A Few Thoughts About The Game, in no particular order.....

[Orton's Arm]

Bullschit. My posting history here suggest otherwise. I've disagreed with countless opinions around here over the years and have benefitted greatly from different points of view.

 

Echoing others' assertion that you are on an anti-Manuel crusade is mocking? OK.

 

GO BILLS!!!

 

> My posting history here suggest otherwise. I've disagreed with countless opinions around here over the years and have benefitted greatly from different points of view.

 

For every time I've seen you engage in the kind of interaction you've described above, there have been at least five times when you've acted condescending toward someone for having a different opinion than yours. You may not realize how dogmatic you come across.

 

Take last year's discussion about Wannestedt for example. It was crystal clear to you that the problem with last year's defense was the players. Not the coaching by any means. The players only. To your credit, you did say a few things in support of that point, instead of just presenting an unsupported opinion. But you came across as though your own arguments were the only thing you could see. When others pointed out that the defense might have benefited from a little extra creativity or unpredictability, the point didn't seem to register with you. Or if it did register, you didn't communicate that fact. You seemed just as frustrated with those who disagreed with you as you would have been with someone who believed that 2 + 2 = 5.

 

The problem with committing so firmly to such a one-sided view is that if you're wrong--as you were about last year's defense--it's hard to backtrack. I'm not trying to suggest that I'm right 100% of the time either, because I'm not.

 

If you want to have reasonable discussions with me, fine. But going into that, there needs to be an understanding that neither of us will disrespect the other; that we're both capable of being wrong, and that no one's unsupported opinion should be confused with fact.

[RuntheDamnBall]

> They need to bolster the OL and they need to acquire a playmaking TE.

 

Granted. But the Bills will probably lose at least two more games (Tampa Bay and New England), with additional losses possible. They'll likely have a top-10 pick. You don't use a pick like that on an OG or even a TE.

It seems like that puts you in another good position to trade down and collect more picks while getting the guy you want at either of those positions, no? Vernon Davis was a top-10 pick, though, just to cite an outlier.

> Steadily Big Ben got better and better to the point that he is now bordering on being an elite qb.

 

The Jets used a similar model with Mark Sanchez. What you've described works great when you've chosen the right QB. If you start off with the assumption that Manuel is the right quarterback, everything you've written flows naturally. But the only way I could convince myself to share in that assumption would be to turn a blind eye to the things he hasn't shown. Or to pretend that most QBs can learn those things if given sufficient development time.

You don't know that you've chosen the right QB until he's been given time to learn the position in the NFL. A precious few guys are NFL ready off the bat. Some have great success to start based on certain natural gifts and a good surrounding cast -- then have a tougher time when they are game-planned for. Others sit for a year or two. By the way, Colin K seems to fall into both of the last two categories -- he has been up and down this season.

Agreed. In that sense he's similar to Fitz. Manuel's physical tools are worlds better than Fitz's. On the other hand, Fitz was very good at quickly and accurately processing large amounts of on-field information. There is no reason other than hope to believe that Manuel will develop a similar ability in the NFL, given that he showed no signs of it in college. Manuel's most likely ceiling is roughly at Fitz's level; with both quarterbacks possessing similar levels of accuracy, and with Manuel's physical tools offsetting Fitz's advantage in information processing.

This is about where EJ fans start feeling like you're insulting Manuel. You can't possibly evaluate his ceiling at this point, can you? If so, how?

 

> This organization has no choice other than place their chips on the qb they brought to the table.

 

On the contrary: they do have a choice. There is no rule against taking first round QBs two years in a row. If anyone within the organization questions the strategy, the response could be, "a typical first round QB chosen outside the top 5 has a 30% chance of working out. It's absolutely essential to get the QB position nailed down, so we're giving ourselves two chances to do that. Besides, we think the world of [QB X]."

Or you could think of it as a waste of a draft pick unless a generational talent is there at your pick.

 

This team's needs are many, and while Manuel put his team in a position to win yesterday, the knives come out after every loss.

 

In reference to your other stat, that 30% chance has led to some of the best QBs we've ever seen, so I just am not sure of the meaning of the statistic. How good are the chances for top 5?

[CSBill]

Was it just me or was anyone else happy to see Marrone show some emotion on the sideline by throwing his visor and yelling?

 

CBF

 

Yes, I thought the same thing . . . first time I saw it all year. Good! Now maybe he needs to direct some it at his own players.

[dave mcbride]

Agreed. In that sense he's similar to Fitz. Manuel's physical tools are worlds better than Fitz's. On the other hand, Fitz was very good at quickly and accurately processing large amounts of on-field information. There is no reason other than hope to believe that Manuel will develop a similar ability in the NFL, given that he showed no signs of it in college. Manuel's most likely ceiling is roughly at Fitz's level; with both quarterbacks possessing similar levels of accuracy, and with Manuel's physical tools offsetting Fitz's advantage in information processing.

 

 

In watching Manuel the last couple of weeks, his problem hasn't been information processing -- he generally makes the right throw, although he checks down a lot to avoid sacks (not a bad thing at all given how devastating sacks are) -- but accuracy on deep and intermediate throws. The near-picks he threw yesterday weren't bad decisions but rather off-target throws along with one unlucky play in which Goodwin fell down because of the lousy turf. He's not horribly inaccurate, but he's certainly not Aaron Rogers at this point of his career. I don't know how much his accuracy will improve, but at this stage his decision making is more or less fine. In the games he has started, he has led the offense to 286, 436, 328, 350, 400 (prorated vs. the Browns), 227, 313, and 405 yards. That's 343 yards per game, which is exactly what they averaged last year. In terms of information processing, turnovers and sack rates strike me as a pretty good proxy. Fitzpatrick's lifetime sack rate was 6.0 prior to this season, but in his first two full-ish seasons (2008 and 2009) it was 9.3 and 8.5. Manuel's sack rate in his rookie is a very-good-for-a-rookie 6.4 percent. By way of comparison, Luck was sacked on 6.1 percent of dropbacks last year and 6.5 percent this year. With regard to turnovers, Manuel has turned it over 5 times (4 ints and one lost fumble). He's average 0.65 turnovers a game (this is a rough estimate because he missed about 20 minutes of the Browns game). Andrew Luck turned it over about 1.4 times a game last year, and in 2011 Fitzpatrick turned it over about 1.67 times. (I say roughly because I'm extrapolating about a 50/50 split on fumbles lost and recovered). His Wonderlic score was a pretty decent 28, which is certainly acceptable for an NFL QB (football ain't rocket surgery, which a lot of people forget). Tom Brady had a 33 and Payton Manning a 28.

 

Anyway, if you focus on the often avoidable negative plays - sacks and turnovers - he's doing pretty well for a rookie. He gets rid of the ball quickly and is willing to take the 2 yard pass completion over the sack. There ain't nothing wrong with that.

Edited December 2, 2013 by dave mcbride

[Wayne Cubed]

 

 

In watching Manuel the last couple of weeks, his problem hasn't been information processing -- he generally makes the right throw, although he checks down a lot to avoid sacks (not a bad thing at all given how devastating sacks are) -- but accuracy on deep and intermediate throws. He's not horribly inaccurate, but he's certainly not Aaron Rogers at this point of his career. I don't know how much his accuracy will improve, but at this stage his decision making is more or less fine. In the games he has started, he has led the offense to 286, 436, 328, 350, 400 (prorated vs. the Browns), 227, 313, and 405 yards. That's 343 yards per game, which is exactly what they averaged last year. In terms of information processing, turnovers and sack rates strike me as a pretty good proxy. Fitzpatrick's lifetime sack rate was 6.0 prior to this season, but in his first two full-ish seasons (2008 and 2009) it was 9.3 and 8.5. Manuel's sack rate in his rookie is a very-good-for-a-rookie 6.4 percent. By way of comparison, Luck was sacked on 6.1 percent of dropbacks last year and 6.5 percent this year. With regard to turnovers, Manuel has turned it over 5 times (4 ints and one lost fumble). He's average 0.65 turnovers a game (this is a rough estimate because he missed about 20 minutes of the Browns game). Andrew Luck turned it over about 1.4 times a game last year, and in 2011 Fitzpatrick turned it over about 1.67 times. (I say roughly because I'm extrapolating about a 50/50 split on fumbles lost and recovered). His Wonderlic score was a pretty decent 28, which is certainly acceptable for an NFL QB (football ain't rocket surgery, which a lot of people forget). Tom Brady had a 33 and Payton Manning a 28.

 

Anyway, if you focus on the often avoidable negative plays - sacks and turnovers - he's doing pretty well for a rookie. He gets rid of the ball quickly and is willing to take the 2 yard pass completion over the sack. There ain't nothing wrong with that.

 

Good post.

 

He is after all a rookie QB. I'd like to know what the Manuel detractors realistically expect from a rookie QB. Key word there, realistically.

[JohnC]

In watching Manuel the last couple of weeks, his problem hasn't been information processing -- he generally makes the right throw, although he checks down a lot to avoid sacks (not a bad thing at all given how devastating sacks are) -- but accuracy on deep and intermediate throws. He's not horribly inaccurate, but he's certainly not Aaron Rogers at this point of his career. I don't know how much his accuracy will improve, but at this stage his decision making is more or less fine. In the games he has started, he has led the offense to 286, 436, 328, 350, 400 (prorated vs. the Browns), 227, 313, and 405 yards. That's 343 yards per game, which is exactly what they averaged last year. In terms of information processing, turnovers and sack rates strike me as a pretty good proxy. Fitzpatrick's lifetime sack rate was 6.0 prior to this season, but in his first two full-ish seasons (2008 and 2009) it was 9.3 and 8.5. Manuel's sack rate in his rookie is a very-good-for-a-rookie 6.4 percent. By way of comparison, Luck was sacked on 6.1 percent of dropbacks last year and 6.5 percent this year. With regard to turnovers, Manuel has turned it over 5 times (4 ints and one lost fumble). He's average 0.65 turnovers a game (this is a rough estimate because he missed about 20 minutes of the Browns game). Andrew Luck turned it over about 1.4 times a game last year, and in 2011 Fitzpatrick turned it over about 1.67 times. (I say roughly because I'm extrapolating about a 50/50 split on fumbles lost and recovered). His Wonderlic score was a pretty decent 28, which is certainly acceptable for an NFL QB (football ain't rocket surgery, which a lot of people forget). Tom Brady had a 33 and Payton Manning a 28.

 

Anyway, if you focus on the often avoidable negative plays - sacks and turnovers - he's doing pretty well for a rookie. He gets rid of the ball quickly and is willing to take the 2 yard pass completion over the sack. There ain't nothing wrong with that.

 

Excellent post Well reasoned and stated.

[chris heff]

 

 

The WaltersFootball evaluation you cited is a terrific evaluation of him as a prospect. What made him appealing were his pysical tools and his personality and character traits. That's the essence of why he was such an intriguing prospect and also a risky prospect. Not one qb prospect in last year's draft was a clean prospect. In all probability no qb prospect in this year's draft is a clean (guaranteed) prospect. The best qb I have seen this year in the college ranks is FSU's Winston. He is not eligible to enter the draft this year and he has some serious legal issues hovering over him.

 

Andrew Luck is a once in a generation qb. So let's not bother using him as a template to compare qbs to. Russell Wilson is another special prospect in that his on the field maturity is already at an elite level. Kaepernick/Griffin/Newton/Foles were not instantly finished products. All of them are undergoing the challenges of learning how to play. That's the frustrating nature of the learning curve that can't be avoided. Since you can't avoid it my recommendation to you is don't allow yourself to be spooked to the point of prematurely pulling the plug on a prospect. The irony that you haven't stated is that the struggles that EJ is going through are the same struggles that other future qb prospects are going to endure. Why start the developmental process and then start the same process with another fresher prospect??? That makes no sense to me.

 

Next offseason the Bills shouldn't use a high draft pick for another qb. In my view that would be foolish. What they need to do is do everything they can to put EJ in a position to succeed. They need to bolster the OL and they need to acquire a playmaking TE. The model for qb development that we should copy is the model that the Steelers used when they drafted Roethlisberger. They had a terrific OL and emphasized the running game and kept the pressure off of their raw qb. Steadily Big Ben got better and better to the point that he is now bordering on being an elite qb.

 

If you put things in perspective you have to acknowledge that EJ has shown enough ability to allow you to think that he can be a franchise qb. The inconsistency he is exhibiting is the norm for young qbs. Is he going to be an elite qb? Absolutely not! He doesn't have the natural impeccable accuracy that those types of special qbs possess.

 

This organization has no choice other than place their chips on the qb they brought to the table. Gambles pay off if you play the cards you are holding; not if you too soon throw the cards on table and walk away. If you want guarantees then you shouldn't have walked into the casino,

You are absolutely correct, but you are trying to reason with the unreasonable. Edwards Arm had decided that Manuel was not any good prior to the draft. He determined this without, in my opinion, ever having seen him play a down of football. Trying to blame Manuel for yesterday's loss is absurd. Manuel's stat line was virtually identical to Luck's. Luck won because his defense didn't get gashed for 34 points and alleged skill players didn't turn over the ball on consecutive potential game wining drives, not because pundits believe he is polished or NFL ready.

 

By Edwards Arm's standards there is a bunch of HOF, Super Bowl winning QBs that would not be considered elite. Starr, Namath, Dawson, Griese and probably Young. There are ten guys that won Super Bowls that he wouldn't have on his team. Bradshaw won four and I remember when he got beaten out by Joe Gilliam, should the Steelers have drafted another QB?

 

You don't give up on a guy after eight starts and you sure as he'll don't give up on him before he even player one game. You also don't try and create blame where there is none.

[JohnC]

You are absolutely correct, but you are trying to reason with the unreasonable. Edwards Arm had decided that Manuel was not any good prior to the draft. He determined this without, in my opinion, ever having seen him play a down of football. Trying to blame Manuel for yesterday's loss is absurd. Manuel's stat line was virtually identical to Luck's. Luck won because his defense didn't get gashed for 34 points and alleged skill players didn't turn over the ball on consecutive potential game wining drives, not because pundits believe he is polished or NFL ready.

 

By Edwards Arm's standards there is a bunch of HOF, Super Bowl winning QBs that would not be considered elite. Starr, Namath, Dawson, Griese and probably Young. There are ten guys that won Super Bowls that he wouldn't have on his team. Bradshaw won four and I remember when he got beaten out by Joe Gilliam, should the Steelers have drafted another QB?

 

You don't give up on a guy after eight starts and you sure as he'll don't give up on him before he even player one game. You also don't try and create blame where there is none.

 

Edwards Arm will eventually come around. Right now he is very invested in his bandwith paradigm. It's a very interesting approach to evaluating qb prospects and it does have merit. My complaint with his paradigm is that there are plenty of examples outside of his paradigm who have thrived at the position.

 

On this issue don't give up on Edwards Arm. I and many others are taking turns hammering away trying to wear him down. If he is as open-minded as I think he is he will eventually come around. He is like the man who only dates blonds. When he eventually trys a redhead who rocks his boat he will learn the lesson about the wisodom of expanding his bandwith.

[Agent 91]

Not exactly a major synopsis of the game, but it comes expected with these posts. No mention of the horrific defense-other than Gilmore? Everyone's savior Kiko was awful. He over pursues and guesses on everything. Not a very bright guy, and that's who is calling the defense on the field? This coaching staff is a nightmare, but what do ypou expect when you are hiring a staff from Syracuse of all places. Can we stop fretting about Pettine getting a head coaching job? Take a look at Buffalo's rankings on team defense. Sure, they have a lot of sacks, because all he does is blitz. Gets burned quite a bit and they can't stop the run. But hey, they are 4-8 and playing meaningful December football, right?

 

I don't know, seems kind of condescending but.... you make some unmistakably good points. I think the secondary needs a succession plan for byrd. And I noticed Alonso waaaaay out of position. Not prepared to call him dumb though. Gilmore is a player who was grossly overdrafted but a second third round grade would make him a steal. Did I just say that. There are a lot of parts that need refining but the base is there.

[FLFan]

It seems like that puts you in another good position to trade down and collect more picks while getting the guy you want at either of those positions, no? Vernon Davis was a top-10 pick, though, just to cite an outlier.

 

You don't know that you've chosen the right QB until he's been given time to learn the position in the NFL. A precious few guys are NFL ready off the bat. Some have great success to start based on certain natural gifts and a good surrounding cast -- then have a tougher time when they are game-planned for. Others sit for a year or two. By the way, Colin K seems to fall into both of the last two categories -- he has been up and down this season.

 

This is about where EJ fans start feeling like you're insulting Manuel. You can't possibly evaluate his ceiling at this point, can you? If so, how?

 

 

Or you could think of it as a waste of a draft pick unless a generational talent is there at your pick.

 

This team's needs are many, and while Manuel put his team in a position to win yesterday, the knives come out after every loss.

 

In reference to your other stat, that 30% chance has led to some of the best QBs we've ever seen, so I just am not sure of the meaning of the statistic. How good are the chances for top 5?

This is all true. It astounds that what we have seen from Manuel thus far would cause anyone to conclude that he is a failed pick, or said another way, will not be an outstanding QB in this league. There is simply no evidence to suggest either after 8 NFL starts. In fact, I have seen nothing so far that would suggest he is anything other than promised - a prospect with great physical tools who will need time to develop his skills at the NFL level. I think his leadership skills and his intelligence for the game are far better than the so called pundits predicted, though exactly what the Bills stated they liked about him.

 

As for drafting another QB, this is beyond silly. Without a total tank by Manuel the balance of the year, there is nothing to suggest they should not continue his development. Selecting yet another rookie, and pitting him against Manuel in training camp, will do nothing but hamper his development, and little to suggest the next guy will be better. Am I missing something or did Andrew Luck just become draft eligible again next year? I see no "generational talents" there. On the contrary, Manuel has given ample reason thus far to suggest his chances are considerable better than "30%".

 

You cannot develop two QB's simultaneously. So, unless they decide he cannot get better, the thing to do is stay the course. This is exactly what is going to happen, so people should get used to the idea.

 

By the way, if I were the Jets, I would be drafting again. There is a case where a QB is living up to exactly his billing, and there is little reason to suspect he is getting or will get better. Big difference. The next coaching staff and GM in NY will make that call, and that would be the time.

Edited December 2, 2013 by MDFan

[RuntheDamnBall]

This is all true. It astounds that what we have seen from Manuel thus far would cause anyone to conclude that he is a failed pick, or said another way, will not be an outstanding QB in this league. There is simply no evidence to suggest either after 8 NFL starts. In fact, I have seen nothing so far that would suggest he is anything other than promised - a prospect with great physical tools who will need time to develop his skills at the NFL level. I think his leadership skills and his intelligence for the game are far better than the so called pundits predicted, though exactly what the Bills stated they liked about him.

It is the hardest thing in the world to just say we don't have all the information that we need and that this will take some time.

 

People also need constant reminding that the plan was for EJ to win the job against a rank-and-file NFL veteran, not to obtain the position by default.

By the way, if I were the Jets, I would be drafting again. There is a case where a QB is living up to exactly his billing, and there is little reason to suspect he is getting or will get better. Big difference. The next coaching staff and GM in NY will make that call, and that would be the time.

I liked Geno, but my dad and I - both fans of his college career - agreed that the NYJ was the ABSOLUTE WORST situation for him to be in. I think if he had been drafted by a strong organization like the Ravens or even the Pats he could have ended up with a killer career. As it stands he faces a very uphill battle in that he has to defeat not just an opponent on a weekly basis, but also the NY media, while keeping the dogs at bay within his clown college of an organization. He is in a very poor place to learn the ropes of the NFL, and with Sanchez hurt he had zero opportunity to sit back and watch.

[fergie's ire]

To me, Manual's game seemed like a microcosm of his season. Started out very accurate....but very safe. Lots of running plays and when he did they were to outlet receivers or short crossing patterns. Then, the defense took that the way, and, frankly, he looked a little lost. Not only were his safe passes gone, but he seemed to get flustered and his footwork fell apart. Later, he took some chances deep and while he missed on some (both passes to Goodwin) and hit others (Woods), they were close enough to loosen the defense, and he started making some nice throws (both fumbled catches) and really won us the game (twice).

 

As for the Gilmore haters, I don't see how you can criticize the guy. He has looked awesome.....like the best shut-down corner in the league. ......Okay, some of you are going to nitpick and say Gitlin has only looked that way in OTAs......and well, that's true. But we may have the best spring cornerback in the league....so we have that going for us.

[Orton's Arm]

Edwards Arm will eventually come around. Right now he is very invested in his bandwith paradigm. It's a very interesting approach to evaluating qb prospects and it does have merit. My complaint with his paradigm is that there are plenty of examples outside of his paradigm who have thrived at the position.

 

On this issue don't give up on Edwards Arm. I and many others are taking turns hammering away trying to wear him down. If he is as open-minded as I think he is he will eventually come around. He is like the man who only dates blonds. When he eventually trys a redhead who rocks his boat he will learn the lesson about the wisodom of expanding his bandwith.

 

> I and many others are taking turns hammering away trying to wear him down.

 

I am much more likely to change an opinion in response to new data than because of social pressure. I acknowledge that you and others have presented data and/or reasoning with which to support your positions. But some of it is flawed. For example, one person sees sack percentage and so forth as a proxy for information processing speed. But what if a QB consistently checks down if that first read isn't open? A QB like that hasn't demonstrated much information processing speed. A better measurement is the eyeball test. If the offense looks wide-open--if you get the sense that the QB will throw the ball to any given open target; regardless of whether he's the first read or the fourth--and if you see the QB actively looking at several different targets each play; then these things are typically a good sign of information processing speed.

 

> Right now he is very invested in his bandwith paradigm.

 

Bandwidth is certainly a very important part of what I look for. Another part is a consistently high level of accuracy. A third is touch. A fourth is timing: the ability to hit the receiver in perfect stride. These are probably the four most important things I look for. My position on these things today is very much the same as it was in 1998; when I strongly supported Peyton Manning over Ryan Leaf.

 

> If he is as open-minded as I think he is he will eventually come around.

 

Whether I "come around" or not will depend a lot more on EJ than anything written here. At this point in his career, Manuel's play doesn't look the way franchise QB play should look. His stats--as measured by yards per attempt--are roughly comparable to those put up by Trent Edwards. If a year or two from now he's "developed" and those things have changed, I'll be the first to say so. Okay, maybe not the very first, but certainly early enough!

 

To answer a question you asked in an earlier post, I think it's extremely unlikely the Bills will use a first round pick on a QB in next year's draft. I'm used to this franchise doing things less well than some of the more intelligent and well-informed fans would do them. For example, there's no way a guy like Bill from NYC could have been convinced to squander the 8th overall pick on Donte Whitner! A discussion about what the Bills will do is different from (and often bears little relation to) a discussion of what they should do.

[chris heff]

 

 

Edwards Arm will eventually come around. Right now he is very invested in his bandwith paradigm. It's a very interesting approach to evaluating qb prospects and it does have merit. My complaint with his paradigm is that there are plenty of examples outside of his paradigm who have thrived at the position.

 

On this issue don't give up on Edwards Arm. I and many others are taking turns hammering away trying to wear him down. If he is as open-minded as I think he is he will eventually come around. He is like the man who only dates blonds. When he eventually trys a redhead who rocks his boat he will learn the lesson about the wisodom of expanding his bandwith.

After my first go round with Edwards Arm, which was after the draft and before training camp, I asked him if he had ever seen Manuel play at FSU. His silence led me to conclude he had not. His opinion was based on how the opinion of others fit his own bandwidth theory. It makes his conclusion questionable. I felt that some of my responses may have been a bit harsh. So I backed off the Manuel debate. I even attempted to find common ground, on other topics. It is not my intention to come to this site to be contentious. I'm cognizant of the fact that we are all Bills Fans. That being said blaming yesterday's loss on Manuel is like blaming World War II on Poland.

[Dibs]

This EJ stuff is crazy...the guy played well. He wasn't perfect, but I'm seeing his performance compared to the Steelers' game? This cannot be a serious statement.

.....

 

I think you are referring to something I wrote here.......and I was serious.....but my meaning wasn't in the way that you took it be.

 

I'll preface this by saying that I hold no stock in my opinions in this sort of area....but conversely, I rarely make comment in these areas unless I feel confident that I have seen something.

 

My comment comparing his performance to the Steelers game was nothing to do with his stats or overall achievements in each game. Obviously he played a vastly better game against the Falcons than he did against the Steelers. My correlation was instead one of how I perceived his demeanor on the field.

 

Through most of the Falcons game I felt that he was not totally confident. This then caused him to play a more "game manager" role(which he did fairly well in) rather than a confident "play maker" role which he exhibited more in the Jets game.

 

In my mind.....assuming my amateur and perhaps naive thoughts have some validity.....this is a good sign for the concept that EJ can become an elite QB. If many of the flaws that he has shown are a product of being a nervous rookie, and not endemic to his actual abilities......when he overcomes the nerves and plays the game in a confident and relaxed manner, he might well become the answer at QB that we have been looking for.

[dave mcbride]

 

 

> I and many others are taking turns hammering away trying to wear him down.

 

I am much more likely to change an opinion in response to new data than because of social pressure. I acknowledge that you and others have presented data and/or reasoning with which to support your positions. But some of it is flawed. For example, one person sees sack percentage and so forth as a proxy for information processing speed. But what if a QB consistently checks down if that first read isn't open? A QB like that hasn't demonstrated much information processing speed. A better measurement is the eyeball test. If the offense looks wide-open--if you get the sense that the QB will throw the ball to any given open target; regardless of whether he's the first read or the fourth--and if you see the QB actively looking at several different targets each play; then these things are typically a good sign of information processing speed.

 

> Right now he is very invested in his bandwith paradigm.

 

Bandwidth is certainly a very important part of what I look for. Another part is a consistently high level of accuracy. A third is touch. A fourth is timing: the ability to hit the receiver in perfect stride. These are probably the four most important things I look for. My position on these things today is very much the same as it was in 1998; when I strongly supported Peyton Manning over Ryan Leaf.

 

> If he is as open-minded as I think he is he will eventually come around.

 

Whether I "come around" or not will depend a lot more on EJ than anything written here. At this point in his career, Manuel's play doesn't look the way franchise QB play should look. His stats--as measured by yards per attempt--are roughly comparable to those put up by Trent Edwards. If a year or two from now he's "developed" and those things have changed, I'll be the first to say so. Okay, maybe not the very first, but certainly early enough!

 

To answer a question you asked in an earlier post, I think it's extremely unlikely the Bills will use a first round pick on a QB in next year's draft. I'm used to this franchise doing things less well than some of the more intelligent and well-informed fans would do them. For example, there's no way a guy like Bill from NYC could have been convinced to squander the 8th overall pick on Donte Whitner! A discussion about what the Bills will do is different from (and often bears little relation to) a discussion of what they should do.

Instead of responding to others' factual posts with rationalizations of your general position and harkening back to the Manning-Leaf debate, I offer a challenge: lay out the ypa, sack rates, and turnover numbers for every rookie qb drafted in the top two rounds who started a significant number of games in their rookie seasons over the past 8 years. The information is readily available. Production stats talk; impressionistic bullsh*t walks.

Edited December 3, 2013 by dave mcbride

[Orton's Arm]

After my first go round with Edwards Arm, which was after the draft and before training camp, I asked him if he had ever seen Manuel play at FSU. His silence led me to conclude he had not. His opinion was based on how the opinion of others fit his own bandwidth theory. It makes his conclusion questionable. I felt that some of my responses may have been a bit harsh. So I backed off the Manuel debate. I even attempted to find common ground, on other topics. It is not my intention to come to this site to be contentious. I'm cognizant of the fact that we are all Bills Fans. That being said blaming yesterday's loss on Manuel is like blaming World War II on Poland.

 

I've tried two different methods of evaluating college QBs. Method 1 is to rely on draft experts to interpret the raw data for me. Method 2 is to look at the raw data myself. When using Method 2, I came away with a favorable opinion of Jimmy Clausen; much to my own embarrassment. Granted, I only watched one of Jimmy's games (the one against Stanford). I'm sure that the most respected experts watched each of his games. I imagine many of them used coaches' film, not just what you see on television.

 

On the other hand, my predictions based on Method 1 have generally (but not always) been reliable. I do not consider myself better at breaking down football film than an expert like Vic Carucci or Greg Cosell; so there's no intrinsic reason to believe that Method 2 should yield better results than Method 1.

 

> That being said blaming yesterday's loss on Manuel is like blaming World War II on Poland.

 

In 1939, the French had promised Poland that in an event of a German attack, France would launch a general offensive against Germany. This promise was a lie.

 

************

In his post-war diaries [british] general Edmund Ironside, the chief of Imperial General Staff commented on French promises "The French had lied to the Poles in saying they are going to attack. There is no idea of it".[25]

***********

 

The Polish government naively believed the French politicians' promises; and adopted an anti-German foreign policy. They ignored Germany's offer of a Germano-Polish alliance against the Soviet Union; and refused to return any Polish-occupied German territory to Germany. It became clear that Poland would fight against Germany in any general European conflict. Whether that justified the German invasion may be a little off-topic for this thread. The point I'm making here is that the truth is sometimes more complex than things may first appear. It's generally worth the time to take a second or even third look before making up one's mind.

[RuntheDamnBall]

Here we go.

[atlbillsfan1975]

Guys the problem is not EJ.

Look no further then Hackett and thus Marrone.

Sorry but these guys will be here two more dreadful seasons and then be fired. They are both in way over their head. They will be here just long enough to ruin EJ's career and confidence. Then Marrone will be an OC back in college and Hackett his QB coach.

Sorry but they lost me yesterday.

I watch a lot of Falcons football. The Bills stunk and wher eunder prepaired after a bye. Inexcuseable.

I hated the Marrone hire when it was made and hate it more now. The guy stinks. Clueless. He is another Mularky, Williams. and Dickie J!!

[Al Cowlings]

Guys the problem is not EJ.

Look no further then Hackett and thus Marrone.

Sorry but these guys will be here two more dreadful seasons and then be fired. They are both in way over their head. They will be here just long enough to ruin EJ's career and confidence. Then Marrone will be an OC back in college and Hackett his QB coach.

Sorry but they lost me yesterday.

I watch a lot of Falcons football. The Bills stunk and wher eunder prepaired after a bye. Inexcuseable.

I hated the Marrone hire when it was made and hate it more now. The guy stinks. Clueless. He is another Mularky, Williams. and Dickie J!!

 

This^ horrible coaching staff. Gailey would have two more wins if he was still around. Marrone is very bad.