Orton is mediocre

[A Dog Named Kelso]

So you take no recognition of our complete inability to score touchdowns under EJ Manuel and inside the red zone with Orton they are perfect on scores to INCLUDE two point conversion?

When one is so focused on the negatives of Orton why would they bother to see the benefits he provides? Especially when it is in stark contrast to what the player many are upset was pulled failed to do. It shows a lack of objective reasoning.

 

Fact - Orton has passed the ball for more yards in his two games than Manuel did in any two games he has had.

Fact - Orton converts on Red Zone opportunities. Manuel did not.

 

I want Manuel to work out but right now he needs to watch someone who knows offenses and at the moment Orton has the most experience more than Hackett that is for sure.

Edited October 14, 2014 by A Dog Named Kelso

[Agent 91]

 

 

I particularly liked how EJ willed Corey Graham to dominate the Bears & get three takeaways and CJ to run the kick back and blocking that punt vs Miami. Some stuff you just can't teach.

 

That has nothing to do with biscuits point. Now her did he mention win loss or a specific game.

[Rob's House]

I don't have the patience to read 13 pages of genii discuss the merits of Kyle Orton.

However, out of curiosity is anyone actually proposing a move back to EJ?

 

It should be clear by now that Kyle Orton is heads and shoulders better than EJ.

 

Bills-Fan-4-EJ seems to be the lone crusader on this one.

[FireChan]

That has nothing to do with biscuits point. Now her did he mention win loss or a specific game.

 

What were his points again? Unless EJ is responsible for our defensive takeaways and ST touchdowns, his point is less than irrelevant

[jumbalaya]

You pick up a career back-up QB that has played about 4 games in 4 years and are concerned he is mediocre? Mediocre is the best we could have hoped for. We yearn for the carefree years when Ryan Fitzy was our QB...

[A Dog Named Kelso]

What were his points again? Unless EJ is responsible for our defensive takeaways and ST touchdowns, his point is less than irrelevant

 

We lost because of Orton's pick and fumble in the first half

[3rdand12]

You pick up a career back-up QB that has played about 4 games in 4 years and are concerned he is mediocre? Mediocre is the best we could have hoped for. We yearn for the carefree years when Ryan Fitzy was our QB...

well some still do seemingly.

 

We lost because of Orton's pick and fumble in the first half

That may well be true.

Spiller's fumble AND Ortons strip fumble

[RuntheDamnBall]

Interesting. All the most hardcore EJ Manboy fanboys think Orton sucks. Coincidence?

The realistic supporter of EJ thinks the benching was warranted, will hopefully do him good in the long run, and that Orton is a limited QB. He doesn't suck, but a lot would have to break right for him to lead this team deep into the playoffs. EJ isn't ready right now and Orton does give the team the best shot, but I think it's no more likely that he is a long term solution than is EJ. Odds are that Orton will be better, but I'd like for him to be a lot better. I want to see some dominance against an inferior Minnesota team before I buy in.

[Agent 91]

 

 

Oh so he didn't play like Brady, that means he didn't play well.

 

No. He didnt play well means he didnt play well.

[FireChan]

No. He didnt play well means he didnt play well.

 

What do you consider "playing well?"

[RuntheDamnBall]

 

 

What do you consider "playing well?"

Probably not giving away the ball twice?

 

Be honest, if EJ threw for 300 yards, kept the team in the game, but scarcely looked Watkins' way, and coughed up two turnovers that New England turned into opportunities to score, would any poster say he played well? I wouldn't.

[Best Player Available]

 

 

We lost because of Orton's pick and fumble in the first half

WOW! Just WOW!

[FireChan]

Probably not giving away the ball twice?

 

Be honest, if EJ threw for 300 yards, kept the team in the game, but scarcely looked Watkins' way, and coughed up two turnovers that New England turned into opportunities to score, would any poster say he played well? I wouldn't.

 

If you changed the nameplates on the back of the jersey's, I'd consider that the best game EJ has had in his career.

 

I'd say he shook off a shaky start and turned his game around in the second half. I'd say that despite the lack of targets to Watkins, generally trying to challenge a CB like Revis who is playing against a rookie is a bad idea, and he made good decisions throwing to other open receivers. I'd say he stepped his game up when the run-game was anemic. I'd say he put a bunch of good passes in places where guys like Chandler had an opportunity to make a play. I'd say that he had a great YPA and great passer rating in a game that he had to throw 40 times, not when he throws 20 times. I'd say he facilitated 3 receivers having career and season high games. I'd say he made throws down field, instead of targeting Freddy in the flat 10 times. I'd say he made a bunch of huge 3rd down conversions. I'd say he answered the bell, and brought the game to one score and would have had a chance to win it if not for the defense getting kicked around in the second half.

 

Let me be clear. I don't expect Orton, nor EJ, to play perfect. I expect them to put us in position to win football games without a totally fantastic defensive performance. I expect them to make throws when it matters. I expect them to inspire confidence that we can win when we're down. When you're going up against one of the best corners in the game who plans on shadowing one receiver all game, you don't have to challenge him. You make them pay for worrying about one receiver. We don't have an offense built around Sammy, we have weapons, plural. Woods, Chandler and Hogan had career games. Is that not okay? You're upset because we had 300 yards passing without throwing to Sammy much? What? Why? Why does it matter? If anything, that helps Sammy moving forward, teams will recognize we'll make them pay if they focus on him.

 

We had a chance to beat a Hall of Fame QB and coach. Despite our defense letting the Pats score every drive in the second half. Despite 3 turnovers in the first half. And you're saying Orton didn't play well? Ludicrous. Mistakes are going to happen, it's how you bounce back from them that matters.

Edited October 15, 2014 by FireChan

[Captain Caveman]

Do people not understand the concept that Kyle Orton actually ATTEMPTS AND COMPLETES PASSES TO WIDE RECEIEVRS?

 

OK I GUESS THAT'S NOT SOMETHING A MEDIOCRE QB MIGHT DO.

[RuntheDamnBall]

 

 

If you changed the nameplates on the back of the jersey's, I'd consider that the best game EJ has had in his career.

 

I'd say he shook off a shaky start and turned his game around in the second half. I'd say that despite the lack of targets to Watkins, generally trying to challenge a CB like Revis who is playing against a rookie is a bad idea. I'd say he stepped his game up when the run-game was anemic. I'd say he put a bunch of good passes in places where guys like Chandler had an opportunity to make a play. I'd say that he had a great YPA and great passer rating in a game that he had to throw 40 times, not when he throws 20 times. I'd say he facilitated 3 receivers having career and season high games. I'd say he made throws down field, instead of targeting Freddy in the flat 10 times. I'd say he made a bunch of huge 3rd down conversions. I'd say he answered the bell, and brought the game to one score and would have had a chance to win it if not for the defense getting kicked around in the second half.

 

Let me be clear. I don't expect Orton, nor EJ, to play perfect. I expect them to put us in position to win football games. I expect them to make throws when it matters. I expect them to inspire confidence that we can win when we're down. When you're going up against one of the best corners in the game who plns on shadowing one receiver all game, you don't have to challenge him. You make them pay for worrying about one receiver. We don't have an offense built around Sammy, we have weapons, plural. Woods, Chandler and Hogan had career games. Is that not okay? You're upset because we had 300 yards passing without throwing to Sammy much? What? Why? Why does it matter? If anything, that helps Sammy moving forward, teams will recognize we'll make them pay if they focus on him.

If you want to ask why I'm perturbed that they weren't using Sammy more, it boils down to the fact that he was open more often than a simple analysis of "don't throw near Revis" would suggest. I was at the game and this was clear. Now the guards were terrible and this didn't help, but I think you have to get your best weapons involved in a NE game that is Likely to be a shootout. They will give the Bills a career day for Chandler between the 20s if it means they don't get burned for a big score. And the kid's not going to make ANY big plays if he isn't targeted.

[FireChan]

If you want to ask why I'm perturbed that they weren't using Sammy more, it boils down to the fact that he was open more often than a simple analysis of "don't throw near Revis" would suggest. I was at the game and this was clear. Now the guards were terrible and this didn't help, but I think you have to get your best weapons involved in a NE game that is Likely to be a shootout. They will give the Bills a career day for Chandler between the 20s if it means they don't get burned for a big score.

 

Yes, I'm sure BB was so content with Orton getting key third downs over and over going to Chandler. He probably popped champagne afterwards. "At least we stopped that mighty and powerful rookie, who cares that Kyle freakin' Orton threw for 300 over the middle."

 

Anyways, present a plausible analysis of why Watkins wasn't targeted more. He was targeted 12 times the week before. You don't think the offense respects Revis more than whoever is the #1 CB for Detroit? I don't even remember his name. Is it really as simple as "Orton is mediocre?" Would you rather have had him throw a possible pick, just to get Sammy involved?

 

And can we talk about EJ vs. Orton again? If the defense stopped that 3rd and 17 play, did you have confidence that Orton would drive down and score again? I did. I had the utmost confidence we would tie that game. When is the last time you felt like that with EJ? Carolina?

Edited October 15, 2014 by FireChan

[JC2002]

Probably not giving away the ball twice?

 

Be honest, if EJ threw for 300 yards, kept the team in the game, but scarcely looked Watkins' way, and coughed up two turnovers that New England turned into opportunities to score, would any poster say he played well? I wouldn't.

 

To be honest EJ doesn't have that ability yet so what you are talking about is a fairy tale .

 

the reality is

 

If one of the turnovers came off a RB not running the right route and the other came off a blown blocking assignment and although he didnt get Sammie the ball as you want you have 3 other receivers with over 70 receiving yards and the TE gets a 100 yards for the first time in eons . I wouldn't say he played great but I would say he played well and I would say our passing game is improving and going forward the plan would be to incorporate everyone better .

 

One thing I will say is that the insertion of Orton is exposing a bunch of offensive mistakes that normally would have probably been blamed on EJ . There are a lot of little mistakes being made and the players cant hide behind EJ missing several throws as a reason .

[RuntheDamnBall]

 

 

Yes, I'm sure BB was so content with Orton getting key third downs over and over going to Chandler. He probably popped champagne afterwards. "At least we stopped that mighty and powerful rookie, who cares that Kyle freakin' Orton threw for 300 over the middle."

 

Anyways, present a plausible analysis of why Watkins wasn't targeted more. He was targeted 12 times the week before. You don't think the offense respects Revis more than whoever is the #1 CB for Detroit? I don't even remember his name. Is it really as simple as "Orton is mediocre?" Would you rather have had him throw a possible pick, just to get Sammy involved?

 

I thought that Orton was going to throw guys open and utilize the deep passing game that was dormant under EJ, though.

 

Orton threw a pick and fumbled the ball in the process of making "safer" plays. So that argument is dubious on its face.

 

I think Belicheck and co were pleased to win the game. I'm sure they weren't celebrating because that's not their style. But they were betting the Bills would be scared to target Revis. They bet right. They got gashed by Chandler but that was about it. If it means they don't get burned by the run game or the big play, I'm sure they take that every time.

 

 

 

Yes, I'm sure BB was so content with Orton getting key third downs over and over going to Chandler. He probably popped champagne afterwards. "At least we stopped that mighty and powerful rookie, who cares that Kyle freakin' Orton threw for 300 over the middle."

 

Anyways, present a plausible analysis of why Watkins wasn't targeted more. He was targeted 12 times the week before. You don't think the offense respects Revis more than whoever is the #1 CB for Detroit? I don't even remember his name. Is it really as simple as "Orton is mediocre?" Would you rather have had him throw a possible pick, just to get Sammy involved?

 

And can we talk about EJ vs. Orton again? If the defense stopped that 3rd and 17 play, did you have confidence that Orton would drive down and score again? I did. I had the utmost confidence we would tie that game. When is the last time you felt like that with EJ? Carolina?

Chicago?

[FireChan]

I thought that Orton was going to throw guys open and utilize the deep passing game that was dormant under EJ, though.

 

Orton threw a pick and fumbled the ball in the process of making "safer" plays. So that argument is dubious on its face.

 

I think Belicheck and co were pleased to win the game. I'm sure they weren't celebrating because that's not their style. But they were betting the Bills would be scared to target Revis. They bet right. They got gashed by Chandler but that was about it. If it means they don't get burned by the run game or the big play, I'm sure they take that every time.

 

 

Chicago?

 

You were confident in EJ that he'd pull out that game? I wasn't. Still, I can see how you would be. That was a while ago now. I know you think benching him was the right call. So am I safe in assuming you weren't confident that EJ could pull out the Houston game? And could you tell that EJ himself wasn't confident in himself to pull out that game? It was yes, and yes for me, which is why I supported the switch.

 

What's worse 1 pick or 2 picks? I already said that mistakes are going to happen. Just because Orton made a mistake elsewhere, doesn't make not challenging Revis the wrong call. That's a ridiculous argument. "Geno's gonna throw a pick or two anyway, might as well attack Richard Sherman." Ridiculous.

 

I thought that Orton was going to throw guys open and utilize the deep passing game that was dormant under EJ, though.

 

I don't understand. Are you saying Orton averaging 100 more yards passing a game, and delivering career highs isn't awakening the dormant passing game? I only remember the coaching staff saying QB production wasn't enough, and we're hoping Orton will be able to produce more. Do you realize what career-high games mean? They mean that they had never performed at that level in their entire careers. And they've played games with EJ for a while. I'll say that 3 guys having career-highs is proof positive that Orton is having a much bigger impact on the passing game, which is what he was supposed to do as the starter. Just because he didn't complete an 80 yarder this game doesn't mean that our passing attack hasn't improved drastically with Orton under center.

Edited October 15, 2014 by FireChan

[RuntheDamnBall]

 

 

You were confident in EJ that he'd pull out that game? I wasn't. Still, I can see how you would be. That was a while ago now. I know you think benching him was the right call. So am I safe in assuming you weren't confident that EJ could pull out the Houston game? And could you tell that EJ himself wasn't confident in himself to pull out that game? It was yes, and yes for me, which is why I supported the switch.

 

What's worse 1 pick or 2 picks? I already said that mistakes are going to happen. Just because Orton made a mistake elsewhere, doesn't make not challenging Revis the wrong call. That's a ridiculous argument. "Geno's gonna throw a pick or two anyway, might as well attack Richard Sherman." Ridiculous.

 

I thought that Orton was going to throw guys open and utilize the deep passing game that was dormant under EJ, though.

 

I don't understand. Are you saying Orton averaging 100 more yards passing a game, and delivering career highs isn't awakening the dormant passing game? Do you realize what career-high games mean? They mean that they had never performed at that level in their entire careers. And they've played games with EJ for a while. I'll say that 3 guys having career-highs is proof positive that Orton is having a much bigger impact on the passing game, which is what he was supposed to do as the starter. Just because he didn't complete an 80 yarder this game doesn't mean that our passing attack hasn't improved drastically with Orton under center.

I would rather Orton have the confidence that he can hit an open Watkins, than concede simply on the basis of Revis' presence. Revis is a few years removed from being all world. I simply want Orton to make the plays when they are there, and I don't think that is too much to ask before I can say he played well in a loss where he committed two turnovers.

 

Also, to the bolded, I said "deep passing game." It was rarely utilized, again, on Sunday. That could just be Hackett's fault.