After the Browns game, who do you want as Bills starting QB?

[Talley56]

I still think Cassel gives us the best chance to get to the playoffs as he has actually been a starter and led a team to the playoffs.

 

Experience >>> a few nice preseason appearances and some mobility

[D. L. Hot-Flamethrower]

Honestly, is the risk as stated by some, really that great by not starting Cassel!

 

If you believe he is mistake free and we cannot lose - I don't see it.

 

Potential is never reached if it is not attempted.

 

IMO

[starrymessenger]

Honestly, is the risk as stated by some, really that great by not starting Cassel!

 

If you believe he is mistake free and we cannot lose - I don't see it.

 

Potential is never reached if it is not attempted.

 

IMO

There is plenty of risk with Cassell. It's just a different type of risk. The Cassell risk is the risk that DBs will be jumping routes all over the place because he lacks arm strength and zip on his short but especially his intermediate throws. Cassell does not make that 15 yard out to Thompson the way Tyrod did.

[D. L. Hot-Flamethrower]

There is plenty of risk with Cassell. It's just a different type of risk. The Cassell risk is the risk that DBs will be jumping routes all over the place because he lacks arm strength and zip on his short but especially his intermediate throws. Cassell does not make that 15 yard out to Thompson the way Tyrod did.

Agreed! Thanks for making my point.

[26CornerBlitz]

@Sportsnet

#Bills will come to a decision on starting QB after this weekend, Rex Ryan tells @FAN590 http://ow.ly/Rp67p

http://pmd.fan590.com/audio_on_demand-3/Rex-Ryan-with-Dean-Blundell-and-George-Rusic-db-20150826-Interview.mp3 (9:29)

Buffalo Bills head coach Rex Ryan joins Dean Blundell and Co. to discuss whether the quarterback picture is any clearer, the offensive tools currently at his disposal, whether the team has any interest in running back Ray Rice, and what has surprised him thus far in his first training camp with the organisation.

[starrymessenger]

Agreed! Thanks for making my point.

Your welcome.

[The Dean]

@Sportsnet

#Bills will come to a decision on starting QB after this weekend, Rex Ryan tells @FAN590 http://ow.ly/Rp67p

 

http://pmd.fan590.com/audio_on_demand-3/Rex-Ryan-with-Dean-Blundell-and-George-Rusic-db-20150826-Interview.mp3 (9:29)

 

Makes sense, given the situation.

 

I see reporters citing this very thing, then saying (paraphrase) "We'll have a good idea who the starting QB will be on Sat. Traditionally the #1 QB gets the start on the third preseason game." Rex keeps telling them that isn't necessarily true, but they can't seem to shake the notion of whoever starts preseason game #3 is the season starter.

 

I like Carucci, but I really can't understand why he thinks Rex is sending "mixed signals" or engaging in any kind of contradiction. Is the situation just a bit too complex for some sports writers to grasp?

 

http://bills.buffalonews.com/2015/08/25/mixed-signals-still-abound-in-quarterback-race/

[BuffaloBill]

Who knows but I think Rex can afford to take a chance and he will do so with Tyrod Taylor

[LeGOATski]

@Sportsnet

#Bills will come to a decision on starting QB after this weekend, Rex Ryan tells @FAN590 http://ow.ly/Rp67p

 

http://pmd.fan590.com/audio_on_demand-3/Rex-Ryan-with-Dean-Blundell-and-George-Rusic-db-20150826-Interview.mp3 (9:29)

Awesome. I can't wait for Saturday! Giddy like a little school girl!

[mattsox]

Let's see where the fanbase stands after that.

 

I am conflicted.

Throw a dart...

[BillsFan-4-Ever]

 

Makes sense, given the situation.

 

I see reporters citing this very thing, then saying (paraphrase) "We'll have a good idea who the starting QB will be on Sat. Traditionally the #1 QB gets the start on the third preseason game." Rex keeps telling them that isn't necessarily true, but they can't seem to shake the notion of whoever starts preseason game #3 is the season starter.

 

I like Carucci, but I really can't understand why he thinks Rex is sending "mixed signals" or engaging in any kind of contradiction. Is the situation just a bit too complex for some sports writers to grasp?

 

http://bills.buffalonews.com/2015/08/25/mixed-signals-still-abound-in-quarterback-race/

hasn't the majorities of arguments / discussions here been about what the media interpreters as "mixed signals"?

 

It may all be true, but 9 of 10 are sure EJ stands no chance. Practices and game action are two different animals.

[The Dean]

hasn't the majorities of arguments / discussions here been about what the media interpreters as "mixed signals"?

 

It may all be true, but 9 of 10 are sure EJ stands no chance. Practices and game action are two different animals.

 

I think you mean, "haven't the majority..." And the answer is "yes". I just really don't see any mixed signals from the staff.

 

Rex would really throw a wrench into that thinking by starting EJ on Saturday.

[The Dean]

 

I think you mean, "haven't the majority..." And the answer is "yes". I just really don't see any mixed signals from the staff.

 

Rex would really throw a wrench into that thinking by starting EJ on Saturday.

 

 

Boom, there it is. I decided to post this here because the thread devoted to his starting EJ Saturday is filled with some of the most ignorant comments I've seen in a while.

 

All the talk about EJ being "clearly #3" and far behind the others, looks to be total BS. My guess, is there really isn't much separation between the three in the minds of the coaches. But it is possible, they are giving EJ some exposure for a possible trade.

 

The truth is, we don't know that is on the minds of the coaches. Just because one guy reported Rex was leaning toward TT and Roman MC (and that report was re-reported by many) doesn't make it so. And even if it was true at some point, it doesn't mean it is true now. The situation is, as they say, fluid.

 

And just because teams typically start their #1 QB in the 3rd preseason game, there is no rule to that effect. What do all of those who claimed we would know who is likely to start the season by who starts this game? They all look like fools now, unless they are convinced EJ is getting the nod come the regular season.

 

As you know, I haven't been the biggest Rex fan, but the guy seems true to his word. He is giving all three a legitimate shot to show what they have. I have to think Roman plays a big part in this, too. This may be the most exciting and interesting preseason I can remember. I'm not sure it will mean much come the second week of September, but what the hell? Bring it on!

[Solomon Grundy]

Boom, there it is. I decided to post this here because the thread devoted to his starting EJ Saturday is filled with some of the most ignorant comments I've seen in a while.

 

All the talk about EJ being "clearly #3" and far behind the others, looks to be total BS. My guess, is there really isn't much separation between the three in the minds of the coaches. But it is possible, they are giving EJ some exposure for a possible trade.

 

The truth is, we don't know that is on the minds of the coaches. Just because one guy reported Rex was leaning toward TT and Roman MC (and that report was re-reported by many) doesn't make it so. And even if it was true at some point, it doesn't mean it is true now. The situation is, as they say, fluid.

 

And just because teams typically start their #1 QB in the 3rd preseason game, there is no rule to that effect. What do all of those who claimed we would know who is likely to start the season by who starts this game? They all look like fools now, unless they are convinced EJ is getting the nod come the regular season.

 

As you know, I haven't been the biggest Rex fan, but the guy seems true to his word. He is giving all three a legitimate shot to show what they have. I have to think Roman plays a big part in this, too. This may be the most exciting and interesting preseason I can remember. I'm not sure it will mean much come the second week of September, but what the hell? Bring it on!

Couldn't have written it better Dean!! BOOM!! For all the armchair coaches that were reporting on practices and not knowing what they were seeing. The WSJ put it all out there. "The tape don't lie"!

http://www.wsj.com/articles/nfls-best-practice-no-wasted-time-1440539319

[BillsFan-4-Ever]

 

I think you mean, "haven't the majority..." And the answer is "yes". I just really don't see any mixed signals from the staff.

 

Rex would really throw a wrench into that thinking by starting EJ on Saturday.

 

Language was never my strong suit.

 

I could always blame Auto Correct!

Boom, there it is. I decided to post this here because the thread devoted to his starting EJ Saturday is filled with some of the most ignorant comments I've seen in a while.

 

All the talk about EJ being "clearly #3" and far behind the others, looks to be total BS. My guess, is there really isn't much separation between the three in the minds of the coaches. But it is possible, they are giving EJ some exposure for a possible trade.

 

The truth is, we don't know that is on the minds of the coaches. Just because one guy reported Rex was leaning toward TT and Roman MC (and that report was re-reported by many) doesn't make it so. And even if it was true at some point, it doesn't mean it is true now. The situation is, as they say, fluid.

 

And just because teams typically start their #1 QB in the 3rd preseason game, there is no rule to that effect. What do all of those who claimed we would know who is likely to start the season by who starts this game? They all look like fools now, unless they are convinced EJ is getting the nod come the regular season.

 

As you know, I haven't been the biggest Rex fan, but the guy seems true to his word. He is giving all three a legitimate shot to show what they have. I have to think Roman plays a big part in this, too. This may be the most exciting and interesting preseason I can remember. I'm not sure it will mean much come the second week of September, but what the hell? Bring it on!

Agreed this goes to the point made. People convinced themselves EJ as the worst of the bunch and that he was no better than #3.

 

Rex has said that he'd rotate the starters and he has.

Scrimmage - EJ, Panthers - Cassel, Cleveland - Taylor, P-burgh - EJ

[You herd it hear last]

If the starter of PS game #3 is historically the starter of the season, wouldn't the staff put the QB they thought was going to be that guy in that slot for the game? Then reverse engineer the "rotation". This is what a logical person would do. So, with that said, NOT changing who is starting game #3 (if in fact it was a legitimate competition and rotational strategy would therefore be an endorsement for that QB. (EJ)

 

What is Rex's historical PS game #3 QB and how does it correlate with his season starter?

 

That may speak louder than the conjecture spewing out of media circles and blog posters.

[The Dean]

If the starter of PS game #3 is historically the starter of the season, wouldn't the staff put the QB they thought was going to be that guy in that slot for the game?

 

 

Not necessarily. I can't believe some can't manage to get past this fallacious reasoning.

[You herd it hear last]

 

Not necessarily. I can't believe some can't manage to get past this fallacious reasoning.

 

OK, what is the prevailing school of thought on this then? What are the real percentages of this fallacy? Or did you just decide that's the way it is?

Edited August 28, 2015 by You herd it hear last

[Kirby Jackson]

If the starter of PS game #3 is historically the starter of the season, wouldn't the staff put the QB they thought was going to be that guy in that slot for the game? Then reverse engineer the "rotation". This is what a logical person would do. So, with that said, NOT changing who is starting game #3 (if in fact it was a legitimate competition and rotational strategy would therefore be an endorsement for that QB. (EJ)

 

What is Rex's historical PS game #3 QB and how does it correlate with his season starter?

 

That may speak louder than the conjecture spewing out of media circles and blog posters.

I don't think that this can factor in at all. He often knew who his starter was like most teams. I will bet that every time Peyton Manning started preseason game 3 he also started the opener. This is an extreme example but you can tell how that piece of information isn't going to be very telling.

The division of the snaps with the 1st team will probably be pretty even during the game (if they are all going to play with the 1s). I would think that it will be 2 drives each. The play in the game will matter some but it isn't going to undo the last 7 months (or whatever it has been). The # of reps with the 1's in practice is probably going to be the most telling moving forwards. If someone is receiving 70% of the snaps with the 1's that is most likely the guy to start game 1.

[The Dean]

 

OK then what is the prevailing school of thought on this then? What are the real percentages of this fallacy?

 

 

The fallacy is, because it is typically done in the past, it has to be in the plan this particular time. What has traditionally happened/what usually happens can be completely unrelated to what is happening this time. A bit of "post hoc ergo propter hoc". In the past, the QB that started the third preseason game had already been named the starter. It wasn't as if they became the starter because they started the third preseason game. Comprende?

 

My guess is, in the past, the staff had already decided who was going to start at QB for the season. What you should really look at, if you were doing a comparison, is what happens in the third game when the coaching staff has made clear statements the starting QB is not yet known. Even in those cases, they wouldn't necessitate the same thinking as in this particular case. Decisions of this type stand alone---they just fall into a pattern. The pattern doesn't make the decision.