We have a backup QB problem

[dma0034]

3 minutes ago, T.E. said:

Deshaun Watson went out in November last year, and Cleveland finished with a better record than the Bills did because they had a solid backup. 

 

The QB that was available to everyone until late November?

[Matt_In_NH]

Wrong

[HOUSE]

Tell that to the Eagles fans when they lost the starter than  won the Superbowl with Nick Foles. There is nobody that saw one that coming. MVP too

[dma0034]

Just now, HOUSE said:

Tell that to the Eagles fans when they lost the starter than  won the Superbowl with Nick Foles. There is nobody that saw one that coming. MVP too

 

He says that. His topic title is the reverse of what he thinks.

 

 

If Allen gets hurt the Bills are cooked. It's because their Offense is Allen. 

[DJB]

Still need a guy that can come in for a game or two and not completely blow it. Otherwise if you don’t have that guy season is over 

[HOUSE]

All I know is Mike White is a hell of alot better than Nick freaking Foles

[GoBills808]

19 minutes ago, T.E. said:

As the roster stands, this statement is true, and has been for years. But why is that acceptable, particularly when you have a team that is supposedly in contention for the Super Bowl?

 

I'll bet the 1990 Giants, 2001 Patriots, and 2017 Eagles were all glad to have capable backups when their starter went down, but we punt on this position every year it seems. Kansas City sure didn't.

Find me the guy who can throw for 4k to this group and rush for 500+ while leading the league in TDs 

 

That's what it takes to run this offense

[Doc Brown]

It's been said a million times.  The only reason the backup qb position matters with the Bills is if Allen out only four or so games and we can go 2-2 with that backup QB.  

[MJS]

You are pointing out exceptions. Most teams are cooked if their starting QBs go down for significant time. There are a few, rare examples where that didn't happen and everyone points to those rare instances.

 

That being said, just like any position, you should have as good of a backup as you can, but there are constraints to that. The best backups go to teams where they think they might have a chance to start games, and also the ones that give them the most money.

[Albany,n.y.]

15 minutes ago, T.E. said:

As the roster stands, this statement is true, and has been for years. But why is that acceptable, particularly when you have a team that is supposedly in contention for the Super Bowl?

 

I'll bet the 1990 Giants, 2001 Patriots, and 2017 Eagles were all glad to have capable backups when their starter went down, but we punt on this position every year it seems. Kansas City sure didn't.

Let's look at your examples: The 1990 Giants were pre-free agency and had a backup who was stuck on the team for years & barely played in the 7 years he was on the team.  The 2001 Patriots entered the season with a sophomore backup QB who threw 3 passes his rookie year and completed 1 for 6 yards. The 2017 Eagles had re-signed a former Eagle who had 1 good year with the Eagles earlier in his career & who had flopped with the Rams & had his option dropped after 1 season with the Chiefs.  At the time he re-signed with Philly, he was basically Mitch Trubisky.  

[GoBills808]

19 minutes ago, T.E. said:

Deshaun Watson went out in November last year, and Cleveland finished with a better record than the Bills did because they had a solid backup. 

That's mostly because Watson is terrible tbh

[Logic]

5 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

It's been said a million times.  The only reason the backup qb position matters with the Bills is if Allen out only four or so games and we can go 2-2 with that backup QB.  

This.

If Allen misses a quarter of the season, we want to be able to stay afloat.

If Allen misses the WHOLE season? Yeah. We're cooked.

My favorite football quote of all time is Colts QB coach being asked why Peyton Manning's backup doesn't get more reps. His response? "If 18 goes down, we're *****, and we don't practice *****".

That quote notwithstanding...we need a guy who can keep our season alive for a few games. Anything beyond a few games and we might as well start talking draft prospects.

[T.E.]

2 minutes ago, Albany,n.y. said:

Let's look at your examples: The 1990 Giants were pre-free agency and had a backup who was stuck on the team for years & barely played in the 7 years he was on the team.  The 2001 Patriots entered the season with a sophomore backup QB who threw 3 passes his rookie year and completed 1 for 6 yards. The 2017 Eagles had re-signed a former Eagle who had 1 good year with the Eagles earlier in his career & who had flopped with the Rams & had his option dropped after 1 season with the Chiefs.  At the time he re-signed with Philly, he was basically Mitch Trubisky.  

Foles was a backup for Vick when he had that great year in 2013. Vick was previously brought in to backup Kevin Kolb. Tony Romo, Dak Prescott, Ryan Tannehill with Tennessee, Doug Flutie with the Bills, Brett Favre with Green Bay...all backups before they started. We don't try to draft or develop anyone for that position. 

[BuffaloBillyG]

19 minutes ago, T.E. said:

Deshaun Watson went out in November last year, and Cleveland finished with a better record than the Bills did because they had a solid backup. 

Honestly, I think the argument could be made that Watson was so bad at times last season that the Browns don't make the playoffs if he didn't go out. 

 

Bengals lost Burrow and though they didn't make it, they stayed alive for a while. 

 

In both instances, the HC/OC did an awesome job of adjusting things. I don't know if I have that confidence in Brady quite yet. Hopefully, we don't have to find out if he can 

[T.E.]

9 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

It's been said a million times.  The only reason the backup qb position matters with the Bills is if Allen out only four or so games and we can go 2-2 with that backup QB.  

Agree 100%, but we don't have that right now. Didn't have it last year either. The year before that, they chose to let Allen take zero games off with an injury on his throwing arm rather than play Keenum for one single game. It's kind of an issue, particularly when you have a QB that plays the way Allen does.

[T.E.]

12 minutes ago, MJS said:

You are pointing out exceptions. Most teams are cooked if their starting QBs go down for significant time. There are a few, rare examples where that didn't happen and everyone points to those rare instances.

 

That being said, just like any position, you should have as good of a backup as you can, but there are constraints to that. The best backups go to teams where they think they might have a chance to start games, and also the ones that give them the most money.

It's not terribly rare. Lots of great QBs started as backups. If getting through free agency is an issue for the Bills, maybe they should try to draft one, right? Zero picks allotted to that position since Allen was taken.

[Doc Brown]

7 minutes ago, T.E. said:

It's not terribly rare. Lots of great QBs started as backups. If getting through free agency is an issue for the Bills, maybe they should try to draft one, right? Zero picks allotted to that position since Allen was taken.

[MJS]

6 minutes ago, T.E. said:

It's not terribly rare. Lots of great QBs started as backups. If getting through free agency is an issue for the Bills, maybe they should try to draft one, right? Zero picks allotted to that position since Allen was taken.

The Bills drafted Jake Fromm in 2020. He was a 5th round draft pick.

 

For every great QB who was a backup once, there are hundreds of backups who wash out of the league. You don't know they are great until they become a starter and play well.

[Jerome007]

25 minutes ago, HOUSE said:

All I know is Mike White is a hell of alot better than Nick freaking Foles

IDK how that happened, but Nick Foles had a super hot streak at one time. And yes, that includes a SB win. He performed better than Wentz.

 

Flacco is a recent example, and of course, Purdy, who was the #3 QB. Brady was 4th QB in the very beginning wasn't he?

 

But no GM can be expected to predict that happening. Way too rare. 

 

White has shown his toughness when facing the Bills, that's for sure.

[msw2112]

I think all can agree that if Allen goes down early in the season with a season-ending injury, then the season is effectively over.  Even if we had a guy like Tannehill, who has started and won a lot of games in the NFL, he's not good enough to overcome the loss of Allen and win a Super Bowl against the league's best.  Could Tannehill get the team to a wild-card berth?  Sure.  Is he going to beat the top teams in the later rounds of the playoffs?  No.

 

That said, if the Bills are 6-2 and Allen goes down for a month, Trubisky could potentially go 2-3 or 1-4 over 5 weeks.  If he went 1-4, the Bills would then be 7-6 (my math isn't the best, but I think I've got this) with Allen returning for the remaining 4 games and the playoffs.  The Bills would still have a good chance for success.

 

And who knows, maybe Brady gets the running game humming.  And Von Miller returns to half of his old self.  Smoot and Solomon put some pressure on the QB.  The new safeties are more athletic than Poyer and Hyde and do well in McDermott's system.  Dorian Williams figures it out and plays well (or Andreessen plays like he did in the Pittsburgh preseason game).  It's a lot, but if all of these things happen - a great running game and a solid defense - why couldn't a backup QB, even Trubisky, go 3-2 or 4-1 over a stretch of the season, winning games 14-10 or 17-16?  The punter would be busy, but the Bills have had huge margins of victory with Allen under center.  With Trubisky or another backup, that's not going to happen, but it's possible to win games other ways.  We do, of course, have a "defensive-minded" head coach.