Uffalo Ills Posted January 3, 2016 Share Posted January 3, 2016 I love that this thread suddenly came to life again today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snafu Posted January 3, 2016 Share Posted January 3, 2016 The answer was no in October and it is still no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frankish Reich Posted January 3, 2016 Author Share Posted January 3, 2016 That's right. At least we were alive until the last minute of the season, whereas they were eliminated from the playoff after Game 14. Oh, wait a minute ... ... the truth is that we probably wouldn't be better off, but we certainly wouldn't be worse off. (And don't tell me "then we wouldn't have Tyrod." We would have definitely had to sign another QB, and if they liked Tyrod, Tyrod would be here anyway) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted January 3, 2016 Share Posted January 3, 2016 16-37 2 TDs and 3 ints is what you get from Fitz in a must win game vs a secondary playing mostly backups Until that play call for the long pass resulting in the INT, I thought to myself "this is the best low completion percentage game I have ever seen a QB play". I don't think you should take it away from our 2ndary. Mario Butler was playing out of his mind at times. Some of those pass breakups he had on on-the-mark, rope throws from Fitzy were just unreal. He wasn't playing like a backup. Give him credit. Fitzy also wasn't helped by a bunch of drops. And if Dareus hadn't suddenly discovered his afterburner after letting it gather cobwebs all season, that long bomb throw could have killed us with Lawson dropping back in coverage. I always have wondered about the play call on those kind of bombs, whether it's Fitz or Gailey who is nuts. Until that play call for the long pass resulting in the INT, I thought to myself "this is the best low completion percentage game I have ever seen a QB play". I don't think you should take it away from our 2ndary. Mario Butler was playing out of his mind at times. Some of those pass breakups he had on on-the-mark, rope throws from Fitzy were just unreal. He wasn't playing like a backup. Give him credit. Fitzy also wasn't helped by a bunch of drops. And if Dareus hadn't suddenly discovered his afterburner after letting it gather cobwebs all season, that long bomb throw could have killed us with Lawson dropping back in coverage. I always have wondered about the play call on those kind of bombs, whether it's Fitz or Gailey who is nuts. PS I don't think we would have been better off overall if we kept Fitz, because I think he learned something from his year with O'Brien that he wouldn't have if he stayed here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
playman Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 as of now: no Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jkgobills Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 The original question was woud the Bills have been better off keeping Fitzy....the answer is still yes. Tyrod is the first QB the Bills have had that is better than Fitzy. He would have been better than or equal to (Orton....but I would take Fitz), than every QB the Bills have started since he left until Tyrod. He would be a better backup to Tyrod than EJ...he may have fared better than EJ in those two starts this season. This does not mean Fitzy would be the QB to take a team to the playoffs. In fact there are probably 20 teams in the NFL these past four seasons who had a better starting QB than Fitzy. Until this season, the Bills weren't one of them. With Tyrod they finally have a starting QB better than Fitz. How could they not have been better off keeping him? Most teams in the NFL would have been worse off to keep him. The brutal truth is the Bills have been (prior to this season) so bad at the games most important position that they actually would have been one of the few teams in the league better off keeping Fitz. I agree....that's painful....but true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prickly Pete Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 The original question was woud the Bills have been better off keeping Fitzy....the answer is still yes. Tyrod is the first QB the Bills have had that is better than Fitzy. He would have been better than or equal to (Orton....but I would take Fitz), than every QB the Bills have started since he left until Tyrod. He would be a better backup to Tyrod than EJ...he may have fared better than EJ in those two starts this season. This does not mean Fitzy would be the QB to take a team to the playoffs. In fact there are probably 20 teams in the NFL these past four seasons who had a better starting QB than Fitzy. Until this season, the Bills weren't one of them. With Tyrod they finally have a starting QB better than Fitz. How could they not have been better off keeping him? Most teams in the NFL would have been worse off to keep him. The brutal truth is the Bills have been (prior to this season) so bad at the games most important position that they actually would have been one of the few teams in the league better off keeping Fitz. I agree....that's painful....but true. Nice spin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 I loved knocking out the Jets but take no pleasure in beating Fitz. He had a career year and we underachieved. Sadly, this sums up his career. Just a little bit short of ever being "the guy." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freddie's Dead Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 Nice spin. Is Fitzy the B word that left town? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jkgobills Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 Nice spin. Actually saw this band during my undergrad days. They played a concert in our campus gym. Fun show. However, I'm not sure you know what "spin" means. I answered the posters original question, gave reasoning, and explained my position. "To Spin" when answering a question is something entirely different than what I did, Good Video though....thanks for the trip down memory lane. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_Formerly_of_Roch Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 One of the reasons TT signed here was that he was given a shot to start. All he needed to do was beat out EJ, don't even think Cassell was signed yet. So TT must have figured he could beat out EJ so he signed. It was written he was oiffered more money from Denver, but turned it down as knew he wasn't about to beat out Peyton Manning. With Fitz here for would have been five years now, pretty much would make him the well established starter for good or bad, much tougher for TT to have beaten him out. So yes if the Bills liked TT he could also have been here except a much higher chance he would not have been interested in signing as he wanted to be a starter. Maybe the Bills still would have offered the best chance with Fitz, but maybe not (And don't tell me "then we wouldn't have Tyrod." We would have definitely had to sign another QB, and if they liked Tyrod, Tyrod would be here anyway) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 I repeat...NO! Fitz and the NYJ are on the road to nowhere. Actually, they are on the road to Buffalo where one win will put them in a destination we haven't seen since 1999 ... Facts are hard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo Barbarian Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 yes but it's clear why he should be a back up, those INTs today were killer, instead of ditching him for EJ we should have kept Fitz to mentor him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 Well, let's see...9 pages later? Pretty sure we can close this one with: 3(this time) 4th qtr INTs. Any fan who watches the games knows we've been down this agonizing road with Fitz. Now it's the Jets fans' turn. Our eyes adored Fitz, though we never liked they way he threw, we all adored him. So close, so close and yet so far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alphadawg7 Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 16-37 2 TDs and 3 ints is what you get from Fitz in a must win game vs a secondary playing mostly backups THIS times a million. I told all my Steeler fan friends that Fitz can't win this game, its not in his arsenal. He's the guy that is good enough to keep you close, good enough to get your hopes up, good enough right up until the end where he can't close and just folds and turns back into Ryan Fitzpick. He is a gun slinger in the mold of Brett Farve without the skill. Brett got away with being a turnover machine because he had so much more talent. Ryan is an over achiever who has peaked...and that peak is still outside the playoff on the back of a 3 INT game where he folded when it mattered most in a must win, and winnable game, against a wounded foe and a depleted secondary. Hes a great backup, but just not the guy to lead the team to consistency. Everyone made excuses...if he only had an elite WR, if he only had an Elite D, if he only had a better run game behind him...Well he had all that and then some this year, and he still reverted back to the Fitz we all knew...a turnover machine when it counts most. Well, let's see...9 pages later? Pretty sure we can close this one with: 3(this time) 4th qtr INTs. Any fan who watches the games knows we've been down this agonizing road with Fitz. Now it's the Jets fans' turn. Our eyes adored Fitz, though we never liked they way he threw, we all adored him. So close, so close and yet so far. Uh, we didn't all adore him...I definitely did not adore Ryan FitzPickSix, FitzPick, Fitzsuck, Fitzcraptrick...I had a bunch of names for him and he always lived up to all of them. Was mind boggling the excuses that used to get made for him when he was here. Was one of the worst screen throwers I have ever seen, today was more of that too where he almost threw multiple INTs on screens. He's a great guy, but was not a fan of the Fitz led QB era from a football perspective. I don't know who got more excuses for himself...Ryan or Trent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 Uh, we didn't all adore him...I definitely did not adore Ryan FitzPickSix, FitzPick, Fitzsuck, Fitzcraptrick...I had a bunch of names for him and he always lived up to all of them. Was mind boggling the excuses that used to get made for him when he was here. Was one of the worst screen throwers I have ever seen, today was more of that too where he almost threw multiple INTs on screens. He's a great guy, but was not a fan of the Fitz led QB era from a football perspective. I don't know who got more excuses for himself...Ryan or Trent. Crap. You didn't adore him when we came back from 21-0 2 times in a row against the Raiders then the Pats? Either I should complement you on your incredible objectivity, or, I should call BS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frankish Reich Posted January 4, 2016 Author Share Posted January 4, 2016 Well, let's see...9 pages later? Pretty sure we can close this one with: 3(this time) 4th qtr INTs. Any fan who watches the games knows we've been down this agonizing road with Fitz. Now it's the Jets fans' turn. Our eyes adored Fitz, though we never liked they way he threw, we all adored him. So close, so close and yet so far. I know it's fun to gloat -- Rex Ryan taught me that -- but no, we can't close this one (yet) because people refuse to answer the question as stated. People insist on rephrasing it, politician style, as their own related question: "would we have made the playoffs with Fitzy." The question is this: would we be better off if we'd kept him instead of everything that's happened subsequently: 6-10, 9-7, 8-8, EJ (instead of some other 1st rounder), Orton, money spent on Fitzy's dead contract instead of on someone who is actually contributing to the Bills, 3 more years of no playoffs. That question is still very much open, and it doesn't depend much on whether Fitzy's Jets made or did not make the playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts