Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

If Barkley starts tomorrow, he will be the 4th different QB to start a game for the Bills in 10 weeks.

 

From what I could find on the Interwebs, the 1987 Patriots have the record with five ... but that was in a strike season (in which Doug Flutie crossed the line and started one game before the strike ended).

 

I feel like there's been no team in the history of the NFL to botch the handling of the QB position (some consider it an important position in the NFL).  Am I wrong?

 

 

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted
13 minutes ago, Gugny said:

If Barkley starts tomorrow, he will be the 4th different QB to start a game for the Bills in 10 weeks.

 

From what I could find on the Interwebs, the 1987 Patriots have the record with five ... but that was in a strike season (in which Doug Flutie crossed the line and started one game before the strike ended).

 

I feel like there's been no team in the history of the NFL to botch the handling of the QB position (some consider it an important position in the NFL).  Am I wrong?

 

 

Well people say the Bills suck and mock them.   

 

Well the Bills are out to prove them right.  

 

  • Like (+1) 3
  • Sad 1
  • Haha (+1) 1
Posted
9 minutes ago, CaptnCoke11 said:

5 technically 

 

I'm sorry, but no.  Peterman, Allen, Anderson, Barkley.

 

I'm talking about how many different QBs start games; not how many different starters (i.e. - Peterman, then Allen, then Peterman again = 2 different starters).

Posted (edited)
32 minutes ago, Gugny said:

there's been no team in the history of the NFL to botch the handling of the QB position.  Am I wrong?

It would definitely be harder to prove you are wrong. How few games Peterman started and how many times he was benched during or after them is insane.

 

McClappy's insistence that Peterman could succeed only resulted with both having so much egg on their faces that they're both a bit of a "yolk" league wide.     

Edited by I am the egg man
Posted
38 minutes ago, frostbitmic said:

I predicted before game 1 that we'd start 6 QB's this year.

 

...not to worry...Clausen and Brady Quinn are on speed dial to get you to six bro.....:thumbsup:

Posted (edited)

Hey listen...keep trying guys until you find a good one. Even if it’s not by design. Eventually law of average is going to kick in and we are going to get lucky on a guy. Maybe that was kind of Fitz but Chan was so inept that the rest of the team made Fitz look bad. Someday we are going to have acceptable QB play again. Who knows? Maybe it will end up being tomorrow. You never know when a guy is just going to match up with a system and reach maximum potential. Maybe Dabol and Barkley will just click. Doubt it, but who knows?

Edited by Brianmoorman4jesus
Posted (edited)
41 minutes ago, CaptnCoke11 said:

5 technically 

In agreement with your contention, there was some discussion the other day on talk radio that the direct snap to McCoy to start the Bills' offensive game vs. New England resulted in McCoy being technically listed as the starting QB for the game.  I heard only parts of the total discussion, so I do not know if the rule / statistic is correct.

 

 

Edited by Ridgewaycynic2013
Clarification.
Posted
1 hour ago, Gugny said:

If Barkley starts tomorrow, he will be the 4th different QB to start a game for the Bills in 10 weeks.

 

From what I could find on the Interwebs, the 1987 Patriots have the record with five ... but that was in a strike season (in which Doug Flutie crossed the line and started one game before the strike ended).

 

I feel like there's been no team in the history of the NFL to botch the handling of the QB position (some consider it an important position in the NFL).  Am I wrong?

 

 

The 1991 Philadelphia Eagles were similar to us albeit they were a better team.  Randall Cunningham went down in the first game of that year and they had at least three quarterbacks the rest of the year.  Also like the Bills they had a solid defense, theres was arguably the best in the league that year.

 

While theres parallels there the Eagles finished 10-6 that year 

Posted
6 minutes ago, Another Fan said:

The 1991 Philadelphia Eagles were similar to us albeit they were a better team.  Randall Cunningham went down in the first game of that year and they had at least three quarterbacks the rest of the year.  Also like the Bills they had a solid defense, theres was arguably the best in the league that year.

 

While theres parallels there the Eagles finished 10-6 that year 

So they were sort of like the 2018 Bills, but completely different in pretty much every way imaginable.

 

Got it.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Haha (+1) 2
Posted
5 minutes ago, LSHMEAB said:

So they were sort of like the 2018 Bills, but completely different in pretty much every way imaginable.

 

Got it.

Both teams had to use several quarterbacks while having a solid defense.  And unless a miracle happens they both arent playoff teams 

×
×
  • Create New...