is for this reason I have no problem going into next season with JP as the starter because I know the upside of Drew Bledsoe, and we will need to see the result of the JP experiment sooner or later. 191177[/snapback] I don't see Dilfer nor Johnson as any different than Bledsoe - we simply don't generate the pass rush that those defenses did, which is the true difference between the teams.
GG Posted January 3, 2005 Posted January 3, 2005 I don't see Dilfer nor Johnson as any different than Bledsoe - we simply don't generate the pass rush that those defenses did, which is the true difference between the teams. 191181[/snapback] Ah, but I'm pretty certain our D & ST scored nearly as frequently as the other guys' did.
John from Riverside Posted January 3, 2005 Posted January 3, 2005 Geez, you can say that about almost every QB in the league. "The way I see it, though, a team with Culpepper as the starting QB will never win the Super Bowl." "The way I see it, though, a team with Pennington as the starting QB will never win the Super Bowl." "The way I see it, though, a team with Breese as the starting QB will never win the Super Bowl." And guess what? I have a 95% chance of being correct with all three of those statements. CW 190988[/snapback] How about a team just make the playoffs and see what happens..... That is what some fail to realize.....they are talking about Super Bowls....you HAVE TO MAKE THE PLAYOFFS to have a chance at a Super Bowl.... We just missed it again.....
ajzepp Posted January 3, 2005 Posted January 3, 2005 Losman has the speed and agility to escape the pass rush and give the receivers time to get open. Unless you're a Peyton Manning, you either have to be strong enough or fast enough to escape the rush. Bledsoe is none of those. Time to make the committment to the Losman, McGahee, Evans offense. 190737[/snapback] Hell, anyone who watched that crap yesterday could easily see that Bledsoe wasn't even TRYING to move around to avoid the rush.......there were several times when he didn't even take two steps up into the pocket, which would have allowed him a little more time.....the guy is clueless. I'm sorry, I know this is very little to go on, but it's still about all we have......if you go back and watch JP in the preseason game against Denver, you saw a player who 1) dropped back quickly, 2) set up quickly, 3) was decisive with the football, and 4) had command of the huddle. There was even a time on the Sounds of the Game tape when Mularkey told JP on the sidelines that he needed to get the team focused......JP went into the huddle and began barking out commands like he was Jim Kelly. I'm sorry, but the guy deserves a shot.....there is a lot that he can bring to this offense. If Baltimore can stick with Boller this long, we can give JP a shot at the helm, too.
Recommended Posts