YoloinOhio Posted June 4, 2015 Posted June 4, 2015 well thanks to Doug Marrone we don't know we should know and now all we have is speculation an to wait for live action play marrone should have absolutely started EJ against the Pats in the final week. I wonder if Whaley put up a fight or not. I'm guessing yes. The FO should have known right then that Marrone was going to bolt, as he didn't have the interest of the organization's future in mind to evaluate the young 1st rd QB further in a game setting. He only cared about his w-l record as he hit the market. Brutal.
Mr. WEO Posted June 4, 2015 Posted June 4, 2015 marrone should have absolutely started EJ against the Pats in the final week. I wonder if Whaley put up a fight or not. I'm guessing yes. The FO should have known right then that Marrone was going to bolt, as he didn't have the interest of the organization's future in mind to evaluate the young 1st rd QB further in a game setting. He only cared about his w-l record as he hit the market. Brutal. Curious as to what playing EJ in that game after all that time off would have proven. Not that he shouldn't have played him, but not sure why the difference would have been at this point. What if EJ bombed? That would have been a disaster for this kid.
Leroi Posted June 4, 2015 Posted June 4, 2015 I'm curious if Orton didn't retire, would he be the undisputed starter?? Imo
YoloinOhio Posted June 4, 2015 Posted June 4, 2015 Curious as to what playing EJ in that game after all that time off would have proven. Not that he shouldn't have played him, but not sure why the difference would have been at this point. What if EJ bombed? That would have been a disaster for this kid. imo it would have been for the film, not the result
Hapless Bills Fan Posted June 4, 2015 Posted June 4, 2015 Nice work!!! Yep. Allow me to toss in Coery Louchiey, Bill Conaty and Corbin Lacina for good measure. Remember the OC Fowler? He would get shoved to the ground by small linebackers. Looks like we made our cases, no? don't forget Cornell Green But considering how bad our OL was last year....do you guys really find it comforting that it could have been worse?
Mr. WEO Posted June 4, 2015 Posted June 4, 2015 imo it would have been for the film, not the result I don't think he would have recovered easily from a bad outing at the end of he season. This film wouldn't have added much new info in that case.
The Wiz Posted June 4, 2015 Posted June 4, 2015 I'm curious if Orton didn't retire, would he be the undisputed starter?? Imo Since Marrone is no longer the head coach I don't think he would have even been involved in OTA's. Imo
YoloinOhio Posted June 4, 2015 Posted June 4, 2015 I don't think he would have recovered easily from a bad outing at the end of he season. This film wouldn't have added much new info in that case. i disagree there. First, we don't know if he would have performed poorly. Second. We don't know that if he did perform poorly that he wouldn't be able to "recover." Most importantly, game evaluation is extremely important for QBs like him who they are trying to make decisions about. The more, the better.
thebandit27 Posted June 4, 2015 Posted June 4, 2015 I'm curious if Orton didn't retire, would he be the undisputed starter?? Imo I think he'd be taking Cassel's spot in the competition.
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted June 4, 2015 Posted June 4, 2015 (edited) Rex would have cut Orton days before Leroi said EJ would be cut marrone should have absolutely started EJ against the Pats in the final week. I wonder if Whaley put up a fight or not. I'm guessing yes. The FO should have known right then that Marrone was going to bolt, as he didn't have the interest of the organization's future in mind to evaluate the young 1st rd QB further in a game setting. He only cared about his w-l record as he hit the market. Brutal. and with the win the naysayers will point to what I have been saying when Orton produced ZERO points against backups EJ won because the Pats* didn't play Gronk and their #1 WR and pulled Brady* and more starters in the 2nd half. The switch should have been made much earlier. maybe after the KC game definitely after the 9 point Miami game Edited June 4, 2015 by BillsFan-4-Ever
BuffaloHokie13 Posted June 4, 2015 Posted June 4, 2015 Rex would have cut Orton days before Leroi said EJ would be cut and with the win the naysayers will point to what I have been saying when Orton produced ZERO points against backups EJ won because the Pats* didn't play Gronk and their #1 WR and pulled Brady* and more starters in the 2nd half. The switch should have been made much earlier. maybe after the KC game definitely after the 9 point Miami game You keep talking about this. I don't know who they didn't start on defense, but we didn't have Dareus, Gilmore, or McKelvin. Let it go man.
Hapless Bills Fan Posted June 4, 2015 Posted June 4, 2015 I'm curious if Orton didn't retire, would he be the undisputed starter?? Imo You are? Why? Rex loves a gamer. Rex hates a quitter.
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted June 4, 2015 Posted June 4, 2015 (edited) You keep talking about this. I don't know who they didn't start on defense, but we didn't have Dareus, Gilmore, or McKelvin. Let it go man. am I telling a lie? did i say Defensive starters? I referenced O players. Regardless the Bills scored ZERO points in the 2nd half. Also are you implying that the Pats* would not have scored in the 2nd half with Brady* and his 3 top guys playing? Edited June 4, 2015 by BillsFan-4-Ever
Mr. WEO Posted June 4, 2015 Posted June 4, 2015 i disagree there. First, we don't know if he would have performed poorly. Second. We don't know that if he did perform poorly that he wouldn't be able to "recover." Most importantly, game evaluation is extremely important for QBs like him who they are trying to make decisions about. The more, the better. The recovery was my opinion. The possibility of doing poorly is based on the probability him doing so. There were plenty of other games to review on film. After taking 12 weeks off (for being benched for poor play), I don't see what good would have come from reviewing the film of one more game.
YoloinOhio Posted June 4, 2015 Posted June 4, 2015 The recovery was my opinion. The possibility of doing poorly is based on the probability him doing so. There were plenty of other games to review on film. After taking 12 weeks off (for being benched for poor play), I don't see what good would have come from reviewing the film of one more game. in player evaluation, the more game film, the better.
BuffaloHokie13 Posted June 4, 2015 Posted June 4, 2015 am I telling a lie? did i say Defensive starters? I referenced O players. Regardless the Bills scored ZERO points in the 2nd half. Also are you implying that the Pats* would not have scored in the 2nd half with Brady* and his 3 top guys playing? You are being disingenuous. You're referencing that the Pats* played their 2nd stringers and we still didn't score. Their 2nd stringers were on their offense, which had little to no effect on our offense scoring. I'm just trying to figure out what impact Gronk sitting has on our offense scoring in your eyes. Brady was completely frustrated in the first half, but to speculate on what would have happened in the second half is entirely pointless because it didn't happen. You can think and assume whatever you want about what could have happened, but the fact is that the Pats* offense got crushed by our defense that game without Dareus, Gilmore, or McKelvin.
GG Posted June 4, 2015 Posted June 4, 2015 marrone should have absolutely started EJ against the Pats in the final week. I wonder if Whaley put up a fight or not. I'm guessing yes. The FO should have known right then that Marrone was going to bolt, as he didn't have the interest of the organization's future in mind to evaluate the young 1st rd QB further in a game setting. He only cared about his w-l record as he hit the market. Brutal. I think it was K-9 who brought up valid points why it would have been fruitless to start EJ. Because it was a glorified August game in December, you wouldn't be getting the true look you would want from EJ and his surrounding cast. You already know what he can do in practice, and the New England game wouldn't have been much more than that. As for the question of why not put in EJ earlier in the season, by Marrone's comments there was clearly pressure from upstairs to put EJ back in as Orton was struggling.
John from Riverside Posted June 4, 2015 Posted June 4, 2015 I'm curious if Orton didn't retire, would he be the undisputed starter?? Imo I do not think he would be.... But I also think Cassel would not have been brought in...... Im tellin everybody I really think Rex is going to give TT a legit shot at that starting spot..... Rex would have cut Orton days before Leroi said EJ would be cut and with the win the naysayers will point to what I have been saying when Orton produced ZERO points against backups EJ won because the Pats* didn't play Gronk and their #1 WR and pulled Brady* and more starters in the 2nd half. The switch should have been made much earlier. maybe after the KC game definitely after the 9 point Miami game We also were missing key players...why do you keep leaving that out.
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted June 4, 2015 Posted June 4, 2015 You are being disingenuous. You're referencing that the Pats* played their 2nd stringers and we still didn't score. Their 2nd stringers were on their offense, which had little to no effect on our offense scoring. I'm just trying to figure out what impact Gronk sitting has on our offense scoring in your eyes. Brady was completely frustrated in the first half, but to speculate on what would have happened in the second half is entirely pointless because it didn't happen. You can think and assume whatever you want about what could have happened, but the fact is that the Pats* offense got crushed by our defense that game without Dareus, Gilmore, or McKelvin. Look, I would be one of the first to brag when Brady* has lost it. In fact I'd love it as much as everyone else!! what do we know? time and again Brady* has come from behind to to crush Bills fans hopes of beating them. Sorry but to say Brady* would definitely not have scored points is silly. Could that have happened? Sure it could. The probability of him not scoring is very low. Remember THE guy who is hard to tackle, his name id Gronk.... where was he? Could be that was why Brady* was completely frustrated.
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted June 4, 2015 Posted June 4, 2015 We also were missing key players...why do you keep leaving that out. lets keep apples with apples. how does the fact that the Bills were missing D players and Brady being stiffed change the Bills O production? it doesn't Weeks before didn't the Bills D also frustrate P Manning? yet the Bills lost. As I said, I hate to admit that the Bills could keep him to 3 pp QTR, but I have learned to never underestimate Brady* year after year. Had the Putz needed the game the odds are the outcome would have been much different. Tell you guys what. since the reality of it bothers you I'll stop posting that. peace
Recommended Posts