MDH Posted August 14, 2015 Posted August 14, 2015 Because EJ hasn't gotten better. Did you ever see Alex Smith play in his first 4-5 years in the league? The guy didn't get noticeably better until year 6 or so. Granted, the Bills can't wait that long to start seeing results with EJ but to think a player can't make significant strides 4-5 years into a career is ludicrous. Speaking of Smith, that's another point I could make from my posts up above. Smith was exactly what everybody here hopes Cassel can be in 2012 under Roman: Efficient, not spectacular, and safe. Yet when he went down and Kaep came in they didn't go back to the "safe" guy, they went with the playmaker. I think he'll do the same here eventually, even if Cassel starts the season as the #1. Tyrod or EJ will end up being the QB of this team once they get their feet under them and understand this offense better. If I had to guess I'd say it'll be Tyrod but I'm not counting EJ out.
section122 Posted August 14, 2015 Posted August 14, 2015 Because EJ hasn't gotten better. Did you just skip right over the part where he said AFTER ROMAN?
thewildrabbit Posted August 14, 2015 Posted August 14, 2015 I wasnt suggesting that its as simple as chucking up a long ball, im talking aout his abilities in general. His long balls tend to float. Once the wind comes swirling off the lake in November Cassel becomes more of a liabiltiy than he is now. If he countered this with amazing accuracy in his short game the lack of the long ball would be mitigated. Yet, hes not that accurate and has proven throughout his career to make bad decisions with the ball that result in turnovers. Without the long ball your short range accuracy needs to be on par with Brady or Rivers because there are so many guys near the LoS there isnt room for mistakes. This is compounded even further when your O plans to run the ball nearly 50% of the time. You cant run the ball with any consistency with 8-9 guys in the box. You have to make them change formations and personnel. You do that by making plays downfield. As you mentioned Romans offense relies heavily on pre-snap reads. That, to me, is a blessing for a young QB. He doesnt have to be relied on to consistently make difficult reads post snap. Get the guys out of the huddle in time and the young signal caller has an eternity to figure out the read. Granted, again, its not as simple as that as there will always be post snap reads but the reliance of pre-snap reads effectively cuts the field in half which makes the post snap read infinitely easier. Top it off with an offense that utilizes a lot of pre-snap movement and the pre-snap reads become even easier as the D is often forced to show their hand. Nothing that Ive seen out of a Roman offense suggests that a vet signal caller, with limited arm strength, mobility and a penchant for turnovers is the right choice. His offense is tailor made for a young, strong armed, athletic guy who doesn't need to have the pressure of the entire offense on his shoulders. Sorry for the long post. Really good post, and don't apologize for a long post if its worth the read. If EJ can go 6-8 with 16 TD's 12 INT's with complete morons coaching him I can only think he will improve under Greg Roman. But it might be moot at this point if the FO has already given up on him. Cassel has had two good seasons going 10-5, and some real stinkers where he went 1-7 in his last season with the Chiefs throwing 6 TD's, 12 INT's. I honestly don't get the love affair for a backup QB with a not so great arm, and the Bills actually gave up a draft pick for this guy. Time will tell us very soon.
Hapless Bills Fan Posted August 15, 2015 Posted August 15, 2015 In general, a QB playing well and the team winning are not always a direct relationship. A QB can play well and the team can still lose; although QB is the most important position, the overall team quality remains the ultimate determining factor. My agreement regarding Metz's post is that a good QB will play well in spite of bad coaching or OL play (etc.) And here's where we'll have to agree to disagree. A great QB will play well in spite of bad coaching or OL play. A good QB....coaching, OL, and WR can all bring him down. I appreciate your thoughtful responses to my intended thought-provoking questions. I think it's telling that you chose Alex Smith as an example of a QB who has generally looked good in your response to me...Alex Smith, IMO and statistically, looked quite bad most of his first 4 years in the league. Getting jerked around by coaches and offensive systems did not help him a bit, and he looked bad...I mean, 2 TD and 4 INTs in 7 games with 48.7% completions in year 3? He made lists of "top 5 bust QB of all time", folks. Not that I'm saying we can or should wait 4-5 years for a QB who may or may not improve, but Smith is a perfect example of a QB who looked bad with bad coaching, and improved significantly with the right coach and supporting cast. Bradford is another example of a young QB with potential who looked outright bad in his second year...again, 10 games, 6 TD 6 INTs and I saw some of those games. The next year, with a different HC and OC he looked much better, unfortunately injuries prevented a conclusion.
TheFunPolice Posted August 15, 2015 Posted August 15, 2015 why not just jeep developing him and at worst you have a solid backup? I'm no EJ fan but I also never understood the logic of "well, he might develop into a solid 10 year backup... for someone else but we can't have that here!" Sure, a 1st rounder being that is disappointing, but a solid 10 year backup is nice to have too.
FireChan Posted August 15, 2015 Posted August 15, 2015 why not just jeep developing him and at worst you have a solid backup? I'm no EJ fan but I also never understood the logic of "well, he might develop into a solid 10 year backup... for someone else but we can't have that here!" Sure, a 1st rounder being that is disappointing, but a solid 10 year backup is nice to have too. Because when he's a FA, he's not going to want to be on a team as a back up at best?
Recommended Posts