Jump to content

Matt Flynn may be available from Seattle, Bills interested?


Recommended Posts

Is he going to get you deep into the playoffs.? I think the answers are too much and no.

I'm sure people said the same thing about Rich Gannon when the Raiders grabbed him off the scrap heap in his mid 30s. And people said the same about Kurt Warner when the Rams grabbed him from the arena league. Nobody knows for sure. Sometimes guys just flourish in the right setting, My thinking is that we don't have a legit starting QB, we should explore every option to get one. Is Flynn guaranteed to be a success - NO. If he guaranteed to fail - NO. As Wayne Gretzky said "you miss 100% of the shots you don't take". The Bills have nothing to lose but a low round draft pick. If Seattle wants more, hang up the phone and move on. I honestly do not see a downside to this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 248
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Right, the guy should be ignored for losing his job to one of nine rookie quarterbacks to make the Pro Bowl...ever. Good point.

 

I'm glad you're "done." Your argument is bogus!

 

My argument being bogus is your opinion ofcourse.

 

We have gone down this re-tread path a lot in the past decade and here we are with no consistency at the most important position. We all remember how happy we were (including me) when we cut Edwards and went with Fitz. Edwards had become very skittish and telegraphed plays. Fitz at least gave us an aggressive style. A couple of years later, we soured on Fitz after his frustrating inaccuracy and penchant for game killing interceptions. I think we need to go a different route and truly go for a QB with long term potential.I admit there is limited game film on Flynn but I am deferring to the talent evaluators at two teams to tell me that he is only a good enough as a backup - albeit (as you say) to two potentially great QBs. But we need to find that great QB and not settle for a second class, hand-me-down option who is likely to continue hampering the Bills success.

 

(BTW, I am surprised at your uncharacteristically rude post)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My argument being bogus is your opinion ofcourse.

 

We have gone down this re-tread path a lot in the past decade and here we are with no consistency at the most important position. We all remember how happy we were (including me) when we cut Edwards and went with Fitz. Edwards had become very skittish and telegraphed plays. Fitz at least gave us an aggressive style. A couple of years later, we soured on Fitz after his frustrating inaccuracy and penchant for game killing interceptions. I think we need to go a different route and truly go for a QB with long term potential.I admit there is limited game film on Flynn but I am deferring to the talent evaluators at two teams to tell me that he is only a good enough as a backup - albeit (as you say) to two potentially great QBs. But we need to find that great QB and not settle for a second class, hand-me-down option who is likely to continue hampering the Bills success.

 

(BTW, I am surprised at your uncharacteristically rude post)

 

Yeah, sorry that was aggressive. My bad, homey.

 

Here's the thing though--we haven't been "down this road" as we haven't brought in any re-treads with the expectation that they'll be starters, it's just unfortunately worked out that way because we missed on drafting JP and Trent.

 

Fitz wasn't meant to be the starter, neither was Holcombe--but look how that panned out.

 

The errors in finding a quarterback over the last decade haven't been through moves like this potential one. Signing Matt Flynn would only suffice for part of the reucrring problem we've had. IF we were to trade for Flynn and then not DRAFT a quarterback with one of our top picks this year OR next year, then yes, we'd be spinning our wheels, and you'd be right--it'd be the same old same old.

 

Until then, just like Tavaris Jackson, Matt Flynn is a safety net/stop gap until they draft somebody, anybody.

Edited by taC giB ehT
Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://sports.yahoo....53385--nfl.html

 

Retreaded link. :)

 

It does explain why the Bills have worked to create a cap bubble though.

 

The article doesn't mention anything about the Bills creating a "cap bubble". Are you inferring that they have created extra cap space and have not signed any free agents because they are intent on acquiring Flynn and need space to acquire his salary?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, sorry that was aggressive. My bad, homey.

 

Here's the thing though--we haven't been "down this road" as we haven't brought in any re-treads with the expectation that they'll be starters, it's just unfortunately worked out that way because we missed on drafting JP and Trent.

 

Fitz wasn't meant to be the starter, neither was Holcombe--but look how that panned out.

 

The errors in finding a quarterback over the last decade haven't been through moves like this potential one. Signing Matt Flynn would only suffice for part of the reucrring problem we've had. IF we were to trade for Flynn and then not DRAFT a quarterback with one of our top picks this year OR next year, then yes, we'd be spinning our wheels, and you'd be right--it'd be the same old same old.

 

Until then, just like Tavaris Jackson, Matt Flynn is a safety net/stop gap until they draft somebody, anybody.

 

Apology accepted.

 

Maybe we did not acquire many of the QBs with the intent of them starting but Holcomb, Fitz did end up starting cos we just had some poor choices on the roster to pick from. We really need to end this cycle of underwhelming and below-average QBing. (duh)

 

Your last sentence is the crux of my problem with a trade scenario. If (big IF) Flynn is not significantly better than TJackson, why spend a draft pick on acquiring him ? Also, our FO is spending a lot of time evaluating the draft class. Spending time with Flynn and having yet another backup-grade QB on the roster will distract the coaches going forward.

 

Now, if after looking at Geno Smith etc, our FO is not convinced they are the long term answer then perhaps it may be worth it to see if there is even a marginal improvement at QB for the short term. But, that is a lot of if's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By the way, Matt Flynn also got hurt in preseason last year, and missed the third game of preseason, the most important one, which led to Wilson winning the job, and to which Pete Carroll said...

The fact Flynn missed last week's game due to injury did not help his cause as Carroll said, "the games did kind of decided the issue."

 

B.S. The Dolphins and Philbin never wanted him. Those comments were Philbin taking the high rode and to save face in case they didn't get the QB they wanted in the draft. If he was that good and Philbin wanted him, he would have signed with the Dolphins.

John Scheinder the GM, who did want him and signed him to a $26m contract, was with the Packers, too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, sorry that was aggressive. My bad, homey.

 

Here's the thing though--we haven't been "down this road" as we haven't brought in any re-treads with the expectation that they'll be starters, it's just unfortunately worked out that way because we missed on drafting JP and Trent.

 

Fitz wasn't meant to be the starter, neither was Holcombe--but look how that panned out.

 

The errors in finding a quarterback over the last decade haven't been through moves like this potential one. Signing Matt Flynn would only suffice for part of the reucrring problem we've had. IF we were to trade for Flynn and then not DRAFT a quarterback with one of our top picks this year OR next year, then yes, we'd be spinning our wheels, and you'd be right--it'd be the same old same old.

 

Until then, just like Tavaris Jackson, Matt Flynn is a safety net/stop gap until they draft somebody, anybody.

 

Flutie, Johnson, Bledsoe, Holcomb, and Fitzpatrick represent our starters for 11 of the last 15 years. I'm not sure anyone could say with a straight face that we "haven't gone down that path". That is a majority of what this franchise has actually done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Flutie, Johnson, Bledsoe, Holcomb, and Fitzpatrick represent our starters for 11 of the last 15 years. I'm not sure anyone could say with a straight face that we "haven't gone down that path". That is a majority of what this franchise has actually done.

And yet they are completely unrelated, other than the fact that the Bills had to get a QB somewhere, and didn't draft one high.

 

What, do you think there were conversations in the Bills offices that said, "We traded a first rounder for Rob Johnson, let's roll the dice and do it again!"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And yet they are completely unrelated, other than the fact that the Bills had to get a QB somewhere, and didn't draft one high.

 

What, do you think there were conversations in the Bills offices that said, "We traded a first rounder for Rob Johnson, let's roll the dice and do it again!"?

 

Thank you.

 

Flutie, Johnson, Bledsoe, Holcomb, and Fitzpatrick represent our starters for 11 of the last 15 years. I'm not sure anyone could say with a straight face that we "haven't gone down that path". That is a majority of what this franchise has actually done.

 

Kelly responded precisely as i would--but i'd also add that the "retreads" weren't the problem. getting the retreads without a draft plan or an heir apparent, or without any draft activity at all has been the downfall, and insofar--since this year's draft and next year's draft (I'm giving them until next year given what we know to be true about the talent discrepency) haven't happened, this isn't YET "more of the same"

 

Also this:

 

http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/156714-what-kills-me-most-about-the-past-3-years/#entry2760158

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can you even call Flynn a "retread" when he's never had a chance to start? We really have no idea what he is or isn't capable of. Whole lot of assumptions being made in this thread.

 

Ha, for a guy who's been in the shadows of Aaron Rodgers, Brett Favre and now Russell Wilson (a rookie pro bowler), there are a lot of assumptions that he's no good...

 

All we know is that he's not better than a first ballot hall of famer, one of the league's top 3 quarterbacks and Russell Wilson...so...that leaves quite a bit of daylight for guys he MAY be better than...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Matt Flynn is an NFL ready QB. 27 years old. Acquiring him would solve the problem of drafting a QB in a year where the only one(s) available have question marks.

 

Now you can use your remaining picks to draft BPA, other positions of need. IMO, if we were able to get Flynn I wouldn't even bother drafting a QB this year. You've already got a reasonable back-up in Tjax.

 

If Flynn doesn't work out (or even if he does) draft a QB next year.

 

I haven't read through this whole thread. I'd guess many are saying Flynn sucks if its like most threads here. Problem is, it is very possible that if we drafted a QB at 8 or 41 that they might suck just as bad, or even worse.

 

Acquiring Flynn (if its even possible) does make sense to me.

 

jb

Link to comment
Share on other sites

is this Matt Flynn or Ryan Fitzpatrick? uh-oh Matt-Flynn-Beard.jpg

 

It's the Amish Crossbow!!!

 

Ha, for a guy who's been in the shadows of Aaron Rodgers, Brett Favre and now Russell Wilson (a rookie pro bowler), there are a lot of assumptions that he's no good...

 

There are also a lot of assumptions that he is good. That's why this debate has reached 11 pages. Because there's nearly an equal number of people with opposing viewpoints.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Matt Flynn is an NFL ready QB. 27 years old. Acquiring him would solve the problem of drafting a QB in a year where the only one(s) available have question marks.

 

Now you can use your remaining picks to draft BPA, other positions of need. IMO, if we were able to get Flynn I wouldn't even bother drafting a QB this year. You've already got a reasonable back-up in Tjax.

 

If Flynn doesn't work out (or even if he does) draft a QB next year.

 

I haven't read through this whole thread. I'd guess many are saying Flynn sucks if its like most threads here. Problem is, it is very possible that if we drafted a QB at 8 or 41 that they might suck just as bad, or even worse.

 

Acquiring Flynn (if its even possible) does make sense to me.

 

jb

 

Very much this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...