The Frankish Reich Posted October 19, 2015 Posted October 19, 2015 Serious question: in 2011, Ryan Fitzpatrick signed his 6 year/$59 million contract extension which would take him through the 2016 season as the Bills starter. Since then, we've been through Fitz, EJ, Kyle Orton, Tyrod Taylor ... and maybe EJ again for a while. What if we'd just let that contract play out? Would we be better or worse off right now? I'm going to have to say better off, since a whole cascade of other events likely wouldn't have happened: drafting EJ, making the Sammy Watkins trade, bringing in Rex Ryan, getting stuck for several years with guaranteed Fitzy dead money that could have been applied to other needs. Easy to dismiss the question with an eye roll emoji, but seriously: what's the argument for exactly how we're better off now -- and maybe more importantly, in 2017 and on -- than we would have been if we'd just let that contract play out? Remember, Fitzy and the Texans beat us last year, and Fitzy's Jets are 4-1 this year. No, he hasn't gone to the playoffs, but unless I missed it, neither have the Bills ...
GG Posted October 19, 2015 Posted October 19, 2015 They're still in game 5 of the season. Wait until his arm gets tired in mid November
PearlHowardman Posted October 19, 2015 Posted October 19, 2015 I agree. And the Buffalo Bills would be better off with Doug Marrone as HC in his third year. But the Buffalo Bills have incompetent/clueless Rex Ryan as HC and really no NFL calibre QBs.
26CornerBlitz Posted October 19, 2015 Posted October 19, 2015 OK ... why? Because Ryan Fitzpatrick is a losing QB as an NFL starter. He's just not good enough and that's the reason why he's now on his SEVENTH NFL team.
papazoid Posted October 19, 2015 Posted October 19, 2015 NO ! fitz was and still is better than EJ and Orton. fitz is not better than TT. might have been better off short term (2011 - 2014), but not long term (2015 - 2017).
The Frankish Reich Posted October 19, 2015 Author Posted October 19, 2015 Because Ryan Fitzpatrick is a losing QB as an NFL starter. He's just not good enough and that's the reason why he's now on his SEVENTH NFL team. Why wouldn't they have been able to bring in a Tyrod Taylor to compete anyway, Fitz or no Fitz? It's not like Tyrod commanded a king's ransom ...
PO16FFS Posted October 19, 2015 Posted October 19, 2015 Fitz is a good game manager when the team has a lead. Fitz has no arm. He is terrible at throwing the deep ball. But I like Fitz . He seems like a good guy. Seems like he loves football and enjoys everything that comes with it.
The Frankish Reich Posted October 19, 2015 Author Posted October 19, 2015 NO ! fitz was and still is better than EJ and Orton. fitz is not better than TT. might have been better off short term (2011 - 2014), but not long term (2015 - 2017). Isn't is a bit premature to say that? And besides, what would have stopped them from signing a Tyrod to compete?
The Frankish Reich Posted October 19, 2015 Author Posted October 19, 2015 Fitz is a good game manager when the team has a lead. Fitz has no arm. He is terrible at throwing the deep ball. But I like Fitz . He seems like a good guy. Seems like he loves football and enjoys everything that comes with it. Watch Fitzy's TD run yesterday. How quickly we forget ... he's limited as a QB, and we all know it, but yes, he actually has won games through his play rather than just serving as a game manager
26CornerBlitz Posted October 19, 2015 Posted October 19, 2015 Why wouldn't they have been able to bring in a Tyrod Taylor to compete anyway, Fitz or no Fitz? It's not like Tyrod commanded a king's ransom ... You know what you have in Fitz and it's not good enough. It'd have been a wheel spinning waste of time to have him around IMO.
ALF Posted October 19, 2015 Posted October 19, 2015 Fitz is a good back up (if his price is right) and might be a good mentor for a young QB.
Maury Ballstein Posted October 19, 2015 Posted October 19, 2015 Pickspatrick forever!! Save us with your game Winn----losing Int's please.
The Frankish Reich Posted October 19, 2015 Author Posted October 19, 2015 What the !@#$ are you talking about? It isn't very complicated. We keep Fitz, who's contract goes through 2016, and then like every other team we go looking for a backup or guy to compete. It's not like Baltimore keeps Tyrod because we still have Fitz. It's not like Tyrod is suddenly the most sought after commodity in the NFL if we still have Fitz. That's what I mean -- all the "hell no" comments aren't backed up by any actual reasoning. You know what you have in Fitz and it's not good enough. It'd have been a wheel spinning waste of time to have him around IMO. It hasn't been a waste of time trying to (1) force a guy widely thought of as a 3rd/4th round pick into the 16th pick overall "QB of the future"? (2) unretiring Kyle Orton for one mediocre year, after which he re-retired?
The Frankish Reich Posted October 19, 2015 Author Posted October 19, 2015 (edited) And don't forget this: http://www.buffalorumblings.com/bills-news-notes/2015/2/11/8015555/buffalo-bills-salary-cap-2015-dead-money-ryan-fitzpatrick-stevie-johnson The dead money trap is largely over, but what other moves to make the team better did it prevent us from making over the last few years? So it isn't just Fitzy vs. EJ or Tyrod. It's Fitzy plus the other talent we missed out on ... Edited October 19, 2015 by The Frankish Reich
PO16FFS Posted October 19, 2015 Posted October 19, 2015 FItz was terrible. He cant throw more than 20 yards without soiling his pants from forcing so hard.
The Frankish Reich Posted October 19, 2015 Author Posted October 19, 2015 What would Fitz have done yesterday on defense to help us win the game? What would Fitz do to help us win more games this year? Horrible thread. So you're saying we would have lost anyway. Which is kind of my point. I guess I'll rephrase for the slow learners: how are we better off without Fitzy?
26CornerBlitz Posted October 19, 2015 Posted October 19, 2015 It isn't very complicated. We keep Fitz, who's contract goes through 2016, and then like every other team we go looking for a backup or guy to compete. It's not like Baltimore keeps Tyrod because we still have Fitz. It's not like Tyrod is suddenly the most sought after commodity in the NFL if we still have Fitz. That's what I mean -- all the "hell no" comments aren't backed up by any actual reasoning. It hasn't been a waste of time trying to (1) force a guy widely thought of as a 3rd/4th round pick into the 16th pick overall "QB of the future"? (2) unretiring Kyle Orton for one mediocre year, after which he re-retired? Could be, but those were different attempts. Staying with a veteran journeyman QB with major limitations that is Ryan FitzPickSix takes the team where they need to be? Nope!
Recommended Posts