dave mcbride Posted October 14, 2015 Posted October 14, 2015 Dont look at it that way...... Cassell or Jordan Gay? Cassell or IK? Freddy or Karlos Williams? Freddy or Boobie? Freddy or Chris Gragg in a TE heavy scheme? I think it was Freddy vs. Bryce Brown, right?
K-9 Posted October 14, 2015 Posted October 14, 2015 flag for straw man...it was widely reported fred would have renegotiated to stay and he's not costing seattle much. cassell was resigned cheap as well Would you really have been OK with Freddy on the inactive list for the first three games? Renegotiated deal or not, Freddy just didn't have a prominent role at the time. He was outperformed by three other RBs for the majority of OTAs and training camp, while Dixon was a lock as a STer. It is unfortunate that he was hurt in camp and he didn't have the best opportunity with to impress a new staff while at his best, but it's often a numbers game and Freddy was at a disadvantage. If people question Whaley because he should have expected the position to be decimated by injury, they are missing the point. That is just not the way you can or should go about the business of constructing a roster. Everybody would love unlimited depth at every position, it just can't be done. GO BILLS!!!
ProcessAccepted Posted October 14, 2015 Posted October 14, 2015 The Steelers preseason game is the only data you need to see. They could have rolled in Mr Magoo and he'd have scored against the Steelers. Bills QBs with at least 1 TD that day Taylor, Manuel, Simms. Bills QBs without a TD: Cassel It's not like Cassel is a real difference maker in this league as we will see in Dallas in the weeks till Romo makes it back.
dave mcbride Posted October 14, 2015 Posted October 14, 2015 He does, actually. Played for the 49ers last year under Roman -and he can run. That's why he's here. He already said he's familiar with the offense. Smart move from a strong mgmnt. That is true. He didn't play a down and was inactive, but he was on the roster at the beginning and end of the season. He is a terrible player, but that is a positive.
K-9 Posted October 14, 2015 Posted October 14, 2015 It seemed like they wanted to make sure they had a "capable" vet going into TC because they didn't know what they were going to get out of EJ and TT with the new system and coaching staff. When I say capable I mean "experienced." Obviously a "good" experienced vet isnt available in FA or for a late round pick. Once they saw what they had with those two, he became dispensible. Teams that rely on guys like Cassel, McCown, Hoyer, Fitz, etc. at QB are just playing scared. JMO. Good post, Yolo. Taylor and Manuel established a comfort level with the coaches who preferred their ability to challenge defenses more than Cassel's. Maybe Bucky and others should see how it all plays out before writing a story they hope to be right about in the future. GO BILLS!!!
LB3 Posted October 14, 2015 Posted October 14, 2015 Every GM is judged in large part based on their (QB) decision(s) and if they draft one high, that pick is going to be scrutinized. And I highly doubt Whaley was high on acquiring direct competition for the 1st round pick he made at QB. The Bills have gone out of their way over the years to avoid QB controversies like the plague. I've heard nothing about the Pegula's extending the GM, which presumably is based on how the team performs in 2015 after so much was spent this off-season. The idea that Whaley should be immune from criticism, especially for QB moves remains absurd. WRT to how the team handled QB controversy in the past, I'm not willing to hold that against Whaley. It is different ownership now and he is a new GM. I do not believe Whaley should be immune to fair criticism. Whaley's job is to put together the best team he can. I do not believe that if a good QB was available for trade/free agent pickup, he would say no because he drafted EJ. Whaley brought Taylor and Cassel in as competition. IMO, the two best QB's with any potential to be the future of this franchise remain on this team. I do not believe getting rid of Cassel was a mistake. Any team down to its 3rd string QB is likely going to lose. I doubt very many teams plan on ever having to play a 3rd QB. Cassel's ceiling, IMO, was 9-7 and his floor was 7-9. I'd rather have a potential tire fire of a season where we find out that we need to get a new QB (draft/trade/FA) than to be mired in mediocrity.
dave mcbride Posted October 14, 2015 Posted October 14, 2015 Would you really have been OK with Freddy on the inactive list for the first three games? Renegotiated deal or not, Freddy just didn't have a prominent role at the time. He was outperformed by three other RBs for the majority of OTAs and training camp, while Dixon was a lock as a STer. It is unfortunate that he was hurt in camp and he didn't have the best opportunity with to impress a new staff while at his best, but it's often a numbers game and Freddy was at a disadvantage. If people question Whaley because he should have expected the position to be decimated by injury, they are missing the point. That is just not the way you can or should go about the business of constructing a roster. Everybody would love unlimited depth at every position, it just can't be done. GO BILLS!!! Feelings really don't matter. If he was inactive, so be it - he's still a better and more valuable option than the guy they kept (Brown). It was a money move and a control move in combination -- nothing else. They didn't cut him to make him happy. It seemed like they wanted to make sure they had a "capable" vet going into TC because they didn't know what they were going to get out of EJ and TT with the new system and coaching staff. When I say capable I mean "experienced." Obviously a "good" experienced vet isnt available in FA or for a late round pick. Once they saw what they had with those two, he became dispensible. Teams that rely on guys like Cassel, McCown, Hoyer, Fitz, etc. at QB are just playing scared. JMO. It depends on whether they're relying on them as backups or starters. The Bills were relying on him as a backup, so the comparison isn't really apt.
YoloinOhio Posted October 14, 2015 Posted October 14, 2015 Feelings really don't matter. If he was inactive, so be it - he's still a better and more valuable option than the guy they kept (Brown). It was a money move and a control move in combination -- nothing else. They didn't cut him to make him happy. It depends on whether they're relying on them as backups or starters. The Bills were relying on him as a backup, so the comparison isn't really apt. Not in my mind, as it was between him and EJ for the backup spot. Not necessary to keep him. He was neither the present, nor the future (in Rex's terms)
dave mcbride Posted October 14, 2015 Posted October 14, 2015 WRT to how the team handled QB controversy in the past, I'm not willing to hold that against Whaley. It is different ownership now and he is a new GM. I do not believe Whaley should be immune to fair criticism. Whaley's job is to put together the best team he can. I do not believe that if a good QB was available for trade/free agent pickup, he would say no because he drafted EJ. Whaley brought Taylor and Cassel in as competition. IMO, the two best QB's with any potential to be the future of this franchise remain on this team. I do not believe getting rid of Cassel was a mistake. Any team down to its 3rd string QB is likely going to lose. I doubt very many teams plan on ever having to play a 3rd QB. Cassel's ceiling, IMO, was 9-7 and his floor was 7-9. I'd rather have a potential tire fire of a season where we find out that we need to get a new QB (draft/trade/FA) than to be mired in mediocrity. The ceiling you're aiming for isn't 9-7 with a guy like Cassel; it's 2-2 in a 4 game stretch when the guy ahead of him is hurt. The Bills are gunning for 10-6 this year (let's be honest), and average QB play with a good defense can hold the fort down in the period when they lose a qb. Josh Johnson gets you to 0-4 in the same stretch. I have no idea about EJ; we'll see. I'm hopeful base on preseason, but he hasn't been good in regular season games so far. I worry about Sunday because he's facing a team that can rush the passer and which has good CBs. He's not facing Pittsburgh's secondary or 3rd stringers now.
PromoTheRobot Posted October 14, 2015 Posted October 14, 2015 (edited) I hope the Pegulas are brighter than some fans here regarding Doug Whaley. Only this fan base would fire a GM over a decision on the #3 QB and totally ignore the gem of a #1 QB he brought in, the DROY he drafted, and all the other talent he found for the team. As for Cassell, if he were the Bills QB we lose to the Titans, and maybe more games because Meh can't run or throw the long ball like TT can. All we'd see are stacked defenses and a crap run attack. You think opposing DC's have a book on Tyrod? Cassel's book is one page and can be figured out in a minute. Edited October 14, 2015 by PromoTheRobot
dave mcbride Posted October 14, 2015 Posted October 14, 2015 Not in my mind, as it was between him and EJ for the backup spot. Not necessary to keep him. He was neither the present, nor the future (in Rex's terms) I guess we just disagree about roster building. I get why the Pats only kept 2 QBs, but none of the Bills QBs were proven, and the best of the three was a running QB (and more likely to get hurt). I think they should have kept all three given the circumstances.
K-9 Posted October 14, 2015 Posted October 14, 2015 Feelings really don't matter. If he was inactive, so be it - he's still a better and more valuable option than the guy they kept (Brown). It was a money move and a control move in combination -- nothing else. They didn't cut him to make him happy. Feelings don't matter? I disagree. You don't want to put a veteran team leader and captain in that position if it can be avoided. Money move and control move? Not sure what you mean by control move, but it was a roster construction move, regardless. This is one of those 20/20 hindsight issues that bring the geniuses like Bucky out of the woodwork. GO BILLS!!!
YoloinOhio Posted October 14, 2015 Posted October 14, 2015 The ceiling you're aiming for isn't 9-7 with a guy like Cassel; it's 2-2 in a 4 game stretch when the guy ahead of him is hurt. The Bills are gunning for 10-6 this year (let's be honest), and average QB play with a good defense can hold the fort down in the period when they lose a qb. Josh Johnson gets you to 0-4 in the same stretch. I have no idea about EJ; we'll see. I'm hopeful base on preseason, but he hasn't been good in regular season games so far. I worry about Sunday because he's facing a team that can rush the passer and which has good CBs. He's not facing Pittsburgh's secondary or 3rd stringers now. EJ has won games in the NFL. He's 6-7 in regular season games he has started and finished. There weren't 3rd stringers in those games. I understand he is a project, but this isn't Johnny Manzeil we are throwing out there.
plenzmd1 Posted October 14, 2015 Posted October 14, 2015 I think it was Freddy vs. Bryce Brown, right? good point...but brown was inactive vs Indy then cut...had we done same with Fred on hook for the $2.5M , plus Fred has less a chance to catch on in theory.
Formerly Allan in MD Posted October 14, 2015 Posted October 14, 2015 Meh would never win a game. He was a Pro Bowler.
GG Posted October 14, 2015 Posted October 14, 2015 I guess we just disagree about roster building. I get why the Pats only kept 2 QBs, but none of the Bills QBs were proven, and the best of the three was a running QB (and more likely to get hurt). I think they should have kept all three given the circumstances. Especially since they brought him back and made him #2 in the process. The trade was odd at the time, and looks much worse this week.
dave mcbride Posted October 14, 2015 Posted October 14, 2015 EJ has won games in the NFL. He's 6-7 in regular season games he has started and finished. There weren't 3rd stringers in those games. I understand he is a project, but this isn't Johnny Manzeil we are throwing out there. I don't put in any stock in QB records, for what it's worth. Having said that, I think Manuel has a chance to be OK and help the team win a game or two over a 3-4 game stretch. But honestly it's less about him - it's what happens if he goes down. The Bills QB situation all along has been shaky, and that's not a debatable issue. I like Taylor, but all of the guys have serious flaws.
PromoTheRobot Posted October 14, 2015 Posted October 14, 2015 Especially since they brought him back and made him #2 in the process. The trade was odd at the time, and looks much worse this week. Not really. At the start of the year they still had questions about EJ. Then they decided EJ was worth keeping and Cassel wasn't, and they saw a chance to get something for him. Smart move, imo.
YoloinOhio Posted October 14, 2015 Posted October 14, 2015 (edited) I don't put in any stock in QB records, for what it's worth. Having said that, I think Manuel has a chance to be OK and help the team win a game or two over a 3-4 game stretch. But honestly it's less about him - it's what happens if he goes down. The Bills QB situation all along has been shaky, and that's not a debatable issue. I like Taylor, but all of the guys have serious flaws. I see that... Edited October 14, 2015 by YoloinOhio
PastaJoe Posted October 14, 2015 Posted October 14, 2015 I don't know how anyone can make this arguement yet. Cassel effectively lost his job because EJ was "enough" of a safety net so that to me can only justify that EJ=MC. And like we've seen so often in the past, Cassel a practice superstar, doesn't tend to hold down a starting job for long once he's out there. Add that Dallas offense is built to attack further downfield then I've tended to see from Cassel and I don't expect it will go well. I don't recall the coaches ever saying that they thought EJ was better than Cassel, or that EJ would start over Cassel. Cassel didn't lose his job, he was traded. The coaches had Cassel as 2nd and EJ as 3rd. That means they thought Cassel was better. That's the only fact, everything else is speculation.
Recommended Posts