BuffaloBillsForever Posted December 27, 2013 Posted December 27, 2013 I know. Some people feel the need to invent controversy and imagine slights to rail about. This isn't imaginary...it did happen.
C.Biscuit97 Posted December 27, 2013 Posted December 27, 2013 This game is meaningless to the Bills record this season; true. However, in the larger picture sense, in determining whether EJ is going to be good enough to be a franchise QB, this game is very, very important, arguably the most important game yet. It is entirely possible, and somewhat likely based on what I have seen coming out of the coaching staff, that they already have their mind made up about EJ. Meaning EJ is intended to be the starter next year and that they don't intend to do anything to question that at all meaning they don't draft a qb and they don't bring in a meaningful veteran competition. That might be the case. And if that is the case, then I suspect that Marrone is thinking "Oh ****! If EJ plays against the Pats and looks horrible (which is a real possibility if he had played) then the Bills will create additional negative animosity in the fan base." And he would rather save whatever hope there still is for EJ until next year where he will either live or die as a coach according to how well EJ plays. Just like how Chan lived and died with Fitzpatrick. I get this point of view. This game is much more interesting if EJ plays. But determining if a rookie QB is a franchise qb after one season is kinda foolish either way. This is about a career & not one season.
Wayne Cubed Posted December 27, 2013 Posted December 27, 2013 (edited) Fred plays with broken ribs, CJ plays with a high ankle sprain, yet the franchise QB can't play with a mild knee spain? Honestly, if Thad plays well in Foxboro, it could very well be time to consider EJ as the backup. Except, look what happened in Washington last year. Exact same injury, RG3 had another week off than Manuel and was in the playoffs. Yea he could play and be fine, but looks what happens when you make the wrong choice. Is it worth it to ruin a players possible career? Edited December 27, 2013 by Wayne Cubed
Dan Posted December 27, 2013 Posted December 27, 2013 Couple things: 1) they didn't dumb down the playbool. They realized they gave him to much to start with & with the missed time, it was a lot to take in. Hiw many rookies are going no huddle from the start if their career. 2) the Seahawks babied Wilson in a similar way. The Packers babied Rodgers. The steelers babied Big Ben. The Chargers babied Rivers. The opposite is David Carr where you get eaten alive. 3) I love Jackson & Spiller. But no one is more important than a qb. They will always be treated differently. I truly hope you're right. But, I'm just not sure. EJ has a lot to prove, not only in regards to his ability to perform, but perhaps more importantly in his ability to lead this team.
PolishDave Posted December 27, 2013 Posted December 27, 2013 (edited) I get this point of view. This game is much more interesting if EJ plays. But determining if a rookie QB is a franchise qb after one season is kinda foolish either way. It is only foolish if you don't mind throwing away 2 or 3 seasons only to determine that he isn't a franchise caliber player. That is where I differ with a lot of the "let's keep playing EJ no matter how good or bad he looks guys" on this board. I am not willing to throw away more than one season questioning whether he might or might not be the guy. He should be on the bench until he can be expected to play at NFL starter level. I don't think he is NFL starter level yet. Other people here obviously do think he is. I would rather have him learning behind a legit starter for a year or two or three so that most of his "faults" are corrected before he is the starter. I don't think NFL fans "especially the sick of losing fans here in Buffalo" are willing to let EJ start for 3 or 4 years playing like he is playing. They will run him out of here long before that along with the coach who tries to do that. So who does that benefit? The staff? No The players? No The fans? no The organization? No. It just continues the revolving door of coaching/gm staffs that have come and gone over the years as fans are an angry mob sick of supporting a losing team year after year. Edited December 27, 2013 by PolishDave
PromoTheRobot Posted December 27, 2013 Posted December 27, 2013 (edited) This isn't imaginary...it did happen. This is what happened: Coach says QB is injured and expects him to recover. A few days later coach is less confident. A few days later backup is named starter. Is this some kind of massive coverup or a player who hasn't recovered enough from an injury? Did Marrone swear on a stack of bibles that EJ would play or was he expressing an opinion? Is a head coach also supposed to be an orthopaedic surgeon too? PTR Edited December 27, 2013 by PromoTheRobot
Wayne Cubed Posted December 27, 2013 Posted December 27, 2013 It is only foolish if you don't mind throwing away 2 or 3 seasons only to determine that he isn't a franchise caliber player. That is where I differ with a lot of the "let's keep playing EJ no matter how good or bad he looks guys" on this board. I am not willing to throw away more than one season questioning whether he might or might not be the guy. He should be on the bench until he can be expected to play at NFL starter level. I don't think he is NFL starter level yet. Other people here obviously do think he is. I would rather have him learning a year or two or three so that most of his "faults" are corrected before he is the starter. I don't think NFL fans "especially the sick of losing fans here in Buffalo" are willing to let EJ start for 3 or 4 years playing like he is playing. They will run him out of here long before that along with the coach who tries to do that. So who does that benefit? The staff? No The players? No The fans? no The organization? No. It just continues the revolving door of coaching/gm staffs that have come and gone over the years as fans are an angry mob sick of supporting a losing team year after year. So let's say they pick a QB high next year, and he doesn't show much on his rookie season (the odds aren't that high that it would happen)? Well you've already decided the first guy isn't the guy and the 2nd guy isn't it either, back to drafting in the 1st again? So you wasted a year anyways... And possibly wasted 3 years because in the 3rd year another rookie QB is starting.
Andrew Son Posted December 27, 2013 Posted December 27, 2013 This is what happened: Coach says QB is injured and expects him to recover. A few days later coach is less confident. A few days later backup is named starter. Is this some kind of massive coverup or a player who hasn't recovered enough from an injury? Did Marrone swear on a stack of bibles that EJ would play or was he expressing an opinion? Is a head coach also supposed to be an orthopaedic surgeon too? PTR Expects him to recover and 110% certain he'll start the next week are not the same thing. It is odd that he said that as coaches are usually conservative in that regard
BuffaloBillsForever Posted December 27, 2013 Posted December 27, 2013 (edited) This is what happened: Coach says QB is injured and expects him to recover. A few days later coach is less confident. A few days later backup is named starter. Is this some kind of massive coverup or a player who hasn't recovered enough from an injury? Did Marrone swear on a stack of bibles that EJ would play or was he expressing an opinion? Is a head coach also supposed to be an orthopaedic surgeon too? PTR 110% is a pretty bold and confident statement to make. That's the issue the people have I think. It just looks bad on our HC IMO. As the previous poster above said and I agree "its odd". Edited December 27, 2013 by BuffaloBillsForever
PromoTheRobot Posted December 27, 2013 Posted December 27, 2013 (edited) Expects him to recover and 110% certain he'll start the next week are not the same thing. It is odd that he said that as coaches are usually conservative in that regard 110% is a pretty bold and confident statement to make. That's the issue the people have I think. I just looks bad on our HC IMO. Maybe he was that confident when he said it? Maybe he didn't realize the thought police were going to freak out over an opinion? Well then, that settles it. We have to fire him. Edited December 27, 2013 by PromoTheRobot
PolishDave Posted December 27, 2013 Posted December 27, 2013 So let's say they pick a QB high next year, and he doesn't show much on his rookie season (the odds aren't that high that it would happen)? Well you've already decided the first guy isn't the guy and the 2nd guy isn't it either, back to drafting in the 1st again? So you wasted a year anyways... And possibly wasted 3 years because in the 3rd year another rookie QB is starting. That is why you have a legit veteran on your team to start until you have a better guy to replace him with. You don't start a "project" qb in his first year unless he is obviously outplaying your starter. If you draft a Peyton Manning that most football experts agree is going to be a franchise qb right away, then you start him sooner. If you start a "project" guy too early, you wreck him.
bisonbrigade Posted December 27, 2013 Posted December 27, 2013 What's the over/under on Knee sprains next year? Whatever!
thebandit27 Posted December 27, 2013 Posted December 27, 2013 I know. Some people feel the need to invent controversy and imagine slights to rail about. While others seem to feel the nees to take ANY criticism of the team personally. It's okay to be disappointed that Marrone said one thing and then did another...really, it is.
bbb Posted December 27, 2013 Posted December 27, 2013 Maybe he was that confident when he said it? Maybe he didn't realize the thought police were going to freak out over an opinion? Well then, that settles it. We have to fire him. How about he says something like he's confident he'll be back, instead of 110%. He's obviously got a 115% chance to be wrong then..............Ah, what's the difference, 90% of all stats are made up anyway.
C.Biscuit97 Posted December 27, 2013 Posted December 27, 2013 That is why you have a legit veteran on your team to start until you have a better guy to replace him with. You don't start a "project" qb in his first year unless he is obviously outplaying your starter. If you draft a Peyton Manning that most football experts agree is going to be a franchise qb right away, then you start him sooner. If you start a "project" guy too early, you wreck him. What rookie qb besides Luck & Peyton Manning aren't projects???
Wayne Cubed Posted December 27, 2013 Posted December 27, 2013 That is why you have a legit veteran on your team to start until you have a better guy to replace him with. You don't start a "project" qb in his first year unless he is obviously outplaying your starter. If you draft a Peyton Manning that most football experts agree is going to be a franchise qb right away, then you start him sooner. If you start a "project" guy too early, you wreck him. I agree. I don't think they intended to start Manuel this year. At the very least it was suppose to be a competition with Kolb/Manuel, with Kolb receiving most of the reps in the beginning of training camp. Then Kolb slips on a mat and the rest is history.
thebandit27 Posted December 27, 2013 Posted December 27, 2013 Maybe he was that confident when he said it? Maybe he didn't realize the thought police were going to freak out over an opinion? Well then, that settles it. We have to fire him. Nobody freaked out that I saw...some of us expressed disappointment though
PolishDave Posted December 27, 2013 Posted December 27, 2013 (edited) I agree. I don't think they intended to start Manuel this year. At the very least it was suppose to be a competition with Kolb/Manuel, with Kolb receiving most of the reps in the beginning of training camp. Then Kolb slips on a mat and the rest is history. The whole signing of Kolb was a joke because Kolb wasn't even as good as Fitzpatrick who we all know wasn't taking the Bills to a Superbowl. Fitzpatrick walks and the Bills replace him with a less talented, highly injury prone quarterback (Kolb) claiming that it is an open competition. Signing Kolb was the same as signing a back up quarterback and calling it an open competition for starting. There is no way anyone in that front office believed Kolb was good enough to take the Bills to the playoffs. They aren't that stupid. Kolb was a proven bad commodity. He sucked beyond imagination the year before when he played for the Cardinals. I am sure they did intend to have Kolb start fully well expecting him to fail 1/2 way or 3/4 of the way through the season. Then they could sprinkle in EJ maybe very late in the season. Then next year would be his "rookie" year. Instead, look where we are at. Major FUBAR by front office in my opinion coming into this season with Kolb as the "supposed" starter. Edited December 27, 2013 by PolishDave
Mango Posted December 27, 2013 Posted December 27, 2013 I agree. I don't think they intended to start Manuel this year. At the very least it was suppose to be a competition with Kolb/Manuel, with Kolb receiving most of the reps in the beginning of training camp. Then Kolb slips on a mat and the rest is history. This is why I am pleased with Manuel this year. I don't think he was ever supposed to be our starter this year, then Kolb basically died. Considering that, and the time he missed with what seems to be a nagging knee, I am pleased with EJ's upside. Not defending his play, but I actually think he surpassed expectations a little bit. Not sure he is the answer for us, but he has played pretty well at times (also pretty bad)
PromoTheRobot Posted December 27, 2013 Posted December 27, 2013 Nobody freaked out that I saw...some of us expressed disappointment though No one is freaking out?
Recommended Posts