UKBillFan Posted February 3, 2021 Posted February 3, 2021 10 minutes ago, Sammy Watkins' Rib said: Yep. Reason why it could benefit the Bills to pay for a premium back up QB. But right now the priority needs to be building a starting roster capable of beating the Chiefs. After two games this year we really are not close. I suppose the only risk is reading more into those two games than they actually showed. Yes, the Chiefs practically blew us out in the Championship game and had it relatively easy in the league game with an injured Josh in the line up but that doesn’t mean the gap is as great as it seems. Look at what happened between the Saints and the Bucs; the former won 34-23 to kickstart the season and blew them out in Tampa 38-3. However, in the Divisional game the Bucs won 30-20. There is a gap which it’d be great to close but we are capable of beating the Chiefs.
Nextmanup Posted February 3, 2021 Posted February 3, 2021 6 hours ago, DrDawkinstein said: Not a bad idea from a Bills perspective, but he'll be able to try for a starting job somewhere so that's where he'll go. I'm not sure he's guaranteed to land a starting gig at all! I heard "Sneaky Joe" mention this on the air the other day and obviously, a big part of his analysis here is the assumption that Trubisky is NO LONGER starting QB material. There is going to be unprecedented QB turnover all around the league this year, so who knows how it all plays out. 1
Sammy Watkins' Rib Posted February 3, 2021 Posted February 3, 2021 2 minutes ago, UKBillFan said: I suppose the only risk is reading more into those two games than they actually showed. Yes, the Chiefs practically blew us out in the Championship game and had it relatively easy in the league game with an injured Josh in the line up but that doesn’t mean the gap is as great as it seems. Look at what happened between the Saints and the Bucs; the former won 34-23 to kickstart the season and blew them out in Tampa 38-3. However, in the Divisional game the Bucs won 30-20. There is a gap which it’d be great to close but we are capable of beating the Chiefs. I don't think the injury had as big an impact on Allen's poor production in the first game as most make it out. Chiefs personnel simply match's up perfectly with how the Bills offense wants to attack defenses. That Zerovolt's guy was on here warning us all week about it. I think he was 100% right. The way to attack the chiefs D is with shorter routes to the RB's and TE's but that's not the way our offense is designed. On the defensive side, they basically chose what they wanted to do in each game and did it with great success each time. In the AFCCG rather than run the ball against our softer defense they just threw it underneath. That was a lot more successful for them in terms of the scoreboard.
UKBillFan Posted February 3, 2021 Posted February 3, 2021 1 minute ago, Nextmanup said: I'm not sure he's guaranteed to land a starting gig at all! I heard "Sneaky Joe" mention this on the air the other day and obviously, a big part of his analysis here is the assumption that Trubisky is NO LONGER starting QB material. There is going to be unprecedented QB turnover all around the league this year, so who knows how it all plays out. Which teams are definitely not looking for a starting quarterback? The Seahawks, the Rams, the Bucs, the Cowboys, the Chiefs, the Chargers and ourselves. I’d presume the Saints (with their cap issue I guess they’ll go with Winston, Hill or both), the Packers (though goodness know considering how MLF is acting at the moment), the Lions (depending on how much they trust Goff), the Titans, the Jaguars (via the draft), the Ravens, the Browns and the Bengals (dependant on Burrow’s return from injury) won’t be looking either but there’s perhaps doubts about the route they’d choose to take. Then there’s questions around the Texans and the Raiders in relation to Watson and Carr’s futures. Every other franchise may be looking for new quarterbacks either via the draft or by trading. I can see a side taking a risk with Trubisky considering the potential needs.
1st Ammendment NoMas Posted February 3, 2021 Posted February 3, 2021 He'd be an upgrade over Barkley but much more than the 2m they throw MB. With all our cap issues, not sure this is a reality unless he took a cut to play here. I don't see it.
UKBillFan Posted February 3, 2021 Posted February 3, 2021 11 minutes ago, Sammy Watkins' Rib said: I don't think the injury had as big an impact on Allen's poor production in the first game as most make it out. Chiefs personnel simply match's up perfectly with how the Bills offense wants to attack defenses. That Zerovolt's guy was on here warning us all week about it. I think he was 100% right. The way to attack the chiefs D is with shorter routes to the RB's and TE's but that's not the way our offense is designed. On the defensive side, they basically chose what they wanted to do in each game and did it with great success each time. In the AFCCG rather than run the ball against our softer defense they just threw it underneath. That was a lot more successful for them in terms of the scoreboard. The question is did we struggle to adapt because of mentality or ability? In both games we should have at least given them something else to think about and in both games we failed to do so.
Bob in STL Posted February 4, 2021 Posted February 4, 2021 9 hours ago, JGMcD2 said: The only way Trubisky can be our backup QB is if he’s capable of winning 4/5 games as a backup? If you can’t do that, then you throw out that idea and move on to your next option. Out of how many? I do think we iAllen went down for 6-8 games and a backup gets you 4-5 wins he did good. Not sure Barclay can do that.
JGMcD2 Posted February 4, 2021 Posted February 4, 2021 13 minutes ago, Bob in STL said: Out of how many? I do think we iAllen went down for 6-8 games and a backup gets you 4-5 wins he did good. Not sure Barclay can do that. It was a joke... taken from a wild take in another thread.4 Wins in 5 games was the requirement of one poster for any backup QB... my response was that another name for that is a “starting QB.” If you can go .500 with your back up QB in there you’re in good shape.
ganesh Posted February 4, 2021 Posted February 4, 2021 11 hours ago, Greg S said: Definite upgrade over Barkley. Will also cost a LOT MORE
pigpen65 Posted February 4, 2021 Posted February 4, 2021 I think Darnold would make a real good backup if they could sign him cheaply 1
machine gun kelly Posted February 4, 2021 Posted February 4, 2021 I don’t see him wanting to go to a team where there is a young top QB where he won’t sniff a starting spot forever. He’d probably rather go to a team and backup one of the older QB’s to get a shot in a year or two. Pittsburgh, Indy, Tampa, New Orleans, etc. He’d never want to go to Buffalo, the Chargers, etc, etc. 1
ColoradoBills Posted February 4, 2021 Posted February 4, 2021 7 hours ago, machine gun kelly said: I don’t see him wanting to go to a team where there is a young top QB where he won’t sniff a starting spot forever. He’d probably rather go to a team and backup one of the older QB’s to get a shot in a year or two. Pittsburgh, Indy, Tampa, New Orleans, etc. He’d never want to go to Buffalo, the Chargers, etc, etc. Agree MGK. His market value on Spotrac is $8.3M which will make a lot of teams interested. I'd add New England to that list. After the QB trade frenzy is over Trubisky is about the best UFA QB out there (omitting Dak). He'll end up on a team that didn't get a trade and is at risk of missing out on the top 2-3 draft QBs. 1
TheBrownBear Posted February 4, 2021 Posted February 4, 2021 I don't see a great need for upgrading the backup position. I think Barkley is the perfect backup QB to be honest. Veteran guy, cheap, understands his role, helpful in Josh's development and game preparation, and can competently run the offense in a pinch. Then you keep Webb or Fromm as your younger developmental guy.
Recommended Posts